To receive and consider the report of the Chief Planning Officer regarding four dwellings to rear and amendment to site access - Albert House, 3 Monk Bridge Road, Meanwood, Leeds, LS6 4DX
The report of the Chief Planning Officer presented an application for four dwellings to the rear and amendment to site access in relation to Albert House, 3 Monk Bridge Road, Meanwood, Leeds, LS6 4DX.
Members visited the site prior to the meeting and site plans and photographs were displayed and referred to throughout the discussion of the application.
The Planning Officer presented the application and provided Panel Members with the following information:
· The application is brought to Panel due to the potential impact the development will have on the Far Headingley Conservation Area and the level of local concern.
· The proposal includes the construction of two 3 bedroom and two 2-bedroom terrace properties located to the rear of Albert House.
· The front garden comprises several mature trees subject to a Tree Preservation Order.
· The surrounding area is predominantly residential.
· Photographs of the existing site and proposals were provided.
· The garden space for Albert House will be retained, as well as the mature hedging.
· Car parking will be provided for the new properties and each property will include large usable gardens to the rear.
· The distance of the proposal to neighbourhood properties is in line with the Neighbourhoods for Living Guidance and is considered being acceptable impact amenity on neighbouring properties.
· The developer has provided similar properties in a nearby development, as viewed by members on the site visit.
A local resident addressed the Panel with objections to the application. These included the following:
· Concerns regarding overdevelopment of the proposals and, the disproportionality to the rear of Albert House.
· Reference to the recent planning application for a swimming pool at Albert House.
· Loss of greenspace in a dense part of Leeds, consequently resulting in a loss of wildlife.
· Concerns relating to the entrance of the proposals and safety of pedestrians / motorists. There will also be increased traffic with bin collections, visitors, and construction workers.
· There are strong views from the local MP and his objections remain outstanding.
· Absence of information relating to biodiversity net gains.
· The comments relayed from the conservation team suggest a different design in terms of depth and height could preserve the conservation area.
The applicant addressed the Panel. Issues raised highlighted the following:
· The site had previous approval for 9 units resulting in a loss in parking and trees, and the current proposals provide a more considered approach to the site that do not require removal of trees, nor change in frontage to Albert House.
· Albert House will be retained as 1 unit and the application is considered proportionate in scale for the site.
· The application responds to the climate crisis by using air source heat pumps.
· Happy to incorporate a condition that restricts the use of gas on-site.
· The application site is located near local amenities for residents to access within proximity, with an aim to reduce overall car usage. The application also meets the Neighbourhood for Living guidance, as well as design guidance.
· Local developers will be used for the construction of the development.
In responding to a question from a member regarding the offer of the condition restricting gas on-site, it was confirmed that the applicant is happy to accept this as a condition. The applicant explained that the proposed application site has a high EPC rating with the proposals as set out.
In response to questions, officers confirmed the following:
· There is a live planning permission that relates to a swimming pool on the proposed site. However, this does not affect the proposal put before members and is expected to lapse in the next year.
· The neighbourhood plan talks about far Headingley conservation appraisal and the importance of greenspaces and the design to respect the local character.
Comments from members included:
· Members are happy with the entrance and trees being retained.
· The development is well considered and in line with design guidance. The proposals fit well within the area.
· The approach to mitigate carbon and use of air source heat pumps. Happy with the applicant agreeing to not use gas on-site.
Following a vote on the recommendation, it was moved and seconded:
RESOLVED – That approval be granted, subject to the incorporation of the conditions as outlined in the submitted report, as well as a condition being added relating to air source heat pumps and no gas on-site.