Tesco drilling has stolen a march on the town Despite efforts to try and prevent Tesco from obtaining a further three years grace in their quest for a supermarket on Mayfield Rd, they have stolen a march on Ilkley and are currently drilling ‘piling’.
What happened to the planning conditions, which according to the letter sent to residents on Mayfield Road, have now been discharged?
They do not expect more significant work to take place on site until closer to the store’s planned opening in 2017/18.
Do they ever intend to build on this site?
Peter McFarlin Brewery Road, Ilkley Latest chaos shows we need better bridge signs The chaos, lasting several hours, caused by a rubbish skip on the back of a lorry colliding with the structure of the railway bridge over Wheatley Lane last Saturday morning (August 17) highlights yet again the need for ‘danger – low bridge’ notices to be displayed prominently, preferably in the area of the rail and bus station in Ilkley and at the junction of Valley Drive and Wheatley lane. The current warning signs (displaying vague symbols frequently obscured by overhanging tree branches) are totally inadequate.
The result is that, on most weekdays, heavy articulated vehicles – often with foreign number plates – relying on their sat navs, frequently disrupt the traffic flow as they hastily shunt back and forth, having realised they are never going to get under the low railway bridge. This situation was considerably worsened by the recent long period when temporary traffic lights were operating at the top of Wheatley Lane.
Several letters written by myself and other requesting prominent ‘danger – low bridge’ warning sign, which have been erected in other towns, have never even been acknowledged by Bradford’s highways department.
Incidentally, my wife and I were most appreciative of the sympathetic treatment we received from one of the police constables dealing with the incident, who organised our escape in our car from the blocked off road.
John Marshall Wheatley Lane, Ilkley Homes need may be based on flawed figures I continue to be astounded by our three Guiseley and Rawdon councillors’ responses to Leeds City Council’s proposals to build around 70,000 new housing units over the next 15 years. The implication behind their view that “development is a necessary evil” is that Leeds has no choice in the matter, that these numbers have been dictated by central government and there is no alternative. In face-to-face meetings between WARD and the Planning Minister, Mr Boles, the Minister stated quite clearly that the individual authorities are free to set their own numbers in accordance with their perceived needs.
Unfortunately for the people of Leeds the council and planners appear to have based their figures on a set of flawed statistics which bear no relationship to the actual population increase demonstrated by the 2011 Census. These figures have not been revised downwards following release of the Census details. For instance, in Leicester a figure of 21,000 new homes is suggested for 47,100 extra people – which is one dwelling for 2.2 persons – about the right figure.
In comparison, Leeds, with a population increase of 35,900, proposes to build around 70,000 new homes – nearly two dwellings per person. Why is this?
Furthermore, with reference to the recent site allocation consultation, it is worth noting that 60 per cent of the sites identified by the SHLAA Group across the whole of Leeds is greenbelt. Why is this when so much brownfield land is available? The councillors are to be congratulated in encouraging people to involve themselves in the development of neighbourhood planning and concerned residents living in Guiseley and Yeadon should join the Aireborough Neighbourhood Forum whilst Rawdon residents should contact the new Rawdon Parish Council.
Finally, Leeds housing targets are not set in stone – they have still to be approved at a public consultation in October by the Government Planning Inspector. It is vital that anyone wishing to question these targets and the proposed loss of greenbelt land (statistics are available on the WARD website) should continue to send written objections to the Chief Planning Officer, Phil Crabtree, and the Head of Forward Planning & Implementation, David Feeney. They should also send copies of their objections to all our elected representatives, including MPs. Individuals or groups wishing to support WARD’s campaign may contact our organisation via the website.
Dr David Ingham Rawdon Parish Councillor (Ind) and Chairman of WARD (Wharfedale & Airedale Review Development When our industries put Otley firmly on the map How pleasing it was to read in The Wharfedale about Sinclairs, one of the last pioneering industries left in Otley.
To think we had Garnetts Paper Mill, Ackroyds and Duncan Barraclough textile mills, and the number of engineering companies that put Otley on the map many years ago!
It prompts me to remind the younger generation of our town that Otley Mills were world famous in the textile trade. They employed a lot of people producing high quality woven fabrics for the UK and the expert trade! Ackroyds made some of the yarn for Duncan Barraclough, the weaving company on Ilkley Road who employed a group of handloom weavers who were fully skilled at making patterns and samples which were then used in the main weaving shed producing cloth on a wide scale.
Eventually the cloth was sold to tailoring companies who made the finest quality garments for the nation. The skills I learned as a handloom weaver stood me in good stead when i went to work in the mills in Bradford and more modern weaving machines at Listers and Drummonds mills respectively.
Joe McHugh, 7 Fairfax Flats Otley
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules here