Leeds City Council:

Minutes for Plans Panel (East) meeting, Jul 2 2009, 1.30PM official page

Other committee documents for Leeds City Council :: Plans Panel (East) details

Venue: Civic Hall, Leeds

Contact: Angela M Bloor  2474754

Items No. Item

19.

Chair's opening remarks

Minutes:

            The Chair welcomed everyone to the meeting and asked Members and Officers to introduce themselves

 

 

20.

Late Items

To identify items which have been admitted to the agenda by the Chair for consideration.

 

(The special circumstances shall be specified in the minutes)

 

 

Minutes:

            There were no formal late items, however Panel Members were in receipt of the following additional information to be considered at the meeting:

            Application 09/00091/FU – 12 Church Lane LS17 – a plan of the site and drawing of the proposals submitted by an objector

            Application 08/01118/FU – Land at Hook Moor Micklefield LS25 – plans and key views showing the impact of the proposed wind farm, tabled by Officers

            Application 06/07671/FU – Back Newton Lane Ledsham LS25 – a letter from the applicant to an objector, dated 1st July 2009, tabled by Officers

            Leeds Flood Allevation Scheme – Plans tabled on behalf of the Environment Agency

 

 

21.

Declarations of Interest

To declare any personal / prejudicial interests for the purpose of Section 81(3) of the Local Government Act 2000 and paragraphs 8 to 12 of the Members Code of Conduct.

Minutes:

            The following Members declared personal/prejudicial interests for the purpose of Section 81(3) of the Local Government Act 2000 and paragraphs 8 to 12 of the Members Code of Conduct

            Report on recent appeal decisions for householder applications – Councillor Finnigan declared a personal interest on application 08/01708/FU – 54 Grove View Town Street Gildersome – as he was a friend of the resident at 56 Grove View (minute 25 refers)

            Application 09/01604/FU – Land off Eastleigh Drive Tingley WF3 – Councillors Congreve, Lyons and Wadsworth declared personal interests through being members of West Yorkshire Integrated Transport Authority as Metro had commented on the proposals (minute 28 refers)

            Application 09/01995/FU – Tesco Roundhay Road LS8 – Position statement – Councillors Congreve, Lyons and Wadsworth declared personal interests through being members of West Yorkshire Integrated Transport Authority as Metro had commented on the proposals (minute 29 refers)

            Application 06/07671/FU – Councillor Congreve declared a personal interest as a member of the RSPB which runs the nearby Fairburn Ings Nature Reserve (minute 31 refers)

            Application 06/07671/FU – Back Newton Lane Ledston LS25 –  update report - Councillors Latty and Finnigan declared personal interests through being British Waterways License holders and having an interest in canals and waterways, as this method of transportation of coal and minerals had been raised as an alternative to road transport (minute 31 refers)

            Application 06/07671/FU – Back Newton Lane Ledston LS25 – update report – Councillor Coulson clarified the position regarding the personal interest he had previously declared on this matter which had been recorded as arising from his regular visits to Fairburn Ings Nature Reserve and stated that he was an occasional visitor and had last visited Fairburn Ings approximately 18 months ago

 

 

22.

Apologies for Absence

To receive any apologies for absence.

Minutes:

            Apologies for absence were received from Councillor Parker who was substituted for by Councillor Coulson and from Councillor Taylor

 

 

23.

Request to defer agenda items

Minutes:

            The Panel’s Lead Officer requested that consideration of the following items be deferred:

            Application 09/01678/OT – 16a Church Lane Bardsey LS17 – request to defer for a site visit requested by Councillor Shelbrooke for reasons relating to the most recent appeal decision and to enable Officers to consider matters raised by objectors in relation to access and trees

            Application 09/00499/FU – Holly House Veterinary Surgery 468 Street Lane Roundhay LS17 – request to defer to enable Ward Members to receive full notification of the application being considered by Panel and to enable further consideration of the proposed conditions

            Application 09/00614/FU – 105 Old Park Road Gledhow LS17 – request to defer to enable further advice to be obtained in relation to new development off an existing private drive

            RESOLVED -  That consideration of the applications be deferred

 

 

24.

Minutes PDF 102 KB

To approve the minutes of the Plans Panel East meeting held on 4th June 2009

 

(minutes attached)

 

 

Minutes:

            RESOLVED – That the minutes of the Plans Panel East meeting held on 4th June, with the exception of minute 8 – Application 06/07671/FU – Back Newton Lane Ledston LS25 be approved.   The Chair informed Members that minute 8 would be discussed with the update report later in the meeting (minute 31 refers)

 

 

25.

Report on recent appeal decisions for householder applications from 1st November 2008 to 31st May 2009 PDF 5 MB

To consider a report of the Chief Planning Officer providing information on the results of appeals decided within the Plans Panel East area for householder planning applications decided under delegated powers and by Panel

 

(report attached)

 

 

Minutes:

            Members considered a report by the Chief Planning Officer providing information on the results of appeals decided within the Plans Panel East area for householder planning applications between 1st November 2008 and 31st May 2009 which were decided under both delegated powers and by Panel.   A brief summary of each appeal decision and location plans were appended to the report

            Members noted that 28 decisions had been issued by the Planning Inspectorate in relation to householder applications during the specified period, with 17 (61%) being dismissed, 10 (35%) being allowed and 1 (4%) split decision.   In 3 cases the decisions to refuse the applications had been taken by Panel, with 2 of these appeals being allowed by the Inspector

            Concerns were raised at the length of time taken to resolve the enforcement action at 56 The Drive Crossgates LS15, despite the concerns of the local MP and Ward Members.   Councillor Gruen asked if the Chair would take an interest in this matter and the Panel’s Lead Officer stated that he would take this issue up with the Planning Compliance Manager and ask that Councillor Gruen be informed of the position

            RESOLVED -  To note the report

 

 

26.

Application 09/00091/FU - Part single storey and part two storey side and rear extension with dormer window and detached storage building at rear of 12 Church Lane Bardsey LS17 PDF 379 KB

To consider a report of the Chief Planning Officer on an application for part single storey and part two storey side and rear extension with dormer window and detached storage building to rear

 

(report attached)

 

 

Minutes:

            Plans and photographs were displayed at the meeting

            Officers presented the report which sought permission for rear and side extensions to 12 Church Lane Bardsey LS17 which was situated in the Bardsey Conservation Area

            Members were informed of the receipt of an additional letter of representation from the applicant

            The Panel heard representations on behalf of an objector who attended the meeting

            Members discussed the following matters:

·        the proposed extensions and the impact of these on the amenity of residents of No 6 Castle Grove

·        the proposed parking area at the front of 12 Church Lane, which was currently green space and whether this accorded with policy

·        whether alternative solutions had been considered which would be more acceptable to all parties

·        that the application complied with planning policies and guidelines

RESOLVED – That the application be granted subject to the conditions

set out in the submitted report

 

 

27.

Application 09/00595/FU - Laying out of 71 additional car parking spaces at Leeds Grammar School Harrogate Road LS17 PDF 665 KB

Further to minute 13 of the Plans Panel East meeting held on 4th June 2009, to consider a further report of the Chief Planning Officer in respect of an application for laying out of 71 additional car parking spaces to school

 

(report attached)

 

 

Minutes:

            Further to minute 13 of the Plans Panel East meeting held on 4th June 2009 where Members deferred determination of an application for 71 additional car parking spaces at Leeds Grammar School, Harrogate Road LS17 for more information, the Panel considered a further report

            Plans and photographs were displayed at the meeting

            Officers presented the report and referred to the information the applicant had provided in support of the very special circumstances which were required to justify the grant of planning permission as the site was in the Green Belt

The applicant had also considered Members’ comments regarding the use of grasscrete as a surfacing material for the proposed car park instead of tarmac, but had stated that due to the gradient of the site, for health and safety reasons and that the car parking spaces could not be delineated if grasscrete was used, this suggestion could not be pursued

Members were informed that all three Ward Members supported the applicant’s proposals and Officers reported the receipt of an additional letter of support from Councillors Mr & Mrs Feldman

The Panel discussed and commented on the following matters:

·        whether the Grammar School had any other proposals for the site, in view of the comments of Officers that the applicant had always been minded to use this area of land as car parking, although this was not part of the original application

·        whether any traffic monitoring had been undertaken in line with the previous permission for the site

·        if amendments to the Green Travel Plan could have been considered before applying for additional car parking

·        the need for a car parking management plan to be provided

·        the need for the additional car parking

·        that if the application was approved for 71 additional car parking spaces that should represent the maximum number of spaces required by the applicant, based on the information they had provided

·        that very special circumstances had not been demonstrated and that the application represented incremental development in the Green Belt

·        that the applicant had appeared to dismiss the use of grasscrete without having provided technical information to support their case

            The following responses were provided:

·        that Officers were not aware of any proposals by the applicant to extend further into the Green Belt

·        that some results from the traffic monitoring had been received and these had indicated that traffic levels were approximately 20% less than had been expected

·        regarding the Green Travel Plan (GTP), the new application would have the travel plan of the previous application applied to it.   Whilst some monitoring of the GTP had been carried out, the assessment of the data had not yet been completed

·        that a condition could be included requiring the submission of a car parking management plan

·        that the application was to provide a formal car parking area which would replace the inappropriate parking which was currently occurring on the site.   The school was used for a variety of educational and non-educational uses, with these overlapping during the day, with user rates being higher than predicted and parents stopping longer than anticipated

Members considered how to proceed

RESOLVED -  That the application be granted subject to the

conditions set out in the submitted report plus additional conditions covering the provision of a car parking management plan and the Travel Plan

 

(Under Council Procedure Rule 16.5, Councillor Congreve and Councillor Gruen required it to be recorded that they voted against the matter)

 

(Under Council Procedure Rule 16.5, Councillor Coulson and Councillor Lyons required it to be recorded that they abstained from voting on the matter)

 

 

28.

Application 09/01604/FU - Erection of 20 two bedroom flats in 3 two storey blocks and 5 one bedroom bungalows and laying out of public open space - Land off Eastleigh Drive Tingley WF3 PDF 447 KB

To consider a report of the Chief Planning Officer on an application for the erection of 20 two bedroom flats in 3 two storey blocks and 5 one bedroom bungalows and laying out of public open space

 

(report attached)

 

 

Minutes:

            Plans and photographs were displayed at the meeting

            Officers presented the report which sought permission for an affordable housing development at Eastleigh Drive Tingley on derelict land which was currently being used for anti-social behaviour

            Members commented on the following matters:

·        whether being an affordable housing development would mean the use of cheaper construction and materials

·        the sustainability of the development

·        how a cohesive and harmonious community could be ensured in view of the different types of units being provided

Officers provided the following responses:

·        that the development which was for a housing association would be required to reach a higher standard than that needed for a private developer and would need to be built to sustainable homes standard

·        whilst no information was available on who would occupy the properties, they would be from the housing list and Members’ comments regarding this would be forwarded on

            RESOLVED -  That the application be granted subject to the conditions set out in the submitted report

 

 

29.

Application 09/01995/FU - Full application for erection of replacement retail store with covered and surface car parking, new petrol filling station and landscaping - Tesco - 361 Roundhay Road LS8 - Position statement PDF 1 MB

To consider a report of the Chief Planning Officer setting out the current position in respect of an application for the erection of a replacement retail store (class A1) with covered and surface car parking, new petrol filling station and landscaping

 

(report attached)

 

 

Minutes:

            Plans, photographs and graphics were displayed at the meeting.   A site visit had taken place earlier in the day which some Members had attended

            Members considered a position statement on proposals for the demolition of the two existing stores on site and the erection of a larger, eco-friendly store

            Members were informed that:

·        the proposed materials would be larch timber cladding and glazing

·        the intention was to site a petrol filling station within the site

·        an additional 70 car parking spaces were being proposed

·        some trees would be lost through the proposals but that replacement planting would be provided throughout the site

·        the service area would be located at the rear of the store, adjacent to the woodland

Officers reported significant local objection to the proposals, with

concerns being expressed by Ward Members regarding highways issues and the massing of the development.   Furthermore 93 additional letters of objection and 18 letters of support had been received.   Panel was also informed of a public meeting which had been arranged and had been attended by 150 people where concerns were raised relating to:

·        the scale of the development

·        the impact of the proposals on local shops

·        flooding and drainage issues

·        the location of the service yard

·        impact on local employment

·        whether the store would be environmentally friendly

·        the proximity of the Roundhay Conservation Area

·        a lack of consultation on the proposals

Members commented on the following matters:

·        the height and scale of the proposals and the focus of the building on Roundhay Road which were areas of concern

·        that the trees on the site should be retained and enhanced planting provided

·        the proposed phasing of the development

·        whether the store would be operating 24hour opening

·        the location of the service yard and its proximity to houses with the possibility of noise nuisance for residents

·        the close proximity of a petrol station to the site; whether there was a need for another one within this development and if so, that further detailing to the access was required

·        the impact of a larger store on local businesses with some Members feeling this could be detrimental, and others of the view that it could enhance and revitalise the local shopping area

·        the information which had been provided to objectors regarding the site visit which had taken place earlier in the day

Officers provided the following responses:

·        that detailed comments were being awaited from Officers regarding the proposed glazing and timber cladding which would replace the 1980s style brick and tile store

·        that details of the phasing of the proposals would be provided when the application was brought for determination

·        that 24 hour opening Monday - Friday was proposed

·        that a condition to protect residents’ amenity would be included in relation to delivery hours

·        that Highways Officers were looking at capacity issues and the impact of the proposals on Roundhay Road from Oakwood to the Fforde Greene junction and that further information would be provided on this matter

·        whilst noting Members’ comments regarding the petrol station, in planning policy terms this was not relevant in relation to PPS6 – Planning for Town Centres.   On this matter, the applicant had been asked about the need for a petrol station and had indicated it was part of the overall package of facilities to be provided

·        that the report was a public document albeit only a position statement and that no formal notification of the site visit had been undertaken

In respect of the issues in the report on which Members’ views were

sought, the Panel’s Lead Officer, noting the concerns regarding the possible impact of the development on the Oakwood shopping area suggested that the draft Section 106 Agreement could look at environmental improvements to this area

            RESOLVED – To note the position statement and the comments now made

 

 

30.

Application 08/01118/FU - Erection of 5 wind turbines, improvements to highway access, underground cabling, access tracks, control building, temporary wind monitoring mast 80m high, temporary construction compound and associated development - Land at Hook Moor Micklefield LS25 - Position statement PDF 392 KB

To consider a report of the Chief Planning Officer on the latest position in respect of an application for the erection of 5 wind turbines, improvement to highway access, underground cabling, access tracks, control building, temporary wind monitoring mast 80m high, temporary construction compound and associated development

 

(report attached)

 

 

Minutes:

            Plans, drawings and graphics showing the proposals from a range of sensitive views were displayed at the meeting.   A site visit had taken place earlier in the day which some Members had attended

            Members considered a report of the Chief Planning Officer setting out the current position in respect of proposals for five wind turbines and associated development on land at Hook Moor Micklefield LS25

            Officers presented the report and highlighted the main aspects of the position statement, these being the principle of development as the site was located in the Green Belt; the visual impact of the proposals and an objection which had been received from the Ministry of Defence (MoD)

            Members were informed that the development which was on a 26.8 hectare Green Belt site was proposed for no longer than 25 years and would comprise 5 wind turbines each with a maximum tip height of 125 metres and associated development, ie control building, access, temporary wind monitoring mast and underground cabling

            Significant interest had been generated by the proposals, with over 3000 letters of representation having been received.   Of these, the majority of objections appeared to be from the local area, with concerns being raised regarding the visual impact of the proposals, noise nuisance and the possible negative effect on house prices.   Support for the proposals was from the wider area of Leeds/Yorkshire with the emphasis being on climate change issues and that the proposals would help LCC meet its target for renewable energy

            Along with the public response to the proposals, Members were informed of objections from three non statutory consultees; the Council’s Landscape Architect, the CPRE and the MoD

            Regarding the principle of development Officers stated that Members would need to balance the national green belt policy against the national renewable energy policy

            In terms of visual impact, the Council’s Landscape Officer highlighted  key views; provided graphics to illustrate the impact of the proposals on these and stated that the wind turbines would have significant visual impact

            Concerning the objection by the MoD, Members were informed this related to aviation safety.   Radar interference would be caused by the wind turbines and as this would not be constant or consistent it could therefore not be disregarded by radar operators as a constant and known source.   Furthermore there would be a shadowing effect from aircraft flying in the vicinity of the turbine which would cause them to disappear from radar.   As the site is approximately 9m from a military airfield – Church Fenton – which has Precision Approach Radar (PAR), but relies on RAF Linton-on-Ouse for Primary Surveillance Radar (PSR) no one local airfield could provide all the necessary data for the safe operating of aircraft in the vicinity of the site.   An additional concern of the MoD was that the proposed wind farm could inhibit the safe use of a tight circle which was used by pilots in emergency situations and for training purposes to reduce the landing circuit

            The MoD had been asked to provide statistics regarding the use of the runway for consideration and the applicant had suggested mitigation measures, but these were not acceptable to the MoD

            Members were informed that a formal report with a recommendation would be brought to a future meeting where the other objections which had been received would be set out

            Members commented on the following matters

·        concerns were expressed that very special circumstances to justify the development in the Green Belt had not been shown

·        the importance of providing the opportunity for objectors to present their views to Panel and to have sight of the information contained in the position statement

·        that the report provided clear information on what were particularly complex and technical matters and was well balanced

·        that Aberford and Micklefield Parish Councils should be informed of the progress of the application

·        the possible impact of the wind turbines on wireless services, particularly for emergency call centres and whether this had been investigated.   Officers stated that whilst Ofcom was a statutory consultee, this matter would be taken up with the applicant

·        the significance of the MoD’s objections in terms of being able to progress with the application

·        the obstacles which appeared to have been put in the way of the proposals and the need to scrutinise the concerns of the MoD for accuracy

·        the need to be consistent in approach to applications which have a bearing on climate change and to have an overview to ensure the city had sufficient renewable energy capacity

RESOLVED – To note the report and the comments now made

 

 

31.

Application 06/07671/FU - Extraction of coal and other minerals and alterations to landform with restoration to agriculture, woodland and nature conservation at Back Newton Lane Ledsham LS25 - Update report PDF 4 MB

Further to minute 8 of the Plans Panel East meeting held on 4th June 2009, to consider an update report by the Chief Planning Officer in respect of an application for the extraction of coal and other minerals and alterations to landform with restoration to agriculture, woodland and nature conservation at Newton Lane, Back Newton Lane and Claypit Lane at Ledston and Ledsham

 

(report attached)

 

 

Minutes:

            Further to minute 8 of the Plans Panel East meeting held on 4th June 2009, Members received a further report on proposals for the extraction of coal and other minerals together with land restoration work at Newton Lane, Back Newton Lane and Claypit Lane at Ledston and Ledsham which was situated in the Green Belt and in close proximity to Fairburn Ings Nature Reserve

            Whilst noting that Panel had resolved not to accept the Officer’s recommendation to approve the application, clarification was sought on whether a reason for refusal based on the possible impact of the proposals on Fairburn Ings Nature Reserve should have been minuted, in view of the comments made by Members at the meeting of 4th June 2009.   The report also set out guidance in Government Circular 03/2009 (Costs Awards in Appeals and Other Planning Proceedings) and appended to the report for information was a letter from the applicant which included significant amendments to the scheme which could be made to address some of Members’ concerns

            Officers reported the receipt of a letter from Ledston Parish Council, 9 letters from residents which included concerns regarding the possible removal of the community benefits fund by the applicant and a letter from RAGE’s consultants outlining possible reasons for refusal of the application

Members noted Councillor Congreve’s comments that having not been present at the Plans Panel East meeting held on 4th June 2009 when the decision to refuse the application had been taken, he would not participate in the debate or vote on this matter

            Members discussed the reasons which had been minuted and it was agreed that the potential impact of the proposals on Fairburn Ings Nature Reserve should have been included in the list of reasons for refusal of the application

            Members commented on the following matters:

·        concerns at the reference in the letter appended to the report to the costs of an appeal which the applicant would seek to recover from the Council, with the inference being that Members had been frivolous in their consideration of the application despite the lengthy and detailed discussions which occurred at the previous meeting

·        that Panel was allowed to take a view which was contrary to that of Officers based on the information which had been provided

·        the community benefits fund and the belief that this was based on the profits made from the coal and minerals which were extracted from the site, rather than being linked to costs incurred in pursuing an appeal

RESOLVED –

(i)         That minute 8 of the Plans Panel East meeting held on 4th June 2009 be amended and approved to read ‘ That the Officer’s recommendation to approve the application be not accepted and that the Chief Planning Officer be asked to submit a further report to the next meeting setting out detailed reasons for refusal based on the concerns raised regarding the Green Belt, the impact on the character and amenities of the Special Landscape Area, highways and transportation issues, sustainability issues and the potential impact of the proposals on Fairburn Ings Nature Reserve’

(ii)        To note the report and the comments now made

 

 

32.

Leeds Flood Alleviation Scheme (FAS) and the FAS design guide and vision PDF 126 KB

To consider a report of the Chief Planning Officer on the proposed flood alleviation scheme for the River Aire through Leeds and to receive a presentation on the proposals

 

(report attached)

 

 

Minutes:

            Plans, photographs and graphics were displayed at the meeting

            Members considered a report of the Chief Planning Officer providing details on proposals for a flood alleviation scheme for the River Aire through Leeds and the associated draft Design Guide and Vision.   A presentation of the proposals had taken place at the Joint Plans Panel meeting held on 1st June 2009 and a copy of the draft minutes from that meeting were appended to the report for information

            Members received a presentation on the proposals on behalf of the Environment Agency

            Members were informed that there were no formal flood defences for the River Aire and that over 4000 residential and business properties were at risk, with the direct costs of flooding being in the region of £400m.   Along with homes and businesses, iconic buildings would be affected by flooding, for example The Royal Armouries together with the transport infrastructure, especially Leeds railway station

            Floods had been experienced in Leeds in 2000, 2002, 2007 and 2008 and the effects of climate change were increasing their risk

            The proposals were for a major investment to protect Leeds through the implementation of a 19km length scheme which would use a variety of raised defences.   Currently the scheme was at the outline stage only with the public consultation process ending on 3rd July and further reports being presented to the Council’s Executive Board in July and August

            Members were informed that the proposals had not received Government funding or approval and as it was a relatively marginal scheme it would need to be considered on ‘Value for Money’ rules, with the best standard of protection being provided which could be achieved for the funding which was made available

            Regarding the public consultation process, Members were informed that 350 people had attended the exhibition and of the 130 questionnaires which had been analysed, 76% of respondents agreed with the need for flood defences and that a combination of proposals were required

            Alternative options had been considered and these were outlined to Members

·        upstream storage – with a site in Rodley being considered.   Whilst this was unlikely to be cost beneficial, if additional funding was made available this scheme could be undertaken

·        alleviation channel – would be of benefit to the city centre only and could cost £50m-£100m

·        land management techniques – however research had indicated there was no evidence this was an effective tool in managing flood risk

Details of other work which was being undertaken was provided

including schemes at Swillington Bridge, St Aidan’s, Mickletown and Methley where work was being undertaken with a view to removing water from the washland more quickly and the provision of a bund to some of the residential properties and at Allerton Bywater where work was ongoing with the Council, Yorkshire Water and the Police to address road flooding

The Panel was shown detailed plans of the proposals for the Leeds

FAS in relation to areas within the remit of Plans Panel East and was informed that a variety of defences were being proposed which included earth embankments and walls of varying heights

            Members commented on the following matters:

·        whether other areas which had experienced flooding would be considered

·        that the gauge being used of a flood incident of 1:200 years was now not realistic

·        whether in the event of a serious flood incident, Thwaite Mills would be seriously affected

The following responses were provided by the Environment Agency representatives

·        that alongside the Leeds FAS, local schemes were being worked on which would include schemes for Wykebeck, Millshaw and Farnley

·        in respect of Thwaite Mills, the Environment Agency was working with the curator, with the view being that a more preferable option would be to allow Thwaite Mills to flood rather than having walls and an embankment through the site which would impact on its use

RESOLVED – To note the report, the presentation and the comments

now made

 

 

33.

Date and time of next meeting

Thursday 30th July 2009 at 1.30pm

 

 

Minutes:

            Thursday 30th July 2009 at 1.30pm

 

 

API Get this info as xml or json help