In the interest of transparency Councillor Ellis declared that he was a member of a number of professional drainage bodies.

Recommended –

That the minutes of the meeting held on 5 December 2019 be signed as a correct record.

(Yusuf Patel – 01274 434579)

In considering approving the minutes of the meeting of the Committee held on 5 December 2020 in relation to Minute 54 (former site of Otto House Ingleby Road Bradford)  Members confirmed that the Minutes be approved subject to an amendment to Minute 54.  Members were specifically asked and they confirmed there were no errors or omissions in the minutes to item 54 Otto house but amended the resolution therein to:

“approve in accordance with officer’s recommendations with an additional condition for a noise attenuation scheme for the whole site plus amendments to two drainage conditions that reflect the drainage concerns expressed in the discussion by members”

(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. 

(Yusuf Patel – 01274 434579)

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.

(Yusuf Patel – 01274 434579)

There we no membership changes.

The Strategic Director Place will submit a report (Document “Z”) which relates to proposals to merge the two Area Planning Panels into one single Planning Panel due to the gradual decrease in number of planning applications being dealt with at the existing Keighley and Shipley Area Planning Panel and the Bradford Area Planning Panel. The Regulatory and Appeals Committee would continue to consider strategically significant and major applications with the other applications being dealt with at a single Planning Panel which would meet more regularly to ensure applications are determined in a timely manner and performance targets continue to be met.

The report recommends implementation of the new panel arrangements for the next municipal year.

Recommended –

(1)       It is recommended that the Regulatory and Appeals Committee agree to recommend to full Council:

(2)       The amalgamation of the Keighley / Shipley and Bradford Area Panels into a single Planning Panel.

(3)       That the City Solicitor be requested to place this report (if            approved) before the Independent Remuneration Panel with a        view to a recommendation regarding the Chair’s and Deputy          Chair’s SRA .

(4)       That the City Solicitor be asked to draft amendments to the         Constitution to implement this decision, including references to the Planning Code of Conduct and the proposed amendments be      recommended to the Governance and Audit Committee to then be             forwarded to Council for approval.

(Chris Eaton -  01274 432483)

The Strategic Director Place submitted a report (Document “Z”) which related to proposals to merge the two Area Planning Panels into one single Planning Panel due to the gradual decrease in the number of planning applications being dealt with at the existing Keighley and Shipley Area Planning Panel and the Bradford Area Planning Panel. The Regulatory and Appeals Committee would continue to consider strategically significant and major applications with the other applications being dealt with at a single Planning Panel which would meet more regularly to ensure applications are determined in a timely manner and performance targets continue to be met.

The report recommended implementation of the new panel arrangements for the next municipal year.

The Assistant Director gave an overview of the proposed changes and the benefits that would accrue from amalgamating the two Area Planning Panels to one single district planning panel, which were detailed in the report.

Comments received from a Craven Ward Councillor were tabled at the meeting which cited a number of concerns around there being no public consultation on the proposed changes, venue and travel and the inconvenience this will cause, the danger of rushing through applications given the large number of applications at any one meeting and that transparency would be lost.

A resident of Silsden was present at the meeting and stated his opposition to the proposals, stating that applications were already decided under delegated powers and that by creating a single Panel would only create an extra burden for officers.  However, he cited the risk of errors, if local knowledge around planning applications was lost; logistical issues for residents having to travel into Bradford and he questioned the money that would be saved from such a proposal and expressing concerns that no public consultation had been undertaken on the revised proposals.

In response to some of the issues raised, the Assistant Director stressed that around 90 -95% of current planning applications were already dealt with under delegated authority and that officers were able to deal with this number of applications.  On the contrary, one Panel would reduce the burden on officers, create efficiencies and with the possibility of webcasting of meetings, be a better and more imaginative use of resources.  He added that there was no statutory need to consult with the public around what were operational requirements of the Council and the needs of the Service.

A Ilkley Ward Councillor was present at the meeting and stated her objections to the proposed merger, stating that this was more about cost cutting and that it would damage the reputation of the Council as well inconvenience communities, who would have to travel long distances in order for applications to be considered.  That officers could have explored other options such as delegating responsibility to the Area Committees, who had a more profound knowledge of their respective localities.

In response the Assistant Director stated that the proposal was not about cost cutting, but about efficiencies; will save on Member time; provide better  ...  view the full minutes text for item 60.

The Strategic Director Place will submit a report (Document “AA”) which seeks the approval of the Regulatory and Appeals Committee to make changes to the Private Hire and Hackney Carriage Vehicle Specification and to publish the results of Base check Grades.

Recommended –

1.         That the six proposed changes from the on-line engagement     survey set out in Appendix A to Document “AA” be approved and    take effect on the dates stated.

2.         That approval is given for the 5 Star Base Audit results to be      made public.

(Carol Stos - 01274 435706)

The Strategic Director Place submitted a report (Document “AA”) which sought the approval of the Regulatory and Appeals Committee to make changes to the Private Hire and Hackney Carriage Vehicle Specification and to publish the results of Base check Grades.

The Enforcement Manager gave a detailed overview of the proposed changes which were set out in the report.

In response to a question regarding breakdown, it was stated that currently there were 330 Hackney Carriage drivers and around 5,000 Private Hire drivers, however 383 drivers had responded to the consultation on the proposed changes.  A Member questioned the wisdom of conducting the consultation during December, which was a very busy period for the taxi trade.  In response it was stressed no time was ever perfect and that the service had written to all the drivers in the district and that there had been a genuine attempt to get the message across.

Members expressed concerns at the proposal regarding the age of vehicles at first registration, and in the context of hybrid and electric vehicles this proposal should be relaxed. 

In term of the impending Government proposals for a clean air zone, the Council was still awaiting details on the extent of this and the implications for the taxi trade, albeit they would work closely with the trade to ensure a workable solution.  It was pointed out that the trade were already aware of some of the impending changes and the need to switch vehicle type.

A Member expressed concerns that the proposals set out in the report could result in financial hardships for taxi drivers.  In response it was stressed that financial hardship was not a material factor in drawing up the proposed changes.

A number of drivers representing both the Hackney Carriage and Private Hire trades were present at the meeting and although they expressed support for the proposed changes to the height of vehicles, and to the introduction of the 5 star award scheme, they expressed reservations around the age of vehicles that would be allowed, citing the already expensive cost of new vehicles coupled with additional cost of purchasing hybrid/electric vehicles.  There was an acknowledgement that the Clean Air Zone would become a reality; however more time should be given in term of the transition period in order for drivers to adjust to the changes and absorb the associated cost with running such vehicles.  

During a lengthy debate Members felt that some changes should be made to Proposals 1 and 3 in order to assist the Trade in making the transition, and it was therefore:

Resolved –

(1)        That the following proposed changes from the on-line      engagement survey be approved and that they take effect on the dates stated:

(i)            Proposal 1 - Vehicle proprietors be offered the option to apply for an extension to their current vehicle licence (as above) beyond the 10 (12 for WAV) years maximum age limit with immediate effect.

(Background - For proprietors (owners) of vehicles which were first licenced  ...  view the full minutes text for item 61.

The Assistant Director (Planning, Transportation & Highways) will submit a report (Document “AB”) which sets out an outline application for residential development of land, requesting consideration of access at The Willows, Hainsworth Road, Silsden.

Recommended –

That the application be approved subject to completion of the Section 106 and conditions set out in Appendix 1 to Document “AB”.

(John Eyles – 01274 434380)

The Assistant Director (Planning, Transportation & Highways) submitted a report (Document “AB”) which set out an outline application for residential development of land, requesting consideration of access at The Willows, Hainsworth Road, Silsden.

The Assistant Director gave a detailed overview of the planning application, showing plans, photographs of the proposed site and summarising the representations that had been received.  He also drew Members’ attention to the implications pertaining to the works carried out to the towpath, which no longer required a contribution from the developer.

Given the narrow width of the existing road a road safety audit had been undertaken by the applicant and assessed by Council’s Highways section, although traffic use on Hainsworth road was minimal.

In response to a question regarding the possibility of widening the existing highway, the Assistant Director stated that given the protected hedgerows on both sides of Hainsworth Road, any widening was out of the question.

In addition a Member questioned the number of houses proposed and that he had concerns regards drainage and possible flooding on the highway as a result of the development.   In response it was stressed that a suitable drainage condition could be imposed to deal with foul and surface water.

A local resident was present at the meeting and raised objections around road safety and in particular the blind bend and narrowness of the existing road; that the new development would seek to add an additional 44 properties and any safety measures would not mitigate this number of properties.

A Silsden Town Councillor was present at the meeting and stated that he had concerns about the existing road with and the protected hedgerow, as well concerns around drainage and sewage water discharge

Comments received from a Craven Ward Councillor were tabled at the meeting which reiterated many of the above points, but in particular drew attention to the limited access on to the site and that the proposed priority scheme would be inadequate.

During the discussion Members expressed concerns on the application particularly with regards to the narrowness of the existing road; inability to prune the existing protected hedgerow and that there were no clear site lines in either direction on Hainsworth Road and thereby highway safety would be severely compromised and it was therefore:

Resolved –

(1)       That the application be refused on the following highway safety            grounds:

(i)            Narrowness of the existing road.

(ii)          Inability to prune the existing protected hedgerow.

(iii)         No clear site lines in either direction on Hainsworth Road

(2)       That the precise wording of the above resolution be delegated to          the Assistant Director Transportation Design and Planning.

ACTION: Assistant Director Transportation Design and Planning

The Assistant Director (Planning, Transportation & Highways) will submit a report(Document “AC”) which sets out a  reserved matters application requesting consideration of appearance, landscaping, layout and scale for means of access for employment development B1, B2 and B8 uses (pursuant to outline approval 17/02463/MAO) on land at Grid Ref 419205 434606, Woodhall Road, Bradford.

Recommended –

That the application be approved subject to the conditions set out in Appendix 1 to Document “AC”.

(John Eyles – 01274 434380)

The Assistant Director (Planning, Transportation & Highways) submitted a report(Document “AC”) which set out a reserved matters application requesting consideration of appearance, landscaping, layout and scale for means of access for employment development B1, B2 and B8 uses (pursuant to outline approval 17/02463/MAO) on land at Grid Ref 419205 434606, Woodhall Road, Bradford.

The Assistant Director gave a detailed overview of the application, showing plans, photographs of the proposed site, stating that the application had been referred to Members as the proposed size exceeded 5000 square metres and the application could therefore not be considered under delegated powers.  He also summarised the representations that had been received.

Resolved –

That the application be approved subject to amendment of the Condition relating to Drawing number M2597/01: revision F to be replaced by revision G.

ACTION:       Assistant Director Transportation, Design and Planning