By John Baron
Plans to sell Pudsey Town Hall in a bid to raise money for Leeds City Council have today been sealed by city councillors.
Leeds City Council decided to put empty Pudsey Town Hall on the open market last year, saying it was costing too much to maintain – £30,000 a year – as the local authority struggles to balance its budget.
The decision was debated at a council scrutiny board at Leeds Civic Hall this afternoon after a request by opposition councillors, led by Conservative Andrew Carter.
A formal request for a “call-in” of the sale decision – which could have seen the sale referred back to the executive board to reconsider – was dismissed by eight votes to four.
Councillor Andrew Carter (Cons, Calverley & Farsley) argued the decision to sell the building was a ‘fire sale’. He said: “The Pudsey coat of arms contains an insignia that says ‘be just and fear not’ – and that is what I’m asking this scrutiny committee to be today.”
He claimed there had been inadequate consultation with both Pudsey and Calverley & Farsley ward councillors and also with a Community Interest Company hoping to bring the building into community use. He said the decision had been ‘rushed’ since the end of August.
Cllr Carter said there had been no engagement with Pudsey and District Civic Society, despite them having a licence to rent part of the building as an archive.
The building closed to the public in 2016. Cllr Carter added: “I do not believe or accept that other options have been fully explored.”
He said the town hall was a building of ‘great importance’ and called it an ‘act of civic vandalism to go ahead and dispose of the town hall without adequate compensation or consultation with the people of Pudsey’.
Councillor Trish Smith (Ref, Pudsey) attended as a director of the Pudsey Town Hall Community Interest Company (CIC), a volunteer-led community organisation aiming to bring the Town Hall back into public use.
She said: “Pudsey Town Hall is one of the last remaining civic buildings in Pudsey town centre. It his home to irreplaceable heritage, including a complete council chamber and the story of the former borough of Pudsey.
“If it is sold without protections, and without properly evaluating a community led pathway, Pudsey risks losing not only the heart of its civic identity but a once-in-a-generation regeneration opportunity.
“Selling the town hall ends a civic story. Activating it restarts a town centre.”
The CIC’s plans, she said, were a ‘springboard for regeneration’ and could support local traders. “We have credible partners and a workable operating model. Our plan is practically phased,” she added.
Councillors said the sale would also lead to a loss of historic memorabilia at the 19th century hall, which used to house the former Pudsey Borough Council.
But council leader Councillor James Lewis (Lab, Kippax) said the local authority had spent ‘a lot of time’ investigating a viable community plan over a number of years.
He added: “A lot of buildings are no longer part of the council’s services as the number of staff, in particular, declined during the years of austerity.
“Most have achieved a price far higher than their value, which shows it is a sound strategy in terms of supporting the council’s budget position. I wouldn’t characterise it as a ‘fire sale’.”
He felt the council had engaged with ward members and the CIC ‘over a good number of years’.
Mark Mills, Leeds City Council’s chief officer for asset management and regeneration, said the decision had gone through a ‘robust process’ in engaging with the CIC and councillors.
He said the building was in a prime location and should receive ‘good interest’ on the open market. He said there was still an option to re-engage with CIC if there was no sale.
Cllr Neil Buckley (Cons, Alwoodley) asked if the council chamber could be preserved ‘in some way, without devaluing the property’. Mr Mills said it wasn’t possible to retain a single room on its own, but he was open to displaying artefacts in other public buildings, such as the community hub/library.
Cllr Diane Chapman (Lib Dem, Rothwell) added: “We all accept buildings have to be disposed of, but these are heritage buildings that reflect the history of Leeds before we were a part of Leeds.”
Cllr Carter called for a decision to be deferred until the next financial year to allow for more time to discuss options with the CIC and local councillors.
The call in notice has been supported by Pudsey Councillors Dawn and Simon Seary (Cons) along with other Conservative, SDP and Garforth Independent councillors. Cllr Trish Smith (Ref, Pudsey) was unable to sign the call in due to her involvement with the CIC. Cllr Carter submitted the call in request on behalf of Cllr Smith.
The meeting can be viewed here:
The full agenda can be read in full here.
Sponsored content
30000 for the upkeep of pudsey townhall how much have they spent on cycling lanes that no one uses and money spent removing flags from lamp posts leeds city council just waist money
Don’t forget the £13mil being wasted at the Lawnswood roundabout highways project
and another £13 million on Dawson corner roundabout (council pays approx 1/3rd cost, the rest iirc Highways Agency). Our councillers are pretty stupid
This transaction does not constitute a legitimate sale; it represents the disposal of public property without adequate consideration for residents’ interests. Leeds City Council has consistently failed to act in the best interests of the people of Leeds and Pudsey. The council appears to pursue its own agenda, utilising public consultation exercises such as ‘Have Your Say’ whilst delivering outcomes that bear little resemblance to the feedback received.
The Armley Gyratory scheme serves as a prime example of this approach, with the council implementing a solution that differed significantly from both what residents requested and what was originally promised.
Unless one is a student, Leeds residents who dutifully pay their council tax are expected to accept, without complaint, projects that fail to assist regular commuters in their daily journeys to work. Meanwhile, basic services remain inadequate. One need only walk along Hough Side Road to observe the accumulated litter, uncleared leaves, overgrown hedges encroaching upon pavements, and the poor condition of the road surface.
One can only assume that any proceeds from this sale will not be reinvested into Pudsey!!
Come on…..it was the stupid petulance of the old Boroughs that caused these problems. It was the old Pudsey council who moved to Dawson Corner to empty the coffers in 1974 and had already moved the library to the new building years before. What plausible plans do the objectors have other than a few organisations that can meet elsewhere. And let’s face it it is by far and away the poorest Town Hall architecturally of all the Northern town halls.
(I remember the old library which even then was tricky to get into…. impossible to make fully accessible without great cost and irreplaceable damage to the building )
And what input has our erstwhile MP had into the matter. I am still thinking about it. …………………………..zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz! Sorry, I dozed off! She is about as interested in the going’s off in Pudsey as she is interested in the truth on any matter!!!