City Council Site Allocations Plan Examination

Revised Submission SAP Matters and Issues

Matter 5A – Revised Submission SAP

Infrastructure

Doc No. M5/1/2

Leeds Local Plan

Page 1 of 8

Issue: Whether the necessary infrastructure will be in place to support the planned development

Questions: 1. For sites which have been brought forward in to Phase 1 in the Revised Submission SAP does the evidence demonstrate that the necessary critical infrastructure will be provided in a timely manner to support the planned delivery of development? (See Appendix 1 for relevant sites)

1.1 Yes. The Council’s approach to phasing is to provide sufficient housing allocations to ensure a 5 year supply of housing land and to identify a supply of specific developable broad locations to be considered at a future review of the SAP. The approach does not relate to the timed release of sites.

1.2 The Council’s response to question 2 under Matter 5 (M5/1) outlines that “critical infrastructure” is assumed to relate to ‘new roads, new water and waste water infrastructure and significant pre-commencement work’ as referred to in Question 5 Matter 7. Yorkshire Water has been consulted throughout the preparation of the SAP including the Revised Submission SAP and have raised no concerns that the necessary infrastructure for new water and waste water cannot be delivered.

1.3 Appendix 1 to this statement lists the housing allocation sites previously in phase 2 and 3 of the Initial Submission draft and demonstrates that the sites can be delivered in a timely manner.

1.4 With regard to pre-commencement development, the SAP is a strategic document and it is considered that it is not necessary or appropriate to identify all pre-commencement requirements for individual sites over above what are provided as site specific requirement. Section 2.52-2.54 of CDR1/1 references the site requirements cross referring to development management policies and other considerations forming part of the planning application process.

2. Is it necessary to be satisfied that the critical infrastructure is likely to be provided in a timely manner for development in Broad Locations given Policy BL1 confirms they will contribute to the CS housing requirement? 2.1 No. The critical infrastructure will be assessed at the time that the plan is reviewed and when any development can be assessed for when it is likely to come forward. The potential infrastructure requirements arising from the Broad Locations have been considered as part of the preparation of the Plan so as to ensure that the Broad Locations are developable and whilst sequentially less preferable have no critical infrastructure impediments to their coming forward at the time envisaged as outlined in the previous matters and issues statement (M5/1). In the event that the Broad Locations are brought forward as housing allocations as part of a future review of the SAP, the work already undertaken

Page 2 of 8 will inform the necessary site requirements and could be revisited if necessary at that stage.

Page 3 of 8

Appendix 1 Sites previously in Phase 2 and 3 of the Initial Submission draft SAP Site Previous Reason for Critical Infrastructure required / implications of phasing change. phase phasing HG2-1 New Birks 2 Major Contributions to address cumulative impact on the A65. No evidence that site Farm, Ings Lane, Settlement cannot be delivered. Extension HG2-2 Wills Gill, 2 Major Highway access to site required directly from Queensway and contributions to Guiseley Settlement address cumulative impact on the A65 will be provided as part of the site Extension delivery. No evidence that cannot be delivered (NB Highway access site requirements still cross refers to vehicular and pedestrian link to HG2-3 – HG2- 3 changed to broad location (BL1-7). This reference will be removed by a proposed modification). HG2-4 Hollins Hill 2 Major Highway access to site from A6038 Hollins Hill requiring widening along site and Hawkstone Settlement frontage would be included in highway design of development. Contributions to Avenue, Guiseley Extension address cumulative impact on the A65, and the A6038/Hawksworth Lane junction. No evidence that site cannot be delivered in a timely manner. HG2-9 Land at 2 Major Highway access to site requires highway improvements on A658 and may Victoria Avenue, Settlement require land outside the site boundary. Contributions to address cumulative Leeds Extension impact on the A65 and A658/Bayton Lane junction. No evidence that site cannot be delivered earlier. Additional land required for access works within control of LCC and Leeds Bradford Airport, the site promoter. East HG2-123 2 Main Urban Site requirements require “Highway Access to Site: Bus stop and traffic calming Colton Road East, Area alteration will be required to achieve access.” Colton LS15 Extension Bringing the phasing of this site forward will simply mean this highways access will be delivered sooner. There is no evidence to suggest that this cannot be achieved.

Page 4 of 8

Site Previous Reason for Critical Infrastructure required / implications of phasing change. phase phasing HG2-174 Wood 2 Major Cumulative impact on A61 junction at Wood Lane resulting from this and other Lane – Rothwell Settlement sites in the locality. Change to phasing will just mean this is delivered earlier in Garden Centre Extension the plan period. MX2-38 2 Major Site requirements require the Manston Lane Link Road (MLLR) to be complete Barrowby Lane, Settlement before the site can be developed. In reality the MLLR is expected to be Manston LS15 Extension completed by the end of 2018, so this is not seen as an impediment to delivery. The requirements also set out that contributions may be required to Junction 46 mitigation works. Again, this is not considered to be an impediment to delivery. North HG2-36 2 Main Urban Site Requirements relating to Highway Access to the site and Local Highway Lane, Alwoodley Area Network: LS17 Extension Highway Access - Suitable access should be achieved on Alwoodley Lane, a footway should be provided on the northern side of Alwoodley Lane between Sovereign Court and the existing footway termination point to the east of the site, and a suitable arrangement for pedestrians to cross Alwoodley Lane (reasonable site requirement - this is not considered to be an impediment to delivery.)

Local Highway Network- The development will have a significant impact on the operation of the Alwoodley Lane/A61 junction. There will also be a direct impact on the junction of the Outer Ring Road and A61. Mitigation measures will therefore be required at these locations. For the A6120/A61 junction this may take the form of a contribution towards the WYPTF scheme. There will also be a cumulative impact on the A61/Street Lane junction and contributions will be required towards a mitigating scheme. This site requirement is purposely flexible. LCC own the site, no evidence that site cannot be delivered in a timely manner. HG2-38 Dunstarn 2 Main Urban Site requirements relating to Highway Access and Local Highway Network- Lane (land south), Area Access either through site HG1-74 or property needs to be acquired. The Adel LS16 Extension existing farm track off Dunstarn Drive is unsuitable. This link has already been

Page 5 of 8

Site Previous Reason for Critical Infrastructure required / implications of phasing change. phase phasing secured via the approved layout for planning permission 16/06463/FU - Land Adjacent To 10 Dunstarn Lane • Local Highway Network- There is likely to be a cumulative impact on the Lane/A6120 junction. The development would be required to contribute to measures to mitigate the cumulative impact of this and other allocated sites affecting the junction. No evidence that site cannot be delivered. HG2-42 Broadway 2 Main Urban Site requirements relating to Highway Access and Local Highway Network and Calverley Area Highway Access: Lane, Extension Access should be taken from Calverley Lane, no direct access onto A6120 Broadway (reasonable steer for future developers)

Local Highway Network: There may be a need for a portion of the development site to be reserved for the proposed improvements to capacity at Horsforth roundabout. HG2-43 Horsforth 2 Main Urban Local Highway Network: The development will have a cumulative impact on the Campus Area operation of the A65 / A6120 'Horsforth roundabout' and implementation of the Extension proposed Airport Link Road. It will also have a cumulative impact upon the A657 / A6120 Rodley junction. Contributions will be sought towards mitigating measures at the Horsforth and Rodley junctions. No evidence that site cannot be delivered Outer North West HG2-17 Breary 3 Smaller The site has outline planning permission (13/05134/OT) and reserved matters Lane East, Settlement permission (17/02312/RM) was granted on the 21st November 2017 Bramhope Extension demonstrating that the site can be delivered in a timely manner. Outer South HG2-186 Hunts 3 Smaller Flood alleviation works in Methley. First 1/3 developer contribution (£1.1m) Farm, Methley Settlement received last year and next 1/3 expected to be received imminently. Works infill tentatively programmed for 2020. Whilst development will not be able to take

Page 6 of 8

Site Previous Reason for Critical Infrastructure required / implications of phasing change. phase phasing place until after this, expected all 25 units can be delivered within the first 5 years of the SAP. HG2-174 Wood 2 Major Cumulative impact on A61 junction at Wood Lane resulting from this and other Lane – Rothwell Settlement sites in the locality. Change to phasing will just mean this is delivered earlier in Garden Centre Extension the plan period. HG2-175 Bullough 2 Major The highway access to the site required from both Bollough Lane and Third Lane – Haigh Settlement Avenue. No evidence that site cannot be delivered. Farm Extension HG2-179 Fleet 2 Major No site requirements proposed for highways. No evidence that site cannot be Lane / Eshald Settlement delivered. Lane (land at) Extension HG2-180 Land 2 Major Cumulative impact on A642 / Bullerthorpe Lane junction resulting from this and between Fleet Settlement other sites in the locality. Change to phasing will just mean this is delivered Lane and Methley Extension earlier in the plan period. Lane Impact on M62 J30, required to contribute to improvement scheme agreed with HE. HG2-183 2 Major No site requirements proposed for highways. No evidence that site cannot be Switherns Lane, Settlement delivered Rothwell Extension Outer South West HG2-233 Land at 3 Smaller This site does not have any site specific requirements. Moor Knoll Lane, Settlement It is predominantly brownfield but was phase 3 because it is in the green belt East Ardsley Extension and an extension to a smaller settlement, however because it is brownfield there could be cause to consider it as previously developed land and could be developed anyway. HG2-136 Whitehall 2 Main Urban The development will impact on the congested A58/A6110 roundabout. Road (South of), - Area Therefore a site requirement has been included to state that the development Harpers Farm Extension shall only commence following the completion of the planned signalisation of the junction. This is a scheme which is planned to take place as part of the

Page 7 of 8

Site Previous Reason for Critical Infrastructure required / implications of phasing change. phase phasing Leeds Outer Ring Road A6110 – junction improvement package. This is one of a group of Leeds projects that have been prioritised within the Plus Transport Fund (See Appendix 3 Transport Background Paper in the Infrastructure Background paper EB9/3). HG2-149 (Lane 2 Main Urban The site has outline permission (16/02988/OT) for 550 dwellings, demonstrating Side Farm, Morley) Area that the site is deliverable. The consent includes a £1.5m contribution scheme Extension of improvement at the junction of the A643 Elland Road (S)/A6110. HG2-150 Churwell 2 Main Urban Improvement to the access on to the A643 (footway and pedestrian crossing) is (land to the east Area required and there is no evidence this cannot be achieved. of) LS27 Extension The Local Highway Network site requirement requires contribution to mitigate against impact on the A6110 (particularly the A643/A6110) and contribution to mitigate impact on the A6119/M621 junction (to agree with Highways ).

As demonstrated by the consent for HG2-149, there is no evidence that contributions for the A643/A6610 could not be secured. The contribution does not include provision for the A6119/M621 junction

Page 8 of 8