COMMENTING ON PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT SITES IN COOKRIDGE

As a result of a number of questions and queries from local residents about the current proposals, their status, how you can object and the types of issues that should be raised and also I have been asked by some residents to reissue the advice I gave previously as they were concerned that a number of residents were not made aware of it the first time round.

BACKGROUND

As you are no doubt aware the Council are currently consulting on whether or not a number of sites in the Cookridge area are suitable for housing development between now and 2028. A list of these sites are as follows: 

Site Ref. Site Description Capacity Colour Code Reason for Colour Coding
1151 Cookridge Lane, Cookridge 50 Red Green Belt site adjoining the main urban area
1199 Land off Moseley Wood Gardens, Cookridge 173 Green Protected Area of Search (PAS) site on existing UDP, so not within the Green Belt.
3044 Cookridge Hall Golf Club 274 Red Green Belt site.
3360 Cookridge Hall 1550 Red Green Belt site.

At this stage no decisions have been made by the Council and no final decisions have been as to which sites have been ruled in or ruled out, this is merely an  indication by the Council as to their possible intentions.

For those of you who attended the event organised by Taylor Wimpey in respect of the site they would like to develop at Moseley Wood Bottom (land off Moseley wood Gardens), I can confirm that at this stage no outline application has been submitted by Taylor Wimpey to the Council yet. They have had pre-application discussions and the event on Thursday was part of this process i.e. the Council expect developers to give local residents the chance to raise any issues prior to a planning application being submitted so that Taylor Wimpey are then given an opportunity to reflect back those issues raised with them before they make the decision as to whether to proceed or not.

Some residents have also contacted me about the three sites currently designated in colour code “Red” and detailed above. Just to confirm, if you support these sites remaining as red i.e. you agree with the Council that at this stage they should not be developed for housing purposes then you should write to the Council supporting their retention as red sites. Later on in this email I have set out a possible structure of a letter you may wish to send in or email in.

FORTHCOMING DEADLINE

If you would like further information on these sites the relevant documents are accessible in the following ways:

  • To view /download from the Webwww.leeds.gov.uk/siteallocations
  • To view  by visiting the Development Enquiry Centre at The Leonardo Building, 2 Rossington St, Leeds, LS2 (Monday to Friday 08:30 – 17:00, except Wednesdays 10:00 – 17:00)

As well as viewing and downloading documents, you will be able to view the maps for each area and supporting background information.  Please contact the Council on (0113) 2478092 or email ldf@leeds.gov.uk if you have special needs regarding the documents.

Comments should preferably be submitted on-line at www.leeds.gov.uk/siteallocations (but can be made in writing or email to Development Enquiry Centre at The Leonardo Building, 2 Rossington St, Leeds, LS2 ) during the consultation period.

The consultation period closes at 5pm on Monday 29th July

On the submission form you will need to mark the relevant site reference you are referring to and then which question you are answering.

POSSIBLE LAYOUT OF A LETTER OR EMAIL

I have been asked if I would send out some guidance on what could be the format of any letters or emails of objection to the Council in respect of the above. Set out below is brief outline:

Dear Sir or Madam

POTENTIAL DEVELOPMENT SITES

Site Ref No(s).

I would like to object to the Council’s designation of the above site(s) which is currently [enter the current colour coding of the site] for the following reasons and/or I would like to support the Council’s designation of the above site(s) which is currently [enter colour coding of site]:

List reasons

Then if it is the PAS site at Moseley Wood Bottom I would suggest using the wording

“And I would suggest that this site is put back as a PAS site in the Development Plan.”

If it is not the PAS site I would suggest

“Due to the number of other developments taking place in the area  I suggest that this site be put back towards the end of the plan post 2020.”

If it is a red site I would suggest

“I fully support the Council’s designation of the above site as a “red” site for the following reasons”:

List reasons.

It is my view that the Council should prioritise building on brownfield sites throughout the city first before any consideration is given to any of the green field/green belt sites.

Yours sincerely [insert name]

ISSUES YOU MAY WISH TO CONSIDER

I have been asked if I could reiterate issues that residents could consider putting in an objection. These would equally apply to any of the sites in Cookridge i.e. they can be used as justification for objecting to the Moseley wood Bottom site and they can be used as justification to keep the other sites as red sites.

Potential Issues To Raise

Sustainability – economic, environmental, socially etc. – it is not clear what the Council means by “Sustainable”.

Access to medical services – this is part of the infrastructure needs for the area.

Impact on access to both primary and secondary school places.

Highways issues – the impact of all the proposed developments on surrounding roads.

Population growth – the population of Leeds is not currently growing at the rate expected.

Concern over the types of housing that is required not adequately reflected

Inadequate road infrastructure to cope with the additional housing

Significant peak hour traffic problems on surrounding roads

Access to sites will be dangerous and problematic

Potential flooding/drainage issues

The increase in local population

Impact on the local environment

Potential public transport issues.

Local job prospects – where will people find jobs?

Loss of agriculture – food sources – self sufficiency

Lack of appropriate infrastructure and the fact that no needs assessment had been carried out by Leeds City Council to date and that this is needed urgently.

Potential visual impact

Cumulative impact i.e. over-development of the area

Ecology – e.g. wildlife, flora and fauna that needs to be protected.

This list is not exhaustive, there may be other reasons. Not every resident necessarily will agree with all of the suggestions above as people will have different opinions.

If you need any help with any of this, please do not hesitate to contact me.

RESIDENTS ACTION GROUP

A number of residents have formed a group with me to try and provide some help and support in terms of designing newsletters, contacting professional contacts they have in the development business to see whether they can give any advice as to the issues where the site may have problems that would be difficult to overcome. These residents are also collecting the names and addresses of residents who would be willing to provide support to the group either through their own knowledge or in terms of delivering leaflets etc.

 If you would like to volunteer to become part of the wider group, not necessarily on the steering group if you don’t have the time or you would like purely just to volunteer to deliver leaflets please let me know and I will pass your details on to a member of the steering group. One other area the group feel might be helpful is trying to support those residents who would like to send in their thoughts and comments to the Council but don’t know the format to be used or don’t feel they have the necessary knowledge. If you would like to volunteer to carry out this support or you would benefit from getting some help and support in submitting your thoughts or comments, again, please let me know and I will get these details passed on to a member of the Steering Group.

 Finally, I would ask if you are able to copy this update and pass it to your neighbours who may not have access to emails in case they need some help, support and guidance.