Letters to the Editor

project is ill-conceived

SIR, - Further to your headline "Fewer lorries for Otley town centre" on the front page of last week's paper and the associated text which reported on the morning session of inquiry hearing into the proposed East of Otley development.

Leeds City Council (LCC) is proposing the early development of the 'East of Otley' site with the staged construction of a new relief road. The relief road, which will form the eastern boundary of the 75-acre site, will run from a new roundabout by Stephen Smiths on the Pool Road to the existing roundabout on the Leeds Road. LCC claim that the only way they are able to secure the construction of a substantial number of affordable houses is by developing this greenfield site now. Major traffic advantages are also claimed.

The public inquiry is considering objections to the proposed changes to the Leeds Unitary Development Plan. Having taken part in the hearings relating to the East of Otley proposals, as representatives of the South East Otley Residents Association (SEORA), we wish to make the following observations:

l Government planning regulations require that brownfield sites normally be developed before greenfield sites. SEORA has submitted evidence that there are many brownfield sites in the Otley area, and there is therefore no need to develop the greenfield East of Otley site in the near future.

LCC acknowledges that 18 of these brownfield sites provide a capacity for between 189 and 209 affordable houses. SEORA subsequently submitted additional evidence which identifies a local potential brownfield site capacity for between 208 and 409 affordable houses.

l In its evidence, LCC claimed that between 275 and 425 affordable houses would be built on the East of Otley site. This was based on an 'indicative target' of 50 per cent affordable houses. Because the developer needs to fund the relief road and other substantial site related costs, SEORA firmly believes that such a high level of affordable housing will prove to be economically impossible to achieve on this site.

l LCC was asked at the hearing to indicate how many houses would be constructed on the East of Otley site, and the percentage of affordable houses that would actually be achieved. They were unable or unwilling to say. When pressed on this point, LCC reluctantly revealed that 25 per cent affordable houses may be achieved. This would reduce their estimate of the number of affordable houses that could be achieved on the East of Otley site to between 137 and 212.

l As these figures clearly demonstrate, the proposed East of Otley greenfield development is not an effective means of securing the construction of affordable housing. We agree with LCC that there is a need to build more affordable houses.

However, the priority should be to develop the alternative brownfield sites that we have shown exist and are capable of achieving much higher numbers of affordable houses.

l Evidence submitted by LCC claims a significant reduction in east-west traffic through the town centre and this includes a reduction in HGV numbers. However, this LCC evidence also shows that the proposed East of Otley development is so large that a 15 per cent overall increase in local traffic volumes will result.

For example, LCC predicts a 21 per cent traffic increase on the Leeds Road and a 15 per cent traffic increase on Billams Hill (with an additional 22 HGV trips per day).

l At the hearing SEORA challenged the LCC evidence about the consequences of the additional traffic generated by the East of Office development. LCC predicts a journey time of just 2.5 minutes between the new Pool Road roundabout and the existing Bradford road roundabout via the new 0.84 mile long relief road and the existing one-mile long by-pass.

l The same LCC evidence shows that traffic levels on the by-pass will be increased from 7,715 to 9,720 trips and that the relief road will carry 13,494 trips. Critically, this evidence shows that 60 per cent of the traffic (8,145 trips) on the relief road will be local traffic to or from the East of Otley development. The relief road will be subjected to a 40 mph speed limit but we predict that average speeds will be significantly less than this since through traffic will have to negotiate three new roundabouts, two road crossing points and a long gradient.

SEORA therefore estimates that the minimum journey time from Pool Road to Bradford via this route will be in excess of three minutes, and considerably longer at peak periods. LCC claims that all through traffic which is not crossing the river will take this route, but the effect of this happening would be to substantially speed up the town-centre route.

l It is clear that the relief road will reduce east-west traffic through the town centre, but by nothing like the amount that LCC claims. The effect of the inevitable congestion created on the relief road by the traffic from the East of Otley development will make the existing town-centre route more attractive for many drivers (including HGV traffic wishing to avoid the gradients and roundabouts).

l SEORA also raised other substantial concerns about the LCC traffic evidence:

(a) The proportion of East of Otley traffic that was assumed to be travelling into Otley (11 per cent) appears to be unrealistically low. The LCC traffic counts show that 40 per cent of Otley traffic is local and 60 per cent is through traffic.

(b) The data on existing Otley HGV traffic levels as used by LCC is unreliable. It was derived by combining statistics from four separate studies and includes a number of anomalies.

(c) The traffic study only considered through HGV traffic; no account was taken of local HGV traffic.

The above is no more than a summary of the main points; we could go on. We conclude that the proposed East of Otley development is ill-conceived, runs counter to national planning policy and will fail to deliver the benefits claimed.

The community of Otley deserves better!

Alastair Watson, John Buck, Peter Smith, Mike Blake, David Blake

(on behalf of SEORA)

Our troops

SIR, - When Blair kept his promised to return the Blackwatch regiment from Iraq before Christmas it caused some surprise. He is not known for keeping promises, as Gordon Brown will testify.

However it now becomes clear. This was only a temporary withdrawal and the army of occupation will be back to its original strength when another 400 troops are sent out - coincidentally the same number as those who came home.

There was no democratic discussion in the House of Commons and this decision was taken unilaterally. Ostensibly, this is to protect democracy in Iraq but taken undemocratically here. Is this not supremely hypocritical and exposes the sham of western democracy?

In Iraq the Sunnis have decided to boycott the election and invalidate it as a democratic process. So is this also not a sham? The danger of civil war in Iraq due to western interference is now critical. Imposing our sham democracy on other cultures exacerbates conflict, more troops will be sent and more innocent people killed.

Don't be surprised if this occurs just before the election and don't be fooled into believing it's a co-incidence. It isn't. Its planned. War is a sure way of winning elections. It worked for Bush and Blair hopes for a repeat performance.

Blair uses his legal training to deceive and can make two plus two equal five. Therefore, when Labours election manifesto is published remember their record of deceit and expect exactly the opposite of what it says.

Given a third term, Labour would be another step nearer to creating a totalitarian state, permanently at war to subjugate the masses.

Malcolm Naylor

21 Grange View,

Otley.

Two points

SIR, - I write to correct last week's correspondents who should or do know better. The town council does not own the civic centre and could not close it. The local Liberal Democrats have always opposed the proposals to build houses to the east of Otley.

Coun Colin Campbell

11 Prince Henry Road,

Otley.

Impact of Post Office closures

SIR, - The last week has seen the closure of five sub-Post Offices within the North West Leeds Parliamentary Constituency following a long and vigorous campaign by many members of the public and not a few politicians, including local Conservative Party activists and myself.

This loss of community amenity will have a significant impact on many people and not just the residents in the immediate vicinity of those branches that are closing. The elderly and the infirm will particularly suffer as a result of the removal of what was an access point to many local services as well as a meeting place and focus for interaction.

The consultation into the closures, for what it was worth, failed to grasp the reality of both impact of and the reasons for people turning away from using their local post office; merely reducing the number of sub-Post Offices in the hope that displaced business will then support the remaining network is nave and provides an early signal that should the current Post Office attitude continue to prevail more closures and the resultant increase in community isolation is inevitable.

Locally and nationally the Conservatives are opposed to further post office closures and certainly within the North West Leeds Constituency our local Conservative campaign teams and I will continue to press Post Office Ltd, its management and board, to seek to enhance and develop the services available to local people in order to encourage more business, rather than merely wielding the axe once again.

Thank you to the great many who supported our campaign to try to save local sub-Post Offices and for the ongoing support in our campaign to stop further closures.

George Lee

Conservative Party Candidate,

North-West Leeds.