Agenda item

The report of the Chief Planning Officer outlines an application for residential development of up to 140 new homes, public open space, flood alleviation measures, landscaping, new access from A58 Wetherby Road and pedestrian / cycle access from The Drive. Land at Wetherby Road, Bardsey, Leeds, LS17.

 

(Report attached)

 

The report of the Chief Planning Officer presented an outline application for residential development of up to 140 dwellings, public open space, flood alleviation measures, landscaping, new access from A58 and pedestrian/cycle access from The Drive at land at Wetherby Road, Bardsey, Leeds.

 

Members were informed the proposal was for a residential development of up to 140 dwellings on an area of land designated as Green Belt. The applicant’s (the Bramham Park Estate and Sandby (Bardsey) Ltd) case was based upon very special circumstances which relate to the refurbishment and restoration of a number of important heritage assets, including a significant number of Grade 1, Grade1* and Grade 2 listed buildings.

 

The Panel was advised of the following points:-

·  Case put forward for special circumstances for the heritage benefits

·  The site had been to Panel in November 2016 when Members had undertaken a site visit;

·  The house and gardens were of local and national importance;

·  There was a disrepair deficit of £10.7m.

·  The Bramham Estate host a number of events including Bramham Horse Trials, Leeds Festival and has been used on a number of occasions for filming;

·  All money generated through Capital receipts would be used for urgent repairs;

·  The application is within the Green Belt

·  Application site is not within the Site Allocation Plan (SAP)

·  Site located between The Drive and First Avenue

·  Lower part of the site is located within flood risk land

·  Located within the conservation area of East Keswick and Bardsey cum Rigton;

·  Application had been submitted in outline with all matters reserved apart from access;

·  35% of the 140 proposed dwellings would be affordable housing;

·  Section 106 agreement would provide 100% of the proceeds from the development would be used for the refurbishment of the heritage sites of the house and garden on the Bramham Estate;

·   An independent viability assessment had been provided which agreed with the conclusions of the officers;

·  509 letters of objection had been received;

·  Speed limit signs on the A58 would be relocated as part of the access proposals; and

·  The Biggin a house located on the site was capable of conversion to flats. It was noted to be economically viable and that if money was input to this it could generate an income in its own right for the longevity of the estate.

 

Members were shown photographs and plans throughout the presentation.

 

Members were reminded of paragraph 14 of the NPPF which was read out at the meeting and set at paragraph 10.7 of the submitted report.

 

Members were further advised of the following:-

·  The three reasons for refusal;

·  Correction to paragraph 10.155 bullet point V: The harm ascribed to the issue of accessibility is ‘significant’ and not ‘limited’.

·  A late representation from a local resident who was unable to attend the meeting that supported the Bardsey Parish Council objection and that the development must not proceed.

 

Nick Lane-Fox, the applicant and Adam Key from Savills were in attendance at the meeting and informed the Plans Panel of the following points:

·  27 Grade 1 listed structures require repairs at a cost of £10.7m and this was rising;

·  100% of the proceeds from the development would go towards the repairs;

·  The estate had no other assets to sell;

·  They were offering public access to the park free of charge on 365 days of the year;

·  The importance of the heritage locally and nationally of the house and gardens;

·  That paragraph 10.35 of the submitted report in relation to heritage matters had not been followed up; and

·  The application had taken 4 years to get to this point.

 

In response to Members comments and questions the following points were noted:-

·  The proceeds from the development would only be used for urgent repairs and would not be towards the general up keep of the estate;

·  There was currently a 10k circuit round the park which was open to the public. However the offer from the estate was to open the grounds which would be one and a half times the size of Roundhay to walk around free of charge to the public including free parking;

·  Current access to the house was by appointment;

·  Access would be restricted during the Horse Trials and the Leeds Festival due to the security and safety aspect; and

·  The walled garden and 66 acres of the park where many of the structures were would also be open to the public for a charge of £4 per adult, £3 for senior citizens and concessions, and £2 for children. 

 

Mr Fox-Lane said that the Bramham Estate was different to that of Harewood as the content of Harewood was more significant including a park landscaped by Capability Brown. Mr Fox-Lane said he was trying to keep the estate as an asset for the future in keeping what was special about Bramham Park with its 18 Century landscaped gardens.

 

In attendance at the meeting to speak for the recommendation was Mark Russell a Chartered Town Planner with Ethical Partnership on behalf of Bardsey Action Group, Bardsey Parish Council and Keswick Parish Council. Also in attendance were Peter Gilan, Tim Gittins and Chris Sidle to answer questions.

 

Members were informed of the following points:-

·  Conflicts with Planning Policy and Niegbourhood Plan aspirations;

·  Harmful to the Green Belt;

·  Failure to prove very special circumstances;

·  Failure to evidence alternative funding steams;

·  Failure to follow Historic England’s guidelines for repairs;

·  Bardsey Neighbourhood Plan voted against this land being used for development and conflicts with community priorities as is located within Green Belt;

·  Council Policy does not allow development on Green Belt;

·  Full option assessment was absent so unable to demonstrate that all options had been explored and exhausted;

·  Not demonstrated consideration of other revenue streams to generate income to fund repairs scheme;

·  Nearby Stockeld Park had become a visitor attraction to help fund repairs and up-keep;

·  The Neighbourhood Plan did not rule out development and a survey taken had identified the need for a small number of  much smaller houses principally for elderly downsizers and young people as starter homes;

·  The Neighbourhood Plan sets out a proposal for 55 properties within the settlement of Bardsey;

·  No assessment had been carried out on noise in relation to the Leeds Festival;

·  The two retail units described at paragraph 10.107 were a hairdressers which had been there a number of years and a convenience store which had been closed and had now been sold. It was not known what the retail unit was to become; and

·  Currently people who live in the area travel to Collingham or further afield for shopping.

 

Members discussed:

·  Policy of Green Belt

·  Weight given to Neighbourhood Plan

·  Special circumstances

·  Accessibility

·  Flooding issues

 

RESOLVED – To refuse the application for the reasons set out in the submitted report.

 

Cllr. S McKenna arrived at the meeting at 14:45 during the presentation of this item and therefore did not participate in this item.