Ten family homes at Rear of 18 Kingsley Avenue, Lockwood, Huddersfield

What was proposed

The application proposed demolishing 18 Kingsley Avenue to create access and building ten three-storey, four-bedroom semi-detached homes.

“The site is located in Crosland Moor off Kingsley Avenue, and comprises approximately 0.63ha of open land, which hosts a number of mature trees and vegetation. The site is located to the rear of existing dwellings on Kingsley Avenue, whereby vehicle access is constrained. Pedestrians can access the site via an existing access road directly adjacent to no. Kinglsey Avenue (to the east) which leads down to Church Street and the play area and recreational ground.”

“Access into the site is to be via a new access from Kingsley Avenue, which is to be created by demolishing no. Kingsley Avenue, with repair works to the attached dwelling (no. 20) to make good. The road would run along the southern boundary of the site, with all 10 plots fronting on to it. Two turning heads are also proposed, with only part of the access road being formally adopted.”

Officer report

The site and surroundings

The site was open land with mature trees, steep slopes, surrounding homes, a play area and recreation ground, and a railway line nearby.

“To the east, south and west are residential dwellings, and to the north-west is a play area and recreation ground. It is also important to note that to the east of the site is a railway line, of which the proposed access would run above.”

Officer report

Earlier applications

Earlier proposals included pre-application advice for up to nine homes and a withdrawn outline application for one terraced dwelling.

“2022/20699 – Pre-application advice for residential development for up to 9 dwellings. Comments made 02/11/2022.”

“97/93208 – Outline application for erection of one terraced dwelling. Withdrawn 13/01/1998.”

Officer report

Why officers supported it

Officers considered the reduced density justified by site constraints and found the design, amenity, access, drainage, ecology and trees acceptable subject to controls.

“As the application site measures 0.94ha it is deemed that the site could potentially be capable of providing 34 dwellings based on the above figures. However, given the nature of the site, proposed site access, railway line, mature planting and the proximity of the site to a children’s play area/recreation ground it is considered reasonable that the number of dwellings proposed here would have a lower density than that required within LP7’.”

“Officers acknowledge and agree with the above justification, in that given local site constraints, restricted access and the sites openly visible setting, adjacent to existing residential dwellings, a reduced density seems logical and appropriate in this location, therefore on this occasion the proposed housing density is considered acceptable.”

Officer report

Consultees’ views

Highways, Network Rail, ecology, environmental health, landscape, trees and waste consultees raised no objections subject to conditions, while Yorkshire Water’s response remained outstanding.

“KC Highways Development Management – Whilst KC Highways did have initial concerns on the layout and access of the site, following discussions and amended plans/details, KC Highways have no objections to the proposals subject to conditions.”

“Yorkshire Water – When the applicant proposed infiltration as the means of surface water discharge Yorkshire Wate initially raised no objections subject to conditions. However, following infiltration being identified as not feasible and the point of discharge being changed to the public sewer, re-consultation has been undertaken on 27/05/2026 in relation to an alteration to the surface water/foul drainage arrangements. Consultee response is outstanding.”

Officer report

What people said

Public comments included 30 supporting responses, 28 objections and one general comment, with concerns about open space, traffic, safety, drainage, wildlife and privacy.

“The end of public consultation was 12/03/2025. In total 83 public comments were received. 30 of the comments were in support of the proposals, 28 were in objection to the proposals (with 2 letters of petition received, one with 16 signatures, and the other with 21 signatures), and 1 general comment.”

“Concerns in respect of overlooking and the loss of privacy. • Concerns over the loss of sunlight and overshadowing, • Concerns in respect of noise and pollution. • The land in question is used by dog walkers and ramblers; this has not been given much consideration by the applicant. • The preservation of green space is essential for the overall health and well-being of the community.”

Officer report

Who spoke

The committee heard representations from the applicant’s agent and the applicant.

The committee’s resolution

The committee delegated authority to approve the application, issue the decision notice and complete the conditions, subject to the stated obligations and drainage process.

“1) That authority be delegated to the Head of Planning and Development to approve the application, issue the decision notice and complete the list of conditions as at (5) below. 2) That authority be delegated to the Head of Planning and Development to secure a Section 106 (i) highways - £10,000 towards funding waiting restrictions at the site access onto Kingsley Avenue Biodiversity (ii) a contribution of £56,120 towards off-site measures to achieve biodiversity net gain…”

“1) Development shall be begun within three years of the date of the permission 2) Development to be carried out in accordance with the approved plans and specifications schedule listed in the decision notice 3) Prior to occupation a scheme detailing the dedicated facilities that will be provided at each dwellinghouse for charging electric vehicles and other ultra-low emission vehicles shall be submitted to the Local Planning Authority, and be installed prior to occupation 4)…”

Minutes