Leeds council rejects plea to buy out private tenants on estate set for demolition

Residents living on an old mining estate in Oulton have been told to up sticks by private landlord Pemberstone, which wants to demolish 70 homes to make way for newbuilds.

The Worcester-based developer has planning permission for the move, which affects those living on Sugar Hill Close and Wordsworth Drive, though a handful of long-term tenants remain in the properties in the hope of a reprieve.

The Save Our Homes LS26 campaign, which was set up by the residents, called on the city council to buy up the estate themselves at a meeting in March, so that tenants can stay.

However, the council has again rejected the request.

The leader of Leeds’ Liberal Democrat group, who is also a ward councillor for the area in question, criticised the decision and said the authority had a “moral obligation” to intervene.

In a decision notice published online, the local authority described the situation facing the tenants as “extremely difficult” and “unjust”.

But it said it had no legal powers to intervene, with the government’s Planning Inspector having given the demolition job planning permission on appeal in 2020. That was after the council’s own plans panel had refused to approve the scheme months earlier.

The council notice said: “These are experiences that no resident in Leeds should have to face and reinforce the council’s view that reform of s21 eviction regulations is urgently required.

“Unfortunately it remains the case that evictions are entirely within the landlord’s legal rights and are done so with a view to implementing a planning permission for redevelopment that has been legally obtained and approved by an independent government appointed Planning Inspector.”

Pemberstone has argued that the homes, which were built by the National Coal Board in the 1950s to house miners, are in such disrepair that they need to be demolished.

Although the results of building surveys carried out on Pemberstone’s behalf were shared publicly as part of their original planning application, the council said the results of some “follow-up surveys” from last year weren’t shared with either themselves or campaigners.

The council said that although there was no legal obligation on the developer to share the results, it bemoaned having “imperfect information” on which to draw advice.

It concluded however: “The council cannot agree with the request that it should reverse its position and acquire the site to refurbish the estate and bring the properties into stock.”

But Rothwell ward councillor and Lib Dem group leader Councillor Stewart Golton said: “The council has a moral obligation to intervene.

“From the very beginning the council has made the decision to be a bystander in this process, because they feel they’ve no legal obligation.

“Actually, and this is an issue we’ve seen recently with the Prime Minister, sometimes it’s more important to do the right thing.”

Coun Golton said the council had a sizeable fund available to buy back old council properties, some of which he suggested could have been used to rescue the estate.

He also suggested the council’s position had “undermined” that of the campaigners and pointed out that only one new home will be built for every one that is demolished.

A spokesman for Pemberstone said: “Surveys of each of the properties were included in the report by Michael Dyson Associates which was made publicly available as part of the evidence to the planning inquiry.

“The surveys were accessible to the council, residents and other interested parties.

“The report played a key role in informing the Planning Inspector’s decision. Subsequent inspections of the properties have confirmed their continued deterioration.”