Leeds City Council Site Allocations Plan Examination Matter 7: Selection of sites allocated for development – Outer South West: Main Issue 1 Main Issue 2 Additional site specific questions Doc No. M7/1j Leeds Local Plan Page 1 of 17 Main Issue 1: For each Housing Market Characteristic Area, are the individual sites selected sound? 1 Are the selected sites justified having regard to the site selection methodology and process, paying particular attention to the deliverability of the allocated sites? 1.1 Yes. The Council’s response to Matter 6 details the overall site assessment and selection process used for allocation of sites in the Plan. The Council considers that this approach is the most appropriate in terms of meeting CS aims and objectives for the MD as a whole and that the selection of sites is justified. This response to Matter 7 sets out how the overall methodology and process has applied in this HMCA. It highlights the specific characteristics of and evidence relating to Outer South West and notes whether there are any specific issues arising. 1.2 Further to paragraph 3.10 of the submission SAP CD1/1, Outer South West has a high Core Strategy target of 7,200 units which makes up 11% of the district total. The largest settlement in Outer South West is the town of Morley which is identified as a major settlement within the Core Strategy Settlement Hierarchy. Outer South West also includes the settlements of Drighlington, East Ardsley, Gildersome and TIngley/West Ardsley which are identified as smaller settlements within the Core Strategy and also have a history of coal mining. There are also the communities of Beeston and Middleton that are connected to the Leeds main urban area. Most settlements contain a range of shops and services and there is also the out of town retail park The White Rose Centre, to the south of Beeston on Dewsbury Road. The South Leeds Regeneration Priority Programme Area (as defined in the Core Strategy) covers the settlements of Morley, Beeston, Middleton and Thorpe on the Hill. All settlements have good access to the M621 and M62 and there are two train stations, located at Morley and Cottingley. There are no major problems with flood risk. 1.3 The methodology as outlined in Matter 6 is considered robust. In Outer South West in terms of new housing allocations 158 sites were put forward for consideration, 93 of which are in or partly in Green Belt. In Outer South West there are: a) 34 housing allocations (14 of which are Green Belt/part Green Belt) b) 5 safeguarded land designation (1 of which is Green Belt) (see response to question 6 below) c) 119 sites are rejected (79 of these are Green Belt). The reasons for allocation and rejection of sites are detailed at Appendix 2, Page 2 of 17 pages 219 to 242 in the Housing Background Paper CD1/34. 1.4 In terms of office and general employment allocations, 20 sites were put forward for consideration in Outer South West. In the HMCA there are: a) 7 general employment allocations (2 in Green Belt) b) 13 sites are rejected Reasons for allocation and rejection of sites are detailed at Appendix 1, pages 52 to 57 of the Employment Background Paper CD1/29. 1.5 Within the context of the NPPF CD3/1, the deliverability of sites concerns whether they are suitable, available and achievable. Paragraphs 5.5 to 5.17 of the Housing Background Paper CD1/34 considers this at a strategic level, paragraphs 5.6 to 5.8 looking at suitability, paragraphs 5.9 to 5.10 availability and 5.11 to 5.17 achievability. The appropriateness of employment sites is explained in the Employment Background Paper CD1/29 and also in response to Matter 2, Question 9. 1.6 Deliverability In terms of suitability, the site assessment process has considered an individual site’s suitability for development including physical constraints such as access, infrastructure, flood risk, ecology and heritage considerations alongside compliance with the CS. The Site Assessments document CD1/38 provides the full site assessments for all allocations in Outer South West (both housing and employment). Where necessary specific site requirements have been applied to sites where mitigation measures are necessary to ensure a site remains suitable for development. 1.7 In terms of the availability of sites, as paragraph 5.10 of CD1/34 and paragraph 3.13 of CD1/29 details, the sites have generally been submitted to the Council for consideration for the allocated use therefore there is landowner intention to release the sites for that purpose. Where this is not the case the Council has contacted the landowners of allocated sites. No evidence has been received that any of the proposed allocations will not be made available except for 2 sites in Outer South West: 1) Site EG1-148 Site Opposite Ravell Works, Gelderd Road, Wortley is adjacent to the Jewish Cemetery. One third of site EG1-148 is owned by the trustees of the Jewish community, the United Hebrew Congregations (UHC) who have donated their land for the specific purposes of being a burial ground. Since submission of the plan UHC is no longer willing to make this land available for employment use and therefore the Council proposes a main modification to amend the boundary to exclude the UHC land from this identified site and the contribution to the employment target will be adjusted accordingly. (Please note that this is the same site as referred to in paragraph 3.2 below). Page 3 of 17 2) Since the submission of the plan the Council has updated the Employment Land Assessment 2017 (EB3/7) which has revealed that the landowner of site EG2-20 Fall Lane, East Ardsley has confirmed that they are no longer willing to make the land available for the proposed employment use. The site is surrounded by newly built housing development and the landowners have marketed it for commercial use with no success resulting in the site being left vacant for a number of years. The Council therefore proposes a main modification to delete this site as an employment allocation from the Site Allocations Plan. It will therefore remain as unallocated allowing the landowner to pursue the most appropriate use or mix of uses for the site through the planning application process. 1.8 The rest of the proposed allocations are considered to be policy compliant and suitable; any lack of response from a landowner has been deemed to that the land remains available and the allocation is justified. A number of sites are already being actively promoted by the agents/developers as evidenced in representations received. In addition 6 sites have planning permission/resolution that planning permission be granted: HG2-143 King Street/Spring Gardens Drighlington (part of site) (14/01904/FU) HG2-155 Joseph Priestly College (16/06900/FU), HG2-149 Lane Side Farm Morley (16/02988/OT/S) and HG2-164 Thorpe Road, Thorpe Square, Middleton/HG2-232 Land at Towcester Avenue, Middleton /HG2-231 Land at Throstle Terrace, Middleton (16/03861/FU). An update on planning permissions on sites since 1/4/16 will be sent to the Inspector before the commencement of the hearing sessions. 1.9 In terms of achievability, the Council’s response to Matter 6 Question 7 explains how viability has been tested and how the Council will respond to any future changes. Outer South West is a mixed market value area. On all sites except 1, there is no evidence and no representations have been received on any particular site to suggest that development is not viable. On one site, EG2-21 Lingwell Gate Lane, a representation (PDE02783) has stated that the cost of remediation is such that a higher value use is needed. Notwithstanding this representation the Council is satisfied that development is achievable, as a higher value use would require more onerous (and therefore more costly) remediation. Given that the land to the west is safeguarded for waste use in the Natural Resources and Waste Local Plan CD2/2, residential development would not be compatible with the adjacent use. Page 4 of 17 2 Are sufficient sites identified in the HMCA consistent with the CS? 2.1 Please see the Council’s response to Matter 2 Question 9. 2.2 Outer South West is 231 under the indicative target of 7,200 as illustrated in the table below. Extract from Table 1 Housing Distribution by Housing Market Characteristic Area (HMCA), paragraph 2.27 of the Submission Draft Plan CD1/1 Housing Core Percentage Existing Proposed Total +/- Market Strategy supply allocations housing Target Characteristic Housing (‘Identified supply Area Target sites’) Outer South 7,200 11% 2,648 4,321 6,969 -231 West Whilst under the CS target, the Council have outlined how it will address this shortfall in our response to Matter 2 and in EX2, response to Question 11. 2.3 As regards employment sites there is no specific HMCA target. Provision and distribution of employment sites is addressed in the Council’s response to Matter 2, Question 9. 3 On identified sites where planning permission has expired, is there very convincing written or verbal evidence that the intentions of the owners/developers have changed? (Please see schedule 1) 3.1 The Council’s response to ‘Further Questions to the Council’ (7th August 2017) EX2c, response to Question 1 provides a narrative in relation to Schedule 1 and gives a detailed response for each expired permission. Since 2012, the base date of the plan, some sites have inevitably expired.