Agenda item

To consider the report of the Chief Planning Officer on an application for the change of use from bank (A2) to a bar/restaurant (A3/A4) Yorkshire Bank, 53 - 55 Harrogate Road, Moortown, LS7 3PY.

(Report attached)

The report of the Chief Planning Officer sought Members consideration on a change of use from bank (A2) to a bar/restaurant (A3/A4) at Yorkshire Bank, 53-55 Harrogate Road, Moortown, Leeds, LS7 3PY.

Members were advised of a change to condition 5 that delivery hours now recommended to only take place between the hours of 06:30 and 07:30.

The application was brought to Plans Panel at the request of Ward Members Councillor Jane Dowson, Councillor Mohammed Rafique and Councillor Eileen Taylor. There concerns were set out at 6.3 of the submitted report.

Members were informed that no operator had been provided by the developer.

Maps, plans and photographs were shown throughout the presentation.

Members noted that an application to English Heritage for the building to become listed had not been forthcoming as it was deemed not coherent enough to be listed and as long as there were no alterations to the outside of the building they had no objection in principle.

Members were informed that it was the aspiration of residents in Chapel Allerton to form a village square and as part of ongoing discussion with developers it had been agreed that a £5,000 contribution towards this scheme through the Section 106 should this proposal be granted. It was the view of officers that this was appropriate as it would create a sitting out area which would benefit the operator.

Members were informed that the change to delivery times was due to the fact that the shops next door had residential properties located above them. 

Members were advised that the road at the side of the Yorkshire Bank was not an access road and had been secured as a seating area by Aldi as part of their application it is hoped that this seating area will amalgamate with the village square.

It was noted that an email from Ms Osbourne an objector due to speak at the Panel had been received by Panel Members prior to the meeting which included photographs of the interior of the building.

Ms Christine Osbourne addressed the panel setting out her objections to the building being developed as another bar restaurant.

Ms Osbourne provided Members with a brief overview of Chapel Allerton town centre highlighting the following points:

·  The building had a dominant aspect within the town centre;

·  The building is located within the Cumulative Impact Policy (CIP) area

·  37 food and beverage outlets;

·  80% of the outlets in the area are café bars

·  Some food outlets are struggling with a couple currently for sale including Nash’s Fish and Chips and Siam Oriental; and

·  Pubs in the area are constantly having to find new attractions for customers

Ms Osbourne thought that the views of the Ward Members should be considered.

Ms Osbourne was of the view that the building was an iconic landmark in the town centre. She said that English Heritage had only looked at the building from outside however there were many features inside the building which should be preserved.

Ms Osbourne provided Members with a brief history of the building saying that it had been built in 1935. Ms Osbourne said that although a change of use would protect the outside of the building she also wanted to protect the interior particularly the domed glass roof.

Ms Osbourne was of the opinion that if a new bar restaurant was to open it could potentially lead to others in the area failing

.

Ms Osbourne said that a local group CANPLAN had proposed that alternative uses be sought especially in light of the bid for European City of Culture. CANPLAN had proposed that some of the items stored at the art gallery and Henry Moore Centre be displayed there. She said that over a five year period the Council could pay rent for the building which would be £300,000. 

When asked what other residents would wish to see on this site Members were informed that they would like to see a small cinema or a community facility such as the Reginald Centre in Chapeltown.

Councillor Dobson said that she knew the building well and would also like to see the interior saved. She suggested that it could be used in a similar way to that of the old fire station at Gipton and asked if there was a local group to save and use this building. No group was suggested.

Ms Osbourne was asked to give her view on the new proposed delivery times. She said that people would drive onto the pavements if they could not park, this would crack the pavements which had only recently been replaced.

Mr Davies, Stoneacre Properties and Mr Singh, KD Properties attended the Panel.

Mr Singh reiterated the points of English Heritage as set out in the submitted report at paragraph 10.3. He said that that without this development the building would remain empty.

Members were informed that the prospective tenant did not wish to be made known at this stage. However, they were able to clarify that the tenant would not be applying for an alcohol licence and that the hours of opening would be not go past 8 or 9pm. The agent was unable to state the exact times that the tenant wanted at this stage.

Members were informed that the applicant would be willing to work with local people to save specific interior features and incorporate them into the new design within reason.

Members asked the agent if the operator would be willing to sign a unilateral undertaking that they would not seek an alcohol licence or late opening hours.

Members were informed by the Legal Officer that in terms of requesting a unilateral undertaking it would need to meet the statutory tests for planning purposes and that what had been suggested related to licensing. It would need to be clear what was licensing and what was planning as they are two separate elements to the process as to how the operator planned to operate the building. It would therefore depend on what was being proposed could be secured in terms of planning purposes.

Members were informed by the agents that due to the date of the meeting no contract was currently in place, therefore they were unable to agree a unilateral undertaking with the Council in regards to opening hours or licence.

The agents clarified that they had only spoken with Councillor Taylor who had no direct objections and had left telephone messages with the other ward members but with no response.

Both Members and Officers had concerns about the lack of clarity from the applicant on who the operator was to be and the type of outlet proposed.

Members asked that more information be provided and the Chair suggested that this item be deferred for one cycle. Members voted on that proposal.

RESOLVED – To defer the application for one cycle to seek further information.