From: Site Allocations Plan To: Site Allocations Plan Subject: PNE00137_Duplicate rep? - check submitted on line - Tim Staddon - Parlington Estate (MX2-39) Date: 02 November 2016 13:29:00

From: Dobson, Cllr Mark Sent: 01 November 2016 15:48 To: Site Allocations Plan Subject: Fwd: Parlington Estate (MX2-39) Wider view

Sent from my iPhone

Begin forwarded message:

From: < Date: 1 November 2016 at 13:51:34 GMT To: < < Subject: Parlington Estate (MX2-39) Wider view Reply-To:

Hi

Submitted to already via the website, but here's the text of my thoughts. It's a bit garbled but basically I think the issue with the Parlington plan is that it doesn't seem to fit into a masterplan that covers the surrounding area.

3.3. Why you think the Plan is sound / unsound:

There is too little consideration of other projects in adjoining areas, as well as developments not covered by LCC. Specifically in the area, the developments in adjoining Parishes as well as Network Rail and HS2/3 planned developments do not seem to link together - in fact it stuns me that STILL we see maps coming out with potential sites for house building in east Leeds that appear to conflict with other plans from other agencies.

3.4. Change(s) you consider necessary to make the Plan sound:

I have no issues with Garforth and the surrounding area being expanded provided green space is maintained to preserve the distinct identities of each settlement, but:

* Garforth is at the centre of all such developments and will function as a hub * Garforth is also the nearest town centre * Garforth has the closest railway station which serves fast trains as well as stopping services * Garforth provides the significant connectivity between the M62/M1/A1/A64.

Micklefield, , Kippax and other PCs may expand but if Garforth is the closest town with the closest amenities then its infrastructure needs significant investment and the abstraction of treating Aberford and Barwick as totally separate to Garforth and Kippax does not help.

Suggestions: a. Create a new zone "Leeds East" consisting of Kippax & Methley, Garforth & , and Harewood ward south of the A64 such that Garforth is the central conurbation (see https://ukelect.files.wordpress.com/2011/11/leeds-v2.png) for illustration. b. At present Garforth is dependent on the M1 (2 junctions) and three other roads forming a triangle: Aberford/Wakefield Road, Ridge Road and the A63. This triangle connects directly onto Junctions 46 and 47 of the M1. This means that for any new developments within 4 miles north/east/south of Garforth railway station there are only three pressure points in the road infrastructure. Any one problem at either motorway junction or at Peckfield roundabout effectively blocks 2/3 of the major routes in and out of the town for example. All new development must be spread around the area such that Barwick Road/Long Lane, A642 Aberford/Wakefield Road, A656 Ridge Road, A6120/A63 Selby Road, the Peckfield roundabout, the old A1 (Great North Road Micklefield) do not all end up as pinch points.

Possible ways to do this if the Aberford developments go ahead:

- build along a dualled Aberford Road/Collier Lane reaching from Junction 47 north past the Aberford crossroads to J47 - dual Ridge Road from J47 to A63 Peckfield roundabout - dual from the A63 Peckfield roundabout to Milford Lodge (already dual carriageway) - add a motorway grade extension from Peckfield roundabout to Old George roundabout - create a new motorway junction at Hook Moor which can feed A1 northbound/southbound traffic directly onto Collier Lane so Aberford/Micklefield traffic doesn't have to come off at J47. - build proper motorway grade junctions instead of roundabouts at key intersections - create a new link road from Barwick Lane to J47 running parallel (but north of) the M1 link so A1 southbound traffic can feed onto the new Collier Lane junction. - Within Garforth and Micklefield the road and rail infrastructure plans must be sanity checked especially at all points where they intersect.

Strategic bullets:

* There is no point having four railway stations (Garforth, East Garforth, Park & Ride, Micklefield) in a 5 mile stretch of track unless the track beds are widened to allow through traffic, and that would mean some roads would need to be widened and some bridges raising. The road bridges over the railway, on Wakefield Rd (by Garforth station) and Bar Lane, may require S shaped humpback bridges to accommodate wider track beds and electrification in which case neither bridge will be suited to HGV access without radical modifications.

* Ridge Road, if dualed, would have to have a flyover and proper motorway grade junction to properly handle the railway, park & ride and new housing sites access to both east and west.

Garforth is the central shopping zone but if 5,000 homes or more are to be built in a very short distance of the town then logically services and amenities will need to be more evenly distributed around the surrounding area, and sensibly situated.

* Parlington and Becca estates (and others in and around the area) have significant local interest or heritage value but are extremely low profile - in fact it's not uncommon for people to not even know of them. These assets should be highlighted on local maps, access by foot or cycle encouraged wherever possible, and the character of such amenities should be preserved - so the old railway line routes, pit heads, tunnels and abandoned properties should see significant investment to encourage people to visit them.

Regards

Mr T.M. Staddon 60 Strawberry Avenue, Garforth, LS25 1EE