(Members Code of Conduct – Part 4A of the Constitution)

To receive disclosures of interests from members and co-opted members on matters to be considered at the meeting. The disclosure must include the nature of the interest.

An interest must also be disclosed in the meeting when it becomes apparent to the member during the meeting.

Notes:

(1)       Members must consider their interests, and act according to the following:

(2)       Disclosable pecuniary interests relate to the Member concerned or their spouse/partner.

(3)       Members in arrears of Council Tax by more than two months must not vote in decisions on, or which might affect, budget calculations, and must disclose at the meeting that this restriction applies to them.  A failure to comply with these requirements is a criminal offence under section 106 of the Local Government Finance Act 1992. 

(4)       Officers must disclose interests in accordance with Council Standing Order 44.

In the interest of transparency and in relation to Minute 21 – land off Bolton Road, Silsden, Councillor Sullivan disclosed that the applicant company had made a donation to Cullingworth Cricket Club and that he had presented the cheque to the club on the applicant’s behalf.  The interest was not prejudicial, and he remained in the meeting during discussions and voting on that item.

In the interest of transparency, and in relation to Minute 21 – land off Bolton Road, Silsden, Councillors Alipoor and Brown disclosed that they had received a lobbying email from the applicant which they had not read or responded to.  Their interests were not prejudicial, and they remained in the meeting during discussions and voting on that item.

Action: Director of Legal and Governance

Recommended –

That the minutes of the meetings held on 15 September 2023 and 28 September 2023 be signed as a correct record.

(Yusuf Patel – 07970 411923 / Jane Lythgow 07970 411623)

Resolved –

That the minutes of the meetings held on 15 September 2023 and 28 September 2023 be signed as a correct record.

(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 – 07970 411923 / Jane Lythgow 07970 411623)

There were no appeals submitted 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 – 07970 411923 / Jane Lythgow 07970 411623)

There were no changes proposed to Sub-Committee membership.

The Deputy Chair acknowledged Councillor Salam’s dedication and commitment to the work of the Regulatory and Appeals Committee during his time as Chair of the Committee and he was thanked for all his hard work.

The Assistant Director (Planning, Transportation & Highways) will submit a report (Document “D”) which reports a full planning application for the development of 138 residential dwellings with open space, associated landscaping and infrastructure works (including access to and within the site) off Bolton Road, Silsden.

This item was deferred for consideration at the meeting on 28 September 2023.

Recommended –

That the application be approved subject to completion of the Section 106 and conditions contained within the technical report appended to Document “D”.

(Hannah Lucitt – 07811503622)

The Assistant Director (Planning, Transportation & Highways) submitted a report (Document “D”) which reported a full planning application for the development of 138 residential dwellings with open space, associated landscaping and infrastructure works (including access to and within the site) off Bolton Road, Silsden.

The Senior Planning Officer gave a detailed PowerPoint presentation setting out the details of the application, showing photographs of the site and the adjoining area; site plans; access and landscaping arrangements and proposed house types.

It was reported that the application had been through a detailed design process and planning obligations which were required were set out in the technical officer’s report.

It was confirmed that the application site was formerly allocated as Safeguarded Land, however, the principal policy, Policy UR5 was not saved as part of the Replacement Unitary Development Plan (RUDP) and sites previously allocated as Safeguarded Land were no longer allocated by the Development Plan. 

The application was recommended for approval subject to conditions contained in the report.

Following the presentation Members asked a number of questions including the percentage of trees which would be lost due to the development.  It was explained that it was intended that trees would be retained along the site boundaries.  Mature trees would be lost along the Holloway which was the unadopted section of Hawber Cote Lane.

In response to a Member’s concern that the development would have a major impact on the volume of traffic it was confirmed that traffic formulas utilised to gauge the impact were not blindly accepted and that they were subject to officer challenge.  It was also confirmed that the application had obligations to consider parking and traffic issues in Silsden. The view of the development team had been that there would be an increase in traffic, but that this could be managed appropriately. 

The Principal Engineer confirmed that the methods used to assess the impact of increased traffic were nationally accepted; challenged; updated and constantly reviewed. The volume of traffic anticipated from the development at peak hours was reported.  It was recognised that traffic may queue at junctions, but it was considered that this was acceptable and safe.

A Member contradicted the traffic assessments contained in the report and felt it was hard to believe the traffic movements predicted.  He referred to the impact on Bolton Road which he felt was already horrendous, parking issues in that location, the inability to widen the road due to the location of residential properties and that the movements generated from the development were inaccurate.  In response it was explained that the figures utilised were an average flow from the site.  It was accepted that due to the topography of the application site a higher percentage of people may choose to use a car.  Officers had asked for higher rates to be utilised and a reassessment had been carried out.  It had been concluded that the higher rates generated were still within acceptable parameters.  Bolton Road was busy, but it was believed that the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 22.