120 affordable homes at Lloyds Banking Group, Farsley, Leeds

What was proposed

The application proposed demolishing existing buildings and constructing 120 affordable homes with access, parking, open space, landscaping, drainage and biodiversity measures.

“Full planning permission is sought for the demolition of the existing office and data centre buildings formerly occupied by Lloyds Banking Group and the redevelopment of the site to provide 120 affordable dwellings together with associated access roads, parking, public open space, sustainable drainage infrastructure, landscaping, biodiversity enhancements and associated engineering works.”

“The amended scheme comprises a mix of apartments and dwellinghouses and has evolved significantly during the course of the application. The current proposal includes: • 27 apartments within a single apartment block; • 93 dwellinghouses; • A central area of public open space; • Integrated sustainable drainage features; • Significant new landscaping and biodiversity enhancements;”

Officer report

The site and its setting

The 3.39-hectare brownfield site contained former office and data centre buildings and was surrounded by housing, schools, community uses and a mature tree belt.

“The application site comprises approximately 3.39 hectares of previously developed land located at Lloyds Banking Group, Cote Lane, Farsley, occupying a prominent position at Dawsons Corner within the western part of Leeds. The site is currently occupied by former office and data centre buildings together with associated areas of hardstanding, access roads, parking provision and landscaped grounds.”

“Educational uses including Farfield Primary School and associated nursery facilities together with established residential development sit to the north and east of the site. The site fronts onto Cote Lane and lies opposite Pudsey Civic Hall. Residential development, including apartment buildings and housing, is situated to the south and south-east.”

Officer report

Earlier plans and changes

Earlier pre-application advice was given, and the scheme was reduced from 133 to 120 homes with more family housing, open space and landscaping.

“PREAPP/24/00427 - Residential redevelopment of the site. Pre- application advice provided 20.02.205.”

“Reduction in dwelling numbers from 133 to 120 units. • Removal of an apartment block and increased provision of family housing. • Introduction of a central area of public open space and SuDS infrastructure. • Improved garden sizes and residential amenity provision. • Enhanced street tree planting, landscaping and biodiversity measures. • Increased natural surveillance through active frontages overlooking public spaces.”

Officer report

What officers recommended

Officers recommended approval because the site was suitable for housing and the revised scheme provided affordable homes, acceptable design, amenity, highways and environmental measures.

“The proposal would provide a broad range of affordable accommodation including apartments, smaller dwellings, family housing and accessible homes. The amended layout has increased the proportion of family housing through the removal of one apartment block and the introduction of additional dwellinghouses, thereby broadening the range of affordable housing products available across the site.”

“The delivery of affordable housing remains a key strategic objective of both national and local planning policy. Officers attach substantial positive weight to the provision of 120 affordable homes in a highly sustainable location.”

Officer report

What consultees said

Consultees raised no objections subject to conditions or obligations, while design and landscape concerns about the initial scheme were addressed through amendments.

“West Yorkshire Police – No objection subject to advice Environmental Health Services (Pollution Control) – No objections subject to conditions Environmental Health Services (Noise) - No objections subject to conditions Contaminated Land – No objection subject to conditions Design – Objection to initial scheme, amended proposals submitted Flood Risk Management – No objections subject to conditions Yorkshire Water - No objections subject to conditions Policy (Local Plans)…”

Officer report

What people said

Objectors cited overdevelopment, traffic, parking, open space, infrastructure, trees and amenity; supporters welcomed affordable housing, brownfield redevelopment and site improvements.

“The scale, density and intensity of the proposed development is excessive and constitutes overdevelopment of the site. • The proposal includes too many apartments and insufficient family housing. • Insufficient on-site public open space and amenity provision. • Increased traffic generation and congestion on the local highway network, including impacts on Cote Lane, Dawsons Corner and surrounding residential streets.”

“The redevelopment would bring a vacant and underutilised brownfield site back into beneficial use. • The proposal would deliver much-needed affordable housing within a sustainable location meeting local need (with a request that the dwellings are given over to local residents) • The scheme represents an improvement over the existing buildings and site appearance.”

Officer report

Who spoke

A ward councillor raised concerns, while the applicant’s representative and another councillor answered members’ questions about traffic, calming, construction and residential streets.

The vote

Members unanimously supported the officer recommendation with additions requiring a TRO review and continued affordable housing provision.

“The Area Planning Manager summed up the discussions, which included the following points: • To add conditions to review the TRO once the development is 80% occupied and to add a clause to the S106 Agreement to ensure that the development would be affordable housing in perpetuity and remain with the registered provider as affordable housing.”

“Upon voting, a motion was put forward to move the officer recommendation, as per the submitted report, with the additions as set out above. This was moved and seconded, and it was unanimously RESOLVED – To defer and delegate to the Chief Planning Officer for approval subject to the specified conditions as set out in the submitted report with two additional conditions: • to review the TRO once the development is 80% occupied.”

Minutes