Agenda item

22/05970/RM - Reserved Matters Application for residential development of 407 dwellings within the Northern Quadrant to approve details in relation to access (save for those details approved by the Outline permission), layout, scale, appearance and landscaping (Condition 1) pursuant to Outline Planning permission 12/02571/OT; on land at Phase A of the Northern Quadrant, East Leeds Extension, Leeds, LS14.

The report of the Chief Planning Officer requests Members consideration on a Reserved Matters Application for residential development of 407 dwellings within the Northern Quadrant to approve details in relation to access (save for those details approved by the Outline permission), layout, scale, appearance and landscaping (Condition 1) pursuant to Outline Planning permission 12/02571/OT; on land at Phase A of the Northern Quadrant, East Leeds Extension, Leeds, LS14.


The Reserved Matters application was presented to Plans Panel to seek views on the proposals for 407 dwellings on the first phase of the development within the Whinmoor Fields, ‘Northern Quadrant’ of the East Leeds Extension. This followed a pre-application presentation for 423 dwellings, which had been brought to the Panel on 30th June 2022.


Members had attended a site visit earlier in the day. Slides, photographs and CGI’s were provided throughout the officer presentation.


Members were informed of the following points:

  • This application related to the north-western part of the ‘Whinmoor Fields’ site, spanning from Wetherby Road to east of Coal Road. The application is one of a number of Phases that already benefits from an outline planning permission for means of access and erection of up to 2,000 residential properties, retail, health centre, community centre and primary school development. It was noted that the remainder of the site was to be developed by others.
  • Members were informed that the primary means of access via the East Leeds Orbital Road (ELOR) and through the site in the form of the spine road were fixed under the outline consent. The spine road will serve the interior of the site and will connect to neighbouring phases of the development and is designed to accommodate bus services.
  • Previously the area had been used as agricultural fields and there is vegetation along the edges of the site with significant trees and hedges along the north side of Red Hall Lane and the west side of Coal Road.
  • It was noted that there is no specific house type character locally in terms of architectural style. The submitted proposal indicated three broad character areas – the ‘rural edge’ abutting ELOR, a ‘contemporary’ area along the spine road and the ‘urban edge’ spanning across the southern side of the site. Details of house types and materials was set out at Paragraph 9 of the submitted report. The proposed houses would be predominantly 2 storey, 2.5 storey with room in loft space, and 3 storey apartments.
  • Routes around the site would be linked by footways and cycles lanes and would connect to ELOR, future development sites and also the existing residential area to the south. A buffer of trees and hedgerows would be planted along ELOR, in addition to the planting already carried out as part of the ELOR scheme. The spine road would take a route through the site with tree planting within verges proposed.  The streets are arranged in a deformed grid, providing connected loops within the site.
  • On the site there would be dwellings for wheelchair uses, as well as accessible and adaptable dwellings, in accordance with policy.
  • Affordable housing throughout the site is to be provided, in accordance with policy.
  • There would be a ‘gateway feature’ on entry to the site from Wetherby Road but this was still to be decided through local community engagement.
  • The site would have a formal Local Equipped Area of Play (LEAP), as required by the S106 Agreement on the outline consent.  In response to Members previous comments, the proposal would now also include two less formal Local Areas of Play (LAPs).
  • A revised drainage strategy including the provision of two new swales to improve water quality and aid biodiversity.
  • There is currently landscaping along ELOR, but the development would add to this with further planting of trees and shrubs.
  • Workshop sessions had taken place with the developers on designs for the blocks of flats, however there was still work to be done on these. It was noted that the details of the houses had progressed, though there were also to be further discussions.
  • Further to comments from Members, there would be a growing area on the site within one of the greenspaces.


The applicant addressed the Panel and provided the following information:

  • Since the pre-application a series of meetings and workshops had taken place with officers, and it was the view that the applicant had responded positively to comments.
  • Members were advised that all dwellings were now to be gas free and heated by electrically powered air source heat pumps. This exceeds the current Building Regulations and the Council’s planning policy requirements.
  • There was to be a further workshop with officers to work on the finer details of the scheme. The applicant is aware that some refinement is still required in terms of boundary treatment, footpath connections and design – particularly of the apartment blocks.  These elements, among others, will be discussed with officers.
  • The applicant was in control of the whole site and wanted to start work on the development as soon as possible.
  • The S106 Agreement on the outline consent contains a large number of obligations and contributions, including the ELOR contribution, primary school, public transport and parks. The development would also attract significant Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) payments.


It was noted that at the site meeting, Members had questions in relation to width of footways and cycles lanes as it was the view that the one parallel to Red Hall Lane may not be wide enough and could cause conflict with users in future.


Responding to this, the applicant stated that in other areas across the site, appropriate separation distances have been provided for – so it was not envisaged that on those shared footway-cycle lanes there would be any concerns regarding the conflict of users.  In addition, it was likely that only the one parallel to Red Hall Lane would be used by commuters other than simply residents.  Such that only that stretch was likely to be used at any speedy by cyclists. It was agreed that officers would consider the ability and implications of widening the cycle lanes, so they were the same as ELOR and discuss further with the applicant.


In response to questions from the Members the Panel were informed of the following:

  • There are currently no plans to install solar panels and the air source heat pumps should be sufficient. However, changes to the Future Homes Standards may make solar panels statutory on new build and be required by the time there is build-out of the phase.
  • The applicant would include fencing to play areas but was currently proceeding as advised.
  • It was acknowledged that Members were unhappy with the design of the flats on the entrance to the site from Wetherby Road and this would be looked at during future design discussions.

Members noted that the small piece of land outside the red line boundary would remain undeveloped as the applicant had not been able to have dialogue with the owner. However, it would not appear out of character with the development and is sandwiched between two areas of greenspace.

Officers provided the following information in response to questions from the Panel:

·  The S106 agreement was secured for the extension of bus services to loop through the site on the spine road. The spine road had been designed to ensure that the buses could use the route to serve the development. It was recognised that wider consultation on the bus services in Leeds was still ongoing.

·  Parking had been allocated to the front and side of dwellings for balance and to allow for verges.

·  Members were advised that Coal Road would remain open so there was access to ELOR but there would be a point closure at a point in time when the spine road meets Coal Road. Separately, Highways had required a signalised junction as part of the Red Hall scheme (subject of a separate planning application) and should this go ahead there may not be the need for the point closure, but this can only be resolved through submission of evidence via a condition discharge application. The Red Hall application would be brought before Panel for consideration.


Members were invited to provide feedback, in response to the following key questions and their responses were as follows:

1. Do Members have any observations in relation to the detailed means of access and connectivity?

  • Given the discussions had in relation to Red Hall Lane junction it was the view that this should be actioned so that it would be consistent with the comments of Cllr Grahame provided at the previous meeting. It was suggested that the developer should look at this again with the other applicants in line with what has been suggested by the East Leeds Extension (ELE) Consultative Forum.

2. Do Members have any comments on the proposed layout of the


  • Members wanted the developers to look at again at the block of flats in the gateway to the site as it was the view that the drive into the site could be over-dominant. It was suggested at a previous meeting that a pair of semi-detached properties would be better in this position. It was not thought appropriate to have such a large building in the gateway to the site.  Members agreed that a streetscene section through this part of the site may be helpful.

3. Do Members have any comments in relation to the landscape proposals?

  • Landscaping was good.

4. Do Members have any comments about the appearance and elevations of the proposed houses and apartments or the scale and siting of the proposed buildings?

  • The houses were well designed. However, Members were of the view that the design of the blocks of flats was not of appropriate standard of design and should be looked at again.

5. Are there any other matters which Members would wish to raise?

  • No further matters were raised.


RESOLVED – To note the content of the report and presentation.




Supporting documents: