Agenda item

21/06408/FU - Single storey rear extension at 532 - 534 Scott Hall Road, Leeds, LS7 3RA.

To receive the report of the Chief Planning Officer for a single storey rear extension at 532 - 534 Scott Hall Road, Leeds, LS7 3RA.


(Report attached)


The report of the Chief Planning Officer requested Member’s consideration of an application for a single storey rear extension at 532-534 Scott Hall Road, Leeds, LS7 3RA.


Members had attended a site visit earlier in the day and photographs and slides were shown throughout the presentation.


Members were informed of the following points:

·  The recommendation was to refuse planning permission for the reasons set out in the report which were: Significant damage to or loss of mature trees at the site and unacceptable highway safety concerns with the proposed intensification of use of the substandard access and track serving the rear of the properties.

·  The application was brought to the Panel at the request of a Ward Member, Cllr Dowson. The Ward Member was of the view that the wider impacts of the potential tree loss in the vicinity could be outweighed by the benefit that the development would bring to the applicant’s business. No other comments had been received.


Members noted the following:

·  The site is currently used as a car parts sales outlet that also offers repairs and fixing of parts to vehicles. These take place on the frontage of the site which forms a part of the wider access forecourt for this site and other commercial properties. It had been observed that this can cause congestion on the service road that runs in front of the commercial properties.

·  Officers had no issue with the principle of the development. 

·  Highways had indicated concerns in relation to the access to the rear of the properties as there was limited forward visibility.

·  Officers were of the view that the impact on the mature trees would be significant in relation to canopy and root coverage. It was the view that these trees although mature still had a long-life expectancy.


Responding to questions from Members, the Panel were provided with the following information:

·  The largest of the trees marked as T3 within the Presentation slides was noted as being 2 metres from trunk to boundary, which was considered to be very close.

·  Concerns were raised that the car park seemed to be used as an area for servicing of vehicles. It was noted that there was no planning permission in place for this and legal advice would have to be sought as to whether this was ancillary to the main, established business use.


The Chair invited the Highways Officer to provide clarification on why the access was deemed to be dangerous. It was noted that access was to the rear of the properties with vehicles parked. There was a right-angled bend which allowed no visibility. There was also a small room for telecoms equipment. The track was not made up and officers were unsure of whether there were the necessary 3rd party access rights for use of the private track to the rear. All the properties on the parade use the rear as emergency access.


Members were advised that this application had been brought to the Panel for consideration at the request of a Ward Councillor who had raised material planning considerations that gave rise to concerns affecting more than neighbouring properties.  This is one of the exceptions which allows a matter to be brought to the Panel at a Councillor’s request, as set out in the Officer Delegation Scheme. Therefore, it was appropriate to report the application to Plans Panel for consideration.


RESOLVED – To refuse permission for the reasons set out in the submitted report.


It was requested that the servicing of vehicles in a public space be investigated.



Supporting documents: