Agenda and draft minutes

South and West Plans Panel
Thursday, 30th May, 2019 1.30 pm

Contact: Andy Booth  88665

Items
No. Item

83.

Declarations of Disclosable Pecuniary Interests

To disclose or draw attention to any disclosable pecuniary interests for the purposes of Section 31 of the Localism Act 2011 and paragraphs 13-16 of the Members’ Code of Conduct. 

 

Minutes:

There were no declarations of disclosable pecuniary interests.

 

With regard to Agenda Item 7, Land at Sugar Hill Close and Wordsworth Drive, Oulton, Leeds, Councillor Anderson informed the Panel that he had been involved in discussion with local residents in his role as shadow housing spokesman and would be treating the application with an open mind and without predetermination.

 

 

84.

Apologies for Absence

Minutes:

Apologies for absence were submitted on behalf of Councillor J Heselwood.  Councillor P Gruen was in attendance as substitute.

 

 

85.

Minutes - 25 April 2019 pdf icon PDF 278 KB

To confirm as a correct record, the minutes of the meeting held on 25 April 2019

 

 

Minutes:

RESOLVED – That the minutes of the meeting held on 25 April 2019 be confirmed as a correct record.

 

 

86.

Application 17/06933/FU - Sugar Hill Close, Oulton Drive, Wordsworth Drive, Oulton, Leeds pdf icon PDF 1 MB

To receive and consider the attached report of the Chief Planning Officer regarding an application for the demolition of existing dwellings and construction of 70 dwellings and associated infrastructure.

 

 

Minutes:

The report of the Chief Planning Officer presented an application for the demolition of existing dwellings and construction of 70 dwellings and associated infrastructure at land at Sugar Hill Close, Oulton Drive, Wordsworth Drive, Oulton, Leeds.

 

Members visited the site prior to the meeting and site plans and photographs were displayed and referred to throughout the discussion of the application.

 

The following was highlighted in relation to the application:

 

·  There would be additional conditions proposed to the recommendation.  These included the following:

o  Survey of existing highways

o  Alteration of existing highways

o  Phasing plan

·  Further representations had been made by local residents and Ward Councillors.  There had also been representations from the Outer South Community Committee and Elmet and Rothwell Labour Party.

·  Further objections received included the following:

o  Inadequate bat survey

o  The properties could be renovated

o  The plans amounted to social cleansing and gentrification

·  The site was constructed in the 1950s and was owned by the coal board.  The existing houses were two storey semi-detached with only a few off road parking spaces.  It was proposed to demolish these due to viability issues and poor standard of the properties.

·  It was proposed to replace the demolished properties with 70 new dwellings on the existing road layout.  Open spaces and landscaping to the south west corner would be retained.

·  Proposed house types and streetscenes were displayed – there would be wheelchair accessible properties and adaptable properties.

·  One of the main objections was the loss of Airey style houses.  Objectors had proposed that these could be renovated.  Due to modern standards and requirements for environmental improvements a much higher specification was required.

·  An equality assessment had been undertaken with a survey of affected tenants having been carried out to obtain information regarding their protected characteristics.  The majority of tenants were on assured tenancies and could be given 8 weeks notice.

·  Twelve of the regulated tenancies had a right to be re-housed under the Housing Act and would be re-housed in new properties within the site.

·  The Council would secure nomination rights for the properties to be let for the benefit of people currently on the housing list.

·   The application gave rise to the Public Sector Equality Duty and Members had to be satisfied regard had been had to that duty.

·  In planning terms the layout and house types all met standards and were policy compliant.  Most gardens were of appropriate size with just a few smaller than required by guidance which was not uncommon in a development of this size.

·  The application was recommended for approval subject to conditions and the provision of a Section 106 agreement.

 

Local residents, a representative of the National Union of Mineworkers and Ward Councillors addressed the Panel with concerns and objections to the application.  The following views were highlighted:

 

·  Residents had been treated with contempt and all the developer was interested in was profit.

·  The existing houses were not aesthetically pleasing but were people’s homes.

·  Residents of the area had formed a  ...  view the full minutes text for item 86.

87.

Application 18/04168/FU - Former Wortley High School, Swallow Crescent, Wortley, Leeds, LS12 4RB pdf icon PDF 2 MB

To receive and consider the attached report of the Chief Planning Officer regarding an application at the former Wortley High School site for 59 dwellings (Use Class C3) and public open space (Partial Traffic Regulation Orders to Swallow Crescent with two parking spaces)

 

Minutes:

The report of the Chief Planning Officer presented an application for 59 dwellings and public open space at land at the former Wortley High School site, Swallow Crescent, Wortley, Leeds.

 

The item had been deferred at the meeting held on 20 December 2018 to allow for the applicant to submit a financial viability appraisal.  Members had visited the site prior to that meeting.

 

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

 

·  The land was owned by Leeds City Council.

·  There would be a mix of two, three and four bedroom properties including terraced, semi-detached and detached.

·  The access previously used for the school would remain as the access to the site.

·  There had been objections to the application from local Ward Councillors and residents.  These included access, highways and on street parking.

·  The site was allocated for housing in the emerging site allocation plan.

·  The scheme complied with national and local policies.

·  There had been amendments to the original scheme and now only 13 properties had parking to the front of the properties.

·  House types were displayed.

·  There would be no impact on existing residents from overlooking or overshadowing.

·  There had been no objection from Highways with regards to parking.

·  There would be a small area of on-site greenspace.

·  There would be additional parking spaces created for residents of Swallow Crescent.

·  The applicant had agreed to a commuted Greenspace sum.

·  A full viability appraisal had been reviewed by the District Valuer.  It was concluded that all sought after Section 106 contributions could be delivered with a reduced affordable housing provision to 13.5%.

·  The application was recommended for approval subject to the completion of the Section 106 agreement.

 

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

 

·  The site had not yet been purchased by the applicant.  The viability of the development was calculated on the existing use of the land on not the purchase price of the land.

·  The provision of full affordable housing provision (15%) was preferable to the securing the sum for greenspace or the travel plan in this case.

·  Concern regarding the positioning of front doors next to each other.

·  That properties should be fitted with euro lock standard locks.

·  There was sufficient space for bin storage.

·  There is a condition for every property to have an electric charging point.  It was suggested that this be amended to all parking spaces.

·  Concern regarding the lack of information following the Council’s declaration of a climate emergency

·  The proposals were not policy compliant with regards to the reduced affordable housing and on-site greenspace.

·  Whether PV panels could be put on affordable houses.

 

A motion was made to defer the application.

 

RESOLVED - That the application be deferred for the following:

 

·  Renegotiation to seek provision of 9 affordable units (full policy compliance)

·  Discuss design of properties to improve quality of design

·  Seek agreement to use euro lock standard locks on all new properties

·  Revisit location of front doors shown adjacent to each other  ...  view the full minutes text for item 87.

88.

Applications 18/02140/FU & 18/02141/LI - Stonebridge Mills, Stonebridge Lane, Farnley, Leeds pdf icon PDF 3 MB

To receive and consider the attached report of the Chief Planning Officer regarding an application and listed buildings application for the change of use and conversion of mill buildings to provide 30 dwellings and the construction of 82 new dwellings with associated access and landscaping.

 

 

Minutes:

The report of the Chief Planning Officer presented an application and a listed buildings application for conversion of mill buildings, demolition of listed buildings to provide 30 dwellings and the construction of 82 new dwellings (112 dwellings in total) with associated access and landscaping at Stonebridge Mills, Stonebridge Lane, Wortley, Leeds.

 

The applications had been presented to the Panel in October 2018 as a position statement where Members had been generally supportive of the scheme.  Members visited the site prior to that meeting.  The applications had been considered at the meeting held in April 2019 when they had been deferred to allow the District Valuer to be present to present their findings and to re-consider the design of properties with integral garages.  Site plans and photographs were displayed and referred to throughout the discussion of the applications.

 

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

 

·  To replace the properties with integral garages would have a further impact on the viability of the scheme.

·  There would be an extension to the proposed size of the mill pond and there would be a link to the nature conservation area at the north of the site.

·  The offer for affordable housing remained the same with an overage clause to provide for up to four more affordable houses should more profit be delivered from the scheme than currently assumed.

·  The application was recommended for approval subject to conditions and Section 106 agreement.

 

The findings of the District Valuer were summarised in the report. The District Valuer’s representative addressed the Panel and explained the methods used to reach their conclusions.  Following discussion with the applicant, it was proposed there would be an overage clause in the Section 106 agreement and this would be reviewed after 50% of the scheme had been developed and actual costs of the scheme are known.

 

In response to Members comments and questions it was confirmed that any additional affordable housing contribution triggered by the overage provisions would be provided on site. 

 

RESOLVED – That the planning application be agreed subject to Section 106 agreement (to include overage clause) and conditions as outlined in the report and that the Listed Building Application be agreed subject to conditions set out in the report.