Agenda item

To consider a report of the Chief Planning Officer which provides a summary of the responses received to the publication consultation on the Aire Valley Leeds Area Action Plan (AVLAAP). The main issues raised in the representations to the plan are discussed in detail within the report, together with options for consideration in determining how the council should respond.

(Report attached)

Further to minute 23 of the meeting held 19th January 2016, where Members were minded to proceed with the Aire Valley Leeds Area Action Plan (AVLAAP) in advance of the Site Allocations Plan (SAP), the Chief Planning Officer submitted a report which provided further analysis of the AVLAAP submissions and options for the way forward in relation to the issues raised.

The report provided a summary of the responses received to the publication consultation on the AVLAAP. Key issues were identified in the report relating to matters where potential options had been developed. The Panel’s guidance was sought in order to inform the Council’s response and allow officers to prepare a schedule of proposed modifications to the draft AVLAAP with the intention of the revised AVLAAP returning to a future meeting of the Panel. It was reported that overall, there was considerable support for the AVLAAP and the benefits it could bring to Leeds and the city region as a whole.

Appendix A of the report included details of the representations received during the consultation process alongside consideration of the representation against matters such as plan soundness, legal compliance and changes sought to the plan where relevant. Schedule 1 contained site specific representations, Schedule 2 contained representations on general issues.

The Principal Planner, Forward Planning & Implementation, presented the report and dealt with a number of representations to the Housing allocations proposed within the AVLAAP in turn:

Skelton Gate (AV111 East HMCA, capacity 2619 dwellings) with two separate land owners within the development site. The views of “Templegate Developments” and ‘Extra MSA’ in respect of future use of their respective sites and housing number calculations were reported. A schedule setting out three options for consideration was included at para 3:25 for the Panel’s consideration, with officers recommending option 3 which would provide 1801 dwellings – a reduction of proposed residential dwellings of 818

(Councillor Walshaw withdrew from the meeting for a short while at this point)

The Panel received assurance that officers were satisfied with the assessment provided by Templegate Developments in relation to their view of the amount of developable land and deliverable housing. Members were advised that the site required significant investment to support development and any future development proposals which suggested housing figures different to those agreed in the Plan would be assessed and dealt with through the planning application process.

In conclusion, the Panel broadly supported officers’ preferred approach to amend the suggested site capacity to 1,801 dwellings as detailed in paragraph 3.26

Bridgewater Road (Site AV40, capacity 425). The submission seeking an increase in capacity to 600 dwellings from the site leaseholder, DB Schenker, was highlighted although it was noted that no supporting evidence had been supplied.

In conclusion, the Panel supported the officer recommendation to use the higher density multiplier and increase the housing capacity for this site to 546 dwellings as detailed in paragraph 3.33 of the report.

Former Tetley Brewery site (part of Site AV94, capacity 830). Representations received from Vastint, owner of the Brewery site suggesting that the site capacity could be significantly increased were reported. In response the officer recommendation was that  the standard SHLAA density multiplier for the city centre of 350 dph be applied on that part of the site assumed for housing (4.4 ha out of the overall 11 hectare site). The Panel noted the proposed future uses of the overall site (HS2 station; city park) and the comment that this site could support high density housing.

In conclusion, the Panel broadly supported the officer proposal detailed in paragraph 3.39 of the report to amend the proposed capacity and increase the housing capacity on site by 810 to 1,635 dwellings.

The report also highlighted alternative sites for housing which had been submitted during the consultation. Although no new sites had been identified, Towngate – the owners of Haigh Park Road, Stourton (Site AV100) had submitted a further representation seeking consideration of the site as suitable for housing in the longer term (beyond 2028 and outside the period of the Core Strategy).

The report outlined the reasons the site had previously been rejected during the publication Draft of the AVLAAP due to concerns over the location of the site which contained two canal basins, lay within Flood Zone 3; was close to a strategic waste allocation and within an area of search for intermodal freight. Officers additionally reported that this site remained a flood risk area and would not be protected by Phase 1 the new Leeds Flood Alleviation Scheme.

The Panel supported officers’ view detailed in paragraph 3.49 of the report, that the existing allocation of this site should be maintained and that the suggestion for a housing allocation should be rejected

The report also addressed the principle of one HMCA making up a shortfall of provision in another HMCA allocation, raised at Panel on 19^th January 2016.

The Principal Planner, Forward Planning & Implementation, led discussion on the allocation of Employment sites within the AVLAAP. The Panel considered each submission in turn, along with the officer recommendation:

Former Skelton Grange Power Station - (Natural Resources and Waste Development Plan (NRWDP) Site 200 and AVLAAP site AV67 and AV68) – the submission from Harworth Estates was noted and the Panel supported the recommendation for the extension of the boundary of the “general employment allocation” of AV68 to the proposed revised boundary, as detailed in Plan 5 of Appendix B of the report

Skelton Grange Road East site (Site AV83) – the submission from the Canals & River Trust was noted and the Panel supported the officer recommendation to amend the boundary of the general employment allocation to AV83, in order to remove the overlap with NRWLP site 20 – as shown in Plan 6 of Appendix B to the report.

In addition, the Panel noted the submissions received from statutory consultees which raised a number of soundness and technical issues requiring further consideration. The submitted report summarised the representations, totalling approximately 116 separate points for consideration, from:

Historic England – broadly in support of the plan but with request to amend wording in respect of consideration of heritage assets. The Panel were informed that officers supported the changes suggested by Historic England.

Coal Authority – submitted objections in respect of land stability issues. The Panel noted that officers had created a new sustainability appraisal objective in response, which acknowledged the high risk coal areas which in turn would trigger the need for a site requirement in relation to the stability issue at relevant sites. As a result, it was felt that none of the proposed allocations needed to be removed from the Plan. If agreed, this change could also apply to the Site Allocations Plan

Highways England – submitted objections in respect of additional trips generated on the national highway network.  The Panel noted that officers had provided further clarification in relation to the delivery of specific sites to Highways England. As a result, it was felt that none of the proposed allocations needed to be removed from the Plan.

Environment Agency – confirmed the AVLAAP and supporting evidence in the Flood Risk Sequential and Exceptions Test did not raise any soundness issues, however did submit an objection in reference to the draft flood maps which illustrated the likely changes to the flood zones post-implementation of the Leeds Flood Alleviation Scheme. Officers confirmed that the draft plans were not relied upon as evidence or justification for the proposed allocations and could therefore be removed

 During the discussions, the Panel noted that approximately half of the submissions could be dealt with quickly in the manner proposed by officers.

RESOLVED

a)  That the summary representations to the draft Aire Valley Leeds Area Action Plan consultation as set out in Schedules 1 and 2 in Appendix A of the submitted report be noted

b)  That, having considered the issues set out in Section 3 of the submitted report, the comments made during discussions be used as guidance to officers for the initial officer responses to the representations.