In the interest of transparency, Councillor Ellis disclosed that he was a member of the Yorkshire Regional Flood and Coastal Committee and the Airedale Drainage Commissioners. The latter organisation had commented on the application concerning Land at Belton Road, Silsden (Minute 24) but he had had no involvement in this process.

In the interest of transparency, Councillors Brown, Ellis, Wainwright and Warburton disclosed that they had been Members of the Committee when the outline application concerning Land at Belton Road, Silsden (Minute 24) had been considered. They undertook to approach the issue with an open mind and to consider all the relevant material planning issues before making a decision.

During the meeting and in the interest of transparency, Councillor Ellis disclosed, in relation to the item concerning Land at Belton Road, Silsden, that he had passed on complaints about the re-building of the bridge at Marcel House, Silsden which had resulted in the retrospective application for the works and that he had consulted the Environment Agency in respect of the relevant permit.

ACTION:       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. 

(Sheila Farnhill - 01274 432268)

There were no appeals submitted by the public to review decisions to restrict documents.

The Committee will be asked to consider recommendations, if any, to appoint Members to Sub-Committees of the Committee.

Recommended –

That the appointment of Non-Voting Co-opted Members to the Corporate

Parenting Panel, for the remainder of the 2017/2018 municipal year, be confirmed as set out below:

·         Inspector Kevin Taylor - West Yorkshire Police

·         Ali Jan Haider – Bradford District Clinical Commissioning Group

·         Yasmin Umarji - Bradford Education

·         The Chair of the Children in Care Council

                                                            (Sheila Farnhill – 01274 432268)

Resolved –

That the appointment of Non-Voting Co-opted Members to the Corporate

Parenting Panel, for the remainder of the 2017/2018 municipal year, be confirmed as set out below:

·         Inspector Kevin Taylor - West Yorkshire Police

·         Ali Jan Haider – Bradford District Clinical Commissioning Group

·         Yasmin Umarji - Bradford Education

·         The Chair of the Children in Care Council

ACTION:       City Solicitor

The Assistant Director - Planning, Transportation and Highways will present a report (Document “K”) which seeks approval for a revised Planning Protocol for inclusion within the Council and Local Council’s Charter.

The report explains that the Council works closely with the district’s nineteen Parish, Town and Community Councils as key stakeholders in support of the people of the district.   To help manage relations and set out how Bradford Council and the Local Councils aimed to work together a Charter was first produced, and approved by the Executive, in 2006 and then revised in 2015.

The Charter includes agreements on general communications, liaison activity, elections, financial arrangements, town planning and relevant parts of the Localism Act such as neighbourhood planning and the Standards Committee arrangements.

The Planning Service has recently worked with a number of the local Councils to review and update Appendix 5 of the Charter which specifically relates to how the Planning Service and Parish/Town/Community Councils interact with one another in respect of planning applications. The revised Protocol was approved at the Parish Council Liaison meeting on 14 June 2017 and is now submitted for Member’s consideration.

Recommended –

That the revised Planning Protocol, as set out in the Appendix to Document “K”, be approved and that it replace the current Appendix 5 of the Council and Local Council’s Charter.

                                                            (Adrian Walker – 01274 431237)

The Assistant Director - Planning, Transportation and Highways presented a report (Document “K”) which sought approval for a revised Planning Protocol for inclusion within the Council and Local Council’s Charter.

The report explained that the Council worked closely with the district’s nineteen Parish, Town and Community Councils (local councils) as key stakeholders in support of the people of the district.   To help manage relations and set out how Bradford Council and the local councils aimed to work together a charter had first been produced, and approved by the Executive, in 2006; and subsequently updated in 2015.

The Charter included agreements on general communications, liaison activity, elections, financial arrangements, town planning and relevant parts of the Localism Act such as neighbourhood planning and the Standards Committee arrangements.

The Assistant Director explained that the Planning Service had recently worked with a number of the local councils to review and update Appendix 5 of the Charter which specifically related to how the Planning Service and Parish/Town/Community Councils interact with one another in respect of planning applications. The revised Protocol had been approved at the Parish Council Liaison meeting held on 14 June 2017 and was now submitted for Members’ consideration.

Resolved –

That the revised Planning Protocol, as set out in the appendix to Document “K”, be approved and that it replace the current Appendix 5 of the Council and Local Council’s Charter.

ACTION:       Assistant Director - Planning, Transportation and Highways

Craven

The Assistant Director - Planning, Transportation and Highways will present a report (Document “L”) in respect of a planning application for the demolition of two existing properties and the erection of ten replacement dwellings at Darkwood House, The Street, Addingham – 17/00570/MAF.

Recommended –

That the application be approved for the reasons and subject to the conditions set out in the Assistant Director - Planning, Transportation and Highways’ technical report.

                                                                        (John Eyles – 01274 434380)

The Assistant Director - Planning, Transportation and Highways presented a report (Document “L”) in respect of a planning application for the demolition of two existing properties and the erection of ten replacement dwellings at Darkwood House, The Street, Addingham – 17/00570/MAF.

The Assistant Director reported on the substance of an additional representation submitted on behalf of the Addingham Planning Scrutiny Group which stated that whilst there was no objection in principle to the proposal it was considered important to ensure that the drainage system would not have any detrimental impact and that bats were not adversely affected by the development. He explained that relevant conditions were proposed within his technical report.

A Ward Councillor asked if the Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) applied to this development and how this would impact in terms of the request for approximately £14,000 towards recreational provision in the area.

The Assistant Director confirmed that CIL would apply and this levy was intended to address the impact of development on educational and recreation infrastructure, amongst other things.  At this stage a precise figure for the amount of the CIL liability had not been calculated but it was anticipated that it would be in the region of £100,000 in this case.

He further explained that this money would go into a central pot to address infrastructure needs across the district with the exception of 15% which could go to a Parish or Town Council if there was one in the area concerned.  The quoted £14,000 was therefore an indicative figure. It had been agreed that consultees would continue to calculate their requirements so that there was a record for consideration when the CIL money was allocated.

An objector raised concerns about the CIL in terms of public scrutiny of how the money would be spent, the 5% administrative charge and the amount that small scale developers would be liable to pay, as it was considered that this could favour larger developers.  He expressed the view that the money should be spent locally and that members of the public have clarity about how much money was being generated by a development.

The Assistant Director explained that the CIL was a national scheme and that the Council could not change the rules that applied.  The administrative charge was necessary to cover the costs of managing the scheme and the Council had a designated officer to undertake this role. Although Section 106 contributions had only been required for developments of 10 or more units CIL applied to any development of 1 unit upwards.  The Council had been required to demonstrate to a Government appointed Inspector that the level of CIL that it would require to be paid was both deliverable and affordable and robust viability testing had been undertaken on a variety of different sites.  This had meant that in some areas of the district the CIL requirement was nil. The calculation was based on the amount of floorspace that would be created by a development but this  ...  view the full minutes text for item 22.

Keighley East

A report will be submitted by the Assistant Director - Planning, Transportation and Highways (Document “M”) in relation to a planning application, with all matters reserved except for access, for a development of up to 45 dwellings on land at Redwood Close, Long Lee, Keighley – 17/02809/MAO.

Recommended –

(1)       That the application be approved for the reasons and subject to the conditions set out in the Assistant Director - Planning, Transportation and Highways’ technical report.

(2)       That the grant of planning permission be subject also to the completion of a legal planning obligation under Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, or such other lawful mechanism for securing the heads of terms as may be agreed in consultation with the City Solicitor, in respect of:

On-site affordable housing provision of 15% of the total number of units.

                                                                        (John Eyles – 01274 434380)

A report was submitted by the Assistant Director - Planning, Transportation and Highways (Document “M”) in relation to a planning application, with all matters reserved except for access, for a development of up to 45 dwellings on land at Redwood Close, Long Lee, Keighley – 17/02809/MAO.

In a correction to his written report the Assistant Director clarified that the barn at the adjacent farm was not listed; it would be unaffected by the development and was not within the site boundary.

He reported that 38 objections had now been received to the proposed development; the issues raised being covered within his report.  He also reported the receipt of further comments from Yorkshire Water which had stated that there was no objection to the proposal subject to the imposition of appropriate conditions and that the details of the drainage could be dealt with at Reserved Matters stage.

In response to questions from Members he confirmed that:

·         The figures quoted in his report for education and recreational infrastructure contributions were indicative.  This site was located within an area where no Community Infrastructure Levy was payable but this scheme did include a Section 106 legal agreement to secure 15% affordable housing provision on-site.

·         The Reserved Matters application could be submitted to this Committee for determination if Members considered this to be appropriate.

The applicant’s agent was in attendance at the meeting and responded to a Member’s question in respect of the delivery of the affordable housing provision:

·         If problems arose with viability this was normally associated with abnormal costs arising once development was underway.  In this case the results of the Phase 1 site investigation works had been quite positive so at this point it appeared likely that it would be possible to fulfil the requirements in full.  It was, however, impossible to give complete reassurance until the detailed design work had been completed.

Resolved –

(1)       That the application be approved for the reasons and subject to the conditions set out in the Assistant Director - Planning, Transportation and Highways’ technical report.

(2)       That the grant of planning permission be subject also to the completion of a legal planning obligation under Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, or such other lawful mechanism for securing the heads of terms as may be agreed in consultation with the City Solicitor, in respect of:

On-site affordable housing provision of 15% of the total number of units.

(3)       That the Reserved Matters application be submitted to this Committee for determination.

ACTION:       Assistant Director - Planning, Transportation and Highways

Craven

Previous references:  Minutes 105 (2015/16) and 10 (2016/17)

The Assistant Director - Planning, Transportation and Highways will submit Document “N” in respect of a Reserved Matters application concerning approval of details of appearance, landscaping, layout and scale for a development of 223 dwellings and associated infrastructure on land at Belton Road, Silsden – 17/02617/MAR.

Recommended –

(1)       That the Reserved Matters application for layout, scale, appearance and landscaping be approved for the reasons and subject to the conditions set out in the Assistant Director - Planning, Transportation and Highways’ technical report.

(2)       That authority be delegated to the Assistant Director - Planning, Transportation and Highways to issue the approval of Reserved Matters subject to a Deed of Variation being entered into in respect of the previously engrossed legal obligation under Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 to provide for an increased contribution for education infrastructure from £202,844 to £244,783.

                                                                        (John Eyles – 01274 434380)

Previous references:  Minutes 105 (2015/16) and 10 (2016/17)

The Assistant Director - Planning, Transportation and Highways submitted Document “N” in respect of a Reserved Matters application concerning approval of details of appearance, landscaping, layout and scale for a development of 223 dwellings and associated infrastructure on land at Belton Road, Silsden – 17/02617/MAR.

The Assistant Director reported on the substance of four additional representations received further to the publication of his technical report.  He also said that, should the Committee be minded to approve the application, he proposed that a further condition be imposed in respect of the submission of full details of the measures to be taken to optimise the security of the site for approval in writing.  This was in response to issues raised by the West Yorkshire Police Architectural Liaison Officer (WYPALO) and as suggested by the applicant.

In response to questions from Members, the Assistant Director clarified that:

·         The comment by the Drainage Authority that the submitted information relating to the mitigation of flood risk was insufficient had been made prior to the External Works Plan being submitted; no formal revised response had been received further to the submission of this plan.  Evidence had been provided to show that the site could be engineered to achieve the required finished floor levels.

·         In terms of the increase from 190 to 223 units on the site; the area of development had not increased and the amount of hard surfacing had not changed to any substantial degree and these were the factors that affected surface water drainage.  A detailed drainage scheme had not yet been submitted but a condition would require that this was done.  The External Works Plan had indicated the provision of an attenuation tank.  Highways Development Control had requested that the applicant submit an addendum to the Traffic Impact Assessment in respect of the increase in the number of units and this had concluded that there would not be a significant impact on the local highway network taking into account the mitigation measures that had already been secured.

A Town Councillor addressed the Committee:

·         The access to this site was achieved via Belton Road which had been flooded on numerous occasions.  People would have to wade through water to access these new houses.

·         A second culvert had not been provided for Belton Road as planned a number of years previously.

·         An earth bund and the wall of a bridge directed water away from the Marsel House site and this meant that it would go towards this site.

·         A second culvert was needed.

·         Photographic evidence was available which illustrated the problems, with large wagons driving through water that reached the top of their axles. Emergency services had had to help people to leave Marsel House when the area had flooded in 2015.

In response, the Assistant Director explained that the bund and the rebuilding of the bridge at Marsel House were currently the subject of a retrospective planning application. In assessing the application account would be taken  ...  view the full minutes text for item 24.

Great Horton

(i)         17/02462/MAF

A report will be submitted by the Assistant Director - Planning, Transportation and Highways (Document “O”) in respect of a full planning application for the construction of three individual retail units (Use Class A1) and a family pub restaurant (Use Class A3) with associated car parking, landscaping and associated works at Scott Works, Hollingwood Lane, Bradford.

Recommended –

(1)       That the application be approved for the reasons and subject to the conditions set out in the Assistant Director - Planning, Transportation and Highways’ technical report.

(2)       That the grant of planning permission be subject also to the completion of a legal planning obligation under Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, or such other lawful mechanism for securing the heads of terms as may be agreed in consultation with the City Solicitor, in respect of:

The implementation of off site highway works/Traffic Regulation Orders as set out below:

·         Installation of a Pelican Crossing on Clayton Road and an inductive loop detector on Hollingwood Lane.

·         Extension of the waiting restrictions across the site frontage on Clayton Road.

·         Provision of residents’ parking on Clayton Road.

·         Conversion of the existing parking bays across the site frontage on Hollingwood Lane to a combination of residents’ permit parking and limited waiting.

·         Provision of yellow box markings at the new access on Clayton Road and at the Hollingwood Lane and Scholemoor Lane junctions,

the legal planning obligation to contain such other ancillary provisions as the Assistant Director - Planning, Transportation and Highways (after consultation with the City Solicitor) considers appropriate.

(ii)        17/02466/OUT

The Assistant Director - Planning, Transportation and Highways will present a report (Document “P”) in relation to an outline planning application, with appearance and scale reserved, for the construction of a retail unit (Use Class A1), landscaping and associated works at Scott Works, Hollingwood Lane, Bradford.

Recommended –

(1)       That the application be approved for the reasons and subject to the conditions set out in the Assistant Director - Planning, Transportation and Highways’ technical report.

(2)       That the grant of planning permission be subject also to the completion of a legal planning obligation under Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, or such other lawful mechanism for securing the heads of terms as may be agreed in consultation with the City Solicitor, in respect of:

The implementation of off site highway works/Traffic Regulation Orders as set out below:

·         Installation of a Pelican Crossing on Clayton Road and an inductive loop detector on Hollingwood Lane.

·         Extension of the waiting restrictions across the site frontage on Clayton Road.

·         Provision of residents’ parking on Clayton Road.

·         Conversion of the existing parking bays across the site frontage on Hollingwood Lane to a combination of residents’ permit parking and limited waiting.

·         Provision of yellow box markings at the new access on Clayton Road and at the Hollingwood Lane and Scholemoor Lane junctions,

the legal planning obligation to contain such other ancillary provisions as  ...  view the full agenda text for item 25.

Reports were submitted by the Assistant Director - Planning, Transportation and Highways, in respect of a site at Scott Works, Hollingwood Lane, Bradford, as follows:

(i)         (Document “O”) in respect of a full planning application for the construction of three individual retail units (Use Class A1) and a family pub restaurant (Use Class A3) with associated car parking, landscaping and associated works – 17/02462/MAF.

(ii)        (Document “P”) in relation to an outline planning application, with appearance and scale reserved, for the construction of a retail unit (Use Class A1), landscaping and associated works – 17/02466/OUT.

(iii)       (Document “Q”) relating to an outline planning application, with appearance and scale reserved, for the construction of a café/drive-through (Use Classes A1, A2, A3, A4 and A5), landscaping and associated works – 17/02473/OUT.

The Assistant Director reported on the substance of two additional representations received further to the publication of his technical report; one was from a local resident and the other from an agent acting on behalf of a major supermarket. He also responded to the points therein explaining that:

·         The Local Planning Authority’s view remained that Scott Works was the most sequentially preferable site.

·         The Council’s Retail Consultant’s view was that both this scheme and a development on the site at Thornton Road were viable.

·         There was only one duplication of identified end users across both schemes.

·         Whilst it was accepted that there may be some impact on trade for the supermarket located on Cemetery Road this store was located outside the defined retail centre which meant that it had less protection.

·         The submitted Noise Impact Assessment was considered to be acceptable.

He also reported that the applicant had requested the amendment of three of the proposed conditions in his report; 30 for 17/02473/OUT (relating to a restriction on the use of the drive through/café element of the scheme to prevent its use as a hot food takeaway); 35 (relating to the amalgamation/sub-division of the units) and 36 for 17/02462/MAF (relating to the levels of convenience and comparison goods floorspace). He recommended that an amendment to permit the sale of sandwiches be accepted in the case of Condition 30 but that Conditions 35 and 36 should remain as proposed as the application had been assessed on the basis of the details submitted.

In response to Members’ questions the Assistant Director said that:

·         The position of existing nearby businesses would always be considered  in the assessment of the amendment/imposition of Traffic Regulation Orders (TROs) to control parking and a business would be able to make representations about any proposed TROs but it was necessary to protect visibility splays.

·         He was not aware of the existence of a railway tunnel under the site but would take this issue up with the relevant Council officers.

·         The Service Yard would be blocked off and not allow pedestrian access through to the retail units. (He referred to the displayed plans to give an indication of the various pedestrian  ...  view the full minutes text for item 25.

A report will be submitted by the Strategic Director, Place (Document “R”) which explains thatthe provision of a Building Regulations Service is a duty of each Local Authority under the provisions of Section 91 of the Building Act 1984. The Building (Local Authority Charges) Regulations 2010 allow local authorities to individually set charges to recover the cost of providing the service.

The Council’s charges were last amended in 2011 and the report sets out a revised scheme of charges to meet the anticipated costs of providing the service in the next few years.

Recommended –

That the proposed Scheme of Recovery of Building Regulations Charges, as set out in the Appendix to Document “R”, be adopted with effect from 4 September 2017.

                                                                        (Justin Booth – 01274 434716)

A report was submitted by the Strategic Director, Place (Document “R”) which explained thatthe provision of a Building Regulations Service was a duty of each Local Authority under the provisions of Section 91 of the Building Act 1984. The Building (Local Authority Charges) Regulations 2010 allowed local authorities to individually set charges to recover the cost of providing the service.

The Council’s charges had last been amended in 2011 and the report set out a revised scheme of charges to meet the anticipated costs of providing the service in the next few years.

Resolved –

That, subject to the amendment of the total figure for the Inspection Charge for ‘other alterations, extensions and new build’ of between £15,001 and £20,000 in Table E from £164.00 to £264.00, the proposed Scheme of Recovery of Building Regulations Charges, as set out in the Appendix to Document “R”, be adopted with effect from 4 September 2017.

ACTION:       Strategic Director, Place