In the interest of transparency Councillors Amran, Riaz Ahmed and S Hussain declared an interest in the item relating to 38 Manningham Lane (Minute 38(a)) as they had all attended the venue as wedding guests.

(Access to Information Procedure Rules – Part 3B of the Constitution)

Reports and background papers for agenda items may be inspected by contacting the person shown after each agenda item.  Certain reports and background papers may be restricted. 

Any request to remove the restriction on a report or background paper should be made to the relevant Strategic or Assistant Director whose name is shown on the front page of the report. 

If that request is refused, there is a right of appeal to this meeting. 

Please contact the officer shown below in advance of the meeting if you wish to appeal. 

(Claire Tomenson - 01274 432457)

No disclosures of interest in matters under consideration were received.

(Access to Information Procedure Rules – Part 3B of the Constitution)

To hear questions from electors within the District on any matter which is the responsibility of the Panel. 

Questions must be received in writing by the City Solicitor in Room 112, City Hall, Bradford, by mid-day on 13 May 2019. 

                                                                           (Claire Tomenson - 01274 432457)

No questions were submitted by the public.

The Panel is asked to consider the planning applications which are set out in Document “M” relating to items recommended for approval or refusal.

The sites concerned are:

(a)     38 Manningham Lane, Bradford (Approve)           City    

(b)     Knowle Farm, Knowle Lane, Bradford (Approve)Wyke

(c)     Land at Apperley Lane, Apperley Bridge,               Idle & Thackley

          Bradford (Refuse)                                                    

(Mohammed Yousuf – 01274 434605)

A retrospective change of use from restaurant/café (A3) to banqueting facilities (sui generis) at 38 Manningham Lane, Bradford, BD1 3EA - 19/00934/FUL

The Strategic Director Place in setting out the application referred to the site history, stating that a change of use application from a restaurant to banqueting facilities was refused in December 2018 on the grounds of noise and disturbance being detrimental to neighbouring amenity.  Previous to this the application was refused in September 2018 on the grounds that there was a lack of off-street parking, leading to indiscriminate parking, which would be detrimental to highway safety as well as noise and disturbance.

It was pointed out that this was a retrospective application and that the applicant had been operating the banqueting suite without planning permission for a number of years and that an enforcement notice had been served, hence the retrospective planning application before the Panel today.

The Strategic Director referred to the site plan, photographs of the site and the adjoining area, although a recent application had been refused partly on highway grounds relating to insufficient parking, the current application had been accompanied by a Transport Statement which the Council’s Highways Officers had accepted the findings of, albeit that the banqueting facilities was likely to generate more usage than a restaurant.  On site parking would only be for 18 vehicles and officers had discounted the assertion on the submitted plan of an additional 20 places to the rear of the site, as this land was shared with other uses within the building.

Following advertising of the application, 18 representations had been received, 17 were objecting and one was in support, the principle objections were detailed in the report, with parking and noise being the main grounds of objection.

The Council’s Environmental Health Officer had confirmed that they did not object to the proposal, subject to the installation of sound insulation measures detailed in the noise impact assessment.

In view of the above and the lack of objection from the Council’s Highway officer, on balance the application was recommended for approval.

An objector was present at the meeting and stated the following points:

• That the venue operated on a 24/7 basis and residents life had been blighted by this continuous use.
• That although there was a residents only permit parking scheme in place, there was a complete disregard for this, as guests parked indiscriminately, causing a huge inconvenience to residents.
• That whilst the venue was operating, congestion in the area was intolerable.
• That the setting off of fireworks, loud music from cars, car horns being sounded and people loitering in the vicinity of the venue, sometimes into the early hours, was making life unbearable for families and creating an intimidating atmosphere for families who had young children.
• In addition to the noise and parking issues, rubbish from the venue was left on the street causing additional inconvenience to residents.
• That the owner had shown a complete disregard for  ...  view the full minutes text for item 38.

The Panel is asked to consider other matters which are set out in Document “N” relating to miscellaneous items:

(a) – (h)          Requests for Enforcement/Prosecution Action

(i) –  (j)            Decisions made by the Secretary of State – Allowed

(k) – (y)           Decisions made by the Secretary of State – Dismissed

                                                (Mohammed Yousuf - 01274 434605)