Agenda item

To consider a report by the Chief Planning Officer which sets out details of an outline planning application with all matters reserved except for access, for the creation of a new community comprising up to 800 dwellings, a food store (A1) (up to 372 sq.m), primary school and public open spaces at Land off Racecourse Approach, Wetherby, Leeds 22.

 

 

(Report attached)

With reference to the meeting of 28^th March 2019 and the decision to defer determination of the application to await further information on: the principle of the development within the Site Allocation Plan (SAP), the masterplan of the SAP site as a whole, sustainability, Education provision, access to the site, more details about the proposed retail and housing provision and further engagement with the public and Ward Members.

 

The Chief Planning Officer now submitted a report which sought to address the matters previously raised by Members. It also included information provided by the applicant, together with additional representations which had been received.

 

Site photographs and plans were displayed and referred to throughout the discussion of the application.

 

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

 

·  Site/ location/context

·  Site adjacent to Wetherby Racecourse and open green land

·  SAP now adopted (10^th July 2019) and therefore able to be given full weight by Members

·  This is an outline application, approval is being sought for the principle of development and means of access only

·  Up to date Masterplan, some parcels of land within the wider SAP allocation are not within the application site

·  The proposal is for a new community comprising up to 800 dwellings, a convenience store, primary school and public open space.

·   Flood risk / ecology, a beck runs through the middle of the site

·  Connectivity within the site

·  Consultation with Ward Members

·  3 means of access

·  Enhanced access to South West corner of the site (SAP requirement)

·  Vehicular access via Carr Lane

·  Sustainability of site

·  Provision of a shuttle bus at 20 minute intervals

·  Developers to deliver a range of house types

·  Possible location of the primary school

 

The Chief Planning officer reported that since the previous meeting, further additional representations had been received:

 

Wetherby Ward Members remained of the view that a variety of issues had not been addressed: there had still been very limited consultation undertaken, school provision was a concern, the climate change agenda called into question the sustainability of the site, a comprehensive Masterplan had not been provided and the proposed vehicular access arrangements onto York Road were inadequate.

 

Wetherby Town Council said that the views of local residents had been ignored, vehicular access onto York Road was a concern, improvements proposed to Carr Lane could not be delivered and the proposed development was not in accordance with the Neighbourhood Plan.

 

Better Wetherby were of the view that the information provided by the applicant in respect of the proposed shuttle bus was optimistic, there was no public transport link, vehicular access onto York Road was a concern, impact on Wetherby Town Centre would be substantial, concerns around sustainability had not been met, there was pressure on school places within the area and consultation with Ward Members, Town Councillors and local residents was inadequate. 

 

Ward Members for Harewood and Collingham were of the view that the development would have an adverse impact on Harewood and Collingham, education and community medical provision remains inadequate to support the additional demand arising from the development and the climate change agenda calls into question the sustainability of the site.

 

It was also reported that 11 further objections had been received referring to: amongst other matters: the impact on the local infrastructure, that the traffic assessment was flawed, the proposed development was close to a Young Offenders Institute, the proposal would create a separate community and this was not a sustainable site.

 

The Panel then heard from Councillor A Lamb (Ward Councillor) and Mr P Catton and Ms I McLaughlin who spoke against the proposal.

 

 Addressing the Panel Councillor Lamb said it was the view of Ward Members and local residents that this site should not be allocated for housing purposes and that the application proposal did not meet the SAP requirements. The proposed vehicular access arrangements at Carr Lane are incredibly dangerous, the accessibility standards within the Core Strategy had not been met, the proposed provision of a shuttle bus was considered to be inadequate, all residents would require access to a motor vehicle and thus the development will be incompatible with the Council’s declaration of a Climate Change Emergency, the site is too isolated and not sustainable, proper consultation by the developer had not been carried out and there are a number of strategic issues which require addressing and should not wait until the Reserved Matters stage.

 

Questions to Councillor Lamb, Mr Catton and Ms McLaughlin

 

·  Were the proposals for this site in keeping with the City Council’s policy on climate emergency

·  Were there any flooding issues associated with this site and was Carr Lane a suitable vehicular access point

·  Could the consultation with the local community have been better

·  Are the concerns around public transport provision justifiable, particularly relating to the inadequacy of the proposed hopper bus service

 

In responding to the issues raised, Councillor Lamb/ Mr Catton and Ms McLaughlin said:

 

·  It is the policy of the City Council that they wish to be carbon neutral by 2030. The majority of the pollutants are created by transport, domestic heating, construction materials used and industrial processes. Residents living on the new development will all have to travel to and from the site by motor vehicle which is not compatible with the declaration of a Climate Change Emergency.

·  Members were informed that 90% of the site was within the flood risk zone, thus it is unacceptable that managing the flood risk will only be dealt with at Reserved Matters stage.

·  The Carr Lane vehicular access point was a concern, traffic was fast moving along this stretch of road and reaction time for vehicles turning right out of the site was challenging.

·  Any large planning scheme should be developed in consultation with the local community. On this particular site, only a single consultation session took place with local residents and a single discussion with the Town Council. Requests from Better Wetherby to meet with the developer were refused. A Consultative Forum should have been established. 

·  There is no rail station in Wetherby and, realistically, people will not use the hopper bus to get into Wetherby to take an onward bus to Leeds or York.

·  The proposed shuttle bus service which would loop the site and then into Wetherby Town Centre would struggle to achieve the suggested 20 minute turn round time.  The Travel Report alludes to this also.

·  It is accepted that the site is allocated within the SAP, but this does not mean that consent must be granted.  Due to the scale of the proposal, it is important that there is an understanding of what the wider site will comprise and provision of a comprehensive Masterplan.

 

The Chair thanked Councillor Lamb and Mr Catton and Ms McLaughlin for their attendance and contributions.

 

The Panel then heard from Mark Johnson (Applicant’s agent) who spoke in support of the proposal.

 

Mr Johnson informed Members that a lot of work had been undertaken since the meeting in March 2019 with a major consultation event having taken place recently in the centre of Wetherby. Responding on the suggestion to set up a Consultative Forum, Mr Johnson welcomed the proposal and also suggested that the applicants would also be agreeable to meeting with the Town Council. Further consultation would inevitably be undertaken were the proposal to proceed beyond the outline application stage. Commenting on the development proposals, Mr Johnson confirmed that a two form of entry primary school would be provided on site, exact location to be confirmed at a later date together with a convenience store. This would come early to site, thus reducing concerns regarding access and sustainability. A hopper bus would provide public transport around the site and then into the centre of Wetherby. This would be funded for a 10 year period, after which it was assumed the service would be self-funded. The timings for the hopper bus have been tested and shown to be achievable. Commenting on the issue of house types, Mr Johnson said that would be clarified at the Reserved Matters stage.  Mr Johnson confirmed that the developer would always work in compliance with the Council’s policies relating to climate change and such matters would be clarified at the Reserved Matters stage.

 

Questions to Mr Johnson

 

·  Did the developers have in their  ownership the necessary land to provide a comprehensive development, was there any written undertakings/ contractual arrangements in place to deliver the proposals, in particular could the vehicle access arrangements delivered

·  Where was the affordable housing provision located

·  This is an isolated site, do you consider it to be suitable for both younger and older people

·  Can clarification be given as to whether the hopper bus service is deliverable and achievable

·  Is there any indication as to where the school is to be located and the responsibility for practically delivering on the same

·  Has consideration been given to the location of the commercial unit and whether this is a sustainable location for the same

·  What is the envisaged build rate for the development of the houses

 

In responding to the issues raised, Mr Johnson said:

 

·  Members were informed that not all the land was in the ownership of the developer. However, commitments had been received from land owners that the land would be made available at the appropriate time.  Detail was given regarding the occupation of part of the wider site for a temporary car wash, but with the hope that this could also come forward and be developed independently at a later date.

·  Referring to the vehicular access on York Road, Members were assured that the necessary access could be delivered at the appropriate time through a Section 278 Agreement.

·  Members were informed that the affordable housing provision (35%) would be pepper-potted through-out each phase of the development.

·  Regarding housing for older people, the intention is to create a site with a wholly inclusive community rather than stipulate that dwellings will be available for a specific sector of the population.

·  Public transport would be provided by the provision of a hopper bus which would run at 20 minute intervals. An independent test had been undertaken by a 3rd party bus operator which evidenced that a 20-minute frequency service is achievable.  West Yorkshire Combined Authority have also confirmed it is content that the hopper service would be viable.

·  A commitment had been made to provide education provision but the location of the school was still to be determined.  Provision of the necessary land for the primary school to the Council is not foreseen as raising a difficulty. Significant financial contributions are intended from the developer via the s106 agreement and Community Infrastructure Levy, which will assist with the necessary education provision.

·  The location of the commercial unit, taking into account viability considerations, can be revisited at Reserved Matters stage.

·  Members were informed that it was anticipated that between 80 – 100 houses would be delivered each year.

·  The site is sustainable in terms of accessibility, with the provision for 3 vehicle accesses and suitable pedestrian / cycle ways as well as pedestrian / cycle access points.

 

Members raised the following questions to officers:

 

·  Referring to the SAP process, was this site suitable for housing development and considered sustainable

·  The school provision, could this be delivered at an early stage

·  The submitted report recognises that the site fails to meet the Core Strategy Accessibility Standards with regards to access to local services, Employment, Health Care and Town/ City Centres

·  It was a requirement of SAP that an access point must be created onto York Road

·  The SAP refers to the whole site, so amendments to the Masterplan are required to cover any enhanced works

 

In responding to the issues raised, Planning Officers said:

 

·  The Chief Planning Officer confirmed that Wetherby had been identified as a suitable location for housing growth within the Core Strategy as early as 2014. This was identified as the best site in Wetherby, it was adjacent to a major settlement, and other sites were not considered satisfactory due to flood risk and possible site contaminants. Much work had been done by officers to identify this as a suitable housing site, with this then confirmed when the SAP was found sound by the Planning Inspector. This clarifies clearly that the principle of development on this site is acceptable.

·  The Planning Manager, Children & Families, said there were a number of options to address school demand for the area: Provide a new school on site or expand existing schools in the area. The preference would be to provide a new school on site due to the size of the development, but it is always needed to revisit projections and know the demand for places from a new residential development before a commitment can be given to that. The intention is to build a school on-site, provided the demand is proved to be there.  There would be reluctance to reduce attendance at existing schools and adversely impact on attendance there if the demand is later proved not to exist.

·  Members were informed that the Masterplan reserves the position because of the work to be done (Condition No.5) and this is sufficient for outline purposes. An amendment to the Masterplan is required but this can only be delivered once third party land comes forward.  The Reserved Matters stage will provide an opportunity for all outstanding matters to be considered.

·  Officers confirmed it may be possible to deliver improvement works to Carr Lane by condition or some other appropriate mechanism.

·  Members were informed that Phase One of the development could be delivered without vehicular access at Carr Lane, but further development could not take place until vehicular access is achieved.

·  Officers confirmed that the levels of cycle and pedestrian access required under the SAP are being delivered, thus that the proposal fulfils these access requirements sufficiently.

 

In offering comments Members raised the following issues:

 

·  This site is identified for housing growth within the SAP and thus the principle of housing development on the site has clearly been established

·  Many other sites in the Wetherby area were considered but were determined to be unsuitable

·  This site is not in the Green Belt

·  This is an outline planning application and seeks approval for the principle of the development and means of access only

·  Access from York Road must be provided and it is the view of Members that this vehicular access must be provided at an early stage and that development should not proceed until the necessary infrastructure was in place

·  An amended Masterplan is required

·  There is a need to know the proposed house types and ensure that the build and design quality of the development as a whole is of an acceptable quality – this should be the focus for Members now, not the principle of development on the site per se

·  The is a need to provide a quality sustainable product

·  There was a need to reflect the health and climate change agenda that seeks a holistic approach to development (zero carbon development) – Key discussions need to take place at the Reserved Matters stage

·  An undertaking is required that a school will be provided

·  The shuttle bus service requires further clarification

·  This site has the potential to generate more car journeys and services throughout Wetherby may need to be enhanced: road network, car parking, health provision and school provision to accommodate any new development

·  The development of up to 1100 dwellings on this site will have a significant impact on the residents of Wetherby

·  Some requirements of the SAP have not been met and currently this is not a sustainable proposal

·  Accessibility remains a concern, as this will be a car dependant location and both York Road and Carr Lane accesses remain a concern

·  Very little progress has been achieved since the meeting in March 2019

 

In summing up, the Chair thanked all parties for their attendance and contributions, commenting that many relevant points had been raised. Access onto York Road clearly remains a fundamental issue. Following a suggestion by officers, Members expressed the view that outline planning approval should only be granted subject to the delivery of vehicular access into the site from York Road before the development could proceed.

 

The Chair also suggested that the climate change emergency had changed the planning agenda in Leeds and if the application was to proceed applicants should come forward with suitable zero carbon proposals.

 

It was moved by Councillor P Gruen and seconded by Councillor N Walshaw that the application be deferred and delegated to the Chief Planning Officer for approval subject to the delivery of a vehicular access into the site from York Road before the development could proceed. This is justified by the need for the proposal to meet the SAP Site requirements.

 

Upon being put to the vote:

 

RESOLVED –

 

(i)  That the application be deferred and delegated to the Chief Planning Officer for approval subject to the submission of an amended Masterplan and Access Parameter Plan and following the  delivery of a vehicular access into the site from York Road to meet the SAP Site Requirements (mechanism by which the vehicular access can be delivered by the applicant and how this is controlled be through the Section 106 Agreement or by condition (whichever is most appropriate) and subject to the conditions specified in the submitted report (and any other conditions which the Chief Planning Officer may consider appropriate) the following and the prior completion of a section 106 Agreement to cover the following obligations:

 

·  Provision of 35% affordable housing on site;

·  Primary Education Contribution of £2.7 million (phased payments to be agreed) and Transfer of Land for Primary School upon commencement of development, with construction of an access road at an agreed timescale;

·  Provision of shuttle bus fully funded for 10 years (£150,000 pa);

·  Contribution of £61,700 towards Harrogate Road corridor cumulative impact;

·  Contribution of £55,000 towards Racecourse Approach 40mph speed limit;

·  Contribution of £41,000 toward Bus Shelters and Displays;

·  Contribution of £7,000 towards a TRO for York Road parking;

·  Sustainable Travel Fund - £396,000 (based on 800 dwellings);

·  £30,000 for mitigation measures if residential model split targets are not met;

·  Completion of access road up to adjoining development sites

·  Marketing strategy of retail unit prior to occupation of 400th dwelling and operationally available by occupation of 500th dwelling;

·  Residential Travel Plan and Monitoring Fee of £6,000;

·  School Travel Plan and Monitoring Fee of £2,500;

·  Maintenance of Greenspace and SuDS;

·  Contribution of £16,000 towards other public footpath and bridleway enhancements; and

·  Employment and Training.

 

(ii)  In the event of the Section 106 Agreement not having been completed within 3 months of the resolution to grant planning permission, the final determination of the application shall be delegated to the Chief Planning Officer.

 

(Subsequent to the above resolution, Councillor D Cohen and seconded by Councillor P Wadsworth proposed a secondary motion to be put to the vote  that the application be refused on the grounds that the SAP requirements had not been met, this was not a sustainable proposal and vehicular access onto York Road was a fundamental concern. Upon being put to the vote, that motion was not supported).