86-bed OAP home in Leeds approved despite objections

A sign for the original Musgrave Court Care Home, Crawshaw Road, Pudsey
A sign for the original Musgrave Court Care Home, Crawshaw Road, Pudsey
Have your say

PLANS for a brand new privately-run older people’s care home to be built on the site of a former council-run facility have been approved at the second time of asking, despite a last minute appeal by local residents worried about its “dominant” look and impact on local infrastructure.

As reported in the YEP yesterday, an initial blueprint for an 86-bed care home on the former Musgrave Court site in Crawshaw Road, Pudsey - which would be more than double the size of the original complex - was deferred last month after a raft of objections were lodged against the three-storey development.

At Leeds Civic Hall today (Thursday), the South and West plans panel unanimously approved the scheme.

However there was anger from the dozen or so local residents who were at the meeting, and had asked for another deferral amid claims they were not aware the application was coming back before the panel today.

But they were told council rules would not allow them to win a an 11th hour deferral.

The original Musgrave Court closed in 2014 despite a local campaign to save it, and Leeds City Council sold the land to a developer in 2016.

The proposals from Angela Swift Development Ltd were changed to include a reduction in height to bring the building in line with others in the area and to make it “less dominant”

The panel took just a few minutes to unanimously approve the application.

Councillor Tom Leadley said: “I think it’s a big improvement. The problems last time were the sheer bulk and the way it would have loomed over neighbouring buildings. Dropping it down has answered a lot of the questions.”

After the meeting, local residents told the Yorkshire Evening Post of their anger and disappointment at the decision.

Emma Furbank, who lives in Crawshaw Road directly opposite the development, said none of the objectors’ planning concerns had been addressed, adding that parking and access issues make the site “not ideal for a care home”.