NEWS: Notes from High Royds Liaison Group meeting with Avant and Trinity

High Royds Liaison Group Meeting on Tuesday July 5, 2022, held at the Civic Hall Leeds

Present:  Cllr Paul Alderson; Cllr Paul Wadsworth; Carol Cunningham LCC Planning; Dean Cutts Technical Director Avant; Nigel Hackett HRRA; Nick Lowry HRRA; Andrew Armitage HRRA; Joanne Palmer, Senior Property Manager, Trinity Estates (via Zoom)

Apologies: Jon Birkin, Avant

Road/pathway/lighting adoption

DC advised the meeting that preparatory drainage works required by Yorkshire Water had now been completed.

Avant had received a deed of variation from YW on Friday July 1. He stated that this would be returned to YW on July 5.

Following this DC would need to obtain approval from the Avant board to proceed with works. He anticipated that this would happen on Monday July 11, 2022.

DC estimated that it would be 2-3 weeks following board approval that works could commence. The anticipated timeline for these works would be approx. three months.

Following the works to roads/pathways/lighting there would be a period of remedial consultation between LCC and Avant. In effect this would constitute a period of one year in which LCC would need to satisfy themselves that all works had been carried out to an appropriate standard to allow adoption to take place.

Unadopted roads/pathways

There are still some works outstanding on areas of unadopted roads specifically, but not limited to areas of block paving around those blocks not yet taken into management, notably Aysgarth Court and Appleton Court.

These areas will need to be brought up to an acceptable standard by Avant before Trinity Estates will agree to take these blocks into management.

This includes the car park behind Appleton, the diagonal walkway at the back of Aysgarth/Askrigg etc.

Other areas of block paving around blocks which have been taken into management will fall under the responsibility of Trinity Estates and JP advised that the tendering process for these areas is underway.

Vehicle access on ingle Lane and High Royds Drive (aboveGuiseley Drive)

NL raised serious concerns about these two areas of road being left open to the possibility of being used as a “rat run” or abused by residents and delivery drivers.

These two points which are both single track roads were originally intended to form part of a bus route and were to incorporate automated bus barriers. This was part of the original s 38 agreement. When the bus route failed to materialise (service providers were unwilling to take on the route), this section of the s38 was withdrawn and Avant replaced barriers with “No Entry” signs. These are as yet unenforceable. They have still to be introduced on Ingle Lane.

CC advised that LCC Highways were justified in removing the requirement for the barrier scheme.

If residents wanted such a system to be introduced following adoption it would have to be approved by all residents.

Members of HRRA suggested that the alternative would undoubtedly lead to a rat run, especially from the A65 onto Guiseley Drive and round Ingle Lane to the traffic lights at the bottom of HRD.

As this section of Ingle Lane is single track road it could and probably would lead to accidents and also traffic using the lawned areas to avoid oncoming vehicles. It would almost certainly be used by delivery drivers as a shortcut.

The top end of HRD above Guiseley drive would almost certainly be used by residents living at the top end of the estate.

Both sections of road would become enforceable under existing road traffic laws following adoption and could be monitored by CCTV cameras.

Cllrs Wadsworth and Alderson agreed to refer the matter further to Jonathon Walters in highways.

Ecological Reports

Questions have been raised for some time now by HRRA with regard the requirement for continued Ecological Reporting once the development is complete and the wider Estate has been handed over to trinity Estates to manage. (This process actually took place in July 2021).

HRRA argues that the requirements for annual Ecological reports only applied to the construction phase of the development and would then cease.

CC confirmed that the last Ecological report received from Avant had been for 2017.

DC stated that he believed that all Ecological reports required under the s106 agreement had been undertaken by Avant. It was noted, however, that these reports should be sent to both LCC Ecologist and HRRA. Neither body had received these reports.

Until these reports were received and evaluated by LCC it was unclear as to who should be responsible for the cost of maintaining the wider estate or indeed carrying out any works highlighted as being required. HRRA is adamant that until such time that the reports are agreed with the LCC Ecologist, Avant must remain responsible for any resultant costs.

CC was of the opinion that it could be the case that any such ecological requirements going forward could mean a less frequent reporting, maybe every five or ten years. This needs to be confirmed.

There are also question marks over two large areas of land taken out of the estate and subsequently sold by Avant to local farmers. One of these is to the left of Guiseley Drive. This land contains the old pumping station which is currently being developed by the new owner. CC appeared unclear about the current status of planning permission for this project and said she would follow up.

The other area of land to the side of Menston Drive was sold with specific conditions relating to both its use and the continuing agreement to meet all ecological requirements going forward. DC advised that these conditions definitely formed part of the contract of sale.

NH asked JP what requirements were in place with regard to the management of the many areas of landscaping around the development under ecological requirements. These areas now form part of the “wider estate” rather than coming under the previous “external block” schedule for means of the service charge.

HRRA has continued to ascertain, for example, which areas of the estate actually constitute “wildflower meadow” and as such are limited to cutting and maintenance on a very limited number of times each year.

JP confirmed that with her Landscaping contractor she is currently developing a comprehensive landscaping maintenance plan for the whole estate. Of course this is a complex task, and is also dependent on all parties having access to all Ecological reports produced historically by Avant. JP agreed to send the plan, once completed to both councillors and HRRA.

New Sports and Social Club

DC advised the meeting that the latest plans for the new sports club, as agreed by the group established under the umbrella of HRRA to handle this project, would be subject to a further planning application to LCC within three weeks.

CC confirmed that as it was an amended application to a previous application it would be seen as a “minor application” by the LCC planning dept. It is estimated that the planning process would be approx 13 weeks.

Other points raised

NL asked DC when the football pitches would be cut as they were looking unsightly. DC confirmed that he had instructed Brambldown accordingly.

DC also confirmed to Cllr PW that the existing cricket pavilion would be demolished as planned. It had been deemed unsafe due to the roof.

Next meeting: early October (although it was  agreed communications will continue between all parties in the meantime)