Save Red Hall Playing Fields

Keep Red Hall green

How Allocating the Fields Is Unsound

The allocation of the fields is unsound, assessed against the four tests of soundness in the National Planning Policy Framework:

1. Positively prepared

The plan should be prepared based on the Core strategy which seeks to meet objectively assessed development and infrastructure requirements … consistent with achieving sustainable development.

Green space

Core Strategy Policy G3 is being ignored, both from a greenspace quantum of provision perspective when assessed against our ward, and also from an accessibility perspective. The allocation would reduce the community’s ability to meet its needs locally, and does not seek a high standard of amenity for future residents.

Development on the publicly-accessible and green portion of this site cannot be made sustainable given the large number of incoming residents.


There are no secondary schools meeting accessibility criteria in the area. There are no primary schools meeting the same criteria that are not already oversubscribed.

2. Justified

The plan should be the most appropriate strategy, when considered against the reasonable alternatives, based on proportionate evidence.

There are numerous scoring errors with the allocation of the site, and the nearness of Roundhay Park is being overstated.

In considering sites such as the fields for allocation, Leeds City Council undertook what they call a “sustainability appraisal”. This involved scoring the fields in various categories.

Unfortunately, they made some mistakes, resulting in the site being rated in an overly positive way, while also demonstrating a lack of familiarity with the area around the fields.

3. Effective

The plan should be deliverable over its period and based on effective joint working on cross-boundary strategic priorities.

Red Hall Dec by AceGarp

While it is not necessary to consider the setting of the historical Red Hall House during plan-making, failure to do so before the allocation will mean that when determining a subsequent planning application related to the fields, it may be discovered that due to Historical England concerns, no or fewer houses than planned can be built.

Leeds City Council seemingly knew this – their stated intention in this proforma (mirrored here if the Leeds site is down) was:

Redhall House to the west of this site is a Grade II Listed Building. There is a requirement in the 1990 Act that “special regard” should be had to the desirability of preserving Listed Buildings or their setting or any features of special architectural or historic interest which they possess. Consequently, before allocating this area, there would need to be some assesment [sic] of what contribution this currently undeveloped area makes to the signficance of this building and what effect its loss and subsequent development might have upon the significance of this asset. If allocated, development proposals would need to ensure that those elements which contribute to the significance of these assets (including their setting) are not likely to be harmed.

4. Consistent with national policy

The plan should enable the delivery of sustainable development in accordance with the policies in the National Planning Policy Framework.

The allocation of the fields is inconsistent with the National Planning Policy Framework, both in a general sense and on specific points.