The Assistant Director - Planning, Transportation and Highways will submit Document “K” in relation to a full planning application for the construction of a community facility with ancillary accommodation at Tile Street, Manningham, Bradford - 18/05541/MAF.

Recommended –

(1)       That the application be approved for the reason 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: 

(i)    The provision of highway works through a Section 278 Agreement to:

a) deliver proposed waiting restrictions and permit parking; and

b) the re-location of the existing prohibition of driving on Holker Street to the Tile Street junction in order to facilitate access from Belvedere Terrace.

(ii)  The securing of £12,000 to be used for post-development traffic/parking surveys and a Traffic Regulation Order (TRO) if required.

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.

(John Eyles – 01274 434380)

The Assistant Director - Planning, Transportation and Highways submitted Document “K” in relation to a full planning application for the construction of a community facility with ancillary accommodation at Tile Street, Manningham, Bradford - 18/05541/MAF.

Members were informed that following the publication of the report an additional representation had been submitted, but no new issues had been raised. 

In response to questions raised, the Assistant Director - Planning, Transportation and Highways clarified that:

·         The length of the building’s frontage would be 70 metres.

·         Details on how the land would be excavated had been requested and retaining information had been provided, however, the requirement of an independent engineers report had been placed as a condition on the application.  The properties on Aberford Road would not be undermined and excavations would be made from the Tile Street side of the site.

·         The applicant would be liable if any issues arose.

·         A detailed landscape proposal had been conditioned and would have to be managed.

·         The landscape management plan would ensure that the site would be maintained for 10 years and issues would have to be enforced.

·         The closure of Holker Street stopped vehicles taking short cuts through the area and the Council’s Highways Department did not want to re-open the route.  The preferred option would be to allow access from Belvedere Terrace and close the road at the junction of Holker Street and Tile Street.

An objector was present at the meeting and raised the following points:

·         She lived on Holker Street and her house would be very close to the proposed building.

·         There was no need for the facility.

·         There was a sports centre, gym and community centre close by.

·         Residents had been visited during the consultation period, but there had been language issues.

·         Residents had been informed that planning permission had been granted and residents’ signatures were required.

·         Promises had been made that the Mosque would be a community centre, however, women were not permitted inside.

·         Traffic congestion in the area was due to people attending the Mosque.

·         Holker Street was regularly closed off due to indiscriminate parking.

·         Youths would congregate in the area.

·         The proposal would impact on the community.

·         The Mosque had two halls that were not used and community events could be held there.

In relation to the parking issues raised, the Assistant Director - Planning, Transportation and Highways stated that adequate on site parking provision would be provided and a residents parking scheme had been proposed.

In response to further questions, it was explained that:

·         It was not unusual to have buildings that were out of keeping with the area.  Bradford had a tradition of stone structures, however, a number of religious premises had been constructed from other materials.  The proposal had been designed to stand out in presence.

·         The site was surrounded by a mixture of residential properties and was intended to be a statement.

·         The Mosque had been present for 10 years.

·         Notices had been placed on Aberford Road and Holker Street and a site notice had been placed in the newspaper.  The correct consultation process had been carried out by the Planning Department.  The public engagement carried out by the applicant was separate to the Council’s process.

The applicant’s agent was present at the meeting and stated that:

·         The officer’s presentation had been detailed.

·         The site was a redundant piece of land that was prone to fly tipping.

·         Residents currently had a poor outlook and the aspiration was to improve this for everyone.

·         The proposal was a well designed multi functional facility that would provide for the elderly and young.

·         A scheme would provide a community hub and centre.

·         The building would offer facilities that the Mosque could not.

·         It was hoped that crime and anti social behaviour in the area would be reduced.

·         The facility would offer advice and encourage all groups to take part.

·         The proposed café and bookshop would be linked to other uses in the facility.

·         28 car parking spaces would be provided.

·         Sustainable modes of transport were nearby.

·         Consultees had supported the application.

·         The scheme would be a long term commitment.

In response to a Member’s concern that women would not be allowed, the applicant explained that the Mosque building had limited capacity, however, women were still able to access the Mosque.  The Assistant Director - Planning, Transportation and Highways clarified that there were clearly marked changing facilities for both male and females within the proposal.

During the discussion a Member raised concerns in relation to the resident’s comments and in response a Member suggested that the applicant should work with the female residents and encourage them to use the facilities.  Another Member highlighted the imposition of the substantial building on the residential area.  The Chair noted the interesting aspects of the proposal and acknowledged the variety of buildings in the area.  In conclusion he hoped that the applicant would consider the comments raised.

Resolved –

(1)       That the application be approved for the reason 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: 

(i)    The provision of highway works through a Section 278 Agreement to:

a) deliver proposed waiting restrictions and permit parking; and

b) the re-location of the existing prohibition of driving on Holker Street to the Tile Street junction in order to facilitate access from Belvedere Terrace.

(ii)  The securing of £12,000 to be used for post-development traffic/parking surveys and a Traffic Regulation Order (TRO) if required.

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.

ACTION: Assistant Director - Planning, Transportation and Highways