SecretLeeds - History, culture and architecture in Leeds

...to maintain access to the Canal. Must admit this bit oc common sense suprises me. The report's a bit short on detail. I suspect not city centre but down towards Hunslet/Knostrop. Anybody go any more info?http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/west ... 521732.stm

The Local Development Framework (LDF) is drawn from the 2001 Unitary Development Plan which defines an overall stratergy for the following 10 years or so and was adopted finally in 2006.The LDF then sets out to detail how it is envisaged these strategies will be implemented.The City Centre Plan is here:http://www.leeds.gov.uk/files/Internet2 ... 2fd.pdfand this is the Home Page where other links can be found:http://www.leeds.gov.uk/page.aspx?pagei ... e0fc7961If anyone is serious about studying and following these, I'd suggest saving a copy - my experience of trying to return to links to aspects of the UDP was to found the documents often having been removed sometime later!

Cardi - page 31 of the City Centre report sports an interesting map entitledSFRA Culverts. Unfortunately as is often the case with a PDF document, the resolution is quite appaling leaving it difficult to read!

Thanks - I'll have to try it at home, keeps crashing my pc.

Cardiarms wrote: Thanks - I'll have to try it at home, keeps crashing my pc. (LCC sites use the same base application as our beloved SL I believe - error, error, log files full)

There is an awful lot of reading in the City CEntre report - part way there - but is interesting and gives a real insight into what is proposed.The first thing I noticed (small points perhaps) is the apparant insiduous creep of the city centre boundary southwards, not entirely out of keeping with proposals of the first Unitary Development Plan from the 70's which stated a deire to extend and push retail trade south and over the river.Another point which stood out was the less than universal acceptance of the term and even concept of city 'Quarters' (all 19 or so of em, strange maths) and alternative terms now being used for things like, the Eastgate Area (Harewood Quarter).With thought, it does seem wrong to consolidate say, entertainment and eateries into their own lumps, far better for trade in general and city life at least to integrate these with other aspects of the centre.        

South of the River was cleared of housing for light industry. Now that's gone retail will rule!I think the thining is that 'branded' quarters become desitnations in theselves and encourage more visits as people know what they'll get rather than have to wander around 'the city centre' e.g China Town we needs to be no more than six restaurants and a supermaket.

Cardiarms wrote: South of the River was cleared of housing for light industry. Now that's gone retail will rule!I think the thining is that 'branded' quarters become desitnations in theselves and encourage more visits as people know what they'll get rather than have to wander around 'the city centre' e.g China Town we needs to be no more than six restaurants and a supermaket. Quite, though it does look a though distinct segregation is not the desired flavour of the providers and I agree, you know, night at the GRand say and a 20 minute or so walk to where ever the restaurants live to eat... Rather akin to keeping arena-goers away from the shops with potential passing trade lost.

"page 31 of the City Centre report sports an interesting map entitledSFRA Culverts. Unfortunately as is often the case with a PDF document, the resolution is quite appaling leaving it difficult to read!"PDF's can be enlarged to improve readability, a good free PDF reader can be downloaded here:http://www.foxitsoftware.com/pdf/reader/

Brunel wrote: "page 31 of the City Centre report sports an interesting map entitledSFRA Culverts. Unfortunately as is often the case with a PDF document, the resolution is quite appaling leaving it difficult to read!"PDF's can be enlarged to improve readability, a good free PDF reader can be downloaded here:http://www.foxitsoftware.com/pdf/reader/ Thanks Brunel but I didn't see any improvement - enlarging simply magnifies the low resolution too as with Adobe reader.