Controversial go-ahead to dispose of council land to build more Calderdale homes

A controversial decision to dispose of council land for a homes site will be implemented – but a community stewardship option explored alongside it.
A scruting Board was discussing Cabinets decision to dispose of land at Horley Green Road at Claremount, Halifax. (Google Street View)A scruting Board was discussing Cabinets decision to dispose of land at Horley Green Road at Claremount, Halifax. (Google Street View)
A scruting Board was discussing Cabinets decision to dispose of land at Horley Green Road at Claremount, Halifax. (Google Street View)

Worried residents crammed into a Halifax Town Hall committee room where Calderdale Council’s Place Scrutiny Board was discussing Cabinet’s decision to dispose of land at Horley Green Road at Claremount, Halifax.

The council disposal of the land for around £150,000 to housing partners Together Housing will result in 29 two-bedroomed homes which Cabinet member for Regeneration and Resources, Coun Jane Scullion (Lab, Luddenden Foot), argued are much needed and would be mixed tenure – some rented, some in shared ownership and some for sale.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

But residents are worried they will lose their last green space and their spokesperson, Nicole Jones, said they had significant concerns about infrastructure including schools, the effect on health, as it was used by residents of all ages to exercise or play, air quality issues as more homes would mean more vehicles in what was an Air Quality Management Area, and about fears constructing new homes might cause structural damage as the site had an underground spring running through it.

Mrs Jones said the community used the land, had proposals to develop that usage in ways which would benefit all ages and wanted to request the land be transferred to them as a Community Asset Transfer from the council.

Residents planned to create a picnic area, plant fruit trees, place a bench there for senior citizens, place and plant vegetable boxes from which people could help themselves and marking out and use space for sports, with a local school interested is using it – a junior club already did.

Coun Scott Benton (Con, Brighouse) said ward councillors had called the decision in for scrutiny because there was clearly concern about its loss as a green space used by the community.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

Amid other procedural concerns about disposal of the land there was concern Cabinet had not been given the option of pursuing a Community Asset Transfer which had been spoken about at a ward forum, he said.

Coun Scullion told the board the council’s Community Asset Transfer policy is discretionary and it must add community value.

She said ward councillors had not objected to the disposal proposals and the land would be resurveyed by Together, while many of the issues raised by objectors would be assessed as part of the planning process.

The council is told it has to provide sites for homes and there was a need for affordable housing, with 740 on the waiting list for homes in the wider Boothtown area, with 267 wanting two-bedroomed homes.

“We feel there is a need,” said Coun Scullion.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

Mrs Jones said residents who attended in numbers at a ward forum meeting were told a Community Asset Transfer could be an option.

A few years ago when, after travellers had left the site, people had cleared it of rubbish left before the council team had arrived to do it.

“We feel this illustrates commitment to, and care residents have for, this land and no doubt the community would make the best use of an asset transfer,” she said.

In terms of a place for exercise and mental wellbeing, it was free facility contributing to a council objective of improving health, a Vision 2024 aim, said Mrs Jones.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

Officers confirmed groups could be invited to bid for an asset transfer once the council knew what its proposals were – the authority had to be satisfied there were additional benefits, otherwise it was not worthwhile taking the idea further.

In educational terms they believed the school system could cope with the estimated 11 extra children the development might bring – a point contested by residents.

Coun Benton’s proposal that the decision should be referred back to Cabinet with the Community Asset Transfer option to be explored, with an agreement that if that proved unsatisfactory in three months the original decision could be released, was defeated on a split vote.

But an amendment proposed by Coun Rosin Cavanagh (Lab, Luddenden Foot) that the decision be released for implementation while exploring the asset transfer was approved.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

The board had earlier heard that the land disposal agreement would not be signed off until planning permission had been obtained.

Coun Cavanagh argued that as members had been told that was likely to take some time a three month deadline for putting the asset transfer case would not make a difference.