Contact: Helen GrayItems No. Item
To identify items which may have been admitted to the agenda by the Chair for consideration.
(The special circumstances shall be specified in the minutes)
There were no formal late items of business added to the agenda. The Chair did however, with the agreement of Panel, allow the following documents to be tabled:
Agenda item 7 Brookfield Nursing Home (minute 74 refers)
- Development on Garden Land - Letter dated 19 January 2010 from Chief Planner, Department for Communities and Local Government
- Additional representation from local resident received on the day of the meeting
Declarations of Interest
To declare any personal/prejudicial interest for the purpose of Section 81 (3) of the Local Government Act 2000 and paragraphs 8 to 12 of the Members Code of Conduct
The following Members declared personal/prejudicial interests for the purposes of Section 81(3) of the Local Government Act 2000 and paragraphs 8 to 12 of the Members Code of Conduct
Councillors Campbell and Leadley – Update Report on the Kirkstall Development - declared personal interests as local authority appointed members of West Yorkshire Integrated Passenger Transport Authority (WYITA.) The applicants were involved in negotiations with METRO regarding the delivery of transport links to the proposed development (minute 78 refers)
Councillor Yeadon – Update Report on the Kirkstall Development - declared a personal interest as the Chair of the Kirkstall Forge Liaison Group and a member of Kirkstall Vision Steering Group. (minute 78 refers)
Minutes of the Previous Meeting PDF 80 KB
To confirm the minutes of the previous meeting held on 17th December 2009 as a correct record
The Panel noted the following amendment to Minute 68 South Park Mills was required:
Flooding – ”.. Members noted the suggestion that the reduction of hard-standing across the site through the creation of softer landscaping associated with these proposals could reduce water run-off” and not “could enable more water-off”
RESOLVED – That subject to the inclusion of the amendment above, the minutes of the meeting held 17th December 2009 be agreed as a correct record
Application 09/02813/FU - Laying out of Access and erection of 2 Detached Houses, a pair of Semi Detached Houses and 4 Terraced Houses at Brookfield Nursing Home, Swain Hill Terrace, Yeadon, Leeds LS19 7HB PDF 363 KB
To consider the report of the Chief Planning Officer setting out details of an application for the laying out of access and erection of 2 detached houses, a pair of semi detached houses and 4 terraced houses at Brookfield Nursing Home, Swaine Hill Terrace, Yeadon, Leeds 19
The Panel considered the report of the Chief Planning Officer setting out proposed reasons to refuse an application for a residential development on the site of the former Brookfield Nursing Home, Yeadon.
Plans and photographs of the site and surroundings were displayed along with architects drawings. Members had visited the site prior to the meeting.
Officers referred to a letter recently despatched by the Department for Communities and Local Government on Garden Developments which outlined the Governments’ position with regards to PPS3 and appropriate resistance to development of existing gardens. Officers also drew Members’ attention to an additional representation received overnight. Both documents had been tabled to the Panel prior to the meeting.
The Panel heard representation from Mr C Woods of Aireborough Civic Society in opposition to the scheme and from Mr M Lane the agent on behalf of the applicant.
(Councillor Taggart joined the meeting at this point)
Members considered the character of the locality and the garden setting of the existing villa and expressed their preference for the retention and re-use of the villa which they felt was of local importance. Members did note the villa was not listed and that the developer had stated the building was no longer viable. The Panel also commented on highways matters; the density of the scheme on this site and the house designs
RESOLVED - That the application be refused for the following reasons:
1) The proposed development fails to acknowledge the character, appearance and setting of the locality, and as such the proposal would appear incongruous within its location. The development proposed would result in a large scale housing scheme, which has a near continuous run through the entire site, with minimal breaks between building forms occupied by vehicle access and parking. The proposal is therefore considered contrary to Policies GP5, BD5, N12 and N13 of the Leeds Unitary Development Plan and Government Guidance contained within PPS1 (Delivering Sustainable Development) and PPS3 (Housing).
2) The Local Planning Authority consider that the proposed development would result in further landscape intrusion from key views from all surrounding compass points by the positioning of development close to boundaries, further erosion of existing boundary vegetation which removes the existing native planting and replaces this with wooden fencing. The proposal is therefore considered to be contrary to Policies N23; N24; N25; N27 and LD1 of the Leeds Unitary Development Plan and the guidance contained within SPG25: Greening the Built Edge
It should be noted that Councillor Taggart abstained from voting on this matter as he had not been in attendance for the duration of the item
To consider the report of the Chief Planning Officer setting out details of an amendment to dwelling house (approval reference 09/04033/FU) comprising new basement 1 Dunstarn Drive, Adel, Leeds, LS16 8EH
Members noted the planning history of the site. Plans of the extant permission dated 2004 were displayed for reference along with the new plans and photographs of the site.
Officers clarified the current position regarding heights and floor levels. Local residents concerns regarding the possibility of over looking due to the 600mm increase in height of the windows within the new property were reported. Officers highlighted the 29m distance between the properties which was felt to overcome the issue.
Members commented on the building works undertaken so far and stressed the need to monitor the build of the development to ensure compliance. The Panel noted that permitted development rights would be removed under the grant of this new permission but requested the following additional conditions to ensure
- The storage use for the basement shall be ancillary to the domestic use
- The new development is built as per the submitted plan
RESOLVED – That the application be granted subject to the specified conditions contained within the report plus the two additional conditions to ensure
- The storage use for the basement shall be ancillary to the domestic use
- The new development is built as per the submitted plan
Application 09/05453/LA - Reserved Matters application to Demolish School and erect replacement part single, part two and part three storey Secondary School, with new playing pitches, landscaping and car parking at Leeds West Academy, Calverley Lane, Bramley, Leeds LS13 1AH PDF 507 KB
To consider the report of the Chief Planning Officer providing a Position Statement in respect of a reserved matters application to demolish school and erect replacement part single, part two and part three storey secondary school, with new playing pitches, landscaping and car parking at Leeds West Academy, Calverley Lane, Bramley, Leeds, LS13 1AH
The Panel received a position statement on the current proposals for the development of Leeds West Academy on the site of the former Intake High School. Panel had received a pre-application presentation on the proposals in November 2009 and considered this update in conjunction with the separate application on the agenda for the access proposals. (Minute 77 refers).
Site plans, photographs, sections showing levels through the site and architects indicative drawings were displayed.
Design/Materials- Members comments on the use of colour were sought as officers indicated the developers’ intention to use
- buff coloured brick with colour panels included within the window apertures to the “wings” of the academy
- patina coloured Trespa Meteon panels to the central pod and entrance to the academy.
- Only one storey would be visible from Intake Lane, however the drop in levels of the land facilitated 3 storeys to the rear of the building.
Sport England - were being consulted. An issue had been raised regarding the pedestrian access off Calverley Lane as it cut through the site to the main academy buildings and SE would prefer a boundary route. The proposed route was preferred by planning officers and the developers
Public response – a public meeting had been held and leaflets despatched. One letter from a local resident had been received so far
Intake Lane – to be the main access point. Highways officers maintained concerns about the shape and size of the bus turn around and this may need further amendment
Summerfield Drive - staff and disabled access. A further tracking model was required
Calverley Lane – Pedestrian access only
Members discussed the following matters:
- Members welcomed the revisions to the scheme and were broadly supportive of the design.
- Expressed support for use of the buff coloured brick for the wings but requested further consideration be given to the colour window panels and the white trespa panels to the dance studio.
- Expressed concern over whether the design of the two “wings” was of sufficient quality compared to the innovative design style of the central hub
- Noted the use of brie soleil for the dance studio element had been considered
- Commented on the high visibility of the rear elevations across the valley and the need to ensure coherence of design across the whole development
- Sufficient planting required to the staff car park in order to screen it from view
- Emphasised the need to ensure the extensive glazing will retain heat
- Expressed concern over the proposed design of the feature gateway
- Require assurance the northern access will be secure outside of normal school hours
Members requested more information be provided on the bus turnaround having regard to the statistics available on pedestrian accidents where bus depots have similar nose-in/reverse out arrangements. Officers highlighted there would be no general pedestrian access to this area; only passengers boarding/alighting and reported the bus turnaround could not be re-located due to the levels and nature of the site although the management and working arrangements of the turnaround would need to be revisited.
RESOLVED – That the contents of the report and the comments of the Panel be noted
To consider the report of the Chief Planning Officer setting out details of an application for the laying out of access road and car parking at Leeds West Academy, Calverley Lane, Bramley, Leeds, LS13 1AH
The Panel considered this application in conjunction with the Reserved Matters application on the agenda relating to an existing approval for the demolition and rebuilding of the former Intake High school to create the Leeds West Academy. (minute 76 refers)
Officers indicated this application related to the earthworks necessary to create the bus turnaround; car parking and main access point to the new school from Intake Lane. The Panel noted that negotiations were still ongoing between LCC Highways and the applicants regarding the size and shape of the proposed bus turning area. Officers further reported comments received from Sport England who had no objection in principle subject to conditions to ensure protection of the playing pitches and that there would be no adverse consequences from the earthworks.
Officers requested two additional conditions be included in the permission should it be granted relating to the development process
RESOLVED – That application 09/05222/LA be granted subject to the specified conditions contained within the report plus the following additional conditions
a) Development to take place in accordance with the approved plans
b) No development shall take place until a plan showing details of storage, parking, loading and unloading of contractors’ plant, equipment and materials have been agreed
c) Earth movements outside periods when children accessing and egressing school
d) car park levels.
To consider a report of the Chief Planning Officer providing an update on the redevelopment of Kirkstall Forge, Abbey Road, Kirkstall, Leeds, LS5 3NF
The Chief Planning Officer submitted a short report in support of a presentation on the current position of proposals to redevelop the former Kirkstall Forge site.
Mr K Bradley, architect, introduced a slide show presentation on behalf of the developers which included photographs of the site, architects impressions and indicative modelling. A scale model of the development was also on display. The 2007 Masterplan was available for comparison. Mr Bradley highlighted the amendments made to the scheme and discussed the following:
Amendments - The main drivers behind the amendments were
- change in the economic climate
- as a response to the need to increase the supply of family homes and thereby reduce the number of apartments on site
- the need to kick-start the development in anticipation of the submission by Network Rail of a planning application for the railway station associated with this development
Housing – aim to create various types of family homes. Increased number of houses from 285 to 460 throughout the development. The development would be dense and desirable with integrated family spaces of generally 3 storey residential properties. A meandering street of terraced properties would be created to the Kirkstall Road boundary. Apartment blocks could incorporate “winter gardens”. A slide showing an award winning residential development in Cambridge by the same developer was displayed for example
Materials – intend to use natural materials in a contemporary way with timber for detailing
Heights – 3 storey residential. Maximum heights elsewhere had been reduced from 15 to 9 storey.
Floor space – non residential floor space increased from 146,000 sq ft to 300,00 sq ft
Members went on to discuss the following matters with Mr Bradley and Mr C Johnson for the developers:
- the developers now intended to build the office development first rather than residential as proposed in 2007.
- the residential sales market had slowed down and the developers felt that releasing this as the first phase would not provide sufficient resources for the rest of the development and sales would be too slow to tie–in with Network Rails’ proposals for the station.
- Members were keen to ensure that even if individual applications were presented for each phase of the development, the Panel retained an overview of the development and the cumulative impact of each phase
- Members commended the introduction of “home zones” but commented that the courtyard spaces between the town houses could be dark.
- The proposal for the boulevard of terrace homes was supported but there were some concerns that front doors should not open immediately onto the street
- Expressed some concern that the proposed increase in family housing would put additional strain on the existing community infrastructure, such as schools, and queried whether the Section 106 Agreement associated with the development would be re-negotiated to take account of this
- Voiced concern over the apparent increase in density although noted the applicants intention to optimise the use of the site whilst ensuring that lots of greenspace was created and available around the homes.
- Requested further detail on the take up and function of the proposed allotments
The Site –
- Noted the proposed use of shared surfaces and queried Highways acceptance of these within this scheme
- Sensitive location of the offices at the site entrance could give the impression of arriving at office park rather than an innovative mixed use development. Members also requested information on the justification for the increase in the proposed office usage in terms of UDP policy
- Commented the proposed site for the railway station should be large enough to accommodate the inevitable increase in train usage
Finally, Members noted that the membership of the Panel had changed significantly since the original outline permission had been granted and agreed that the next report to Panel should include a summary of the history of the approval process so far. Panel should also receive regular update reports on development progress as this site would take a significant period of time to develop
RESOLVED – That the contents of the update report and the comments made by Panel be noted
To consider and comment upon a report of the Chief Planning Officer on the Natural Resources and Waste Development Plan Document Policy Position Report (Preferred Options) which was released by the Council’s Development Plan Panel as the basis for informal public consultation commencing on 18th January 2010
The Chief Planning Officer submitted a report in support of a presentation to Panel on the Natural Resources and Waste Development Plan Document (NRWDPD). The Development Plan Panel had considered the Policy Position Report on 13th October 2009 and referred the matter to each of the Plans Panels as part of the wider public consultation process.
An Officer from the Strategy and Policy Section within City Development Department presented the report and tabled a copy of the Policy Position Report Summary at the meeting. The Summary was now being distributed as part of the consultation process and available to the public at the consultation road shows. The main points of the document were outlined relating to:
Land use – the need for efficient use of previously developed land, particularly contaminated land and the need to safeguard existing rail sidings and canal wharfs
Minerals – existing mineral sites to be safeguarded from building development to ensure continued reserves.
Water resources – space for floodwater should be created by protecting areas of functional floodplain and by ensuring that developments in flood risk areas provided space for flood water. Developers should be required to take measures to reduce the rate of surface water run-off and include water efficiency measures within their development proposals
Air quality – Developers to be requested to include measures for improving air quality commensurate to the scale of the development and investigate the benefits of low emission zones – the intention being to include this in the list of matters for consideration by applicants of major developments.
(Councillor Leadley withdrew from the meeting at this point)
Energy – significant encouragement to be given to greater use of renewable energy generation and heat distribution
Waste – four possible new strategic waste sites had been identified for further investigation along with 5 industrial estates which did have the capacity to deal with waste use. The importance of reducing, re-using and recycling waste was highlighted and the need to generate energy from waste.
Members commented on the following matters:
Local relevance – Members were concerned that each of the road shows should include data relevant to the locality in order to engage the interest of local residents.
Energy - Noted the comments that the energy grid contained in the Summary was not ambitious enough and that local government was being required to encourage measures that would provide only a negligible improvement to overall energy creation
Solar Energy – Members supported the view that the use of photo-voltaic panels should be advocated to developers. 1000 panels throughout a development would create 1 megawatt. This would support the Policy to seek a minimum of 10% renewable energy. Members were keen to ensure this aim was discussed at the next meeting of the Joint Plans Panel to ensure that all Plans Panel members were aware. Members also wished to ensure that officers discussed renewable energy provision with developers, particularly with more robust comments coming forward from officers of the Sustainable Development Unit and that comments of the SDU be included within the recommendations within reports on larger developments
Energy from waste – noted the target of 15 megawatts by 2021 came from the requirement that 50% of incineratable waste be utilised. Municipal Waste accounted for only 15% of waste which could be incinerated, the rest being commercial/retail waste
Energy from wind – noted the map showing the areas of Leeds with recorded higher wind speeds which could be more appropriate for turbine development
Sites – commented this consultation could enable suitable sites to be identified in preparation for future energy related applications and assist plans panels being able to identify sites where they would not support certain developments – such as wind turbines
RESOLVED - That the contents of the report and the presentation and the comments made by the Panel be noted
Date and Time of the Next Meeting
Thursday 18th February 2010 at 1.30pm
RESOLVED – To note the date and time of the next meeting as Thursday 18th February 2010