COUNCILLORS have deferred a decision on a controversial plan to build a new Tesco store in north Leeds.
After nearly three hours of debate, members of the council's east plans panel said they needed more information on highways issues; the likely impact of the development on smaller shops in nearby Oakwood district centre; and details of how a £192,500
contribution from Tesco for footpath and other improvements would be spent.
The supermarket giant wants to demolish its store and a Homebase branch in Roundhay Road and replace them with a new Tesco, a petrol station and a 665-space car park.
A planning officer's report has recommended approval of the scheme.
The meeting heard the new Tesco would be an "eco store" with a timber frame, larch wood cladding, glazing, natural ventilation and a combined heat and power system.
The plans have split the community, with 591 people objecting and 417 people supporting the proposal.
Simon Jose, one of the objectors, said the application contravened planning policies and community engagement during the consultation period had been poor, and the impact on the Oakwood district centre under-estimated.
He said allowing a larger Tesco to be built could be "the tipping point for the collapse of Oakwood and Harehills."
He claimed Tesco had made a number of contradictory claims and added: "In view of the negative economic and social impact we think the application should be rejected or at the very least deferred while we are allowed to submit evidence that counters Tesco's claims."
Deborah Hayeems, the company's regional corporate affairs manager, said the Oakwood store was popular and there was evidence that customers wanted a wider choice of goods.
She said the scheme would create jobs for local people and strengthen the store's links with the Oakwood centre. She was confident highway improvements would cope with an increase in traffic and said: "We believe this is a good package that will bring benefits and will help to keep people shopping locally."
Coun Robert Finnigan (Morley Independent, Morley North) said the application should be rejected because of its size and likely impact on other shops, but the panel opted for deferral.
