A councillor believes a decision by planning chiefs to open up two major roads to more development will be disastrous.
Coun Brian Cleasby (Lib Dem, Horsforth) claims planning officers have made a blunder by removing a clause which protected the A65 and A660 from further residential development.
The two roads have now been removed from the restricted development category of Leeds City Council's Unitary Development Plan. The Council's UDP panel, of which Councillor Cleasby is a member, was overruled by the planning inspector and it had to accept the new recommendations.
Coun Cleasby said: "The area alongside the A660 and A65 in the vicinity of Horsforth and Airebor-ough was, so we thought, protected from new development due to its limited capacity to cope with additional traffic.
"Now planners tell us that they made a mistake and the relevant clause will simply be deleted. It beggars belief that Officers can see fit to strike from the record a policy that is designed to safeguard an area of Leeds from housing development that it just isn't able to support.
"The way is now open for property developers to build in the A660/A65 road corridor, with potentially disastrous effects."
He believes the roads are already overcrowded and more developments will produce more traffic and could increase the number of road accidents.
"The routes leading into Leeds from this part of the city are already seriously overcrowded," he added.
"Additional commuters will only increase the pressure on the road network, adding to problems such as high levels of road accidents and rat-running through residential areas. Whatever reasons planners may give to justify removing this protection, it's the people of North West Leeds that will ultimately suffer."
Chairman of the UDP panel Councillor Elizabeth Minkin (Lab) said it was the intention of the panel to restrict development on this stretch.
"When we were drawing up the Unitary Development Plan for the Leeds district we originally intended to restrict housing developments in this area," she added.
"However, we were over-ruled by the inspector, and this council's UDP panel agreed to accept the inspector's recommendation."
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article