A controversial planning application to build supported housing for people at risk of homelessness in Beeston will be discussed at a meeting on Monday (1 June 2026).
St George’s Crypt, which has run a city centre homeless shelter for many years, has submitted a planning application to build 34 self-contained flats and two houses on former Pullan’s site on Sunnyview Gardens in Beeston.
In a covering letter to the application the charity says the homes are for “people with recent histories of homelessness, those at immediate risk of homelessness, and individuals who are vulnerably housed.” It continues:
“The proposed development builds on established models that St George’s Crypt has successfully delivered and managed elsewhere, combining specialist housing with appropriate support in a way that compliments local communities.”
Whilst some residents have supported the plan on local Facebook groups, others say the development is in the wrong place, citing its proximity to a residential care home and sheltered housing.
Cllr Andrew Scopes (Labour, Beeston & Holbeck) said:
“I know the planning proposals submitted by St George’s Crypt have caused a lot of anxiety, at least in part due to the lack of consultation prior to submitting the planning application. I’ve organised this meeting to give people a chance to hear directly from St George’s Crypt about their plans and to ask questions.
“The type of housing proposed is massively needed but needs to be in the right place and with the support of the neighbouring community. Given this, I’ve been working with a number of hyper-local residents to support their objections to the plans.”
The meeting will take place at The Old White Hart on Town Street, Beeston on Monday 1 June starting at 6pm.
You can read the full planning application here.
You can comment on the proposal until midnight on Tuesday (2 June 2026).
Image: Brewster Bye Architects
While you’re here, can we ask a favour?
South Leeds Life is published by a not-for-profit social enterprise. We keep our costs as low as possible but we’ve been hit by increases in the print costs for our monthly newspaper which have doubled in the last two years.
Could you help support local community news by making a one off donation, or even better taking out a supporters subscription?
Donate here, or sign up for a subscription at bit.ly/SLLsubscribe
To whom it may concern,
I am writing to formally object to the proposed supported housing development within our community.
My objection is not based on a lack of compassion for vulnerable individuals. Everyone deserves access to appropriate support, housing, and opportunities to rebuild their lives. However, I strongly believe that this particular proposal is fundamentally unsuitable for this location and risks causing significant harm both to existing residents and to the future occupants themselves.
Our community is already experiencing considerable social challenges. Residents regularly contend with antisocial behaviour, intimidation, petty crime, shoplifting, and a general decline in feelings of safety. Many local people, particularly families, elderly residents, and those who rely on local amenities, already feel increasingly vulnerable when walking through the area.
Introducing a supported housing scheme catering for individuals with complex needs-including those experiencing severe mental health difficulties or recovering from substance misuse-without first addressing the existing pressures on the neighbourhood is likely to exacerbate these issues. Concentrating individuals with high support needs in an area already struggling with crime and antisocial behaviour raises legitimate concerns regarding community safety, policing resources, and the capacity of local services.
I am also concerned about the wider impact on local businesses. Many shop owners already face persistent theft and antisocial behaviour. There is understandable anxiety that additional pressures may further discourage customers from using local shops and undermine businesses that are already operating under difficult circumstances.
Furthermore, I question whether this location genuinely provides the stable, supportive environment that vulnerable individuals require to achieve positive outcomes. Effective supported housing should be situated where residents have access to comprehensive services, employment opportunities, and a safe environment conducive to recovery and independence. Placing individuals with complex needs into an area that is itself struggling may ultimately fail both existing residents and those the scheme is intended to help.
There is a growing perception amongst local residents that Beeston has borne a disproportionate share of developments that place additional strain on an already overstretched community. Long-term residents who have invested their lives here increasingly feel that their concerns are overlooked whilst decisions are made by individuals who will not experience the long-term consequences of these policies.
Communities such as ours deserve investment that improves quality of life, reduces crime, strengthens local services, and restores confidence in the area-not developments that many residents reasonably fear will intensify existing problems.
I respectfully urge the Council to not follow through with this proposal and, at the very least, undertake a far more robust assessment of its likely impact on community safety, local infrastructure, public confidence, and the wellbeing of both existing residents and prospective occupants.
I ask that the voices of those who live here every day be given genuine consideration before any decision is made.