Agenda item

To consider a report of the Director of City Development outlining the public consultation period for the Core Strategy and seeking comments from the Area Committee on the document

(report attached)

Council Function

  East Outer Area Committee considered a report of the Director of City Development outlining the public consultation period for the Core Strategy and seeking comments from the Area Committee on the document

  Kathryn Holloway – Team Leader Local Plans East and Lyla Peter – Team Leader - Data from City Development were in attendance and presented the report

  Concerns were raised that for a matter of such importance, no Senior Officers from City Development had attended the meeting

  Officers outlined the report and the challenges Leeds faced in terms of changing demographics and the infrastructure and green space requirements a growing city needed

  A key aim of the Core Strategy was to provide a strategic overview for the preparation of a future Site Allocations Development Plan Document (DPD) and neighbourhood plans, therefore the Core Strategy was not site specific but took a district-wide approach to planning for homes, jobs etc

  The importance of regeneration was emphasised as was the maintenance of distinctive communities and accessibility to public transport

  Members were informed that the consultation related to the soundness of the plan rather than to general comments and changes

  Members discussed the report and commented on the following matters:

·  the remit of the consultation and the likelihood of the public engaging in this

·  the real problems being faced by people in East Leeds due to a shortage of school places and poor transport

·  demographics and the figures being used to predict demand, with concerns that mistakes made in the past should not be repeated

·  the number of planning permissions granted where no development had commenced despite the need for housing in the city

·  that developers would concentrate on areas of their choosing, with greenfield sites in outer areas being likely to be developed ahead of brownfield inner city sites

·  that no mention of social housing had been made

·  that population forecasts were paramount and that there should be regular reviews of the soundness of these figures

·  the need to ensure there was good communication between the different sections within City Development, particularly where there were changing circumstances, with concerns that a recent residential development in LS15 had been recommended for approval, despite it failing to meet policy requirements for affordable housing; with the financial viability of the scheme being assessed by Officers.  Following refusal of the application by Plans Panel East, it seemed the developer had now agreed to provide the level of affordable housing required

·  concern that in concentrating on the Core Strategy, the Protected Areas of Search (PAS) sites would be forgotten and the need for planning applications on these sites to also conform to the same tests as in the Core Strategy, i.e. around identity/cohesiveness

·  indications on the Core Strategy key diagram for 2000 – 3500 additional homes in Garforth and whether this related to the town or the whole Garforth and Swillington Ward and the need for further, specific information to fully understand the address the issues which would be raised by this

·  the difficulties in aligning what Officers felt was needed with what developers wished to construct

·  that demographics was not an exact science and that the projected drop in pupil numbers had not occurred

·  that a key element was obtaining the right type of housing and that consultation on this was important

·  the need for public consultation on the possible use of PAS sites

·  the need for a fair approach to be taken across the city and for Members to be at the centre of discussions around proposals in their wards

·  the importance of the availability of school places; that there should be a link made between education issues and the Core Strategy and that where there was a lack of school places in an area, people would not chose to live there

Officers provided the following responses to issues which had been

raised:

·  demographics; that the information from the Office for National Statistics (ONS) had been considered along with a study in 2010 of future demand for housing, with that study revising the demographics for Leeds and the ONS realising they had overestimated the figures for the city

·  that in respect of PAS sites, further information would form part of the Site Allocations DPD and that some sites might be revaluated but that some new sites would become PAS land and that the aim was to work with communities on these issues

·  in terms of housing numbers, the figures contained in Spatial Policy 6 of the Core Strategy was for 70,000 dwellings (net) up to 2028, in a phased manner and that outstanding planning permissions up to a set time and existing allocations identified in the UPD would contribute towards the housing numbers

·  that the Core Strategy contained broad steers in terms of minimum and maximum requirements relating to size/bedroom numbers and that there were policies covering independent living, but that much would be based on the individual applications which were submitted

·  that the provision of 70,000 homes across the city was a vast undertaking and the desire to be equitable about the siting of developments would be hampered by the unsustainability of some areas to accommodate development, e.g.in areas which flooded. 

Concerns were raised at the accuracy of the information being

provided in view of a recent meeting attended by some Members relating to proposals to locate 7,000 residential dwellings in an area which was susceptible to flooding

·  that for Garforth, the numbers on the key diagram related to the town, rather than the whole Ward but that further, detailed information would come forward in the preparation of the Site Allocations DPD

·  that the need for a defined link between the Core Strategy and education policy would be picked up

Whilst acknowledging the presentation which had been made and the

responses provided, concerns were reiterated that further details were needed, especially relating to schools and that a further meeting be arranged within the consultation period, with Senior Officers from City Development attending

  RESOLVED – To note the report and that a further meeting be arranged before 12^th April to enable East Outer Area Committee to fully consider the report and comment, with Senior Officers from City Development being in attendance to respond to Members’ queries and comments

  (During consideration of this matter, Councillor James Lewis joined the meeting)