Agenda, decisions and minutes

Regulatory and Appeals Committee
Thursday, 11th March, 2021 10.00 am

Items
No. Item

52.

DISCLOSURES OF INTEREST

(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 may remain in the meeting and take part fully in discussion and voting unless the interest is a disclosable pecuniary interest or an interest which the Member feels would call into question their compliance with the wider principles set out in the Code of Conduct.  Disclosable pecuniary interests relate to the Member concerned or their spouse/partner.

 

(2)       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. 

 

(3)       Members are also welcome to disclose interests which are not disclosable pecuniary interests but which they consider should be made in the interest of clarity.

 

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

Minutes:

In the interests of transparency, both Councillor Wainwright and Warburton disclosed that they had attended meetings when the items in respect of 71 Beacon Road, Bradford and the Willows, Hainsworth Road, Silsden had previously been discussed but each undertook to consider the applications solely on the information presented at this meeting.

 

Also in the interest of transparency, Councillors Amran and Kamran Hussain disclosed that they recognised some of the names of members of the public attending the meeting but confirmed that they had not discussed any item on the agenda with them.

 

ACTION: City Solicitor

 

53.

INSPECTION OF REPORTS AND BACKGROUND PAPERS

(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)

Minutes:

No requests were made to review restrictions on reports or background documents.

54.

MEMBERSHIP OF SUB-COMMITTEES

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

 

                                                            (Sheila Farnhill – 01274 432268)

Minutes:

Resolved –

 

That Councillor Mullaney replace Councillor Watson on the District Planning Panel

 

ACTION: City Solicitor

55.

71 BEACON ROAD, BRADFORD - 20/05807/FUL pdf icon PDF 715 KB

The Assistant Director (Planning, Transportation & Highways) will present a report (Document “AY”)which sets out an application for retrospective planning permission for change of use from a doctor’s surgery with a flat above to a mosque.

 

Recommended –

 

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

 

(Mohammed Yousuf – 01274 424605)

Additional documents:

Minutes:

Note – at the commencement of this item, the Chair of the Committee experienced connectivity problems so the Deputy Chair assumed the Chair. Councillor Warburton took no part in the discussion or voting on this matter.

 

The Assistant Director (Planning, Transportation & Highways) presented a report (Document “AY”)which set out an application for retrospective planning permission for change of use from a doctor’s surgery with a flat above to a mosque.

 

A comprehensive presentation was made to the Committee including the sharing of plans and photographs of the site and local area. Members were advised that the mosque was not a large establishment and that no external works to the premises were proposed.  A number of representations had been received in objection to the application, mainly based on noise, disturbance and highways matters. In response to those the applicant had proposed noise insulation works and the use of wardens at busy times. The main use of the mosque would be for Friday prayers but it was noted that this was a time when most local residents would be at work. Four parking spaces had been identified to the rear of the premises.

 

A member queried the capacity of the mosque and was advised that it would usually be used by 20 worshippers and could only go to a maximum capacity of under 100.

 

A local resident joined the meeting and spoke in objection to the application. He referred to a previous Local Ombudsman Investigation in respect of these premises which had stated that the views of local residents and the effect on the local community should be taken into account. He advised that the mosque had been in operation for three years and that it was open from 0500 to 2200 every day and that it could be open 24 hours a day at some times of the year. The effect of traffic from such an operation was described as dreadful and the lack of parking was highlighted as a particular problem, especially as there was little on street parking for residents’ use. He did not consider the proposal for four on-site parking spaces to be a practical solution and highlighted the level of objection to the application that had been submitted. He also referred to other applications which had been refused by the Council where there had been a large number of visitors resulting in disturbance to local residents.

 

In response, the Assistant Director stated that this application must be considered solely on its own merits and that the Council’s Environmental Health Team had received no complaints from residents. He accepted that on-street parking would have some impact but considered it to be similar to that caused by a local school. He advised members that in the last five years there had been no accidents attributable to the operation of the mosque.

 

The Principal Engineer – Highway Development Control confirmed that, during the period in which the mosque had been in operation, there had been no recordable  ...  view the full minutes text for item 55.

56.

OUTLINE APPLICATION FOR RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT OF LAND AT THE WILLOWS, HAINSWORTH ROAD, SILSDEN - pdf icon PDF 2 MB

The Assistant Director (Planning , Transportation & Highways) will present a report (Document “BB”) which sets out an application for outline planning permission 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 contained within Document “BB”.

 

(Mark Hutchinson – 01274 434380)

 

Minutes:

Note: at the commencement of this item Councillor Warburton resumed the chair.

 

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

 

A comprehensive presentation was made in respect of the application, with plans and photographs of the site and surrounding area being shared. It was noted that a previous application had been refused on the grounds highway safety and that, when the Planning Inspector had considered the consequent appeal, it had been refused on the grounds of lack of affordable housing not highways issues. 

 

This application had been assessed as satisfactory by the highways officer and the issue of affordable housing had also been addressed by the applicant. Objections to this application had been received on the grounds of poor access and highway safety.

 

A member queried the issue of visibility and was advised that the road scheme had been designed to cause no conflict for road users and that the roundabout being referred to was half a mile away from the development. Any issues of visibility caused by the hedging was able to be dealt with by the Council, with the landowner being recharged if necessary.

 

A ward councillor joined the meeting to represent residents’ concerns about this application. She highlighted that the site was on both a narrow lane and a blind bend and expressed some doubt that those issues could be mitigated.

 

She advised the Committee that an incident had occurred at this location which had required the presence of firefighters and that they had needed to park their vehicle and continue on foot as access was so poor; she considered this to be very concerning.

 

She also opposed the cutting back of protected hedgerows and, while welcoming the inclusion of affordable housing, she considered that the properties would not be affordable for first time buyers.

 

In response to a question in respect of the weight carried by the Core Strategy which was currently out for consultation, members were advised that it carried little weight as yet and that until its adoption, applications must continue to be considered on the extant policies and their individual merits.

 

It was also highlighted that the site, while greenfield, was not in the green belt and that the application would contribute to the council’s target for housing supply. Members were reminded that the previous application had not been dismissed by the Inspector on highways grounds.

 

In respect of the ward councillor’s point about emergency access it was explained that access to the Willows would be improved as a result of this development. It was also explained that management of the protected hedgerows would be undertaken appropriately and sympathetically.

 

A town councillor also joined the meeting and advised that his town council had considered that the application should be rejected as it represented part of an ongoing overdevelopment of the village. He expressed  ...  view the full minutes text for item 56.

57.

PROPOSED PUBLIC SPACE PROTECTION ORDER FOR BRADFORD DISTRICT RELATING TO ANTISOCIAL BEHAVIOUR AT ILKLEY RIVERSIDE PARKS pdf icon PDF 139 KB

The Strategic Director, Place will present a report (Document “AZ”) which outlines proposals and seeks approval to begin the required six week public consultation exercise to consider the implementation of a Public Space Protection Order for Bradford District relating to antisocial behaviour at Ilkley Riverside Parks.

 

Recommended –

 

(1)  That the Strategic Director, Place be authorised to undertake the required (minimum 6 week)consultation exercise to implement a Public Space Protection Order for the designated area within Ilkley Ward 

 

(2)  That further to the completion of the necessary consultation process, the proposed Order be submitted to this Committee for approval or, alternatively

 

(3)  That further to the completion of the necessary consultation process, the proposed Order be approved under delegated powers by the Strategic Director, Place in consultation with the chair of this committee.

 

(Michael Churley – 01274 431364)

 

 

 

 

 

 

Additional documents:

Minutes:

The Strategic Director, Place presented a report (Document “AZ”) which outlined proposals and sought approval to begin the required six week public consultation exercise to consider the implementation of a Public Space Protection Order for Bradford District relating to antisocial behaviour at Ilkley Riverside Parks.

 

Members concurred that the consultation exercise should go ahead and the results of that be very carefully considered.

 

Resolved –

 

(1)  That the Strategic Director, Place be authorised to undertake the required (minimum 6 week)consultation exercise to implement a Public Space Protection Order for the designated area within Ilkley Ward 

 

(2)  That further to the completion of the necessary consultation process, the proposed Order be submitted to this Committee for approval or, alternatively

 

(3)  That further to the completion of the necessary consultation process, the proposed Order be approved under delegated powers by the Strategic Director, Place in consultation with the chair of this committee.

 

 

            ACTION; Strategic Director, Place

 

 

 

 

58.

BRADFORD COUNCIL'S USAGE OF THE NATIONAL REGISTER OF REFUSALS AND REVOCATIONS (NR3) pdf icon PDF 108 KB

The Committee is asked to consider Document “BA” which seeks approval to implement the use of the National Register of Refusals and Revocations (NR3), in respect of all previously revoked or refused licenses and all new / renewal Private Hire and Hackney Carriage licenses.

 

Recommended –

 

That members recommend that the use of the NR3 register be implemented by 1st May 2021 for all new and renewal applications for Private Hire and Hackney Carriage licenses.

 

(Carol Stos – 01274 437506)

Minutes:

The Committee considered Document “BA” which sought approval to implement the use of the National Register of Refusals and Revocations (NR3), in respect of all previously revoked or refused licenses and all new / renewed Private Hire and Hackney Carriage licenses.

 

A member commented that this proposal was to be welcomed as it would help to ensure the safety of both drivers and passengers. He asked whether it would adversely affect renewal applications by adding unnecessary bureaucracy. He was advised that it would not do so and should not affect renewal applications as much as first applications.

 

Resolved –

 

That the use of the NR3 register be implemented by 1st May 2021 for all new and renewal applications for Private Hire and Hackney Carriage licenses.

 

ACTION: Strategic Director, Place

 

 

59.

CHANGES IN TAXI LICENSING CONDITIONS TO SUPPORT THE CLEAN AIR PLAN (CAP) AND ALIGN WITH THE CLEAN AIR ZONE (CAZ) STANDARDS AND SUPPORT PACKAGES pdf icon PDF 1 MB

The Strategic Director Place will present a report (Document “BE”) which explains that the Council has prepared a plan to achieve compliance with legal limits for nitrogen dioxide (NO2) in the shortest possible time, in line with Ministerial Direction. The Clean Air Plan (CAP) will include the introduction of a Clean Air Zone (CAZ) on the 5th January 2022 that will require Hackney Carriages and private hire vehicles (PHV) licensed in Bradford to either meet the CAZ emission standards or pay a daily charge to enter the CAZ. The Government has confirmed funding of over £10m in support for Bradford taxi drivers to upgrade to CAZ requirements, setting a precedent for levels of grant funding for PHV nationally. The Council seeks to amend taxi licensing conditions to support the Clean Air Plan (CAP) and align with the Clean Air Zone (CAZ) standards and support packages.  

 

Recommended –

 

(1)  That members allow currently licensed vehicles regardless of their emission standards to remain and continue to be licensed to their maximum age of 10 years for Non-Wheelchair Accessible Vehicles and 12 years of age for Wheelchair Accessible Vehicles. This is subject to the following:

·         The vehicle must pass its annual and any other vehicle compliance inspection.   

·         The vehicle must remain continuously licensed and with the same Proprietor.

·         Vehicles that do not meet the Clean Air Zone (CAZ) emission standards will be subjected to a daily fee if they enter the CAZ area of Bradford District.

(2)  That members recommend that once a vehicle has reached its maximum age, if it is to be replaced the new vehicle, that vehicle must meet the requirements of the CAZ, set out in table 1.

 

(3)  That members recommend all NEW vehicles presented to be licensed after the 11th March 2021 must meet the CAZ requirements as outlined in this report.

 

(4)  That members recommend all new and currently licensed vehicles licensed vehicles which meet the CAZ standard can be licensed up to a maximum of 15 years of age, subject to the vehicle passing its annual and any other vehicle compliance inspection

 

(Carol Stos – 01274 437506)

 

 

Minutes:

The Strategic Director Place presented a report (Document “BE”) which explained that the Council had prepared a plan to achieve compliance with legal limits for nitrogen dioxide (NO2) in the shortest possible time, in line with Ministerial Direction. The Clean Air Plan (CAP) would include the introduction of a Clean Air Zone (CAZ) on the 5th January 2022 that would require Hackney Carriages and private hire vehicles (PHV) licensed in Bradford to either meet the CAZ emission standards or pay a daily charge to enter the CAZ.

 

The Committee was advised that the Government had confirmed funding of over £10m in support for Bradford taxi drivers to upgrade to CAZ requirements, setting a precedent for levels of grant funding for PHV nationally. The Strategic Director sought to amend taxi licensing conditions to support the Clean Air Plan (CAP) and align with the Clean Air Zone (CAZ) standards and support packages.

 

The package of support measures for hackney carriage and private hire operators and drivers, including a grant of £3,200 towards a new vehicle and a short term period of relicensing  for vehicles reaching their maximum age  was explained in detail.

 

A member queried the consultation that had been undertaken so far and was advised that engagement exercises had taken places in 2019 and 2020 and that weekly messages had been sent to all drivers and operators. Approximately 25% of the trade had responded and 40% of those were interested in changing their vehicle.

 

The member remained unconvinced about the efficacy of the consultation, pointing out that as a local ward member he had not been informed of consultation in his area. He did not consider the report to be clear about how consultation had taken place.

 

He also queried why the standard of vehicle was different for hackney carriage and private hire drivers and was advised that the difference in standard was in respect of wheelchair accessible vehicles as there were currently no alternatives available for those drivers.

 

The Committee was also reminded that 10% of all traffic movements in the District came from the taxi trade and that a comprehensive package of support for drivers wishing to move to a CAZ compliant vehicle had been put in place. Clean air zones were also being introduced in other major towns and cities and the grant available in Bradford was one of the most generous to be proposed. It had been set at a level to ensure a driver could buy a compliant vehicle that was reasonably new to allow a period of trading so they could adjust to the new process and prepare their future plans without the need to pay the daily charge.

 

A number of members expressed concern at the pressures currently being faced by the trade and considered this to be an additional burden at a very difficult time. They also considered that they could have assisted to publicise the engagement events had they been informed of them. They put on record  ...  view the full minutes text for item 59.