Could you help make the footpaths below Official Routes?

Greenside Greenway community group are in the process of submitting claims to make two sections of the disused railway line which have been used by residents for nearly 50 years into official Public Rights of Way. By doing this will help give protection against any other building developments on the proposed Greenway route. The sections are

  1. Tyersal Embankment
    16 acres of land (between the bridleway down from the Fox and Grapes public house to Black Hey Farm ). This land is currently owned by Ogden Group.

  2. Lowtown to Mt Pleasant Road
    This section of disused rail track passes Paul’s pond (old Mill private fishing pond). The land is accessed by the side of Henry Kranks shop on Lowtown, this land may have a number of owners.

    If you have walked / cycled / horse riden any of the above routes we are keen to obtain evidence statements which will be submitted to Leeds City Council Public Rights of Way section, who will process the PROW (Public Right of Way) claims.

    If you can assist, please send an email to

    or send details via private messenger or contact any Committee member, we just need your contact details.

    Please indicate which of the two footpath claims (1 or 2 ) you can help with. We will then post the user evidence form to you with a SAE to return to us.

Many thanks.

Greenside Greenway Commitee

Update September 2021

We are pleased to announce that the feasibility report into phase one of Greenside Greenway has now been completed by Sustrans. This was funded by local community donations and contributions from Historical Railway Estates, and both Leeds and Bradford Councils. Thank you to everyone that contributed, both in terms of finance and support.

The detailed report is 125 pages long and contains design options, land ownership searches, ecology information, and support statements from various local stakeholders. Initially we have focused on phase 1, from Greenside Tunnel in Pudsey to Tyersal Lane in Bradford, incorporating the Tyersal embankment.

With a predicted cost of £2.5 to £4.0 million, the 2.5km long phase 1 represents excellent value for money, compared to both similar greenway schemes, and expensive road schemes, especially when considering the health and wellbeing benefits it will bring. It offers both the chance to create a sustainable transport and leisure route, and to bring back the historic Greenside tunnel into public use. A further 3 phases of the greenway are also proposed, which would eventually link Stanningley to the Spen Valley Greenway.

The proposed Greenside Greenway is considered to be of excellent value, and has strong local support from organisations, community groups, and politicians. We have recently met with the West Yorkshire Combined Authority and both Leeds and Bradford Councils to appraise them of the project and to request assistance in realising the greenway. We will continue to work tirelessly to make it a reality.

Contact details:
Twitter: @greensidegreen Facebook: GreensideGreenway

Planning objection submitted

The group have submitted an objection to the current planning application for the two semi-detached houses currently being built. You will see from the objection statement below, that we are not against the building of the houses, just that thought needs to be put into how the retaining wall is constructed so that it would not prevent the construction of the greenway at a later date.

The closing date for comments is Monday 17th May.

To view and comment, head to and search for 21/02106/FU.

Greenside Greenway objection:

We note the previous planning history of the site and surroundings:

16/04825/FU – 8 dwellings on the site of old garage – approved
17/02642/FU – Partial infilling of railway cutting with inert material – approved
18/05570/FU – Full infill of former railway cutting – refused
20/05470/FU – two semi detached houses – approved
21/02106/FU – one pair of semi detached houses – Current application

We wish to object to the current planning application on the grounds that engineering detail regarding the retaining wall in the former railway cutting has not been supplied.

The Greenside Greenway group is proposing that the old Pudsey Loop Railway Line is repurposed as a greenway for pedestrians, wheelchair users, runners, cyclists, and horse riders. The proposed route runs through the Greenside Tunnel and continues through the cutting that adjoins the site in question. We have recently supplied to the council a feasibility study completed by Sustrans that confirms that a greenway utilising the greenside tunnel and former railway line is both technically and financially feasible. 

It is essential that the council mandate that the construction of the 2 semi detached houses and the associated retaining wall will not prejudice the removal of the partial infill of material in the cutting that may be required if the greenway goes ahead. If the council fails to do this, it will go against their own policies of improving active travel links.

The officer’s report of a previous application (20/05470/FU) incorrectly stated that the design of the retaining wall was only a matter for building control as it would be concealed once the rest of the cutting had been filled in. A negligent omission from the report being the fact that a recent application to fully infill the cutting had been refused by the council (18/05570/FU), with significant local objection. The assumption should therefore be that the cutting would remain unfilled and thus the retaining wall should be amenable in both a visual and structural capacity.

We also note the partial infill plan (17/02642/FU) bears little resemblance to the current infill and the proposed site plan (21/02106/FU) highlights the extent to which the development has encroached onto land created by the current infill. It is therefore requested that the foundations for any retaining wall are secured into the bank of the original cutting (as it was prior to partial infill), and not any loose material that has been tipped in the last 4 years.

This will have two effects:
Ensure that the retaining wall is structurally sound eliminating risk of subsidence of the pair of houses currently being built.
Ensure that if any material from the partial infill is removed for future greenway construction, it will not jeopardise the structural integrity of the retaining wall.

Update February 2021

Greenside Greenway Community Group have now received phase 1 Feasibility Study report commissioned by Sustrans.

This details the practicalities and benefits of constructing a Greenway route utilising Greenside Tunnel and Tyersal Embankment. 

The report also includes description of other proposed phases linking to nearby Spen Valley Greenway, and in the opposite direction to Lowtown and Stanningley Leeds Cycleway.

We are in the process of consulting with Stakeholders and intend to launch the report in Spring 2021.

We would like to thank all our supporters who contributed to the fundraising of this study and who also objected to the full Infill of the Greenside rail cutting.

For more information of this project see the links below:

 Follow us on Facebook: @GreensideGreenway

 Follow us on Twitter: @greensidegreen    

Email us:      

Greenside Greenway object to new planning application

The developers building houses on the site adjoining the railway cutting leading to the Greenside Tunnel have submitted a new planning application to build two semi detatched houses instead of the previously approved single detached house.

Greenside Greenway have submitted an objection on the grounds that this would make the use of the cutting for a greenway more difficult in the future, and we suspect that the original partial infill of material has not been performed as per in the original approval.

Please see below for a link to the planning application where you can comment if you so wish, and our detailed objection.

Link to planning application

The Greenside Greenway group is proposing that the old Pudsey Loop Railway Line is repurposed as a greenway for pedestrians, wheelchair users, runners, cyclists, and horse riders. We are imminently expecting the publishing of a feasibility study by Sustrans that we commissioned earlier this year.

The proposed route runs through the Greenside Tunnel and continues through the cutting that adjoins the site in question. An earlier planning application (17/02642/FU) approved the partial infill of inert material into the cutting. Members of the Greenside Greenway group opposed that planning application as it had the potential to make the development of the greenway more difficult.

The plans for the greenway have continued even after the partial infill of material as both ourselves and experts consider the partial tipping reversible. The inert material could be redistributed to other parts of the route that require elevating, thus restoring the original profile of the cutting.

It should be noted that the original planning application for 8 dwellings on the site (16/04825/FU) was approved prior to that of the partial infill. As such, the dwellings as built to these plans would be unaffected if the partial infill was removed.

We note the current application (20/05470/FU) for two semi-detached houses in place of one detached house in the original application. In principle, we have no objection to this change, however upon examination of the plans, it appears that the footprint and curtilage of the semi-detached houses extends further into the cutting than that of the original detached house. This would indicate that there is now more land available than when the original planning application for the dwellings was submitted.

We also note the original proposed layout plan that was approved in the partial infill application (17/02642/FU). This shows the location of the infill material in the centre of the cutting, with none added to the sloping area next to Carlisle Road and the dwelling site location.

We therefore request that the planning application is refused for the following reasons:

  • The only way land is now available for two houses rather than one, is because the partial infill planning permission has been breached. The inert material has not been placed as indicated in the prior planning application.
  • Allowing the building of an additional house on material that has been tipped into the cutting would prejudice removal of that material at a later date, and thus prejudice the development of the greenway.
  • Although not civil engineers, we do not think that recently tipped material is a stable foundation for a house.

Visit with Tong councillors

Last week, David, Martin, and Gary from the Greenside Greenway group met with Tong councillors Kausar Mukhtar and Alan Wainwright to show them the proposed route of the Greenway.

While the greenway will sit predominantly in the Pudsey ward, routes that connect to it will pass through the Tong ward.

Both Alan and Kausar were enthusiastic about the scheme and the potential links and benefits it could bring to people in the communities they represent.

Campaign Update – May 2020

In these unprecedented times, some good news can work wonders, so here it is!

On 9th March, the Greenside Greenway group held our AGM at the Royal in Pudsey. Over 40 people packed into the top room to hear updates on the project and our plans for the upcoming year.

Main highlights from the past year have been:

  • Regular litter picks along the proposed route. These will continue once lockdown regulations allow.
  • The developer applied for full infill of the railway cutting, which we vehemently opposed and campaigned against. Earlier in the year we heard that planning permission had been rejected.
  • And finally, news that we had raised the required sum (approximately £10,000) for the feasibility study, and were in the process of instructing Sustrans to begin. The first official site meeting being on 12th March 2020.

The meeting also agreed to re-elect existing committee members and roles and formally elect Gary Lemal as Vice Chair , and Lee Carter and Chris Dunford Kelk as committee members. Martin Stanley was elected as Secretary as David Dowden stood down from this position. We are also looking for any new members who can be of assistance and We also sought two auditors for the accounts and both Tim Devereux and Mark Sewards were elected for this role.

Future plans include:

  • A proposal to apply for Charitable Status. Gary Lemal introduced this item and explained the reasons behind the proposal., which will also entail the election of Trustees. The proposal was voted on and accepted.


We thanked in particular The Squeaker for the two-page report from which a lot of fundraising was generated. The Fleece and Sunbeam Brewery for their drinkable contribution, and major fundraiser pledges to the feasibility study costs from The Historical Railway Estate (HRE), Leeds City Council, and Bradford Metropolitan District Council.

Guest Speaker Cllr Peter Carlill, who is the lead member for LCC on Sustainable Travel then gave us a brief update on the sustainable ambitions of the council. Peter then took a number of varied questions before we brought the meeting to a close.

Finally, we would also like to thank the Royal Public House who again provided the meeting room and facilities for this event.

Annual General Meeting 2020

MONDAY 9th MARCH 2020, 7.30pm.


This is a public meeting and all are welcome to attend.

Among the business to be conducted, the AGM will:

  • consider reports from existing Committee members: Chair; Treasurer; Publicity officer. This will included detailed updates on all our activities this year.
  • Proposal to apply for charity status and elect Trustees.
  • Elect Trustees / Committee members for 2020-21.
  • Consider and agree new constitution

Officers/Trustee positions are Chair, Vice-Chair, Secretary, Treasurer, Publicity Officer, Membership Secretary.

Additionally there are vacancies other Committee members who may fill specialised roles.

Post AGM activities

Further activities are scheduled following the AGM and we hope you will be able to stay for a drink.

– Invited speakers, including Cllr Peter Carlill, Lead Member for Active Travel for Leeds City Council and member of The Combined Authority

Full Infill Planning Permission Refused

This weekend saw a big step forward in our plans for the Greenside Greenway. The full infill application, that would have scuppered the whole project, was refused by Leeds City Council.

The two official documents outlining the reasons for refusal can be found at the links below.

Officer Report

Refusal of Planning Permission

Despite the good news, it is important to remember that this decision can still be appealed, and that the application was refused because it did not adhere to council planning policies, not because the council are supporting the greenway.

We still have work to do.