DEVELOPERS are appealing against a refusal of planning permission for 57 homes at Pool-in-Wharfedale.

The Taylor Wimpey application had been granted outline planning permission at appeal. But last year Leeds City Council rejected the company’s detailed plans.

Adel and Wharfedale councillor Barry Anderson said: “It is very disappointing that Taylor Wimpey have appealed the planning refusal. Outline permission is in place but that was after appeal to the Planning Inspector as well. Residents and myself disagree with the Planning Officer’s interpretation of the Inspector’s decision, particularly in terms of the statement made about a relief road needing to be built. The Council need to be clear on the Inspector’s view that a relief road needs to be constructed, and what this actually means because at the moment Leeds City Council are singularly refusing to consider its introduction, and to having a proper and full discussion with local residents about the effect of this relief road and the highways implications of this Taylor Wimpey development. “

He added: “Another 57 houses in Pool is quite a big increase for a village of its size and the Council have no plans for any additional investment in additional infrastructure to go with it. Currently Main Street and Arthington Lane suffer with the amount of traffic that is going through the village. There is still a significant concern about the amount of HGVs going through the village, from a safety perspective this has to be addressed. “

He argued: “The piece of land they are appealing is part of a larger parcel of land identified in the Site Allocations Plan and a holistic approach to the whole site is needed, with supporting infrastructure, not a piecemeal development that is unsustainable on its own. However, none of this land should ever have appeared in the Site Allocations Plan which I fought against at the time.”

A submission to the council on behalf of Taylor Wimpey says the development would bring jobs and much needed affordable housing to the area. It says the proposals “constitute not only sustainable development but also a high-quality design to a high standard.”

It adds: “The delivery of this scheme would bring about a raft of social, economic and environmental benefits which far outweigh any minor perceived harms.”