Agenda item

To consider a report by the Chief Planning Officer which sets out details of an application for the construction of phase 2 of the Leeds flood alleviation scheme (FAS) to land adjacent to, and within the River Aire Corridor between Leeds City Centre (Whitehall Waterfront) and Calverley.

(Report attached)

The Chief Planning Officer submitted a report which set out details of an application for the construction of phase 2 of the Leeds Flood Alleviation Scheme (FAS) to land adjacent to, and within the River Aire corridor between Leeds City Centre (Whitehall Waterfront) and Calverley, Leeds.

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

The Planning Officer confirmed and clarified the following by verbal updates to the Panel report issued:

Page 34 – 10.10 – embankments would be up to a max. height of 4000mm (not 400mm as mentioned).

Page 37 – 10.29 - Zone 12 – the wall shown either side of the Locomotive sheds at Armley Mills would be 2.3m high (not max.1.8m as suggested)

The Planning Case Officer reported that further representations had been received following publication of the report to Panel:

·  Yorkshire Wildlife Trust had confirmed no objections to the proposal.

·  Environment Agency, raised no objections subject to conditions, the full detail of these are expected by 12^th June 2019.

·  Councillor A Carter (Calverley & Farsley Ward) had commented there was a strong case for effective action following storm Eva in 2015 and was broadly supportive of the proposals.

·  The Home Office confirmed that they were supportive of the proposals, particularly given the history of flooding in the area and the impact on their offices at Waterside Court.

·  2 sets of residents from Newlay Bridge had requested their ‘objections’ be changed to ‘comments’ following the revised drawing at this location and additional clarifications from the Project Team

·  Horsforth Town Council were neither supporting or objecting to the proposals (neutral response)

·  Kirkstall Ward Members Veener and Bithell expressed their support for the scheme and look forward to working with Officers and local residents on the detail of the scheme as it develops. Specifically they wished to mention that protection of natural habitats and the nurturing of the various species that thrive in the valley are of particular concern to our constituents and we look forward to discussions with them and the ecologists working on the scheme in order to ensure that local wildlife are protected as much as possible in the development and building of the flood defences.

·  Councillor J Illingworth (Kirkstall) confirmed that he would not now be attending to speak and address Panel, but was content for the application to proceed and welcomed more details about the scheme as the work progresses.  In addition, Councillor Illingworth requested (1) experience from this proposal be used to inform an improved approach to consultation on large-scale planning applications in the future (2) that as part of the proposals consideration be given to mitigation measures being relocated to wider areas

Planning Officers addressed the Panel, speaking in detail about the proposal and highlighted the following:

Construction of Phase 2 of the Leeds Flood Alleviation Scheme (FAS) including flood storage areas, flow control structure (including plant and machinery) and defence to include; walls, sheet piling, earth bunds, scour protection and associated access, landscaping, demolition, building and construction works.

Listed Building Consent was also sought in respect of the following:

Application No. 19/01277/LI – Construction of a 200mm thick reinforced concrete flood defence wall clad in stone into Wellington Bridge

Application No. 19/01278/LI – Construction of a 200mm thick reinforced concrete flood defence wall clad in stone into Newlay Bridge

Application No. 19/01279/LI – Installation of a control structure tying into Clough House using suitable lime hydraulic mortar and remedial works to Clough House (Kirkstall)

Application No. 19/10280/LI – Construction of flood walls connecting to the Engine Shed on the NW and SE elevations and remedial works to the Engine Shed, comprising the insertion of a floor to ceiling flood defence wall, replacement flood defence door and inserted secondary flood defence glazing (at Armley Mills)

In addition, Planning Officers outlined the engagement and consultation that has been undertaken with the public and Ward Members in anticipation of the proposal coming before Panel.

Members raised the following questions:

·  Could more details be provided about the proposed works to the Engine Shed

·  Referring to paragraph 6.22 and the Council’s declaration of a climate emergency, Members queried if the materials to be used on the scheme could be appropriate to meet the Council’s ambitions – particularly in order to aid reduction of carbon emissions

·  Was any consideration given to using the goits to produce

hydro-electricity

·  Was a suitable species of tree being used to slow the flow of water

·  Were the proposed works to be phased suitably so as to avoid increasing flood risk up-stream during construction

·  When would work on the scheme commence

·  Would completion of the scheme assist businesses in obtaining flood protection insurance cover

In responding to the issues raised, Council Officers said:

·  Officers reported that a secondary wall and glazing (floor to ceiling) would be inserted behind the existing wall, with the secondary wall intended to take the necessary weight but with the glazing being such as to enable water to pass through if required .Once complete the building would be secure and dry.

·  Engines within the Engine Shed will be removed and stored within Armley Mills during construction – with discussions already having been undertaken with Leeds Museums & Galleries in relation to the logistics required for this.

·  Members were informed that the scheme involves a number of elements which will contribute towards the Council’s climate change priorities.  The overall intention is to follow natural flood management methods including the planting of up to two million tress (to delay run off). In addition, there will be a reduction in the use of carbon-intensive bricks, steel & concrete; the greater use of modified wood and other plant-based derivatives; use of hybrid excavators; material reuse up to an estimated 90%; and use of materials from local suppliers as far as possible to reduce transportation requirements.

·  Natural flood management methods being used as far as possible will slow down the overall rate of water flow, meaning that actual built and more invasive flood management elements that comprise the scheme are reduced in number.

·  Members were informed that due consideration had been given to the use of goits to produce hydro-electricity but it was determined to not be commercially viable for this scheme.  Hydro-electricity production is therefore not incorporated as a distinct element of Phase 2, but opportunities for this in the future are not being unduly limited.

·  Professor Sir John Lawton, speaking on behalf of the Council, said the scheme before Members was the most ambitious natural flood management scheme in the UK. He said once the trees were established, the tree canopy would create a large surface area and would be effective in slowing the watercourse down.  Further, established tree roots (both in summer and winter) would assist in taking on excess water and so help to prevent over-topping of the watercourse.

·  It was reported that phasing of the works was the subject of further discussions with the contractors and will form a condition to the permission, as it is important not to increase flood risks elsewhere as a consequence of any works.  In addition, Environment Agency permitting and the following of Environment Agency guidelines by the contractors will introduce an inevitable element of phasing to the work-scheme.

·  It was understood that some business in the Kirkstall area struggled in obtaining flood protection insurance. The completion of Phase 1 would provide some reassurance to insurance companies as it provides a 1:100 flood protection.  The completion of Phase 2 would in turn further enhance that reassurance. The Chief Planning Officer said that all new business development in the area should be compliant with current standards around flood risk, such that the obtaining of appropriate insurance going forward is easier and new developments can obtain suitable protection. 

In offering comments Members raised the following issues:

·  Members were supportive of the scheme commenting that it was a comprehensive, ambitious plan, impressive in design and sits well within the landscape.

·  Members noted that the scheme will be much welcomed and provide considerable relief for residents, businesses and other occupiers in the area in view of the history of flooding in the area.

·  Members were of the view that the river needs to be usable and attractive.

·  Could the two goits at: Armley Mills and St Anne’s Mills be inspected with a view to maintenance/ repair, the flow appears to be restricted.

·  Could the use of water power at Armley Mills be investigated further

In responding to the latter point the Chair suggested that it may be an appropriate subject to be considered by the new Climate Change Advisory Committee.

In summing up the Chair thanked all parties for their attendance and contributions, he suggested that the Members appeared to be unanimously supportive of the application.

RESOLVED –

(i)  That Application No. 18/07367/FU be deferred and delegated to the Chief Planning Officer for approval subject to the conditions specified in the Appendix No.1 of the submitted report (and any others which he might consider appropriate).

(ii)  That Application Nos; 19/01277/LI, 19/01278/LI, 19/01279/LI and 19/01280/LI be deferred and delegated to the Chief Planning Officer for approval subject to the conditions specified in the Appendix No. 2 of the submitted report (and any others which he might consider appropriate).