Campaigners call on planning chiefs to stand firm on 299-home Haigh Woods plan decision

Outline plans to build the homes near Haigh Wood, West Ardsley, were rejected by councillors at a plans panel meeting in January, due to concerns around a lack of amenities and public transport in the area.

But a report set to go before a virtual meeting of the council’s city plans panel this week – set to determine the reasons for refusal – now includes an option to accept the proposals in principle due to ‘additional information’ from the applicants about the site.

West Ardsley Action Group (WAAG), which has campaigned against the plans for a number of years, claims the council’s plans panel should be stick to the choice it has already made, and that the recommendation to overturn the decision took the community by surprise.

A letter sent by WAAG to Leeds City Council tells of the meeting in January: “Sixty objectors left the room when discussion of the item was concluded only to discover later that the decision minuted was to defer the matter so that detailed reasons for refusal could be presented at a future meeting.

“We were, however, assured that this was simply a matter of procedure and we accepted in good faith that the matter would return to the next plans panel meeting for the detailed reasons for refusal to be agreed.

“We were somewhat taken by surprise by the Chief Planning Officer’s report for the May 21 meeting that contains not only the detailed reasons for refusal, but an alternative recommendation – that the application be approved.”

It went on to suggest there had been a ‘public outcry’ on social media since the release of the new report.

The letter continued: “We understood that the planning process was a transparent, fair, and democratic one. We are concerned this case is very much an exception.”

The planning document, set to be discussed by the council’s city plans panel on Thursday, includes two options – one to refuse the application due to transport and accessibility issues, and another to defer and delegate to the chief planning officer for approval.

The first proposed reason for refusal was that surrounding roads were too narrow, and that this could lead to highways issues around the site. However, the report confirms the road widths conform to the authority’s own planning guidance.

Another proposed reason for refusal was that the applicant offered a lack of detail in how it would mitigate the extra highways issues in the area. But the new report confirms that money would be secured by the council to spend on work to alleviate future traffic problems.

The third proposed reason for refusal is around accessibility, with complaints made around the infrequency of bus services in the area. Since that meeting, the applicant has committed to contribute £750,000 over five years towards local bus services.

The site, near Westerton Road, was included on the council’s 2019 site allocations plan, a document which lists sites which the council feels would be acceptable to build on to meet housing targets in the coming years. This feeds into the authority’s Core Strategy, effectively the council’s own rules for housebuilding and planning.

But WAAG listed a number of concerns around information published relating to the case, claiming accessibility would in fact ‘fall well short’ of core strategy standards.

It adds some junction improvements ‘cannot be implemented’, as improvements at the A650/A6029 would require partial demolition of Tingley Mills.

The letter continued: “Some of the estimates given for accessibility on foot to local amenities and schools are inaccurate and woefully underestimated.

“There has still been no consultation by the developers of the local residents.

“There are many further matters in the report that would require further consideration to be in a position to properly respond to it.”

WAAG said it believes the original decision to refuse the application should be endorsed, and that the three reasons for refusal can be defended at an appeal.

But it added that if members supported approval then the matter must be deferred.

A spokesperson for developers West Ardsley Development Consortium said: “We fully support the Chief Planning Officer’s recommendation that the proposal is compliant with the council’s development plan and it should be approved subject to planning conditions and completion of the s106 agreement.

“We have worked in good faith with the council over the last seven years whilst it promoted the site during the SAP process. The site was found to be sound, accessible and sustainable.

“The proposal provides, for the first time, public access to the significant open and wooded areas of Haigh Wood with improved accessibility and management. It is a significant local community benefit.

“Approval of the application will strengthen the terms and objectives of the adopted SAP and encourage and incentivise much needed investment in the Leeds district.

“The Regional and National Housebuilders are keen to invest in Leeds and will be encouraged with the council’s consistent determinations in support of plan-led development like this proposal. Conversely, if schemes which are consistent with the Council’s own development plan are not endorsed this will prejudice confidence and investment in Leeds.”

“It is evident that as a result of the current pandemic and the recession that will follow, the Government is looking to the construction industry to lead the charge for the economy. Local Councils have a duty to support this. It is therefore consistent for the council to endorse this SAP allocated site for quality family market and affordable housing.”

Leeds City Council have been contacted for a comment.

The meeting will take place virtually on Thursday, May 21.