THE GOVERNMENT is being asked to intervene in a bid to save fields surrounding an area that has remained almost completely unchanged for 200 years.

Campaigners say Nether Yeadon's heritage is being sacrificed to appease developers, and they are appealing to Communities and Local Government secretary, Greg Clarke, to step into the row.

Nether Yeadon residents have campaigned for more than two years to preserve the historic hamlet – described as a relic of pre-industrial revolution Yorkshire – which includes 17 listed buildings, a medieval green and sunken footpaths.

And they slammed the decision by Leeds City Council not to include surrounding fields in the newly-created conservation area, ignoring advice from Historic England, as well as local groups and politicians.

Nether Yeadon Conservation Area chairman, Nigel Wilson, said: "The council is failing Leeds by not protecting what makes Yorkshire, Yorkshire.

"They are appeasing developers by sacrificing our heritage.”

Mr Wilson said the decision also meant tree preservation orders are being denied until there is an immediate threat.

He added: "Will the city development team wait until the developers fire-up the chainsaws before they consider taking action?"

The council, which gave funding for the designation of Nether Yeadon's conservation area, described it as a "rare survival of pre-industrial townscape of the Aireborough area".

But a report of the sustainable development unit earlier this year stressed extending the boundaries of the conservation area could make them harder to defend. Councillors were told Nether Yeadon and the majority of the surrounding fields were already protected by being within the greenbelt.

It states: "An increase in the proposed conservation area boundary will bring in large amounts of open agricultural land with little direct relationship to the built heritage assets or archaeological remains.

"This is a scenario officers usually resist, in the absence of any historic architectural or archaeological evidence, due to the complications it causes in the defence of such boundaries.

"Although the surrounding fields do contribute to the wider setting of the conservation area, these aspects will be protected under guidance on the setting of heritage assets and the planning system can therefore insist upon the protection of such setting. Any development adjoining the conservation area will also be required to meet the statutory test of whether it 'preserves or enhances' the character and appearance of the conservation area."

It adds: "It is therefore felt extending the boundary to include open fields would in fact fail to have any real benefits upon the preservation of the special qualities of the area and would, potentially, undermine the very defensible boundary as proposed."

A total of 48 letters of support for the conservation area were received from residents, with most wanting the boundary to be increased.

Councillors were told there were no objections to the conservation area in principle, although two representations were received from Persimmon and Barratt homes, who had concerns due to their interests in the area.

lWhat do you think? We welcome letters on this or any other subject. E-mail richard.parker@nqyne.co.uk or write to the Content Editor, Gazette and Observer, 38 High Street, Skipton BD23 1JU. Please include your full name, address and daytime telephone number.