Comment on the plan now

Tell Leeds how you feel about building on the fields

Local residents have until September 15th to submit comments to the planning committee, explaining the high value we put on the playing fields as a public local amenity for dog walkers and amateur sports people alike, and explaining the lack of alternative provision nearby.

We know that the fields belong to the public held in statutory trust.

We also share concerns with Historic England about the damage to the heritage setting of Red Hall itself.

Please provide your personal perspective on these issues. Even brief comments are welcome. There’s a list of things you might want to mention below.

Background

In 2020, the Red Hall Playing Fields site was removed from the Leeds Site Allocations Plan. It reverted to its previous employment allocation within the UDP.

As part of the new Leeds Local Plan, Leeds City Council must now decide whether to allocate the site for housing or not. You have until September 15th to comment on the proposed allocation.

The fields belong to us, the public

The site is subject to a statutory trust under the Public Health Act 1875 / the Open Spaces Act 1906. The Council has been unable to find any formal appropriations of the site for other purposes, save for the January 2022 appropriation of the site for planning purposes. Redrow - the current planning permission applicant – is questioning whether this trust is effective or not.

This means there is a good chance the fields still belong to us, the public, as open space for recreation.

Bring this to the attention of the Plans Panel in your comments.

Things you might want to mention

  • The lack of open spaces that you can walk to nearby
  • The damage to the setting of Red Hall. The site is scored 0 for Heritage Assets but in reality in the scoring methodology the site can only be 0 or -3 (when a Battlefield/Park & Garden >10% or Scheduled Ancient Monument) and Heritage England have voiced a statutory objection
  • The damage to the remaining link between Thorner and Roundhay in the Leeds biodiversity network
  • The damage to the character of the local landscape
  • The requirement for yet more drainage downhill that will result in the felling of dozens more mature trees on the ring road – following closely after the loss of hundreds to thousands of mature trees for ELOR
  • The error in the site description (it says 365 houses, but the adopted SAP in 2019 said 50)
  • The fact that public land will become private, leased back to the council with maintenance paid for by new residents
  • The fact that these fields are in statutory trust for public use, and “appropriation” is not appropriate

Relevant plans panel minutes

166: Officers are aware of recent case law (R (Day) v Shropshire Council [2023] UKSC 8), which is concerned with statutory trusts. The key principles emanating from the case are that:

• Land held under the Public Health Act 1875 or the Open Spaces Act 1906 is subject to a statutory trust for public recreation.

• Such land cannot be freed from the trust unless the advertising and consultation requirements of Section 123(2A) of the Local Government Act are met.

• A failure to comply with these requirements means the land remains protected, and any planning decision made without considering this is legally flawed.

167: Accordingly, the key implications are that Local Authorities must investigate and document the legal status of land before disposal, Local Planning Authorities must treat the existence of a statutory trust as a material consideration and purchasers of such land should be mindful of legal uncertainty if the proper procedures were not followed. In the context of the Red Hall site, notwithstanding the Development Plan allocations, it has been concluded that most, if not all, of the site that is subject to the planning application appears to be currently held by the Council for recreational purposes pursuant to either the Public Health Act 1875 and/or the Open Spaces Act 1906, meaning that it is subject to a statutory trust. As noted earlier in the report, it is now several years since the land was formally used for recreation and some of it has been used for other purposes since the Council acquired it. Officers have been unable to find any formal appropriations of the land for other purposes, save for the January 2022 appropriation of the site for planning purposes which has been brought into question by the applicant as to whether it is effective or not.

168: Following careful consideration, the 2022 appropriation (which would otherwise have extinguished the statutory trust) is not considered to be effective and as landowner, the Council has agreed in principle to appropriate the land again, having due regard to any representations or objections that the Council receives. If the site is to be reappropriated, the Council is of the opinion that the whole of the site should be appropriated from recreational use to planning purposes, so as to avoid the possibility of the part of the site which is held for the purposes of the Public Health Act 1875 and/or the Open Spaces Act 1905 not being appropriated and remaining subject to a statutory trust. As discussed earlier, historically the eastern half of the site, north of Red Hall Lane, was known as Red Hall playing fields and while it is understood that these were previously used as formal sports pitches, that has not been the case since 2006, due to their poor quality and ongoing drainage issues that were too costly to address in a sustainable way.
169: Notwithstanding the above, any further appropriation is not going to take place until after the Plans Panel and so the purpose of this part of the report is to ensure that Panel Members are aware that the site is subject to a statutory trust, albeit one that will be extinguished by a subsequent appropriation of the land. The existence of a statutory trust is a material planning consideration under section 70(2)(c) of the 41Town and Country Planning Act 1990 and so Members should have regard to it in the determination of this application.