I am now retired but I worked in the planning department of Leeds City Council for more 40 years so I have an extensive experience in forward planning.

I thought I should temper the sensational headline and report of the latest campaign to oppose the “saving” of Otley.

Firstly, let’s consider the facts: the east of Otley extension is an allocated site; this means that it is a site committed to housing and has been since 2006.

The recent Inquiry (October 2013) into the Core Strategy for Leeds did hear representations from developers and from local community representatives about the number of new households that need to be found over the next 20 years.

The independent inspector listened to the arguments of both sides and Leeds City Council as to whether the total figure for new households should be more than 75,000 or less.

As part of his deliberations and final decision (his decision is binding) he will take into account those sites which are a “commitment” such as the East of Otley extension and this will definitely form part of his overall housing provision.

It also seems clear that the final demand figure for new housing may vary slightly but it will be in the region of 75,000 and consequently each community will be tasked with providing its share.

Commitments and new allocations will feature in the forthcoming ‘Site Allocations’ Development Plan Document, for which initial consultation has already taken place (June 2013).

Secondly let’s consider the huge benefits the new housing will bring to Otley. I was born here and have lived here for the last 63 years and have gradually seen the vibrant market town shrivel and die.

Okay, so it’s not quite dead yet but its definitely struggling.

In “planning” terms we consider the ‘vitality and viability’ of a town centre and the presence of a plethora of charity shops and the disappearance of independent traders, e.g. butchers, fishmongers, fruit and veg shops, gift shops, hardware and fashion shops and the loss of public houses, which Otley was once renowned for – is a sad indictment of the town centre’s health.

The shops which are still open, the bargain shops and others struggle to survive as do the other businesses. What do they need? Quite simply, more customers, and if we accept that Otley may expand by some 2,000 homes then that would mean 2,000 more families or 4,500 more people who could and would shop in Otley.

This would provide a huge boost to the local economy, supporting shops and services and encouraging others to return or to take up opportunities within a once again vibrant town centre.

This would also add to the ‘tourist offer’ that Otley can provide – a more attractive venue, with a greater variety of quality shops and services. Plus Boroughgate could be pedestrianised IF the bypass was completed.

Half a bypass is no bypass at all, particularly when the major HGV route along the Wharfe valley is ignored.

The removal of all these HGVs trundling through the heart of the town centre must be a huge bonus to its environment, its amenity and its pedestrians.

Many years ago the shop keepers of Commercial Street in Leeds City Centre objected to the proposed pedestrianisation, and yet in the first year after it was implemented their turnover doubled.

People really enjoy the Victorian Fair in Otley and in part this is down to the joy of being able to walk around and across the streets, without the fear of being knocked down by car or large lorry.

The bypass will be funded by the East of Otley extension. As an allocated housing site since 2006, why has it not come forward for development?

It would seem that the depressed housing market would be one good reason and this combined with the fact that the development has significant costs to finance before they sell their first house, i.e. major infrastructure, engineering, including the bypass and the relocation of and laying out of playing fields, disturbed by the line of the new road.

The housing market is improving and with local support the house builders may begin to look at the development in a more positive manner. There are signs of this with the apparent acquisition of land from Otley RUFC, reported in the Wharfedale Observer recently. In order to reverse the downturn in the vitality and viability of Otley Town Centre, the heart of the town, we need more housing, more footfall, more customers, more tourists and they need a pleasant and safe environment. Support the housing initiative and the bypass, support your town – don’t destroy it.

Richard Askham, Otley

Petition starts to oppose 20 per cent more houses

Further to last week’s story “Campaign bid to fight huge town expansion” highlighting the planned 20 per cent more houses in Otley, readers may be interested to know that an e-petition opposing this increase has been launched on thepetitionsite.com/835/546/662/ stop-otley-planning-disgrace.

Alternatively, to save typing please use tinyurl.com/poauxp2 .

As mentioned in the story there is also the ODD Facebook group which can be found at facebook.com/groups/veryodd. This provides further details of what is proposed together with links to the petition and details of other things that you can do to oppose the plans.

Alastair Watson, Elm Terrace, Otley

Retailers could improve on Main Street’s stark display

So, we’ve had the festive lights switch-on in Burley, Otley, Yeadon and Addingham. Can I ask what went wrong for Guiseley?

Guiseley, the place where big national retailers reside, including Morrisons, Argos, M&S, Boots, TK Maxx, and Asda to name but a few. Would it not be too much to ask them to dig into their extremely full pockets and all make a contribution in making a shopping experience in Guiseley a memorable occasion, instead of the stark and dismal festive display that currently lines the Main Street?

Anne Waite, Ings Lane, Guiseley

Gap between rhetoric and actions grows ever wider

How to destroy a project: The gap between our Lib Dem MP’s rhetoric on the Civic Centre and his actions grows wider (Wharfedale Observer, Dec 5 2013).

Mr Mulholland has in the past claimed to support the refurbishment of the Civic Centre, though he never got in touch with the Save Otley Civic Centre campaign, in existence from 2003-10, nor has he met with the Town Council Civic Centre Working Group established in late spring.

Instead he is putting a great deal of energy into apparently ‘exposing’ the Town Council and ‘flushing out’ the ‘secret talks to close the police station’. These were exploratory talks by West Yorkshire Police with Leeds that he was fully aware of at least 10 months ago, as he said in your front page article on March 7. (These discussions came to nothing.) I am at a loss to know why our MP has chosen this precise point to publicise facts that he knew about in March. If he knew the facts then, why has he now decided to accuse the Town Council of ‘secrecy’ and ‘dishonesty’? Just who is being dishonest?

The Civic Centre working group set up by the Town Council has representation from his own party as well as committed volunteers with no political affiliation. It is very distressing for the working group to be attacked in this way by someone who purports to support the refurbishment, and it certainly gets in the way of work to develop the project business plan. The best way to destroy a project’s chances of success is to turn it into a political football, throw mud at the people involved, undermine their morale and drive away public support. Hmm. That’s exactly what he’s doing. I wonder why?

If our Member of Parliament won’t support the parties involved in trying to develop a future for the Civic Centre, are there not many pressing national issues that he can put his energies into, such as lack of jobs for young people, soaring energy prices, struggling families forced to rely on food banks, and a desperate shortage of decent, affordable social housing?

Penny Mares, Member of the Civic Centre Working Group, Newall Mount, Otley

Beware silly drivers playing ‘chicken’ at danger bridge

As a pedestrian I have witnessed several incidents of road rage within the priority system governing the road under Ben Rhydding Railway Bridge, and as a motorist I recently narrowly avoided a collision with a southbound car whose driver came bombing out of the blind right-hand bend beyond the bridge for A65-bound drivers, and ploughed on as my car entered the chicane under the bridge. A small but dangerous percentage of southbound drivers appear to think that 35 or 40mph is a reasonably safe speed at which to negotiate the bend. Your motoring readers should be aware that before any southbound driver charges into view out of the bend, he or she must show consideration to another about to enter the chicane, having crossed the give-way line before that driver came into view. It is then incumbent on both drivers to slow and exercise due care and consideration. My sympathies are always with the A65-bound driver who crosses the give-way line with a clear view ahead, only to be confronted a split second later by a silly driver wanting to play “chicken” at this dangerous pinchpoint.

As a former senior police traffic officer I have always doubted the wisdom of any priority system at a location with poor sight lines, in preference to traffic lights. The latter option would probably benefit Ben Rhydding residents by discouraging the use of Wheatley Lane and Bolling Road as the rat run into Ilkley which it has increasingly become over the past ten years.

Keith Elliot Hunter, Ben Rhydding