Keighley and Shipley) to Be Held on Wednesday, 10 July 2019 at 10.00 Am in Council Chamber - Keighley Town Hall

Public Document Pack

Agenda for a meeting of the Area Planning Panel (Keighley and Shipley) to be held on Wednesday, 10 July 2019 at 10.00 am in Council Chamber - Keighley Town Hall

Members of the Committee – Councillors LABOUR CONSERVATIVE THE INDEPENDENTS Engel (Ch) Barker Naylor Abid Hussain (DCh) K Green Godwin Mullaney

Alternates: LABOUR CONSERVATIVE THE INDEPENDENTS Amran Ellis Hawkesworth Azam Pollard Greenwood Jenkins Notes:  This agenda can be made available in Braille, large print or tape format on request by contacting the Agenda contact shown below.  The taking of photographs, filming and sound recording of the meeting is allowed except if Councillors vote to exclude the public to discuss confidential matters covered by Schedule 12A of the Local Government Act 1972. Recording activity should be respectful to the conduct of the meeting and behaviour that disrupts the meeting (such as oral commentary) will not be permitted. Anyone attending the meeting who wishes to record or film the meeting's proceedings is advised to liaise with the Agenda Contact who will provide guidance and ensure that any necessary arrangements are in place. Those present who are invited to make spoken contributions to the meeting should be aware that they may be filmed or sound recorded.  If any further information is required about any item on this agenda, please contact the officer named at the foot of that agenda item.  A legal briefing for all Members will take place at 0930 in the Council Chamber, Keighley Town Hall on the day of the meeting.  Applicants, objectors, Ward Councillors and other interested persons are advised that the Committee may visit any of the sites that appear on this Agenda during the day of the meeting, without prior notification. The Committee will then reconvene in the meeting room after any visits in order to determine the matters concerned.  At the discretion of the Chair, representatives of both the applicant(s) and objector(s) may be allowed to speak on a particular application for a maximum of five minutes in total. From: To: Parveen Akhtar City Solicitor Agenda Contact: Palbinder Sandhu Phone: (01274) 432269 E-Mail: palbinder.sandhu@bradford.gov.uk A. PROCEDURAL ITEMS

1. ALTERNATE MEMBERS (Standing Order 34)

The City Solicitor will report the names of alternate Members who are attending the meeting in place of appointed Members.

2. 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.

3. 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.

(Palbinder Sandhu – 01274 432269)

4. PUBLIC QUESTION TIME

(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 City Solicitor in Room 112, City Hall, Bradford, by mid-day on Monday 8 July 2019.

(Palbinder Sandhu - 01274 432269)

B. BUSINESS ITEMS

5. APPLICATIONS RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL OR REFUSAL 1 - 42

The Panel is asked to consider the planning applications which are set out in Document “C” relating to items recommended for approval or refusal.

The sites concerned are:

(a) 19 Hollin Head, Baildon (Approve) Baildon (b) 5 Dale View, Ilkley (Approve) Ilkley (c) Darkwood House, The Street, Addingham Craven (Approve) (d) 1 Wrexham Road, Burley In Wharfedale, Wharfedale Ilkley (Refuse) (e) 453 Bradford Road, Sandbeds, Keighley Keighley East (Refuse) (f) Land to rear of 19 Northgate, Baildon Baildon (Refuse)

(Mohammed Yousuf – 01274 434605) 6. MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS 43 - 46

The Panel is asked to consider other matters which are set out in Document “D” relating to miscellaneous items:

(a)-(e) Decision made by the Secretary of State

(Mohammed Yousuf – 01274 434605)

THIS AGENDA AND ACCOMPANYING DOCUMENTS HAVE BEEN PRODUCED, WHEREVER POSSIBLE, ON RECYCLED PAPER Agenda Item 5/

Report of the Strategic Director of Place to the meeting of the Area Planning Panel (Keighley and Shipley) to be held on 10 July 2019 C

Summary Statement - Part One Applications recommended for Approval or Refusal

The sites concerned are:

Item Site Ward A. 19 Hollin Head Baildon West Yorkshire BD17 7LJ - Baildon 19/02356/HOU [Approve] B. 5 Dale View Ilkley West Yorkshire LS29 9BP - Ilkley 19/01578/FUL [Approve] C. Darkwood House The Street Addingham West Craven Yorkshire LS29 0JY - 19/01843/FUL [Approve] D. 1 Wrexham Road Burley In Wharfedale Ilkley West Wharfedale Yorkshire LS29 7LS - 19/01618/FUL [Refuse] E. 453 Bradford Road Sandbeds Keighley West Keighley East Yorkshire BD20 5NH - 19/01885/FUL [Refuse] F. Land To Rear Of 19 Northgate Baildon West Baildon Yorkshire BD17 6JZ - 19/01605/FUL [Refuse]

Julian Jackson Portfolio: Assistant Director (Planning, Transportation and Regeneration, Planning & Highways) Transport

Report Contact: Mohammed Yousuf Overview & Scrutiny Committee Phone: 01274 434605 Area: Regeneration and Environment Email: [email protected]

Page 1 Report to the Area Planning Panel (Keighley/Shipley)

19/02356/HOU

19 Hollin Head Baildon BD17 7LJ

Page 2 Report to the Area Planning Panel (Keighley/Shipley)

10 July 2019 Item: A Ward: BAILDON Recommendation: TO GRANT PLANNING PERMISSION

Application Number: 19/02356/HOU

Type of Application/Proposal and Address: Householder Application to add a pitched roof to an existing flat roofed extension to the rear of 19 Hollin Head, Baildon, BD17 7LJ

Applicant: Mrs Victoria Hinchliff Walker

Agent: None

Site Description: The application dwelling is a modern semi-detached bungalow, built in brick with a concrete tiled roof and white upvc window fittings. The property is on a street lined by similar properties in a residential area. Behind the property the Wharfedale railway line runs in a cutting. An existing flat roofed extension projects out to the rear.

Relevant Site History: 72/01870/FUL - Extension to bedrooms (GRANT) 09.10.1972 76/02742/FUL - Double garage across two properties (GRANT) 12.06.1976

The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF): The NPPF is a material planning consideration on any development proposal. The NPPF highlights the fact that the purpose of the planning system is to contribute to the achievement of sustainable development and that there is a presumption in favour of sustainable development, which can deliver:- i) Planning for prosperity (an economic role) - by ensuring that sufficient land of the right type and in the right places is available to allow growth and innovation; ii) Planning for people (a social role) - by promotion of strong, vibrant and healthy communities by providing an increase supply of housing to meet the needs of present and future generations and by creating a good quality built environment with accessible local services; iii) Planning for places (an environmental role) - by protecting and enhancing the natural, built and historic environment, adapting to climate change including moving to a low-carbon economy.

As such the NPPF suggests local planning authorities should approve development proposals that accord with statutory plans without delay.

Page 3 Report to the Area Planning Panel (Keighley/Shipley) adoption of Allocations and Area Action Plan development plan documents. The site is unallocated. Accordingly, the following adopted Core Strategy policies are applicable to this proposal.

Core Strategy Policies DS1 – Achieving Good Design DS3 – Urban Character DS5 – Safe & Inclusive Places SPD08 – Householder Supplementary Planning Document

Parish Council: Baildon Parish Council

Publicity and Number of Representations: Publicity by letters to neighbours. No representations have been received

Summary of Representations Received: None.

Consultations: Baildon Parish Council – No comment received at the time of writing the report.

Summary of Main Issues: Impact on Local Environment Impact on Neighbouring Occupants

Appraisal: The proposal is to add a pitched roof to the existing single storey extension behind this bungalow. The rear extension projects quite a significant distance – its depth is 10.50 metres, and width 6.30 metres. However, the adjoining semi has a rear extension projecting a similar amount and this already has a pitched roof.

The existing flat roof of the extension is around 2.5 metres high and the new roof will raise its height to a peak of 5.0 metres. This ridge height will match the host dwelling’s roofline. The new roof will be a double pitched gable style with three roof lights. The roof will be covered in matching tiles. A small amount of new gable will be faced in a render material.

The proposal cannot constitute as permitted development and planning permission is required because the cubic content of the new roof will enlarge the dwelling by 130.00 m³, exceeding the Part 1 Class B permitted development limitation of 40 cubic metres.

However, in terms of design and effects on neighbours, the proposed roof extension is acceptable.

It will be at the rear of the dwelling, so it will not be visible from the street. There is a public footpath crossing land behind the property at an elevated position, and the proposed roof will be visible from some public viewpoints, but being of a similar form and size to the existing hipped roof extension on the adjoining neighbouring property, the roof extension will represent a visual enhancement compared with the large expanse of the existing flat roof. In terms of design, the new roof will restore a greater sense of symmetry and balance between the semi-detached dwellings and will not cause any harm to visual amenity or the local environment. It will comply

Page 4 Report to the Area Planning Panel (Keighley/Shipley) with policies DS1 and DS3 of the Core Strategy DPD and guidance in the Council’s adopted Householder Supplementary Planning Document.

With regard to impact on neighbouring occupants, the proposed roof extension will have three roof lights added to the roof planes and one new window in the gable facing the back garden. These new openings will not face directly onto any habitable room windows in the neighbouring properties or cause significant overlooking of any private external space. There is no potential for overlooking or loss of privacy that will be harmful to residential amenity of neighbours.

The new roof will increase the height of the rear extension from about 2.50 metres to 5.00 metres to the roof ridge. The new roof will be about the same height as the extension to the rear of the adjoining semi-bungalow and as a result it is not considered that the extra roof pitch will result in any significant overshadowing or loss of light to either of the neighbouring properties. The proposal will maintain standards of amenity and accord with policy DS5 of the Core Strategy DPD and the adopted Householder Supplementary Planning Document.

In terms of impact on highway safety, there are no changes to existing access or parking arrangements so the proposal will have no adverse impact on highway safety.

Community Safety Implications: The proposal has no community safety implications.

Equality Act 2010, Section 149: In writing this report due regard has been taken of the need to eliminate unlawful discrimination, harassment and victimisation, advance equality of opportunity between different groups and foster good relations between different groups. It is not however considered that any issues with regard thereto are raised in relation to consideration of this application.

Reason for Granting Planning Permission The proposed pitched roof extension will not represent any harm to the visual amenity of the local environment. Furthermore the new roof will pose no significant threat to the residential amenity of the neighbouring occupants. The proposal complies with policies DS1, DS3 and DS5 of the Core Strategy Development Plan Document and the adopted Householder Supplementary Planning Document.

Conditions of Approval 1. The development to which this notice relates must be begun not later than the expiration of three years beginning with the date of this notice.

Reason: To accord with the requirements of Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act, 1990 (as amended).

2. The development hereby permitted shall be constructed using external roofing materials to match the existing building as is specified on the submitted application.

Reason: To ensure the use of appropriate materials in the interests of visual amenity and to accord with Policies DS1 and DS3 of the Core Strategy Development Plan Document.

Page 5 Report to the Area Planning Panel (Keighley/Shipley)

19/01578/FUL

5 Dale View Ilkley LS29 9BP

Page 6 Report to the Area Planning Panel (Keighley/Shipley)

10 July 2019

Item: B Ward: ILKLEY Recommendation: TO GRANT PLANNING PERMISSION

Application Number: 19/01578/FUL

Type of Application/Proposal and Address: Full planning application for a change of use for a section of land from adopted highway to private curtilage at 5 Dale View, Ilkley LS29 9BP.

Applicant: Mr William Scott

Agent: Mr Richard Blenkiron

Site Description: The application site is a grass verge within the adopted highway at the junction of Dale View and Beverley Rise. These are two conventional residential estate roads with a wide vehicular carriageway and footways to either side. The surrounding area comprises modern detached houses. It is understood they were built in the 1970’s. The verge land and Beverley Rise slope upwards towards the south and the application site is a roughly triangular shaped open verge between the footways and the existing boundary to the curtilage of the detached house at 5 Dale View which is occupied by the applicant. There is also a hard surfaced pavement running north- south alongside the adjoining curtilage which is also part of the land for which change of use permission is sought.

Relevant Site History: 18/01209/FUL: Change of use from adopted highway to private curtilage. Refused at planning panel on the 12.07.2018. Reason: The change of use would result in the loss of a prominent open area which would materially affect the amenity of the local area and is considered detrimental to highway safety.

Appeal: 18/00090/APPFL2. Dismissed. Reason: The proposal would have a harmful effect on the character and appearance of the area.

19/00472/HOU: Two storey side extension and front porch. Granted 27.03.2019

Page 7 Report to the Area Planning Panel (Keighley/Shipley)

future generations and by creating a good quality built environment with accessible local services; iii) Planning for places (an environmental role) - by protecting and enhancing the natural, built and historic environment, adapting to climate change including moving to a low-carbon economy.

As such the NPPF suggests local planning authorities should approve development proposals that accord with statutory plans without delay.

Local Plan for Bradford: The Core Strategy for Bradford was adopted on 18 July 2017 though some of the policies contained within the preceding Replacement Unitary Development Plan (RUDP), saved for the purposes of formulating the Local Plan for Bradford, remain applicable until adoption of Allocations and Area Action Plan development plan documents. The site is not allocated for any specific land-use purposes in the Replacement Unitary Development Plan. Accordingly, the following adopted Core Strategy and saved RUDP policies are applicable to this proposal.

Core Strategy Policies DS1 – Achieving good design DS3 – Urban Character DS4 – Streets and Movement DS5 – Safe and Inclusive Places SC9 – Making Great Places.

Parish Council: Ilkley Parish Council recommends refusal of this application and would like to refer this application to planning panel for a decision. The Parish Plans Committee notes that the appeal from the previous application was refused and that there are numerous valid objections from local residents to the current application.

The Parish Council declare that it has an objection logged to Land Registry for this piece of land being registered in the applicant’s name. Ilkley Town Council have also applied to have this piece of land registered as an Asset of Community Value therefore the Committee would strongly object to any planning permission being granted.

Publicity and Number of Representations: A site notice and neighbour notification letters advertised the application. The publicity period expired on the 7th May 2019. Twenty-two objections have been received, including one from an Ilkley Ward Councillor. The Ward Councillor has referred the application to Area Planning Panel for determination in the event of an officer recommendation to approve.

Summary of Representations Received: 1. The land in question is an asset of community value on the Bradford Council register and has been previously refused by the Council and a Planning Inspector. The verge has amenity value having provided a welcome visual amenity for the estate for 50 years. This area should be protected and enhanced - not lost to private garden.

2. Incorporation into the garden of 5 Dale View would restrict visibility for vehicles leading to highway safety issues and will result in the loss of footpath.

Page 8 Report to the Area Planning Panel (Keighley/Shipley)

3. This would set a precedent for further loss of grass verges in the area to the detriment of visual amenity.

Consultations: Highways Development Control: The current application seeks to acquire a smaller portion of the land than the previous application. There were no highway objections raised previously and the Government Inspector concurred with the views of the Highway Authority in the previous application. There are no objections on highway grounds to this proposal. Although the proposal would result in the loss of a public path running along the edge of the site, there is a standard footway running alongside the carriageway providing connectivity for pedestrians.

The land subject of this planning permission is presently part of the highway so in addition to obtaining planning permission, where the closure or diversion of the highway is involved, there is a legal procedure under Section 247 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 which will have to be undertaken before any part of the planning permission may be implemented.

Summary of Main Issues: 1. Impact of the change of use on local amenity. 2. Highway Safety issues 3. Implications of Asset of Community Value status 4. Other issues raised by representations. 5. Consideration of personal circumstances.

Appraisal: The proposal The application land comprises part of a gradually sloping grassed verge with an intersecting length of footway linking the footways to the sides of Beverley Rise and Dale View. It is currently an open verge maintained by the Council. The application seeks permission for a change of use for a section of the grassed verge to incorporate it into the garden of the adjacent house at No 5 Dale View.

This is a re-submission following a refused application which was later dismissed appeal. This previous application sought to incorporate all the grass verge into the residential curtilage of 5 Dale View. Having taken account of the previous planning and appeal decisions, the applicants say they have now much reduced the extent of verge they would like to incorporate within their curtilage. They say the reason they want to take the land into their curtilage is to help to create more privacy within the garden.

This application proposes to extend the residential curtilage by 2.1 metres to the side (east) of the plot to encompass the footpath and a triangular area of land to the north east. A timber fence, 800mm high, is proposed to create the new boundary along the side and a low stone wall (600mm high) is proposed along the front boundary with Dale View. This would effectively square off the residential plot and leave the remainder of the land as open grass highway verge as existing.

It will be noted from the Site History section that since the previous application and appeal, a two storey extension to the side of 5 Dale View has been approved, but not yet built.

Page 9 Report to the Area Planning Panel (Keighley/Shipley)

Impact of the change of use on local amenity: The site is an area of open grassed space on the corner of the junction of Dale View and Beverley Rise. There are two other smaller areas of similar verge to the south of the appeal site at the junction of Beverley Rise and Woodlands Rise. The application site is larger and more prominent than those areas of verge.

The Inspector who dealt with the appeal against the refusal of the proposal to absorb the whole of the land into the garden of 5 Dale View noted how the land provides an area of openness which provides visual relief within the expanse of built development in the area. Whilst the site has limited recreational value, he considered that the proposal would result in the loss of a prominent area of green space which has significant value in terms of openness and positively contributes to the area. That was why enclosing the whole site as part of the residential curtilage and the likely domestic paraphernalia on the site would detrimentally erode the open nature of the area, resulting in a cramped environment.

The Inspector concluded that the proposal would have a harmful effect on the character and appearance of the area contrary to policies DS1, DS3 and SC9 of the Core Strategy DPD 2017.

Following the refusal and dismissal of the appeal, the applicant now proposes a much smaller parcel of land to be taken into residential curtilage. This reduced proposal will leave 150.5 square metres of open space as verge out of the total of 250.5 square metres of land.

The agent says the remaining verge will be comparable in size to the other existing parcels of verge land evident elsewhere along Beverley Rise, and Officers consider that this is a better balanced proposal. It would only enclose the triangular section of verge and a narrow strip along the line of the footway. The majority of the verge area would remain open and unenclosed and free of domestic clutter.

The more limited expansion of the residential curtilage would not significantly erode the open nature of the area, or result in a cramped environment. The majority of the verge would remain open – providing an appropriate level of visual relief within the expanse of built development in this estate. Officers consider that the character and appearance of the area would be retained and that there is no conflict with policies DS1, DS3 and SC9 of the Core Strategy DPD 2017.

With regard to recreational value of the land, consideration has been given to Paragraph 91 of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) which suggests that policies and decisions should plan positively for the provision and use of shared spaces and community facilities to enhance the sustainability of communities and residential environments. However, this highway verge is modest in size, which makes it generally unsuitable for most sports or games. The restricted size, in combination with its position adjacent to the road junctions means the land has very limited value as a recreation space. This was also acknowledged by the Planning Inspector who noted that ‘the site has limited recreational value’. The new proposal would also maintain public accessibility across the remaining section of verge.

Highway Safety issues Objections are made to the loss of the length of footway which is currently adjacent to the existing side garden of 5 Dale View on grounds of safety for road users and inconvenience to pedestrians. However, the more conventionally routed footway around the edge of the verge would still be retained and would only add a minor increase in distance for footpath users. Consequently, loss of this duplicate section of footway would not demonstrably diminish connectivity within the residential estate. The proposals could not be said to discourage people to walk and would not

Page 10 Report to the Area Planning Panel (Keighley/Shipley) cause existing footpaths to be less well integrated and will not make the routes within the estate less well overlooked or convenient.

The Council’s Highway Officer raises no objections to loss of the verge on highway safety grounds, observing that the highway would continue to retain an appropriate footway alongside Beverley Rise of adequate width and alignment and will continue to provide a safe route for pedestrians around the junction. There is no identified conflict with policy DS4 of the Core Strategy Development Plan.

The Highway Officer advises on the need for consent under Section 247 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 to extinguish the highway before any planning permission may be implemented. The grant of any planning permission would not in itself alter the status of a public highway. It is a necessary prelude to an application for an Order to be obtained extinguishing the public highway.

Implications of Asset of Community Value status: Since the last application was determined, the land in question has been formally listed as an asset of community value (ACV).

However, the primary purpose of the ACV regime is to afford the community an opportunity to purchase a property or land when it is offered for sale by the owner. When the owner decides to sell the listed asset they must give formal notice under the ACV regime and the community then has a period of 6 months where they can make the owner an offer to purchase it – the owner can accept or refuse. The owner is not prevented from making any number of planning applications whilst the asset is listed and those applications can be determined as normal.

The registration of this verge as an ACV is a material planning consideration and the weight given to such consideration will be a matter of planning judgement. Its presence on the ACV register is not intended to prevent an otherwise acceptable development. Given that this application affects the footway and the edge of the verge, and that the majority of the ACV is to be retained, officers do not consider that the ACV status should carry much weight in the planning balance and recommendation.

Other matters raised in representations It is clear from the listing of the verge as an ACV and the number of representations received, that a section of the community including the Parish Council are passionate about the prospects of losing this verge to a private residential garden. However, in this reduced form, the proposal is materially different to what was before the panel in 2018 and it is considered that the sense of spaciousness and open character around the junction would still be maintained. The boundary treatments would be low level and commensurate with the boundary treatments in the area and would not therefore cause significant harm to the quality of the local environment or local character.

The applicants provided the title deed in the previous application which indicated that the grassed verge is shown within their registered tittle. There are suggestions of legal challenges to this land however this is a separate legal matter.

Personal Circumstances The applicant has mentioned certain personal circumstances to explain why the applicants attach importance to these proposals as a means of improving their privacy. These personal reasons have been omitted from this report for reasons of privacy.

Page 11 Report to the Area Planning Panel (Keighley/Shipley)

It is acknowledged that the removal of the existing path that directly abuts the side garden would help to create a better perception of privacy for the occupants of 5 Dale View. However, the proposal is considered acceptable in its own right, and only limited weight in planning terms has been afforded to the personal circumstances. The site has always been located on a corner plot where views from public vantage points towards the garden space are naturally more easily attained. Methods to improve privacy levels for the occupants of 5 Dale View could be achieved without the need to make the changes proposed to the curtilage.

Community Safety Implications: None identified.

Equality Act 2010, Section 149: In writing this report due regard has been taken of the need to eliminate unlawful discrimination, harassment and victimisation, advance quality of opportunity between different groups and foster good relations between different groups. It is not however considered that any issues with regard thereto are raised in relation to consideration of this application.

Reason for Granting Planning Permission The proposed change of use would maintain an appropriate sense of spaciousness and open character around the junction of Dale View and Beverley Rise and therefore would not cause significant harm to the quality of the local environment or local character and would not result in any highway safety issues. The development complies with the requirements of policies DS1, DS3, DS4 and DS5 of the Core Strategy Development Plan Document and the National Planning Policy Framework.

Conditions of Approval 1. The development to which this notice relates must be begun not later than the expiration of three years beginning with the date of this notice.

Reason: To accord with the requirements of Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act, 1990 (as amended).

2. The new boundary treatments hereby permitted as part of this development proposal shall be constructed as specified on the hereby approved drawing number 842JS 04 dated 8.04.2019

Reason: In the interests of visual amenity and to accord with Policies DS1 and DS3 of the Core Strategy Development Plan Document.

Page 12 Report to the Area Planning Panel (Keighley/Shipley)

19/01843/FUL

Darkwood House The Street Addingham LS29 0JY

Page 13 Report to the Area Planning Panel (Keighley/Shipley)

10 July 2019

Item: C Ward: CRAVEN Recommendation: TO GRANT PLANNING PERMISSION

Application Number: 19/01843/FUL

Type of Application/Proposal and Address: A full planning application to alter the approved house types on plots 1 – 5 of the development approved by permission 17/00570/MAF at Darkwood House, The Street, Addingham, LS29 0JY.

Applicant: Mr S. K. Hall

Agent: Allison & MacRae Ltd

Site Description: The application is for amendments to the design of 5 houses that are part of an on-going residential development. The site is around 0.4 hectares in size, and was originally occupied by a pair of houses (Darkwood House and Darkwood Cottage). The site is between an embankment to the Addingham By Pass and a large suburban estate extending northwards. Vehicular access is from the north via an unmade track called The Street which leads westwards to listed buildings at Street House Farm and eastwards emerges onto Stamp Hill Close near its junction with Broadfield Way. The section of The Street leading to this development site is to be upgraded. The part of the development which is the subject of this application adjoins the rear of two detached bungalows on Lime Close, a cul de sac.

Relevant Site History: 17/00570/MAF : Demolition of Darkwood House and cottage and erection of 10 replacement dwellings. Granted: 11-AUG 2017.

18/04794/FUL : Alterations to approved house types on Plots 6, 7 and 10. Granted: 10-JAN-2019. 17/06826/FUL: Alterations to design of approved house type at plot 9. Granted. 17/05718/FUL: Alterations to design of approved house type at plot 8. Granted.

Page 14 Report to the Area Planning Panel (Keighley/Shipley) iii) Planning for places (an environmental role) - by protecting and enhancing the natural, built and historic environment, adapting to climate change including moving to a low-carbon economy.

As such the NPPF suggests local planning authorities should approve development proposals that accord with statutory plans without delay.

Local Plan for Bradford: The Core Strategy Development Plan Document was adopted on 18 July 2017 though some of the policies contained within the preceding Replacement Unitary Development Plan (RUDP), saved for the purposes of formulating the Local Plan for Bradford, remain applicable until adoption of Allocations and Area Action Plan development plan documents. The site is unallocated in the Replacement Unitary Development Plan. Accordingly, the following adopted Core Strategy policies are applicable to this proposal.

Core Strategy Policies DS1 Achieving Good Design DS3 Urban Character DS5 Safe and Inclusive Places DS4 Streets and Movement TR2 Parking Policy SC9 Making Great Places

Parish Council: Addingham Parish Council would be concerned to see the height of the buildings raised as a result of the proposed alterations to the house types as this could lead to a perceived increase in the density of building on the site, to the detriment of residential amenity and to the detriment of the neighbouring environment. It would also like to see steps taken to ensure adequate car parking provision for the likely increased number of residents to be accommodated in the larger houses."text"

Publicity and Number of Representations: A site notice advertised the application. The publicity period expired on the 10th June 2019. 23 letters of objection have been received.

Summary of Representations Received: The development is already seen to be intrusive and out of character with the area. The buildings on this site dwarf the far smaller neighbouring bungalows and houses. Unfair to have new houses overlooking current neighbours on Lime Close and Broadfield Way. They will block light and overlook them too. No provision for visitor parking. Roof space will be used for creation of separate studio/apartment Loss of wildlife Completely unnecessary as there is no need for further housing and the area doesn't need it.

Consultations: Highways DC : There are no changes to the approved highway layout and therefore raise no objections.

Summary of Main Issues: 1. Background 2. Design/Impact on visual amenity.

Page 15 Report to the Area Planning Panel (Keighley/Shipley)

3. Impact on residential amenity 4. Other matters raised in representations

Appraisal: Background Planning permission 17/00570/MAF has approved the demolition of the two existing houses that stood on this site and the construction of 10 new dwellings. The approved scheme comprises a row of 7 x traditional style 2-storey cottages (arranged in pairs linked by intervening garages), 1 detached house, and 2 x detached single storey dwellings arranged around a mews court leading off Broadfield Way in between existing houses.

This application was considered by the Council’s Regulatory and Appeals Committee in 2017 and objections from neighbours and the Parish Council were carefully considered. The objections considered at that time included opposition to the density and scale of development; the impact of the scheme on surrounding bungalows and semi-detached houses adjoining the site - including those along Broadfield Way and on Lime Close, which occupiers feared would be overshadowed; there was concern about the vehicular access to the development site via The Street; comments regarding drainage issues and comments that the proposed large houses will not serve the needs of the Addingham community which needs small and inexpensive housing.

The development has commenced and the construction of the houses on plots 7 and 8 is almost complete. As noted in the site history, minor amendments to the design of the dwellings on Plots 6-10 have been approved under different applications.

Several objectors refer to the houses being too big, too intrusive, traffic issues and that the houses are not needed. These matters were all considered in the 2017 application and as this 2017 planning permission is extant, the Local Planning Authority cannot now withdraw that permission.

Instead, the Local Planning Authority can only consider the impact, in planning terms of the amendments now proposed to the row of linked houses on Plots 1-5 inclusive.

The proposals The design amendments are fairly modest and consist of the following:

- The addition of single storey rear extensions of a depth of 1.9 metres on the rear elevation of each of the 5 dwellings. These will allow a larger ground floor dining room. - Addition of a chimney to each dwelling. - Use of the empty roof space void of the houses on plots 1, 3 and 5 to create an additional bedroom with the addition of 4 rooflights to north-west roofslopes of each of these dwellings. This will create 5 bedrooms in these units. The approved properties on plots 2 and 4 already contain 5 bedrooms. - Lowering the height of the garage roofs for each house to better relate with other windows once the rear extensions are in place.

In response to the concerns expressed by Addingham Parish Council, it must be stated that is not proposed to increase the overall eaves or ridge height of any of the 5 dwellings. The head height to create the additional bedroom in the roof space of the houses on plots, 1, 3 and 5 will be achieved by altering the internal floor levels.

Also, with regard to another point of objection, the developer is not proposing to create separate flats or otherwise subdivide the 5 dwellings. The ‘studio’ annotation used by the architect on the

Page 16 Report to the Area Planning Panel (Keighley/Shipley) plan refers to incorporation of ancillary home-office space which was shown on the approved plans.

It should also be noted that the 2017 planning permission did not remove permitted development rights, so once the dwellings are built and occupied, the proposed extensions, internal works towards creation of another bedroom in the roof space and the addition of roof lights could all be carried out without needing planning permission since these alterations would all comply with the permitted development rights conveyed under Part 1 of Schedule 2 of the GPDO.

2. Design/Impact on visual amenity: On the approved drawing all 10 dwellings were designed and grouped to be of traditional appearance and to reflect their setting in the village of Addingham. They are being built in natural stone with artificial stone slates. The scale and proportions of the 10 dwellings were designed to reflect another recent development of 3 houses on land to the west (designed by the same architect).

The amendments will not alter the shape, height or roof form of the approved houses. The single storey extensions are modest in size, located on the rear and set against the mass of the existing houses and generally unobtrusive. The chimneys will add to the traditional character of the development and the rooflights added to the dwellings are of reasonable proportion and will have little visual impact.

There are listed buildings away to the west of the site but the setting and special interest of these would not be impacted by the modest alterations proposed. There is therefore no conflict with Policy EN3 of the Core Strategy or the duty under S. 66 of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990.

The amendments complement the design quality of the approved scheme and accord with design policies DS1 and DS3 of the Core Strategy Development Plan.

3. Impact on residential amenity: The proposed dining room extensions behind each house on Plots 1-5 are single storey and modest in scale. Although encroaching 1.9 metres further towards the boundary with the bungalows on Lime Close, the extensions would not project beyond the approved garages and would maintain a minimum distance of 7 metres to the rear boundary with the bungalows on Lime Close. At single storey level, the impact on the amenity of the neighbouring occupants arising from the changes that are tabled for consideration would be minimal.

The new rooflights are proposed to the north-west roofslopes. This roofslope is on the front side of the properties and therefore would not face toward properties on Lime Close or Broadfield Way. Furthermore, as they would be set high up in the roof plane, the rooflights would not afford increased views towards the new dwellings to be built on plots 9 and 10. There would be no resulting impact on privacy levels or resulting loss of privacy for adjoining occupiers.

Despite objections, there is no evidence to suggest the proposed amendments would lead to increased overlooking or loss of privacy or result in a more dominant development proposal. There is no identified conflict with the amenity of neighbours or policy DS5 of the Core Strategy Development Plan.

4. Impact on Highway Safety: There are no alterations to the approved street layout or parking arrangements for the dwellings which the Highway Officer confirms will continue to provide the required number of off-street

Page 17 Report to the Area Planning Panel (Keighley/Shipley) parking spaces to meet previously agreed parking standards. Visitor parking arrangements did not form part of the original approval and are not required as a result of the changes proposed.

It is noted that objectors and Parish Council say that steps should be taken to require extra car parking provision for the likely increased number of residents to be accommodated in the larger houses. However, there is no evidence that the addition of a 5th bedroom in 3 dwellings would cause a demonstrable increase in parking demand.

The design amendments will cause no appreciable highway safety problems and there is no conflict with policies DS4 and TR2 of the Core Strategy Development Plan.

Community Safety Implications: There are no apparent community safety implications arising from the design amendments.

Reason for Granting Planning Permission The amendments comprising small ground floor additions and internal alterations to the dwellings already approved on plots 1-5 are of relatively minor scale. The resulting dwellings will continue to respect and harmonise with the locality and, after careful consideration, will have no additional effects on the amenity of occupiers of adjoining properties. The development complies with relevant policies of the Core Strategy Development Plan Document and the National Planning Policy Framework.

Conditions of Approval: 1. The development to which this notice relates must be begun not later than the expiration of three years beginning with the date of this notice.

Reason: To accord with the requirements of Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act, 1990 (as amended).

2. The development hereby permitted shall be constructed using external facing and roofing materials as specified on the submission of details application 17/00570/SUB01.

Reason: To ensure the use of appropriate materials in the interests of visual amenity and to accord with Policies DS1 and DS3 of the Core Strategy Development Plan.

3. Construction work shall only be carried out between the hours of 0730 and 1800 on Mondays to Fridays, 0730 and 1300 on Saturdays and at no time on Sundays, Bank or Public Holidays, unless specifically agreed otherwise in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: To protect the amenity of the occupants of nearby dwellings and to accord with Policy DS5 of the Core Strategy Development Plan.

4. Before any of the dwellings comprising the development approved by this permission, or permission 17/00570/MAF are brought into use, and as is shown on the approved drawing F-022-15 Rev B, Public Footpath No 9 (Addingham) which runs along the southern edge of

Page 18 Report to the Area Planning Panel (Keighley/Shipley)

the development site, shall be surfaced for a distance corresponding to the extent of the development site. The surfacing shall use crushed stone of a type and to a specification to be approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

Reason : In the interests of promoting continued use of the footpath to accord with Policy DS4 of the Core Strategy Development Plan.

5. The boundaries to the development plots shall accord with specifications shown on the previously approved drawing F-022-15 Rev B and these boundaries shall be installed prior to the occupation of the relevant part of the development.

Reason : To safeguard future occupiers and accord with Policies DS1 and DS5 of the Core Strategy Development Plan.

6. In the first planting season following the completion of the residential development of which these units forms part, replacement trees shall be planted along the southern perimeter of the site in accordance with specifications and details of proposed sizes and species of trees that shall first be submitted to, and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

Any trees or plants comprising this replacement planting scheme that become diseased or which die or are removed or damaged within the first 5 years after the completion of the planting shall be removed and a replacement tree of the same species/specification shall be planted in the same position no later than the end of the first available planting season following the disease/death/removal of the original planting.

Reason: To mitigate the impact of the buildings on the landscape, and provide appropriate replacement planting, in the interests of visual amenity and to accord Policies EN5 of the Core Strategy Development Plan.

Page 19 Report to the Area Planning Panel (Keighley/Shipley)

19/01618/FUL

1 Wrexham Road Burley In Wharfedale Ilkley LS29 7LS

Page 20 Report to the Area Planning Panel (Keighley/Shipley)

10 July 2019 Item: D Ward: WHARFEDALE Recommendation: TO REFUSE PLANNING PERMISSION

Application Number: 19/01618/FUL

Type of Application/Proposal and Address: Construction of detached bungalow (revised scheme to application number 18/04252/FUL) at 1 Wrexham Road, Burley In Wharfedale.

Applicant: Mr and Mrs Halliday

Agent: Mr Roger Lee

Site Description: 1 Wrexham Road is a detached dwelling dating from the mid C20 constructed with a rendered finish and red coloured profile roofing tiles located on a corner plot with Sun Lane to the north. The property has been previously extended to the rear at single storey level and there is a detached garage within the rear garden area which takes access off Sun Lane. The surrounding area is residential in nature although there is a mix of housing types and style in the local streetscene.

The site the subject of this application comprises the rear garden to No 1 which is level and laid to lawn.

Relevant Site History: 18/04252/FUL: Construction of a detached bungalow. Refused 29.11.2018, the subsequent appeal is still in progress. 07/05772/PMI: Construction of dwelling. Not acceptable in principle 30.7.2007 05/03807/FUL: Dormer bungalow to rear. Refused 28.7.2005 05/01478/FUL: Dormer bungalow to rear. Withdrawn 12.4.2005 05/08262/COU: Change of use of public highway to private curtilage. Approved 5.1.2006

Page 21 Report to the Area Planning Panel (Keighley/Shipley) iii) Planning for places (an environmental role) - by protecting and enhancing the natural, built and historic environment, adapting to climate change including moving to a low-carbon economy.

As such the NPPF suggests local planning authorities should approve development proposals that accord with statutory plans without delay.

Local Plan for Bradford: The Core Strategy for Bradford was adopted on 18 July 2017 though some of the policies contained within the preceding Replacement Unitary Development Plan (RUDP) are saved for the purposes of formulating the Local Plan for Bradford, and remain applicable until adoption of Allocations and Area Action Plan development plan documents. The site is not allocated for any specific land-use in the RUDP. The following adopted Core Strategy Development Plan Document policies are applicable to this proposal.

Core Strategy Policies HO5 Density of Housing Schemes HO9 Housing Quality DS1 Achieving Good Design DS3 Urban Character DS4 Streets and Movement DS5 Safe and Inclusive Places TR2 Parking Policy SC9 Making Good Places

Burley In Wharfedale Post-Examination Draft Neighbourhood Plan 2017-2030 The Burley In Wharfedale Neighbourhood Plan has recently been adopted. Policy BW1 is concerned with new development within the settlement boundary and this is relevant to the consideration of this application.

Parish Council: Burley in Wharfedale Parish Council

Publicity and Number of Representations: By site notice and letters to neighbours. Overall expiry date 13.5.2019. Three letters of support and two objections have been received, the former including one from a Wharfedale Ward Councillor at the time with a request that the item be considered by the Area Planning Panel.

Summary of Representations Received: In Objection 1. The height of the dwelling still remains very tall at around 6 metres and is only 0.5 metres lower than the previously refused application. Whilst described as a bungalow the property has an upstairs and is similar in height to the existing property at 1 Wrexham Road. 2. Apart from the omission of the garage and reduction in scale of the guest bedroom to a study the overall design is very similar to the previous application. 3. The Planning Statement is misleading in that it gives examples of development in garden plots. These all took place on very wide plots allowing the new properties to be built on roughly the same building line as the original houses and so the impact is much less - the new buildings fit in with the street pattern, the length of the gardens and the character of 'openness' is maintained.

Page 22 Report to the Area Planning Panel (Keighley/Shipley)

4. The proposal would result in the adjacent neighbour being ‘hemmed in’ with a lack of openness. This is even more important should the development on Sun Lane go ahead as this would remove an existing open aspect for many properties to the west 5. May have a negative impact upon property value. 6. Small size of parking spaces may encourage / displace cars onto the road and may block sight lines for vehicles exiting Wrexham Road. 7. Boundary treatments may adversely impact upon sight lines.

In Support: 1. The new/amended proposal is an improved design over the previously refused scheme and so overcomes the reasons for refusal. 2. The scheme will see the existing garage replaced with an attractive modern house. 3. There is a mix of house designs along Sun Lane and this property will add to the diversity of houses in the area. Many properties in this area have had houses built within their gardens. 4. The proposed layout will improve the ability of a neighbouring property to reverse safely out of their drive. 5. The house is eco-friendly and energy efficient 6. The proposal will meet the needs of the applicants and enable them to stay in the area long term.

Consultations: Drainage: No objection subject to the use of a separate drainage system for foul and surface water and the use of a porous surface to all parking areas. Noted that a watercourse crosses the site in the area of the proposed dwelling and that this may require further investigative work on the part of the applicant. The proposed works must impose no additional loading on the watercourse or restrict flow in any manner. Part of the site is within land identified by the Environment Agency as having the potential to be affected by surface water flooding. The developer should therefore consider raising floor levels and using flood resilient building materials and construction techniques in the development where appropriate.

Highways DC: No objection subject to conditions requiring the provision of domestic parking and the closure of the existing access point onto Sun Lane.

Burley Parish Council: No objection

Summary of Main Issues: Background and Site History Principle of Development Visual Amenity Residential Amenity Highway Issues Outstanding Matters Raised by Representations

Appraisal: The proposal seeks approval for the construction of a one-bed detached bungalow on the site. The submitted drawings show that the existing detached garage will be removed to accommodate the unit and the existing dropped kerb returned to full face status. A new driveway is shown on Sun Lane to serve the new property. The existing raised deck to the rear of 1 Wrexham Road is to be removed and a new driveway is shown to the front of the existing dwelling with access of Wrexham Road.

Page 23 Report to the Area Planning Panel (Keighley/Shipley)

The proposed bungalow is contemporary in appearance and constructed from stone, render and cedar cladding. Natural roof slates are also proposed for the majority of the roof.

Background and Site History A previous planning application, 18/04252/FUL, for a detached two-bed bungalow on the site was refused on 29 November 2018 on three counts: (1) the proposal would represent a cramped and incongruous form of development at odds with the character of the local area; (2) it would have an overbearing and oppressive impact on the neighbour at No 1A Wrexham Road; (3) it would have an unsatisfactory relationship with the existing property at No 1 Wrexham Road to the detriment of the amenities of existing and future residents. This application is the subject of an on-going, current appeal.

Prior to this there had been two previous planning applications for a detached dormer bungalow within the curtilage of 1 Wrexham Road. One application was withdrawn ( 05/01478/FUL refers) and the subsequent resubmission was refused (05/03807/FUL refers) on the grounds that the proposal represented a cramped form of development and that it would have an overbearing impact upon the amenities of adjacent neighbours. A subsequent pre application enquiry for residential development was also not supported (07/05772/PMI refers)

The current proposal differs from the 2018 application in that the attached garage element has been deleted. This has opened up the side of the property and improved the relationship between it and the parent dwelling at No. 1 Wrexham Road to some extent. The height of the bungalow has been reduced by about 0.5 metres and the second guest bedroom on the mezzanine level has been replaced with a study area. The overall design and form of the property is broadly similar to the earlier refusal in terms of its appearance, choice of materials, position relative to Sun Lane and the joint boundary to No. 1A Wrexham Road. The parking area to No. 1 Wrexham Road has also been re-thought and is now shown to the front with access off Wrexham Road which is more successful than the earlier tandem arrangement.

Principle of Development Whilst the NPPF has removed private residential gardens from the definition of previously developed land, this would not necessarily preclude the redevelopment of such sites provided, inter alia, that they do not harm the character of the established residential area. This is in recognition of the fact that such sites would often satisfy the sustainability objectives as set out in the NPPF through representing an appropriate use of an unallocated site within the limits of the built up settlement and with good access to existing local facilities.

Wrexham Road, and neighbouring Mansfield Road, have been subject to extensive infill development which has resulted in a mix of house styles types and ages. Consequently the construction of a modern detached property need not look out of place in the context of the local area. However, the proposed development does not wholly reflect the character and pattern of development in the surrounding locality since other developments been slotted in to the side of the existing buildings and have generally retained their share of the long back gardens of the original property. By comparison this proposed bungalow is proposed within the rear garden and appears to be rather shoe-horned into this relatively shallow plot, pushed as far back into the site as possible to maintain a suitable set back from the Sun Lane frontage. This has resulted in a property with no appreciable rear garden – all amenity space is to the front and side, overlooked by the existing rear facing habitable windows of No. 1 Wrexham Road and cannot be held to be truly private. Consequently the proposal represents a cramped form of development to the detriment of visual amenity, at odds with the more spacious plots around it.

Page 24 Report to the Area Planning Panel (Keighley/Shipley)

Consequently the resulting built form would be at odds with the underlying character of the street. Previous applications for bungalows of a similar form, mass and impact have been refused for this reason and there have been no material changes in circumstances to warrant the Local Planning Authority (LPA) from taking an alternative view as to the principle of development. The proposal is contrary to policies DS1, DS2, DS3, HO9 and SC9 of the Core Strategy Development Plan Document.

Visual Amenity In itself, the design of the proposed dwelling is acceptable in that it reflects the overall style and material palette of neighbouring properties, a number of which are contemporary in style. However this would not override the underlying concerns that the development would have a cramped appearance and would be harmful to the character and appearance of the local street scene for the reasons as outlined above. The proposal is considered to be contrary to Policies DS1, DS2 and DS3 of the Core Strategy Development Plan Document.

Residential Amenity A particular area for concern is the impact of the development on the living conditions of the adjacent neighbours at No. 1A Wrexham Road. The proposed bungalow has a width of about 11 metres, minimum height to eaves at 2.6 metres and a maximum height of 6.0 metres and would sit within 2 metres of the joint boundary between Nos. 1 and 1A Wrexham Road. The proposed bungalow would dominate their rear garden and outlook from rear facing windows resulting in an oppressive sense of enclosure to the detriment of amenity. It is acknowledged that the bulk of the property has been reduced with the removal of the garage element and minor adjustment is roof height however the property is still a tall, overdominant structure with its highest point comparable with the eaves height of the neighbour at No. 1A, a two storey dwellinghouse. The new dwelling is substantially larger than the existing garage on the site; by comparison the maximum height of the garage stands at 3.6 metres.

The amenities of the occupiers of the new bungalow may also be compromised by the layout of the plot since it has no private amenity space at the rear with all garden to the front and side and potentially visible from the road. The garden area to the side of the new bungalow is also likely to be overlooked, albeit obliquely, from the rear facing windows of the parent property at close quarters given their close physical relationship. No overlooking concerns are however envisaged in respect of the property on the opposite side of Sun Lane (No. 74). Internally the living accommodation is likely to be dark given that there are no window openings in the southern, rear elevation. There may be a high dependency therefore on artificial light sources which is not good practice in terms of residential amenity or energy efficiency.

The outlook from the rear facing rooms of the parent dwelling should not however be unduly affected by the proposal. The reduction in eaves height and removal of the garage element will improve the relationship between these properties.

Overall, the proposal therefore fails to accord with Policy DS5 of the Core Strategy Development Plan Document.

Highway Issues The proposal is unlikely to generate highway safety concerns. The layout shows a minimum of two spaces can be achieved for both the current and new property off Wrexham Road and Sun Lane respectively. Speeds on Sun Lane are low and reversing vehicles are unlikely to give rise to highway safety concerns. The Council’s Highway Engineer raised no objections to the proposal. No conflict with policies DS4 or TR2 of the Core Strategy Development Plan Document are envisaged.

Page 25 Report to the Area Planning Panel (Keighley/Shipley)

Representations The comments raised by both the objectors and supporters have been noted. The LPA concurs that the proposal would be harmful to the character and appearance of the streetscene and amenities of the adjacent neighbour for the reasons outlined above. The proposed parking arrangements for both properties are considered to be appropriate and commensurate with the needs of each unit. The amended scheme does not satisfactorily address all the reasons for refusal on the earlier 2018 proposal and introduces a further area of concern –the side garden area to the bungalow would be overlooked by the existing house at No. 1 Wrexham Road given their close physical relationship. The LPA would normally expect a distance of 7 metres between a window in a two storey elevation and a boundary – this distance is closer to 4 metres in this instance. It is acknowledged that the development could enable the applicant to remain living in the area in a single storey property which may best suit long-term needs and family support network however this is not sufficient reason to permit a form of development that is contrary to the Council’s adopted planning policies in all other respects.

Community Safety Implications: None

Reasons for Refusal: 1. The proposed development would, by virtue of its height, mass, means of access and parking arrangements, bulk and close proximity to neighbouring dwellings, represent a cramped and incongruous form of development that would be at odds with the existing balance between buildings, gardens and landscaping in this locality. The proposal would be detrimental to visual amenity and would conflict with policies DS1, DS3, HO9 and SC9 of the Core Strategy Development Plan Document.

2. The dwelling would, by reason of its close proximity to the joint boundary with 1A Wrexham Road, have an overbearing impact upon the occupiers of this adjacent property resulting in both a loss of outlook and an oppressive sense of enclosure to their private rear garden and rear facing habitable living accommodation. This would be detrimental to the amenity of its occupants and contrary to Policy DS5 of the Council's Core Strategy Development Plan Document.

3. The amenity space to the side of the proposed dwelling would be overlooked at close quarters by the rear facing windows of the existing dwelling to the detriment of privacy and the amenities of future residents. For this reason the proposal is considered to be contrary to Policy DS5 of the Council’s Core Strategy Development Plan Document.

Page 26 Report to the Area Planning Panel (Keighley/Shipley)

19/01885/FUL

453 Bradford Road Sandbeds Keighley BD20 5NH

Page 27 Report to the Area Planning Panel (Keighley/Shipley)

10 July 2019 Item: E Ward: KEIGHLEY EAST Recommendation: TO REFUSE PLANNING PERMISSION

Application Number: 19/01885/FUL

Type of Application/Proposal and Address: Change of use from office to private hire control office at 453, Bradford Road, Sandbeds Keighley BD20 5NH

Procedural Matter: On the application form the agent described this proposal as a change of use to a private hire booking office. The applicant has since confirmed that this is incorrect. The intention is that no facilities will be provided for customers and so the agent agrees that the use should be described as a private hire control office.

Applicant: Mr G Ghous

Agent: AA Planning Services

Site Description: The proposal is for conversion of part of the office of a car sales business (JA Motors). This business has a forecourt and fronting the Bradford Road between Keighley and Bingley. The car sales business occupies a two storey rendered building that stands at the end of a row of terraced houses on Poplar Terrace. The houses step away towards the north. Adjoining the car sales building to the west is a single storey building occupied by a hot food takeaway called Spice Village. This shares the forecourt. There is a bus stop serving the 662 Keighley - Bradford bus on the main road just east of the forecourt, and there is also a demarcated cycle lane.

Relevant Site History: 02/04486/VOC : Variation of opening hours. Granted: 07-MAR-03. 01/03687/COU : Change of use of property to car sales. Granted: 16-MAY-02. 99/00182/CLE : Certificate of lawfulness for Sunday opening. Refused : 28-NOV-00. 97/02688/VOC : Variation of condition on approval number 81/04509/COU regarding opening times. Refused: 03-OCT-97. 97/02682/ADV : Illuminated signs. Refused: 03-OCT-97. 95/01628/COU : Change of use from offices to extend take away with seating facility. Withdrawn : 26-SEP-95. 88/06187/COU : Change of use of two storey dwelling to restaurant and the formation of parking area. Refused: 30-SEP-88. 81/04509/COU : Change of use from cafe to takeaway. Granted : 05-AUG-81. 80/65857/COU : Change of use from cafe to Fish and chip shop. Refused: 18-FEB-81. 74/04804/FUL : Use of site for display of cars. Refused: 20-FEB-75.

Page 28 Report to the Area Planning Panel (Keighley/Shipley)

As such the NPPF suggests local planning authorities should approve development proposals that accord with statutory plans without delay.

Local Plan for Bradford: The Core Strategy for Bradford was adopted on 18 July 2017 though some of the policies contained within the preceding Replacement Unitary Development Plan (RUDP) are saved for the purposes of formulating the Local Plan for Bradford, and remain applicable until adoption of Allocations and Area Action Plan development plan documents. The site is not allocated for any specific land use in the RUDP. The following adopted Core Strategy Development Plan Document policies are applicable to this proposal.

Core Strategy Policies DS5 - Safe and inclusive places TR2 - Parking policy EN8 - Environmental Protection

Parish Council: Keighley Town Council : No response to consultation.

Publicity and Number of Representations: By site notice and letters to neighbours. 81 objections and 117 representations in support have been received

Summary of Representations Received: In Objection: 1. This proposal will cause chaos. This is a populated residential area with families with young children, and this proposed new use will be a danger due to the increase of traffic it will cause. 2. There is no suitable parking/waiting area for the proposed taxis. Private hire vehicles will use Poplar Terrace and Moorview Court as a turning circle. 3. In the immediate vicinity there is a bus stop. Local residents have to rely on street parking and there are cycle lanes on a single carriageway both sides of the road. Waiting taxis will therefore either have to park in front of residents properties on Bradford Road, further towards Crossflatts or on the road side where they will obscure the vision for drivers exiting Poplar Terrace and Alexander Court.

Page 29 Report to the Area Planning Panel (Keighley/Shipley)

4. This part of Bradford Road and Sandbeds is already a very busy area with through-traffic and a plethora of vehicles already visit the established businesses. Extra vehicles moving around where people are passing by - especially school children and parents taking children to the local nursery a few hundred yards away – is not acceptable. 5. This is a residential area and the noise of cars starting, doors opening and closing till all hours of the day is not acceptable. The takeaway and the car sales use with (alleged) rotting cars dumped outside are bad enough. This new use will cause noise and disruption for residents who need peace and quiet. 6. An identical application has been turned down in the past. 7. People who don't live anywhere near the address in question can’t offer support for an application outside their own area. 8. There is already an overabundance of taxi firms serving this area in Keighley, Bingley, Nab Wood, Cottingley, Shipley and Saltaire. Objectors can see no pressing reason for yet another to be created where it will cause problems.

In Support: 1. Objectors have misunderstood; this is not a ‘taxi’ rank, customers will not be allowed to book from the office. 2. A welcome proposal – there is no problem as people in Sandbeds and Riddlesden always struggle to get a car to come out, so it would be good for everyone in the area to have their own private hire business based here. 3. Healthy competition will make sure the public get a good service at a competitive price. This business will help provide a better service to the public.

Several representations give no specific comments.

Consultations: Highways DC : Do not support this proposal for a change of use . A private vehicle hire office would be likely to lead to an intensification of use of the site by vehicles. The proposal provides insufficient off street parking provision and turning space for the proposed use, and would cause a reduction in parking and turning space for existing uses, leading to layout which would be operationally impracticable. This would be likely to lead to vehicles reversing onto the highway to turn, and overspill parking close to a junction or indiscriminate parking in a bus bay, obstructing the free flow of traffic on a busy classified road, to the detriment of highway safety.

Summary of Main Issues: Highway safety implications Impact on amenity of residential neighbours.

Appraisal: The Site History section of this report shows that this site on the main Bradford Road between Keighley and Crossflatts has had a controversial history, with proposals for changes of use and amendments to operating hours of various business uses raising objections and concerns on grounds of road safety and the impact on the amenity since the 1980’s.

Into this existing situation, the applicant wants to introduce a private vehicle hire office. The office would have a floor space of 13.6 sq. metres The stated hours of operation are 6am – 11pm, 7 days a week.

The application form says there are presently 2 full time and 3 part-time employees.

Page 30 Report to the Area Planning Panel (Keighley/Shipley)

Highway safety implications The buildings fronting the main road at the end of Poplar Terrace are currently used as a hot food takeaway and for a car sales business. There is a forecourt between the building frontage and the main road. A large part of this forecourt is occupied by cars for sale, which leaves limited space for staff and customers of the two businesses to park cars clear of the highway.

The proposed office would occupy part of a room presently used by the car sales business which is understood to be owned/operated by a member of the applicant’s family. The private hire office would rely on access and parking on the forecourt shared with the car sales use and the existing takeaway.

However, observations since submission of this application have shown that there is rarely free space on the forecourt of the property as it is occupied by cars for sale or vehicles presumably associated with the existing businesses. This is confirmed by objections from local people. This site cannot provide sufficient workable space clear of the public highway to accommodate the needs of the additional private hire use as well as the existing businesses. There are further concerns due to the restrictions of the two accesses to the forecourt which would make manoeuvring potentially hazardous. There are two access points to the forecourt fronting the property. One direct from Bradford Road and one from Poplar Terrace, close to its junction with Bradford Road.

Bradford Road is a busy classified highway. Although the Aire Valley Trunk Road dual carriageway has substantially reduced the amount of traffic on Bradford Road since 1986, it is still a classified road and carries a significant amount of local traffic between the suburbs north of Keighley and Crossflatts/Bingley. It also serves as a frequent service bus route and there is a bus stop with ‘clearway’ markings just to the east of the forecourt and a cycle lane is marked out along the site frontage.

The Council’s Highways Engineer is therefore unable to support the proposed development due to the highway safety concerns it would be likely to raise.

Appendix 4 of the Council’s Core Strategy gives a parking standard for a private vehicle hire booking office as a minimum of five spaces, or 1 space for every 4 cars operating from the site. Two spaces have been indicated on the site layout plan which falls short of the requirement and would therefore be insufficient.

Furthermore, it has been pointed out by the Highways Engineer that the proposed parking spaces that are dedicated to the private hire use are shown alongside the access from Bradford Road, with insufficient turning space to allow vehicles to manoeuvre in or out of them safely. A clear turning space of 6 metres would be required, but from plan only around 3 metres clearance is available which would mean cars having to back into the road and the cycle lane. This would create a hazard to road users which would be unacceptable.

The submission explains that private hire vehicles would operate remotely and customers would book online or by telephone via an app based booking system, and there is no intention for the office to be used for walk-in bookings. No customer waiting facility is to be provided and a planning condition could be used to prevent this.

However as with all private hire offices there will be a tendency, especially at off-peak times, for the private hire drivers to return to base at times for comfort breaks, administration matters, visit the office for instructions, for refreshments or to chat with colleagues during quiet periods. Private hire vehicles wanting to park here between fares are likely to either have to park in front of

Page 31 Report to the Area Planning Panel (Keighley/Shipley) residents’ properties on Poplar Terrace or Bradford Road, or on the road side where they will obscure the vision for drivers exiting Poplar Terrace and Alexander Court further along the road. The conclusion has to be that this proposal for a change of use from office to private vehicle hire office would lead to an intensification of use of an already congested and over developed site.

The applicant has said he guarantees problems would not happen, but the Council would have no ability to enforce his management arrangements and these could change over time or if ownership or day to day management changes. Planning permission goes to the property, not the person. The uses on this site should be considered comprehensively in order to ensure sufficient off street parking for them all.

The proposal would lead to more intensive use of an already congested site by vehicles. A new business use that clearly depends on vehicles, would result in even more competition for the restricted off street car parking space than at present. The cramped parking arrangements are such that the new use would lead to loss of parking and turning space for the car sales area and takeaway. Parking available for takeaway customers could be obstructed by parking dedicated to the private vehicle hire office which would lead to delivery or customer vehicles associated with the takeaway having reverse onto the highway to turn. Such manoeuvres would be close to the junction of Poplar Terrace with Bradford Road and parking to the takeaway as shown would obstruct access into the site from Poplar Terrace.

Paragraph 109 of the NPPF says that development should only be prevented or refused on highways grounds if there would be an unacceptable impact on highway safety, or the residual cumulative impacts on the road network would be severe. That is judged to be the situation here at the end of Poplar Terrace.

The proposal provides insufficient off street parking provision and turning space for the proposed use, and would cause a reduction in parking and turning space available to existing uses, leading to parking layout which would be operationally impracticable. This would be likely to lead to vehicles reversing onto the highway to turn, and overspill parking close to a junction or indiscriminately in a bus bay, obstructing the free flow of traffic on a busy classified road, to the detriment of highway safety.

Impact on amenity of residential neighbours Many residents oppose the application on grounds of disturbance and nuisance which they fear would be caused to nearby homes. The application form says it is not intended to operate 24- hours a day, but there would be late night working until 11pm every day and the office would be starting its activities at 6am.

Some objections refer to the site being a ‘taxi rank’, which is not the case, and the applicant has re-assured officers that customers would not be permitted to visit the site as it is solely intended as a control office. A planning condition could be imposed to prevent the establishment of a booking counter or waiting room.

The nearest properties are on Poplar Terrace (No. 2) immediately behind the existing businesses, and 451 Bradford Road which is across the street to the west.

The private hire office would inevitably attract an amount of vehicular activity as drivers will visit the office for instruction, comfort breaks or to chat with colleagues during quiet periods. Such visits may be less due to the ‘app’-based control system, and it is noted above how they would cause highway safety problems. However, with regard to the amenity implications of a control office, the Council’s Environmental Health Officer concurs with the Planning Officer view that

Page 32 Report to the Area Planning Panel (Keighley/Shipley) there seem no significant grounds to object on nuisance grounds. If customers are not coming to the office, it is unlikely to be a use that generates noise nuisance.

Whilst additional overspill parking might arise in Poplar Terrace, most activity would probably be on the Bradford Road or the building forecourt and the houses on Poplar Terrace are screened from the office and the forecourt by the existing car sales and takeaway businesses. Taking into account the size of the office, the disposition of the existing uses, and the position of the proposed office in relation to the nearest houses, it is not accepted that significant noise or other disturbance would be experienced by residents. Therefore, although the application is opposed on highway safety grounds, it is not thought that it would significantly impinge on the amenity of nearby residents.

Community Safety Implications: None

Reasons for Refusal: The site is already congested due to the requirements of the existing car sales and hot food takeaway businesses which are to remain in place. The private hire office would be introduced into this already congested forecourt and provides insufficient off-street parking provision or turning space. The proposal would also cause a reduction in parking and turning space available to the existing uses, leading to a parking layout which would be operationally impracticable and would be likely to lead to vehicles reversing onto the highway to turn, cause overspill parking close to the junction, lead to indiscriminate parking in a bus bay and affect a cycle lane. The proposal would cause an unacceptable impact on highway safety, and cause severe residual cumulative impacts on the road network contrary to policies DS4 and TR2 of the Core Strategy Development Plan Document.

Page 33 Report to the Area Planning Panel (Keighley/Shipley)

19/01605/FUL

Land To Rear Of 19 Northgate Baildon BD17 6JZ

Page 34 Report to the Area Planning Panel (Keighley/Shipley)

10 July 2019 Item: F Ward: BAILDON Recommendation: TO REFUSE PLANNING PERMISSION APPLICATION WITH PETITION

Application Number: 19/01605/FUL

Type of Application/Proposal and Address: Construction of a single-storey private hire vehicle booking office on land to the rear of 19 Northgate, Baildon BD17 6JZ.

Applicant: Miss Louise Hogg trading as Baildon Private Hire

Agent: Kevin Ratcliffe

Site Description: The application site comprises a small gravelled area of land to the rear of 19 Northgate within the centre of Baildon Village. Immediately to the east of the site is a detached lock up garage, and to the west, at a slightly lower level, is 19A Northgate, a ground floor residential flat which has habitable windows which look towards the site. At the time of inspection the site appeared to be in use an amenity area by the flat. Immediately to the north is a vehicular access which serves the grade II listed Malt Shovel Public House opposite as well as acting as the service road to the nearby Baildon Co-op store. Parking restrictions in the form of a yellow box marking is in place on this access road to prevent indiscriminate parking to ensure that it is clear of obstruction at all times. Northgate, the B6151, is a well-used classified road forming the main route through the village with double yellow lines along its route close to the site.

Relevant Site History: None on this particular the site.

Page 35 Report to the Area Planning Panel (Keighley/Shipley)

As such the NPPF suggests local planning authorities should approve development proposals that accord with statutory plans without delay.

Replacement Unitary Development Plan (RUDP) Allocation: The site falls within Baildon Local Centre and Conservation Area

The following adopted Core Strategy DPD policies are applicable to this proposal. Core Strategy Policies DS1 Achieving good design DS3 Urban Character DS4 Streets and Movement DS5 Safe and inclusive places EN3 Historic Environment EN8 Environmental Protection TR2 Parking policy

Parish Council: Baildon Town Council

Publicity and Number of Representations: By press and site notice and letters to neighbours. Overall expiry date 10.5.2019 A petition with over 30 signatories has been received against the proposal together with 21 letters of objection. In support, around 90 representations have been received including one form a local Ward Councillor.

Summary of Representations Received: OBJECTIONS

1. The proposed Taxi Office is deficient in terms of parking provision. This will result in an increase in demand for on street parking in a location where such on street car parking is under provisioned to the severe detriment of highway safety. 2. This stretch of Northgate is very busy already and the proposal would cause chaos with extra cars accessing the site. 3. Baildon is already well served by taxi firms and there is a lack of need for the proposal. 4. The proposed booking office is situated in the entrance of a busy delivery yard that has wagons and vans being driven in and out, this alongside parked taxis and pedestrians using it would have safety implications that would surely have more risk than benefits to the community 5. Noise and disruption to neighbouring residents from customers of the taxi office especially at the weekends and late into the evening. 6. The proposal would have a negative impact on the conservation area. 7. The site is owned by the brewery.

Page 36 Report to the Area Planning Panel (Keighley/Shipley)

SUPPORT 1. Baildon Taxis provide a valued service and residents wish to see this business retained in the village. 2. Previous office was in a dangerous location along the main road and this new base could be safer 3. The applicant is an experienced and well-respected taxi operator 4. Baildon taxis are being forced to relocate to alternative premises as their lease has expired on their existing site

Several representations give no specific comments.

A local Ward councillor has stated that is simply a relocation of an existing well established and well regarded business and that it should be supported with a provison that there should be no drop offs or pick-ups on Northgate itself. The building would be in keeping with the conservation area.

A general comment from a nearby business, Café Bar 12, has also been received stating that they presently have an arrangement for the taxi firm to park on their land as and when necessary and that this could continue.

Consultations: Highways DC : Do not support this proposal for a change of use . The shortfall in off-street parking provision will therefore result in an increase in on-street parking in an area where available parking is limited to the detriment of highway safety.

Heritage Conservation : The proposed use generates concern as to the amount of traffic generation, parking and movement in this confined location of the conservation area, close to a listed building and in the core of the conservation area. The structure could screen some neighbouring dilapidated and unsightly garages and its appearance, subject to a number of modifications to the design, could be consistent with the overall character of the conservation area.

Summary of Main Issues: Highway Safety Implications Impact on amenity of residential neighbours. Visual Amenity and character of the Conservation Area Representations

Appraisal: The proposal seeks approval to construct a single storey building to be used as a taxi booking office by Baildon Taxis. The business has previously operated for many years from a nearby unit at 28 Northgate but explains that termination of the lease is forcing and urgent relocation to alternative premises within the village. The applicant has emphasised the importance of this to both the community and those relying on the business for their livelihoods.

The submitted Design and Access statement states that the applicant is looking for a base within the village which would improve customer safety and alleviate the congestion caused by the boarding and alighting of passengers outside the existing booking office on Northgate.

The building is small – it will be a kiosk, similar in form and scale to a domestic garage and will be constructed from natural stone and positioned alongside an adjacent garage building with a floor area of 8m2.

Page 37 Report to the Area Planning Panel (Keighley/Shipley)

Unlike other private hire office proposals, this one will serve as both a control base and will also provide a covered waiting area to the front of the booking window. It will therefore attract calling customers. Behind the waiting room and booking counter are an office space and a toilet which can only be accessed from an external door. It is likely that this will be accessible by office control staff and drivers.

The application form states that 3 x FTE staff will be employed from the office on a 24 hour basis. Documentation submitted in support advises that there are 25 drivers currently employed by the business.

Highway safety implications The proposal raises significant concerns around highway safety in view of the deficiencies of the proposed parking arrangements and the restricted nature of the existing access road.

The applicant was made aware of reservations about the suitability of this locality for a private hire booking office in October 2018 when advising in respect of a proposal to convert from a residential bedsit on ground floor to private hire taxi booking office. Officers signalled that this was unacceptable and could not be supported.

This free standing kiosk proposal is equally problematic from a highway safety point of view.

Appendix 4 of the Councils Core Strategy sets the parking standard for a Private Hire booking office as a minimum of five spaces, or 1 space for every 4 cars operating from the site. The submitted form says two spaces will be provided but no parking layout plan has been tabled to show where these are positioned within the confines of the site or demonstrate that such arrangements will be workable and safe to operate. Notwithstanding this point, the proposal for just two spaces for cars falls substantially short of the minimum provision and the Council’s Highway Officers are unable to support the scheme for this reason.

Whilst information submitted in support of the proposal explains that taxis could park elsewhere within the village centre, either along Northgate or within adjacent car parks associated with neighbouring businesses, the Council would have no ability to enforce the management of the business and prevent private hire cars waiting around the proposed office or parking indiscriminately. Arrangements promised by the applicant could change over time once the use is established or if business ownership and management changes.

Potential for drivers to park private hire vehicles along the access road to the office is restricted given that this access serves as the service access road for the neighbouring public house and the village Co-Op food store. Clear access along this is essential at all times and an informal yellow box marking is in place to try to discourage parking in that area.

Observations since the submission of this application have shown that indiscriminate parking does occur in this area and this has been confirmed by the many objections from local people. The numerous objectors, including the manager of the Co-Op store, argue that this site cannot provide sufficient space to accommodate the needs of the proposed private hire use whilst maintaining the rights of the existing businesses to service their property in a safe manner due to the restrictive nature of the access road.

The establishment of a private hire business in this location would result in even more competition for the restricted off street car parking. Private hire drivers are likely to regularly visit the site to collect fares from walk-in bookings and are also likely to return to base at times for comfort

Page 38 Report to the Area Planning Panel (Keighley/Shipley) breaks, administration matters etc. The increase in vehicles using this access road may result in overspill parking close to the junction of a busy classified road, Northgate, conflicting with other road users to the detriment of highway and pedestrian safety.

The Local Planning Authority acknowledges that this application relates to the relocation of an existing, long established business rather than the setting up of a new enterprise and that the driver numbers will remain unchanged. It is also noted that the proprietor would consider limited licensed trading hours from 6pm-2am on Friday and Saturday evenings however none of these facts would overcome the serious objection on highway safety grounds to setting up a private hire business in this already restricted location.

In support of their application reference has also been made to a grant of planning consent for the change of use of a retail shop to a private hire booking office at 54 Westgate, Shipley (18/05184/FUL). However, the circumstances are not directly comparable. The Shipley proposal related to the change of use of an existing building within a town centre on a site which was used in the past as a private hire office. The office was also to be operated in connection with an existing taxi base located across the street - on the forecourt of a former petrol filling station which has plentiful on-site parking provision. The Council’s Highway Officer raised no objections to that proposal. In contrast this application is for a new building to be introduced into an already congested area with no obvious car parking provision and which has attracted objections from Highways DC.

Paragraph 109 of the NPPF says that development should only be prevented or refused on highways grounds if there would be an unacceptable impact on highway safety, or the residual cumulative impacts on the road network would be severe. Local highway circumstances are such that that is judged to be the situation here in the vicinity of Northgate.

The proposal provides insufficient off street parking provision and turning space for the proposed use, and would cause a reduction in parking and turning space available to existing neighbouring uses, leading to conflicts along the access road. This would be likely to lead to vehicles reversing onto the highway to turn, and overspill parking close to a junction, obstructing the free flow of traffic on a busy classified road, to the detriment of highway safety. The proposal would be in conflict with Policies DS4 and TR2 of the Core Strategy Development Plan Document.

Impact on amenity of residential neighbours The proposed private hire booking office would also have a negative impact upon the amenities of nearby residents. The structure is very close to the flat at 19A Northgate and would not only have an overbearing impact on outlook from the ground floor habitable room windows, the residents of that flat are also likely to experience unacceptable levels of noise and disturbance from the comings and goings of customers and vehicles given that the business would intend to operate on a 24 hour basis and has a booking window where customers can book cars directly in person.

Information provided with the application states that customers would wait on average of up to 4 minutes at a time for a car to become available. Drivers are invariably likely to visit the office for instruction, comfort breaks or to chat with colleagues during quiet periods. Customers and drivers congregating outside this property at close quarters to the nearby flat at unsociable hours would be materially harmful to the amenities of existing and future occupiers. Whilst a proposed car parking plan has not been tabled it is likely that waiting private hire cars will be waiting alongside the office unit, and directly outside the front of No 19A. The submitted design and access statement states that mitigation measures in the form of sound proofing to neighbouring residents and fencing could be erected but no detailed measures have been put forward with this proposal to demonstrate that this could work successfully. Little weight can be given to such vague

Page 39 Report to the Area Planning Panel (Keighley/Shipley) proposals. The proposal is considered likely to harm the amenity of existing residents contrary to Policy DS5 of the Core Strategy Development Plan.

Visual Amenity and impact on the character of the Conservation Area The site is in Baildon Conservation Area, and the Council’s Conservation Officer has commented that the increase in parking and vehicle activity in this location could have a detrimental impact upon its character. In its favour, the general form and appearance of the proposed building is consistent with the character of the conservation area given that it is to be constructed in coursed stone, with a stone slate roof with tabling. The location of the building would also have the benefit of screening the dilapidated building to the east from direct view from Northgate.

A number of modifications to the design have been recommended but these could be secured by condition. Broadly, and subject to conditions, the proposal would have a neutral impact on the heritage asset and is acceptable with regard to Policy EN3 of the Core Strategy Development Plan. However, this does not affect the conclusions on the main issues of traffic safety and residential amenity.

Representations It is acknowledged that the application has stemmed from the need of an existing long-standing business to relocate within the village and that Baildon Taxis is a well-respected private hire firm providing a service to the local community; this is illustrated by the amount of support for the proposal. Whilst the previous base may have had shortcomings in terms of highway safety, that is not sufficient reason to justify an alternative location that would be equally unsatisfactory from a highway safety perspective. The Ward Councillor’s suggestion that vehicles should not pick up fares on Northgate is not realistically practicable as the Local Planning Authority would not be able to enforce such an arrangement.

The proposal is deficient in parking provision and introduction of a private hire booking office in such confined surroundings would result in a significant risk to highway safety and compromise the ability of existing businesses, such as the Co-op, to operate safely and effectively. Northgate is a busy classified road and any intensification in traffic activity could cause material harm to the safety of road users including pedestrians.

The amenities of neighbouring residents would also be adversely affected for the reasons outlined above. The full impact of the proposal on the character and appearance of the wider conservation area cannot be fully considered at this point in time without refinements to the design. However given the overriding objection to the principle of the development it is not considered that it is reasonable or expedient to pursue this point with this submission. Issues relating to competition are not matters to be considered under the planning process.

Community Safety Implications: None

Page 40 Report to the Area Planning Panel (Keighley/Shipley)

Reasons for Refusal: 1. The proposed private hire booking office would be introduced to a site that is already restricted due to the poor access and due to servicing requirements of the neighbouring businesses. It would provide insufficient safe and workable off street parking provision or turning space to meet its needs. The proposed use would therefore lead to indiscriminate parking and cause conflicts with the parking and turning space available to existing uses, potentially causing overspill parking close to the junction with Northgate, a busy classified road, and may require vehicles to reverse out onto the highway. The proposal would cause an unacceptable impact on highway safety, and cause severe residual cumulative impacts on the road network. For this reason the proposal is considered to be contrary to Policies DS4 and TR2 of the Core Strategy Development Plan Document.

2. The proposed private hire booking office would result in increased noise and disturbance from visiting customers and associated vehicle movements at the premises. This increase in activity is likely to cause disturbance affecting neighbouring residents, particularly those at No 19A Northgate, to the detriment of residential amenity particularly late at night or at other unsocial hours. The proposal is therefore contrary to Policy DS5 of the Core Strategy Development Plan Document.

Page 41 This page is intentionally left blank Agenda Item 6/

Report of the Strategic Director of Place to the meeting of the Area Planning Panel (Keighley and Shipley) to be held on 10 July 2019 D

Summary Statement - Part Two Miscellaneous Items

No. of Items Decisions made by the Secretary of State - Allowed (2) Decisions made by the Secretary of State - Dismissed (3)

Julian Jackson Portfolio: Assistant Director (Planning, Transportation and Regeneration, Planning & Highways) Transport

Report Contact: Mohammed Yousuf Overview & Scrutiny Committee Phone: 01274 434605 Area: Regeneration and Environment Email: [email protected]

Page 1 Report to the Area Planning Panel (Keighley/Shipley)

DECISIONS MADE BY THE SECRETARY OF STATE

Appeal Allowed

ITEM No. WARD LOCATION

A. Ilkley (ward 14) 26 Margerison Road Ilkley West Yorkshire LS29 8QU

Extension of existing raised patio area – Case No: 18/04922/HOU

Appeal Ref: 19/00025/APPHOU

B. Bingley Rural Public Conveniences Keighley Road Harden (ward 03) Bingley West Yorkshire

Change of use and extension of existing disused toilet block into retail unit. – Case No: 18/01490/FUL

Appeal Ref: 18/00133/APPFL2

Appeal Dismissed

ITEM No. WARD LOCATION

C. Baildon (ward 7 Bertram Drive Baildon West Yorkshire BD17 01) 7NR

Construction of a detached dormer bungalow - Case No: 18/04057/FUL

Appeal Ref: 19/00001/APPFL2

D. Baildon (ward Former Glengate 44 Lucy Hall Drive Baildon West 01) Yorkshire BD17 5BH

Division of existing dwelling into two dwelling houses – Case No: 18/02531/FUL

Appeal Ref: 19/00021/APPFL2

E. Baildon (ward The Old Dairy Glen Road Baildon West Yorkshire 01) BD17 5EA

Single storey extension to rear – Case No: 18/04998/HOU

Appeal Ref: 19/00012/APPHOU

Page 2 Report to the Area Planning Panel (Keighley/Shipley)

Appeals Upheld

There are no Appeal Upheld Decisions to report this month

Appeals Upheld (Enforcements Only)

There are no Appeal Upheld Decisions to report this month

Appeals Withdrawn

There are no Appeal Withdrawn Decisions to report this month

Appeal Allowed in Part/Part Dismissed

There are no Appeals Allowed in Part/Part Dismissed to report this month

Notice Upheld

There are no Notice Upheld to report this month

Notice Varied and Upheld

There are no Notice Varied and Upheld to report this month

Page 3 This page is intentionally left blank