Agenda item

To consider a report of the Chief Planning Officer and to receive a pre- application for the laying out of access and erection of circa 1150 houses at Thorp Arch Estate, Wetherby, LS22.

This is a pre-application presentation and no formal decision on the development will be taken, however it is an opportunity for Panel Members to ask questions, raise issues, seek clarification and comment on the proposals at this stage. There is no opportunity for public speaking about the proposals outlined in the presentation.

The report of the Chief Planning Officer introduced a pre-application presentation in relation to the laying out of access and erection of circa 1150 houses at Thorp Arch Estate, Wetherby, Leeds 22.

The following representatives attended and addressed the meeting:-

• Sue Ansbro – WYG Panning Consultants (Applicants Representative)
• Colin Pool – Clerk to Walton and Thorp Arch Parish Council’s

Members were shown detailed plans and photographs of the scheme and had previously visited the site prior to the meeting.

The applicants representative addressed the meeting and highlighted the following issues:-

• The proposed application is a Policy Compliant scheme
• The application supports Thorp Arch as an employment area
• The sustainability of the Thorp Arch Trading Estate was a key issue for the  developers
• A previous Planning Inspector’s report concluded that there were no employment land supply issues
• Thorp Arch was the only major brown field site in East Leeds
• A substantial amount of public consultation had already been carried out (i.e. meetings with Ward Councillors, Local Parish Council’s, the leafleting of properties in the Thorp Arch, Walton and Boston Spa areas and a dedicated website)
• Affordable housing 35%
• Introduce alternative highway arrangements
• Proposed new public transport arrangements
• Proposed new community facilities (New school)
• New cycleway and pedestrian routes
• Sustainability proposals
• The undertaking of an environmental impact assessment

In conclusion Ms Ansbro suggested that if the application was to be approved it would create employment opportunities in the area, deliver housing growth and lead to sustainable development

The Chair then invited questions and comments from Members on the specific proposals of the pre-application.

In summary, specific reference was made to the following issues:-

• Had meaningful consultation taken place with the neighbouring Parish Council’s and local residents?

•  The intention of the developers to “press ahead” with a full application without addressing concerns raised by the public
• A suggestion that family housing (2,3 & 4 bedroom properties) be included within the housing proposals
• The integration of the neighbouring villages; Walton and Thorp Arch into the proposal was an important factor
• Seek to deliver the aspirations of Walton Parish Council in linking the proposals to the village
• Proposed community facilities
• Not convinced about the sustainability of the development, in particular the existing retail park required substantial investment
• Concerns about transport network, in view of the amount of proposed new housing
• Proposals around public transport
• The suggestion that the application was being pushed through prior to the implementation of the Localism Bill

The Chair then invited Mr Colin Pool Clerk to Walton and Thorp Arch Parish Council’s to comment on the proposals and highlighted the following issues:-

• The Thorp Arch site was requisitioned by the military in 1942 to build a munitions factory. The site was chosen because it was in an isolated area, the road network was poor, all movements to and from the site were by rail
• To this day the road network remains poor
• The proposal to build a substantial number of houses in the area would create havoc on the local road network
• Local Parish Council’s were made aware of the proposals in May 2012, they were not consulted, “they were told what was going to happen”
• Developers appeared to be confident that the application would be granted on appeal
• Concerns about the sustainability of the site
• Proper highway solutions required
• The proposed development appears to have not being properly thought through (Disjointed)
• Concerns that failure to address major issues would have adverse implications for the two neighbouring communities
• Not opposed to development in the area but major issues require addressing

At this point in the meeting the Chair, Councillor Taggart left the meeting, Councillor J McKenna assumed the Chair.

The Chair then invited questions and comments from Members on the specific issues raised by Mr Pool.

In summary, specific reference was made to the following issues:-

• Parish Council’s not opposed to development but concerns around infrastructure and sustainability of the site
• No meaningful consultation carried out
• Original housing proposal was 250 houses now 1100
• Neighbourhood Plan suggest development but highlights major concerns of the highway network

In concluding discussions, the Chair put forward the following specific matters for Members consideration:-

- Do Members have any comments to make about the principle and scale

of residential development in this location?

Ø  No objections were raised to the principle of residential development so long as it was supported with the appropriate  infrastructure to serve the needs of its residents and offset the impact of the development on the local communities. The nature of the development appeared disjointed and concerns were raised in respect of residential development on the ‘Wighill Lane’ site as this was not well related to the rest of the proposed development or Walton village

- What are Members thoughts on the approach to the indicative masterplan

for the site?

Ø  Require a comprehensive plan for the whole of the site that sets out the vision for the development of the Trading Estate as a whole.  Further details required around a numbers of matters including proposed public transport, possible Primary School and Community Centre and investment in the industrial estate

- What are Members views on the nature, mix and type of housing

provision (including affordable housing) on this site?

Ø  It would be premature to comment in any detail at this stage. However, the mix and type of housing was too vague and required local housing needs assessment. Affordable housing should be 35%

- Do Members have any particular concerns, beyond those identified in the

report, around the issue of sustainability, traffic impact and accessibility?

Ø  Yes. Concerns were raised that the site was not sustainable and that significant measures should be proposed to make the development so. These included appropriate highway and public transport provision, environmental measures and appropriate facilities for the residents of the proposed development and details of what measures that would be put in place to help integrate this development with existing communities

- What are Members thoughts on the nature and location of greenspaces

on site and how these link into the wider strategic green areas?

Ø  Premature at this stage in the absence of the information requested above

- In the context set by the appropriate planning regulations do Members

consider that the proposed heads of terms cover the appropriate

obligations?

Ø  Premature to consider at this stage in light of previous comments made

- Are there any other issues Members would like to raise?

Ø  That proper and meaningful public consultation should take place, including a Consultation Committee to be established

RESOLVED – That the report and pre- application presentation be noted.