(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.

The Chair disclosed a personal and prejudicial interest in the item relating to Land at 1-3 West Lane and 14 The Fold, Haworth, BD22 8DU (Minute 1(a)), as the applicant was a previous Labour Party councillor and colleague. She therefore withdrew from consideration of this item in accordance with the requirements of the Members’ Code of Conduct (Part 4A of the Constitution) and the Members’ Planning Code of Conduct (Part 4B of the Constitution).

ACTION: Director of Governance

Recommended –

That the minutes of the meeting held on 22 February 2023 be signed as a correct record.

(Asad Shah – 07970 414022)

Resolved –

That the minutes of the meeting held on 22 February 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. 

(Asad Shah - 07970 414022)

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

(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 Director of Legal and Governance in Room 112, City Hall, Bradford, by mid-day on Monday 31 July 2023. 

                                                (Asad Shah – 07970 414022)

There were no questions submitted by the public. 

The Panel is asked to consider the planning applications which were

set out in (Document “A”) relating to items recommended for approval

or refusal.

The sites concerned are:

(Amin Ibrar – 01274 434605)

(a)       Land at 1-3 West Lane and 14 The Fold, Haworth, BD22 8DU

Change of Use from 3 x C3 dwelling houses, 1-3 West Lane and 14 The Fold, Haworth, BD22 8DU, to a Sui Generis use comprising 11 holiday lets: construction of two additional storeys with dormer windows above 3 West Lane, alterations to the frontage of 3 West Lane and associated alterations.

The Area Planning Manager (APM) was in attendance and with the invitation of the Chair, gave a synopsis of the report to the panel.

Following presentation, the following question and answer (Q&A) session ensued:

·         In light of the proposed development, how would this influence the flow of traffic and impact on current parking provisions?

o   The majority of dwellings and operating businesses in the area had no parking provision. However, the area was adequately served with parking provision that helped to ease the centre free of vehicular traffic. In regard to the influence on current traffic volume, a traffic assessment had not been undertaken, as this part of the process, officers were only responding to the applicant’s proposal.

·         In response to safety provision and the management of the building, what had been proposed by the planning department?

o   This was responsibility for the applicant to ensue with Building Regulations and not the Local Planning Authority.

·         Had the dormer windows been assessed?

o   Yes, and following assessment, the proposed dormer windows would be pitched roofs, be 1.4 metres wide and set well back into the roofline.  The submission of revised drawings shown the barge board depth now being increased which appeared to be more in keeping with the area. 

·         As this was a proposed change of use from three C3 residential dwellings to a sui generis use providing 11 ‘aparthotels’ for short term holiday lets, then was it possible for the applicant to submit a later application for a further change of use?

o   This was possible however restrictions could be imposed to restrict applicants to submit further change of use.

Following Q&A, the following comments were made by the panel:

·         The implications of 11 units accommodation on the already congested nature of this part of the conservation area was of concern due to the detrimental influence of additional traffic and, the unfavourable impact on parking provision for existing local residents and businesses. The consequence of guests arriving in vehicles during weekends to visit occupiers of the proposal would cause harmful impacts on the local amenity.

·         Due to the association with the Bronte family and the Keighley Worth Valley Railway, the area had always been a high tourism attraction. Along with the proposed development, could possibly burden the area with significant increase of vehicles in the area.

o   In response, parking provision was easily and quickly accessible for everyone.

A Councillor of the Haworth with Stanbury Parish Council was in attendance and with the invitation of the Chair, made the following representations to the panel:

·         The proposal for 11 apartments would go against the agreed  ...  view the full minutes text for item 5.

The Panel is asked to consider other matters which are set out in

(Document “B”) relating to miscellaneous items:

(A-B)   Items to note.

(C - F)Decisions made by the Secretary of State – Allowed.

(G - R)Decisions made by the Secretary of State – Dismissed.

(S)       Decision made by the Secretary of State – Varied and Upheld.

(Amin Ibrar – 01274 436505)

The Panel considered other matters which were set out in

(Document “B”) relating to miscellaneous items:

(A-B)   Items to noted.

(C - F)Decisions made by the Secretary of State – Allowed.

(G - R)Decisions made by the Secretary of State – Dismissed.

(S)       Decision made by the Secretary of State – Varied and Upheld

Resolved –

That the decisions made by the Secretary of State as set out in (Document “B”) be noted.

Action: Strategic Director, Place