You are on page 1of 3

Rider 1 Conservation (section 3.

3)

Site HG2-36 is very close to Eccup Reservoir which is an area of Special Scientific
Interest providing sanctuary for the wintering and migrating wildfowl these
birds feed on surrounding grassland, primarily this site, by day. As an area, it has
the most significant population of wintering goosander in the British Isles (1-2%)
and building on this site will potentially cause disturbance to these and other
wildfowl.

Rider 2 Greenbelt (section 3.3)


The Site is currently included in Greenbelt, but the intention is to remove it to
allow for the housing requirements of Leeds. The comment for the site is that
the development would constitute rounding off of the existing settlement and
is well related and that the site is Connected to housing on two sides. I would
refute these comments for the following reasons:

4
5

One side of the site (the north-west) is bound by a footpath and Sandmoor
golf club, the other by beck which separates a development of 9 houses,
known as Sovereign Court from the current site. Any development would
therefore not be rounding off any existing settlements since the current
site has natural barriers to the existing developments.
The current development on the northern side of Alwoodley Lane is the
depth of one house this development with the proposal for 285 houses is
clearly going to be significantly deeper and is therefore encroaching into
the countryside and is not well related to the existing housing.
The site is close to Eccup Reservoir, the most important open water area
for wildfowl in West Yorkshire. Removing this site from the Greenbelt will
remove one of the current feeding areas for the wildfowl and potentially
disrupt the current population of wildfowl that use Eccup which is on the
trans-Pennine bird migration route. The local Red Kite population also
frequently use this site for feeding.
The site performs an important role in safeguarding the countryside from
encroachment.
There would be potential for further urban sprawl onto the adjoining site
(previously labelled 2053A) if this site were to be built on.

Rider 3 Local Services and Facilities (section 3.3)


This area of Alwoodley is already poorly served with facilities and local services
that can be accessed by foot. The closest shops are those on the Harrogate
Road or the Avenue, neither of which are a short walk away. Neither of these has
a local convenience store/small supermarket or Pharmacy. The nearest of these
is the Co-Operative on High Ash Drive or Tesco Express, the far end of the
Avenue, on King Lane and Lloyds Pharmacy, adjacent to Tesco Express. In

addition, there are few GPs serving this area. The closest ones are on the
Avenue, Nursey Lane and King Lane, the latter two soon to share a new Health
Centre on King Lane. Currently, I wait for at least a week for a non-urgent
appointment at the surgery that I am registered with. The proposed additional
amount of housing will cause a huge strain on the existing practices at a time
when it is widely reported that it is difficult to encourage doctors to become GPs.

Rider 4 Highways (section 3.3)


The site is very close to an existing heavily congested junction (Alwoodley
Lane/Wigton Lane/Harrogate Road).
The traffic survey included in the
background infrastructure report notes that as far back as 2011/2012, this
junction was the 32nd busiest junction in Leeds and that it was very constrained
ie. It is flanked closely by residents properties making widening impossible
without significant acquisition and demolition.
The current problems have been exacerbated by the building of the Grammar
School at Alwoodley Gates. At peak times of the day the junction is congested in
all 4 directions, queueing past the Shell Garage coming out of Leeds, past the
mini roundabout from Harrogate and well past Site HG2-36 on Alwoodley Lane,
down to the traffic lights at the Harrogate Road.
Additional traffic from 285 proposed houses and traffic to and from the proposed
primary school will significantly exacerbate the problem. The insertion of yellow
hatched boxes to allow residents to enter/regress from their houses has not
helped the problem on Alwoodley Lane. As a resident of Sovereign Court, I often
find that I cannot turn right into the courtyard because of cars stopping in the
box which then means that the traffic backs up to the traffic lights behind me
because it is a single carriageway. Residents at numbers 1 and 2 Sovereign
Court regularly witness cars using the courtyard as a place to do a u-turn rather
than having to turn left from Wigton Lane (where there is a no right-turn
arrangement in place) and wait at the traffic lights further up the Harrogate Road
to loop back to the Grammar School at Leeds.
The alternative routes out of Alwoodley Lane (turn right to the Avenue or King
Lane or cut through on Sandmoor Drive or Sandmoor Avenue) are equally busy
and congested at peak times.

Rider 5 section 3.4

On the basis of my responses to question 3.3, I do not believe that the site itself
is justified due to the major traffic problems that will result from the use of this
site for the volume of proposed housing and a primary school and the
encroachment into the countryside. If the site is to be developed at all, it should
be more in keeping with the surrounding housing ie. large family homes, one
deep, fronting onto the road. In addition, there should be a barrier between any
development and the houses at Sovereign Court which back directly onto the
proposed site and a development brief should be agreed with Alwoodley Parish
Council and local houseowners. The site is hilly and careful consideration would

need to be given to ensure that any new development doesn't affect the current
privacy of neighbouring properties at Sovereign Court.
I strongly suggest that a full traffic survey is conducted before the proposed use
of this site is brought forward.

I would suggest that there are a number of other sites which are currently coded
red (such as site numbered 3360 in the earlier drafts of the Site Allocations Plan)
that are more suitable than this site.

Rider 6 section 4.3


Notwithstanding that Leeds City Council prepared leaflets about the proposed
Site Allocations Plan and sought views from the community in 2013 I do not
believe that sufficient effort was made to notify neighbouring landowners of the
proposed site allocations to allow them the opportunity to object to those
allocations at the appropriate time. Appendix 3 to the Statement of Community
Interest specifies that Leeds City Council will engage with individuals who the
Council think may be interested in a particular issue (paragraph A3.7) - my house
backs onto Site HG2-36 and, as such, I would have thought that I would fall
within such a category but I have never received any direct communication to
notify me of the proposed allocation notwithstanding that local Councillors did
send a letter to some households in Alwoodley, including some in Sovereign
Court. However, the Councillors themselves have acknowledged that this letter
was not delivered to my house - if it had been, I would have been raising the
issues that I am currently raising two years ago. Strangely, no-one in Sovereign
Court was aware of the allocation of this site. It doesn't seem too heavy a task
for LCC to have specifically targeted neighbouring landowners of adjoining
properties for all the proposed sites to ensure that all were aware of the
proposals and could comment on them.