Agenda item

To consider the report of the Director of City Development which provides the Panel with an indication of the scale of representation received and the nature of comments and objections raised to the Core Strategy Selective Review (CSSR) Submission Draft Plan. The report highlights that the comments will be considered to ascertain whether there is a need to make any changes to the Plan prior to Submission of the Plan to the Secretary of State for independent examination. 

(Report attached)

The Planning Strategy Team Leader, Policy & Plans, presented a report which provided an indication of the nature and number of comments and objections raised to the Core Strategy Selective Review (CSSR) Submission Draft Plan. Responses were still being catalogued and would be considered to ascertain whether there was a need to make any changes to the Plan prior to its submission to the Secretary of State for independent examination. In general, responses indicated a difference of opinion between residents/community groups and housebuilder/developer on several key matters:

-  Housing Requirement - Many resident/community responses felt that the proposed Policy SP6 housing requirement of 51,952 dwellings was too high however housebuilder responses felt it was too low and did not reflect the job growth scenarios set out in the Leeds Growth Strategy.

-  Plan period for housing supply of 2017 – 2033 - Some residents felt that the period of 2012 – 2028 should be retained, or at least dwelling requirements calculated for 2012-28 and 2028-33.

-  Housing distribution in Policy SP7 - Some residents/community responses felt that areas with Green Belt sites should have reduced targets, whereas the development industry felt there needed to be a wide distribution of housing land supply in different housing markets, including areas with Green Belt.

-  Affordable Housing - Developers queried the evidence to support the increase from 5% to 7% in Zones 3 & 4

-  Housing Standards - Housebuilders queried whether need could be demonstrated for Policies H9 space and H10 Accessibility

-  Electric Vehicle Charging Points - Housebuilders commented that Policy EN8 should read “seek provision” rather than require.

The Panel noted the comments and responses submitted and further discussion focussed on the following:

·  As the Build-to-Rent market was relatively new, it had not matured enough for current residents to consider accessibility measures and standards or think about future proofing their home

·  The revisions to Policies H9 and H10 provided an opportunity to ensure the delivery of high standard homes; including those for the Build to Rent market. Comments regarding money saving measures utilised by some developers were discussed and Members agreed that installation of shatter proof locks should be worked into the sustainable design and construction requirements.

·  Members noted assurance that the previous resolution to establish standards for HMO’s and student housing through creation of an SPD would be implemented.

·  The weight to be afforded to the measures set out in the CSSR during consideration of planning applications as the Review progressed.

·  Concern that developers would seek to target sites that may not be needed for development once the SAP and CSSR processes conclude.

(Councillor R J Lewis joined the meeting at this point)

·  Building Regulations and the impact of the Grenfell Tower disaster in terms of assurance over the application of Regulations and standards in Leeds was discussed.

·  The close link between Building Control and planning. Issues such as accessibility, renewable energy; water and construction can be addressed through optional building standards where the Plan Process has established need.

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

·  The role of Infrastructure Delivery Plans as an integral part of the Core Strategy and SAP and as influencers over developments

·  The need to discuss all elements of infrastructure provision more widely and the role of Section 106 monies in its provision.

RESOLVED – To note the headline outcomes of the consultation on the National Planning Policy Framework Consultation Proposals, along with the contents of the Panel’s discussions.