Leeds Girls High School
Leeds HMO Lobby has made a number of representations on the Draft
Planning & Development Brief for the Leeds Girls High School
sites in Headingley.
Leeds Girls High School, 15 January 2007
I write on behalf of Leeds HMO Lobby (which comprises all the local
community associations in Inner NW Leeds) with some initial comments
on GVA Grimley's ideas for the LGHS sites in Headingley. Following
its January meeting, the Lobby wishes to make a number of points
(1) The majority of the housing units provided should be for family
(2) all of the affordable housing quota should be for family use;
(3) no units should be used for multiple occupation [for instance,
prevention by means of restrictive covenants];
(4) all protected playing pitches should be retained (as designated
in UDP, Policy N6);
(5) any buildings of historic significance should be retained [not
only listed buildings].
Individual member organisations of the Lobby, and indeed their
individual members, will have additional points to make, and will
doubtless be in touch with you. I know that the Area Committee's
Planning Group will also be seeking a meeting.
Richard Tyler, for Leeds HMO Lobby, 15 January 2007
Representation on Leeds Girls High School Draft Planning
& Development Brief, 12 June 2007
Leeds HMO Lobby is a coalition of all the local community associations
in Inner NW Leeds concerned about the imbalance of housing in our
Area. The Lobby herewith submits a short Representation on the Draft
Planning & Development Brief for Leeds Girls High School.
Leeds HMO Lobby welcomes the Brief as a valuable contribution to
community involvement in the development of the LGHS sites in Headingley.
In particular, the Lobby welcomes the Brief's strategic objective
"to establish the principle of residential development and
to make a positive contribution to the creation of a balanced and
mixed community" (para 1.18). The Lobby has three particular
comments on the Brief.
#1 Leeds HMO Lobby recommends that Policy H15
of the Revised UDP 2006 be added to the list of relevant policies
in para 3.16. The Brief is primarily concerned with residential
development. Policy H15 is a Housing Policy specific to the Area
of Housing Mix, within which all the LGHS sites are located. It
is important therefore that this Policy is acknowledged.
#2 Leeds HMO Lobby welcomes the commitment to
Mixed Community in para 4.7 - in general the aim "to help re-establish
a mixed and balanced local community", and in particular, both
"the development of a range and choice of non-student
housing types and sizes," and also, "the need to provide
family accommodation." This commitment recognises
the housing imbalance pertaining in our Area, and the chief reason
#3 Leeds HMO Lobby however opposes the proposition
in para 4.42 on Affordable Housing that "a reduction in the
affordable housing requirement may be acceptable." Such a reduction
would not be acceptable to the Lobby. First of all, the
requirement for 15% affordable housing in our Area represents a
policy which is now clearly out of date (and currently under review),
and does not reflect the local need for affordable housing. And
secondly, this aspiration is quite contrary to the aims and objectives
expressed in paras 1.18 and 4.7. If "a mixed and balanced local
community" is to be re-established, then it is essential that
a full "range and choice of housing types and sizes" is
Dr Richard Tyler, on behalf of Leeds HMO Lobby,
12 June 2007
Leeds Girls High School, 14 August
I write to you as members of the Executive Board of Leeds City
Council. I write on behalf of Leeds HMO Lobby, representing all
the local community associations within Inner North West Leeds.
And I write regarding Leeds Girls High School, whose draft Planning
& Development Brief is I understand on the agenda of your meeting
on 22 August.
Regrettably, the Grammar School At Leeds has forfeited any support
it may have had from the local community (and hence I believe our
representatives on the Council). The previous headmaster has seen
in our locailty "a rapidly deteriorating socio-economic infrastructure
- a combination of student bed-sits and 'druggies' on the open park
land opposite (Woodhouse Moor) - and you have a scene which would
not have surprised Dickens" (Bryan Collins, 'Goodbye to all
that' in Conference & Common Room, 38:2, Summer 2001).
Clearly, the Schools have been only too anxious to quit our area.
Yet, whilst they were here, they did not lift a finger to alleviate
our infrastructure. And on their way out, they are bequeathing a
legacy of further deterioriation - the loss of playing space, and
the introduction of yet another pub!
Leeds HMO Lobby is concerned in particular with the Planning &
Development Brief's approach to 'student bed-sits'. The Lobby welcomes
the Brief's strategic objective "to establish the principle
of residential development and to make a positive contribution to
the creation of a balanced and mixed community" (para 1.18).
However, the Lobby is surprised that Policy H15 of the Revised UDP
2006 is missing from the list of relevant policies in para 3.16.
The Brief is primarily concerned with residential development, and
Policy H15 is a Housing Policy specific to the Area of Housing Mix,
within which all the LGHS sites are located. Furthermore, no measures
are proposed to resist the appropriation of new housing as student
accommodation (these might include avoidance of large apartments,
and a condition preventing use of any accommodation as multiple
Leeds HMO Lobby requests the Executive Board to invite LGHS to
re-submit its draft Planning & Development Brief.
Best wishes, Dr Richard Tyler, Co-ordinator, Leeds HMO Lobby,
14 August 2007
Leeds HMO Lobby