Controversial proposals for a housing development on the former Leeds Girls High School site in South Headingley have been deferred by councillors following a legal challenge from a local resident.
Bill McKinnon had earlier this week filed for an injunction preventing any decision being made on the planning applications until after a judicial review into the procedure that led to the council's planning department recommending approval of the plans.
His bid for an injunction was dismissed at the High Court on Wednesday.
But McKinnon, of the Friends of Woodhouse Moor group, told the Guardian yesterday evening that the application for a judicial review into the council planning department's last two reports is still ongoing.
McKinnon is opposing plans to turn the site into more than 100 dwellings, with a mix of apartments and townhouses. The application has received widespread opposition in the community, including more than 1,300 letters of objection, the formation of the Leeds Girls High Action Group, a 1,000-name petition to request the purchase of the fields for local schools and objections from Leeds Civic Trust, The Victorian Society and local councillors.
McKinnon said:
"At the August plans panel meeting, councillors were presented with an officers' report recommending that the application be approved. In my view, that report did not take into account local and national planning guidance."About three weeks ago I wrote to council chief executive Tom Riordan to say how disappointed I was and pointed out to him what I felt to be the failings of the report and asked him to take these into account when the panel met again [yesterday].
"I said that if the failings weren't taken into account and the report recommended approval then I would have no option but to apply for a judicial review into the process that led to both the August and October reports."
McKinnon said the latest report failed to take on the community's concerns and the issues over planning guidance, so he applied for a judicial review. He also applied for an injunction asking for no decision to be made on the planning applications until a substantive decision had been reached on his application for judicial review.
He also claims that the reports have failed to take into account the playing field requirements of the Education (School Premises) Regulations 1999 and the fact that these demonstrate a severe lack of playing pitch provision for local schools, 'other than an oblique reference in the second report'.
Deferral recommended
At yesterday afternoon's meeting of the the west plans panel in Leeds Civic Hall, chief planning officer Phil Crabtree recommended that that the decision over the application was deferred until the council could respond to some of the issues raised in court. He added:
"It is important that we follow the appropriate process and that everything is taken into account. We need to make a considered response to the points raised. We haven't got all the information in front of us so we can't make a reasoned response."
Crabtree said that there had also been considerable interest in what was a 'sensitive' issue for local residents and there had been a lot of representations made since the August meeting.
'I feel somewhat aggrieved'
Labour councillor Mick Coulson said:
"I feel as if I need to make a comment today. For years we have been instructed to take on board the views of the local residents and I feel somewhat aggrieved by some of the things that have happened. This is going beyond being a planning application, for me it's developing into a battle between plans panel members and planning officers.
"The greenfield issues are not acceptable to us but planning officers keep bringing them back in the same form as they were originally. I had to turn my computer off last night because it was blocked by emails from members of the public concerned about the greenfield issue. Can you as officers look at these issues?"
Crabtree said that the loss of greenfields was an important issue, but that planning officers had a duty to give their advice.
Labour councillor John Hardy pressed for a decision to be taken immediately to prevent the issue being dragged out further.
Liberal Democrat Ben Chastney said he was concerned that the developer may look to bypass the council and go to appeal. Crabtree said the developer had been understanding over the latest delay, but whether they went to appeal was ultimately down to them.
The councillors agreed to defer the decision over the plans until November 4.
What do you think? Have your say in the comments section below.
