Appendix 2 Chapel Allerton Community Plan and Design Statement Supplementary Planning Document REPRESENTATIONS STATEMENT Relating to the main issues raised during the formal consultation period in accordance with Regulation 18(4)(b) of the Town and Country Planning (Local Development) (England) Regulations 2004 as amended. Summary of representations received during consultation period 14th April – 24th May 2011 QUESTIONNAIRE A total of 53 questionnaires were completed question yes no not sure 1 Do you agree with the transport proposals set out in the Plan to improve pedestrian safety? 46 6 1 2 Do you support the proposals to part pedestrianise the areas outside the Yorkshire Bank and create a village/town square? 45 5 3 3 Do you agree with the proposals to limit the number and concentration of bars and other licensed premises in Chapel 42 10 1 Allerton? 4 Do you agree with the proposals to improve the appearance of shop frontages and the village centre through new shop 46 5 2 signs and paving material? 5 Do you agree with the Future Vision for the development of the former Yorkshire Bank site off Harrogate Road as set out 42 3 8 in the Plan? 6 Do you support the proposal to seek the listing of the existing Yorkshire “Penny” Bank on Harrogate Road? 43 10 7 Do you agree with the need to improve and encourage the use of existing green spaces by the public? 49 4 8 Do you support the proposals to further improve and encourage the use of the Cemetery by the War Memorial. 45 4 4 9 Do you agree with the need to provide improved recycling facilities? 45 4 4 10 Do you agree with the need to tackle litter in the streets? 49 1 3 1 Quality of Plan and Consultation 1 bad – 5 good 1 2 3 4 5 What is your overall opinion of the proposals set out in the Plan? 2 4 23 24 How do you feel CANPlan is conducting this consultation? 2 1 4 14 32 Comments Comments were received from 34 people Notes: In the following table: Ref Refers to the respondents, listed at end of document. LCC Endorsed by relevant Leeds City Council Officers. How issues Proposed modifications to Consultation Draft. addressed Ref Comment LCC How issues addressed in the Document CONSULTATION PROCESS 33 We took the time and trouble to visit the library having seen a notice of CANPlan in the YEP. Endorsement noted Inclusion of additional We found at the library that this questionnaire had been left in most streets but not ours. If my streets to be considered husband had not spotted the notice in the press, we should have known nothing of these well in future consultations thought out ideas and planning. 26 An executive summary in future consults would be good - there is a lot of information to take in Noted No amendment to document 47 When leafleting about open consultation days, it would be good to specify the time deadline for Noted replies to be in (bearing in mind that not everyone can attend the consultation event) 43 Excellent Endorsement welcomed No action 49 Perhaps have a mini exhibition at Chapel Allerton Primary school to seek views of parents with All households in CA were given the No action young children. opportunity to comment. GENERAL 28 The consultation draft has no section 8.11, it jumps from 8.10 to 8.12 Noted Paragraph numbering amended 31 Chapel Allerton is very nice as it is. Please don't spoil it by over-enthusiastic updating. (The Further consultation will be undertaken if No current action woodland path through the churchyard could do with attention but please don't pave it) this project is developed 29 Having moved to Chapel Allerton from Headingley I feel that the local community should be LCC welcomes CANPlan’s input to No action . consulted and protected every step of the way. The local community in Headingley was community planning and consultation and decimated by lax planning and encouragement of HMOs and shops which were dedicated to understands that CANPlan would hope to students. Anyone over 25 or families find Headingley a no-go area at weekends after 5 pm. be involved in decisions affecting the This must not be allowed to happen in CA. character of the Conservation Area. 43 CANPlan document is absolutely excellent! Thank you again to all involved. Endorsement welcomed No action 48 Excellent plan which I fully support. Endorsement welcomed No action 2 53 A great initiative. We fully support all the proposals which we feel would benefit Chapel Allerton Endorsement welcomed No action hugely. 23 The gentleman we spoke to was clearly not interested in any constructive criticism or genuine The questionnaire responses acknowledge No amendment to concerns about the proposed village square outside the Yorkshire bank. He was rude and that not everyone shares the same view document. CANPlan ignorant and refused to consider anybody else's point of view. Why consult with the community regarding the proposal to create a hopes to work with the if you don't want to listen to what they've got to say?! village/town square, however, there is City Council to advance clearly a majority view in favour of this. this proposal. 21 Thank you for the work you are doing on this project, I do appreciate it. Support welcomed No amendment to document 56 Thank you for all the work you've done on this Support welcomed No amendment to document 59 Why on earth is this being proposed anyway and why are people such as your committee so CANPlan has worked hard to engage No amendment to intent on changing the face of Chapel Allerton? It seems to me that Chapel Allerton has residents in issues and decisions which document changed beyond recognition over the years by all the developments that have occurred. affect their community and the city council Why can't it just be left alone?!!! welcomes their input. TRANSPORT 25 I'm glad cyclists are mentioned. Perhaps consideration should be given to cycle routes to the This is an initiative which would be Comment to be added in schools. supported by the city council. para 6.16 24 Chapel Allerton has become Patchallerton due to the state of the pavements, side roads and Noted ‘Repair’ to be added to speed bumps which in some cases are too high and I do feel that these should take priority Repairs will be carried out as funds note 2, p10 rather than using resources to pave the centre unnecessarily. become available. 44 Parking outside the parade at post office adjacent to Montreal Avenue – new yellow bus stop Noted Generally covered in lines are too restrictive past crossing so all trying to park on corner of Church Lane/Montreal section 6 – no Ave to go to PO, Natwest Bank, hairdressers etc. Plus creation of new bus stop at Esso garage amendment to document op Tech North only a few yards for main existing one is ridiculous. Clogged with buses now and traffic chaos. 22 Nobody seems to have taken into account the transport of disabled people to existing premises Parking for disabled people would need to Generally covered in (bank, dentist etc) and this proposal removes parking spaces which are not to be replaced. be taken into consideration in any section 6 – no Also nowhere for collection/delivery of goods to launderette, WJB, dentists, angel share etc. remodelling of the area. amendment to document 37 The parking of vehicles on Montreal Avenue is creating a situation of confrontation and danger Noted Generally covered in to pedestrians. section 6 – no amendment to document 34 Car parking has to be addressed in some way. The Mustard Pot and Co-op car parks are Given the built up nature of the area car No amendment to insufficient for car travellers who come into Chapel Allerton. parking can only be brought forward document through the redevelopment of existing sites. The Council’s emphasis is on encouraging visitors to the centre to walk cycle or use public transport. 49 Very important to have an additional pedestrian crossing on Harrogate Road near Yorkshire Noted, however this could only be Generally covered in Bank site. achieved through developer contributions section 6 – no or through an injection of additional capital amendment to document funding. 3 51 Very much want to see improvements to pedestrian safety and reduction in traffic volume and Noted Generally covered in speed. section 6 – no amendment to document 21 One cannot argue with the safety argument and I do support the idea of a 2nd pedestrian The city council has no current plans to Generally covered in crossing for Harrogate Road, however, I am less keen on the suggestion to narrow the road, I narrow Harrogate Road and this would only section 6 – no think the width of Harrogate Road helps contribute to the sense of openness and welcome to be considered in the context of improving amendment to document Chapel A. If the road was to be narrowed to provide a cycle track that would be a very sound pedestrian and cycle facilities. reason, but not just to close off access. I am also very concerned that narrowing the road will The highway implications of any proposals just force commuters to find more rat runs as for instance Henconner Lane which is already to create a village/town square would need used as such. The area could do with a 'park and ride' facility, as many commuters do park in to be carefully considered.