Agenda item

To receive a report of the Chief Planning Officer regarding an outline application for residential development (up to 46 dwellings) and public open space.

With reference to the discussions set out in minute 60, the Panel considered how to proceed

  For the avoidance of doubt, the Head of Planning Services clarified the reasons for refusal of the application, in view of the amendments made in the supplementary report before Members

  RESOLVED -  That the application be refused for the following reasons:

  1 The Local Planning Authority considers that the release of this site for housing development would be premature being contrary to Policy N34 of the adopted Leeds Unitary Development Plan Review (2006) and contrary to Paragraph 85, bullet point 4 of the National Planning Policy Framework.  As the application site forms part of a larger designation of safeguarded land (total 11.7 ha), is not located in an area where housing land development is demonstrably lacking and does not include or facilitate significant benefits, it also fails to meet the criteria set out in the interim housing delivery policy approved by the Council’s Executive Board on 13^th March 2013, to justify early release.  The suitability of the site (and the wider safeguarded area of which it forms part) for housing purposes needs to be comprehensively reviewed as part of the preparation of the ongoing Site Allocations Plan

  2 The Local Planning Authority considers that the applicant has so far failed to provide the necessary information to demonstrate that the proposals can be accommodated safely and satisfactorily on the local highway network in relation to impact on the proposed NGT junction designs

  3 The Local Planning Authority considers that the applicant has so far failed to provide the necessary information to demonstrate that the proposals can be accommodated safely and satisfactorily on the local highway network.  Specific issues relate to the validity of the traffic count data used, the lack of future traffic growth applied to future year scenarios and validity of queue length modelling at the Church Lane/A660 junction.  In addition, no assessment has been made of impact at the Long Causeway/Adel Lane or Weetwood Lane/ Ring Road junctions

  4 The Local Planning Authority considers that the proposed means of access via a signalised junction onto the A660 will unnecessarily delay movement and increase road traffic accidents on the A660 and is therefore an unsuitable form of access into the site and that as such the proposals would be detrimental to the safe and free flow of traffic and pedestrian and cycle user convenience and safety.  Also that the applicant has failed to work with the adjacent applicant to take opportunities to provide a comprehensive access solution to both sites.  For these reasons the application does not comply with polices GP5, T2, T2B and T5 of the adopted Leeds Unitary Development Plan (Review) 2006, policies T2 of the emerging Core Strategy and guidance contained within the adopted Street Design Guide SPD

  5 In the absence of a signed Section 106 agreement, the proposed development so far fails to provide necessary contributions for the provision of affordable housing, education, greenspace, public transport, cycle and pedestrian connections; travel planning and off site highway works contrary to the requirements of Policies H11, H12, H13, N2, N4, T2, GP5 and GP7 of the adopted UPD Review (2006) and related Supplementary Planning Documents and contrary to Policies H5, H8, T2, G4 and ID2 of the emerging Core Strategy and guidance in the NPPF.  The Council anticipates that a Section 106 agreement covering these matters could be provided in the event of an appeal, but at present reserves the right to contest these matters should the Section 106 agreement not be completed or cover all the requirements satisfactorily