In the interests of transparancy the following declarations were made.

The Chair (Cllr S Engel) and Cllr Khan declared that item B (Minute number 65) was in their Ward but had not been in contact with any interested parties.

Cllr M Amran declared that item C (Minute Number 65) was in his Ward and he was acquainted with people in attendance but had not been in contact with any interested parties.

Action: Interim City Solicitor

Recommended –

That the minutes of the meeting held on 23 February 2022 be signed as a correct record.

(Su Booth – 07814 073884)

Resolved -

That the minutes of the meeting held on 23 February 2022 be signed as a correct record (previously circulated)

Action: Interim City Solicitor

(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. 

(Su Booth – 07814 073884)

No requests to view documents 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 Interim City Solicitor in Room 112, City Hall, Bradford, by mid-day on Monday 25 April 2022. 

                                                                           (Su Booth – 07814 073884)

There were no questions submitted for matters under consideration.

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

The sites concerned are:

(Mohammed Yousuf – 01274 434605)

A.        5 Ashburnham Grove Bradford BD9 4NX             Manningham

This was a householder application for the construction of a single storey extension to the rear of the above property.  Officers provided the Committee with plans and photos of the host property and explained that it was brought to the Committee for transparency as the applicant was a Ward Councillor.  The proposed extension would not be visible on the street and despite the loss of the two garages, there would still be adequate parking available on the property.  There were no representations received relating to this application

The agent for the applicant attended the meeting and addressed the Committee and confirmed that the extension would not be visible.

There were no questions or comments from Members of the Committee.

Resolved –

That the application be approved for the reasons and subject to the conditions set out in the Strategic Director, Place’ technical report (Document “K”)

Action: Strategic Director, Place

B.        6 Duckworth Lane, Bradford, BD9 5EP                 Toller

The application was for the fitting of an external rear extraction canopy and AC unit to the property named above.  The two storey retail shop was located in a mixed use area with many having flats at first floor level plus residential properties at the rear fronting onto Toller Lane.   The application received 16 objections which were listed in the report. 

Officers presented the proposed site for the extraction equipment and explained that modifications had been made as to where it would be placed to minimise the noise impact on the neighbouring residence.  Officers pointed out that there was no change of use and the latest noise impact report was acceptable.  There would also be no change to the front elevation.  All objections relating to the AC unit had also been addressed.  The use of the building was not part of the application and litter/vermin complaints were not a planning matter for this application as was parking.  Filters would be fitted to reduce smells.

Members were then give the opportunity to comment and ask questions, the details of which and the responses given are as below:

In terms of the noise, was it acceptable to the residence above to which Officers responded that there was no residence above.  The unit sighting was altered to address the problem for the flat next door and would not be an issue for residents across the road.

Why did the plan include seating if there was no change of use to which Officers responded that it was simply to illustrate that it could be operated as a seated eating facility. In terms of the concern that it could become a takeaway, this would be addressed via enforcement if the situation arose.

A Member was still concerned about parking but was again reminded that the business still sat in the same use class and planning permission was not needed so the impact of the use could not be considered as the application was for fitting of equipment only.

The location  ...  view the full minutes text for item 65.

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

(Muhammed Yousuf – 01274 434605)

Resolved –

That the requests for Enforcement/Prosecution Action and the decisions made by the Secretary of State as set out in Document “L” be noted.

Action: Strategic Director, Place

(Mohammed Yousuf - 01274 434605)