Agenda item

To consider a report by the Chief Planning Officer which sets out details of an application which seeks adjustments to the existing "airside" apron including demolition of existing passenger pier and ancillary accommodation, earthworks and site remodelling at the existing eastern parcel of the Airport apron to accommodate a new terminal building and forecourt area;

A new terminal building and passenger piers; Construction of supporting infrastructure, goods yard and mechanical electrical plant; Relocation and extension of existing fuel storage tanks; Hard and soft landscaping including biodiversity works; Associated infrastructure/utilities, including drainage;

Reconfiguration of existing car parking, and new car parking provision in the

vicinity of the Viking car park. The provision for a new ‘meet and greet’ building and separate parking inspection building. Additional car parking above the existing provision on site will only be provided if future assessments show there is a need. Additional car parking over the existing level would be phased and its delivery would be controlled through a planning review mechanism; New and modified vehicular (and pedestrian/cycle) access from Whitehouse Lane, including improved access for bus and coach to the new terminal building; New bus terminal and taxi drop off facilities to the front of the new passenger terminal; and Modifications to flight time controls to reflect current noise guidance, and to extend the daytime flight period, at Leeds Bradford Airport, Whitehouse Lane, Yeadon.

 

 

(Report attached)

Prior to discussion of this item, the Chair sought to clarify the following procedural issue:

 

In accordance with the Protocol for Public Speaking at Plans Panel there was no further opportunity for third parties to address the Panel as in my opinion as Chair, the further report raises no significant new information giving rise to new material planning considerations. 

 

The Chair then invited the Panel’s Legal Services Officer to clarify the role of Members in considering the information before them today

 

The Legal Services Officer said that it was a matter of public record that Members had already approved in principle subject to a number of matters being considered and satisfactorily resolved. The specific conditions were the focus of the report, to be read together with the previous report. Both will collectively form the basis of the decision made. If there were any concerns or issues it was for Members as decision makers to seek advice from Officers and thereafter decide on the weight to attach to those issues, with weight being a matter of planning judgement for the decision maker. No weight should be given to any non-material matters raised either at the meeting or in previous correspondence.

 

It was also clarified that the Protocol for Public Speaking at Plans Panel stated that individuals would only be entitled to speak at Panel on one occasion unless significant new information raising new material planning considerations had been raised. The report does not do that, rather it clarifies matters in scope of the same material matters. Therefore, no further speaking rights are triggered.

 

The Chair then invited the Planning Case Officer to present the report.

 

The Planning Case Officer made reference to the meeting of 11^th February 2021 and the decision to approvethe application in principle, subject to the conditions specified in the submitted report and subject to further considerations of conditions and/or obligations relating to the following:

 

·  Future of/ demolition of existing  terminal

·  Linking of the new terminal delivery to the commencement of  changes to the  flight regime

·  Level of Contribution to the  new railway station and public transport enhancements

·  Positioning of Taxi rank in relation to new terminal

·  Charging  for taxis using new terminal

·  Extent of  landscaping and mature/semi mature  tree planting 

·  Review of cycle paths to, from and through the airport

·  Further off site highway measures – contributions to Horsforth Roundabout/ Dynsley Arms  improvements

·  Improvements to carbon offsetting in terms of planting beyond the airport boundary

·  Increase in the employee transport modal shift percentage

 

and being further considered by Panel following further discussions with the applicant.

 

The Planning Case Officer reported that further discussions had taken place with the applicant, the scheme now having additional contributions over and above what was previously reported. Members were informed that the report provided further information and conclusions in responding to the specific issues raised by the Panel, Pages 12 – 17 of the submitted report referred.

 

Members were made aware that since the last Panel report, there had been a number of further representations received in respect of the proposals. These were presented in summary as a verbal update to Panel including further comments from Friends of the Earth.

 

The Friends of the Earth comment that: 

 

-  Nowhere in the previous panel report was there mention of the Climate Change Committees report from December 2020 providing recommendations on the sixth carbon budget

-  Members had been advised to ignore emissions from international aviation

-  Paragraph 631 of the Spurrier decision has not been taken into account

Officers commented in relation to these points are as follows:

 

In terms of the Committee for Climate Change, this report formed part of the discussion at the last plans plan. The Committee on Climate Change issued a report in December 2020 which recommended that there should be no net expansion at UK airports.

 

In terms of the legal status of the report, The Committee on Climate Change was an advisory body established under the Climate Change Act 2008. Its remit is to advise the government on climate change, including carbon budgeting. At this stage, the report is a recommendation to the government and no more than this. The government needs to consider the report and consult with the devolved administrations before accepting the conclusions and recommendations of the report. If wishing to follow the recommendations a carbon budget would then be laid before Parliament. However, the government does not have to adopt the recommendations in the report and the range of matters to be considered in setting the carbon budget is wide and includes economic and fiscal matters. Once passed through parliament, the government would then need to incorporate into national legislation and/or guidance before any real significance could be afforded to it.

 

The  report was a material planning consideration in determining the Application and the weight to be given to a material consideration was a matter for the decision-maker having regard to its status at the time the decision is made. In considering the weight to be given, the decision-maker should also consider the government’s policies and guidance – which clearly state that essentially, international aviation emissions are to be dealt with at a National and International level. Paragraphs 78-91 and paragraphs 206-214 of the Chief Planning Officer’s first Report sets out this position in full.

 

In terms of international aviation, Members had not been previously advised to ignore emissions. On the contrary officers had advised Members that it is a material consideration but in determining the weight to be given, Members also had to take into account National Policy.

 

In terms of the case of Spurrier, the paragraphs of greatest relevance to this application are in fact referred to in the previous report. Para 631 which is the para quoted in the Friends of Earth letter, is not, as this relates specifically to the Airport National Policy Statement which is not applicable to this application.

 

The additional representations raise no new issues from those matters contained in the original report. Some additional suggested conditions had been received but again they were either already covered in the existing conditions or were not considered necessary by officers.

 

It was also reported that there had also been a representation from Outer North West Community Committee setting out those conditions they would wish to be considered (Paragraph No.49 of the submitted report referred).

 

The planning case officer also updated the conditions in relation to the report to state that conditions 52 and 53 should be combined, additional conditions for a badger survey, healthy airports obligations, terminal to achieve BREEAM excellent and submission of details for the meet and greet building, bus station and other public transport infrastructure, private hire car access to the one hour car park

 

In addition there should be additional clauses to the Section 106 Agreement to cover off site planting contribution and cycle path implementation.

 

In conclusion Members were informed that officers considered that the scheme was acceptable in all matters as outlined in the previous report (copy included as an appendix to the submitted report) and the scheme had now additional contributions over and above what was previously reported.

 

In discussing the outstanding issues, Members considered:

 

·  The partial demolition of the existing terminal building (20%) was not satisfactory and that further discussions should take place about the demolition of the building and its future use.

·  On the issue of linking the new terminal delivery to the commencement of changes to the flight regime. Members remained of the view that there should be no change to the flights regime until the new terminal was open.

·  A small number of Members considered the level of contribution to the new railway station and public transport enhancements was insufficient and that further contributions be sought. Other Members were generally satisfied with the level of contribution negotiated

·  The Positioning of Taxi rank in relation to new terminal was a significant concern for Members and that further discussions with the applicant should take place.

·  On the issue of charging for taxis using the new terminal, Members were generally supportive of the proposal to permit all (non-official airport) taxis and private hire vehicles to have unrestricted access to the 1 hour free car park and allowing multiple trips within the same hour.

·  Members were generally satisfied with the extent of landscaping and mature/semi mature tree planting, there was however, a desire to see more trees planted locally. 

·  A number of Members expressed concern that the cycle path should not pass through the car park, other Members were generally satisfied with the proposed improvements to the cycle links within the vicinity of the airport including funding cycle links from Victoria Road along the western part of Whitehouse Lane, with cycle lanes provided within the car park linking Whitehouse Lane to the new terminal.

·  A small number of Members were of the view that further off site highway contributions to Horsforth Roundabout/ Dynsley Arms  improvements was justified given the possible impact on the highway network, but it was generally accepted that the peak travel to and from the airport was not within the peak times at the above two locations.

·  Members were generally supportive of the proposals for carbon offsetting; £30,000 for tree planting beyond the airport boundary.

·  Members were supportive of the proposals to increase the employee transport modal shift percentage.

 

In offering comments Members were of the view that further discussions were necessary in respect of the following:

 

·  There should be no change to the flights regime until the new terminal was open.

 

·  The hackney carriage taxi rank remained a concern and that further discussion were required with a view to incorporating a rank at the new terminal frontage.

 

·  Further discussions were required on a Climate Change Action Plan.

 

It was moved by Councillor Walshaw and seconded by Councillor Garthwaite that the application be deferred for further discussions around a Climate Change Action Plan looking at Scope 1, 2 and 3 emissions.

 

An amendment was moved by Councillor Cohen and seconded by Councillor Nash proposing that the recommendation put forwarded by the Chief Planning Officer be supported and the application be deferred and delegated to the Chief Planning Officer for approval subject to two further additional planning conditions requiring that: (i) there shall be no change to the flights regime until the new terminal is open and (ii) that an hackney carriage taxi rank be incorporated at the new terminal frontage.

 

At this point Councillor P Gruen moved a further amendment to Councillor Cohen’s motion to also include a third additional planning condition requiring that (iii) further negotiations take place on the extent of demolition

It was also suggested that the additional conditions to be finalised by the Chief Planning officer in consultation with the Chair and nominated Vice Chair

 

Both Councillor Cohen and Councillor Nash agreed to incorporate the additional condition within their amended motion.  

 

The Chair sought the advice of the Legal Officer with regard to the order in which the motions should be heard.

 

Members were advised that the amended motion put forward by Councillor Cohen should be dealt with first.

 

The amended motion of Councillor Cohen that the application be deferred and delegated to the Chief Planning Officer for approval subject to the inclusion of three further additional planning conditions requiring that: (i) there shall be no change to the flights regime until the new terminal is open, (ii) the hackney carriage taxi rank to be incorporated at the new terminal frontage and that (iii) further negotiations take place on the extent of demolition. The additional conditions to be finalised by the Chief planning Officer in consultation with the Chair and nominated Vice Chair. 

 

Upon being put to the vote, the amended motion was passed 9 votes to 5 and therefore became the substantive motion.

 

Upon being put to the vote, the substantive motion was carried 9 votes to 5

 

RESOLVED –

 

(A)  That the application be deferred and delegated to the Chief Planning Officer for approval subject to the conditions specified   in the submitted report and presented verbally to Members to   cover conditions 52 and 53 should be combined, additional   conditions for a badger survey, healthy airports obligations, terminal to achieve BREEAM excellent and submission of   details for the meet and greet building, bus station and other   public transport infrastructure, private hire car access to the one   hour car park. In addition there should be additional clauses to   the Section 106 agreement to cover off site planting contribution   and cycle path implementation and with the inclusion of three   further  planning conditions requiring that: (i) there shall be no   change to the flights regime until the new terminal is open, (ii)   the hackney carriage taxi rank to be incorporated at the new   terminal frontage and that (iii) further negotiations take place on   the extent of demolition and following the completion Section   106 agreement with the Head of Terms being detailed within   paragraph 41 of the submitted report and presented verbally to   Members for off-site planting and cycle path implementation.   The additional conditions to be finalised in consultation with the   Chair and nominated Vice Chair. 

 

(B)  That the application be referred to the Secretary of State in   relation to inappropriate development within the Green Belt.