Agenda item

To receive a report of the Chief Planning Officer which provides a Position Statement with regards to a residential development on the land at Seacroft Hospital, York Road, Leeds, LS14 6UH

REPORT TO FOLLOW AS LATE ITEM

The Chief Planning Officer submitted a report which provided a position statement with regards to Planning Application 15/07300/FU for a residential development of 503 houses, conversion of a former hospital administration block, demolition of the former Villa building, associated infrastructure including two new vehicle access points to A64, public open space and retention of Clock Tower on land at Seacroft Hospital, York Road, Leeds, LS14 6UH.

Site photographs and plans were displayed and referred to throughout the discussion of the application.

Further issues highlighted in relation to the application included the following:

• That the site was allocated for housing it being part green field and part brown field;
• The site would have two entrances which would be linked by a central spine road;
• The Clock Tower which formed part of the original hospital buildings on the site would be retained as would some of the existing trees, alongside planting of new trees. There was also provision for public space within the development, although slightly less than normal due to the site abutting a park;
• Confirmation that there would be 905 allocated parking spaces for residents and 101 visitor spaces;
• Flooding issues were addressed and plans to alleviate the possibility of flooding were explained to Members, with the possibility that water storage could be included to allow for slower run -off;
• That the site had been designed so that a secondary school could be built to the eastern side of the development; and
• It was confirmed that 15% of the total proposed residential units would be affordable housing and that a contribution of £964k would be made to the CIL (Community Infrastructure Levy).

The Head of Planning Services commented that highways and air quality issues were key considerations that needed to be addressed together for this site and would need to be progressed once formal comments from consultees were received.

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

• In relation to parking provision Members sought clarification that planning permission would be required should any residents wish to convert the garages into habitable rooms in the future;
• Consideration was given to the clock tower including its possible community use and the likely costs of maintaining it;
• The mix of housing was discussed. Members felt that more two bedroomed properties should be included within the development. Extra housing for the elderly was also considered essential. The Panel also questioned the standard that the homes would be built to and considered it important that they matched the “Leeds Standard”;
• In relation to the proposed 15% affordable housing, Members asked that it be considered that coal seams exist in the area and as such the costs relating to any necessary ground stability works could possibly affect the viability of the level of affordable housing being proposed;
• Members felt that they would expect assurance from the developers that they had conducted all enquiries with respect to highways, public transport and air quality. Currently Members felt that they were not in a position to pass comment;
• Members considered that the designs presented for the houses and the apartment buildings needed further improvements. The Head of Planning Services considered that the apartment block replacing the “arts and crafts” building did not look right proportionally in terms of the relationship between the window sizes and solid elevations and further work was needed to improve this design;
• Members requested that consideration be given to keeping the “arts and crafts” building;
• The Panel discussed the possibility of a school being built on the land to the east of the development. Members established the access arrangements for the school and the route buses would be likely to take should it be built; and
• Members noted that it was likely to take up to five years to develop this site and that thought would need to be given to the traffic on the busy road running past the site and how this would affect local residents.

The Chief Planning Officer commented that the development of the site in relation to secondary school provision faced two uncertainties these being the East Leeds Extension and if the school was to be built who would pay for it.

The architect for the site addressed the Panel commenting that the demolition of the “arts and crafts” building currently on the site was an essential part of the development due to it responding negatively to the public realm area which looked over the clock tower.

Members responded to the questions featured at paragraph 11.1 of the submitted report as follows:

1. The design of the accommodation required further work. The separate blocks appeared disjointed and disparate when viewed in relation to each other and the illustrations did not demonstrate the possible quality of the accommodation;

2&3. The approach to greenspace provision was supported;

4.  The housing needed to meet the quality and mix promoted by the Leeds Standard and the Council’s adopted policy on housing mix. Homes for the elderly should also be considered;

5. More information required on the potential highway impact including the conclusions of the Council’s Highway Services and the potential cumulative impact of this and other development in the area on the highway network;

6. Potential drainage impact and flood risk mitigation needed to be addressed by the proposals, particularly for communities further downstream;

7.More certainty is required in relation to the proposed school provision on the site and Children Services should attend Panel when the proposal is next brought to Members;

RESOLVED – That the contents of the report be noted.