Kirklees Council

KIRKLEES COUNCIL

PLANNING SERVICE

LIST OF PLANNING APPLICATIONS TO BE DECIDED BY

STRATEGIC PLANNING COMMITTEE

06-Nov-2014

LOCAL GOVERNMENT (ACCESS TO INFORMATION) ACT 1985 BACKGROUND PAPERS

There is a file for each planning application containing application forms, plans and background papers.

Simon Taylor - Extension 04778

In respect of the consideration of all the planning applications on this Agenda the following information applies;

PLANNING POLICY

The statutory development plan comprises:

The Unitary Development Plan (UDP). These reports will refer only to those polices of the UDP ‘saved’ under the direction of the Secretary of State beyond September 2007.

The statutory development plan is the starting point in the consideration of planning applications for the development or use of land unless material considerations indicate otherwise (Section 38(6) Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004).

The LDF core strategy approved by the Council in March 2012 was sunmitted to the Secretary of State on 2nd April 2013 for independent examination. However, following correspondence and meetings with the planning inspector, appointed by the Secretary of State, the council resolved to withdraw the core strategy on 23rd October 2013. Until such time as revised core strategy proposals have been submitted for examination they will have no significant weight in the determination of planning applications.

National Policy/Guidelines

National planning policy and guidance is set out in National Policy Statements, primarily the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) published 27th March 2012, the Planning Practice Guidance Suite (PPGS) launched 6th March 2014 together with Circulars, Ministerial Statements and associated technical guidance.

The NPPF consitutes guidance for local planning authorities and is a material consideration in determining applications.

REPRESENTATIONS

The Council adopted its Statement of Community Involvement (SCI) in relation to planning matters in September 2006. This sets out how people and organistations will be enabled and encouraged to be involved in the process relating to planning applications.

The applications have been publicised by way of press notice,.site notices and neighbour letters (as appropriate) in accordance with the Statement of Community Involvement and in full accordance with the requirements of regulation, statute and national guidance.

EQUALITY ISSUES

The Council has a general duty under section 149 Equality Act 2010 to have due regard to eliminating conduct that is prohibited by the Act, advancing equality of opportunity and fostering good relations between people who share a protected characteristic and people who do not share that characteristic. The relevant protected characteristics are:

• age;

• disability;

• gender reassignment;

• pregnancy and maternity;

• religion or belief;

• sex;

• sexual orientation.

HUMAN RIGHTS

The Council has had regard to the Human Rights Act 1998, and in particular:-

• Article 8 – Right to respect for private and family life.

• Article 1 of the First Protocol – Right to peaceful enjoyment of property and possessions.

The Council considers that the recommendations witihn the reports are in accordance with the law, proportionate and both necessary to protect the rights and freedoms of others and in the public interest.

PLANNING CONDITIONS AND OBLIGATIONS

Paragraph 203 of The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) requires that Local Planning Authorities consider whether otherwise unacceptable development could be made acceptable through the use of planning condition or obligations,

The Community Infrastructure Levy Regulations 2010 stipulates that planning obligations (also known as section 106 agreements – of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990) should only by sought where they meet all of the following tests.

• necessary to make the development acceptable in planning terms;

• directly related to the developmetn; and

• fairly and reasonably related in scale and kind to the development.

The National Planning Policy Framework and further guidance in the PPGS launched on 6th March 2014 require that planning conditions should only be imposed where they meet a series of key tests; these are in summary:

1. necessary;

2. relevant to planning and;

3. to the development to be permitted;

4. enforceable;

5. precise and;

6. reasonable in all other respects.

Recommendations made with respect to the applications brought before the Planning sub-committee have been made in accordance with the above requirements.

Application No: 2014/90688 ...... 9 Type of application: 60m - OUTLINE APPLICATION Proposal: Outline application for erection of commercial floorspace (B1c, B2, B8) including details of engineering operations to form serviced employment plots and full application for the erection of 166 dwellings Location: Land at Slipper Lane, Mirfield Ward: Mirfield Ward Applicant: Taylor Wimpey Yorkshire & Park Crescent Agent: Neil Rowley, Savills Target Date: 24-Jul-2014 Recommendation: OASD - CONDITIONAL OUTLINE APPROVAL SUBJECT TO DELEGATION TO OFFICERS ------Application No: 2014/92021 ...... 70 Type of application: 61m - RESERVED MATTERS Proposal: Reserved matters application for erection of 94 dwellings Location: Land off Grange Road, Golcar, Huddersfield, HD7 4QZ Ward: Golcar Ward Applicant: Colin Simpson, Barratt and David Wilson Homes Agent: Mark Johnson, Johnson Brook Target Date: 26-Sep-2014 Recommendation: RM - APPROVAL OF RESERVED MATTERS ------Application No: 2014/92214 ...... 81 Type of application: 62m - FULL APPLICATION Proposal: Erection of 30 dwellings, and associated works including highways and landscaping Location: Land off Crosland Road, Lindley, Huddersfield Ward: Lindley Ward Applicant: Persimmon Homes (West Yorkshire) Agent: Adam Jackson, Nathaniel Lichfield & Partners Target Date: 14-Oct-2014 Recommendation: ASD-CONDITIONAL FULL APPROVAL SUBJECT TO THE DELEGATION OF AUTHORITY TO OFFICERS ------Application No: 2014/91575 ...... 102 Type of application: 62 - FULL APPLICATION Proposal: Demolition of existing filter beds. Land fill site and change of use from redundant sewerage beds to agricultural land Location: Old Sewerage Works, Smithies Lane, Heckmondwike Ward: Dewsbury West Ward, Heckmondwike Ward Applicant: The Dome Regeneration Co Ltd Agent: J A Oldroyd Target Date: 30-Nov-2014 Recommendation: FC - CONDITIONAL FULL PERMISSION ------

Application No: 2014/91714 ...... 124 Type of application: 62 - FULL APPLICATION Proposal: Erection of 2 dwellings and widening, surfacing and lighting to Station Road Location: Land at Station Road, Meltham, Holmfirth, HD9 4NL Ward: Holme Valley North Ward Applicant: Mr A Pogson & Mr S Lockwood Agent: Stuart Beaumont, One17 Design Target Date: 17-Sep-2014 Recommendation: FC - CONDITIONAL FULL PERMISSION ------Application No: 2014/92610 ...... 143 Type of application: 60m - OUTLINE APPLICATION Proposal: Outline application for formation of snow sports slope (modified proposal) Location: John Smiths Stadium, Stadium Way, Huddersfield, HD1 6PG Ward: Dalton Ward Applicant: Kirklees Stadium Development Ltd Agent: Steve Morton, Signet Planning Ltd Target Date: 26-Nov-2014 Recommendation: OASD - CONDITIONAL OUTLINE APPROVAL SUBJECT TO DELEGATION TO OFFICERS ------Application No: 2014/92515 ...... 160 Type of application: 62 - FULL APPLICATION Proposal: Change of use from B2 to Community Hub and Church, Mixed Class D1 and D2 use Location: former Britvic site, Willow Lane, Birkby, Huddersfield, HD1 5EB Ward: Greenhead Ward Applicant: Chris Haygarth, Rivertree Trust Agent: Matthew Robinson, Martin Walsh Associates Target Date: 10-Nov-2014 Recommendation: FC - CONDITIONAL FULL PERMISSION ------Application No: 2014/92662 ...... 171 Type of application: 62m - FULL APPLICATION Proposal: Change of use from builders merchant (Sui Generis) to warehouse (B8), vehicle workshop (B2) and external vehicle storage Location: Builder Centre, Willow Lane, Fartown, Huddersfield, HD1 6EB Ward: Greenhead Ward Applicant: Ken Savage, Perrys Motor Sales Ltd Agent: Thomas Gibson, GD Design Group Target Date: 25-Nov-2014 Recommendation: ASD-CONDITIONAL FULL APPROVAL SUBJECT TO THE DELEGATION OF AUTHORITY TO OFFICERS ------

Application No: 2014/90688

Type of application: 60m - OUTLINE APPLICATION

Proposal: Outline application for erection of commercial floorspace (B1c, B2, B8) including details of engineering operations to form serviced employment plots and full application for the erection of 166 dwellings

Location: Land at Slipper Lane, Mirfield

Grid Ref: 419493.0 421601.0

Ward: Mirfield Ward

Applicant: Taylor Wimpey Yorkshire & Park Crescent

Agent: Neil Rowley, Savills

Target Date: 24-Jul-2014

Recommendation: OASD - CONDITIONAL OUTLINE APPROVAL SUBJECT TO DELEGATION TO OFFICERS

------

LOCATION PLAN

Map not to scale – for identification purposes only

1. SUMMARY OF APPLICATION

Scale of Development 12.38 hectares No. Jobs Created or Retained Unknown Policy UDP allocation Employment allocation & B3 Buffer zone Independent Viability Required Yes Representation/Consultation Individual Support (No.) 1 Individual objections 277 Petition N/A None received Ward Member Interest No Statutory Consultee No Objections Contributions • Affordable Housing See ‘Section 106 contributions/viability’ below • Education See ‘Section 106 contributions/viability’ below • Public Open Space See ‘Section 106 contributions/viability’ below • Other See ‘Section 106 contributions/viability’ below Other Issues The application site is allocated for employment use. Any Council Interest? No Planning Pre-application Yes advice? Pre-App Consultation Yes – Public Exhibition held by the applicant on 9th Undertaken? December Comment on application

RECOMMENDATION:

GRANT CONDITIONAL OUTLINE PLANNING PERMISSION (BUSINESS AND INDUSTRY DEVELOPMENT) AND FULL PLANNING PERMISISON (RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT), SUBJECT TO DELEGATION OF AUTHORITY TO OFFICERS TO IMPOSE: i) ALL NECESSARY AND APPROPRIATE CONDITIONS, WHICH MAY INCLUDE THOSE SET OUT BELOW, ii) SUBJECT TO THE COUNCIL AND THE APPLICANT ENTERING INTO A SECTION 106 AGREEMENT TO SECURE THE HIGHWAY MITIGATION MEASURES SET OUT IN THIS REPORT, DELIVERY OF INFRASTRUCTURE WORKS TO THE EMPLOYMENT PART OF THE SITE (AS SET OUT IN THE REPORT), OFF-SITE DRAINAGE WORKS AND TO SECURE A COMMUTED SUM IN RESPECT OF OTHER POLICY REQUIREMENTS iii) AND TO ISSUE THE DECISION.

2. INFORMATION

The application is brought before the Strategic Planning Committee in accordance with the Council’s delegation agreement as the application seeks permission for residential development of more than 60 dwellings, as site area exceeds 0.5ha with non-residential development proposed and as the development proposed represents a departure from the Council’s Unitary Development Plan.

3. PROPOSAL/SITE DESCRIPTION

Site Description:

The application site comprises land on the northern urban fringe of Mirfield and consists of 12.38 hectares of land. The site has a frontage to Leeds Road (A62) and is bisected by Taylor Hall Lane. The site is bounded by Leeds Road to the north, by the rear of properties fronting Sunny Bank Road to the east, open fields, school playing fields and a former landfill site to the south and Slipper Lane to the west.

Taylor Hall Lane provides vehicular access from Leeds Road to a small group of cottages. Beyond this, it has been closed to vehicular traffic, but provides a pedestrian/cycle link. A public footpath also crosses the site from Sunny Bank Road to Leeds Road. Slipper Lane gives access from the south to residential properties; there is no direct access from Leeds Road via Slipper Lane.

To the west of Taylor Hall Lane, the site is largely flat, becoming dome shaped where it abuts Slipper Lane, with a level change of approximately 9 metres. To the east of Taylor Hall Lane the site falls uniformly from Leeds Road to the south east with a level change of approximately 10 metres. The site has the appearance of open fields, although some archaeological digging is currently taking place.

Proposed Development:

The application seeks outline planning permission for the erection of commercial floorspace (B1c, B2, B8) including details of engineering operations to form serviced employment plots and full planning permission for the erection of 166 dwellings.

The application site is effectively split into two roughly equal sections, with Taylor Hall Lane segregating the two parts. To the east of this is the part subject to the full application for residential development and to the west is the proposed Business & Industry development which is subject to the outline application.

With respect to the outline application, the only matter applied for is means of access into the site. Although an indicative site plan has been submitted, this only shows how the site could be developed. The proposed site access for the Business & Industry is in the form of two T-junctions directly onto Leeds Road. 11

Layout, scale, appearance and landscaping are not applied for and are reserved for subsequent consideration.

The proposed uses for this part of the site are B1c (Light Industry appropriate in a residential area), B2 (General Industry) and B8 (Storage or Distribution). The applicant has not specified a split in the total floorspace in respect of these types of business uses, however this is considered in the ‘Assessment’ below.

With respect to the proposed residential development of 166 dwellings, this has been submitted in the form of a full application. Access into the residential development is proposed as a single junction, directly onto Leeds Road.

The residential development itself is effectively split into two parts to allow for an area of open space, along with two dry basin areas for drainage. This also allows for the retention of the existing Public Footpath through the site and accommodates existing power lines. On the eastern part of the site 46 dwellings are proposed, with the remaining 120 being to the west of this area.

The proposed dwellings are a mix of terraced, semi-detached and detached properties. They also range in height with 2 storey, 2 and a half storey and 3 storeys.

This mixed use application has come forward because, as set out by the applicant, the consented employment development cannot come forward alone due to the costs of providing infrastructure on the site. There has been no market interest in the consented retirement community. Accordingly the applicant proposes residential development (on the part of the site previously consented for a retirement community) to cross subsidise employment development upon the remainder. The financial dynamics of the proposal are explained in full later in this report.

The proposals constitute Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) development as defined in the Town & Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) Regulations 2011.

4. BACKGROUND AND HISTORY

2007/90423 – Outline application for B1 (Offices) and B2 (General Industry) and hotel. Withdrawn.

2008/90695 – Outline application for B1 (a, b, c) and B2 use within a Continuing Care Retirement Community and Ancillary A1 use together with means of access, landscaping and change of site levels. Approved.

2011/92428 - Erection of two B2 (general industrial) /B8 (storage & distribution) use buildings (14,100 sq.m in total) with ancillary B1 offices, formation of access, car parking, drainage proposals, landscaping and the erection of a 6m high acoustic fence, gate house, substation, site compound 12

and temporary stockpiling of fill materials and top soil on land to the east of the proposed buildings. Approved

2012/93087 - Extension to time limit to previous permission 2008/90695 for outline application for B1 (A,B,) and B2 use within a continuing care retirement community and ancillary A1 use together with means of access, landscaping and change of site levels. Approved

5. PLANNING POLICY

Unitary Development Plan:

UDP allocation – The majority of the application site is allocated for Business and Industry (Policy B2), with the eastern and western boundaries (and a small amount of the southern boundary) of the site allocated as Buffer Zones (Policy B3).

BE1 – Good quality design BE2 – New development to be in keeping with surroundings BE11 – Materials BE23 – New development should incorporate crime prevention measures B1 – Employment needs B2 – Allocation of land for business and industry B3 – Buffer Zones T10 – Highway safety T16 – Pedestrian routes T17 – Cycling provision T19 – Parking standards EP4 – Noise sensitive developments EP6 – Noise levels EP11 – Ecological landscaping G6 – Contaminated land NE9 – Trees H10 – Affordable Housing H12 – Retention of Affordable Housing

Other considerations:

Mirfield Design Statement (2002)

National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF):

‘Core Planning Principles’ ‘Decision taking’ ‘Topic Areas’: Part 1 Building a strong, competitive economy Part 4 Promoting sustainable transport Part 6 Delivering a wide choice of high quality homes Part 7 Requiring good design Part 8 Promoting healthy communities 13

Part 10 Meeting the challenge of climate change, flooding and coastal change Part 11 Conserving and enhancing the natural environment

Other guidance:

SPD1 – Negotiating financial contributions for transport improvements SPD 2 Affordable Housing ‘Providing for Education Needs Generated by New Housing’ (KMC Policy Guidance)

6. CONSULTATIONS

The following is a brief summary of Consultee advice (more details are contained in the assessment section of the report, where appropriate):

KC Highways DM – No objections subject to the imposition of conditions

KC Environmental Health – With respect to each aspect of the development:

Residential development: No objections subject to the imposition of conditions in respect of Contaminated Land, noise, ventilation and dust.

Business & Industry development: No objections subject to the imposition of conditions in respect of Contaminated Land, noise, odours, artificial lighting and air quality.

KC Environment Unit – No objections subject to the imposition of conditions.

KC Arboricultural – No objections subject to conditions.

KC Environmental Strategic Waste – No objections.

KC Strategic Drainage – Following receipt of additional information and subject to the imposition of conditions, previous concerns are overcome. In addition a £30,000 sum to fund off-site works is considered necessary and this can be secured by Section 106 agreement.

KC Education – In order to satisfy a shortfall in additional school places generated by the development (in respect of Old Bank J I & N School and Mirfield Free Grammar, a contribution of £725,752 is calculated.

KC Landscaping – A commuted sum (of £143,750) for off-site provision has been requested by the Council’s Landscape section.

Environment Agency – No objection subject to the imposition of conditions.

English Heritage – “We do not consider that it is necessary for this application to be notified to English Heritage.”

West Yorkshire Archaeology Advisory Service – Request that the applicant submit an evaluation of the full archaeological implications of the proposed development before the application is determined.

Yorkshire Water – No objections subject to conditions.

W.Y. Police Architectural Liaison Officer – No objections in principle.

Coal Authority – No objections subject to the imposition of a Condition requiring further intrusive site investigation works before development commences.

Highways Agency – “offers no objection”

7. REPRESENTATIONS

The application has been advertised by means of neighbour notification letters, site notices and notice in the press. The original period of publicity expired on 5th April 2014.

Following submission of amended plans and an amended description, the proposal has been re-advertised and this period expired on 30th September 2014.

A total of 277 letters of objection have been received, with one letter of support. These representations include those submitted by Mirfield Free Grammar and Sixth Form and ‘Save Mirfield’. Appended to the ‘Save Mirfield’ objection is a petition of objection with 527 signatures.

For information, the objections submitted by Mirfield Town Council and corresponding response from the applicant are appended to this report. In addition, the comments from ‘Save Mirfield’ are also appended.

The main points of objection are:

Highways:

- Existing congestion on A62 will be worsened – both from residential and the industrial developments - Mirfield suffers from severe congestion at peak times - Cumulative impact of residential development in Mirfield needs to be considered - Development will lead to ‘rat runs’ through Roberttown - Slipper Lane and Taylor Hall lane should be opened up to ease congestion - Children will be at a highway safety risk - Access for emergency services may be restricted - Mirfield roads are particularly narrow - Parking on Slipper Lane may be encouraged

- Mirfield Free Grammar request a pedestrian crossing on the A62 near junction with Slipper Lane

Landscape / ecology:

- Loss of green open space will be detrimental - Development will impact on wildlife - No deciduous trees should be planted next to the Mirfield Free Grammar playing field as fallen leaves would be a Health & Safety Hazard

Planning policy:

- Buffer Zones should be retained with the specified distances as a minimum - Proposal will create more pressure to find additional employment land in North Kirklees, thereby risking as-yet undeveloped Green Belt sites - Housing proposal is contrary to site allocation - When/how was the site ‘re-zoned’ for housing? - Proposed development is not ‘Sustainable’ - NPPF recognises the value of open land - Development does not comply with Policy BE12 - Site should be retained for recreation and open space benefit - Site should be re-allocated as Green Belt

Impact on amenity:

- Existing houses would look over houses rather than open fields - Industrial buildings are shown too close to existing dwellings - Development will create noise/smell issues - New houses will create overlooking of existing properties - Design of dwellings is of concern – a ground breaking design could be put forward - Details of boundary treatment should be required

Infrastructure capacity:

- Local schools are already oversubscribed - Health services are also stretched beyond capacity - Mirfield train station cannot cope

Other matters raised

- Loss of natural drainage by introducing hardstanding - Mirfield has “approx. 300” houses currently on the market so there is no demand for further housing - Site already suffers from drainage issues (which will become worse in time) - Development should not impact on drainage of school playing fields

- Significant disruption would be caused during the lengthy construction phase - Air Quality will be adversely affected - Health & safety concerns such as children climbing on scaffolding - Industrial buildings in a rural area are not acceptable and may infringe on human rights - Proposals will affect property prices - Existing empty buildings should be used - Council has wrong approach to developing ‘Green Belt’ - Proposals will lead to future development around Cooper Bridge - Possible land stability issues given mining heritage - Development will set a precedent for other open fields to be built on

The following points have been made in support of the application:

- Development on this site is overdue - Housing is preferable than industrial buildings for local people

Mirfield Town Council –

The following comments have been made on behalf of Mirfield Town Council, with Officer’s responses below them:

“Departure

1. The application is a very clear departure from the development plan. It has been publicised as such.

Response: Noted.

2. In recent times, case law seems to be re-emphasising the statutory basis of decision making in respect of planning applications with the requirement to adhere to the Section 38(6)1 statutory presumption in favour of the development plan. See, for example, Lark Energy Limited v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government & Waveney DC [2014] EWHC 2006 (Admin) where Lindblom J said at Para 46: That presumption is the cardinal principle of the plan-led system of development control. If it is to be properly applied the decision-maker must understand the relevant provisions of the plan.

Clearly in this application the proposed 166 houses is a major and significant departure from the B2 sites for business and industry allocation in the Development Plan (saved policies).

Response: The importance of the Development Plan as a starting point in the consideration of planning applications is set out at page 3 of this agenda. The assessment sets out the material planning considerations that have been weighed in the planning balance.

The parts of the development which do not accord with the Development Plan are clearly set out in the ‘Assessment’ section of this report. These issues are weighed against other material considerations where appropriate.

3. As we have previously debated in relation to previous applications on this site it is not permissible to answer or counter the development plan by applying NPPF. The development plan has to be the starting point and the presumption is that development proposals that do not accord with the plan should be refused unless material considerations indicate otherwise. It is accepted that NPPF is a material consideration.

Response: The main issue for the Council, as decision maker, is the respective weight to be afforded to the development plan and to the various material considerations. These are set out below and the report clearly acknowledges the fact that the proposal constitutes a Departure from the adopted plan. The appropriate material considerations arising from the NPPF can then be considered.

4. Therefore it must be necessary to start with the statutory question: does the development proposed accord with the development plan?

Response: The development represents a Departure from the Development Plan, meaning that it does not accord with that plan. However, when other material considerations are weighed in the planning balance, the development is considered acceptable.

5. It is necessary to look at the plan as a whole – see Lark Energy at Para 47.

Response: Noted.

6. Clearly there are a number of important saved development plan policies that have a major bearing on the application of the statutory question. These include (but are not limited to)

B2, B3, BE12, H8, H10, T10, BE1

Response: Noted.

7. The proposed 166 houses is a proposal that does not accord with UDP policy B2. Further the inclusion of Use Class B8 storage and distribution uses within the development proposal breaches policy B2. The Council’s attention is drawn to the contents of paragraph 10.14 of the supporting text to policy B2 which sets out the rationale why B8 is not suitable on this particular site. It is submitted that the rationale in 10.14 is as good today as it was in 1999 when the UDP was adopted. It is hoped that the officer report to the decision-maker would therefore include Para 101.14 in its entirety.

Response: The assessment notes and considers that the proposed dwellings and B8 uses are contrary to the relevant policies in the UDP. When weighed against all material considerations these uses are considered to be acceptable. 18

8. In relation to policy B3 Buffer Zones – the housing being proposed in the buffer zone is in itself a departure from the objective of the policy, for example the last sentence of B3 dealing with visual amenity and wildlife conservation would apply. There is also an issue of principle, in that the buffer zones are linked to business and industry.

Response: The assessment considers this issue in the below ‘Buffer Zones (UDP Policy B3)’ section. For the reasons set out in that part of the report, this aspect of the development is considered acceptable.

8. We have discussed the application of policy BE 12 in relation to the proposed 166 houses. The Council are aware of recent issues relating to the application of this policy elsewhere in the Mirfield area. On this type of large open relatively-level greenfield site one would expect that the minimum acceptable 21.0m distance in BE 12 i (habitable room window facing a habitable room window) would be applied. In the absence of such a 21m distance it would be necessary to apply the tests in the last sentence of BE12 ( permanent screening, changes in level etc preventing a detrimental effect on occupiers) in order to conclude that the proposed layout of the dwellings was in accordance with BE 12. There is a crucially important distinction between the textual interpretation of the meaning of policy in a plan and the exercise of planning judgment where the policy itself so requires. That difference was explained by the Supreme Court in Tesco Stores v Dundee City Council [2012] UKSC 13 – see the speech of Lord Reed at paras 19, 20 and 21.

In this instance the Council cannot make the UDP Policy BE 12 mean whatever they would like it to mean. A distance of 15m from habitable room window to habitable room window without any screening, changes in level or innovative design ( resulting in no detriment) would not in my submission amount to a layout that was in accordance with BE12. The assessment of 21m versus the 15m of the proposal is a classic case of textual interpretation rather than some form of planning judgment.

It is suggested that the shortfalls in this case of space about proposed dwellings is a material breach of policy BE12. I would suggest that it would be irrational to conclude otherwise.

Response: This issue is considered in the ‘Residential amenity’ section of this report. This acknowledges that a number of dwellings within the site do not meet the full requirements of Policy BE12 in respect of separation distances. However, the report then considers whether these shortfalls would be harmful to residential amenity to a degree which could represent a reason for refusal. Taking into account all other material considerations (including the desirability of making efficient use of land to meet the housing need and the achievement of visual variations to the street scene) the development is considered acceptable in respect of residential amenity.

9. UDP Policy H18 (provision of public open space) is another policy that requires textual interpretation. The policy starts with an initial presumption of on-site provision at the specified rate. The second part of the policy, dealing with the alternative of off-site provision is subject to a ‘readily accessible’ test to the application site.

The proposed layout of the 166 houses does not provide for the relevant amount of public open space at the rate of 30 sq m per dwelling. I would suggest that land below overhead high voltage power lines would not be suitable as public open space given the health concerns. Any proposal for off- site provision or enhancement would need to pass the ‘readily accessible’ test2. In the absence of any detail of the location and accessibility of off-site provision the only rational conclusion must be that the proposal does not accord with policy H18.

Response: The ‘Public Open Space’ section of this report sets out the fact areas within the development (including the dry basin areas and the area shown as open space) are not considered to constitute formal areas of Public Open Space. However, they do provide areas suitable for informal exercise and recreation.

In respect of an off-site sum the report sets out that the landscaping team have requested a sum of £143,750 for ‘destination parks’ which have been identified as Fox Royd and Southway Island. The securing of this money has been considered in the context of the Viability of the development in the ‘Section 106 contributions/viability’ section of the report.

10. Affordable Housing provision is required by policy H10. Based on the level of affordable housing that is being proposed by the developer the Council will need to consider whether the proposal accords with H10. The Council have declined to disclose the relevant viability information so that the Mirfield Town Council have been denied the opportunity to comment upon the overall viability. There is potentially a complex interaction with the applicant’s argument that the housing scheme (166 houses) enables the provision of the infrastructure on the B1 and B2 site. The enabling argument is, however, an ‘other material consideration’ and does not form part of the development plan. Consideration will need to be given to the issue of the nature and amount of affordable housing on the site.

Response: Mirfield Town Council submitted a Freedom of Information request to view the applicant’s submitted Viability Appraisal. The request was assessed against the Environmental Information Regulations 2004 and provided a redacted copy of the report to MTC on the basis that the public interest in withholding the information outweighs the public interest in disclosing it.

The applicant’s Viability Appraisal has been independently assessed and this reached the same conclusions as the original report. The provision of affordable housing has been considered in the ‘Section 106 contributions/Viability’ section. 20

11. Highway Safety and the adequacy of the Highway Network is an integral part of the application of policy T10. Clearly the Council will need to assess the highway impacts of the proposed development. Concern is expressed about the impact of the free flow of traffic on the A62 following the proposed development particularly at the nearby junction of the A62 with Sunnybank Road/Child Lane. Any mitigation measures should be deliverable by this particular development- part funding of such improvements does not amount to mitigation where the remainder of the funding is not committed or available. The A62 is a category 2 highway in the strategic highway network.

Response: The below ‘Highway considerations’ section of the report considers Highway issues and concludes that the development is acceptable in this regard. This section also notes proposed mitigation measures.

12. Policy BE1 is also relevant. The promotion of a healthy environment including space and landscaping about buildings and avoidance of exposure to excessive noise or pollution is an important policy objective of the development plan. Attention is drawn to the issue of space about buildings in relation to the 166 houses and the impact of the possible B2 development in proximity to the proposed 166 houses – in the south-west corner of the proposed housing development.

Response: The Council’s Pollution & Noise team has been consulted on the application and has raised no objections in this respect. As the layout of the industrial element of the site would need to be the subject of a reserved matters application, the impact of the development on nearby residents (including those subject to this application) will need to be further considered at that stage.

Conclusion on the UDP

13. It is submitted that there are a number of breaches of UDP policies, as set out above, such that the proposal cannot be said to accord with the development plan for the purposes of the presumption in Section 38(6).

Response: It is considered that this issue has been explored in the above responses and in the below assessment.

Other material considerations

15. The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF). As we discussed at our recent meeting, the paragraph 14 presumption in favour of sustainable development is material to this application. The first step is to determine whether the development proposed amounts to sustainable development? The meaning of sustainable development is that which is set out in paragraph 6 of NPPF: the need to look at the policies in paragraphs 18 to 219, taken as a whole.

There is a very interesting argument about whether the 166 houses could be said to prejudice the objective in NPPF Para 20 of planning proactively to meet the development needs of business and support an economy fit for the 21st century. This site would arguably be available for future business needs, given its strategic location on the highway network and its loss to 166 houses would be contrary to that objective. The other side of that argument is the objective in paragraph 22 (avoidance of long-term protection where there is no reasonable prospect) and the enabling argument for the provision of certain infrastructure on the remainder of the site advanced by the applicant. Arguably it could be said that the long-term objective of maintaining a supply of business and industry sites should outweigh the short term (recession related) issues of viability. That would, it is suggested, be capable of saying that the proposal might not lead to a conclusion that what is being proposed (166 houses) gives rise to a conclusion sustainable development. Once that assessment is undertaken, if (and only if) the development is deemed to be ‘sustainable development, then in this case, the second bullet point of the ‘decision-taking’ part of Para 14 applies (given that the development does not accord with the development plan).

Perhaps the fundamental question in applying the second bullet point is whether, in relation to the 166 houses, the UDP Policy B2 is ‘out of date’ in relation to the provision of sites for business and industry. Arguably the policy is not ‘out of date’ having regard to Chapter 1 of NPPF. For example the fourth bullet point of Para 21 states:

Plan positively for the location, promotion and expansion of clusters or networks of knowledge driven, creative or high technology industries.

And the fifth bullet point:

Identify priority areas for economic regeneration, infrastructure provision and environmental enhancement. The point is that this site, including the site of the proposed 166 houses is very suitable for future economic growth, given its location and the likely strategy for employment land to be contained in the forthcoming Local Plan. Even though UDP Policy B2 is some fifteen and a half years old it still fits comfortably with the NPPF policy objectives. It might be said that the fifth bullet point suggests that the Local Plan should seek to make provision for the relevant infrastructure without the need to ‘sacrifice’ half the site to housing.

UDP Policy B2, given its general contextual nature, does not fall foul of the need for policies to accord with the overall cost/benefit approach in NPPF. It is suggested therefore that UDP policy B2 is not out of date for the purposes of NPPF 14. In turn that would suggest that the NPPF Para 14 presumption does not, in this case, support the 166 houses.

Response: The merits of the application have been fully considered in the assessment section of this report.

16. NPPF Para 17 fourth bullet point recognises the need for a good standard of amenity for future occupants of buildings. This buttresses the concerns about the space between habitable room windows within the proposed dwellings.

Response: The below assessment considered the amenity of future occupiers of the development and considers it complies with Policy D2 in respect of residential amenity.

17. The application before the Council is for a mixed use scheme B1, B2 & B8 and 166 houses. Care is required in the application of NPPF Para 49 in circumstances where the residential element is solely to justify, as enabling development, the infrastructure for the business & industry part of the application site.

Response: The below assessment sets out the material considerations in favour of the residential development and these go beyond solely the concept of ‘enabling development’.

18. The third bullet point of NPPF 69 supports the points made above about the lack of adequate on-site public open space.

Response: Noted – as per response to point 9.

19. There is a very clear tension between the need to promote business and industry and the need for housing. The NPPF seeks to obtain both, in a balanced way. There are other sites to accommodate housing.

Response: The application has been assessed on its planning merits and found to be acceptable (only the application before the Council can be assessed).

Other non-NPPF material considerations.

20. The Council’s attention is drawn to the planning condition No 25 on outline permission 2008/90695 for B1, B2 and a Continuing Care Retirement Community on this same site:

“Notwithstanding the details shown on the indicative layout and notwithstanding the provisions of The Town & Country Planning (General Permitted development) Order 1995 (as amended), or any order replacing or re-enacting that order, there shall be no buildings within a 30m buffer from the western (Slipper lane) boundary of the site.”

This condition is an important ‘other material consideration’ as planning history. It reflects the requirements of UDP policy B3 and was imposed for that reason along with the interests of visual amenity and to safeguard the amenities of occupiers of existing residential properties. The Council are invited to impose this same condition on any approval for the current application using identical wording. 23

Response: Noted – whilst this is a material consideration, since the time of the grant of permission 2008/90695, application 2011/92428 for David Brown Gears has received approval and this included industrial buildings in the Buffer Zone.

As noted in the below ‘Buffer Zones (UDP Policy B3)’ section, Officers’ are satisfied that the function of the Buffer Zones can be satisfied in respect of noise mitigation and visual amenity. This issue will need to be further considered at reserved matters stage when the site layout is determined.

21. There is a need for the Council to carefully consider the applicant’s viability argument. It is suggested that the housing element of the proposal ought to be valued within the development appraisal based upon assumptions regarding the application of policy in relation to such matters as affordable housing, provision of on-site public open space and educational contributions. That should then yield a land value for the 166 houses which will need to be assessed against how that might fund the provision of the infrastructure on the business/industry part of the proposed development.

The Council have refused to release such details to the Town Council which makes comment very difficult. As a result the position is reserved on this important matter.

Response: Noted – as per response to point 10.

22. The application is in detail for the 166 houses and in outline only for the B1/B2/B8 development. There is a significant risk that the grant of planning permission would result in the development of houses but would not result in the development of B1/B2/B8 units or the infrastructure. It is suggested that a planning obligation under Section 106 of the Town & Country Planning Act 1990 would be essential if the application were to be approved in order to ensure that the B1/B2 and B8 employment development was delivered. The Council have recently taken the stance, in relation to enabling development elsewhere in the district, that a planning obligation was necessary (rather than a condition) to make the proposed development acceptable in planning terms. It is submitted that the planning obligation route must be correct given the significant departure from the development plan.

A robust mechanism is required to ensure that if 166 houses are built then the relevant funds are expended upon the B1/B2 and B8 site within a given period with a defined description of works.

Response: Noted and agreed – a Section 106 agreement relating to the delivery of the Industrial aspect of the development will be secured if Members are minded to approve the application. This approach is set out in the ‘Delivery of the Business and Industrial Development’ section below.

23. A KSEZ contribution will be required in accordance with SPD1.

Response: Noted and addressed in the ‘Section 106 contributions/viability’ section below.

24. The lack of detail on the B1/B2 and B8 development is a cause of some concern. The applicant includes with their Planning Statement a letter from Dove Haigh Phillips dated 24 February 2014. That contents of that letter would suggest that the problem here is the lack of willingness of the developer to invest in the necessary infrastructure for the site. The problem does not seem to be one of lack of demand.

Therefore it would seem possible for the applicant to include, as part of the application some firm details of proposed buildings, to give the decision- maker some comfort that development can be delivered. The main issue is the lack of willingness of this particular developer to invest in the site. There is no problem with the site and its location. Dove Haigh Phillips assert that “... demand has been frustrated by the vital need to install the site infrastructure, services .....” The response is that is not a demand issue, but rather an issue related to the supply of serviced plots. Put simply, if the developer invests in the site and provides serviced plots, the demand will take up that supply. Thus the ‘blockage’ is the unwillingness to invest in the supply side of the equation. That unwillingness, ought not to be the basis for a major departure from the development plan (and NPPF) objective of delivering this site for employment uses.

Response: The applicants have stated that the investment suggested by MTC would not make commercial sense, with the financial returns not justifying the investment or the risk. However, if the provision of infrastructure/access being funded by other means (i.e. the residential in the form of a cross-subsidy), then the viability position changes and the provision of the industrial buildings becomes viable.

25. There is a residual concern about the description of development contained in the application and whether it would deliver the employment site infrastructure proposed by the developer. The original wording of the description of development has been apparently altered to:

“Outline application for erection of commercial floorspace (B1c, B2, B8) including details of engineering operations to form serviced employment plots and full application for the erection of 166 dwellings”

However the details of the engineering operations to form serviced employment plots still fall within that part of the description that deals with outline matters. In context, the word ‘including’ suggests that the engineering operations are part of the outline component of the application. Given that all matters are reserved other than access it would seem that the serviced plots could not be delivered until such time as reserved matters approval (and discharge of relevant pre-development conditions) had been obtained. This is a cause of concern in relation to the timing of delivery of the employment 25

infrastructure. It is suggested that if what is proposed is that the infrastructure works to create the serviced plots is not intended to be part of the ‘bare’ outline application then this should be made very clear in the description of development.

It is observed that the revised description above of development is inconsistent with that described on the application form.

Response: Officers’ have previously sought legal advice on this point and this confirmed that the revised description is acceptable and enables delivery of engineering operations to the employment part of the site to take place prior to submission of reserved matters.

Following the submission of the amended description, the application was re- advertised with this amended description – this is listed as the description on the Council’s website and on the re-posted site notices and neighbour notification letters. Therefore, it is considered that sufficient and reasonable steps have been taken to make this revision clear.

26. The impact of releasing approximately half of this employment site for 166 houses potentially could affect the Council’s position in arguing for future employment allocations in the forthcoming Local Plan. The question would be why future land might need to be allocated for employment when existing allocations were recently approved for housing?

This is surely capable of being a material consideration in the present case.

Response: At the present time the weight to be afforded to the Local Plan is considered to be limited given its current status. The assessment below sets out the reasons why the proposed development is considered acceptable and this includes the use of approximately half of the site for residential development.

Furthermore, as set out below, the fact that the site has been allocated for Business and Industry since the UDP was adopted in 1999 but hasn’t been brought forward in that time is relevant. The provision of housing will significantly increase the prospects of Industrial development being brought forward on the balance of the site. This could potentially reduce the pressure on other sites in Kirklees needing to be brought forward for employment purposes.

27. The amount ofB1/B2/B8 employment development is unknown at this bare outline (access only) stage. The lack of certainty as to what might be developed adds to the concerns. For example it would be possible to develop the site wholly with B8 storage under the current proposals.

The Council’s attention is also drawn to the provisions of Class E to Part 3 of Schedule 2 of the General Permitted Development Order 1995. Even buildings built for B1 and B2 purposes could be changed to B8 use. Therefore

some form of limitation by planning condition would be a desirable planning objective, e.g. to remove certain permitted development rights.

Response: In respect of the concern over the amount of B8 storage that could be brought forward, Members are advised that a condition is suggested which restricts B8 floorspace to a maximum of 50% of the total industrial floorspace.

The necessity for a restriction on potential changes of use can be considered at reserved matters stage, depending on the nature of use of each the buildings brought forward.

28. In order to apply the concept of enabling development, one has to be sure that the development which is contrary to policy will actually deliver the desired benefits. It will be recalled that the previous CCRC was justified by constraints on the local highway network preventing a complete B1/B2 development on the whole allocated site and not by the concept of enabling development.

Response: This first issue has been addressed in the ‘Delivery of the Business & Industrial Development’ section of this report. The impact and acceptability of the development on the highway network has been looked at in the ‘Highway considerations’ section below.

Conclusion

29. Mirfield Town Council have serious reservations about the proposals – particularly in relation to the provision of 166 houses. There are doubts about the deliverability of the employment development and concerns that the proposal does not accord with the development plan and may well not amount to NPPF sustainable development.

Response: Noted.

The lack of access to the viability information is also a concern, as it seems to be the main basis for the 166 houses on the eastern part of the site.

Response: Noted.

8. ASSESSMENT

The applicant seeks outline planning permission for the erection of commercial floorspace (B1c, B2, B8) including details of engineering operations to form serviced employment plots and full planning permission for the erection of 166 dwellings.

General Principle/Policy:

The majority of the application site is allocated for Business and Industry (Policy B2), with the eastern and western boundaries (and a small amount of the southern boundary) of the site being allocated as Buffer Zones (Policy B3).

The application site has two extant planning consents in place. Firstly the 2008 outline consent for B1 and B2 Use with a Continuing Care Retirement Community and ancillary A1 use. This was subsequently renewed in October 2013 (under application 2012/93087). The B1/B2 Uses occupied the western half (approximately) of the site, with the eastern half being taken up by the CCRC.

In May 2012 a full application (Ref: 2011/92428) was approved for David Brown Gears for two B2 (general industrial) /B8 (storage & distribution) use buildings. This application took up approximately a quarter (to the western side) of the total site now subject to this application.

Although this is a new full application, the extant consents remain important material considerations. The 2008 consent and the subsequent renewal in 2013 accepted the principle of the eastern half (approximately) being used for purposes other than the allocated Business & Industry uses.

The National Planning Policy Framework states that the purpose of the Planning system is to contribute to the achievement of sustainable development for which there is a presumption in favour.

NPPF identifies three dimensions to sustainable development; an economic role contributing to building a strong, responsive and competitive economy; an environmental role; and a social role by providing the supply of housing required to meet the needs of present and future generations.

The NPPF states at Chapter 1, paragraph 18 that,

“The Government is committed to securing economic growth in order to create jobs and prosperity.”

Paragraph 6 of the NPPF states, “The purpose of the planning system is to contribute to the achievement of sustainable development. The policies in paragraphs 18 to 219, taken as a whole, constitute the Government’s view of what sustainable development in England means in practice for the planning system.”

Paragraph 19 adds that the Government “is committed to ensuring that the planning system does everything it can to support sustainable economic growth.”

Accessibility is one element of sustainable development but not the ultimate determining factor. Accessibility tests are set out in the Regional Spatial Strategy (RSS table 13.9). Although the RSS has been revoked it remains the latest plan which has been the subject to public examination and is therefore currently the soundest basis for assessment under NPPF paragraph 14. The application has been assessed against the tests as follows:

• Test 1: is there a local service centre within 1200m walking distance? • Test 2: is there a bus stop within 800m with a service of at least a 30 minute frequency and a journey time of less than 30 minutes (25 minutes bus and 5 minutes walking) to a town centre offering employment, leisure and retail opportunities? • Test 3: is there a primary school within 1600m? (This equates to a 20 minute walk) • Test 4: is there a surgery or other primary health facility within 1600m?

The nearest local centre is 1,000m away from the site entrance at Roberttown. From the access given by the footpath to the south of the site, the nearest local centre to the site is 800m away at Greenside at the junction of Old Bank Road and Sunny Bank Road.

The site is approximately 550m from the nearest bus stop, on Sunny Bank Road. This is served by the 221 and 253 buses, serving Leeds, Wakefield and Bradford on an hourly basis. The 221 service to Leeds takes 85 minutes and the 253 journey time to Dewsbury is 18 minutes, Bradford is 52 minutes and Wakefield is 53 minutes. The journey time and frequency do not meet those set out in the accessibility test. The site is 900m away from bus stops on Leeds Road. Whilst this is beyond the 800m set out in the test, the bus services offered are slightly better. The 229 and 220 provide 3 buses an hour to Huddersfield with a journey time to Huddersfield of 25 minutes.

The site is approx 1,000 metres from Old Bank Junior and Infants School (via Taylor Hall Lane). The site is approximately 2,500 metres from the Health Centre at Doctor Lane, but is served half-hourly by 221 and 253 buses on Sunny Bank Road.

It is considered that the economic benefits of the development in terms of facilitating employment opportunities, investment and providing business opportunities for contractors and local suppliers are significant. Bringing land allocated for business and industry into employment use will provide opportunities to accommodate local businesses looking to expand and find new land and premises and will also help attract new business and investment into the area.

High end engineering and manufacturing are key sectors in the Kirklees economy and it is a Council priority, through the ‘Kirklees Economic Strategy’, to meet the needs of such industries. Making provision to enable the growth and relocation of such industries is key to the successful delivery of the strategy objectives. Slipper Lane represents one of few sites allocated for business and industry that benefits from the characteristics (size, topography, and proximity to workforce, supply chains and the motorway) required of modern business operations.

In terms of an environmental role, the development makes efficient use of land allocated for development, delivering new development that is fit for purpose, providing new modern buildings that are energy efficient and take advantage of renewable energy sources and low carbon consumption.

The development of a greenfield site represents an environmental loss however, whilst national policy encourages the use of brownfield land for development, it also makes it clear that no significant weight can be given to the loss of greenfield sites where there is a national priority to increase housing supply.

There will be social gain through the provision of housing at a time of general shortage, including the provision of affordable housing.

On balance, the development is considered to be sustainable in the context of the NPPF.

The acceptability of the principle of the two aspects of the development (Business & Industry and Residential) are considered individually below:

B1c (Light Industry appropriate in a residential area)/ B2 (General Industry)/ B8 (Storage or Distribution):

Unitary Development Plan Policy B1 sets out the Council’s Strategy for meeting the employment needs of the district by, in part, providing land to accommodate the requirements of existing businesses.

As the application site is allocated (aside from the Buffer Zone allocations) for Business and Industry (Policy B2), the proposed B1& B2 Uses of the western half of the site are in accordance with Policy B1 of the Kirklees UDP.

The UDP allocation for this site extends to B1/B2 uses only. The uses falling within Class B8, as proposed, therefore represents a Departure from the UDP.

The UDP states that some sites (including this) have been allocated for B1/B2 Uses, with B8 Uses excluded: “On the basis that land for business and industry is a relatively scarce resource in Kirklees, it will be appropriate to seek to ensure that job densities achieved through the development of the allocated land are as high as possible, particularly on the larger greenfield sites. Potentially the most extensive land users achieving the lowest job 30

densities are storage and distribution, which fall into class B8. It is therefore proposed to preclude development for B8 use on those allocations which have the greatest potential to attract investment intended to secure the future prosperity of established companies in Kirklees or to accommodate new business. The exclusion of B8 uses from these sites should also ensure that there is scope for development drawing on established skills of the local workforce....”

Although the use of the site for B8 purposes would represent a departure from the UDP and would be contrary to Policy B2, it is the view of Officers that the proposed commercial development is acceptable for the following reasons:

Firstly, the UDP allocation dates back to the adoption of the UDP in 1999 and it is accepted that the nature of and necessity for B8 uses has changed since that time. Given the scale of Industrial development proposed (upto 17,844m2) it is considered that an element of B8 use forms an important part of a mixed use development such as this. A condition is suggested restricting the amount of B8 floorspace to 50% of the total industrial floorspace – this is also in line with the 50% B8 which the submitted Transport Assessment considered.

Secondly, including an element of B8 within the development will give the applicant a degree of flexibility in securing end users. Any B8 uses will generate a level of employment, often in respect of specialised logistics jobs. The case for allowing flexibility in the delivery of an employment use is also increased by the fact that the site has sat undeveloped for a considerable period of time, despite the sites allocation.

Thirdly, the 2011 consent, as noted above, established an element of B8 industrial use on part of the application site for David Brown Gears. This is an important material consideration.

Fourthly, and by way of background information, a report commissioned by Yorkshire Forward in 2009 (titled “Planning for Employment Land – Translating Jobs into Land”) to inform guidance to Local Planning Authorities on the assessment of future needs for employment land has some relevance to the proposed B8 use. The report considered, amongst other aspects, the employment density generated by business uses. It found that it is appropriate to consider all business uses together in this respect as,

“these uses operate largely in similar buildings and at similar densities – wi t h the exception of large specialist units.”

Therefore the level of employment generated by B8 uses is generally considered to be comparable with that from B1 and B2 uses.

It is considered that the material considerations, when considered cumulatively, weigh significantly in favour of allowing the B8 element of the

development, thus outweighing concerns over the departure from the adopted UDP.

The use of the site for B1c (Light Industry appropriate in a residential area) and B2 (General Industry) uses is in accordance with Policy B1 of the Kirklees UDP and is therefore acceptable.

Residential development:

As the application site is allocated for Business and Industry (Policy B2), the proposed residential development represents a departure from the adopted UDP.

Paragraph 49 of the NPPF presumes in favour of sustainable development and indicates that housing policies should not be considered up to date if the Local Planning Authority is unable to demonstrate a 5 year supply of deliverable housing sites. Currently the Council is unable to demonstrate a 5 year supply of deliverable housing land. In this respect recent appeal decisions have confirmed that given the lack of a demonstrable 5 year land supply the Council’s housing land supply policies in the UDP are out of date. As such the lack of an adequate land supply in itself is a relevant and material consideration as is the provision of new housing which would help address the shortfall.

The NPPF identifies the dimensions to sustainable development as being economic, social and environmental. It states that the roles are mutually dependent and should not be undertaken in isolation.

A proposal for 166 dwellings will provide economic gains by providing business opportunities for contractors and local suppliers. There will be social gain through the provision of housing at a time of general shortage.

The application site is greenfield (i.e. not previously developed). The development of a greenfield site represents an environmental loss however, whilst national policy encourages the use of brownfield land for development, it also makes it clear that no significant weight can be given to the loss of greenfield sites where there is a national priority to increase housing supply.

Assessing the policies in the NPPF as a whole in accordance with the paragraph 14 test, the provision of housing on this greenfield site will outweigh any environmental harm arising from the development. The development proposed is therefore considered to be sustainable.

Part 1 of the National Planning Policy Framework ‘Building a Strong and Competitive Economy’ states at paragraph 22:

land and buildings should be treated on their merits having regard to market signals and the relative needs of different land uses to support sustainable local communities.”

The opportunity for employment use to be delivered on the balance of the business and industry allocation and for the economic benefits that this would bring to be realised is enabled by the development of part of the site for housing.

The applicant has stated that the residential element of the development is necessary to achieve this because it is necessary to in effect cross-subsidise development of the employment site. This is on the basis that the cost of site preparation and infrastructure works for the employment site make this aspect of the development unviable as a stand-alone proposal (this is explored further in the ‘Section 106 contributions & Viability’ section of this report).

The applicant has stated that, “The residential development will be sold to the residential developer on the grant of planning consent. The sale proceeds will then be used to fund the site preparation, infrastructure and services for the employment site.”

The ‘enabling’ nature of the residential development in bringing forward Business & Industry use for the balance of the site is considered to be a factor to which significant weight should be attached given the economic and employment benefits.

Furthermore, the application site (either as a whole or in part) has the benefit of two separate planning permissions (the older of which has been renewed) within the last 5 years. The fact that the permissions have not been implemented suggests (although it is accepted that there could have been other factors involved) that there is a limited prospect of the whole site coming forward for employment use or for the Continuing Care Retirement Community development being delivered.

A Marketing report by Knight Frank has been submitted in support of the application and this supports the argument that there is no realistic prospect of the Continuing Care Retirement Community being delivered. The residential element, therefore, represents a pragmatic and deliverable solution in terms of securing the Business & Industry on the balance of the site.

A further factor in support of residential development on the eastern part of the site is the fact that it is compatible with neighbouring residential properties (both those on Leeds Road and Sunny Bank Road).

Taking the above considerations into account, Officers’ consider that subject to a mechanism in the Section 106 to secure the phased implementation of development to ensure that the residential development can’t be brought forward without facilitating the delivery of the Business & Industry land, the principle of residential development on the site is considered acceptable and outweighs concerns over the departure from the adopted UDP. 33

Delivery of the Business & Industrial Development:

The value realised from the residential development is sufficient to cross subsidise the delivery of the infrastructure works necessary to bring forward development of the balance of the employment land.

The infrastructure works to be delivered are:

- Construction of accesses to serve the employment site - Earthworks to create a flat/level site - Undertake any necessary remediation - Provision of services to development plots

These works are to be undertaken before the first dwelling is occupied on the residential part of the site and this can be secured by Section 106 agreement. Whilst this will not prevent dwellings being built on site without businesses actually operating on the employment land, it will significantly improve the prospects of delivery.

The applicant has also confirmed that they will undertake a marketing exercise for the employment site, to be secured through the Section 106 agreement. This will increase the likelihood of the industrial development being brought forward in a timely manner.

Buffer Zones (UDP Policy B3):

With respect to the residential development and the eastern section of the application site, the entire eastern boundary is allocated as Buffer Zone. This also extends to part of the south eastern boundary (approx.115 metres) and a 130 metre stretch across the site frontage to Leeds Road. The width of the Buffer Zone varies from a maximum of 100 metres down to approximately 30 metres.

The western half of the site (with the proposed Business & Industry development) also has a Buffer Zone and this runs in an L-shape, along the entire western boundary of the site and for a section of approximately 65 metres along the southern boundary. This has a width of approximately 30 metres.

Policy B3 of the UDP states that: “…Proposals for development within allocated areas should ensure that identified buffer zones are kept free of industrial buildings and should provide for tree planting or other means of screening within the Buffer Zone …All proposals affecting buffer zones should have regard to visual amenity and wildlife Conservation.”

The proposed residential development would extend into land identified as Buffer Zone to the eastern part of the site. Any proposed buildings within the Buffer Zone would be at variance with Policy B3 of the UDP and represent a departure. However the pre-amble to Policy B3 is relevant in regard to Buffer Zones and states that, “The intention of the buffer zone designation is to keep 34

areas adjoining residential development and other sensitive land uses free of industrial buildings so that disturbance and visual impact are minimised.”

The purpose of the Buffer Zone is clearly defined in the policy and the pre- amble as being for the protection of surrounding residential development (and other sensitive land uses free of industrial buildings) from noise disturbance and visual impact. The extant consent for the Continuing Care Retirement Community included close care apartments within the Buffer Zone and therefore the principle of development (of a residential nature) within it has been established. Notwithstanding this, the functions of the Buffer Zone in terms of protecting neighbouring dwellings in respect of noise and visual impact are achieved. The impact of the dwellings proposed is also fully assessed below in respect of visual and residential amenity.

With respect to the proposed Business & Industry development to the western part of the site, this is applied for in outline form with only means of access to be considered. Layout forms one of the ‘Reserved Matters’ and is not a matter for consideration at this time.

Notwithstanding this, the applicant has submitted an Indicative layout showing how this part of the site could be developed. This includes some development within the Buffer Zone and given that the total amount of floorspace proposed is upto 17,844m2, it is likely that some development within the Buffer Zone will be included at reserved Matters stage. Such development within the Buffer Zone, if proposed at Reserved Matters stage, would be contrary to Policy B3.

The impact of the Business & Industry development, in terms of noise and visual amenity, will need to be fully assessed at Reserved Matters stage when the scale and position of the buildings are established, but even if a reduced Buffer Zone width is proposed then the function of the Buffer Zone in terms of noise mitigation and visual amenity could be adequately provided.

For information, in the consideration of the David Brown gears application, some building within the Buffer Zone was considered acceptable (subject to conditions protecting residents in respect of noise and visual impact).

Section 106 contributions/Viability:

The table below details the policy requirements in relation to the development as a whole which would normally be secured through the Section 106 agreement:

Provision/Contribution Policy Requirement Affordable Housing 30% of floorspace on the residential site Education Contribution £725,752 Public Open Space (POS) £143,750 Kirklees Strategic Economic Zone £511,940 (KSEZ) A62/Sunnybank Road junction £300,000* N.B. to be secured improvements through Section 278 agreement Travel Plan Monitoring fees £25,000 (Framework Travel Plan & Residential Travel Plan) Stocks Bank Road junction (signals) £35,000 improvements Highway safety (traffic £35,000 management/calming) improvements at Roberttown Church Lane contribution (traffic £25,000 management/calming) Leeds Road footway surfacing £35,000 contribution (shared pedestrian/cycling lanes) Off site drainage works to/adjacent to £30,000 Old Engine Close

The necessary Highway works, as detailed above, total £455,000. These payments can be secured through the Section 106 agreement, except for the Sunny Bank Road improvements.

As the exact cost of works to Sunny Bank Road is unknown, a Section 278 agreement will be needed to secure the works and they will be undertaken by the applicant. It is estimated by the Council’s Highway Engineers that these works will cost around £300,000. Therefore, for the purposes of viability considerations, that figure will be used.

The applicant has submitted a Viability Appraisal (VA) which demonstrates that the residential development can effectively cross-subsidise development of the employment site. This is on the basis that the significant costs involved in respect of the necessary earthworks, site preparation and in particular piled foundation works can be met by the residential development.

However the appraisal demonstrates that there is insufficient value in the development as a whole to fund other requirements in relation to affordable housing, education, public open space and KSEZ contribution.

The VA has been subject to independent examination by a consultant appointed on behalf of the Council. The independent assessment has agreed with the conclusions of that VA, namely that the development is not viable 36

with the above Section 106/Highway contributions. The independent appraisal has assessed all of the costs given by the applicant (in their Viability Appraisal) and found them to be reasonable.

The expected Section 106 contributions total approximately £4.16 million, whilst the earthworks and site preparation works to deliver the employment land total approximately £3.09 million.

The Applicant’s original offer to the Council was £500,000 towards all of the Section 106 costs. The applicant has stated that the offer would be funded by the land owner rather than through the development given that the viability appraisal and the independent assessment both conclude that the development could not afford to deliver such a contribution. Following negotiations with Officers’ this offer has been increased to £1 million.

Paragraph 173 of the NPPF covers Viability and states,

“To ensure viability, the costs of any requirements likely to be applied to development, such as requirements for affordable housing, standards, infrastructure contributions or other requirements should, when taking account of the normal cost of development and mitigation, provide competitive returns to a willing land owner and willing developer to enable the development to be deliverable.”

Officers’ consider that, given the conclusions of the viability appraisal, the independent assessment and the guidance within the NPPF, this is a reasonable offer which would enable the necessary highway improvements to take place (as listed above) with a remaining contribution of approximately £545,000.

The £1 million figure also equates to the difference between the total Section 106 contributions required and the cost of delivering the earthworks and site preparation works (to provide serviced employment plots).

The development would not, however, deliver the normally expected contributions in respect of Affordable Housing, KSEZ, Public Open Space or a full education contribution. It is intended that the allocation of the residual contribution would be subject to consultation with ward Members.

It is also proposed to include a clause within the S106 requiring that if development of the B1c, B2 B8 units has not commenced within 12 months of the grant of planning permission then monies identified in the viability appraisal to enable the employment development that have not been expended would be paid to the Council and would be used towards meeting the other obligations that have been forgone.

Conclusion (principle of development):

The proposed residential development represents a departure from the adopted UDP in respect of Policy B2. 37

The lack of a 5 year supply of deliverable housing sites, the absence of a likelihood of employment uses being delivered on the whole site and the extant consent for non-employment uses on part of the site weigh in favour of accepting the principle of residential development.

The fact that the residential development would help facilitate development of the Business & Industry allocation with the opportunity for employment use to be delivered on the balance of the allocation and for the economic benefits that this would bring to be realised also weighs in favour of the development proposed.

The proposed Business & Industry development (in respect of B1 and B2 Uses) on the balance of the site is in accordance with the adopted Plan, the B8 use is a departure. However, the necessity for B8 within most large mixed use developments, the fact that B8 uses in many cases offer a similar density of employment to other B uses and the imposition of a condition restricting the maximum amount of B8 within the development weighs in favour of the development proposed.

On balance therefore, the principle of the development is considered acceptable subject to the imposition of conditions.

Impact on Amenity:

Visual amenity

With respect to the proposed Business & Industry development, as layout and appearance (amongst others) are Reserved Matters, the impact of the development upon visual amenity will need to be further considered at reserved matters stage.

Surrounding residential development (which is largely to the east/south east of the site) is mixed in character with some detached, semi-detached and terraced dwellings present. The proposed residential development reflects this mix of house types.

Paragraph 58 of the NPPF states that planning policies and decisions should ensure developments, “respond to local character and history, and reflect the identity of local surroundings and materials”

The proposed residential development provides a mix of house types of a design and appearance that reflects the general character of the wider area. The scale proposed is considered acceptable in the context of surrounding development, which is largely two storey or bungalows. The proposed 3 storey properties are more centrally located within the site, which is considered acceptable.

Variation is provided within the layout which ensures that the proposal is not too linear, as this can often lack visual interest. The site layout also ensures a 38

good degree of natural surveillance throughout the site, including to the areas of open space.

With respect to design, the proposed house types are all considered acceptable in respect of fenestration and proportions. The proposed materials for the dwellings are not specified. Given that there are a variety of materials of construction for dwellings in this part of Mirfield and factoring in the number of dwellings proposed, it is considered that a mix of materials would be appropriate. It is therefore suggested that a condition be imposed which requires details of materials to be submitted before development commences.

It is considered that the proposed development is acceptable in relation to visual amenity and the proposals accord with Policy D2 of the Kirklees UDP in this regard.

Residential amenity

With respect to the proposed Business & Industry development, the two extant consents for the site both included Business & Industry development within this part of the application site. These remain material considerations in respect of residential amenity.

As layout and appearance (amongst others) are Reserved Matters, the impact of the development on residential amenity will need to be further considered at reserved matters stage. Other amenity matters such as noise are assessed below.

In assessing the impact of the residential development on surrounding dwellings, Policy BE12 of the UDP is considered relevant. This normally requires 12 metres between existing habitable room windows and proposed non-habitable room windows and 21 metres between existing and proposed habitable room windows.

The proposed development complies fully with the requirements of Policy BE12 in respect of separation distances between existing and proposed dwellings. There are no dwellings in close proximity to the (residential part) site to the north or south. To the west is a row of four terraced properties which front Leeds Road. The closest to the proposed development is No. 60a and this achieves a separation of approximately 23 metres. To the east are a number of detached and semi-detached dwellings (odd Nos 149 to 165 Sunny Bank Road). The closest of these dwellings is approximately 24 metres away from the closest proposed dwellings.

It is therefore considered that the proposed development complies in respect of separation distances to existing properties.

With respect to internal separation distances (i.e. between proposed new dwellings), it is acknowledged that a number of proposed dwellings within the layout do not meet the separation distances set out in Policy BE12. A number

of dwellings (mainly to the western part of the residential development) achieve distances of around 15 metres between habitable room windows.

The issue to consider is whether these separation distances would cause a level of harm in terms of impact on amenity which would be sufficient to warrant a reason for refusal. Any concerns in this respect need to balanced against the desirability of making efficient use of land in order to meet the housing need. Furthermore, the application of the separation distances in a rigid way is not usually conducive to securing variation in the street scene within the layout. Future occupiers would also be aware of the separation distances.

Paragraph 59 of the NPPF also provides guidance on design which is of some relevance in this context,

“…design policies should avoid unnecessary prescription or detail and should concentrate on guiding the overall scale, density, massing, height, landscape, layout, materials and access of new development in relation to neighbouring buildings and the local area more generally.”

In these circumstances, it is not considered that the shortfall in some of the distances will have a materially adverse impact upon amenity and Officers’ therefore advise that this reason alone would not be sufficient grounds upon which to refuse the application, taking into account all other material considerations.

With respect to residential amenity, the impact of the proposal in terms of overshadowing and overbearing impact need to be considered. Given the separation distances that are present to existing buildings, there are no concerns in this regard. Furthermore, although the development does contain a number of 2 and a half and 3 storey properties, none of these are located along the eastern boundary of the site and adjacent to existing dwellings on Sunny Bank Road.

On balance, the proposed development is considered acceptable in relation to its impact on residential amenity and accords with UDP Policy D2.

Noise/ Contamination-Remediation/ Air Quality:

The Council’s Pollution & Noise team has been consulted on the application and has commented as follows:

Residential development:

With respect to contaminated land, there are no objections subject to the imposition of conditions requiring the submission of a Phase II Intrusive Site Investigation report and subsequent remediation and validation reports if necessary.

Conditions to protect future occupants from road noise from Leeds Road are also suggested. These set out maximum noise levels achieved within the dwellings closest to Leeds Road. The applicant is also required to demonstrate that these dwellings can be ventilated without the need to open windows.

Business & Industry development:

In relation to noise, and to protect surrounding residents from this development, conditions are suggested which will permit noise emitted from the site exceeding specified levels. These noise levels will be measured on the Western, Eastern and Southern boundaries of the industrial site (which are the boundaries with residential properties beyond them).

A condition is also requested in respect of requiring details of any audible warning devices to be used on site.

Furthermore, in respect of noise and protection of residential amenity, the proposed site layout for the industrial development will need to be carefully considered at reserved matters stage.

Pollution & Noise have also requested standard conditions to control lighting from both the construction phase and beyond occupation to protect residential amenity.

In respect of Air Quality, an AQ report has been submitted with the application and this suggests that a Construction Environmental Plan will be implemented to deal with elevated levels of PM10 and Nitrogen Dioxide during construction. A requirement for this to be submitted before development commences can be conditioned.

With regard to the operational effect of the development on Air Quality, the submitted Air Quality report predicts that both aspects of the development will have a negligible impact on Air Quality in the area. Pollution & Noise acknowledge that the development has the potential to impact on local air quality and therefore a number of conditions are suggested to mitigate impacts from the development.

These include the submission of a further Air Quality Impact Assessment before development commences. This will calculate any pollutant damage emissions costs from the development and then determines measures to mitigate this impact. Further, the provision of electric charging points for ultra- low emission vehicles is also required.

Summary:

Subject to the imposition of conditions as described above, the development is considered acceptable in relation to noise, contaminated land and air quality and complies with the relevant policies in the UDP and the guidance in the National Planning Policy Framework.

Highway considerations:

Pre-application discussions have taken place between the applicant and Kirklees Highways Development Management. These discussions have guided the preparation of highway related documents submitted as follows as part of the planning application: • Transport Assessment dated 6th February 2014; • Transport Assessment Addendum dated 8th September 2014; • Framework Travel Plan dated 7th February 2014; • Residential Travel Plan dated 7th February 2014.

The application site was the subject of the Mirfield 25 planning application in 2008 (ref: 2008/90695) which received planning consent. The Mirfield 25 consent established a level of traffic generation that was considered acceptable at this location and identified the scale and nature of the mitigation measures required to accept the extra traffic. An application for a potential end user of the commercial element of the site was considered and approved in 2011 (ref: 2011/92428) but this was within the Mirfield 25 level of traffic generation established in 2008.

A comparison of the 2008 Mirfield Moor scheme with the current application reveals that the generations are less with the current application as follows:

Mirfield 25 Weekday AM and PM Peak Hour Vehicle Trips In Out Two-Way AM Peak Vehicles 251 79 330 PM Peak Vehicles 53 203 256

Current Application Weekday AM and PM Peak Hour Vehicle Trips In Out Two-Way AM Peak Vehicles 136 127 263 PM Peak Vehicles 105 136 241

However, while the 2008 application is a material consideration, the approach of Kirklees Highways Development Management in the assessment of this application has been to request the applicant to undertake a new Transport Assessment in line with the latest guidance contained in ‘Guidance on Transport Assessment’ – (DfT: 2007) with updated base network traffic counts and traffic generation estimates. 42

The development proposal comprises the following: • 17,200m2 of B2 light industrial / B8 storage and distribution; • 168 residential dwellings.

Access is proposed from three new priority junctions along the A62 Leeds Road.

Traffic counts were undertaken by the applicant in June 2013 at the A62 Leeds Road / Sunny Bank Road junction and the A62 Leeds Road / Stocks Bank Road junction. The details of these counts are presented in appendices to the Transport Assessment and confirm the AM Peak hour as 07:30 – 08:30 and the PM Peak hour as 17:00 – 18:00. Existing queuing problems have been observed to occur on a regular basis at the Sunny Bank Road junction on the Leeds Road and the Child Lane approaches in the AM and PM Peak periods and at the Stocks Bank Road junction on the Stocks Bank Road approach in the AM and PM Peak periods. It is noted that base flows through these junctions are approximately 12% lower in the AM Peak and 5% lower in the PM Peak than those counted in 2006 and used in the Mirfield 25 assessment.

Trip generation estimates for the proposed development have been produced from TRICS 85th percentile trip rates. On the basis that the employment part of the site will be split 50% B2 use and 50% B8 use, the following peak hour trip generation totals result:

Weekday AM Peak Hour Vehicle Trips Vehicles In Out Two-Way Residential 41 84 125 B2 Light Industrial 50 30 80 B8 Storage and 45 13 58 Distribution

TOTAL 136 127 263

Weekday PM Peak Hour Vehicle Trips Vehicles In Out Two-Way Residential 81 42 123 B2 Light Industrial 19 59 78 B8 Storage and 5 35 40 Distribution

TOTAL 105 136 241

The assignment of development trips to the network is based on a combination of census travel to work data and a gravity model to give more emphasis to longer distance trips. This results in the following assignment of flows to individual approach routes to the site:

Assignment of Development Trips to Approach Routes

Approach Route % Weekday AM Weekday MP Assignment Peak (Two-Way) Peak (Two-Way) A62 from Cooper Bridge 26% 68 63 A62 from Heckmondwike 26% 68 63 Stocks Bank Road 15% 39 36 Sunny Bank Road 32% 84 77 B6119 through 1% 3 2 Roberttown

A package of measures has been identified to mitigate the full impact of the current application which is largely consistent with the Mirfield 25 consent. The delivery of the schemes and/or payment of contributions are triggered by the first development to progress at the application site. It is therefore necessary for this application to deliver in full the following mitigation measures:

• Improvement of the A62 / Sunny Bank Road junction; • Contribution towards highway safety improvements in Roberttown - £35,000; • Contribution towards highway safety improvements along Church Lane - £25,000; • Enhancement of cycling and pedestrian facilities along the A62 between the site and Stocks Bank Lane - £35,000; • Provision of a Framework Travel Plan monitoring fee of £15,000 (5 years at £3,000 per annum) for the employment site; • Provision of a Residential Travel Plan monitoring fee of £10,000 (5 years at £2,000 per annum) for the residential site;

This development has a direct impact on the Kirklees Strategic Employment Zone (KSEZ) and is required under Kirklees Planning Guidance to make a contribution to highway improvement schemes at the Cooper Bridge and Stocks Bank Road junctions. The developer has identified that 65 two-way development trips are assigned to the network at this point in the AM Peak hour. Applying the KSEZ contribution sum of £7,876 per trip, a contribution of £511,940 is calculated.

Layout changes to the A62/Sunny Bank Road/Child Lane junction are proposed with the aim of 1) mitigating the impact of development, and 2) providing some benefit in operation over current performance.

The proposed changes incorporate the following features: o Bring the current right turn from A62 into Sunny Bank Road under unopposed signal control; o Convert the existing right turn lane from A62 into Child Lane to ahead only; o Convert the existing left turn and ahead lane to left only from A62 into Sunny Bank Road; o Separately signal the ahead and left turn movements on A62 approach (from Leeds); o Ban the right turn from A62 into Child Lane; o Ban the left turn out of Child Lane; o Improve pedestrian crossing facilities.

This junction improvement will be implemented through a Section278 Agreement.

The proposed changes to the junction have a positive effect both on safety and on capacity. A comparison between 2013 (current layout and 2013 flows) and 2018 (revised layout with development flows) show the following modelled queue lengths (these are mean maximum queues which means they are an average over the hour. Individual queues could be longer or shorter on occasions):

A62 / Sunny Bank Road Junction 2013 Current 2018 With Layout Development Current Revised Flows Layout Difference AM Peak AM Peak AM Peak Junction Arm Queue Queue Queue

A62 North - Left / 11 15 4 Ahead

n/a 2 2 Sunny Bank Road - Left Sunny Bank Road - 62 40 -22 Ahead / Right

A62 South - Right turn 2 3 1 to Sunny Bank Road A62 South - Left / 27 37 10 Ahead

Child Lane - Left / 30 27 -3 Ahead / Right

2013 Current 2018 With Layout Development Current Revised Flows Layout Difference PM Peak PM Peak PM Peak Junction Arm Queue Queue Queue

A62 North - Left / 64 56 -8 Ahead

n/a 1 1 Sunny Bank Road - Left Sunny Bank Road - 23 23 0 Ahead / Right

A62 South - Right turn 4 14 10 to Sunny Bank Road A62 South - Left / 18 20 2 Ahead

Child Lane - Left / 47 19 -28 Ahead / Right

Improvements to the A62/Stocks Bank Road are incorporated into the KSEZ improvement works and are therefore addressed by the contribution to the KSEZ. If a KSEZ contribution is not made, highways have identified a scheme comprising a full refurbishment of the signal heads and vehicle detectors and the connection of the junction to the cctv system so that congestion monitoring can be undertaken for a cost of £35,000.

A comparison between 2013 (current layout and 2013 flows) and 2018 (current layout with development flows) show the following modelled queue lengths (these are mean maximum queues which means they are an average over the hour. Individual queues could be longer or shorter on occasions):

A62 / Stocks Bank Road Junction

2013 Current 2018 Layout Current Current Layout With Flows Development Difference AM Peak AM Peak AM Peak Junction Arm Queue Queue Queue

A62 North - Left / 11 16 5 Ahead

Stocks Bank Road 126 148 22

A62 South - Right turn 2 2 0 to Stocks Bank Road A62 South - Ahead 9 11 2

2013 Current 2018 Layout Current Current Layout With Flows Development Difference PM Peak PM Peak PM Peak Junction Arm Queue Queue Queue

A62 North - Left / 21 28 7 Ahead

Stocks Bank Road 20 31 11

A62 South - Right turn 6 6 0 to Stocks Bank Road A62 South - Ahead 7 7 0

Highway safety schemes are being pursued in Roberttown. The proposed development does have an impact on these routes and thus it is appropriate for it to make a contribution to emerging schemes to mitigate the impact of development.

The development presents an opportunity to enhance cycling and pedestrian facilities along the A62 corridor in the vicinity of the site. A combined cycle / footway is proposed along the site frontage towards Huddersfield (in addition to the contribution identified above) and an on-road cycle lane will be provided towards Heckmondwike.

A Framework Travel Plan for the employment site and a Travel Plan for the residential site have been presented as part of the planning application. These will be developed and implemented through a highways condition. They include a range of measures including membership of the West Yorkshire Travel Plan Network, personal journey planning, staff induction packs, bicycle user group, cycle parking and shower facilities, a car sharing database and an emergency lift home scheme. These measures aim to achieve a reduction in single occupancy car use. The travel plan will be monitored and reviewed on an annual basis.

One priority junction for the residential site and two priority junctions for the employment site are proposed off A62 Leeds Road. These are designed in accordance with highway design standards and incorporate dedicated right turn lanes into the sites, centre hatching and traffic islands to enforce road space. The proposed access arrangements have been subject to capacity testing and are found to be acceptable. The proposed access arrangements have been subjected to a Stage 1 Safety Audit and are found to be acceptable.

The internal layout for the residential element of the development has been reviewed in detail and an iterative process has resulted in a layout which is now acceptable to highways.

Based on this analysis of the development proposal, its impact on transport networks and the proposed mitigation measures, the proposals are considered acceptable and the Highways Service has no wish to resist the granting of planning permission subject to conditions and agreements.

Biodiversity:

The applicant has submitted an ecological survey with the application. This has been assessed by the Council’s ecologist who has confirmed that it is comprehensive and has been carried out to a high standard.

The ecological surveys carried out are to a high standard and comprehensive. Mitigation measures are also included in the submission. The survey found that the site is largely semi-improved neutral grassland with native species- poor hedgerows.

Conditions requiring the development to be carried out in accordance with the requirements of the submitted Ecological report are considered necessary. These conditions also include the submission of a detailed landscape management plan and details of bat and bird roost/nest features within the site.

Subject to the imposition of conditions as described, the development is considered acceptable in respect of ecology and accords with the guidance contained within the National Planning Policy Framework, the Wildlife &

Countryside Act 1981 (as amended) Conservation of Habitats and the Species Regulations 2010.

Trees:

The Council’s Arboricultural officer has been consulted and has raised no objections in respect of the application for residential development.

With respect to the Business & Industry proposal, there is a belt of Protected Trees at the junction of Taylor Hall Road and Leeds Road. As layout has not been applied for with this development, the impact on these Protected Trees will need to be considered at Reserved Matters stage. It is suggested that this can be covered through the imposition of a condition requiring the submission of an Arboricultural method statement with any subsequent Reserved Matters application.

Subject to the imposition of conditions, the proposed development is considered acceptable in respect of Protected and mature Trees, in accordance with Policy NE9 of the Kirklees UDP.

Flood Risk/ Drainage:

The Environment Agency and Yorkshire Water have raised no objections to the application subject to standard conditions.

The Council’s Strategic Drainage Officer has also commented on the application, these comments are summarised as follows:

Existing Watercourse:

An examination of the 2006 watercourse survey and our own recent investigations reveal the watercourse between the site and Old Engine Close is located approximately under the public right of way. Both surveys highlighted the need for renewal to reduce residual flood risk from the development and its interaction with the surrounding development. Kirklees Council as Land Drainage Authority has looked into the work required and this will total £30,000. The developer has confirmed their willingness to fund this.

Flood Routing:

Subject to the imposition of conditions in respect of flood routing, within the residential site, the development is considered acceptable in this respect.

This issue will need to be examined at reserved Matters stage in respect of the industrial part of the site, when detailed layout proposals are brought forward.

Surface Water Drainage Strategy:

The site layout includes two dry basin areas, which would only fill up in the event of storm conditions. A condition is proposed which requires (amongst other requirements) full details of surface water details for the site, and this will include details of the basin areas.

Responsibility for the maintenance of these areas can be included in the Section 106 agreement, with a management company set up if necessary.

Drainage conclusion

Subject to the imposition of conditions and the securing of a £30,000 sum (through the Section 106 agreement) for off-site works, the development is considered acceptable in respect of drainage.

Affordable housing:

In accordance with Policies H10 & H12 of the UDP and the guidance contained within SPD2, the provision of affordable housing is a material planning consideration. As this is a Greenfield site, the contribution would normally be 30% of the total floorspace of the (residential) development.

Matters relating to Section 106 contributions have been covered in the above ‘Section 106 contributions/viability’ section of this report.

Public Open Space:

Policy H18 of the UDP requires the provision of POS on sites put forward for housing development which are over 0.4 hectares. The residential part of the site area is well in excess of this and therefore the requirements of Policy H18 apply.

The residential proposal includes an area of open space, which extends to approximately 0.4 hectares. This is not formally classified as an area of Public Open Space because it is located underneath pylons and isn’t large enough for equipped provision of the scale required for a development of this size. However, it does provide some opportunities for informal recreation and exercise.

A commuted sum (of £143,750) for off-site provision has been requested by the Council’s Landscape section. This would be spent at the destination parks of Fox Royd and Southway Island (both near Kitson Hill Road, Mirfield). If this sum were provided, the proposal would be in accordance with Policy H18 in respect of providing improvements to established public open space, which is readily accessible from the site (certainly in terms of proximity).

Matters relating to Section 106 contributions have been covered in the above ‘Section 106 contributions/viability’ section of this report.

Education:

In line with the requirements of ‘Providing for Education Needs Generated by New Housing’ (KMC Policy Guidance), the proposed development may attract a contribution towards additional School Places it generates.

In order to satisfy a shortfall in additional school places generated by the development (in respect of Old Bank J I & N School and Mirfield Free Grammar, a contribution of £725,752 is calculated.

Matters relating to Section 106 contributions have been covered in the above ‘Section 106 contributions/viability’ section of this report.

Archaeology:

West Yorkshire Archaeology Advisory Service (WYAS) has commented on the application and noted that the assessment submitted by the applicant and their own records show that there are no known archaeological sites within the application site boundary.

However, to the immediate south of the eastern part of the development, a Celtic stone head was found which may date to the late pre-historic or Romano British period and may indicate the presence of a contemporary site in the vicinity.

On this basis, WYAS are requesting that the applicant submit an evaluation of the full archaeological implications of the proposed development before the application is determined.

This request has been considered by the LPA and on the grounds that the site has an extant consent, it could be unreasonable for this information to be required at this stage.

Notwithstanding this, the applicants are currently undertaking this work and it may be completed before a decision is reached on this application. In the meantime, a condition can be imposed requiring that this investigation work be carried out before any development commences.

Objections:

Insofar as representations received that have not been addressed in the above assessment these are answered as follows:

- Loss of green open space will be detrimental Response: Although it is acknowledge that the development will result in a loss of a green space, the principle of the development has been assessed in the above report and found to be acceptable.

- Proposal will create more pressure to find additional employment land in North Kirklees, thereby risking as-yet undeveloped Green Belt sites 51

Response: The application has been assessed on its planning merits and on the basis of the submitted information. The development of part of the site for non-employment purposes has also been assessed in the above report and found to be acceptable.

- Existing houses would look over houses rather than open fields Response: There is no right to a protection of private views in planning law, however the issue of the impact on visual amenity has been considered in the above assessment and will need further consideration at ‘Reserved Matters’ stage.

- Local schools are already oversubscribed Response: The application has been assessed in the context of the Council’s ‘Providing for educational needs generated by new housing’ Policy guidance document and has been considered in the above assessment.

- Health services are also stretched beyond capacity Response: The Local Planning Authority does not have control over this matter, which is controlled by the Local Health Authority.

- Mirfield train station cannot cope Response: Noted.

- Mirfield has “approx. 300” houses currently on the market so there is no demand for further housing Response: The application has been assessed on its planning merits and on the basis of the submitted information. Furthermore, the Council is unable to demonstrate a 5 years supply of housing land.

- Significant disruption would be caused during the lengthy construction phase Response: It is acknowledged that the development may lead to a period of disturbance and disruption during construction, but this is the same for any development.

- Health & safety concerns such as children climbing on scaffolding Response: This is a matter which is covered through Health & Safety legislation rather than controlled through the planning system.

- Proposals will affect property prices Response: This is not a material planning consideration and therefore can’t be taken into consideration.

- Existing empty buildings should be used - Council has wrong approach to developing ‘Green Belt’ Response: The site is not designated Green Belt on the Development Plan.

- Proposals will lead to future development around Cooper Bridge

Response: The application has been assessed on its planning merits and on the basis of the submitted information – any future application would need to be assessed on the same basis.

- Possible land stability issues given mining heritage Response: The Coal Authority has been consulted on the application and raised no objection subject to further investigative works being carried out prior to development commencing.

- Development will set a precedent for other open fields to be built on Response: The application has been assessed on its planning merits and on the basis of the submitted information – any future application would need to be assessed on the same basis.

- No deciduous trees should be planted next to the Mirfield Free Grammar playing field as fallen leaves would be a Health & Safety Hazard Response: This is not a material planning consideration and therefore can’t be taken into consideration.

- Site should be retained for recreation and open space benefit Response: The site is within private ownership, meaning it could be fenced off by the owners if they so wished. In addition, whilst it is accepted that it has a visual amenity value at present, the site is allocated for Business & Industry in the UDP. Furthermore, the site has an extant consent for Industrial development and a Continuing Care Retirement Community.

Conclusion:

The proposed residential development represents a departure from the adopted UDP in respect of Policy B2.

The lack of a 5 year supply of deliverable housing sites, the absence of a likelihood of employment uses being delivered on the whole site and the extant consent for non-employment uses on this part of the site weigh in favour of accepting the residential development.

The NPPF has introduced a presumption in favour of sustainable development. The policies set out in the NPPF taken as a whole constitute the Government’s view of what sustainable development means in practice. It is considered that the proposed development is in accordance with the principles of sustainable development.

9. RECOMMENDATION

RECOMMENDATION:

Conditions:

Residential development only:

1) The development shall be begun not later than the expiration of three years beginning with the date on which permission is granted.

2) The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in complete accordance with the approved plans and specifications except as may be required by other conditions.

3) No development shall take place until details and samples of all facing, roofing, hard landscaping and boundary materials have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall thereafter be constructed using the approved materials and maintained as such.

4) Prior to development commencing, intrusive site investigation works should be undertaken, in accordance with the requirements of the submitted Coal Mining Risk Assessment. In the event that the site investigations confirm the need for remedial works to treat the areas of shallow mine workings, these works shall be fully completed prior to commencement of the development.

5) Before first occupation, the developer shall provide written evidence to the local planning authority to demonstrate that the following internal sound levels have been achieved in plots 1-4, 10-12, 13-17, 90-92, 112-120.

1 The 16hr LAeq shall not exceed 35dB between 0700 and 2300 hours when readings are taken in any noise sensitive rooms in the development.

2 The 8hr LAeq shall not exceed 30dB between 2300 and 0700 hours when readings are taken inside any bedroom in the development.

3. The LAF1 (15min) indoor shall not exceed 45 dB between 2300 and 0700hrs when readings are taken inside any bedroom in the development.

If it cannot be demonstrated that the aforementioned sound levels have been achieved, a further scheme incorporating further measures to achieve those sound levels shall be submitted for the written approval of the Local Planning Authority. All works comprised within those further measures shall be completed and written evidence to demonstrate that the aforementioned sound levels have been achieved shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority before the development is first brought into use. 6) Before development commences, a ventilation scheme to show how habitable rooms to plots 1-4, 10-12, 13-17, 90-92,112-120 shall be ventilated without the need to open windows shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. All works which form part of the approved scheme shall be completed prior to occupation of the aforementioned plots. 7) Before the development is first brought into use all barrier works which form part of the sound attenuation scheme as specified in the Noise Report dated February 2014 produced by WSP Ltd :-

I. shall be completed; and II. written evidence to demonstrate that the specified noise levels have been achieved shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority.

If it cannot be demonstrated that the noise levels specified in the aforementioned Noise Report have been achieved then a further scheme shall be submitted for the written approval of the Local Planning Authority incorporating further measures to achieve those noise levels. All works comprised within those further measures shall be completed and written evidence to demonstrate that the aforementioned noise levels have been achieved shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority before the development is first brought into use.

8) Before development commences a scheme shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority specifying the measures to be taken for the suppression of dust arising from operations permitted by this consent. The approved scheme shall be implemented before development commences and shall be operated throughout the life of the planning permission.

9) Where site remediation is recommended in the Phase II Intrusive Site Investigation Report, development shall not commence until a Remediation Strategy has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The Remediation Strategy shall include a timetable for the implementation and completion of the approved remediation measures.

10) Remediation of the site shall be carried out and completed in accordance with the Remediation Strategy approved pursuant to condition 9. In the event that remediation is unable to proceed in accordance with the approved Remediation Strategy or contamination not previously considered [in either the Preliminary Risk Assessment or the Phase II Intrusive Site Investigation Report] is identified or encountered on site, all works on site (save for site investigation works) shall cease immediately and the Local Planning Authority shall be notified in writing within 2 working days. Unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority, works shall not recommence until proposed revisions to the Remediation Strategy have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Remediation of the site shall thereafter be carried out in accordance with the approved revised Remediation Strategy.

11) Following completion of any measures identified in the approved Remediation Strategy or any approved revised Remediation Strategy a Validation Report shall be submitted to the local planning authority. Unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority, no part of the site shall be brought into use until such time as the remediation measures for the whole site have been completed in accordance with the approved Remediation Strategy or the approved revised Remediation Strategy and a Validation Report in respect of those remediation measures has been approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

12) The development shall be carried out in complete accordance with Sections 12.6 of the submitted Ecology and Nature Conservation Report. The features specified in this report shall be provided prior to occupation of the final dwelling on the site, and retained thereafter.

13) No development shall commence until a scheme to reduce the risk of flooding from surface water, has been submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Local Planning Authority. The attenuation system shall be designed so there is no flooding to properties on or off-site for rainfall events up to the 1 in 100 year return period. The scheme shall limit the surface water run-off generated by the site at the greenfield run-off rate so that it will not exceed the 56

run-off from the undeveloped site and not increase the risk of flooding off- site. This applies for up to and including 1 in 100 year plus Climate Change rainfall event. The scheme shall be fully implemented and subsequently maintained, in accordance with the timing/phasing arrangements embodied within the scheme or within any other period as may subsequently be agreed, in writing, by the Local Planning Authority.

14) All downpipes carrying rain water from areas of roof shall be sealed at ground-level prior to the occupation of the development. The sealed construction shall thereafter be retained throughout the lifetime of the development.

15) Inspection manholes shall be provided on all foul and surface water drainage runs such that discharges from individual units can be inspected/sampled if necessary. All manhole covers shall be marked to enable easy recognition. Foul will be marked in red. Surface water will be marked in blue. Direction of flow will also denoted. Where more than one discharge point is proposed, manholes will also be numbered accordingly to correspond with their respective discharge point.

16) The site shall be developed with separate systems of drainage for foul and surface water on and off site.

17) No piped discharge of surface water from the application site shall take place until works to provide a satisfactory outfall for surface water have been completed in accordance with details to be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority before development commences.

18) No buildings shall be occupied or brought into use prior to completion of the approved foul drainage works.

19) No works to commence the residential development hereby approved shall take place until the applicant, or their agents or successors in title, has secured the implementation of a programme of archaeological recording. This recording must be carried out by an appropriately qualified and experienced archaeological consultant or organisation, in accordance with a written scheme of investigation which has been submitted by the applicant and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

20) Before development commences, a landscape management plan shall be submitted to the Local Planning Authority detailing retention of existing features and ecological connectivity and compensation measures for any lost features. The approved scheme shall be implemented prior to first occupation of the final dwelling.

21) The development shall not be brought into use until a Full Travel Plan for the site (or part of the site), produced in accordance with the Framework Travel Plan dated 07/02/2014, has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The Full Travel Plan shall include:

• Measures, objectives and targets for reduced car usage and increased non-car transport usage, including modal split targets; • The provision of Travel Plan Co-ordinator including roles, responsibilities and annual monitoring; • The provision of travel Information; • Implementation and review timescale; and Enforcement, sanctions and corrective/review mechanisms.

The measures contained within the Travel Plan shall be implemented in accordance with the approved timescale, except where the monitoring evidence demonstrates that a revised timescale/measures to achieve trip targets are necessary, in which case the revised details would be implemented.

22) Development shall not commence until a scheme detailing access provision to and from the site for construction traffic, including what arrangements will be made for restricting such vehicles to approved points of access and egress, has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved scheme shall then be operated throughout the period of construction work.

23) Development shall not commence until a scheme detailing provision for on site parking for construction workers for the duration of the construction period has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved scheme shall be then be implemented throughout the construction period.

24) Within 3 months of the date of this permission a scheme detailing the following off-site works, including the relevant Stage 1, 2 or/and 3 Road Safety Audits (ref: CIHT guidelines on Road Safety Audit (2008)) has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority:

• A62 / Sunny Bank Road Junction as set out on WSP drawing number 0467-S278-TS-005 Rev E.

• Three priority junctions to provide site access off the A62 as shown on WSP drawing number 1004/GA/01 Rev A.

The development shall not be brought into use until the all the works under the approved scheme have been carried out complete accordance with the approved scheme. These works shall thereafter be retained for the lifetime of the development.

25) No development shall commence until the scheme of details of finished floor levels of each dwelling, together with corresponding finished ground levels and of surface and land drainage associated with any works, have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall be carried out only in accordance with the details so approved and no dwelling shall be occupied until the works relating to that property have been completed. These shall be so retained for the lifetime of the development, unless otherwise approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

26) Development shall not commence until a scheme detailing the piping of ordinary watercourses and Leeds Road Highway Drain within the site, has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. There shall be no buildings are structures located within 3 metres of ordinary watercourses and the highway drain serving Leeds Road. The scheme shall include a plan to protect the works throughout the construction phase and detailed maintenance and management regime for the piped watercourse and works for the lifetime of the development. These works should be completed in accordance with an approved phasing plan. No part of the development shall be brought into use until the watercourse piping works comprising the approved scheme have been completed. The maintenance and management regimes shall be implemented for the lifetime of the development.

27) The development shall not commence until an assessment of the effects of 1 in 100 year storm events, with an additional allowance for climate change, exceedance events and blockage scenarios on drainage infrastructure and surface water run-off pre and post development between the development and the surrounding area, in both directions, has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. No part of the development shall be brought into use (dwellings shall not be occupied) until the works comprising the approved scheme have been completed and such approved scheme shall be retained thereafter throughout the lifetime of the development.

28) Development shall not commence until a scheme detailing foul, surface water and land drainage, (including a scheme to integrate off and on site works, outfalls, balancing works, plans and longitudinal sections, hydraulic calculations, phasing of drainage provision, existing drainage to be maintained/diverted/abandoned) has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Discharge rates shall be limited to the specific outfalls noted in a Flood Risk Assessment by WSP revision dated 11th September 2014. There shall be no pumped discharge of surface water from this site. Attenuation should accommodate the 1 in 100 year critical storm event with an appropriate allowance for climate change. None of the dwellings/buildlings shall be occupied until such approved drainage scheme(s) has been provided on the site to serve the development or each agreed phasing of the development to which the dwellings relate and thereafter retained throughout the lifetime of the development.

29) Development shall not commence until a scheme, detailing temporary surface water drainage for the construction phase (after soil and vegetation strip) has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The scheme shall detail:

- phasing of the development and phasing of temporary drainage provision. - include methods of preventing silt, debris and contaminants entering existing drainage systems and watercourses and how flooding of adjacent land is prevented.

The temporary works shall be implemented in accordance with the approved scheme and phasing. No phase of the development shall be commenced until the temporary works approved for that phase have been completed. The approved temporary drainage scheme shall be retained until the approved permanent surface water drainage system is in place and functioning in accordance with written notification to the Local Planning Authority.

Industrial development only:

1) Approval of the details of the appearance of the site, layout, scale and landscaping (hereinafter called 'the reserved matters') shall be obtained from the Local Planning Authority in writing before any development is commenced.

2) Plans and particulars of the reserved matters referred to in Condition 1 above, relating to the appearance, layout, scale and landscaping of the site shall be submitted in writing to the Local Planning Authority and shall be carried out in full accordance with the approved plans.

3) In the event of the submission of reserved matters being phased then submission shall be phased in accordance with a phasing plan to be approved by the Local Planning Authority. Application for approval of the first set of reserved matters shall be made to the Local Planning Authority before the expiration of three years from the date of this permission. Application for approval of subsequent reserved matters shall be made to the Local Planning Authority before the expiration of five years from the date of this permission.

4) The development hereby permitted shall be begun either before the expiration of two years from the final approval of reserved matters or, in the case of approval on different dates, before the expiration of two years from the date of the final approval of the last such matter to be approved.

5) Prior to development commencing, intrusive site investigation works should be undertaken, in accordance with the requirements of the submitted Coal Mining Risk Assessment. In the event that the site investigations confirm the need for remedial works to treat the areas of shallow mine workings, these works shall be fully completed prior to commencement of the development.

6) The development shall not be brought into use until a scheme detailing the boundary treatment of the site has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall not be brought into use until the works comprising the approved scheme have been completed. The works comprising the scheme shall thereafter be retained.

7) Where site remediation is recommended in the Phase II Intrusive Site Investigation Report approved pursuant to condition 7, development shall not commence until a Remediation Strategy has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The Remediation Strategy shall include a timetable for the implementation and completion of the approved remediation measures.

8) Remediation of the site shall be carried out and completed in accordance with the Remediation Strategy approved pursuant to condition 8. In the event that remediation is unable to proceed in accordance with the approved Remediation Strategy or contamination not previously considered [in either the Preliminary Risk Assessment or the Phase II Intrusive Site Investigation Report] is identified or encountered on site, all works on site (save for site investigation works) shall cease immediately and the Local Planning Authority shall be notified in writing within 2 working days. Unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority, works shall not recommence until proposed revisions to the Remediation Strategy have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Remediation of the site shall thereafter be carried out in accordance with the approved revised Remediation Strategy.

9) Following completion of any measures identified in the approved Remediation Strategy or any approved revised Remediation Strategy a Validation Report shall be submitted to the Local Planning Authority. Unless otherwise agreed in writing with the local planning authority, no part of the site shall be brought into use until such time as the remediation measures for the whole site have been completed in accordance with the approved Remediation Strategy or the approved revised Remediation Strategy and a Validation Report in respect of those remediation measures has been approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

10) Noise emitted from the site, as measured on the Western, Eastern and Southern boundaries of the site, shall not exceed:

30 dB LAeq (1 hour) from 1900 hours to 2300 hours and 30 dB LAeq (5min) from 2300 hours to 0700 hours on any day,

11) Prior to the commencement of development, details of any audible warning devices to be used on vehicles based at the site shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

12) The use hereby permitted shall not begin until details of the installation and/or erection of any extract ventilation system, including details of the methods of treatments of emissions and filters to remove odours have been submitted and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority and the works specified in the approved scheme have been installed. Such works shall thereafter be retained, operated at all times when the businesses are in use and maintained in accordance with the manufacturers instructions.

13) Before development commences a scheme which indicates the measures to be taken for the control of any glare or stray light arising from the operation of artificial lighting shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Thereafter the artificial lighting shall be operated in accordance with the approved scheme.

The scheme should include the following information:- 1) The proposed design level of maintained average horizontal illuminance for the site. 2) The predicted vertical illuminance that will be caused by lighting when measured at windows of any properties in the vicinity. 3) The proposals to minimise or eliminate glare from the use of the lighting installation 4) The proposed hours of operation of the lighting

14) Prior to development commencing a Construction Environmental Management Plan shall be submitted to and agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority. The plan shall include, as a minimum, the recommendations in sections 9.6.13 to 9.6.15 of the Environmental Statement submitted as part of the application. The agreed plan shall be adhered to throughout the construction of the development.

15) Prior to the development commencing a further Air Quality Impact Assessment should be submitted to and agreed with the Local Planning Authority. The Assessment must calculate the pollutant damage emissions costs from the development and use this figure to determine measures to mitigate against this impact. The mitigation must be agreed by the Local Planning Authority and all works carried out prior to occupation of the development

16) Before development commences the applicant must submit a plan detailing facilities to be provided for charging plug in and other ultra-low emission vehicles. This plan must be agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority before development commences and the plan implemented before first occupation of any premises on the development.

17) Prior to development commencing within 30 metres of the Protected Trees on site (at the junction of Taylor Hall Road and Leeds Road), an Arboricultural method statement, in accordance with British BS 5837, shall be submitted and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority before development commences. The method statement shall include details on how the construction work will be undertaken with minimal damage to the adjacent 62

protected trees and their roots and the type of surfacing. Thereafter, the development shall be carried out in complete accordance with the Arboricultural Method Statement.

18) The development shall be carried out in complete accordance with Sections 12.6 of the submitted Ecology and Nature Conservation Report. The features specified in this report shall be provided prior to occupation of the final unit on the site, and retained for the lifetime of the development.

19) No development approved by this planning permission shall take place until such time as a scheme to reduce the risk of flooding from surface water, has been submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Drainage Department at Kirklees Council. The attenuation system needs to be designed so there is no flooding to properties on or off-site for rainfall events up to the 1 in 100 year return period. The scheme shall limit the surface water run-off generated by the site at the Greenfield run-off rate so that it will not exceed the run-off from the undeveloped site and not increase the risk of flooding off-site. This applies for up to and including 1 in 100 year plus Climate Change rainfall event. The scheme shall be fully implemented and subsequently maintained, in accordance with the timing/phasing arrangements embodied within the scheme or within any other period as may subsequently be agreed, in writing, by the Local Planning Authority.

20) Surface water draining from areas of hardstanding shall be passed through an oil interceptor or series of oil interceptors, prior to being discharged into any watercourse, soakaway or surface water sewer. The interceptor(s) shall be designed and constructed to have a capacity compatible with the area being drained, shall be installed prior to the occupation of the development and shall thereafter be retained and maintained throughout the lifetime of the development. Clean roof water shall not pass through the interceptor(s). Vehicle washdowns and detergents shall not be passed through the interceptor.

21) All downpipes carrying rain water from areas of roof shall be sealed at ground-level prior to the occupation of the development. The sealed construction shall thereafter be retained throughout the lifetime of the development.

22) Inspection manholes shall be provided on all foul and surface water drainage runs such that discharges from individual units can be inspected/sampled if necessary. All manhole covers shall be marked to enable easy recognition. Foul will be marked in red. Surface water will be marked in blue. Direction of flow will also denoted. Where more than one discharge point is proposed, manholes will also be numbered accordingly to correspond with their respective discharge point.

23) The site shall be developed with separate systems of drainage for foul and surface water on and off site.

24) No piped discharge of surface water from the application site shall take place until works to provide a satisfactory outfall for surface water have been completed in accordance with details to be submitted to and approved by the local planning authority before development commences.

25) No buildings shall be occupied or brought into use prior to completion of the approved foul drainage works.

26) Surface water from vehicle parking and hardstanding areas shall be passed through an interceptor of adequate capacity prior to discharge. Roof drainage should not be passed through any interceptor.

27) Before development commences, a landscape management plan shall be submitted to the Local Planning Authority detailing retention of existing features and ecological connectivity and compensation measures for any lost features. The approved scheme shall be implemented prior to first occupation of the final dwelling.

28) No part of the development shall be brought into use until a Full Travel Plan for the site (or part of the site), produced in accordance with the Framework Travel Plan dated 07/02/2014, has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The Full Travel Plan shall include:

• Measures, objectives and targets for reduced car usage and increased non-car transport usage, including modal split targets; • The provision of Travel Plan Co-ordinator including roles, responsibilities and annual monitoring; • The provision of travel Information; • Implementation and review timescale; and • Enforcement, sanctions and corrective/review mechanisms.

29) Development shall not commence until a scheme detailing access provision to and from the site for construction traffic, including what arrangements will be made for restricting such vehicles to approved points of access and egress, has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved scheme shall then be operated throughout the period of construction work.

30) Development shall not commence until a scheme detailing provision for on site parking for construction workers for the duration of the construction period has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved scheme shall be then be implemented throughout the construction period.

31) Within 3 months of the date of this permission a scheme detailing the following off-site works, including the relevant Stage 1, 2 or/and 3 Road Safety Audits (ref: CIHT guidelines on Road Safety Audit (2008)) has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority:

• A62 / Sunny Bank Road Junction as set out on WSP drawing number 0467-S278-TS-005 Rev E.

• Three priority junctions to provide site access off the A62 as shown on WSP drawing number 1004/GA/01 Rev A.

32) The amount of B8 Storage or distribution floorspace hereby approved, as defined in the Schedule of the Town and Country Planning (Use Classes) Order 1987 (as amended) or in any provision equivalent to that Class in any Statutory Instrument revoking or re-enacting that Order, shall not exceed 50% of the total floorspace provided by the development.

33) The development shall not commence until an assessment of the effects of 1 in 100 year storm events, with an additional allowance for climate change, exceedance events and blockage scenarios on drainage infrastructure and surface water run-off pre and post development between the development and the surrounding area, in both directions, has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. No part of the development shall be brought into use (dwellings shall not be occupied) until the works comprising the approved scheme have been completed and such approved scheme shall be retained thereafter throughout the lifetime of the development.

34) Development shall not commence until a scheme, detailing the treatment of all surface water flows from parking areas and hardstandings for commercial/industrial development through an oil interceptor, (or a full petrol oil interceptor) reedbed or alternative treatment system, has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Use of the parking areas/hardstandings shall not commence until the works comprising the approved treatment scheme have been completed. Treatment shall take place prior to discharge from the treatment scheme. The treatment scheme shall be retained, maintained to ensure efficient working and used throughout the lifetime of the development. Roof water shall not pass through the interceptor. 65

35) Development shall not commence until a scheme detailing foul, surface water and land drainage, (including off site works, outfalls, balancing works, plans and longitudinal sections, hydraulic calculations, phasing of drainage provision, existing drainage to be maintained/diverted/abandoned) has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Discharge rates shall be limited to the specific outfalls noted in a Flood Risk Assessment by WSP revision dated 11th September 2014. There shall be no pumped discharge of surface water from this site. Attenuation should accommodate the 1 in 100 year critical storm event with an appropriate allowance for climate change. None of the dwellings/buildlings shall be occupied until such approved drainage scheme(s) has been provided on the site to serve the development or each agreed phasing of the development to which the dwellings relate and thereafter retained throughout the lifetime of the development.

36) Development shall not commence until a scheme, detailing temporary surface water drainage for the construction phase (after soil and vegetation strip) has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The scheme shall detail:

FOOTNOTES:

NOTE: All contamination reports shall be prepared in accordance with CLR11, PPS23 and the Council’s Advice for Development documents or any subsequent revisions of those documents.

NOTE: In relation to Condition 11 of the Industrial permisison, consideration should be given to the use of white noise reversing alarms on permanent site vehicles (principally site fork lift truck), which give a full spectrum of noise rather than a single tone, and are understood to be as effective as single tone alarms at close range, whilst at a distance blend into the ambient noise climate.

NOTE: To minimise noise disturbance at nearby premises it is generally recommended that activities relating to the erection, construction, alteration, repair or maintenance of buildings, structures or roads shall not take place outside the hours of: 66

07.30 and 18.30 hours Mondays to Fridays 08.00 and 13.00hours , Saturdays

With no working Sundays or Public Holidays In some cases, different site specific hours of operation may be appropriate.

Under the Control of Pollution Act 1974, Section 60 Kirklees Environment and Transportation Services can control noise from construction sites by serving a notice. This notice can specify the hours during which work may be carried out.

NOTE: Surface water run-off should be controlled as near to its source as possible through a sustainable drainage approach to surface water management (SUDS). SUDS are an approach to managing surface water run- off which seeks to mimic natural drainage systems and retain water on or near the site as opposed to traditional drainage approaches which involve piping water off site as quickly as possible. SUDS involve a range of techniques including soakaways, infiltration trenches, permeable pavements, grassed swales, green roofs, ponds and wetlands. SUDS offer significant advantages over conventional piped drainage systems in reducing flood risk by attenuating the rate and quantity of surface water run-off from a site, promoting groundwater recharge absorbing diffuse pollutants and improving water quality. Ponds, reedbeds and seasonally flooded grasslands can be particularly attractive features within public open. The variety of SUDS techniques available means that virtually any development should be able to include a scheme based around these principles and provides multiple benefits, reducing costs and maintenance needs.

NOTE: Environment Agency advice:

For further information and advice about pollution prevention please refer to the Environment Agency's website to access Pollution Prevention Guidance Notes (http://www.environment- agency.gov.uk/business/topics/pollution/39083.aspx) and advice on how to get your site design right (http://www.environment- agency.gov.uk/static/documents/Business/pp_pays_booklet_e_1212832.pdf).

You may also wish to contact our National Customer Contact Centre on tel. 08708 506 506 for site-specific advice on pollution prevention.

We recommend that developers should:

1) Follow the risk management framework provided in CLR11, Model Procedures for the Management of Land Contamination, when dealing with land affected by contamination.

2) Refer to the Environment Agency Guiding Principles for Land Contamination for the type of information that we require in order to assess 67

risks to controlled waters from the site. The Local Authority can advise on risk to other receptors, such as human health.

3) Refer to our guiding principles on groundwater protection are set out in our document GP3 - Groundwater Protection Policy and Practice, which is intended to be used by anyone interested in groundwater and particularly those proposing an activity which may impact groundwater. GP3 is available on our website at: http://www.environment- agency.gov.uk/research/library/publications/40741.aspx

4) Refer to our website at www.environment-agency.gov.uk for more information.

Foul Drainage:

A mains connection has been proposed for foul drainage disposal. You are strongly advised to satisfy yourself, prior to determination, that there is capacity in both the receiving sewer and sewage treatment works to accommodate the discharge proposed. Please contact the sewerage undertaker, Yorkshire Water, to attain this information. If capacity is not available, an alternative means of foul drainage disposal may need to be explored or improvement works to resolve the capacity issue secured as part of the planning permission. If a non-mains solution is to be considered we should be re-consulted, prior to determination, and given the opportunity to comment further.

This recommendation is based on the following plan(s):-

Plan Type Reference Version Date Received Location plan 4/3/14 Indicative industrial 112 rev E 8/9/14 layout plan Proposed floor plans P11-4464-32 – 5/3/14 PD49 Proposed floor plans P11-4464-34 PD49 5/3/14 Proposed floor plans P11-4464-36 PA48 5/3/14 Proposed floor plans P11-4464-38 PA48 5/3/14 Proposed floor plans P11-4464-50 – 5/3/14 PT310 Proposed floor plans P11-4464-40 5/3/14 PD411 Proposed floor plans P11-4464-52 – 5/3/14 PT310 Proposed floor plans P11-4464-48 – 5/3/14 PA25 Proposed floor plans P11-4464-46 – 5/3/14 PB51 Proposed floor plans P11-4464-44 – 5/3/14 PB51 68

Plan Type Reference Version Date Received Proposed floor plans P11-4464-42 – 5/3/14 PD411 Proposed floor plans P11-4464-30 – 5/3/14 PE41 Proposed floor plans P11-4464-24 – 5/3/14 PD410 Proposed floor plans P11-4464-28 – 5/3/14 PD48 Proposed floor plans P11-4464-26 – 5/3/14 PD48 Proposed floor plans P11-4464-16 – 5/3/14 PA34 Proposed floor plans P11-4464-22 – 5/3/14 PD410 Proposed floor plans P11-4464-18 – 5/3/14 PB35 Proposed metal railings P11-4464-09 5/3/14 Proposed knee rail P11-4464-08 5/3/14 Proposed timber fence P11-4464-07 5/3/14 boundary treatment 1800mm timber fence P11-4464-06 5/3/14 Garage details P11-4464-04 5/3/14 Garage details 2/2 P11-4464-03 5/3/14 Streetscenes P11-4464-11 rev A 5/3/14 Proposed landscaping P11-4464-100 rev 8/9/14 layout (residential) D Indicative landscaping P11-4464-101 rev. 8/9/14 layout (industrial) B Site sections P11-4464-12 rev A 5/3/14 Environmental Impact February 2014 6/3/14 Assessment Design & Access February 2014 5/3/14 statement Planning Policy February 2014 5/3/14 Statement Statement of February 2014 6/3/14 Community Involvement Transport Assessment 7/3/14 Travel plan – residential 6/3/14 Travel Plan – 6/3/14 framework

Application No: 2014/92021

Type of application: 61m - RESERVED MATTERS

Proposal: Reserved matters application for erection of 94 dwellings

Location: Land off Grange Road, Golcar, Huddersfield, HD7 4QZ

Grid Ref: 410277.0 416718.0

Ward: Golcar Ward

Applicant: Colin Simpson, Barratt and David Wilson Homes

Agent: Mark Johnson, Johnson Brook

Target Date: 26-Sep-2014

Recommendation: RM - APPROVAL OF RESERVED MATTERS

------

LOCATION PLAN

Map not to scale – for identification purposes only

1. SUMMARY OF APPLICATION

The principle of residential development on this site together with the means of access was established with the grant of conditional outline planning permission in June of this year.

The outline application was considered by the Huddersfield Planning Sub Committee who undertook a site visit when considering the application.

This Reserved matters submission seeks approval of appearance, landscaping, layout and scale. Conditions on the outline permission regarding remediation and drainage are still applicable and will need to be discharged prior to development commencing.

The layout is considered to be satisfactory, both in terms of the relationship to open space within the layout, as well as affording adequate distance between existing and proposed dwellings.

The buildings would be 2 storey which is considered to be appropriate and the density of 27 dwellings per ha is compatible with surrounding development, as are the house types and proposed materials.

The areas of landscaping proposed incorporate a large swathe of open space that crosses the site as well as planting to the perimeter of the site and gardens. This is considered to be acceptable.

As such the reserved matters submission is considered acceptable and approval is recommended.

RECOMMENDATION: APPROVE RESERVED MATTERS

2. INFORMATION

The application is brought to the Strategic Committee following a request from Ward Councillor Andrew Marchington. The reasons given being “… so members can judge whether the applicant has gone as far as possible to minimise the impact of this development”.

3. PROPOSAL/SITE DESCRIPTION

Site Description

The site comprises an area of 3.5ha, and is located approx 0.6km from Golcar village centre. The site comprises a series of fields (the field pattern is defined by old stone boundary walls with some trees and shrubs). The site is flanked to the west, south and north by existing dwellings on Parkwood Road, Thorpe Green Drive, Darbyfields, Grange Road and Leafield Avenue. To the east is a field which then backs onto Quarry Bank Mills and Parkwood Mills. These mill buildings are Grade 2 listed and have been converted to apartments.

The site is adjacent to the Longwood Edge Conservation Area which includes Quarry Bank Mills and Parkwood Mills.

There is an existing pedestrian connection to the NW of the site, off Parkwood Road, just opposite Parkwood Court.

The site slopes down from north-west to south-east, the lowest point being towards Quarry Mills and Leafield Bank. There is a culvert/ watercourse that emerges towards the southern edge of the site and flows south east.

The site is part of a larger area that is allocated as Provisional Open Land on the Kirklees Unitary Development Plan.

Proposal

Conditional outline planning permission for residential development of 96 dwellings was granted in June this year. This approved details of access.

The planning permission was subject to a planning obligation which secured the provision of affordable housing as part of the development, provision and subsequent maintenance of public open space, an education contribution, travel plan monitoring fee and a contribution towards provision of Metro cards for occupiers of the development.

This application seeks approval of the reserved matters - Appearance; Landscaping; Layout and Scale.

The layout proposes 94 dwellings, a mixture of detached, semi-detached and terraced properties. They range between 2 and 4 bedrooms, are 2-storeys in height, laid out as a series of cul-de-sacs, accessed off Thorpe Green Drive and Grange Road. There is a central area of green space and an area of open space that accommodates a new footpath link from the site to Parkwood Road

4. BACKGROUND AND HISTORY

2013/91987 – Conditional outline planning permission for residential development of 96 dwellings. This included means of access and was subject to a Section 106 Agreement. (The no. of dwellings shown on the illustrative layout, used to calculate Section 106 contributions is 96).

5. PLANNING POLICY

Kirklees Unitary Development Plan

D5 – Provisional open land BE1 – Design principles BE2 – Quality of design BE12 – Space about buildings BE23 – Crime prevention G6 – Land contamination T10 – Highway safety T16 – Footpaths within development T19 – Parking standards H10 – Affordable housing H12 – Arrangements for securing affordable housing 72

H18 – Provision of open space

National Policies and Guidance

Part 4 Delivering sustainable transport Part 6 Delivering a wide choice of high quality homes Part 7 Requiring good design Part 8 Promoting healthy communities Part 10 Meeting the challenge of climate change, flooding and coastal change Part 11 Conserving and enhancing the natural environment Part 12 Conserving and enhancing the historic environment

6. CONSULTATIONS

KC Highways - Amended plans have been received addressing initial concerns. The layout is satisfactory and conditions are recommended.

KC Public Rights of Way- No objection. Need to ensure that the new pedestrian routes are secured through the relevant agreements i.e. a Section 38 Agreement.

KC Ecologist - At the Outline stage a Mitigation, Compensation and Enhancement strategy was submitted which made recommendations regarding the above. The scheme takes a lot of these on board but there are still improvements that could deliver greater bio diversity enhancement. A condition will be required relating to the provision of bat and bird roost opportunities, and a greater provision of native tree species and meadow planting will be required within the landscape master plan.

KC Strategic Drainage -The applicant has submitted an initial drainage scheme for discussion. The issue of drainage is covered by condition on the Outline approval and a formal discharge of condition application is required for consideration and approval before any development can commence. An agreed layout is necessary to inform the drainage solutions for the site.

KC Parks & Landscape - The layout is similar to the indicative layout that was presented at the Outline stage. The amount of space provided is in excess of the amount that would be required under policy H18 of the Kirklees Unitary Development Plan. The provision and future maintenance is secured within the existing Section 106 Agreement

Environment Agency - No objections

Yorkshire Water - No objections, happy with the principles that show foul water draining to the public sewer and surface water to an existing watercourse. (NB detailed drainage conditions are still be discharged via a Discharge of Condition application)

Police Architectural Liaison Officer - The layout as shown has largely addressed the initial concerns identified on the illustrative layout at outline stage. The absence of shared paths to the rear of dwellings is welcome and there is good surveillance of the publicly accessible space at the centre of the site, and surrounding the footpath entrance on the NW corner off Parkwood Grove.

7. REPRESENTATIONS

The application has been publicised by site notices and neighbour notification letters.18 letters of objection have been received and a petition with 18 signatures. The points of concern raised are:

1. There are problems with the exit onto Thorpe Green Road and any surveys should be undertaken outside of the school holidays.

(Comment: the principle of development and the capacity of the highway network to accommodate it have already been considered at outline stage. The numbers of dwellings indicated is 94, two less than shown on the original indicative layout).

2. The local infrastructure can’t cope with the additional housing.

(Comment; as with no 1, the principle of residential development has been established by the grant of outline planning permission. The outline permission secured a financial contribution towards education within the vicinity, in accordance with Council policy).

3. This application is premature given that conditions on the outline such as remediation have yet to be discharged.

(Comment; this is not the case, any outstanding conditions will still need to be satisfactorily discharged via Discharge of Condition applications. This reserved matters submission seeks approval for details of appearance, landscape, layout and scale only).

4. Privacy will be adversely affected due the proximity of the new houses. Previous extensions to existing dwellings have been omitted.

(Comment: the layout does identify existing neighbouring properties that have been extended, and this is taken into account in considering the layout against the ‘space about buildings’ Policy BE12).

8. ASSESSMENT

Scale:

The number and size of dwellings proposed would be at a density of 27 dwellings per ha, which is broadly consistent with the surrounding area.

The development would consist entirely of 2 storey dwellings. Quarry Bank Mills are located to the east of the site and are set at a lower level. The development proposed should be subordinate to the Listed Mill buildings.

It is considered that the scale of the development and the density proposed are acceptable, and reflect that of the surrounding area to the north, east and south of the site.

Layout and Appearance:

The layout proposed respects the prevailing building lines where appropriate, for example at the access points from Grange Road and Thorpe Green Drive. There is a mix of house types proposed, which create a varied streetscene, with dwellings also fronting on to the central area of green space.

The proposed dwellings have been designed to work with the changes of level within the site, as illustrated by the proposed streetscene and section.

Within the area there is a mix of building styles and designs, with terraced stone dwellings, semi-detached dwellings with artificial stone, brick and render and the grade 2 listed Quarry Bank Mills and Parkwood Mills.

The house types proposed and materials (brick and tile) are considered to be acceptable having regard to the established character and appearance of the surrounding area.

The footpaths which cross the site deliver permeability and pedestrian access to the surrounding areas to the north, south and west. In addition the layout provides a link from the access road to the northern part of the site to adjoining land to the rear of Quarry Bank Mills which is also part of the larger Provisional Open Land allocation, and therefore its development should not be prejudiced by the layout proposed.

The Police Architectural Liaison Officer is also satisfied with the layout in terms of Policy BE23 Crime Prevention, with there being good natural surveillance of the open space areas and paths.

Landscaping:

The landscape scheme centres on a green swathe of land to the centre of the site that in turn accommodates the culvert that flows across the site east to west. This area is proposed to be mainly grassland. There are a number of existing trees to be retained within the site, with new tree planting proposed within the open space and adjoining the proposed new footpath link at the northwest corner of the site to Parkwood Road.

Native hedgerow is proposed on the eastern and western boundaries, and elements of the exiting dry stone wall that define the existing field pattern have been retained to the front gardens of plots 48 to 59 which face onto the central open space. 75

The landscaping scheme is considered to be acceptable and would deliver bio diversity enhancement across the site, with the planting of native species, both trees and hedgerow. Significant planting close to the existing line of the watercourse (which is in fact a collapsed culvert) is not feasible for reasons of future maintenance. The provision and location of future bird and bat roost opportunities still needs to be conditioned.

Impact on Residential Amenity:

The proposed layout identifies neighbouring dwellings and also those which have been extended.

Distances between habitable room windows in the rear elevations of existing dwellings that have not been extended and proposed dwellings accord with the minimum distances set out in policy BE12 of the UDP,

Two dwellings adjoining the site have been extended with two storey extensions. Distances between habitable room windows accord with the minimum distances set out in policy BE12 (the siting of plot 11 having been amended in order to achieve the 21m).

A number of dwellings adjacent to the site have been extended with the single storey extensions. Distances between habitable room windows in the single storey rear extensions and proposed dwellings fall short of the minimum acceptable distances set out in the policy. The policy however allows for distances less than the minimum if it can be shown that by reason of permanent screening, changes in level or innovative design no detriment would be caused to existing or future occupiers of the dwellings. The layout proposes screen fencing of 1.8m in height to the boundaries of the site. The erection and subsequent retention of the screen fencing can be secured by condition. This would protect privacy from views between ground floor windows such that there would be no detriment to existing or future occupiers of the dwellings.

Within the layout, distances between habitable room windows in rear elevations accord with policy BE12. Distances between habitable room windows in front elevations internal to the site do in some instances fall short of the minimum acceptable distances set out in policy BE12.

This however needs to be balanced against the desirability of making efficient use of land in order to meet housing need, the desirability of retaining open space within the layout, the fact that applying the separation distances in a rigid way would not be conducive to securing variation in form and street scene within the layout and that future occupiers of the proposed development would be aware of the separation distances when purchasing properties.

It is therefore considered that whilst in some instances the separation distances between properties internal to the site fall short of the minimum distances set out in policy BE12, this in itself would not be sufficient grounds to refuse planning permission when balanced against other material considerations.

Highways Issues:

The principle of access to the site from Leymoor Road via Thorpe Green Drive and Grange Road has been established by the grant of outline planning permission for the erection of 96 dwellings

The proposed layout is similar to the indicative layout included within the 2013 application. The proposal is to serve the development for 94 dwellings by two access points. 71 dwellings would be served off Leymoor Road and Parkwood Road via Thorpe Green Drive; and 23 dwellings off Leymoor Road via Grange Road.

Taking each part of the development in turn:

Proposed 71 dwellings:

71 dwellings would be served from Leymoor Road and Parkwood Road via Thorpe Green Drive. A point closure within the development at the junction with Grange Road will prevent vehicular access through to the eastern side of the development site (Proposed 25 dwellings).

At the end of Thorpe Green Drive there is currently a turning head. A scheme to change the road alignment here is proposed whereby a priority junction would serve 6 dwellings and a through route would serve 75 dwellings (4 existing and the proposed development). A stage1 Road Safety Audit has been carried out on the proposed scheme where recommendations have been made and designer’s response given. No insurmountable matters have been raised.

In terms of visibility requirements along Thorpe Green Drive and from its junction along Leymoor Road, they have been assessed in relation to driven speeds and the 30mph speed limit and meet recommended guidelines set out in Manual for Streets.

This section of the development site consists of 1 detached house served by an extension to the existing Thorpe Green Drive and 70 dwellings served by traditional estate roads and shared surface carriageway loop. These roads provide sufficient space to allow internal service vehicle turning and access. Each of the 71 dwellings has adequate off-street parking provisions in accordance with UDP parking standards. A pedestrian link is provided through to Parkwood Road.

Proposed 25 dwellings:

25 dwellings would be served from Leymoor Road and Stoney Lane via Grange Road and Ayton Road respectively. Grange Road and Ayton Road have footways on either side and are traditional in their layout and currently serve some 85 dwellings. A point closure within the development at the junction with Grange Road will prevent vehicular access through to the western side of the development site (Proposed 71 dwellings).

Grange Road is without the benefit of a turning head to accommodate a service vehicle which would be provided as part of the proposed development. Improvements to sight lines and pedestrian route to the bus stop outside 140 Leymoor Road from the Grange Road junction would be achieved with lining and build outs at the Darbyfields junction. A Stage 1 Road Safety Audit has been carried out on the proposed scheme where recommendations have been made and designer’s response given. No insurmountable matters have been raised.

This section of the development site consists of 4 detached houses served by an extension to the existing Grange Road and 21 dwellings served by a shared surface carriageway which provides sufficient space to allow internal service vehicle turning and access. Each of the 21 dwellings has adequate off-street parking provisions in accordance with UDP parking standards. This application provides insufficient information to allow proper highway assessment

Whilst acceptable in principal, amendments are required in order for this proposal to be considered acceptable to highways:

- A 1.8m wide footway is needed along the Parkwood Road frontage of the development. Measures will also be needed to prevent pedestrians running out onto Parkwood Road.

- The radii to the shared surface carriageway needs to be shown chamfered and create a layout that better resembles a mews court development.

Conclusion

The details of the reserved matters submitted are considered to be acceptable. They do not prejudice the delivery of the balance of the Provisional Open Land allocation and correspond with the parameters set out in the Outline approval. There are still matters of detail to be dealt with by way of the Discharge of Condition process, prior to any development commencing.

It is recommended that the Reserved Maters be approved.

9. RECOMMENDATION

Approve Reserved Matters

1. The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in complete accordance with the approved plans and specifications except as may be required by other conditions.

2. No development shall take place until samples of facing and roofing materials have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority, and the development shall be constructed of the approved materials.

3. Prior to the development being brought into use, the approved vehicle parking areas shall be surfaced and drained in accordance with the Communities and Local Government; and Environment Agencies “Guidance on the permeable surfacing of front gardens(parking areas)” published 13/5/2009(ISBN 781409804864) as amended or superseded ; and thereafter retained throughout the lifetime of the development .

4. No development shall take place until a scheme detailing the proposed internal adoptable estate roads have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The scheme shall include full sections, drainage works, street lighting, signing, surface finishes and the treatment of sight lines, together with an independent safety audit covering all aspects of the work. Before any building is brought into use the scheme shall be completed in accordance with the scheme shown on the approved plans and retained thereafter.

5. Any planting, seeding or tree management works forming part of the approved landscaping scheme (which includes the retention of existing stretches of walling) shall be carried out during the first planting, seeding or management season following the commencement of development, or as otherwise may be agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority, and shall be maintained for a period of five years from the completion of planting works. All specimens which die within this period shall be replaced and any damages to the retained walls shall be repaired.

6. Prior to development commencing details of the numbers and locations of bat and bird roost opportunities within the new housing scheme shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The details approved shall be implemented prior to the occupation of the dwellings to which they relate, and shall thereafter be retained.

This recommendation is based on the following plan(s):-

Plan Type Reference Version Date Received Design and Access 24/6/14 Statement Planning Statement 24/6/14 Transport Assessment 24/6/14 First and Second 24/6/14 addenda Ecological Appraisal R 1526-01 24/6/14 Air Quality Assessment 24/6/14 Flood Risk Assessment EO9/4961/FR001b 24/6/14 Location Plan P13:4684:02 A 24/6/14 Proposed planning P13:4684:01 J Oct 2014 layout Landscape Masterplan P13:4684:100 A 24/6/14 Site Sections P13:4684:07 O 24/6/14 Streetscenes P13:4684:08 O 24/6/14 HOUSETYPES Cambridge(AS) P13:4864:15 O 24/6/14 Cambridge(OP) P13:4864:16 O 24/6/14 Halstead (AS) P13:4864:17 O 24/6/14 Halstead(OP) P13:4864:18 O 24/6/14 Kennington (AS) P13:4864:19 O 24/6/14 Kennington(OP) P13:4684:20 O 24/6/14 Lincoln(AS) P13:4684:21 O 24/6/14 Lincoln(OP) P13:4684:22 O 24/6/14 Kington(AS) P13:4684:23 O 24/6/14 Kington(OP) P13:4684:24 O 24/6/14 Ashton(AS) P13:4684:25 O 24/6/14 Ashton(OP) P13:4684:26 O 24/6/14 Morpeth (AS) P13:4684:27 O 24/6/14 Morpeth(OP) P13:4684:28 O 24/6/14 Falmouth(AS) P13:4684:29 O 24/6/14 Falmouth(OP) P13:4684:30 O 24/6/24 Barwick (AS) P13:4684:31 O 24/6/14 Barwick(OP) P13:4684:32 O 24/6/14 Fincley(AS) P13:4684:33 O 24/6/14 Fincley(OP) P13:4684:34 O 24/6/14 Newton (AS) P13:4684:35 O 24/6/14 Newton(OP) P13:4684:36 O 24/6/14 Composite Materials GR/ML-04 29/10/14 Schedule

Application No: 2014/92214

Type of application: 62m - FULL APPLICATION

Proposal: Erection of 30 dwellings, and associated works including highways and landscaping

Location: Land off Crosland Road, Lindley, Huddersfield

Grid Ref: 410893.0 418478.0

Ward: Lindley Ward

Applicant: Persimmon Homes (West Yorkshire)

Agent: Adam Jackson, Nathaniel Lichfield & Partners

Target Date: 14-Oct-2014

Recommendation: ASD-CONDITIONAL FULL APPROVAL SUBJECT TO THE DELEGATION OF AUTHORITY TO OFFICERS

------

LOCATION PLAN

Map not to scale – for identification purposes only

1. SUMMARY OF APPLICATION

Scale of Development 0.7ha No. Jobs Created or Retained NA Policy UDP allocation Employment allocation B8.1 & B3 Buffer zone Independent Viability Required Yes Representation/Consultation Individual Support (No.) None received Individual objections 5 Petition N/A None received Ward Member Interest Statutory Consultee No Objections Contributions • Affordable Housing 5 units (approx 16% floor area). • Education £74,132 • Public Open Space £93,000 towards off site provision in local area • Other £161,630 towards off site highway works £14,272.50 towards residential METRO cards Financial contribution towards Traffic Regulation Order Other Issues The residential use of this site which is allocated for employment and how the scheme relates to the Comprehensive Framework Any Council Interest? No Planning Pre-application Yes Yes advice? Pre-App Consultation Yes Letters sent to residents on Romsey Undertaken? Close and the Ward Councillors Comment on Application

RECOMMENDATION:

Grant conditional full permission subject to:

1. Delegate to Officers to complete a S106 Obligation to secure:

• The provision of affordable housing within the site; • A financial contribution towards Education provision; • A financial contribution towards the provision of Public Open Space within the local area; • A financial contribution towards off site highway improvements; and • A financial contribution towards the provision of residential METRO cards

2. Impose any necessary and appropriate conditions which may include those below; and

3. Subject to there being no substantive changes that would alter this recommendation issue the decision notice.

2. INFORMATION

The application was considered by the Huddersfield Planning Sub Committee on 18th September when, following a site visit the Sub Committee resolved to refer the application to Planning & Highways Committee with a recommendation to grant conditional full planning permission subject to delegation of authority to officers to complete a S106 Obligation.

Annual Council on 1st October 2014 approved the replacement of Planning & Highways Committee with a new Strategic Planning Committee. The application is therefore brought to the Strategic Planning Committee for consideration

3. PROPOSAL/SITE DESCRIPTION

Site Description

The site comprises an area of 0.7ha located of Crosland Road, Lindley. The site is a rectangular field with frontage (approx 55m) onto Crosland Road. The field is bounded by dry stone walls with a grass verge along the Crosland Road frontage.

To the south the site abuts existing dwellings on Romsey Close. To the north is the curtilage of Crosland Road Farm and Jericho Cottage. Crosland Road farmhouse is a Grade 2 listed building. To the east is the residential allocation (now under construction) off Weatherhill Road and Cowrakes Road. On the opposite side of Crosland Road is a playing field and open fields. There are overhead power lines crossing this site.

The site is part of a larger employment allocation B8.1, on the Unitary Development Plan, and the southern and eastern parts of the site are identified as buffer zone on the Unitary Development Plan.

Proposal

Full planning permission is sought for the erection of 30 no dwellings with a mix of detached, semi-detached and terrace properties providing:

• 2 no 2 bed units; • 24 no 3 bed units; and • 4 no 4 bed units

The dwellings proposed would be 2 and 2.5 storey in height and are proposed to be constructed from artificial stone with grey roof tile.

Vehicular access is to be taken off Crosland Road with the development essentially taking the form of a cul de sac. New footpaths along the Crosland Road frontage linking up with those next to Romsey Close are provided.

4. BACKGROUND AND HISTORY

2011/91518 - Outline application for Data Centre campus with formation of access off Lindley Moor Road. Approved subject to a Section 106 agreement.

2011/91519 - Full application for residential development (294 units) and associated works including the demolition of existing buildings, construction of new accesses from Cowrakes Road and Weatherhill Road, footpath, drainage, earthworks, provision of public open space and landscaping. Approved subject to a Section 106 agreement.

NB Both of the above applications were considered concurrently and in relation to a comprehensive development framework. Both of the Section 106 agreements include an appropriate financial contribution towards infrastructure improvements within the area.

5. PLANNING POLICY

Development Plan:

Site allocation:

The northern part of the site is allocated for business, general industry and storage and distribution use (allocation B8.1) whilst the southern and eastern parts are allocated as buffer zone to the employment allocation. (Policy B3). Allocation B8.1 is subject to a series of footnotes:

Footnote 6 - In order to assess the traffic effect of the allocation, further detailed work (including, where appropriate, analysis of a traffic impact assessment) will need to be undertaken by the Highways Agency to ensure that traffic can be accommodated satisfactorily on the trunk road network. Where this is not possible, but could become so by remedial highway improvements, the Highway Agency will seek the attachment of appropriate planning conditions relating to the commencement or occupancy of the development prior to the carrying out of such improvements. Where remedial works prove not to be feasible or agreement as their scale can not be reached with the developer, the Highways Agency might have to direct refusal of the planning application, or if before the Secretary of State object to the proposal.

Footnote 9 - The maximum acceptable proportion of B8 floorspace shall be 20%.

Footnote 10 - The site shall be developed comprehensively with site H8.17.

UDP policies:

B1 – Employment needs of the district B3 – Buffer zones BE1 – Design principles BE2 – Quality of design BE12 – Space about buildings BE23 – Crime prevention T10 – Highway safety T19 – Parking standards G6 – Land contamination H1 – Housing needs of the district H10 – Affordable housing H12 – Arrangements for securing affordable housing H18 – Provision of open space EP12 – Overhead power lines EP4 – Noise sensitive development

National Policies and Guidance:

National Planning Policy Framework;

Part 1 - Building a strong competitive economy; Part 4 - Promoting sustainable transport; Part 6 - Delivering a wide choice of high quality homes Part 7 - Promoting good design Part 8 - Promoting healthy communities Part 10 - Meeting the challenge of climate change, flooding and coastal change. Part 11 - Conserving and enhancing the natural environment Part 12 - Conserving and enhancing the historic environment

Other Policy Considerations:

Supplementary Planning Document 2 - Affordable Housing KMC Policy Guidance “Providing for Education Needs Generated by New Developments”.

6. CONSULTATIONS

KC Highways - No objections in principle, and satisfied that the surrounding road network can cope with a development of this scale. Detailed conditions recommended.

In accordance with the masterplan provided as part of the Comprehensive Development Framework (for applications 2011/91518 and 2011/91519) a financial contribution of £161,630 is required towards the improvement of surrounding infrastructure.

Financial contributions towards METRO cards and a Traffic Regulation Order are also sought. The METRO cards contribution required is £14,272.

KC Environmental Health - Recommend conditions regarding remediation, and Air Quality The Air Quality submission by the Lindley Moor Action Group has been reviewed, and the Services conclusions and recommendation are unaltered. There is no justification for the requested moratorium on any development affecting the Birchencliffe (A629) area.

KC Conservation and Design - No objections to the proposal in principle, and are satisfied that there will be no adverse effect on the setting of the neighbouring listed building (ie Jericho cottages). Suggested amendments regarding orientation and siting of some of the dwellings have been incorporated in an amended layout. Recommend a condition for landscaping along the northern boundary of the site.

KC Environment Unit - The scheme makes no mention of any mitigation. Details of mitigation relating to provision of bird/ bat roost opportunities within the development, and the landscaping details around the perimeter of the site( including the existing dry stone walls retention) should be conditioned.

KC Education Service - In this case a financial contribution of £74,132 is required

KC Strategic Housing Service - As a green field site and in accordance with Policy H10 of the UDP, and SPD2 Affordable Housing the requirement is 30% floor area. This provision should be made on site

KC Parks and Recreation - Policy H18 of the UDP is applicable. In this instance an off site payment in lieu of onsite provision is acceptable. This is to be used to improve facilities in the vicinity of the site. The contribution required is £93,000.

KC Strategic Drainage - A satisfactory scheme has been submitted, and there are opportunities to provide additional attenuation in the road side improvements along Crosland Road. However assurances as to the delivery of this scheme are needed, and as such conditions are recommended for approval and completion should an alternative scheme need to be produced.

British Coal - Material consideration. No objections subject to appropriate condition.

Environment Agency - Given the size of the site (i.e. less than 1ha) there is no requirement to consult.

Yorkshire Water Authority - No objection recommend conditions in the event of an approval

Police Architectural Liaison Officer - No objections in principle. Detailed comments regarding rear footpaths, have been incorporated within an amended layout

7. REPRESENTATIONS

The application has been publicised by site notices and neighbour letters.

To date 5 individual letters of objection have been received the main points of concern being;

1. Brownfield sites should be brought forward before greenfield sites.

2. Land is allocated for business, and part of the site as buffer zone. Development is supposed to be a buffer zone distance away from dwellings on Romsey Close.

3. Together with the development already approved and under construction the development will generate unacceptable levels of traffic lead to congestion on a network that is unable to cope.

4. Development will result in loss of amenity and loss of privacy for existing dwellings. There will be significant disturbance during building e.g. noise, dust even worse than the existing site on Weatherhill Road.

5. Site is a valuable wildlife habitat that will be lost

6. Lindley has insufficient facilities to accommodate any more dwellings e.g. full schools and local doctors surgeries.

7. Inappropriate development for the character of the area

Huddersfield Civic Society objects to the proposal for 2 reasons:

1. Inappropriate use (site is allocated for employment and buffer zone)

2. The dwellings should be faced in natural stone, in accordance with Policy BE11 of the Unitary Development Plan

An amended layout has been received (altering orientation and siting of a small number of the units - no change to numbers or access). As a result neighbours on Romsey Close have been re notified. No additional representations have been received.

Since the Sub Committee resolution, representation has been received from the Lindley Moor Action Group. This comprises a letter and an appendix covering Air Quality Issues. The conclusions of this letter and summary are:

Conclusion • The strategic intent to create employment on Lindley Moor is under sustained attack from developers with an agenda to maximise their profits by building houses instead. • The application attempts to seek change of use departing from the employment allocation of the Lindley Moor plot. Its approval would set a precedent to subvert the UDP strategy with not a single permanent job created. • The highways network is unable to accommodate the development for lack of capacity (particularly Halifax Road corridor and Ainley) or safety (particularly Crosland Road, despite all the improvements proposed. • All proposals would make worse the long standing health problem of air pollution in the area. Kirklees is conducting a detailed assessment likely to result in the declaration of an Air Quality Management Area. Until the investigation is completed any Planning Approval making things worse would represent a reckless disregard for public health, exposing the Council open to legal challenge. (until the investigation is published a moratorium any Planning Approval impacting A629(Birchencliffe) traffic should be imposed.)

Summary The brave new world of the 1992 draft UDP promised 2000 permanent jobs for local people on strategic land allocated for employment. Contrast the 2015 evil fat cats salivating over easy pickings from the £200m green field housing bonanza. No jobs, no affordable housing for locals, commuters clogging up the M62 and precious green fields transformed into dormitory wasteland. Fundamental defects in the argument for departure from the plan and air quality assessments have been recently identified. Each of these represents compelling new material grounds to refuse. Acceptance would be to squander the larger plot on ephemeral development rather than the bed rock industrial regeneration we need so badly. It is very apposite that Kirklees has chosen to create a Strategic Planning Committee to consider the wider economic aspects of key applications. LMAG has confidence that Members will reject this application with vigour.

8. ASSESSMENT

General principle:

The application site includes land that is part of a wider employment allocation for business, general industry and storage and distribution use on the Councils UDP and land identified as a buffer zone to that allocation.

To the south of the site is residential development on Romsey Close and to the north, Crosland Road Farm and Jericho Cottage. Further to the north the employment allocation continues to Lindley Moor Road.

Part 1 of the National Planning Policy Framework ‘Building a Strong and Competitive Economy’ states at paragraph 22:

“Planning Policies should avoid the long term protection of sites allocated for employment use where there is no reasonable prospect of the site being used for that purpose.…Where there is no reasonable prospect of the site being used for the allocated employment use, applications for alternative uses of land and buildings should be treated on their merits having regard to market signals and the relative needs of different land uses to support sustainable local communities.”

In considering the development proposed it is necessary to look at the particular circumstances of this site, as distinct from the balance of the employment allocation and the impact that the development would have upon delivery of the Comprehensive Framework for the Lindley Moor allocations (residential and employment) that accompanied the two applications for the Data Campus and the development of 294 houses.

The site is part of a wider employment allocation on the UDP and is also identified as part of a buffer zone to the allocation.

To the south of the site is an existing residential development (Romsey Close) and immediately to the north of the site is Crosland Hill Farm and Jericho Cottages. Jericho Cottages are listed and together with Crosland Hill Farm form a grouping of agricultural buildings.

The development therefore sits between residential development to the south and the farm complex (including residential development) to the north. The allocated buffer zone is a depth of 30m, which would leave a site, with a depth of only 25m for development, including the creation of a road and turning facilities for industrial vehicles. As such it is not feasible to develop this site for employment purposes with the retention of the existing buffer zone, together with the need to provide a buffer for the farm complex.

The delivery of this site for employment purposes would therefore be dependent upon the of the entire employment allocation along the eastern side of Crosland Road, up to Lindley Moor Road ,and including the Crosland Farm complex coming forward.

The use of all or any part of that allocation for employment would require the provision of a buffer zone, and as such the key piece of land in the allocation is the Crosland Farm site, on which the owners have indicate their wish to remain.

As a result the release of the application site for housing is not considered to prejudice the delivery of the balance of the allocation.

In considering the development proposed against the Comprehensive Development Framework brought forward for the entirety of both residential and employment allocations at Lindley Moor, the site should still deliver a financial contribution towards the infrastructure improvements necessary to accommodate the respective developments (which was the main purpose in 89

requiring that the residential and employment allocations be developed comprehensively).

With regard to the allocated buffer zone, the intention of policy B3 of the UDP is to protect the amenity of occupiers of land neighbouring sites allocated for business and industry and to reduce the impact of industrial development on visual amenity, landscape and wildlife. Given that the nature of development proposed is residential, it is considered that the objectives of policy B3 would not be prejudiced in this case.

Therefore in accordance with paragraph 22 of the NPPF it is appropriate to consider an alternative use (housing) on its merits.

Paragraph 49 of the NPPF presumes in favour of sustainable development and indicates that housing policies should not be considered up to date if the Local Planning Authority is unable to demonstrate a 5 year supply of deliverable housing sites. Currently the Council is unable to demonstrate a 5 year supply of deliverable housing land. In this respect recent appeal decisions have confirmed that given the lack of a demonstrable 5 year land supply the Councils housing land supply policies in the UDP are out of date. As such the lack of an adequate land supply in itself is a relevant and material consideration as is the provision of new housing which would help address the shortfall.

The NPPF identifies the dimensions to sustainable development as being economic, social and environmental. It states that the roles are mutually dependent and should not be undertaken in isolation.

A proposal for 30 dwellings will provide economic gains by providing business opportunities for contractors and local suppliers. There will be social gain through the provision of housing at a time of general shortage, including the provision of affordable housing. The development of a greenfield site represents an environmental loss however, whilst national policy encourages the use of brownfield land for development, it also makes it clear that no significant weight can be given to the loss of greenfield sites where there is a national priority to increase housing supply.

Accessibility is one element of sustainable development but not the ultimate determining factor. Accessibility tests are set out in the Regional Spatial Strategy (RSS table 13.9). Although the RSS has been revoked it remains the latest plan which has been the subject of public examination and is therefore currently the most-sound base for assessment under the NPPF paragraph 4.

The tests are:

1. Is there a local service area within 1200m walking distance? 2. Is there a bus stop within 800m with a service at least 30 minutes (25 minutes bus plus 5 minutes walking) to a town centre offering employment, leisure and retail opportunities? 3. Is there a primary school within 1600m (this equates to a 20 minute walk) 90

4. Is there a surgery or other primary health care facility within 1600m?

The site satisfies each of the above tests.

Given the size of the site and the number of dwellings envisaged the following policies are applicable:

• Policy H10 Affordable Housing; • Policy H18 Provision of Public Open Space; • The Councils guidance on the provision of education needs generated from new development.

As a greenfield site affordable housing should be provided at 30% of the floor area in order to satisfy policy H10 and SPD2.

Contributions are also required towards the improvement of existing public open space and to meet education needs.

The provision of affordable housing and the necessary contributions are to be secured by way of a Section 106 Agreement.

In addition, contributions are required towards off site infrastructure improvements, provision of residential METRO cards and a Traffic Regulation Order.

The applicant has submitted a viability appraisal for the development. In accordance with accepted procedure in such cases and guidance contained in paragraph 205 of the NPPF the appraisal has been independently assessed on behalf of the Council. The independent assessment verifies that the levels of contributions proposed are acceptable and necessary for the development to be viable and to come forward.

The proposed Heads of Terms for the Section 106 Agreement are set out below:

• Affordable Housing: 5 units (which equates to 16.6% floor area); • Public Open Space: £93,000 towards off site provision within the local vicinity of the site; • Education : £74,132 towards meeting education need within the local area; • Financial contribution towards local highway infra-structure improvements: £161,630; • Financial contribution towards residential METRO cards: £14,272.50; and • Funding of Traffic Regulation Order

Highway issues:

A Transport Statement has been submitted with the application which provides details of the existing highways and transport characteristics, the policy background, the development proposals and the trip generation estimates.

The development proposed is forecast to generate 17 two-way vehicle trips in the AM Peak hour (5 in /12 out) and 19 two-way vehicle trips in the PM Peak hour (12 in /7 out). Assignment of trips to the network has assumed an equal split onto Crosland Road north and south of the site access. It is also forecast that there will be two vehicle passengers, three bus users, three pedestrians and no cyclists generated by the development in each of the peak hours.

Access to the site is proposed via a 5.5 metre site access road with 2.0 metre footways on each side. The access then becomes a shared surface within the site. The priority junction with Crosland Road is located approximately 40 metres north of Romsey Close. New footways are provided on Crosland Road between the Crosland Farm access and the existing footway at Romsey Close to provide a continuous facility. To support the formation of this new junction the speed limit is proposed to be reduced to 30mph to a point north of the new site access junction. A visibility envelope of 2.4 metres by 43 metres is achieved in accordance with Manual for Streets. A Section 278 Agreement will be needed for the junction detailed design and a TRO will be needed to alter the speed limit along Crosland Road. Both will need to be implemented before the first unit is occupied.

Two units (units 29 and 30) are proposed to have direct access off Crosland Road. These units will need to achieve inter-visibility between drivers and pedestrians on the footway in line with Manual for Streets. This will be controlled through conditions.

The site access shared surface will need to be designed in detail through the Section 38 process. The principles of design as presented with the application have been reviewed and are accepted subject to fine tuning through the Section 38 process.

The development site is within the area covered by the Lindley Moor Comprehensive Framework Masterplan and the associated Lindley Moor Comprehensive Transport Assessment which were both prepared during the consideration of planning applications 2011/91518 (Data Centre Site on Lindley Moor Road) and 2011/91519 (Miller Homes Site on Weatherhill Road). The comprehensive approach adopted in the masterplan and the transport assessment considered full development of the masterplan area so that the cumulative effect of development on off-site highways could be assessed. The traffic generations associated with full implementation of the masterplan were used as the basis of design for off-site highway improvements at the Ainley Top roundabout and the Halifax Road / East Street junction. The applicant has been informed that it is appropriate to contribute to the off-site works and a figure of £111,720 has been advised 92

based on off-site highways works totalling £2,327,500 and the application contributing 4.8% of the peak hour traffic generation from the comprehensive masterplan area.

A Section 106 agreement will be needed to collect this contribution. It is recommended that this be provided before the completion of the 15th dwelling (i.e. 50% of the way through the development).

The Lindley Moor Road /Crosland Road junction has been identified as needing improvement to accommodate the full comprehensive masterplan scheme. A contribution from the development of £49,910 towards this will be required based on the percentage that this development contributes to the total comprehensive masterplan assignment through this junction in the combined peak hours.

Metro has commented on the application and has recommended that a residential metro card is provided by the developer to each residential unit to encourage public transport use. The cost of each card is £475.75 and when applied to the 30 units totals £14,272.50. This contribution would be secured through the S 106 legal agreement.

Highways Development Management has considered this application in the context of the comprehensive framework masterplan for the Lindley Moor area. An appropriate site access design and associated works along Crosland Road have been proposed by the applicant. Appropriate contributions have been identified to address off-site highway impacts and to encourage the use of public transport in favour of the private car. On this basis, Highways Development Management raises no objection to this development proposal subject to a Section 106 agreement and appropriate conditions.

Impact on Amenity:

The development proposed provides 30 houses on a 0.7ha site, a density of approx 42 per ha. This is considered to be an appropriate density for this area as well as being an efficient use of land. The dwellings proposed are detached, semi-detached and terraced, 2 storey (with the exception of 3 no 2.5 storey dwellings in the NE corner of the site). The scale and house types proposed are considered acceptable for this location.

Visual Amenity - As stated above the scale of the development is considered acceptable and the materials proposed, artificial stone and grey roof tiles are appropriate. The scheme seeks to retain the stone boundary walls which are part of the character of this area and the layout has been amended to provide frontage development onto Crosland Road. A simple landscape scheme is proposed along the northern boundary which should help retain the open character of this part of Lindley Moor.

With respect to the setting of the neighbouring listed building, the application is supported by a Heritage Impact Assessment and Planning Statement that 93

makes reference to the heritage assets that are found in close proximity to the site. The listing relates to Jericho Cottages rather than the farm, however they are considered to be part of the same agricultural grouping and it is the impact upon the setting of the farm complex that needs to be considered.

The setting is one of agriculture and as such open spaces should be retained to give context to the site. Given the proposals location to the south and adjacent existing residential development and the open land to the north, it is considered that the proposal will not result in undue harm to the setting of the listed building. It is important however that landscaping to the northern boundary of the site is secured to soften the development edge and retain some agricultural context.

Residential Amenity - There will be no adverse effect on the residential amenities of the properties within the Crosland Road Farm complex either by way of loss of privacy or bulk of building.

With respect to the relationship to the nearest properties on Romsey Close the Council’s space about buildings standards are satisfied with the exception of the distances from Plots 26 and 27 to No’s 3 and 3A Romsey Close. These are situated very close to the boundary of the site and at an angle to the application site.

Whilst at an angle the distances between habitable room windows between 3A and Plot 26 is in excess of 24 metres, plus the angle, as such this is satisfactory. The distances between upper floor habitable rooms between No. 3 Romsey Close and Plot 26 are 21m and satisfactory.

In terms of Plot 27 the distance to the rear elevation is approximately 19.5m, however, No. 3 is sited at such an angle so that there is no direct line of sight to the upper floor bedroom window on Plot 27.

Within the development site itself, a number of the proposed dwellings either side of the estate road are less than 21 metres apart. These are Plots 3 and 4 on the north and Plots 26 and 27 on the south.

These properties face each other across a road that will be used by both vehicles and pedestrians as well as receiving deliveries, i.e. a considerable degree of public activity which one would not associate with rear garden areas.

This aspect needs to be balanced against the desirability of making efficient use of land in order to meet housing need. The application of the separation distances in a rigid way is not usually conducive to securing variation in form of street scene within the layout, and future occupiers of the proposed development would be aware of the separation distances.

In these circumstances it is not considered that the shortfall in some of the distances will have a materially adverse impact upon the amenity and the

shortfall, in itself would not be grounds to refuse planning permission when balanced against other material considerations.

Environmental Issues (Noise, Remediation, Air Quality, Overhead Power Lines):

Noise: Given that this application is for residential development adjacent to existing residential there is not considered to be any noise issue either from the development as an emitter of noise or as a receptor of noise. (The M62 and Lindley Moor Road are a significant distance away from this site).

Remediation: The application site is a green field site with no history of previous use for industry. The site is capable of being remediated if necessary to accommodate the proposed residential development, and conditions are recommended to this effect.

Air Quality: The applicant has submitted an Air Quality Assessment as part of the application. It is considered that the size of the development (30 dwellings) would have an imperceptible impact on nearby roads with large volumes of traffic. Therefore no further assessment is required.

The submission from the Lindley Moor Action Group regarding Air Quality and requesting a moratorium on planning approvals has been reviewed Environmental Health’s conclusion/ recommendation remain unaltered.

It is considered that the development will not have a significant effect on air quality along Halifax Road indeed the development would have a imperceptible effect on air pollution along Halifax Road.

(NOTE: The Council has carried out work to improve congestion and air quality in the area around Ainley Top. Ainley Top has been widened and an intelligent traffic light system has been installed that reacts to the levels of traffic on surrounding roads and helps to reduce congestion and therefore improve air quality).

A condition to promote green and sustainable development i.e. detailing the provision of facilities to providing charging and plug in facilities for electric and other ultra-low emission vehicles is recommended.

Overhead Power Lines: Policy EP12 of the UDP indicates that developments should take account of proximity to overhead power lines in terms of any potential impact on residential amenity. This scheme proposes the relocation of the overhead lines that cross a significant part of this site, and a stand off distance on the eastern edge of the site to what will be the nearest pylon.

Drainage:

The site is locate within Flood Zone 1(i.e. the area east likely to flood), and not withstanding the size of the site a Flood Risk Assessment and Drainage Strategy has been submitted. This is welcomed. 95

The drainage strategy has considered flood routing both from outside the site where a vertical curve to prevent water from Crosland Road entering the site has been suggested .The layout also provides a grassed zone to the east which can provide a safe exit fro blockage scenarios, avoiding properties. The scheme will involve improvements to the Crosland Road frontage which should incorporate road gullies which could be incorporated into the drainage attenuation scheme for the site.

The submitted drainage layout is satisfactory subject to the securing of appropriate agreements. A pumped system for surface water is not preferred, and alternatives should be explored before this is considered. In sum: The site is capable of being satisfactorily drained and existing green field run off rates of 5l/s, can be achieved, and would be acceptable to Yorkshire Water. As such conditions are recommended, for approval prior to any development commencing, and implemented prior to he fist occupation.

Bio diversity:

The applicant has submitted a Phase 1 Ecological Survey which concludes that the site is probably of limited value in bio diversity terms. However in accordance with part 11 of the NPPF ‘Conserving and enhancing the natural environment’ the opportunity to deliver some bio diversity enhancement should be taken.

Retaining the existing dry stone boundary walls, securing appropriate landscaping within the site together with the provision of open space to the eastern part of the site provides such opportunity. In addition compensatory measures could include the provision of bird boxes. It is proposed to condition that a landscape scheme and bio diversity mitigation measures be submitted for approval prior to any part of the development being occupied.

Crime Prevention:

There are no fundamental objections to this proposal with respect to crime prevention. There is satisfactory boundary treatments proposed and the car parking spaces allocated to dwellings are immediately adjacent or in front of the dwellings that they serve. The dwellings to the eastern end of the development face towards the open space, thus providing natural surveillance. Each dwelling (with the exceptions of plots 2 and 13) has its own individual access to the rear of the property.

As such it is considered that the proposal is in accordance with Policy BE23 of the Kirklees Unitary Development Plan, and the guidance contained in part 8 of the National Planning Policy Framework ‘Promoting Healthy Communities’.

Conclusions:

The proposal is for residential development on land allocated for employment use, and associated buffer zone and as such constitutes a departure from the 96

Unitary Development Plan. Notwithstanding this the delivery of an employment use on this site is not considered to be feasible, and therefore in accordance with the guidance contained in paragraph 22 of the National Planning Policy Framework appropriate to consider alternative uses. As an alternative use, housing on this site is appropriate given its relationship to neighbouring residential development, and also given the current position regarding the lack of a 5 year housing land supply the proposal would help address that shortfall. Appropriate contributions towards affordable housing, education public open space and local, infrastructure improvements are secured through a section 106 agreement, and the layout and parking arrangements are considered to be acceptable.

As such on balance the proposal is recommended for approval.

9. RECOMMENDATION

Grant conditional full permission subject to:

1. Delegate to Officers to complete a S106 Obligation to secure: • The provision of affordable housing within the site; • A financial contribution towards Education provision; • A financial contribution towards the provision of Public Open Space within the local area; • A financial contribution towards off site highway improvements; and • A financial contribution towards the provision of residential METRO cards

2. Impose any necessary and appropriate conditions which may include those below; and

3. Subject to there being no substantive changes that would alter this recommendation issue the decision notice.

Conditions:

1. The development shall be begun not later than the expiration of three years beginning with the date on which permission is granted.

2. The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in complete accordance with the approved plans and specifications except as may be required by other conditions.

3. No development shall take place until samples of facing and roofing materials have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall be constructed of the approved materials.

4. No development shall take place until a comprehensive scheme for landscaping treatment of the site prepared in accordance with the Local Planning Authority’s Code of Practice Note 2 has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

5. Any planting, seeding or tree management works forming part of the landscaping scheme referred to in Condition 4 shall be carried out during the first planting, seeding or management season following the commencement of development, or as otherwise may be agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority, and shall be maintained for a period of five years from the completion of planting works. All specimens which die within this period shall be replaced.

6. Development shall not commence until actual or potential land contamination at the site has been investigated and a Preliminary Risk Assessment (Phase I Desk Study Report) has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

7. Where further intrusive investigation is recommended in the Preliminary Risk Assessment approved pursuant to condition 6 development shall not commence until a Phase II Intrusive Site Investigation Report has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

8. Where site remediation is recommended in the Phase II Intrusive Site Investigation Report approved pursuant to condition 7 development shall not commence until a Remediation Strategy has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The Remediation Strategy shall include a timetable for the implementation and completion of the approved remediation measures.

9. Remediation of the site shall be carried out and completed in accordance with the Remediation Strategy approved pursuant to condition 8. In the event that remediation is unable to proceed in accordance with the approved Remediation Strategy or contamination not previously considered [in either the Preliminary Risk Assessment or the Phase II Intrusive Site Investigation Report] is identified or encountered on site, all works on site (save for site investigation works) shall cease immediately and the Local Planning Authority shall be notified in writing within 2 working days. Unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority, works shall not recommence until proposed revisions to the Remediation Strategy have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Remediation of the site shall thereafter be carried out in accordance with the approved revised Remediation Strategy.

10. Following completion of any measures identified in the approved Remediation Strategy or any approved revised Remediation Strategy a Validation Report shall be submitted to the Local Planning Authority. Unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority, no part of the site shall be brought into use until such time as the remediation measures for the whole site have been completed in accordance with the approved 98

Remediation Strategy or the approved revised Remediation Strategy and a Validation Report in respect of those remediation measures has been approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

11. Development shall not commence until a scheme detailing foul, surface water and land drainage, (including discharge rates to be agreed with the Local Planning Authority/Land Drainage Authority, drainage infrastructure improvements (trash screens), Sustainable Drainage Statement, off site works, outfalls, balancing works, plans and longitudinal sections, hydraulic calculations, phasing of drainage provision, existing drainage to be maintained/diverted/abandoned) has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. None of the dwellings shall be occupied until such approved drainage scheme has been provided on the site to serve the development or each agreed phasing of the development to which the dwellings relate and thereafter retained throughout the lifetime of the development.

12. The site shall be developed with separate systems of drainage for foul and surface water on and off site.

13. The development shall not commence until an assessment of the effects of 1 in 100 year storm events, with an additional allowance for climate change, exceedance events and blockage scenarios, on drainage infrastructure and surface water run-off pre and post development between the development and the surrounding area, in both directions, has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. No part of the development shall be brought into use (dwellings shall not be occupied) until the works comprising the approved scheme have been completed and such approved scheme shall be retained thereafter throughout the lifetime of the development.

14. Prior to development commencing details of bio diversity measures to be incorporated within the new build dwellings on the site, shall be submitted for the written approval of the Local Planning Authority. The approved details shall be implemented prior to the occupation of the dwellings to which they relate and thereafter retained for the lifetime of the development.

15. Prior to any development commencing, details of the re siting of the overhead power lines shall be submitted for the written approval of the Local Planning Authority. The re siting shall be undertaken in accordance with an phasing and timescale to be agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

16. No development shall commence until a scheme detailing arrangements and specifications for the following works have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority: • Site access junction with Crosland Road; • Footway on east side of Crosland Road from immediately south of the Crosland Road Farm access to tie into existing provision just north of Romsey Close;

• Extension of the 30mph speed limit along Crosland Road to a point north of the proposed site access; • Site roads and turning head. Before any part of the development is brought into use the development shall be completed in accordance with the approved scheme and these works shall be retained for the lifetime of the development.

17. Plots 29 and 30 shall not be occupied until 2.0m x 2.0m vehicle/pedestrian intervisibility splays have been provided on both sides of the access/drive such that there is no obstruction to visibility greater than 600mm above the level of the adjacent footway. Such splays shall thereafter be retained throughout the lifetime of the development.

18. Individual plots shall not be occupied until all the areas indicated to be used for access, parking and turning by that plot in the approved scheme and specification have been marked out, and laid out with a hardened and drained surface and these areas shall be so retained, free of obstructions and available for the uses specified for the lifetime of the development.

19. Development shall not commence until a scheme detailing access provision to and from the site for construction traffic, including what arrangements will be made for restricting such vehicles to approved points of access and egress, has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved scheme shall then be operated throughout the period of construction work.

20. Development shall not commence until a scheme detailing provision for on-site parking for construction workers for the duration of the construction period has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved scheme shall then be implemented throughout the construction period.

21. Before development commences the applicant must submit a plan detailing facilities to be provided for charging plug-in and other ultra low emission vehicles. This plan must be agreed in writing by the LPA before development commences and the plan implemented before first occupation of the properties.

100

This recommendation is based on the following plan(s):-

Plan Type Reference Version Date Received Location plan 1420-02 17/7/14 Site layout 1420-01 B 5/9/14 House types Hanbury 1402-10 17/7/14 Rufford 1402-15 17/7/14 Hatfield 1402-14 17/7/14 Clayton 1402-23 17/7/14 Kendal 1402-22 17/7/14 Ledsham 1402-26 17/7/14 Brampton 140219 17/7/14 Bickleigh 1402-20 17/7/14 Design and Access 50322/JG/AJ 17/7/14 Statement Conservation/ Heritage SE 10886-18482 17/7/14 Statement Phase 1 Geo 17/7/14 Environmental Report Coal Assessment 17/7/14 Flood Risk Assessment 4119/FRA 1 17/7/14 Air Quality Assessment 33801 R1 17/7/14

101

Application No: 2014/91575

Type of application: 62 - FULL APPLICATION

Proposal: Demolition of existing filter beds. Land fill site and change of use from redundant sewerage beds to agricultural land

Location: Old Sewerage Works, Smithies Lane, Heckmondwike

Grid Ref: 422003.0 422202.0

Ward: Dewsbury West Ward, Heckmondwike Ward

Applicant: The Dome Regeneration Co Ltd

Agent: J A Oldroyd

Target Date: 30-Nov-2014

Recommendation: FC - CONDITIONAL FULL PERMISSION

------

LOCATION PLAN

Map not to scale – for identification purposes only

102

1. SUMMARY OF APPLICATION

Scale of Development 6.1 ha No. Jobs Created or Retained Unknown Policy UDP allocation Green Belt Independent Viability Required N/A Representation/Consultation Individual Support (No.) 1 Individual objections 1 Petition No Ward Member Interest No Statutory Consultee None Objections Contributions • Affordable Housing N/A • Education N/A • Public Open Space N/A • Other N/A Other Issues Any Council Interest? No

Planning Pre-application Yes advice? Pre-App Consultation No Undertaken? Comment on application

RECOMMENDATION: GRANT CONDITIONAL FULL PERMISSION

2. INFORMATION

This application is brought to the Strategic Planning Committee as the proposal involves the disposal of more than 50,000m³ of solid waste.

3. PROPOSAL/SITE DESCRIPTION

The application site is the former Heckmondwike sewage works and comprises an area of land occupying approximately 6.1ha which contains 28 circular concrete filter beds and associated infrastructure including walkways, water tanks and ancillary buildings. The site has been redundant for several years and at present has a derelict unkempt appearance. The application site is located off Smithies Lane and is bounded to the east by the River Spen, public rights of way Spe/14/130 to the north and Spe 143/30 to the south and by the access road to the Ponderosa Therapeutic Centre to the west.

103

The applicant proposes to demolish the existing site infrastructure and export the resultant demolition rubble from the site to use as secondary aggregates. Inert waste would then be imported to the site to remodel the landform to create an area which can subsequently be used for agricultural purposes. The applicant has estimated that the proposed remodelling works would require in the order of 88,000m³ of infill material.

The existing site topography includes an extensive level area where the filter beds and associated infrastructure are located and an incline which rises steeply from the western side of the sewage works footprint west towards the boundary of the site. This involves a change in levels of approximately 5m across the site. These proposals would see this steep slope slackened considerably by raising land levels across the site gradually from the eastern side of the site towards the high ground to the west.

Access to the site would be from Smithies Lane and the current access road that serves the Ponderosa Therapeutic Centre and then a temporary surfaced access into the site.

4. BACKGROUND AND HISTORY

The application site was formerly the sewage treatment works for the Heckmondwike area where sewage was processed before the resultant treated water was released into the adjacent River Spen. However, the site has been redundant for several years and shows evidence of vandalism and is starting to appear derelict. The current sewage treatment works is immediately adjacent to this site to the north on the other side of PROW Spe/14/130.

The application site and the current treatment works originally formed part of the historic sewage works footprint and a number of relatively minor planning permissions have been approved associated with the operation of the site including perimeter fencing and switch gear kiosks etc. However, it is not considered that these are relevant to this proposal.

5. PLANNING POLICY

The statutory development plan comprises the Unitary Development Plan (UDP). This report will refer only to those policies of the UDP ‘saved’ under the direction of the Secretary of State beyond September 2007.

The LDF core strategy approved by the council in March 2012 was submitted to the Secretary of State on 2 April 2013 for independent examination. However, following correspondence and meetings with the planning inspector appointed by the Secretary of State the council resolved to withdraw the core 104

strategy on 23rd October 2013. Until such time as revised core strategy proposals have been submitted for examination, they will have no significant weight in the determination of planning applications

The site is allocated as Green Belt in the adopted Unitary Development Plan and it is considered that the following policies and documents are relevant to this application:

Unitary Development Plan

EP4 – Noise sensitive development EP6 – Noise generating development T10 – Requires that new development does not detrimentally affect highway safety R13 – Development affecting public rights of way WD1 – Indicates that land will be made available for storage and transfer, treatment and recycling and final disposal of waste within the district WD5– Disposal of waste to landfill

National Policy Documents

NPPF Section 1. Building a strong, competitive economy NPPF Section 9. Protecting Green Belt land NPPF Section 11. Conserving and enhancing the natural environment Planning Practice Guidance – Waste National Planning Policy for Waste

6. CONSULTATION RESPONSES

K.C. Highways – No objections to the proposal subject to the inclusion of the following planning conditions:

(i)There shall be no more than 40 heavy goods vehicle movements (20 in and 20 out) at the site in any one day.

(ii) The development shall not commence until the proposed, access road, 2.4 x 43m sight lines and compacted hardcore turning and parking area, shown on plan number 13/301/4 rev A shall be laid out ,surfaced, and drained in accordance with details that have previously been approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

(iii) No development shall commence until a vehicle management plan has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Mineral Planning Authority which provides the following information:

(a) Vehicle routeing arrangements to and from the site (b) On and off site vehicle/driver protocols (c) Monitoring arrangements (d) Incident/action procedures

105

The approved scheme shall be fully implemented prior to development commencing and shall be retained for the duration of this planning permission.

K.C. Environmental Health – No objections subject to the following Planning Conditions:

(i) Development shall not commence until actual or potential land contamination at the site has been investigated and a Preliminary Risk Assessment (Phase I Desk Study Report) has been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority.

(ii) Where further intrusive investigation is recommended in the Preliminary Risk Assessment approved pursuant to condition (CLC1)] Development shall not commence until a Phase II Intrusive Site Investigation Report has been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority.

(iii) Where site remediation is recommended in the Phase II Intrusive Site Investigation Report approved pursuant to condition (CLC2)] Development shall not commence until a Remediation Strategy has been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The Remediation Strategy shall include a timetable for the implementation and completion of the approved remediation measures.

(iv) Remediation of the site shall be carried out and completed in accordance with the Remediation Strategy approved pursuant to condition (CLC3). In the event that remediation is unable to proceed in accordance with the approved Remediation Strategy or contamination not previously considered [in either the Preliminary Risk Assessment or the Phase II Intrusive Site Investigation Report] is identified or encountered on site, all works on site (save for site investigation works) shall cease immediately and the local planning authority shall be notified in writing within 2 working days. Unless otherwise agreed in writing with the local planning authority, works shall not recommence until proposed revisions to the Remediation Strategy have been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. Remediation of the site shall thereafter be carried out in accordance with the approved revised Remediation Strategy.

(v) Following completion of any measures identified in the approved Remediation Strategy or any approved revised Remediation Strategy a Validation Report shall be submitted to the local planning authority. Unless otherwise agreed in writing with the local planning authority, no part of the site shall be brought into use until such time as the remediation measures for the whole site have been completed in accordance with the approved Remediation Strategy or the approved revised Remediation Strategy and a Validation Report in respect of those remediation measures has been approved in writing by the local planning authority.

106

(vi) All contamination reports shall be prepared in accordance with CLR11, PPG and the Council’s Advice for Development documents or any subsequent revisions of those documents.

To minimise noise disturbance at nearby premises it is generally recommended that activities relating to the erection, construction, alteration, repair or maintenance of buildings, structures or roads shall not take place outside the hours of:

07.30 and 18.30 hours Mondays to Fridays 08.00 and 13.00hours, Saturdays

With no working Sundays or Public Holidays

K.C. Environment Unit – No objection subject to the development being carried out in accordance with the proposals set out in section 4 of the supporting ecological statement and the submission of detailed restoration proposals which elaborate on those proposals

K.C. Strategic Waste – Confirmed that the site lies adjacent to the former Spen Valley Landfill. However, the nearest gas monitoring site has not registered the presence of any methane during the last 5 years.

K.C. Strategic Drainage – No objection in principle but has requested that further information be provided with regard to existing and proposed surface water regimes and how the access roads and parking/turning area will be drained.

Environment Agency – No objection subject to the following planning conditions:

(i)The development hereby permitted shall not be commenced until such time as a scheme to treat and remove suspended solids from surface water run-off during demolition and restoration works has been submitted to, and approved in writing by, the local planning authority. The scheme shall be implemented as approved.

(ii)No development, including any demolition, shall take place until a Construction and Environmental Method Statement has been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The approved Statement shall be adhered to throughout the construction period. The Statement shall provide for:

• the means of access for demolition and construction traffic; • the loading and unloading of plant and materials; • the storage of plant and materials used in demolition and restoration of the site; • wheel washing facilities; • measures to control the emission of dust and dirt during demolition and restoration; and 107

• a scheme for recycling/disposing of waste resulting from demolition works.

Any changes to these components require the express written consent of the local planning authority. The scheme shall be implemented as approved.

Health and Safety Executive –Officers consider that the nature of the development is such that although the development falls within a HSE consultation Zone, it would not add any significant societal risk.

Coal Authority – No objections subject to a planning condition which requires the location of mine entries within the site and the creation of appropriate standoff zones around them during landfill operations.

Yorkshire Water – No objections.

7. REPRESENTATIONS

This application was publicised by the posting of 4 site notices in the vicinity of the site, the mailing of 8 neighbourhood notification letters and an advertisement in the local press. This resulted in the submission of 2 letters of representation being received. One letter from the Spen Valley Civic Society which supports the proposal the other being a letter of objection which raised the following concern:

The application has not included land which would be required to gain satisfactory access to the site and that if this land is included then the owners of that land would need to be served with the required notice.

8. ASSESSMENT

General Principle:

Unitary Development Plan Policy (UDP) WD1indicates that sites in Kirklees will be made available for the final disposal of waste materials.

Although the site was previously used in connection with an industrial process it falls within a wider area of Green Belt. Section 9 of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) indicates that there is a presumption against inappropriate development in such areas unless there are very special circumstances to allow it. Consequently, in this instance, the key issues are whether the proposed development is inappropriate and if so whether there are very special circumstances which outweigh the presumption against inappropriate development.

The use of land for the importation of inert material would in itself be inappropriate development within the Green Belt.

Paragraph 79 of the NPPF states that the fundamental aim of Green Belt policy is to prevent urban sprawl by keeping land permanently open; the 108

essential characteristics of Green Belts are their openness and their permanence.

The Local Planning Authority should give substantial weight to any resultant harm to the Green Belt from the development proposed. Inappropriate development is by definition harmful to the Green Belt and very special circumstances will not exist unless the potential harm, by reason of that inappropriateness and any other harm to the Green Belt is clearly outweighed by other considerations.

In order to form a judgement about the harm caused, it is best to consider firstly whether harm is caused to any of the purposes of including land in the Green Belt as set out in paragraph 80 of NPPF. These are:

• to check the unrestricted sprawl of large built-up areas; • to prevent neighbouring towns merging into one another; • to assist in safeguarding the countryside from encroachment; • to preserve the setting and special character of historic towns; and • to assist in urban regeneration, by encouraging the recycling of derelict and other urban land.

It is considered that the development proposed would not be of harm to the purposes of including land within Green Belt.

In addition to the harm by definition due to inappropriateness, there would also inevitably be some harm to the openness of the Green Belt because of the nature and extent of development proposed. These aspects constitute the negative impacts of the development proposed in Green Belt terms. Whilst acknowledging the potential harm to the Green Belt, paragraph 81 of the NPPF indicates that in identified Green Belts local planning authorities should also plan positively to enhance the beneficial use of the Green Belt, including:

• looking for opportunities to provide access; • to provide opportunities for outdoor sport and recreation; • to retain and enhance landscapes; or • to improve damaged and derelict land

It is considered that the development proposed would contribute positively to the use of the Green Belt in that it would help retain and enhance the existing landscape and would help to improve existing damaged and derelict land.

It is accepted that this does not in itself overcome the harm to the Green Belt, but it is considered that this should be afforded some weight in addition to any very special circumstances.

109

In terms of very special circumstances, the former sewage treatment works is now redundant and has fallen into disrepair, with evidence of vandalism and ongoing liabilities in terms of security and maintenance. The site extends to some 6.1ha and accommodates 28 circular concrete filter beds and associated infrastructure including walkways, water tanks and ancillary buildings. The scale and extent of the existing development detracts from the openness of the Green Belt and is harmful to the visual amenity of the area.

The opportunity to demolish the redundant sewage treatment filter beds and the associated infrastructure and to remodel the landform in order to accommodate an agricultural after use would significantly enhance the appearance of the area and would regenerate a redundant site within the Green Belt accommodating an after use that is wholly appropriate within the Green Belt.

The restoration of the site would also relate well to the wider surrounding landscape and would provide an opportunity to significantly enhance local biodiversity through strategic planting and habitat creation. This could provide ecological connectivity with the Lower Spen Country Park which is situated immediately to the south of this site.

It is therefore considered that the long term benefits associated with allowing the development would outweigh any potential harm to the Green Belt.

The remodelling and re profiling of the site using imported inert material would involve engineering operations which would ultimately see the restoration of a redundant derelict site to an agricultural use. Para. 90 of the NPPF states that:

“Certain other forms of development are also not inappropriate in Green Belt Provided that they preserve the openness of the Green Belt and do not conflict with the purposes of including land in Green Belt.”

Such other forms of development include engineering operations. This proposal would lead to what is considered to be an acceptable final landform which would return the site to agricultural use and whilst the engineering works would inevitably have some impact upon the openness of the Green Belt, it is considered that the openness of the Green Belt would still be preserved and that the development would not conflict with the purposes of including land within it.

It is therefore considered that the engineering operations proposed would not be inappropriate within the Green Belt.

Appendix A of the National Planning Policy framework contains a waste hierarchy and although this indicates that the most effective environmental solution to the generation of waste is waste prevention, it also indicates that the re-use and recycling of materials are the next best options. Waste Planning Authorities are therefore encouraged to take a positive approach towards dealing with waste in a way which moves its treatment up the 110

hierarchy. In this instance the imported waste would be used specifically to re- engineer acceptable contours to facilitate an agricultural use rather than simply being disposed of. It is therefore considered that this proposal would see the re-use of a significant proportion of inert waste material which is consistent with current national planning guidance.

It is therefore considered that the principle of this development is acceptable providing it does not conflict with the criteria stipulated in Unitary Development Plan Policy WD5.

UDP policy WD5 states: proposals for disposal of waste to landfill will be considered having regard to:

i provision for the prevention of noise nuisance or injury to visual amenity;

ii the mode of transport utilised to serve the site;

iii provision for vehicle routing and access arrangements;

iv conservation interests;

v arrangements for phased restoration and aftercare schemes appropriate to agricultural, forestry or amenity after-use linked to a permitted period of operation;

vi measures included in the scheme to eliminate environmental hazards from leachate and gas emissions;

vii arrangements for the protection of natural resources such as ground water, rivers or other water bodies;

viii the extent and duration of any past or current landfill activity in the area; and

ix the need for landfill capacity for the relevant waste types at the location proposed.

Impact on Amenity:

Visual Amenity As the site is a former sewage works and already has a significant visual impact on the area. The main elements are the large filter beds and associated infrastructure which cover a significant area of the site. The site is screened to some extent by existing vegetation and cannot be easily overlooked from the nearest residential properties. However, pedestrians using the adjacent PROWs to the north and south of the site can currently gain limited views of the existing site and would therefore be affected to some extent by the proposed works. However the applicant has indicated that the 111

project would take 2 years to complete and the site would be restored to reflect the character of the surrounding landscape. It is therefore considered that there would not be any significant additional impact on the visual amenity of the area as a result of this development during the construction phase and that the final restoration of the site would in fact result in a significant improvement in the visual amenity of the area. The proposal therefore accords with UDP policy WD5(i)

Noise Waste would be transported to the site by heavy vehicles including open skip and tipper lorries. Noise will therefore be generated by the vehicles themselves and during the unloading and working of the waste. The nearest residential properties are located approximately 130 metres to the west at Carr Farm and 150 metres to the west at Park Farm and it is therefore possible that the above described activities could adversely affect the amenity of occupiers of those properties. Having said this it is unlikely that the noise resulting from operations at the site would exceed those associated with any development site. The Council’s pollution and Noise Control team has recommended that operations be carried out during normal working hours and it is considered that it would be sufficient to mitigate against any impacts resulting from noise. Consequently this proposal would accord with UDP policy EP4, EP6 WD5(i) and Section 11 of the NPPF with regard to noise.

Dust The potential emissions to the atmosphere from demolition and backfilling operations such as those proposed at the application site are associated with possible dust arising from three main sources:-

• Vehicle movements to and from the site.

• Operational processes including the demolition of exiting structures and the working and placement and compaction of waste material

• Exhaust’s from operational plant/equipment.

The degree to which significant dust emissions are capable of causing nuisance can arise from a particular site depends upon various factors, including:

• Time of year and climatic conditions, with dry conditions and high wind speeds being conducive to dust generation.

• Surface characteristics, with vegetation cover making material in bunds less susceptible to dispersion

It is considered that problems associated with dust can be adequately dealt with through the implementation of measures on site which could include:

• All lorries delivering waste to the site being sheeted

112

• Internal haul routes would be defined with a prepared surface and dampened as necessary

• Upswept exhausts used on site vehicles

• Dampening of surface of filling areas when necessary

• The suspension of operations in extreme windy conditions

• Speed restrictions on site

Such measures can be required under terms of appropriately worded planning conditions and in such circumstances it is considered that this proposal would not conflict with UDP Policy WD5(i) or policy guidance contained in Section 11 of the NPPF.

Environmental Impact:

Local Ecology/Biodiversity

The applicant has provided an ecological impact assessment in support of this application, the conclusions of which can be summarised as follows:

• The presence of protected species at this site is highly unlikely.

• No evidence of protected species or Schedule 1 bird species was found at this site.

• There is currently little ecological value on the site.

However, the report suggests that this development provides an opportunity to significantly enhance biodiversity in the area through the use of strategic planting, seeding, hedge formation and the creation of wetland habitats as part of the final restoration.

The Council’s Ecologist has reviewed this assessment and agrees with its conclusions and has indicated support of this proposal subject to the restoration being carried out to reflect recommendations made in the supporting ecological statement. This proposal therefore accords with UDP policy WD5 (iv) and national policy guidance contained in section 11 of the NPPF.

Landscape and Visual Impact

Although the proposed development would affect the landscape character and visual amenity of the area during the demolition and construction phases of the development, this must be considered within the context of existing

113

landscape character. As outlined previously most of the application site forms part of a former sewage works. Consequently the landscape already shows evidence of substantial disturbance in this area. The proposed works would be for a limited period and the final restoration of the site would result in a significant improvement in the visual amenity value of the site.

Notwithstanding the general openness of the landscape, due to the existing topography and natural screening, the site is not visible from many viewpoints within the wider landscape, although longer distance views from the higher ground to the east would be possible. Consequently it is considered that whilst this proposal would result in a moderate adverse impact on the character of the local landscape, this would be temporary and the long term benefits of the restored site would enhance visual amenity in the area. It is therefore considered that this accords with UDP policy WD5(i) and Section 11 of the NPPF with regard to this issue.

Pollution/Contamination:

Due to the previous use of the site there is the potential for on site contamination and as the site is immediately adjacent to the River Spen it is important to ensure that any such contamination is dealt with appropriately. It is therefore proposed to include a suite of planning conditions which would require site investigations to be carried out and any site remediation which may be necessary as a result to be completed prior to development commencing. Under such circumstances it is considered that the development would comply with UDP Policy WD5(vii)

Coal Mining Legacy:

It has been identified that there are several mine entrances on or in the vicinity of the site which date back to the early part of the 20th Century. However, they are not in the areas where it is proposed to backfill the site. The Coal Authority has indicated that it would be necessary to create stand off zones around these entrances to ensure that operations at the site do not adversely affect these historic workings and the stability of adjacent land. It is therefore proposed to include a planning condition requiring details of stand off areas and their subsequent implementation during operations at the site. the proposal would therefore accord with Section 11 of the NPPF with regard to land stability issues.

Highways safety:

The proposal is for the export of demolition rubble and the subsequent importation of 88,000 m³ of inert materials over a two year period. On average, the applicant has indicated that this will generate 40 HGV movements (20 in, 20 out) per day over the lifetime of the project. The development would be served by the existing access to the Ponderosa Therapeutic Centre which adjoins Smithies Lane and then via a temporary surfaced access which would run into the site. The current highway facilities are considered to be satisfactory and would allow two HGVs moving in 114

opposite directions the ability to pass. Given the relatively low number of traffic movements proposed as a result of this development it is considered that it would not lead to highway safety being compromised in the vicinity of the site. The Council’s Highways Development Management Team has been consulted on this proposal and has raised no objections subject to the conditions outlined above. It is therefore considered that as this development would not have any significant additional impact on highway safety in the area it accords with UDP policy T10 and WD5 (iii).

Objections:

As previously indicated 1letter of objection has been received in relation to this proposal. The concern raised and response can be summarised as follows: The application has not included land which would be required to gain satisfactory access to the site and that if this land is included then the owners of that land would need to be served with the required notice.

Response: The application has been assessed based upon the red line boundary included in the application submission. The issue of site access has been considered on that basis by the Council’s Highways Development Management team and, subject to the conditions outlined above, is considered to be acceptable.

Conclusion:

Whilst the use of land for the importation of inert material would in itself be inappropriate development within the Green Belt, it is considered that the very special circumstances would outweigh any potential harm to the Green Belt.

The engineering works to remodel and re profile the site using imported inert material would result in an acceptable final landform which would return the site to an agricultural use and whilst the engineering works would inevitably have some impact upon the openness of the Green Belt, it is considered that the openness of the Green Belt would still be preserved and that the development would not conflict with the purposes of including land within it. It is therefore considered that the engineering operations proposed would not be inappropriate within the Green Belt.

This proposal would involve the import of a significant quantity of inert waste over a period of 2 years resulting in 40 vehicle movements (20 in 20 out). Whilst this proposal would have a short term impact on the amenity of the area, it is considered that progressive backfilling of the site combined with the proposed mitigation measures would satisfactorily limit the adverse effects associated with this development. Furthermore the subsequent restoration of the site would tie in well with the wider surrounding landscape and would provide an opportunity to significantly enhance local biodiversity through strategic planting and habitat creation. This could therefore provide ecological connectivity with the Lower Spen Country Park which is situated immediately to the south of this site .It is therefore considered that the long term benefits 115

associated with allowing development would outweigh the limited detrimental affects likely to be experienced during the course of the demolition, backfilling and land forming operations. Furthermore it is considered that this proposal would not have a significant detrimental impact on the amenity of the area or highway safety and would comply with both local and national policy guidance.

9. RECOMMENDATION – GRANT CONDITIONAL FULL PERMISSION

Conditions

Commencement

1. The development shall be begun not later than the expiration of three years beginning with the date on which permission is granted.

2. The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in complete accordance with the approved plans and specifications except as may be required by other conditions.

Time Limits

3. The import of waste to the site shall cease by 30 November 2016 and the site shall be fully restored in accordance with conditions 33 – 36 below by 30 April 2017.

Prior Cessation

4.In the event of prior cessation of landfilling operations in excess of a period of six months the haul road and any part of the permitted site which has been subject to landfilling but has not been restored in accordance with the terms of this conditional planning permission shall be restored to use for agriculture/nature conservation and woodland within twelve months of the date of cessation and in accordance with a restoration scheme to be submitted for the prior approval of the Local Planning Authority. The scheme shall provide for: i. The removal of plant and equipment from the site ii. The remodelling of the land using available materials iii. Plans indicating post restoration ground levels on the site by contour and cross section, areas to be restored to agricultural/nature conservation or woodland, and any hedges, walls or enclosure to be created on the site iv. Details for soil replacement including depths of subsoil and topsoil to be replaced. v. Relief of compaction and drainage arrangements

116

vi. Details for the establishment of a grass sward on areas to be restored for agricultural use

vii. Details for tree planting on areas to be restored to woodland including species of which at least 50% should be broadleaf, size of sapling, spacing, method of planting and means of protection and weed control.

Access and Protection of the Public Highway

5. The sole means of vehicular access to and egress from the site shall be as indicated on approved plan no. 13/201

6. No commercial vehicles shall enter the public highway unless their wheels and chassis have been cleaned to prevent material being deposited on the access road or highway.

7. All Heavy Goods Vehicles importing waste to or exporting waste from the site shall have their loads sheeted prior to delivery/dispatch.

8. No more than an average of 40 HGV movements (20 in 20 out) per day shall take place at the site.

9. No development shall commence until the 2.4 x 43m sight lines indicated on plan no. 13/301/4 rev A have been formed. The site lines shall be retained for the duration of this development.

10. No development shall commence until a vehicle management plan has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority which provides the following information:

(a) Vehicle routeing arrangements to and from the site (b) On and off site vehicle/driver protocols (c) Monitoring arrangements (d) Incident/action procedures

The approved scheme shall be fully implemented prior to development commencing and shall be retained for the duration of this planning permission.

11. No development shall commence until a scheme has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority which details measures to lay out, surface and drain the access road, turning and parking areas shown on plan no. 13/301/4 rev A.

Protection of local water regimes and nearby land from pollution/contamination

117

12. Development shall not commence until actual or potential land contamination at the site has been investigated and a Preliminary Risk Assessment (Phase I Desk Study Report) has been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority.

13. Where further intrusive investigation is recommended in the Preliminary Risk Assessment approved pursuant to condition 12 Development shall not commence until a Phase II Intrusive Site Investigation Report has been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority.

14. Where site remediation is recommended in the Phase II Intrusive Site Investigation Report approved pursuant to condition 13 Development shall not commence until a Remediation Strategy has been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The Remediation Strategy shall include a timetable for the implementation and completion of the approved remediation measures.

15. Remediation of the site shall be carried out and completed in accordance with the Remediation Strategy approved pursuant to condition 14 In the event that remediation is unable to proceed in accordance with the approved Remediation Strategy or contamination not previously considered [in either the Preliminary Risk Assessment or the Phase II Intrusive Site Investigation Report] is identified or encountered on site, all works on site (save for site investigation works) shall cease immediately and the local planning authority shall be notified in writing within 2 working days. Unless otherwise agreed in writing with the local planning authority, works shall not recommence until proposed revisions to the Remediation Strategy have been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. Remediation of the site shall thereafter be carried out in accordance with the approved revised Remediation Strategy.

16. Following completion of any measures identified in the approved Remediation Strategy or any approved revised Remediation Strategy a Validation Report shall be submitted to the local planning authority. Unless otherwise agreed in writing with the local planning authority, no part of the site shall be brought into use until such time as the remediation measures for the whole site have been completed in accordance with the approved Remediation Strategy or the approved revised Remediation Strategy and a Validation Report in respect of those remediation measures has been approved in writing by the local planning authority.

17. No development shall commence until a scheme to treat and remove suspended solids from surface water run-off during demolition and restoration works has been submitted to, and approved in writing by, the local planning authority. The approved scheme shall be implemented for the duration of works on site.

118

18. No development, including any demolition, shall take place until a Construction and Environmental Method Statement has been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The approved Statement shall be adhered to throughout the period of operations. The Statement shall provide for:

The approved scheme shall be implemented and retained for the duration of works at the site.

Land Stability

19. No development shall commence until a scheme has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local planning Authority which indicates how the mine entries on or in the vicinity of the site will be protected to ensure that the stability of surrounding land is not adversely affected. The scheme shall include details of the position of the mine entries and of the stand off areas proposed. The approved scheme shall be implemented and retained for the duration of works at the site.

Soil Stripping and Storage

20. All available topsoil covering areas to be landfilled shall be stripped from the site and stored in 3 metre high screen bunds along the perimeter of the site in locations which have received the prior written approval of the Local Planning Authority.

21. No plant or vehicles shall cross any areas of unstripped topsoil on the site except for the purposes of stripping operations authorised by condition 20.

22. The soils on site shall not be stripped or moved except when the materials to be moved are dry and it would not be damaged by heavy vehicles and machinery passing over it.

23. The surface and slopes of soil storage mounds shall be evenly graded, seeded, a grass sward established and thereafter regularly mown to control the growth of weeds and rank vegetation.

119

Working Programme

24. No development shall commence until a scheme has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority which indicates the sequence of demolition to be employed across the site and the method of disposing of the resultant demolition material. The approved scheme shall be implemented and retained for the duration of works at the site.

25. Following demolition works the site shall be progressively landfilled in accordance with a detailed scheme submitted to and approved in writing by the local Planning Authority Prior to development commencing on site. The scheme shall provide for:

(a) The phasing and direction of the backfilling of the site with imported waste. b) spreading a minimum depth of 500mm of subsoil or clean excavation material and 200mm of top soil over landfilled areas to be restored to grassland/agriculture

(c) the ripping of any compacted layers of final cover on the backfilled waste deposit to ensure adequate drainage and aeration before the spreading of topsoil.

(d) spreading a minimum depth of 500mm of subsoil over areas to be restored by tree planting

26. Unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority only inert wastes, as defined by the Landfill (England and Wales) Regulations 2002, shall be imported into the site for landfill.

Replacement Soils

27. Soil shall only be respread when it is dry, and the ground onto which it is to be spread is firm and supportive and the material can be handled without undue compaction and structural damage.

28. The Local Planning Authority shall be notified upon the completion of the works required by condition 27 and shall be given the opportunity to inspect the completed works before further restoration work is carried out.

29. Imported soil or soil making materials shall be made available on request for inspection by the Local Planning Authority prior to use in the restoration of the site.

30. Wherever topsoil is re-spread it shall be cross-ripped to alleviate compaction and any stone larger than 100mm in any dimension shall be removed from the site

31. The Local Planning Authority shall be notified in writing within 7 days of the works required by condition 30 having been completed. 120

32. A grass sward shall be developed in the first available sowing season on all parts of the site which are not to be planted with trees as indicated in the restoration scheme required by either condition 4 or 33.

Restoration

33. Following the completion of backfilling operations in any phase, the site shall be progressively restored to agriculture/ woodland/nature conservation in accordance with a detailed scheme to be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority within 3 months of the date of this permission. The scheme shall build upon the proposals contained in Section 4 of the Wildlife and Ecological Assessment produced by the Lucille Fairbank Wildlife Survey and Consultancy. The submitted scheme shall include:

a) the removal of plant, machinery and haul roads

b) details of cultivation techniques and the plant and equipment to be used

c) grass seeding of any areas not to be planted with trees including seed mixture

d) tree species, spacing and planting methods

e) methods of protecting planted species

f) maintenance and weed control g) details of gates and fences h) The provision of specific wildlife habitat areas within the site

i) programme of works & timescales

34. All tree planting at the site shall be carried out only during the period between 1 November and 31 March of the subsequent year.

35. Any tree or shrub which becomes damaged, diseased or fails within the first 5 years after planting shall be replaced in the next available tree planting season.

36. The restoration of the land shall include a land drainage system the details of which shall be approved in writing by the Mineral Planning Authority prior to its installation.

Aftercare

37. An outline aftercare scheme requiring such steps as may be necessary over the aftercare period of five years to bring each restoration phase of the site reclaimed to the required standard for use for agriculture/nature 121

conservation and woodland shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Mineral Planning Authority at least 3 months prior to the completion of replacement of all restoration soils on any phase of the permitted development site and thereafter fully implemented.

38. The aftercare scheme submitted in accordance with Condition no.37 above shall provide an outline strategy which shall identify who is responsible for carrying out the aftercare, broadly outline the steps to be carried out in the aftercare period and their timing within the overall programme, include all areas subject to aftercare on an accompanying map with separate demarcation of any areas having different aftercare periods or management proposals.

39. Following compliance with Condition 37 above a detailed annual aftercare programme shall be submitted to the Local Planning Authority before 31 August during the remainder of the aftercare period. The programme submitted shall amplify the outline strategy for aftercare work to be carried out in the forthcoming year, include any modifications to the original proposals.

40. Every year during the aftercare period, the developer shall arrange a site meeting to be held before 30th November to discuss the report prepared in accordance with Conditions nos.39 above to which the following parties shall be invited:

(a) The Local Planning Authority (b) All owners of land within the site (c) DEFRA (d) Natural England

Protection of amenity

41. No activities, including the import of waste to the site, shall take place outside the hours of:

Monday to Friday 07:30 to 18:30 hours

Saturday 07:30 to 13:00 hours

With no working on Sundays or Public/ Bank Holidays.

42. No development shall commence until a detailed scheme has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority which indicates how dust will be suppressed during operations on site. The submitted scheme shall deal with suppression of dust from all operations on the site including vehicular movements, excavator, soil stripping, stockpiling and spreading operations but excluding prescribed processes subject to the requirements of Part 1, Section 6 of the Environmental Protection Act 1990. The submitted scheme shall provide for: (a) the provision of mobile water bowsers;

122

(b) the use of solid site boards and cloaked outlets on screening/crushing equipment; (c) the use of dust filters on all fixed plant and machinery; (d) all haul roads and areas used for the storage of soils and waste lacking established vegetation to be watered during dry windy conditions; (e) the suspension of movement of soils or waste during adverse weather conditions. The approved scheme shall be implemented immediately thereafter and retained for the duration of this permission.

43. Vehicles or plant travelling on internal haul roads shall not at any time exceed a maximum speed limit of 10 mph.

44. Notwithstanding the provisions of Schedule 2 of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order, 1995 (or any Order amending, replacing or re-enacting that Order) no fixed plant or machinery, buildings or structures and erections, or private ways shall be erected, extended, installed or replaced at the site, without the prior agreement in writing of the Local Planning Authority.

45. Any facilities for the storage of oils, fuels or chemicals shall be sited on impervious bases and surrounded by impervious bund walls. The volume of the bunded compound shall be at least equivalent to the capacity of the tank plus 10%. If there is multiple tankage, the compound should be at least equivalent to the capacity of the largest tank, or the combined capacity of the interconnected tanks, plus 10%. All filling points, vents, gauges and sight glasses shall be located within the bund. The drainage system of the bund shall be sealed with no discharge to any watercourse, land or underground strata. Associated pipework shall be located above ground and protected from accidental damage. All filling points and tank overflow pipes outlets shall be detailed to discharge downwards into the bund.

This recommendation is based on the following plans and documents:

Plan Type Reference Version Date Received

Location Plan 13/201 21 July 2014 Survey and Cross 13/201/1 21 July 2014 Sections Cross Sections 1-7 13/201/2 21 July 2014 Cross Sections 8 - 12 13/201/3 21 July 2014 Access Road Details 13/201/4 21 July 2014 Traffic Assessment 21 July 2014 Design and Assessment 21 July 2014 Land Quality 25/2011 21 July 2014 Assessment Access, Parking and 13/201/4 Rev. A 21 July 2014 Turning Arrangements

123

Application No: 2014/91714

Type of application: 62 - FULL APPLICATION

Proposal: Erection of 2 dwellings and widening, surfacing and lighting to Station Road

Location: Land at Station Road, Meltham, Holmfirth, HD9 4NL

Grid Ref: 410746.0 411060.0

Ward: Holme Valley North Ward

Applicant: Mr A Pogson & Mr S Lockwood

Agent: Stuart Beaumont, One17 Design

Target Date: 17-Sep-2014

Recommendation: FC - CONDITIONAL FULL PERMISSION

------

LOCATION PLAN

Issues S inks

Issues

Shelter S inks

Water

Sluice Shelter Harewood Bridge (footbridge) Weir Sinks ESS

STATION ROAD

150.3m 164

Church

W orks El Sub Sta B 6108 6 El Sub Sta 7

10 El Law Coyt Sub

Hall 157.6m Sta FS 11 © Kirklees Council 100019241 2008 UNT Map not to scale – for identification purposes only

1. INFORMATION

The proposals are brought forward to the Sub Committee for determination in accordance with the Council’s Scheme of Delegation as:

124

- the application is contrary to the Development Plan and; - the site is over 0.5 hectares in area

Councillor Charles Greaves has also requested that the application is determined by the Sub Committee with a site visit. The reason for this is as follows:

“Whilst the applicant states that this development would not sterilise future housing development on the remainder of the POL site, Meltham Mills is the industrial heart of Meltham and the application site is located within an established industrial area, and is adjacent to a manufacturing mill complex. Whilst the application site forms part of a POL site, it is earmarked for commercial / industrial use, not housing.

Any housing development on part of the POL will not only restrict commercial / industrial use of the remainder of the POL, it will also impact upon the potential to reuse or redevelop the adjacent mill complex. We need employment areas within our ward and this location is well away from most housing, next to the main road, in an established industrial area and could help to meet our future needs for businesses.

No attempt has been made to gauge the prospects for the application site, or the wider POL & mill site for business use, and my view is that we should not approve housing on this site unless we have sufficient evidence to demonstrate that the application site can play no meaningful role for business and that it will not impact on the potential of adjoining sites for business use”.

2. SITE DESCRIPTION / PROPOSAL

Site description The application relates to part of an area of grazing land which is situated on the northern side of Station Road, Meltham. The western part of the site slopes up to form a hillock which sits within the larger area of grazing land.

To the east of the site is an industrial complex and to the north of the site is an area of protected trees with open fields beyond. The southern elevation abuts Station Road which is a long narrow access road serving a small number of dwellings which lie to the west of the site. Further to the south is an industrial building with Huddersfield Road beyond.

Proposal The application seeks full planning permission for the erection of two detached dwellings. The proposal involves widening, surfacing and lighting works to Station Road.

Each of the two proposed dwellings would form a large ‘L’ shaped building providing accommodation over two levels and including integral garages. The dwellings would generally be viewed as two storey buildings but they would be single storey at the rear because part of the ground floor level would be 125

subterranean as a result of the site levels. The dwellings would be faced in natural stone with blue slate roofs and timber windows and doors. To the front of each dwelling is a courtyard area providing vehicle turning space and to the rear of each dwelling is a terrace cut into the hillock providing a level area of outdoor amenity space. Terraces are also proposed to the side of the dwellings.

The submission details include a planning statement, highways statement, ecology statement, and sustainability statement.

3. BACKGROUND AND HISTORY

None

4. PLANNING POLICY

Most of the site is part of a larger area allocated as Provisional Open Land on the UDP Proposals Map. Part of the site access forms part of a Green Corridor with the remainder of the access being unallocated.

Kirklees Unitary Development Plan

D2 – Development without notation D5 – Provisional Open Land (POL) D6 – Land adjoining green corridor BE1 – Design principles BE2 – Quality of design BE12 – Space about buildings T10 – Highway safety T19 – Car parking standards G6 – Contaminated land H1 – Meeting housing needs in the District EP4 – Noise sensitive development EP11 – Integral landscaping scheme to protect / enhance ecology NE9 – Retention of mature trees

National Planning Policy Framework

NPPF Promoting sustainable transport (chapter 4) NPPF Delivering a wide choice of high quality homes (chapter 6) NPPF Requiring good design (chapter 7) NPPF Promoting healthy communities (chapter 8) NPPF Meeting the challenge of climate change, flooding (chapter 10) NPPF Conserving and enhancing the natural environment (chapter 11)

Also relevant:

Planning Practice Guidance March 2014

126

5. CONSULTATIONS

The following is a brief summary of the consultation responses received. Where necessary, these consultations are reported in more detail in the assessment below:

K.C. Highways Development Management – No objection subject to conditions

K.C. Environmental Services – No objection subject to conditions

K.C. Trees – No objection subject to a condition

K.C. Policy – No objection

K.C. Environment Unit – Site should be surveyed in summer to fully assess its ecological value

K.C. Strategic Drainage – No objection subject to conditions

Environment Agency – No objection subject to conditions

6. REPRESENTATIONS

The application has been advertised by neighbour letter, newspaper advertisement and site notice.

Two representations have been received. The points raised are summarised as follows:

- The proposed access to the site requires the granting of access rights by a third party - Vehicle movements on Station Road should not be increased at the present time, whilst heavy and light commercial vehicles are accessing the adjacent industrial units (Spinks Mire Mill) - The proposed highway works, including the removal of the historic stone setts, will be out of character with the surroundings - Existing highway safety issue due to conflict between residential traffic from Station Road and commercial traffic exiting the industrial site (suggested that give way signs / road markings are placed at the exit from the mill) - Refuse vehicles do not reverse along the length of Station Road, contrary to the information in the highway statement; refuse vehicles turn around at the head of Station Road. Turning area within the site has no effect on the access needs of large vehicles. - Unfenced area opposite the proposed site entrance which drops down into Meltham Beck; this is a health and safety risk - No proposals for access to the remainder of the land shown within the applicants’ ownership – the agricultural land to the rear of the dwellings could not be maintained or used. 127

- Telephone service must be maintained - Query whether it is reasonable to assume that the new residents will make use of the public transport system - Ecological assessment does not include numerous species of fauna which are known to be present in the area - Essential that access is maintained at all times for the existing residential properties on Station Road - Request for guarantees that development will be built in accordance with the plans and that amendments aren’t sought to increase the number of dwellings - Query regarding permission to carry out the proposed works to Station Road and the future maintenance of these works

Meltham Town Council:

Although the Council supports residential development in this area it objects to this application on the grounds of the inefficient use of land – the Council feel that more than two houses could be built in this area to include the provision of affordable housing.

7. ASSESSMENT

General principle:

The application site is part of a wider area of land designated as Provisional Open Land (POL) subject to UDP policy D5. Policy D5 states that “planning permission will not be granted other than for development required in connection with established uses, changes of use to alternative open land uses or temporary uses which would not prejudice the contribution of the site to the character of its surroundings and the possibility of development in the longer term”

The weight that can be given to policy D5 in determining applications for housing must be assessed in the context of National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) paragraphs 215 and 49.

In the context of paragraph 215, the wording of policy D5 is consistent with NPPF paragraph 85 concerning safeguarded land. However, with regard to paragraph 49 the council is currently unable to demonstrate a five year supply of deliverable housing sites. Relevant information is provided in the annual monitoring report published on 31 December 2013.

(www.kirklees.gov.uk/business/regeneration/ldf/AnnualMonitoringReport.aspx )

The weight that can be given to policy D5 in these circumstances was assessed in October 2013 by a planning inspector in his consideration of an appeal against refusal of permission for housing on a POL site at Ashbourne Drive, Cleckheaton (ref: APP/Z4718/A/13/2201353). The inspector concluded (paragraph 42): 128

“The lack of a five-year supply, on its own, weighs in favour of the development. In combination with other paragraphs in the Framework concerning housing delivery the weight is increased. The lack of a five-year supply also means that policies in the UDP concerning housing land are out of date. Policy D5 clearly relates to housing and so it, too, is out of date and its weight is reduced accordingly. This significantly reduces the weight that can be given to the policy requirement for there to be a review of the plan before the land can be released. In these circumstances, the Framework’s presumption in favour of sustainable development is engaged.”

The presumption referred to by the inspector is set out in NPPF paragraph 14 which states that where relevant policies are out-of-date, planning permission should be granted “unless any adverse impacts of granting permission would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits when assessed against the policies in this framework taken as a whole, or that specific NPPF policies indicate development should be restricted”. Footnote 9 lists examples of restrictive policies but this does not include policies concerning safeguarded land.

The NPPF identifies the dimensions of sustainable development as economic, social and environmental roles. It states that these roles are mutually dependent and should not be undertaken in isolation; “economic, social and environmental gains should be sought jointly and simultaneously through the planning system” (paragraph 8).

The proposal is for two dwellings, so will have limited economic impacts, although it will provide business opportunities for contractors and local suppliers. There will be a social gain through the provision of new housing at a time of general shortage, in a location that has good access to local facilities and services. The development of a greenfield site represents an environmental loss, however, although national policy encourages the use of brownfield land for development it also makes clear that no significant weight can be given to the loss of greenfield sites to housing when there is a national priority to increase housing supply. The submitted ecological survey indicates that the site has little habitat value and the any planning permission can be conditioned to include habitat improvements. On balance the proposal is considered to meet the paragraph 8 test.

The NPPF does not set out specific criteria to determine the sustainability of development. However, accessibility tests are set out in the Regional Spatial Strategy (RSS) (table 13.9). Although the RSS has been revoked it remains the latest plan which has been subject to public examination and is therefore currently the most sound basis for a paragraph 14 assessment. The tests are as follows:

129

minutes bus and 5 minutes walking) to a town centre offering employment, leisure and retail opportunities? • Test 3: is there a primary school within 1600m? (This equates to a 20 minute walk) • Test 4: is there a surgery or other primary health facility within 1600m?

The site is approximately 1,200m away from Meltham district centre, via Huddersfield Road. It is 250m from a bus stop which is primarily served by the 324 bus which provides a frequent service to Meltham. The site is approximately 1,500m from Meltham CE Primary School and is within 1,300m of Meltham Village surgery.

Assessing the policies in the NPPF as a whole in accordance with the paragraph 14 test, the provision of housing on the site constitutes sustainable development and the environmental harm arising from the development of this greenfield site is considered to be clearly and demonstrably outweighed by the benefits to be gained from the provision of housing. The principle of development is therefore acceptable.

Impact on the Provisional Open Land:

The application site forms part of a larger area of POL which extends to the south west, north west and north east of Spinks Mire Mill. The POL also wraps around a parcel of land abutting the northern boundary of Spinks Mire Mill which is allocated as a site for business and general industrial use on the UDP Proposals Map; this site has not yet been developed. A footnote attached to the allocated business/industrial site requires that any development makes provision for road access across the site to enable the western part of the adjoining POL - which is where the application site is located - to be accessed from Huddersfield Road.

With regard to the impact of the proposed development on the remainder of the POL allocation, the majority of the POL would be able to be brought forward for comprehensive development in the future provided that suitable access can be achieved from Huddersfield Road. Officers consider that suitable access is feasible from Huddersfield Road – this would involve a direct access to the north eastern part of the POL, in all likelihood somewhere between 225 and 245 Huddersfield Road. This would provide direct access to a large swathe of the POL (the most readily developable part) and would enable a link to be made with the adjacent industrial allocation and the south western part of the POL allocation.

Further, a new access off Huddersfield Road is considered to be the most practical option for the future development of the POL because the existing access to Spinks Mire Mill and Station Road itself and are not ideal for accommodating the volume of traffic which could be generated by future development on the land given its size.

130

The presence of the proposed dwellings would have some impact on future development of the western part of the POL allocation because the layout of the available land would be constrained and the amenity of the occupiers of the dwellings would be a material consideration when determining any future application on this land. It is however considered that the development potential of the surrounding POL would not be unduly prejudiced; the site would, in principle, be suitable for B1 light industrial use and there is scope for measures to be incorporated to mitigate the impact on residential amenity (e.g. acoustic fencing).

The greatest impact of the proposal on future development of the POL would be on the south westerly portion of the POL allocation adjacent to plot 1. This is because of the proximity of plot 1 and because the development, to some extent, separates this area from the remainder of the POL. However, the south west part of the POL is already somewhat restricted because of the proximity of residential dwellings on Station Road – particularly Law Coyt – and because of the geography of the land here which rises up into a relatively steep hillock. These two factors affect the potential for business/industrial uses to be located in this part of the POL and make residential development a more realistic option.

Density:

Paragraph 58 of the NPPF lists criteria for the design of development. One of the criteria is to ensure that developments “optimise the potential of the site to accommodate development”.

The application is for two large detached dwellings and the agent has indicated that part of the reason for having this type of development (i.e. two well-spaced, five bedroom, detached dwellings) is to make the scheme viable given the cost of the necessary highway works. Meltham Town Council has raised concerns with this density of development on the site and it has been suggested that more than two houses could be built in this area to include the provision of affordable housing. The threshold for affordable housing, as set out in the council’s SPD2 (affordable housing), is 5 dwellings.

More than two dwellings could be physically accommodated on the site but Officers do not consider that the density of development would be sufficient reason to refuse the application. There is no minimum density requirement for new residential development and properties of the type proposed are in keeping with the existing dwellings to the west on Station Road which form large detached houses with generous gardens. Furthermore, taking into account the cost implications of the engineering works to develop a site which predominantly forms a hillock as well as the cost of the highway works, there is a reasonable justification for the proposed type of development on viability grounds. What is more, there are no grounds to require a minimum of 5 dwellings on the site for the purpose of securing affordable housing.

131

Impact on visual amenity:

Each of the proposed dwellings would form a large ‘L’ shaped building providing accommodation over two levels. The dwellings would generally be viewed as two storey buildings but they would be single storey at the rear because part of the ground floor level would be cut into a hillock.

When seen from Station Road the dwellings would be viewed against the backdrop of the hillock and the area of protected trees beyond which mitigates the size of the dwellings when viewed within the landscape. Plot 1 comes close to the boundary with Station Road but the closest part of the building is single storey before rising to two storeys further into the site. Plot 2 is set well back from Station Road. It is considered that the dwellings would not have a visually harmful effect in views from Station Road.

Some of the most prominent views of the development would be from the public footpath which lies to the north east and is around 45 metres from the application site. The dwellings would however be set down in relation to the footpath and the separation distance ensures that the visual amenity of the area, as experienced from the footpath, and the setting of the footpath would not be materially harmed.

The dwellings would not be readily visible – if at all – from the Green Belt land to the north because of the area of protected trees and the position of the dwellings in relation to the hillock. The openness of the Green Belt would not therefore be materially affected.

The dwellings essentially form a stand-alone development with no immediately adjacent properties to which they would relate. As such, the general design is deemed to be acceptable. The proposed materials (natural stone walls under a blue slate roof) would also help the development to harmonise with its semi-rural setting.

To the front of each dwelling is a courtyard area providing space for vehicle turning and the site would be bound on the Station Road frontage by a low wall. Each dwelling would have external terrace areas at the side and rear (at first floor level) providing amenity space for the properties. The visual impacts of these aspects of the development are considered to be acceptable.

The application accords with Policies BE1, BE2 and BE11 of the UDP and section 7 of the NPPF.

Impact on residential amenity:

Policy BE12 of the UDP sets out the Councils policy in relation to space about buildings. New dwellings should be designed to provide privacy and open space for their occupants and physical separation from adjacent property and land. Distances less than those specified in the policy will be acceptable if it can be shown that by reason of permanent screening, changes in level or 132

innovative design no detriment would be caused to existing or future occupiers of the dwellings or to any adjacent premises or potential development land.

The nearest residential properties to the application site are approximately 100 metres away and would not be overlooked by the new dwellings.

The proposed plots would have habitable windows facing towards one another however the relative siting of the dwellings, the position and main outlook from the windows and the separation distances mean that the privacy of the future occupiers of the proposed dwellings would not be prejudiced. Similarly, the terraces and balconies of the respective dwellings would not unduly prejudice the neighbouring plot.

Habitable windows in the development exceed the minimum required separation distance in relation to adjacent undeveloped land.

Noise:

Kirklees Environmental Services have not raised any concerns with the proximity of the dwellings to the established industrial use on the land to east (Spinks Mire Mill). Plot 2 is separated from the main mill complex by a distance of around 95 metres which provides an adequate buffer zone between the sites; this buffer zone contains a mill pond surrounded by trees. The operational flexibility of the established industrial site would not be unduly prejudiced by the proposed development.

The application site is over 100 metres from the nearby industrial allocation to the north of Spinks Mire Mill and as such it is considered that development on this allocated land would not be prejudiced by the proposal.

Noise issues relating to the proposed dwellings and potential future development on the surrounding POL would be considered at the time of the application on the POL. This is because without knowing what development is to be brought forward on the POL, it is not possible to stipulate what noise mitigation may be appropriate e.g. acoustic fencing.

Highways:

Station Road is an un-adopted road that provides access to Spinks Mire Mill and a small number of residential properties. Part of the proposed access forms a public right of way.

133

The applicant proposes to widen Station Road and create a footway along the site frontage to the east of the proposed access. Resurfacing works to a section of Station Road are to be carried out and two lighting columns installed. The altered extent of Station Road will remain private (unadopted).

Kirklees Highways Development Management has not raised any objections to the application. The proposal would not significantly increase traffic on Station Road and the proposed highway works ensure that the development can be safely accessed. There is adequate space for parking and turning within each plot.

The plans show space for a refuse waggon to turn within the shared access; whilst this is welcomed it is not deemed critical to the acceptability of the application. It is not therefore considered necessary to seek to ensure that the shared access is made available at all times for refuse vehicle turning. Refuse waggons have to continue past the site to access the existing dwellinghouses further along Station Road and one of the representations confirms that refuse vehicles turn around at the head of Station Road. As such, the proposed development would not materially alter the existing waste collection arrangements.

On the basis of the above the application is considered to comply with Policy T10 of the UDP.

Ecology:

The site forms an area of grazing land enclosed by a dry stone wall and a wire fence. Immediately to the south of the site is an area which forms part of a Green Corridor on the UDP Proposals Map and an area of protected trees with Meltham Dike beyond.

An ecological survey has been submitted with the application. The survey focuses on bats but also includes an assessment of any badger activity, bird life and the flora present on the site.

Kirklees Environment Unit has been consulted on the application and has raised some concerns with the scope of the survey and the time the survey was carried out which was undertaken at a sub-optimal period for many species.

Notwithstanding the deficiencies of the survey, it is considered that there are no statutory constraints to determining the application. The site has very little bat roost potential and the survey found that there was no evidence of badger activity. The impact of the development on biodiversity can be adequately mitigated through an appropriate landscaping scheme and the inclusion of bat and bird boxes on the exterior of the dwellings; this can be dealt with by condition. In addition, it is recommended that details of the lighting to Station Road are submitted to the Local Planning Authority to ensure that the lighting is controlled so as not to harm the local biodiversity.

134

Trees:

The Service’s Trees officer has not raised any objections to the application. He has however recommended that any works to the protected trees along Station Road are approved by the Local Planning Authority. It is envisaged that any tree works would generally be limited to pruning to facilitate the movement of construction traffic. This matter can be dealt with by condition.

Drainage/Flood Risk:

The development is to incorporate rain water harvesting tanks and soakaways as part of the drainage strategy. Kirklees Strategic Drainage has not raised any objections to the application subject to the approval of a detailed drainage scheme and an assessment of the suitability of soakaways in this location. A condition is also recommended requiring that the areas for parking and turning within the site incorporate sustainable drainage techniques.

The Environment Agency does not object to the application subject to a condition relating to finished floor levels within the dwellings. The submitted plans demonstrate that the minimum required finished floor levels are achievable.

Other matters:

Council records indicate that a proportion of the application site is potentially contaminated due to possible previous use as a landfill site. Conditions to address this issue are therefore recommended.

Objections:

Two representations have been received. The Officer response to the concerns raised is provided below:

The proposed access to the site requires the granting of access rights by a third party Response: This is a private matter for the applicant/developer to address.

Vehicle movements on Station Road should not be increased at the present time, whilst heavy and light commercial vehicles are accessing the adjacent industrial units (Spinks Mire Mill) Response: The erection of two dwellings would not significantly intensify the use of Station Road and Highways Development Management considers that the dwellings can be accommodated without resulting in any material harm to highway safety.

Existing highway safety issue due to conflict between residential traffic from Station Road and commercial traffic exiting the industrial site (suggested that give way signs / road markings are placed at the exit from the mill) Response: Highways Development Management is satisfied that access to and from the site can be achieved safely. It would not be possible under this 135

application to require give way signs/markings at the exit of the mill (which is on private land in any event).

The proposed highway works, including the removal of the historic stone setts, will be out of character with the surroundings Response: The highway works are small in scale and are not in a particularly prominent location (although they are close to a public right of way). As such, it is considered that there would not be any significant detrimental impact on the character of the surrounding area.

Refuse vehicles do not reverse along the length of Station Road, contrary to the information in the highway statement; refuse vehicles turn around at the head of Station Road. Turning area within the site has no effect on the access needs of large vehicles. Response: Any wider benefit of the refuse vehicle turning area as shown on the submitted site plan is a material planning consideration. However, this is not a determining factor in the recommendation.

Unfenced area opposite the proposed site entrance which drops down into Meltham Beck; this is a health and safety risk Response: This is not a material consideration in the determination of this application.

No proposals for access to the remainder of the land shown within the applicants’ ownership – the agricultural land to the rear of the dwellings could not be maintained or used. Response: There is nothing to prevent the land owner creating a new access further to the west along Station Road to enable access to the remaining grazing land.

Telephone service must be maintained Response: There is nothing to suggest that the overhead telephone cables towards the east of the site would be affected by the development. Any works to the telephone cables would be a matter for the applicant/developer to address with the provider.

Query whether it is reasonable to assume that the new residents will make use of the public transport system Response: The new residents would be able to access local bus services because of their proximity to the site however there is nothing to compel the new residents to use public transport.

Ecological assessment does not include numerous species of fauna which are known to be present in the area Response: The ecological survey is not a comprehensive survey of all fauna known to be present in the area and whilst it is acknowledged that there are some deficiencies with the survey, this does not alter the recommendation. Officers are satisfied that the impact of the development on biodiversity can be adequately mitigated.

136

Essential that access is maintained at all times for the existing residential properties on Station Road Response: Station Road is a private road and any obstructions (other than to the public footpath) are outside the control of the Council. This would be a private matter for rights holders.

Request for guarantees that development will be built in accordance with the plans and that amendments aren’t sought to increase the number of dwellings Response: It is a requirement that developments are built in accordance with the approved plans. Any further dwellings on the site or material amendments to the plans would require a separate planning application.

Query regarding permission to carry out the proposed works to Station Road and the future maintenance of these works Response: The applicant does not own the access and has submitted the requisite ownership certificate. For the purposes of this planning application issues of land ownership have therefore been addressed. Station Road is a private road and this will remain the case. The responsibility of maintenance lies with frontagers of this private road.

Councillor Greaves has submitted a representation on the application and this is set out in full in section 1 of this report. Officers respond as follows: • The application site and the remainder of the POL site are not identified specifically for commercial/industrial or residential use. • The effect of residential development on the application site on the viability of the nearby mill and the effect of the activities of the mill on future residents of the application site has been essessed in this report and found to be acceptable. Such considerations with regard to the wider POL site would be addressed when an application for that site was received in the future.

Conclusion:

Following the withdrawal of the Core Strategy the Council can no longer demonstrate a required deliverable housing land supply sufficient for 5.87 years and in accordance with the NPPF relevant policies for the supply of housing are out of date. In such circumstances no significant weight can be given to its content and, in accordance with NPPF, there is a presumption in favour of sustainable development and planning permission should be granted “unless any adverse impacts of granting permission would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits when assessed against the policies in this framework taken as a whole, or that specific NPPF policies indicate development should be restricted”.

137

This application has been assessed against relevant policies in the development plan and other material considerations. The proposals are considered to be compliant with the policies in the Unitary Development Plan and there are no adverse impacts which would significantly and demonstrably (NPPF para 14) outweigh the benefits of the scheme.

10. RECOMMENDATION

CONDITIONAL FULL PERMISSION

1. The development shall be begun not later than the expiration of three years beginning with the date on which permission is granted.

2. The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in complete accordance with the approved plans and specifications except as may be required by other conditions which shall in all cases take precedence.

3. Samples of all external facing and roofing materials shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority before development commences and the development shall be implemented in accordance with the approved details.

4. Notwithstanding the details shown on the approved site plan (drawing number 2901(0-)02 Revision A) and the details contained within the Supporting Highway Statement, a detailed scheme for:

i) the widening, to 4.8 metres, of the part of Station Road block coloured grey on drawing number 802 / 01 of the Supporting Highway Statement (Appendix D)

ii) the provision of a 2.0m wide footway to the northern side of the access (coloured orange on drawing number 802 / 01 of the Supporting Highway Statement (Appendix D))

shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority before development commences. The scheme shall include construction specifications, street lighting, kerbing, white lining, signing, and surface finishes. All of the agreed works shall be implemented in full before either of the dwellings hereby approved is first occupied.

5. The development shall not be brought into use until the areas to be used for turning and external parking as indicated on the approved site plan (drawing number 2901(0-)02 Revision A) have been laid out with a hardened and drained surface. The surfacing shall be in accordance with the Communities and Local Government and Environment Agency’s ‘Guidance on the permeable surfacing of front gardens (parking areas)’ published 13th May 2009 (ISBN 9781409804864) as amended or any successor guidance. Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995 as amended (or any Order revoking or 138

re-enacting that Order with or without modification) these areas shall be so retained, free of obstructions and available for the parking and turning of vehicles.

6. Notwithstanding the submitted details, a landscaping scheme for the site based upon native species shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority before either of the dwellings hereby approved is first occupied. The approved landscaping scheme shall be implemented in full no later than the first available planting season after the first occupation of the second dwelling and, from its completion, shall be maintained for a period of five years. If, within this period, any tree, shrub or hedge shall die, become diseased or be removed, it shall be replaced with others of similar size and species unless the Local Planning Authority gives its written consent to any variation.

7. Details of any works to the protected trees which abut and / or overhang the access to the site which are necessary to construct the development shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority prior to the work being carried out and shall be carried out to British Standard 3998. All works to the protected trees shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.

8. The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the approved Flood Risk Assessment (FRA) prepared by bdn, Rev 22-07-14 and the following mitigation measures detailed within the FRA:

1. Finished floor levels within the two dwellings shall be set no lower than 150.0 metres above Ordnance Datum (AOD).

9. A scheme detailing foul, surface water and land drainage, (including off site works, outfalls, flow control and balancing works, plans and longitudinal sections, hydraulic calculations, existing drainage to be maintained/diverted/abandoned, and percolation tests) shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority before development commences. Neither of the dwellings shall be occupied until such approved drainage scheme has been provided on the site to serve the development. The drainage scheme shall thereafter be retained.

10. A scheme demonstrating an adequately designed soakaway for an effective means of drainage of surface water on this development/site shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority before development commences. The scheme shall include percolation tests in accordance with BRE Digest 365 along with calculations demonstrating that the designed soakaways can store a critical 1 in 30 year storm event and can empty by 50% within 24 hours. Where soakaways are proven not to be an effective means of draining surface water, an alternative surface water drainage scheme shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority before development commences. Neither dwelling shall be occupied until the works comprising the approved scheme have been completed. The drainage scheme shall thereafter be retained. 139

11. Development shall not commence until actual or potential land contamination at the site has been investigated and a Preliminary Risk Assessment (Phase I Desk Study Report) has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

12. Where further intrusive investigation is recommended in the Preliminary Risk Assessment approved pursuant to condition 11, development shall not commence until a Phase II Intrusive Site Investigation Report has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

13. Where site remediation is recommended in the Phase II Intrusive Site Investigation Report approved pursuant to condition 12, development shall not commence until a Remediation Strategy has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The Remediation Strategy shall include a timetable for the implementation and completion of the approved remediation measures.

14. Remediation of the site shall be carried out and completed in accordance with the Remediation Strategy approved pursuant to condition 13. In the event that remediation is unable to proceed in accordance with the approved Remediation Strategy or contamination not previously considered [in either the Preliminary Risk Assessment or the Phase II Intrusive Site Investigation Report] is identified or encountered on site, all works on site (save for site investigation works) shall cease immediately and the Local Planning Authority shall be notified in writing within 2 working days. Unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority, works shall not recommence until proposed revisions to the Remediation Strategy have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Remediation of the site shall thereafter be carried out in accordance with the approved revised Remediation Strategy.

15. Following completion of any measures identified in the approved Remediation Strategy or any approved revised Remediation Strategy a Validation Report shall be submitted to the Local Planning Authority. Unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority, no part of the site shall be brought into use until such time as the remediation measures for the whole site have been completed in accordance with the approved Remediation Strategy or the approved revised Remediation Strategy and a Validation Report in respect of those remediation measures has been approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

16. Notwithstanding the requirements of condition 4, the proposed street lighting shall be designed so as to minimise light spill outside of the application site boundary. Details of the design measures to minimise light spill shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority before the street lighting is installed. The lighting shall be installed in accordance with the approved details before the dwellings are occupied and thereafter retained.

140

17. Notwithstanding the submitted plans, two ‘Schwegler’ type bat tubes or similar shall be installed on the external gable wall of the master bedroom of plot 1 (south east elevation) before plot 1 is first occupied and shall be retained thereafter. The bat tubes shall be located above the eaves level of the master bedroom and to the right of the triangular window within this elevation.

18. Notwithstanding the submitted plans, one woodcrete sparrow terrace shall be installed on the external gable wall of the Study / Library / Utility / Pantry of plot 2 (north west elevation) before plot 2 is first occupied and shall be retained thereafter. The sparrow terrace shall be located above the level of the eaves.

19. A scheme detailing the proposed boundary treatment for the part of the application site which is currently used as grazing land shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority before either of the dwellings hereby approved are first occupied. The works comprising the approved scheme shall be completed prior to the dwellings first being occupied and shall be retained thereafter.

20. Notwithstanding the submitted plans, details of all retaining walls for the development, showing their location, height and facing materials, shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority before development commences. The retaining walls shall be erected in accordance of the approved details and thereafter retained.

141

This recommendation is based on the following plan(s):-

Plan Type Reference Version Date Received Location Plan 2901(LP)01 - 23 July 2014 Existing Site Plan 2901(0-)01 - 23 July 2014 Proposed Site Plan 20901(0-)02 Rev A 23 July 2014 Existing Site Sections 20901(0-)03 - 23 July 2014 Proposed Site 20901(0-)04 - 23 July 2014 Elevations Proposed Plans & 20901(0-)05 - 23 July 2014 Elevations – Plot 1 Proposed Plans & 20901(0-)06 - 23 July 2014 Elevations – Plot 2 Planning Statement Prepared by - 23 July 2014 Assent Planning Consultancy Ltd, dated May 2014 Sustainability Statement Prepared by One17 - 23 July 2014 Design, dated May 2014 Ecological Survey Prepared by John - 23 July 2014 Gardner Highway Statement Supporting - 23 July 2014 Highway Statement, prepared by PAH Highway Consultants Flood Risk Assessment Prepared by bdn Rev 22- 23 July 2014 07-14

142

Application No: 2014/92610

Type of application: 60m - OUTLINE APPLICATION

Proposal: Outline application for formation of snow sports slope (modified proposal)

Location: John Smiths Stadium, Stadium Way, Huddersfield, HD1 6PG

Grid Ref: 415392.0 417387.0

Ward: Dalton Ward

Applicant: Kirklees Stadium Development Ltd

Agent: Steve Morton, Signet Planning Ltd

Target Date: 26-Nov-2014

Recommendation: OASD - CONDITIONAL OUTLINE APPROVAL SUBJECT TO DELEGATION TO OFFICERS

------

LOCATION PLAN

Map not to scale – for identification purposes only

143

1. SUMMARY OF APPLICATION Application Details Type of Development Outline application for formation of snow slope (modified proposal) Scale of Development Major No. Jobs Created or Retained Unknown Policy UDP allocation Urban Greenspace Independent Viability Required No Consultation/Representation Individual Support (No.) None Individual Objection (No.) None Petition None Ward Member Interest None Statutory Consultee Objections Yes Health & Safety Executive Contributions • Affordable Housing Not applicable • Education Not applicable • Public Open Space Not applicable • Other The larger scheme of which this proposal is a modified part was subject to a S106 Agreement requiring public transport and travel plan measures, local highway works, managed habitat, affordable housing and off site open space. The current application would require a ‘supplemental’ obligation to be secured to be read in conjunction with the earlier outline permission. Other Issues Any Council Interest? Yes The applicant manages the Stadium complex on behalf of partners of which the Council is one. Pre-application planning advice? Yes No objections raised Pre-App Consultation Yes Biodiversity Officer raised no objections Undertaken? Comment on Application The proposal is a minor alteration to the wider HD One regeneration scheme. Whilst it represents a further erosion of the open character of Kilner Bank (designated as Urban Greenspace on the UDP) the additional area is proportionally minor and will not result in material harm.

RECOMMENDATION: Grant Conditional Outline Permission subject to delegation of authority to officers to: A) Refer the resolution to grant conditional outline planning permission to the Health & Safety Executive B) Should the Health & Safety Executive determine not to request the Secretary of State to call-in the application, negotiate a supplement to the S106 agreement forming part of planning application no. 2008/92864 which this application partly seeks to modify

144

C) Impose all necessary and appropriate conditions including those below. D) Subject to there being no substantive changes to alter the recommendation, issue the decision notice.

2. INFORMATION

This application is brought to the Strategic Planning Committee as the application site exceeds 0.5 ha for development proposed that is non residential.

The applicant, Kirklees Stadium Development Ltd (KSDL), was formally created in 1992 and exists to run the Stadium and related facilities. The Council is a partner in KSDL with the Council’s Assistant Director (Acting) Place – Investment and Regeneration being the Company Secretary. Councillors are representatives in the Company.

3. PROPOSAL/SITE DESCRIPTION

In July 2010 outline planning permission was granted for the erection of a multi-use leisure and entertainment development with ancillary facilities plus hotel, office and residential uses on a large area of land around but principally to the south of the Stadium. This was subject to a S106 Agreement requiring public transport and travel plan measures, local highway works, managed habitat, affordable housing and off site open space. The decision was in accordance with a resolution by the Area Planning Sub-Committee on 21st January 2010.

The outline permission requires an application for approval of reserved matters to be submitted not later than 5th July 2016. This extended period (normally 3 years) was agreed to allow for the practicality of bringing forward a development of such scale and complexity.

An indicative layout submitted with that application showed a main and nursery ski slope approximately in the area now proposed in the current application but slightly further to the south.

The current modified proposal requires a separate application for planning permission as it extends beyond the site boundary of the previous outline permission. The additional land extends approximately 30 metres beyond the previous boundary to the north at the rear of the Kilner Bank Stand. The application site boundary is limited to the snow sports slope and remains linked to the larger regeneration scheme. The facility is now described as a snow sports slope to reflect additional snow sports users envisaged by the applicant.

The proposal seeks outline planning permission with all matters reserved. The submitted indicative plans and sections show that the slope would be constructed as a raised platform with an embankment on either side. Levels

145

would be raised to varying degrees of up to 13.5 metres above existing ground levels.

The Design & Access Statement submitted with the earlier application indicates an open-air surfaced area rather than an enclosed building.

The site lies to the south of the Stadium on land currently part of the Stadium car park and the wider area of coniferous woodland on Kilner Bank. It rises to the south east to within 12.5 metres of the edge of Kilner Bank. This is an adopted highway which has point closures to through traffic at its junctions with Bradley Mills Road and Chapel Street.

The nearest residential properties are a minimum of approximately 150 metres+ to the south east at Heather Grove Fold, Grange Bank Close and Edgehill Close.

Part of the site is crossed by a gas pipeline and high tension electricity cables. The site also lies to the south of existing operations at the Syngenta site and therefore within the outer consultation zone associated with it.

4. BACKGROUND AND HISTORY

2008/92864 – Outline permission for erection of multi-use leisure and entertainment development with ancillary facilities plus hotel, office and residential uses issued 6th July 2010 with all matters reserved and subject to a S106 Agreement requiring public transport and travel plan measures, local highway works, managed habitat, affordable housing and off site open space. Conditions restricted the amount and type of retail floorspace as well as the amount of floorspace for each type of use.

5. PLANNING POLICY

The site lies mostly within the wider area shown as Urban Greenspace on the Unitary Development Plan. The area closest to the existing stadium is shown for that purpose on the UDP. The Kilner Bank road at the top of the hill is shown as a Green Corridor.

The following UDP policies are relevant: D3 – Urban Greenspace D6 – Green Corridor BE2 – design of new development R5 – Stadium G1- Regeneration NE9 – Retention of mature trees EP6 – Noise generating development EP11 – Enhancement of ecology T10 – Highway safety B1 –Meeting the employment needs of the District R1 – New recreational facilities TC32 – Major developments outside the Ring Road: pedestrian links 146

National Planning Policy Framework.

Section1. Building a strong, competitive economy Section 4. Promoting sustainable transport Section 7. Requiring good design Section 8 – Promoting healthy communities Section 11 – Conserving and enhancing the natural environment.

The NPPF has superseded national planning advice in Planning Policy Statements and Planning Policy Guidance as well as the Regional Spatial Strategy considered at the time of the previous outline application.

Other Policy/Legislative Considerations: Planning Practice Guidance was published on 6th March 2014 and the following sections are relevant to this application.

Land stability, Open space, sports and recreation facilities, public rights of way and local green space.

6. CONSULTATION RESPONSES

K.C. Highways Development Management – no objections.

K.C. Public Rights of Way (PROW) Team – no comments received.

K.C. Environmental Services – no objections.

K.C. Planning Policy – no comments.

K.C. Environment Officer – no objections subject to conditions requiring information to be submitted as reserved matters.

K.C. Drainage – no comments received.

HSE (Automated response through PADHI system) – sufficient reasons on safety grounds to advise against the granting of outline planning permission in this case.

Yorkshire Water – no objection

Environment Agency – no objections.

Coal Authority – no objections

National Grid – no comments received

Northern Gas Networks – the high pressure gas pipeline crossing the site is protected by easement restricting the work which may be undertaken and preventing any building or permanent structure within it. A minimum distance 147

of 14 metres between the pipeline and normally occupied properties is recommended.

KC Trees – no objections.

7. REPRESENTATIONS

Publicity:

This application was publicised by site notice and newspaper advertisement. Letters were not sent due to the significant distance to the nearest residential dwellings in accordance with the Council’s agreed publicity procedure.

The period of publicity expired on 3rd October 2014. No comments have been received.

8. APPLICANT’S STATEMENT

The applicant states that a ski slope on Kilner Bank has previously been considered by the Council when outline planning permission was granted. This application seeks to reposition the slope in order to accommodate an adventure golf facility within the HD1 scheme. The use is broadened to a snow sports slope to reflect the emergence of the snowboard and the wider breadth of activities now envisaged. The snow sports slope and centre are “key components of the HD1 leisure offer which will broaden the attractiveness of HD1 and contribute towards establishing a destination leisure draw that is capable of attracting visitors from beyond West Yorkshire.”

It is argued that the HD1 scheme as a whole broadly accords with NPPF and is sustainable development. The snow sports slope will broaden the attractiveness of the development scheme ensuring economic and social benefits whilst appropriate mitigation measures will reduce environmental impact and enhance biodiversity.

The scheme as a whole has reached a stage where the input of investors and leisure operators is influencing the location, orientation and scale of individual leisure components. This has identified a need for an adventure golf facility requiring the re-alignment of the snow sports slope. Nevertheless approximately 60% of the facility sits within the previous application site boundary.

The means of access to the snow sports slope remains through the HD1 scheme as in the earlier permission.

The proposal includes a nursery slope and base facility the locations of which are covered by the earlier permission.

The previous proposal contained habitat mitigation improvements including a woodland management plan particularly taking into account bat habitat; 10 metre buffer of dense scrub across the top of the ski slope to maintain wildlife 148

connectivity; development of habitats for key species of birds and the retention and development of the shale bank for invertebrate habitat. The applicant is willing to accept conditions to re-assess and retain these commitments.

Whilst details of external appearance are reserved at this stage the applicant has supplied the following provisional information.

• The slope will be an open, uncovered facility with jumps, rails and a ‘half- pipe’. It will be served by two tow-lifts. The nursery slope below will have its own tow or ‘moving carpet.’ • The surface, ‘Snowflex’ has been developed by a firm based close to Holmfirth and is supplied worldwide. It is a lubricated surface performing close to natural snow with flexibility to form features such as jumps and half pipes whilst sufficiently resilient and absorbent to ensure safe use. • The facility would be in use year round and at prices “at half or under the prices charged at enclosed, artificially-made, ‘real’ snow slopes.” This affordability will open up new markets particularly the young.

9. ASSESSMENT

Principle of development:

The publication of the NPPF and Practice Guidance are material changes in policy circumstances since the earlier permission in 2010.

The NPPF states that the purpose of the planning system “is to contribute to the achievement of sustainable development.” NPPF identifies the dimensions of sustainable development as economic, social and environmental roles. It states that these roles are mutually dependent and should not be taken in isolation. “Economic, social and environmental gains should be sought jointly and simultaneously through the planning system.” NPPF stresses the presumption in favour of sustainable development.

The proposal fulfils the economic role as it is part of the wider regeneration scheme in the area. It will also result in employment opportunities for contractors and suppliers as well as being a future source of employment.

The proposal fulfils the social role contributing to sports facilities in the District.

The proposal is part of the wider scheme which secures habitat improvements which will fulfil the environmental role.

Whilst the proposal involves significant alterations to ground levels there is no reason to suspect that land stability would be prejudiced. The previous application was accompanied by investigation and assessment but it was recognised that detailed proposals for the ski slope would require extensive slope stability analysis and design of retaining structures. It was accepted that this could be addressed by condition which would address UDP policy BE2 and Planning Practice Guidance. 149

UDP policy D1 states that development proposals which lead to a loss of valuable open land within towns will not normally be permitted.

UDP policy D3 states that on sites designated as Urban Greenspace planning permission will not be granted unless the development proposed: (i) Is necessary for the continuation or enhancement of established uses or involves change of use to alternative open land uses, or would result in a specific community benefit, and in all cases will protect visual amenity, wildlife value or opportunities for sport and recreation; or (ii) Includes adequate alternative provision of urban greenspace equivalent in both quantitative and qualitative terms to that which would be developed and reasonably accessible to existing users.

The NPPF recognises that access to good quality open spaces and opportunities for sport and recreation can make an important contribution to the health and well-being of communities. Paragraph 74 provides for the protection of such facilities and requires that:-

Existing open space, sports and recreational buildings and land, including playing fields, should not be built on unless: • an assessment has been undertaken which has clearly shown the open space, buildings or land to be surplus to requirements; or • the loss resulting from the proposed development would be replaced by equivalent or better provision in terms of quantity and quality in a suitable location; or • the development is for alternative sports and recreational provision, the needs for which clearly outweigh the loss.

NPPF para 215 requires that due weight is given to relevant policies in existing plans according to their degree of consistency with NPPF. It is considered that all planning applications on open space, sports and recreational buildings and land should be assessed against NPPF (para 74) rather than UDP policy D3. The effect of this is a more restrictive approach to the development of urban greenspace sites than currently exists under policy D3 whereby most forms of community benefits, other than for sport and recreation, will not be permissible.

An assessment under paragraph 74 will determine: • whether the site is surplus to requirements; or • the adequacy of any proposed replacement provision; or • whether the proposed development could be acceptable where alternative sports and recreational provision is included within the proposal.

In this case the latter consideration is the salient point.

150

In granting the extant outline planning permission it was previously concluded that for reasons of topography this is the only feasible location for the facility moreover it is essentially an “open land use” in accordance with UDP policies D1 and D3. The report further stated that even if it were concluded that this was not an “open land” use then it could be seen as an ‘exceptional circumstance providing direct community benefit in terms of recreation / sporting facilities. It was argued that the proposal involved only a small part of the area designated as Urban Greenspace and that, with the enhancement works secured by that permission, the function and quality of the Greenspace would be retained.

The additional area now proposed is not significant and would not adversely affect the function and quality of the Urban Greenspace as a whole. The proposal provides a facility which is not available elsewhere in the District. Furthermore, in terms of wider material considerations the scheme is part of a wider regeneration scheme which will benefit the town and surroundings in terms of investment and employment. On balance it is considered that the loss of the open space as a result of this proposal is clearly outweighed by the provision of an alternative sports facility and the recreation provision, of ‘community benefit’ included in this proposal.

It will be necessary to supplement the current S106 agreement forming part of application no. 2008/92864 to ensure that its requirements are secured through the current application.

It is considered that the period required to submit reserved matters should be set to that required under application no. 2008/92864 given that they are likely to be submitted as part of the overall scheme for the Complex.

The site boundary does not take in the area of the south western flank of the ski slope where the slope is expected to be embanked. However, this would lie within the area of the extant outline permission and would be expected to be addressed in the future application for reserved matters as part of the overall layout and appearance. This area lies within the land shown within the control of the applicant (the ‘blue line’) and therefore a condition can be made to ensure a satisfactory treatment.

Health & Safety:

The proposal lies over a High Pressure Gas Pipeline. The Health & Safety Executive (H&SE) advise against granting planning permission on the grounds of risk of harm to people at the proposed development. They note that the risk of a major accident is small but “it is felt prudent for planning purposes to consider the risks to people in the vicinity of the hazardous installation.”

The H&SE raised no objections to the previous planning application in 2010. The report to the Area Planning Committee at the time noted that the high pressure gas main runs behind the Stadium across the area occupied by the golf driving range and then directly west beneath the river to St Andrews 151

Road. “It will be protected by an easement. Northern Gas Networks have advised on current recommended distances between the pipeline and buildings/trafficked routes and these can be taken into account in the detail of the Reserved Matters, since location is not applied for at outline stage.”

With regard to the proximity of the Syngenta site no objections were raised by the H&SE.

However both responses were based on an outline planning application with all matters reserved and understanding that the locations of the uses, shown only indicatively on the plans, were flexible. This is not the case with this application where the site options are restricted to the much smaller area of the application site boundary and there is no scope for the facility to be peripheral or outside the zones.

The Planning Practice Guidance on Hazardous Substances notes that the decision on whether or not to grant planning permission rests with the Local Planning Authority. Nevertheless: “In view of its acknowledged expertise in assessing the off-site risks presented by the use of hazardous substances, any advice from Health & Safety Executive that planning permission should be refused for development for, at or near to a hazardous installation or pipeline should not be overridden without the most careful consideration.”

It is noted that whilst the H&SE advise against granting planning permission they note that the risk of harm to people is small. The Sub-Committee will need to balance this against the positive regeneration benefits of this sustainable development both in its own right and as part of the wider scheme which enjoys the benefit of planning permission. Furthermore the potential risk of harm from the proposal must be seen in proportion to the current risk to the existing Stadium development.

On balance Officers consider that the regeneration benefits of the scheme outweigh the level of risk identified by the H&SE.

If Members are minded to issue outline planning permission against Health & Safety advice the Executive require 21 days notice to give further consideration to the proposal before a decision is issued and determine whether or not to request the Secretary of State to call-in the application. This is reflected in the recommendation.

Whilst development would be within the easement identified by Northern Gas Networks this is a private matter for the applicant to resolve independently from any planning permission.

Impact on visual amenity:

The application is in outline with all matters reserved for subsequent approval. The proposal lies in a prominent hillside position and would be visible over a long distance from various points in the town to the west and north. This will 152

be emphasised by the likely surfacing and the loss of trees on the bank. Nevertheless the modified scheme will not have any significantly different impact beyond that previously considered and the NPPF and Planning Practice Guidance do not introduce materially different considerations. As previously it is considered that the impact on visual amenity can be addressed by condition at reserved matters stage and would comply with UDP policy.

Ecology:

A comprehensive ecological survey was undertaken over 2008 and 2009 as part of the previous application. This identified the range of habitats and species present on site, the potential impacts of that proposed development and the mitigation, compensation and enhancement measures required to meet biodiversity obligations, relating to planning policies at that time.

In the main, conditions at the site are unlikely to have changed significantly and the habitat primarily affected by this proposal, would be restricted to species poor grassland and mixed plantation woodland as identified in the original report.

The trees within the woodland area do not contain features likely to used by roosting bats and nor are other European Protected Species likely to be impacted by the development.

Even so, the potential impacts detailed in the earlier survey work are still relevant with respect to: • Loss of habitat especially plantation woodland with consequential impacts on the populations of a range of associated species. • Risk to nesting birds during the construction phase; • Direct impacts on bat foraging habitat through fragmentation due to the loss of woodland; • Indirect impacts on bat foraging habitat through fragmentation due to increased artificial lighting.

However, the proposed mitigation, compensation and enhancement measures proposed and detailed in the earlier reports are also still relevant although these measures need tailoring to this particular proposal in the following way:

1. Updating of the survey report for the area subject to development. 2. Planning guidance: there have been some changes in planning policy and guidance relating to biodiversity. 3. Scale: measures should reflect the reduced scale of this development although the development will still result in the same degree of fragmentation to the woodland habitat. 4. Compensation and enhancement measures: these should be reviewed in the context of the updated biodiversity action plans.

153

Given that it is very unlikely that there have been any significant habitat changes at the site, the above information in a revised mitigation strategy should be provided as part of the reserved landscaping matters.

Highway safety:

The proposal represents a minor alteration to the extant scheme and will not present additional material highway issues.

Other issues:

Conditions are repeated from the earlier application to address issues of land stability, contamination and light pollution. A further condition is added in the light of the findings of the Coal Mining Risk Assessment submitted with the application.

Objections:

There have been no representations from the public or elected Members.

Conclusion:

The proposal is a minor alteration to the wider HD One regeneration scheme. The scheme will offer major community benefits including leisure facilities and employment. Whilst it represents a further erosion of the open character of Kilner Bank (designated as Urban Greenspace on the UDP) the additional area is proportionately minor and will not result in material harm.

There has been no fundamental material change in circumstances since the previous approval of the scheme as a whole such as to justify refusal of the proposal.

10. RECOMMENDATION: -

Grant Conditional Outline Permission subject to delegation of authority to officers to: A) Refer the resolution to grant conditional outline planning permission to the Health & Safety Executive B) Should the Health & Safety Executive determine not to request the Secretary of State to call-in the application, negotiate a supplement to the S106 agreement forming part of planning application no. 2008/92864 which this application partly seeks to modify C) impose all necessary and appropriate conditions including those below. D) Subject to there being no substantive changes to alter the recommendation, issue the decision notice.

154

1. Approval of the details of the appearance, layout, scale, access, landscaping of the site (hereinafter called the ‘reserved matters’) shall be obtained from the Local Planning Authority before any development is commenced.

2. Plans and particulars of the reserved matters referred to in condition 1 above, relating to the appearance, layout, scale, access, landscaping of the site shall be submitted in writing to the Local Planning Authority and shall be carried out in full accordance with the approved plans. .

3. Application for approval of any reserved matter shall be made to the Local Planning Authority before 6th July 2016.

4. The development hereby permitted shall be begun either before the expiration of two years from the final approval of reserved matters or, in the case of approval on different dates, the final approval of the last such matter to be approved.

5. The site shall be developed with a separate system of drainage for foul and surface water on and off the site.

6. No development shall commence until a scheme detailing foul and surface water drainage from the site has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Principles of sustainable urban drainage (SUDS) shall be employed unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority. Surface water run-off from existing areas of hard surfacing that are to be built on shall be reduced by 30%. For greenfield areas that are to be built on the surface water run-off rate shall be limited to greenfield run-off rate. Furthermore the scheme must demonstrate how run-off in the event of a 1 in 100 year + climate change event would be stored on site. The works shall be implemented in accordance with the approved scheme and there shall be no piped discharge of surface water from the development prior to the completion of the approved surface water drainage works and the development shall not be brought into use prior to the completion of the approved foul drainage works.

7. No infiltration of surface water drainage into the ground shall take place without the prior written approval of the Local Planning Authority. Where such infiltration is proposed it must be demonstrated that there is no resultant unacceptable risk to ground waters.

8. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the submitted Flood Risk Assessment (FRA) Revision C dated November 2009 and the following mitigation measure detailed within it: • Identification and provision of safe routes into and out of the site to an appropriate safe haven.

155

9. Notwithstanding the requirements of conditions 1 and 2, any reserved matters submission for ‘landscape’ shall include details of the treatment of the south western boundary of the slope including any earthworks, screening and soft landscaping together with an ecological survey and mitigation strategy of the site as a whole.

10. Piling or any other foundation designs using penetrative methods shall not be used without the prior written approval of the Local Planning Authority. Where such methods / designs are proposed it must be demonstrated that there is no resultant unacceptable risk to groundwater.

11. Development shall not commence until a Phase II Intrusive site investigation report, which shall include coal mining legacy has been submitted to and approved in writing with the Local Planning Authority.

12. Development shall not commence until a Remediation Strategy has been submitted to and approved in writing with the Local Planning Authority. The Remediation Strategy shall include a timetable for the implementation and completion of any identified remediation measures within the site should be undertaken. This shall include any remedial works to treat mine entries and/or foundations.

13. Remediation of the site shall be carried out and completed in accordance with the Remediation Strategies approved pursuant to condition 12. In the event that remediation is unable to proceed on accordance with an approved Remediation Strategy or contamination not previously considered in the Phase II Intrusive Site Investigation Report is identified or encountered on site all works on the affected areas (save for site investigation works) shall cease immediately and the Local Planning Authority shall be notified in writing within two working days. Unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority works shall not recommence until proposed revisions to the Remediation Strategy/Strategies have been submitted to and approved in writing with the Local Planning Authority. Remediation of the site shall thereafter be carried out in accordance with the agreed revised remediation Strategy / Strategies.

14. Following completion of any measures identified in an approved Remediation Strategy or any approved revised Remediation Strategy, a Validation report shall be submitted to the Local Planning Authority. Unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority the development shall not be brought into use until such time as the remediation measures have been completed in accordance with the agreed Remediation Strategy or the approved revised Remediation Strategy and a validation report in respect of those remediation measures has been approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

156

15. Before development commences details of all retaining structures necessary to maintain the stability of Kilner Bank including a slope stability assessment shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved retaining structures shall be implemented before the development is brought into use and retained thereafter. Should these details require amendment to take into account any slope stability issues not apparent at design stage then amended details shall be submitted to the Local Planning Authority before the works are implemented.

16. No development shall commence (including pre-construction/ decontamination phase) until a construction management plan including details of construction site access, parking and locations of site compounds has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority and the development shall be undertaken in accordance with the approved details.

17. Before the development is brought into use a Car Park Management Plan shall be prepared in accordance with Appendix D of the Framework Travel Plan Rev H dated November 2009 and submitted to and approved in writing with the Local Planning Authority. The works/measures in the approved plan shall be operated from the time that the development becomes operational and retained thereafter.

18. In advance of the completion / implementation of Full Travel Plans for the development it shall be operated in accordance with the details set out in the Framework travel plan Rev H dated November 2009.

19. Within three months of the development becoming operational a Full Travel Plan shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The Plan shall adhere to the criteria/content of the Framework Travel Plan and shall be operated from the time of approval thereafter.

20. The development shall not be brought into use until details of the installation and erection of any extract ventilation system, air handling unit, air conditioning system or similar including details of the siting, methods of treatments of emissions and filters to remove odours and control noise emissions have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority and the works specified in the approved scheme have been installed. Such works shall thereafter be retained, operated at all times when the development is in use and maintained in accordance with the manufacturer’s instructions.

21. With the exception of site preparation works and temporary lighting no development shall commence until details of artificial lighting for any external areas including means to control any glare or stray lighting arising from the operation of artificial lighting and measures to avoid adverse impacts on species within the woodland belt has been submitted to and approved in writing with the Local Planning Authority. The works comprising the approved scheme shall be implemented before the development becomes operational 157

and the artificial lighting shall thereafter be operated in accordance with the approved scheme.

22. Before development commences a scheme shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local planning Authority specifying the measures to be taken for the suppression of dust arising from the operations permitted by this consent and any Reserved Matters so approved. The approved scheme shall be operated throughout the site preparation and construction phases of the development.

23. Japanese Knotweed shall be treated and eradicated using the process set out in Chapter 8 of the Environmental Statement Revision C issued 11th November 2009.

24. With the exception of site preparation works no development shall take place until a scheme for renewable energy use within the development has been submitted to and approved in writing with the Local Planning Authority. The scheme shall include arrangements for securing at least 10% of the energy used from decentralised and renewable or low-carbon energy sources. The development shall be constructed in accordance with the approved details and retained as such thereafter.

25. Details submitted with the Reserved Matters pursuant to conditions 1 and 2 shall include a scheme setting out measures to be incorporated into the development to minimise energy used and waste generated and details of how waste generated by the development is to be managed. The development shall be completed in accordance with the details approved under this condition and such scheme shall be retained thereafter.

26. With the exception of site preparation works development shall not commence until a scheme detailing the treatment of all surface water flows from parking areas and hardstandings for vehicles through an oil interceptor or alternative treatment system has been submitted to and approved in wring by the Local Planning Authority. Use of these parking areas / hardstandings for vehicles shall not commence until the works comprising the approved treatment scheme has been completed. Roof water shall not pass through the treatment scheme unless the size of the treatment unit is increased accordingly. Treatment shall take place prior to discharge from the treatment scheme. The works comprising the treatment scheme shall be retained for the lifetime of the development.

158

This recommendation is based on the following plans:

Plan Type Reference Version Date Received Ownership Line 3412:AP(03)1152 P01 18 August 2014 Application boundary 3412:AP(03)1151 P02 18 August 2014 Existing plan 3412:AP(02)1000 P01 18th August 2014 Upper level 03 3412:AP(04)1513 P02 18th August 2014 Illustrative Masterplan Proposed sections A-A 3412:AP(06)1600 P01 18th August 2014 & B-B Upper level 02 3412:AP(04)1512 P02 18th August 2014 Illustrative Masterplan Upper level 01 3412:AP(04)1511 P02 18th August 2014 Illustrative Masterplan Lower level 00 3412:AP(04)1510 P02 18th August 2014 Illustrative Masterplan Covering letter 18th August 2014 Coal Mining Risk A0532/G/1 August 18th August 2014 Assessment 2014 Coal Authority Mining 51000577391001 18th August 2014 Report Planning Statement 18th 18th August 2014 August 2014

159

Application No: 2014/92515

Type of application: 62 - FULL APPLICATION

Proposal: Change of use from B2 to Community Hub and Church, Mixed Class D1 and D2 use

Location: former Britvic site, Willow Lane, Birkby, Huddersfield, HD1 5EB

Grid Ref: 414208.0 417848.0

Ward: Greenhead Ward

Applicant: Chris Haygarth, Rivertree Trust

Agent: Matthew Robinson, Martin Walsh Associates

Target Date: 10-Nov-2014

Recommendation: FC - CONDITIONAL FULL PERMISSION

------

LOCATION PLAN

5 7

1 11

Works PH 30

ASH STREET 28 7 1 to 36

King Cliffe 85.0m W o rk s Fl ats ROAD Bay Hall Mills DW

B ay Hall Works 3 COMMON DW

12a

64 31

14 23

Cycle Track

P W o rk s

82.6m Bay Hall

105 7 9 78 14 12 74

60c 82 1 to 6 88 60

b 46 60a 40a 44 38a 76.2m 42 40 38 WILLOW LANE

36 91

74.7m

Clough House Mill Beck

17 Shelter

79 77

2 80.8m 4

83.5m

Map not to scale – for identification purposes only

1. SUMMARY OF APPLICATION

The application relates to the former Britvic site at Willow Lane, Birkby.

160

The proposals look to reuse this large vacant, general industrial site for a mixed use development comprising a “community hub and church ” which would include leisure and educational facilities (D1 and D2 Uses). The proposals are welcomed as it would deliver sustainable development by enhancing and providing integrated community facilities and promoting mixed use in a sustainable location, in accordance with the core principles of the National Planning Policy Framework.

RECOMMENDATION: CONDITIONAL FULL PERMISSION

2. INFORMATION

This application is brought to the Strategic Committee in accordance with the Council’s Delegation Agreement as the site area is in excess of 0.5ha.

3. PROPOSAL/SITE DESCRIPTION

Site Description The application site comprises of the former Britvic industrial site, Willow Lane Birkby. The application red line encompasses all the buildings and land previoulsy associated with the industrial use. These consist of industrial type buildings sited centrally within the site, a short row of terraced properties (no’s 82-88 Willow Lane) to the south east along the road frontage, and car park areas, to the south west and east. There is an existing controlled vehicular access into the site from Willow Lane.

There are mixed uses surrounding the application site. To the south are the industrial/warehouse units along Beck Road, to the east, north and west are principally residential properties along Halifax Old Road, Miln Road, Bay Hall and St. John’s Road.

Part of the site, to the south west, is within the Birkby Conservation Area.

Proposal The application seeks permission for the principle of change of use from general Industry (B2 Use Class) to mixed use comprising of a “community hub and church” (D1 & D2 Use Classes). No physical altertions are proposed.

4. BACKGROUND AND HISTORY

2011/92007 – remvoal of existing dry stone wall to front of service yard and erection of 2.0m high paladin fence and controlled access gate for staff and visitors, and secure the service yard with a 2.0m high fence including HGV access gates – granted Sept 2011

2007/91375 - erection of fence and gates and turnstile, resite streetlight and lower footpath for vehicle entry, install pedestrian footpath – granted May 2007

2006/91539 – Installation for external doors - granted May 2006 161

2005/93679 – Erection of 2.4m High secuirty fence – granted October 2005

5. PLANNING POLICY

The site is unallocated on the Kirklees Unitary Development Plan (UDP) proposals map with the car park area to the south west lying within the Birkby Conservation Area. There are listed buildings located to the north-west of the site, protected trees on the perimeter of the large car park area and a public right of way runs through the site.

Kirklees Unitary Development Plan:

B4 – loss of business site D2 – Unallocated Land BE5 – Conservation Areas EP4 – Development & noise G6- Contaminated land T10 – Highway consideraitons in new development T19 – parking provision NE9 – retention of mature trees R13 – development affecting a public right of way

National Planning Policy Framework:

Core planning principles to meet the three dimensions of sustainable development (economic, employment and social)

NPPF Building a strong competitive economy (Section 1) NPPF Promoting healthy communities (Section 8) NPPF Meeting the challenge of climate change, flooding and coastal change (Section 10)

6. CONSULTATIONS

K.C. Highways Development Management – further information required (see assessment below)

K.C. Environmental Services – no objections (see assessment below)

K.C. Planning Policy - no objections

Environment Agency - no objections

K.C. Business & Economy/Regeneration – comment that they are satisfied the market has shown little interest in employment land at this site.

162

7. REPRESENTATIONS

The Council has advertised the application in the press, by site notices and through neighbour letters on receipt. This is in line with the Councils adopted Statement of Community Involvement. The publicity period expired on 26th September 2014. As a result of the above publicity there has been no objection / representations received.

8. ASSESSMENT

General Principle / Policy:

This application seeks to change the use of a long established industrial premises to a mixed use largely centred around Class D1 (non-residential uses) and Class D2 (assembly and leisure) use. The principle of this development is firstly assessed against Policy B4 of the UDP. This includes, amongst other considerations, the suitability of the land and premises for continued business and industrial use, the compatibility of the proposed use with the surroundings uses, the effect on any buildings of architectural or historic merit, the effect on the local amenity and highway network.

The impact of the proposed change of use on amenity and the highway network are addressed later in this assessment. However with regards to the the suitability of the land and premises for continued business and industrial use the information submitted with the application states:

“the site was informally put on the market in June 2013 with very little interest. In November 2013 a formal marketing strategy was implemented. This received more encouraging response. However specific configuration and layout issues prejudiced a number of parties’ interest. These concerns related to the long leasehold nature of the site to interested parties, particularly given the limited support for industrial and commercial acquisitions from high street banks at the present time (dictating a long leasehold property is even less attractive to majority of high street banks and their customers than a freehold).

Inevitably some enquiries were forthcoming for comprehensive redevelopment of the site with residential, care and possible retail uses identified (given the site’s location in a mixed use area and still relatively close to Huddersfield town centre). Again, concerns were raised in connection with the long leasehold.

Interest also appears to be expressed by others (see below) but for the reasons given, the site has been discounted.

A Milnsbridge based company seeking to purchase a suitable site or property in and around Huddersfield area. The premises required significant alterations if not demolishing to be suitable for their modern day use.

163

Another Milnsbridge company were seeking to re-locate into 17,000 to 30,000 sq. ft premises. They advised access was not sufficiently good for their purpose and ideally they are seeking premises closer to the M62

A commercial property developer from Huddersfield was interested, however they advised the agents that it was not suitable for potential selective demolition and splitting to create a multi occupied complex.

An Elland based company were seeking to re-locate in the Elland, Huddersfield, Brighouse triangle though their requirements include an essentially open plan single unit. Their interest was discounted with confirmation the site was not entirely freehold.

An existing company in Huddersfield were looking to re-locate, however the facility was not modern enough to meet their requirements (nor sufficiently large enough).

A Huddersfield based commercial and residential developer paid interest to the site. However they considered the site to be relatively nominal given existing layouts and likely constraints from not insignificant parts of the site being long leasehold.

Finally, Rivertree Trust (the applicants) – previously known as New Life Christian Trust have been seeking to expand and relocate from their existing site in Paddock for many years. Whilst the existing buildings may require significant alterations and adaptions to meet their requirements ( which do not form part of the application), the site is located well for their purpose being only a short distance from Huddersfield town centre and easily accessible of numerous routes. Rivertree Trust would provide significant community projects and support from the site”.

The proposed change of use would result in the loss of an employment site but not necessarily employment. The submitted proposal would ensure the vacant Britvic site would not only be brought back to use but ensure the existing operations of an established enterprise could expand which itself could promote employment opportunities. In addition, the proposals would provide accessible local services that reflect the wider community’s needs and support its health, social and cultural wellbeing.

No jobs would be directly lost as a result of the proposal, as the site is currently vacant. It is considered that the proposed use would be less detrimental to the amenities of the neighbouring sites, in particular residential properties, in comparison to the previous open Class B2 industrial use of the site, in accordance with Policy B4 of the UDP. The Business & Economy/Regeneration team are also satisfied that the information submitted with the application show that there is little interest in employment land at this site.

164

Finally the proposal would provide integrated facilities and services in accordance with chapter 8 of the NPPF and in return support healthy communities by providing accessible local services.

Impact on visual Amenity:

The site is partly within the Birkby Conservation Area with listed buildings in close proximity, to the north- west of the site. Protected trees also exist on the perimeter of the large car park area to the south west. As the proposal is purely for the change of use with no physical alterations there would be no impact on the visual amenities of the area, the setting of the nearby listed buildings or the long term viability of the protected trees.The principle of change of use, with no alterations proposed at this time would not conflict with Policies D2, BE5 or NE9 of the UDP.

Impact on residential amenity:

The surroundings are mixed use, with mainly residential properties to the north west and north east on Miln Road and south east of the site on Willow Lane. The proposal needs to be considered in the light of Policy EP4 of the UDP which states that proposals for noise generating uses of land close to existing noise sensitive development will be considered taking into account the effects of existing and projected noise levels on the occupiers of existing noise sensitive development.

Whilst it is considered that the proposed use would be more compatible with the neighbouring residential properties, in comparison to the previous industrial use, no information in terms of existing or projected noise levels has been submitted. Environmental Officers have recommended a condition requiring the submission of a report specifying the measures to be taken to protect the occupants of nearby noise sensitive premises (on Miln Road, Bay Hall and Willow Lane) from noise from the proposed development before any development commences. This would is required to ensure the amenities of these properties is not unduly compromised by the proposal and to accord with paragraph 123 of the NPPF. In addition they have also recommended the operation of the use be restricted to between 08:00 to 21:00 Monday to Sunday. The applicants have responded to these recommended conditions as follows:

1: The existing premises have operated as a bottling plant operating 24hours a day 7 days a week for many years. The change of use will not be detrimental to the local properties as the operations being undertaken within the facility will omit lower sounds than that of a production facility. As such we feel that the need for an acoustic assessment should not be necessary.

2: With regards to the same issue above the restriction of operating hours should be limited to 23:00 Monday to Sunday. In essence we are reducing the operating hours from the existing use.

165

The applicant’s reponse is noted. Nevertheless, the proposed use would be introducing D1 and D2 uses. This could range from,as set out in the Town and Country Planning (Use Classes) Order 1987 (as amended) public dance and sports halls, places of worship, concert halls, skating rinks and other in/out door sports and leisure uses. Consequently, having the potential to cause disturbance from loud music and people arriving and leaving, which could be of equal or more intensive than the previous use to the nearby residential properites. On this basis, it is considered reasonably necessary to impose the conditions requested by Environmental Health Officers , to protect the occupants of noise sensitive premises (on Miln Road and Willow Lane) from noise from the proposed development to accord with Policy EP4 of the UDP.

This has been discussed with the agent, who now accepts the above reasoning and for the imposition of such conditions subject to the information being submitted prior to the development being brought into use, rather than before development commences.

Highways issues:

The highway impact of the proposal needs to be considered in relation to Policies T10 and T19 of the UDP.

The principle of the development is considered acceptable by Highway Officers. However, it has been requested that further details are required, in the form of a breakdown of • the gross floor area for each proposed use, • detailed access and parking layout plan, and • details of method of storage/access for waste collection from the premises

In response to this the agent makes the following comments:

1: The site currently occupies 48,000sq/ft of floor space. Currently the client cannot confirm the use class breakdown until the application is hopefully approved. There will be a considerable amount of work involved in producing plans, schemes etc to determine the use of the buildings to such an in depth degree.

2: There is a bin store currently on site. The client has confirmed that due to the size of the site they would look at negotiating a commercial waste removal contract with the council. Access to this will be no doubt in the same format as the previous occupiers. The exact location of waste receptacles etc. again cannot be confirmed until a full spatial design of the building has been submitted.

3: The access and car parking will remain as existing

In addition, a plan has been submitted showing existing car park areas within the site. The agent has also stated these areas would remain as such for the 166

proposed uses and agrees for an appropriately worded condition to be imposed should Members be mindful to approve the application.

With regards to details of method and storage/access for waste collection from the premises, this again can be conditioned

The site is in a sustainable location within close proximity to Huddersfield Town Centre, with good access to sustainable modes of transport. On street highway restrictions exist along Beck Road to ensure that there is no parking or stopping between Monday to Saturday 8am to 6pm. The use of the site would now be restricted to specific times, where as previously there was no restriction and no formal objections are raised.

It is therefore considered, subject to the existing car park areas and vehicular access to the site to be conditioned to be retained, that this would provide an adequate level of off street parking provision in principle. In principle the use need not create or materially add to highway safety nor generate a significant number of journeys that cannot be served adequately by the existing highway infrastructure.

This is only ‘in principle’ however, an additional condition is required to define the gross floor area for each proposed use together with a detailed access and parking layout plan to support such uses before development commences. This is so that the detailed use of the premise can be assessed and controlled to ensure that the operation of the site can indeed be served adequately by the existing highway infrastructure.

The application, subject to conditions, is therefore considered to comply with Policies T10 and T19 of the Kirklees UDP.

With regard to the public right of way (PROW) running through the site, the proposed development seeks the principle of change of use with no alterations as such would not affect the PROW

Other Issues:

This site lies partially in Flood Zone 2/3 on our Flood Map. The change of use proposed would result in an increase to the sensitivity of the development, placing some elements in the ‘more vulnerable’ category.

The Environment Agency do not object but recommend that the developer uses this opportunity to reduce the potential impact of flooding by raising floor levels wherever possible and incorporating flood proofing and resilience measures. Physical barriers, raised electrical fittings and special construction materials are just some of the ways to help reduce flood damage.

In light of this, a note will be added to the decision notice making the agent/ applicant aware of these recommendations. In addition, to reflect the change of use, the Environment Agency advises a flood evacuation plan be produced, in accordance with paragraph 103 of the NPPF. 167

Finally, the Environmental Officers recommend a condition requiring the reporting of any unidentified contamination if encountered during the developoment. This would be in accordance with Policy G6 of the UDP. This can be conditioned and the applicants have not commented on this request.

REPRESENTATIONS:

None received

Conclusion:

In conclusion the proposed change of used to a mixed use Class D1 and D2 is considered to be acceptable. The proposals would be compatible with other commerical uses in the surrounding area and, subject to condition, not cause a detrimental impact on residential amenity or highway safety within close proximity of this site. The development has been assessed against Policy B4 of the UDP and later guidance in the NPPF. The site has been through a marketing exercise and this suggests that there is no reasonable prospect of the site being re-used for employment purposes. Having regard to these market signals it is considered that this alternative use would provide a facility that would help support a sustainable local community.

This application has been assessed against relevant policies in the development plan and other material considerations. It is considered that the development would constitute sustainable development and is therefore recommended for approval.

9. RECOMMENDATION

CONDITIONAL FULL PERMISSION

1. The development shall be begun not later than the expiration of three years beginning with the date on which permission is granted.

2. The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in complete accordance with the plans and specifications listed in this decision notice, except as may be specified in the conditions attached to this permission, which shall in all cases take precedence.

3. A report specifying the measures to be taken to protect the occupants of nearby noise sensitive premises (on Miln Road, Willow Lane and Bay Hall) from noise from the proposed development shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority, before the hereby approved development is made operational. The report shall include

168

1. an assessment of noise emissions from the proposed development 2. details of background and predicted noise levels at the boundaries of properties on 27-31 (odd) Miln Road, 74-80 (even)Willow Lane and 7-9 (odd) Bay Hall 3. a written scheme of how the occupants of the properties specified in 2. will be protected from noise from the proposed development with noise attenuation measures as appropriate

The development shall not be brought into use until all works comprised within the measures specified in the approved report have been carried out in full and such works shall be thereafter retained.

4. The D1 & D2 uses herby permitted shall not open to visiting members of the public outside the hours of 08.30 to 21.00hours on any day of the week.

5. Notwithstanding the requirements of condition 6, the existing car park areas, shown hatched on drawing no. K14/5795/02 and vehicular access to the site shall be retained at all times for purposes of access and parking to serve the proposed uses..

6. Development shall not commence until detailed floor plans to include the gross floor area for each proposed use, together with a detailed access and parking layout plan to support such uses, have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall thereafter be operated in compliance with the approved floor plans, access and parking layouts.

7. Details of storage and access for collection of wastes from the premises shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority, before the hereby approved development is brought into use. The development shall thereafter be operated in compliance with the approved details and adhered to at all times.

8 .In the event that contamination not previously identified by the developer prior to the grant of this planning permission is encountered during the development, all works on site (save for site investigation works) shall cease immediately and the local planning authority shall be notified in writing within 2 working days. Unless otherwise agreed in writing with the local planning authority, works on site shall not recommence until either (a) a Remediation Strategy has been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority or (b) the local planning authority has confirmed in writing that remediation measures are not required. The Remediation Strategy shall include a timetable for the implementation and completion of the approved remediation measures. Thereafter remediation of the site shall be carried out and completed in accordance with the approved Remediation Strategy.

Following completion of any measures identified in the approved Remediation Strategy a Validation Report shall be submitted to the local planning authority. Unless otherwise agreed in writing with the local planning authority, no part of the site shall be brought into use until such time as the whole site has been 169

remediated in accordance with the approved Remediation Strategy and a Validation Report in respect of those works has been approved in writing by the local planning authority.

NOTE: With regards to condition no. 3, a competent person should undertake any noise survey and developers may wish to contact the Association of Noise Consultants http://www.association-of-noise- consultants.co.uk/Pages/Links.htm (01736 852958) or the Institute of Acoustics http://www.ioa.org.uk (01727 848195) for a list of members.

NOTE: The site lies partially in flood zone 2 and 3 on the Environment Agency’s flood maps as such please see link below to advice from the Environment Agency on how to reduce the potential impact on flooding and the production of a flood evacuation plan. http://www2.kirklees.gov.uk/business/planning/application_search/filedownloa d.aspx?application_number=2014/92515&file_reference=510751

NOTE: All contamination reports shall be prepared in accordance with CLR11, PPS23 and the Council’s Advice for Development documents or any subsequent revisions of those documents.

07.30 and 18.30 hours Mondays to Fridays 08.00 and 13.00hours , Saturdays

With no working Sundays or Public Holidays In some cases, different site specific hours of operation may be appropriate.

This recommendation is based on the following plan(s):-

Plan Type Reference Version Date Received Location plan K14/5795/01 22 Aug 2014 Design & Access K14/5795/ 22 Aug 2014 statement Flood risk and K14/5795/ 22 Aug 2014 sequential test Dated August 2014 Car Park plan K14/5795/02 29 Sept 2014

170

Application No: 2014/92662

Type of application: 62m - FULL APPLICATION

Proposal: Change of use from builders merchant (Sui Generis) to warehouse (B8), vehicle workshop (B2) and external vehicle storage

Location: Builder Centre, Willow Lane, Fartown, Huddersfield, HD1 6EB

Grid Ref: 414385.0 417744.0

Ward: Greenhead Ward

Applicant: Ken Savage, Perrys Motor Sales Ltd

Agent: Thomas Gibson, GD Design Group

Target Date: 25-Nov-2014

Recommendation: ASD-CONDITIONAL FULL APPROVAL SUBJECT TO THE DELEGATION OF AUTHORITY TO OFFICERS

------

LOCATION PLAN

88 8 PH

46 ASH STREET

40a 13 Shelter

104 44 38a 102 76.2m 42 2 40

38 11 9 100

WILLOW LANE 98

36 141 96

96a 74.7m 139

DW 92 7

20 94

90 5 133

DW 2 4

Clough House Mill Beck CROFT COTTAGE PH 1 4 LANE 74.7m

1 131

TCB

129 86

20 86a

1 5

123 to 127 to 123 El Sub Sta

23 Builder's Yard

121

115

119

117 76

107

103 105 14

101 64

93 BRADFORD ROAD

Map not to scale – for identification purposes only

1. SUMMARY OF APPLICATION

It is considered that the proposed development would protect visual amenity and highway safety and in principle would amount to sustainable 171

development. At present however there is insufficient information to establish that the proposed use could operate without giving rise to unacceptable levels of noise disturbance harmful to residential amenity. It is therefore recommended that conditional full permission is granted subject to the delegation of authority to officers as set out in the Recommendation below.

RECOMMENDATION: Conditional Full permission subject to the delegation of authority to officers to: • Resolve potential noise issues following submission of an acoustic report and consultation with Environmental Services • Impose all necessary and appropriate planning conditions including those below • Subject to there being no substantive change that would affect this recommendation, issue the decision notice.

2. INFORMATION

The application is brought to Sub Committee because the site area is over 0.5ha. This is in accordance with the Council’s delegation agreement.

3. PROPOSAL/SITE DESCRIPTION

Site The site comprises a large piece of land mainly surfaced in concrete and with two large buildings, one (measuring 42 by 19m) near the north-west corner close to the boundary with Willow Lane, and the other, which is larger (66 by 28m), near the east of the site.

Clough House Mill Beck forms the south-western boundary of the site. The site backs on to the rear of residential properties to the east and there are more residential development on the opposite side of Willow Lane to the north.

Proposal The proposal is for the change of use of the site from a builders’ merchant (sui generis) to a mixed use comprising warehouse (B8), vehicle workshop (B2) and external vehicle storage (164 cars)

Within the larger building, about two thirds of the internal area would be taken up by a warehouse, the rest by offices, dispatch and delivery centre, and staff facilities. The smaller building would be predominantly car storage.

The application form states that there would be 44 full-time employees and that the main hours of operation would be from 0700 until 1800 hours Mon-Fri, 0700 untill1300 hours Saturdays, with no working on Sundays or Bank holidays. An additional statement however says that in addition to this, delivery vans would depart from the premises Mon-Fri at 0600 hours and that there would also be a nightshift commencing 2200 on Monday and ending at 0700 Tuesday, with three vehicle departures throughout the night. 172

Furthermore a small number of personnel would be employed overnight on other days of the week to take delivery of stock, stock check and stack the shelves.

An explanatory statement goes into further detail about the reason for the proposal. According to this statement, the applicant already operates a number of car dealerships from sites in Huddersfield that are not able to expand so the intention is to take some of the facilities away from these sites, namely parts warehousing and deliveries along with storage and preparation of new and used vehicles, which would then be transferred back to and sold from the existing dealerships.

4. BACKGROUND AND HISTORY

2001/90948 – Use of part of builders’ merchant’s as ancillary tool hire centre. Permission granted. 98/92270 – Erection of extension – conditional approval 88/01396 – Erection of warehouse, storage, office and showroom facilities – conditional approval

5. PLANNING POLICY

Kirklees Unitary Development Plan (UDP)

The site is within Huddersfield Town Centre on the UDP proposals map and is within an area in which industrial and warehousing development will normally be permitted.

• TC12 – Industrial and warehousing development in Huddersfield Town Centre • BE1 – Design principles • BE2 – Quality of design • EP4 – Noise generating and noise-sensitive development • T10 – Highway safety • T19 – Parking standards

National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF)

• Core Planning Principles • Section 1 – Building a strong, competitive economy • Section 7 – Requiring good design • Section 10 – Meeting the challenge of climate change, flooding and coastal change • Section 11 – Conserving and enhancing the natural environment. • Technical Guidance

6. CONSULTATION RESPONSES

Environment Agency – No objection 173

KC Highways Development Management – No objections to the highway safety aspects of the proposal.

KC Environmental Services – A noise report should be submitted before the application is determined.

7. REPRESENTATIONS

The statutory publicity period expired on 03-Oct-2014.

No representations have been received as a result.

8. ASSESSMENT

General Principle:

The application will be assessed having regard to the following Policies contained within the NPPF:

Core planning principles – Planning should proactively drive and support sustainable economic development.

Building a strong, competitive economy – The planning system should support sustainable economic growth.

Requiring good design – Developments should function well and add to the overall quality of the area, establish a strong sense of place, optimise the potential of the site to accommodate development, create safe and accessible environments, and be visually attractive.

Conserving and enhancing the natural environment – advises that planning policies and decisions should aim to prevent noise giving rise to significant adverse impacts on health and quality of life, while not placing unreasonable restrictions on businesses.

Promoting Healthy Communities - planning decisions …should aim to achieve places which promote…safe and accessible environments where crime and disorder, and the fear of crime, do not undermine quality of life or community cohesion.

Meeting the challenge of climate change, flooding and coastal change: Planning decisions should take into account flood risk and where possible take opportunities to reduce the causes of flooding.

The site is located in a built-up area, close to Birkby Local Centre and Huddersfield Town Centre, and would make efficient use of previously- developed land. It would not result in a net loss of an employment site since it would involve replacing one employment use with another. Furthermore the site is allocated in the UDP as an area in which industrial and warehousing 174

development will normally be permitted. It would allow a currently vacant site to be brought back into productive use. The change of use is therefore appropriate in principle and supportive of the aims of sustainable development subject to amenity, environmental and highway factors, which are to be assessed in detail below.

Impact on amenity:

Visual amenity:

No external alterations to the existing buildings are proposed. No changes to the boundary treatments are proposed except the replacement of the existing palisade fencing around the entrance gate.

The external storage of up to 164 cars would have some impact on the visual character of the site. However, the site is not particularly open – it is only adjacent to the public highway on the north side, and the main vehicle storage areas would be predominantly located away from the highway boundary. Some of the vehicle storage areas, in particular those located towards the south-eastern corner of the site, would be close to the rear gardens of neighbouring residential properties; however it is considered that this in itself would not have a significantly detrimental impact on their outlook, especially considering the site’s former use as a builder’s yard.

It is considered that the proposed development would respect visual amenity and the character of the area and would comply with the aims of Policies BE1 and BE2 of the UDP and guidance in Chapter 7 of the NPPF.

Residential amenity:

The vehicle workshop element of the proposal has the potential to generate a significant amount of noise during the hours of operation. The warehouse and distribution element would probably not generate such high levels of noise in itself but owing to the scale and nature of the use it would give rise to more intensive vehicle movements including car transporters.

Based on these factors and as a result of concerns expressed by Environmental Services, an acoustic report has been requested from the applicant. The acoustic report would need to demonstrate how nearby residents will be protected from noise from the proposed development and include an assessment of noise emissions from the proposed development and details of background and predicted noise levels at the boundary of nearby residential properties together with proposed noise attenuation measures. The report would need to provide appropriate information for all times of day and night when the development will operate.

The impact of noise on the amenities of nearby residents is material to the acceptability of the proposal. It is considered that planning permission should not be granted until this matter is resolved through the submission and

175

assessment of a suitable acoustic report. To date no report has been received but progress on this matter will be provided in the update to Members.

The Environmental Health officer has recommended that if permission is granted then it should be subject to the condition that the hours of operation are restricted to those on the application form (7:00-18:00 Monday to Friday and 7:00-13:00 Saturdays). Officers consider on the basis of the information currently submitted that additional night-time working and despatches from the site as early as 0600 hours as proposed by the applicant would be likely to give rise to an unacceptable level of noise disturbance to neighbouring residential properties.

The agent has been notified of the Council’s concerns and has stated that to the best of his knowledge, limited night-time operations took place when the site was in use as a builder’s yard, and has furthermore explained that the proposed use might not be viable if the opening hours were restricted to 0700 to 1800 only. The agent has offered to provide further information on the previous hours of operation of the site. However, no evidence has been submitted to date. The approved hours of operation on permission 88/01396 for the erection of the original buildings are 0800 to 1800 Mon-Sat only, although it is not known whether these hours have been adhered to since this time.

Awaited information in the noise report and any evidence of previous breaches of conditions are important material considerations. Nevertheless the application is brought to Committee at this stage to avoid any delay to this employment generating proposal.

No additional external lighting is proposed – the existing floodlights that are mounted on the larger building and illuminate the yard are to be retained.

Subject to the receipt of a satisfactory acoustic report and mitigation being submitted and the appropriate hours being imposed, it is considered that the proposed development would not give rise to loss of residential amenity and would accord with the aims of Policies D2 and EP4 of the Unitary Development Plan.

Impact on ecology:

The proposed development would not involve the loss of, or works to, any mature trees within the site or on its boundary. None of the trees on the site boundary is covered by a Tree Preservation Order.

The site is in the bat alert layer but it is not considered to have any implications for bats. No demolition or external alteration to the buildings is proposed, the original use could be resumed without planning permission, and furthermore the buildings appear to be sound and could be brought back into use without major repairs or adaptation. The standard precautionary note should be added.

176

Highway safety:

13 staff and managers’ parking spaces are to be provided close to the larger building with a further 5 spaces for motorcycles and 5 for pedal cycles. 21 spaces are to be provided for the parking of vans with an additional area for deliveries and loading. In addition, a secure fenced compound is to be created at the southern end of the site for storage of 70 cars, and another one in the western part of the site for storage of 94 cars.

The standard car parking requirement for storage and distribution uses is one space per 150 square metres, which would in this case imply a need for 11 spaces; industrial uses, where located in town centres or locations with good public transport accessibility, are only expected to provide spaces to fulfil their minimum operational requirements. It is considered that employee car parking provision is adequate.

Service vehicle parking, for both types of use, should normally be one per 500 square metres. The spaces provided would be in excess of this and the proposed layout shows sufficient space for manoeuvring and loading / unloading of large vehicles.

It is proposed that cars would be delivered to site on transporters and offloaded on site which would minimise any inconvenience to highway users. This would include articulated vehicles. The application as submitted does not make it clear how many vehicular movements there would be each day or week. The agent has been asked for clarification on this point as part of the Council’s assessment of noise implications.

It is however considered, that on the basis of the proposed use, the arrangements that would be made for access, servicing and parking for the proposed development would not create or materially add to highway safety problems and would accord with the aims of Policies T10 and T19 of the UDP.

This is subject to the condition that the parking spaces for staff and delivery vehicles are marked out before the use commences, and that these plus the cycles and motorcycle parking facilities are retained thereafter.

Other issues:

A small part of the site near the south-eastern corner is in Flood Zone 2 but this does not affect either of the buildings within the site. Furthermore, the proposed development does not involve a change from a less to a more vulnerable use.

The proposal is not considered to have any implications for crime and disorder.

Representations:

No representations have been made by any third party. 177

Conclusion

In conclusion it is considered that subject to the resolution of noise issues the proposed development would protect visual and residential amenity and highway safety and would amount to sustainable development. It is therefore in accordance with the UDP and NPPF and it is recommended that conditional outline permission is granted.

9. RECOMMENDATION

Conditional Full permission subject to the delegation of authority to officers to: • Resolve potential noise issues following submission of an acoustic report and consultation with Environmental Services • Impose all necessary and appropriate planning conditions including those below • Subject to there being no substantive change that would affect this recommendation, issue the decision notice.

Conditions

1. The development hereby permitted shall be begun within three years of the date of this permission.

3. The development shall not be brought into use until all areas indicated to be used for parking, turning of vehicles, loading and unloading on the submitted/listed plan(s) have been provided and marked out. Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995 as amended (or any Order revoking or re-enacting that Order) these areas shall be so retained, free of obstructions and available for the use(s) specified on the submitted/listed plan(s) for the lifetime of the development.

178

This recommendation is based on the following plans:

Plan Type Reference Version Date Received Location plan 1204-PRH/P 100 03-Sep-2014 Existing layout 01 03-Sep-2014 Proposed layout 02 03-Sep-2014 Existing elevations PDI 03-Sep-2014 centre Existing elevations 03-Sep-2014 warehouse building Supplementary information 29-Aug-2014 Statement on hours of operation

179