LARGE parts of green land in Aireborough and Wharfedale are still set to be built on - despite reduced housing targets.

That is the warning being made by Aireborough Neighbourhood Development Forum and local councillors.

As reported last week Leeds City Council has been advised it needs 55,000 new homes to meet future demand, from 2017 to 2033.

Those findings from a review by the Strategic Housing Market Assessment (SHMA) had sparked hopes the council might amend its Site Allocations Plan (SAP).

A development blueprint for 2012 to 2018, the SAP is based on an earlier, higher housing target of 70,000 - and currently allocates land for major schemes in towns including Guiseley, Yeadon and Otley.

Chair of Aireborough Neighbourhood Development Forum Jennifer Kirkby fears the new, lower housing target is unlikely to have an impact.

She said: "The inspectors for the Site Allocation Plan Hearing in October, 2017 will not be taking any account of the emerging housing need figure of 55,296 between 2017 and 2033.

"They will be looking for land for 66,000 houses - 70,000 net, including windfall.

"That will include the current plans for green belt deletions under exceptional circumstances.

"The inspectors are expecting to have the SAP done and dusted by December, 2017.

"If they do then it is up to Leeds City Council whether or not they want to adopt the current site allocation plan, under the out-of-date housing policies."

Instead, the 55,000 figure will be used as the basis for discussions that will underpin a Core Strategy for 2017 to 2033 - something unlikely to be agreed before the end of 2018.

She added: "With the current direction of travel we will end up with large areas of green belt being built on, a lack of brownfield regeneration, and a housing stock that does not have enough smaller or easily purchasable properties - and does not meet future trends in the type of houses actually needed."

Councillor Colin Campbell (Lib Dem, Otley & Yeadon) shares those concerns.

He said: "In my opinion none of the sites in the current Site Allocation programme will disappear if the council adopts a revised plan with lower numbers, however their development may be put back and it may be during the next Development Plan - after 2032 - when some are developed.

"In many ways it shows the folly of the council in adopting an artificially high figure for housing need.

"Large areas of green field are likely to disappear under houses and, even if the council sees sense and adopts a lower, more realistic figure these sites will remain at risk."

Last week the city council accepted it was 'likely' the future housing target would be 'reduced to reflect what we know now'.