Agenda item

To receive and consider the attached report of the Chief Planning Officer regarding an application for 61 dwellings with associated infrastructure including public open space and landscaping (access through Phase 1 from Moseley Wood Rise

 

The reports of the Chief Planning Officer presented the following:

 

·  An application for 61 dwellings with associated infrastructure including public open space and landscaping (access through Phase 1 from Moseley Wood Rise) at land off Moseley Gardens, Cookridge, Leeds.

·  An application for a new vehicular access from Cookridge Drive to Phase 2 of Moseley Green development at land off Cookridge Drive, Cookridge, Leeds

 

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

 

Further issues highlighted in relation to the applications included the following:

 

Application 19/02597/FU:

 

·  Phase 1 of the Moseley Green development was partially complete.

·  A proposed layout was displayed.

·  There would be a formal public open space to the west of the site and further greenspaces to the northern and southern boundaries.

·  There had been objections relating to drainage and flood risk submitted in relation to Phase 1 proposals previously.  The proposals would be similar to those at Phase 1 and the measures had worked successfully on that phase.

·  There would be a mix of detached and semi-detached properties with one block of three.

·  There would be 21 affordable housing units.

·  Additional representations had been received but had been covered in previous representations.

·  Principle of development of the site had been established through the Site Allocation Plan and the proposals would contribute to delivery of the housing supply.

·  The developer had held consultations with the local community.

·  There was no planning policy requirement for a second vehicular access.

·  There would be improved bus stops and a sustainable travel contribution

·  The affordable housing offer met policy requirements.

·  House and garden sizes were policy compliant

·  There would be a loss of 3 trees but 47 new trees would be planted

·  The development would be compliant with Policies EN1 and EN2

·  There was an acceptable drainage solution

·  The application was recommended for approval.

 

Application 19/02598/FU

 

·  The proposal for a second vehicular access would mean the loss of woodland.

·  The loss of woodland and wildlife habitat outweighed the need for a second vehicular access.

·  The application was recommended for refusal.

 

A local Ward Councillor addressed the Panel with concerns and objections to the application.  These included the following:

 

·  It was acknowledge that there was a good working relationship with the developer.

·  Reassurance as sought that there would be hedging/fencing to the pathway at the back of Cookridge Drive.

·  Was there enough tree planting.

·  Concern regarding the proposed park and ride facility for the parkway station.  Should there be limitations on parking?

·  Road surface on Moseley Wood Gardens – This would not be resurfaced till works were completed.  The developer had offered to contribute towards to repairs prior to this.

·  A request for Ward Councillors to be involved in the development of the construction management plan.

·  In response to questions, the following was discussed:

o  Ward Councillors had already had discussions with the developer regarding involvement in the construction management plan and would like this to be a condition to the application.

o  The proposals for flood management were felt to be suitable.

 

The applicant’s representative addressed the Panel.  The following was discussed:

 

·  The second access was not supported by the developer.

·  There was an adequate walking/cycle connection.

·  There would be a considerable Community Infrastructure Levy contribution.

·  In response to questions, the following was highlighted:

o  There would be hedging/fencing to the walkway and would be happy for this to be a condition of the application.

o  Tree planting – this was addressed by landscaping conditions.

o  The developer had no objection to repairs to Moseley Wood gardens but would require an updated survey of the road condition.

o  Ward Councillors would be invited for future discussion on the construction management plan proposals.

o  The house types would maintain the blend from Phase One of the development.

 

In response to Members questions and comments, the following was discussed:

 

·  The proposed Parkway Station was at a very early stage and the pedestrian route was not specific.  There were no proposals regarding the management of parking at this stage and it would be unreasonable to impose a condition on the developer with regard to this.

·  Concern regarding the layout and distribution of affordable housing units – it was felt that an appropriate balance had been made and further amendments to the layout could have an impact on other issues including garden sizes.

·  Members broadly welcomed the scheme and the fact that it met policy requirements and also agreed with the refusal of a second access.

 

RESOLVED –

 

(1)  Application 19/026597/FU

 

That the application be deferred and delegated to the Chief Planning Officer subject to the conditions outlined in the report and the completion of a Section 106 agreement to cover:

 

1)  Affordable housing provision – 8 intermediate and 13 social rented houses

2)  Management and future maintenance of green space areas

3)  Travel plan and management fee (£3,000)

4)  Bus stop contribution of £10,000 towards bus stop 11740

5)  Sustainable travel contribution of £30,530.30

6)  Additional measures to Biodiversity Enhancement Management Plan for woodland area to the north

7)  Local employment during the construction phase

 

(2)  Application 19/02598/FU

 

That the application be refused in accordance with the officer recommendation.