Agenda item

The report of the Chief Planning Officer requests Members consideration for an application to demolition existing buildings, development of 241 dwellings and provision of open space, landscaping and drainage works at Land Off Ninelands Lane, Garforth, Leeds, LS25.

 

(Report attached)

 

Further to minute 58 of the meeting held on 19^th October 2017 the Chief Planning Officer submitting a report in respect of the demolition of existing buildings, development of 241dwellings and provision of open space, landscaping and drainage works at the former Stocks Blocks site, off Ninelands Lane, Garforth.

 

Further to minute 58 above the Head of Development Management left his seat and took no part in discussions on this item.

 

The application was previously deferred as the Panel had requested more information from Yorkshire Water in relation to the capacity of the drainage and sewage system and its ability to cope with the demands of the proposed development and for more information on flooding issues.

 

Yorkshire Water had supplied further information as requested which had been circulated to the Panel and published to the web site as supplementary information prior to the meeting.

 

It was noted that a resident of Hazel Mews had distributed his representation to Panel Members.

 

Cllr.S.McKenna who was unable to attend the meeting had written the following representation which was read out to the Plans Panel.

“Members I’ve still concerns over the drainage and flooding issues, at the last plans meeting I mentioned numerous times about the flooding in Ninelands Lane and Garforth in general. I’m still not convinced the developer is addressing the problems over the drainage for the proposed 241 dwellings. Panel Members know the issues regarding flooding in Garforth and I believe at the moment this could add to the problems if not taken seriously. I don’t believe any new information has come forward to convince me that this should be passed, we need to be convinced totally this site won’t flood or add to more flooding.”

 

Plans, maps and photographs were shown throughout the presentation.

 

Members’ attention was drawn to 1.3 of the submitted report which provided a table to show improvements in cumulative discharge rates, inclusive of both foul and surface water, during key events. It was also noted that the applicant had highlighted at 1.4 of the submitted report the benefits associated with the proposed drainage strategy.

 

The Panel were also shown diagrams on the proposed drainage system which would slowly release water into the drainage system.

 

The additional information provided by Yorkshire Water confirmed it’s no objection response remained. Yorkshire Water had confirmed that the originally suggested conditions 19 and 20 as detailed in Appendix A of the submitted report had not altered.

 

Yorkshire Water had provided additional information on the following points:-

·  Proposed foul water connection point;

·  Network connections/infrastructure beyond the site;

·  Existing network callouts/issues within the area;

·  Future Yorkshire Water proposals.

 

 

Members were asked to note the two additional conditions related to drainage as follows:

·  No. 25:  Water saving devices within the proposed development, so as to reduce water usage down to 105 litres per person per day.

·  No.26: Water butts (250 litres minimum per dwelling) to minimise use of mains water.

 

Members heard that the site as it is currently is some of the cause of the problems due to the amount of hardstanding which causes issues with water run- off. The new development will include garden areas which should slow the run off into the drainage system. The Members were advised that Yorkshire Water and Flood Risk Management were supportive of the development on this site.

 

The Chair reminded Members as part of their consideration the use of a Consultative Forum had been found helpful where there had been long term issues.

 

Cllr. Mark Dobson spoke at the meeting saying that he had expected more after the debate at the previous meeting. He was of the view that the report was not comprehensive from Yorkshire Water. He was also surprised that this application had come back so soon in the process. He said that he was under the impression that Yorkshire Water would have provided a more detailed report. He said that the suggestion that a new housing development would not produce as much effluent as was produced by the existing site was not acceptable.

 

Cllr. Dobson asked Members to take the information relating to the presence of cooking fat in the system ‘with a pinch of salt’ as there were no takeaway outlets in the area.

 

Cllr. Dobson mentioned the slides shown at the previous meeting of raw sewage and sanitary products floating down the road. He explained that this photograph had been taken during floods which had happened in August 2017. He said that he did not believe that the commercial premises of Stocks Blocks was part of the issue as it had been closed for almost six months when this had happened. Cllr. Dobson was of the opinion that the effluent was being produced by the houses within the area and the connector system used by Yorkshire Water.

 

In response to Panel Members Cllr. Dobson informed the Panel of the following points:-

·  He accepts that the new system proposed would be an improvement to what exists. However he was of the view that there was not sufficient details provided by Yorkshire Water and he still did not know where the water would go to.

·  He had been a councillor in Garforth for 10 years and in that time many solutions to the flood issues had been considered including the use of balancing tanks. The Garforth Flood Alleviation Group had been formed and they had done a lot of work such as:

o  Tank at Glebeland development

o  Culvert at Ninelands Lane

o  West Garforth slow release system

·  The housing developments built in the sixties had not had drainage or sewage developed to address where the water and sewage would go.

·  Historical records had been requested on numerous occasions but he was constantly told that the information had been lost.

 

Jonathan Dunbavin the agent and Gary Little the Engineering Manager of Redrow Homes were at the meeting and addressed the Members.

 

Mr Little in response to Members questions advised Members of his qualifications. He also provided more clarification on how the proposed drainage system would work in relation to the Stocks Blocks site. He said that the offer of two systems recognised the difficulties in this area for run-off water and foul water. He said that the proposed system would reduce the discharge from this site from 700 litres per second to around 100 litres per second.

 

Members were advised that surface water would not go into the foul water drain. Foul Water would go into a combined system further down to the South West of Garforth.

 

Members heard that a storage tank likened to the size of an Olympic swimming pool by officers would be sufficient attenuation for a 100 year storm and cope with climate change.

 

Officers advised Members that the developers were not responsible for flooding issues in the Garforth area but were responsible in ensuring that the problem was not made any worse by the proposals.

 

Mr Little explained that the use of a gravity feed was better than a pump as they did not break down as much required less maintenance and that it created a vortex within the stored water in the ‘swimming pool’ which slowly released the water into the drainage system.

 

An officer from the Council’s Flood Risk Management team explained that with the new proposed system surface water run-off would not be able to feed into the foul drain only flushing toilets would feed into the foul drain.

 

Members were advised that a survey had been undertaken by Environmental Health but not detailed enough to list every manhole. It was noted that this would be part of the remit of Yorkshire Water.

 

The Panel requested that a letter be sent from the Chair outlining the concerns of the North and East Plans Panel on the wider concerns of flood issues in the Garforth area.

 

Members were provided with information on the housing types proposed for the development and shown some designs. Members were informed that there would be 1 block of flats and that 15% of the dwellings would be affordable housing which would be ‘pepper potted’ through the scheme. The Panel were also shown a map which indicated where the affordable houses would be located. 

 

Members were advised of the different house types:-

·  24 different types to be provided

·  Broad range of 1 bedroom to 4 bedroom properties

·  There are to be no dwellings above 3 storeys

·  1 block of flats on the scheme

 

It was noted that materials are still to be finalised.

 

Members were concerned that a number of the affordable homes seemed to be located within one area of the scheme and requested that they be more evenly distributed throughout the development. Members also requested that the affordable houses should be no different to other properties on the development. In relation to the design of the affordable homes Members requested that they see the designs prior to approval of the application.

 

It was noted that the Hazel Mews was 21 metres from the proposed new properties which was an acceptable distance in planning terms. The ash pile located at this part of the site needs to be removed with a proposal for new planting in this area.

 

Steve Varley the LCC Design Officer informed Members that he was to discuss the house types proposed for this scheme. He said that Redrow have generally have a good design pedigree and architectural background, however, some of the proposed designs need addressing.

 

In response to Members questions in relation to the building of bungalows in this scheme, Members were informed that a survey had indicated that there was not a demand for bungalows within this area.

 

 RESOLVED – To defer and delegate approval to the Chief Planning Officer as set out at pages 19 and 20 of the submitted report and including the additional conditions set out at page 1 of the supplementary information with a slight amendment to Condition 26 to include reduction of surface water run-off.

 

Also to include:-

·  Additional condition to establish a Consultative Forum;

·  A letter from the Chair to Yorkshire Water; and

·  To address the distribution of affordable housing