Agenda item

Further to minute 95 of the City Plans Panel meeting held on 24^th October 2013 where Panel considered a position statement on an application for residential development of up to 400 dwellings to consider a further report of the Chief Planning Officer setting out the formal, revised application for residential development of up to 325 dwellings, access and associated works including open space and structural landscaping, including addition of pelican crossing

(report attached)

The report of the Chief Planning Officer presented an outline application for residential development of up to 325 dwellings, access and associated works including open space and landscaping on land at Spofforth Hill, Wetherby.  An addendum report was also submitted which contained a further update on consultation responses and recent meetings with Ward Members and residents.

Members attended a site visit prior to the meeting and site plans and photographs were displayed and referred to throughout the discussion on this application.

Further issues highlighted from the report included the following:

·  The Panel had received a pre-application presentation regarding this application in April 2013 and a position statement in October 2013.

·  The site covered a total of 15.7 hectares and had previously been used as arable farm land.

·  The outline application was for 325 dwellings of which 285 would be accessed from the west of the site.

·  Members were shown an indicative layout and there would be a range of 1 to 6 bedroom properties which would be 2 to 2.5 storeys in height.

·  There would be 35% affordable housing.  15% of this would be on site with the further 20% in the form of a commuted sum of £8.5 million to be spent elsewhere across the City.

·  Removal of TPO trees for forming an access to the site.

·  Following negotiations with the developer, Ward Members and residents the number of proposed dwellings had been reduced from 400 to 325.

·  Contact had been made with Harrogate Borough Council and North Yorkshire County Council regarding opening an access to the north of the site.  They had not been supportive of this.

·  The proposals fell within current planning guidance and policy and also satisfied conditions of the interim PAS policy.

·  The Panel was informed of conditions to this application which would see development recommence at the Easel 7 site.

·  The addendum report informed Members of the following:

o  Proposals for a pelican crossing.

o  An additional £400k towards additional mitigation and traffic measures.

o  Consultation responses – there had been no objections from Natural England.  The Council for the Protection of Rural England had raised some concerns.

o  Current position with relation to planning policy.

o  Scetion 106 update and education contribution.

o  Agreement for buffer planting on the inside boundary of the site.

o  No objections from Harrogate Borough Council or North Yorkshire County Council regarding highways.

A local representative addressed the Plans Panel with objections to the application.  These included the following:

·  There was no evidence that the proposals would be sustainable.

·  The Council should protect land that was used for food growth from development.

·  There would be a shortage of food growing land by 2030.

·  It was not agreed that there was no other alternative land to use.

·  The proposals were not felt to be in line with current policy and guidelines.

·  In response to questions from Members, the following was discussed:

o  It was felt that the application had been pre-determined and that the interpretation of planning policies had not been objective or impartial.

o  Concern that there was a lack of involvement from Elected Members.

o  The land was currently used for agricultural purposes.

The applicant’s agent addressed the Panel.  Issues raised included the following:

·  There had been a lengthy consultation process with Elected Members.

·  The proposals all fell within current planning policy and guidance.

·  Reference to the £8.5 million contribution for affordable housing that could be used at the Council’s discretion.

·  Benefits to Wetherby and the surrounding areas.

·  It was felt that on balance that the proposals would outweigh the loss of the agricultural land.

In response to Members comments and questions, the following was discussed:

·  There were no concerns regarding surrounding areas being used as rat runs by traffic.  Surveys would be carried out and there was mitigation funding available should there be an adverse impact and measures need to be taken.

·  The inclusion of a dedicated right hand turn into the site – it was reported that under highways design guidance that a right hand turn should be considered under the terms of this proposal.  This was not essential, but was considered highly desirable from a highways perspective and could always be implemented at a later date.

·  Concern regarding the distance from the site to local primary schools and that relevant infrastructure will not be in place. It was reported that all infrastructure was desired as soon as possible and would be set out in the Section 106 agreement.

·  Affordable housing – it was recognised that there was a need for affordable housing in Wetherby but proportionally less than in other areas of the City.

·  Further development of the Easel 7 site linked to this proposal.  It was reported that there was a legally binding condition to do this through the terms of the Section 106 agreement.

·  Concern that the majority of the site was only accessible via one entrance.

·  It was reported that local primary schools had reached capacity and that both Deighton Gate and Crossley Street Primary Schools had space for expansion.  The proposals would necessitate another half form entry.

·  Concern that the development of agricultural land was contrary to guidance in the National Planning Policy Framework.

·  Concern regarding the width of the footpath/highway and whether this would lead to the loss of more trees.

·  It was preferred that affordable housing be pepper potted across the site.

·  It was suggested that the inclusion of a dedicated right hand turn be reconsidered and the land needed be reserved to implement this in future if required.

·  Concern regarding future school provision – Deighton Gate Primary was a long way from the site and Sport England had previously objected to converting the field to hard use at Crossley Street Primary.

RESOLVED – That the application be approved for deferral and delegation to the Chief Planning Officer subject to conditions and a Section 106 agreement as outlined in the report and further to the following being reported back for further consideration at the next meeting of City Plans Panel:

·  Guarantees regarding the off-site commuted sum in relation to affordable housing.

·  Proposed changes to the right hand turn access to the site,

·  Pepper potting off affordable housing throughout the site.

·  Further discussion with Harrogate Borough Council regarding access to the site.

·