Page 10 of 13

Posted: Sat 23 Jun, 2012 11:25 am
by chameleon
Go-ahead for the naming of the Barnbow Site's roads -http://www.yorkshireeveningpost.co.uk/n ... -1-4673564

Posted: Sun 24 Jun, 2012 5:02 pm
by raveydavey
Another step closer to the developments at Grimes Dyke getting underway - today I've seen notices attached to lamposts, etc on the A64 York Road advising of plans to downgrade the speed limit from the existing 50mph to 40mph, from the Windmill Roundabout (junction with the A6120) right out past the Scholes turning - I think this could be where the existing 50mph cedes to NSL, just over the former railway bridge. Note this section already has several speed cameras, so presumably the signage for any change of limit will be suitably prominent.I'm slightly concerned by this as this is the last overtaking opportunity until you are virtually at the Bramham crossroads - and didn't the traffic survey by the developers state that the new access road wouldn't cause any concerns..?They also include a proposal to make the dual carriageway stretch "no stopping", which is actually well overdue and something that should have been done years ago - cars parked outside the houses on this section are a danger and it should hopefully address the issue of stationary vehicles blocking lane one queuing to get into the hand car wash at the former Texaco filling station. Presumably the existing bus stops will be exempt.

Posted: Mon 25 Jun, 2012 4:43 pm
by chameleon
'They also include a proposal to make the dual carriageway stretch "no stopping", which is actually well overdue and something that should have been done years ago - cars parked outside the houses on this section are a danger and it should hopefully address the issue of stationary vehicles blocking lane one queuing to get into the hand car wash at the former Texaco filling station. Presumably the existing bus stops will be exempt.'And of even greater concern there is the frequent braking to make U turns in the narrowed section by the Ghost Island ( Highway Code 'Should only enter if necessary...' from which not wishing to take the safer route provided Like the busses do to access the Stanks/Swarcliffe area is - a necessity, as little so as the horrrendously dangerous right turns on and off the A64 at the Red Lion!!I would hope these points could be addressed as part of the overall Traffic scheme.BTW - it's amazing how many vehicles heading east from the Wind mill - sorry, now the Britania Hotel (another bit of heritage sinking to oblivion) think the limit is already 40mph judging by the orten sudden slowing to that speed or less. Maybe the prominet "50" signs are just for show

Posted: Mon 25 Jun, 2012 4:48 pm
by Cuds214
All I hear about the ELE is Regeneration of East Leeds .. when infact it is the Urbanization of it!!!! ..... well I'm sorry but the powers that be need to GOOGLE the difference ... The Green belt on East leeds is there for a purpose .. to stop the expansion of CITY BOUNDRIES and the Urban Sprawl that goes with it ..... and that goes for any city in the United Kingdom ... and powers that been seem to just do away with a lands status for their own purposes .. changing it to Pas land or Brownfield whenever it suites them !! .... we cannot keep on extending these boundries .. there is an established Eco system of well established wildlife in East Leeds from Deer to Badgers and any new road ESPECIALLY a Dual Carriageway and development of near on 10.000 houses once they have built on to Swarcliffe and to the East of Scholes ..... IS JUST NOT GOOD ENOUGH !!!Everyone around the city in every ward needs to pull together and stop all this madness with the SHLAA sites ... its Ridiculous the amount of planning being thought about .... there are action groups in Scholes, Garforth, Morley, and heaven knows where else trying to protect and save fields, ancient hedgrows and thoroughly good pasture and agricultural land that we need ....

Posted: Mon 25 Jun, 2012 10:22 pm
by chameleon
Cuds214 wrote: All I hear about the ELE is Regeneration of East Leeds .. when infact it is the Urbanization of it!!!! ..... well I'm sorry but the powers that be need to GOOGLE the difference ... The Green belt on East leeds is there for a purpose .. to stop the expansion of CITY BOUNDRIES and the Urban Sprawl that goes with it ..... and that goes for any city in the United Kingdom ... and powers that been seem to just do away with a lands status for their own purposes .. changing it to Pas land or Brownfield whenever it suites them !! .... we cannot keep on extending these boundries .. there is an established Eco system of well established wildlife in East Leeds from Deer to Badgers and any new road ESPECIALLY a Dual Carriageway and development of near on 10.000 houses once they have built on to Swarcliffe and to the East of Scholes ..... IS JUST NOT GOOD ENOUGH !!!Everyone around the city in every ward needs to pull together and stop all this madness with the SHLAA sites ... its Ridiculous the amount of planning being thought about .... there are action groups in Scholes, Garforth, Morley, and heaven knows where else trying to protect and save fields, ancient hedgrows and thoroughly good pasture and agricultural land that we need .... Urbanisation it is indeed. Sadly rather late in the day to argue, land identified under the Governmental requirements of Councils (Leeds included) every 10 years or so, this present traunch was identified back in 2000 or so, argued about and finally approved at public enquiry in 2004.    

Posted: Wed 27 Jun, 2012 8:19 pm
by raveydavey
To be fair, recent events have dashed any hopes that I might once have had in democracy, local or otherwise.Scores, if not hundreds of people have objected to the Grimes Dyke development / ELLR yet it gets pushed through.Thousands objected to the closure of Stanks Fire Station and that too was pushed through "on the nod" with indecent haste once the obligatory consultation period had ended, despite clear evidence that the figures published WYFRS to support the closure were seriously flawed.Week after week we see plans approved in the YEP that no-one wants but which meet "guidelines" and are supported by biased and interest protecting "reports", so have to be passed in case they leave the council open to the cost of any appeal to Whitehall who always seem to favour the developer rather than the indigenous population.Local councillors make all the right noises, no doubt with one eye on the next election, yet seem incapable of getting any positive action.Politicians regardless of affiliation seem pretty much of a muchness now it's become a career stepping stone rather than a vocation."Vote for me, I'm slightly more palatable than the alternative" - who said that the first qualification for a politician should be that anyone who wants the job is automatically excluded?

Posted: Sat 30 Jun, 2012 10:23 am
by chameleon
The outline application for the remaining land between Grimedyke and W etherby Road has been lodged reference 12/02571/OT/ENot yet being able to look at it in detail to see how it compares with the original proposals because the LCC Planning Portal Public Access site is - inaccessible today. . ..!

Posted: Sat 30 Jun, 2012 10:47 am
by Jogon
In relation to the development on Fields opposite the Lawnswood Arms up the road from us (vehicle access to be Church Ln I think).Yesterday I saw a 'For Sale xx?? acres' further outbound on the left. I don't know if this is arable land or for resi development.Sign was just past Kingsley Dr to the left on A660 Otley Rd.

Posted: Sat 30 Jun, 2012 4:58 pm
by raveydavey
chameleon wrote: The outline application for the remaining land between Grimedyke and W etherby Road has been lodged reference 12/02571/OT/ENot yet being able to look at it in detail to see how it compares with the original proposals because the LCC Planning Portal Public Access site is - inaccessible today. . ..! Direct link to the plans:http://planningapplications.leeds.gov.u ... Z00However the 'additional documents' tab where all the detailed plans, artists impressions and other interesting stuff is likely to be found produces an error message - which seems odd as every other tab is working perfectly OK....This is as much as you can see at the moment:"Land Between Wetherby Road, Skeltons Lane And York RoadLeeds LS14Outline Application for means of access and erect residential development (circa 2000 dwellings), retail, health centre, community centre and primary school development, with associated drainage and landscaping"I'm not clear how accurate that location is meant to be, as a cursory look at any map will show that Skeltons Lane doesn't meet either Wetherby Road or York Road.On a related note, isn't this where the council wanted to site the new cemetery? Or is that no longer happening? It's difficult to keep up....

Posted: Thu 06 Dec, 2012 3:05 pm
by Leodian
Regarding proposed planning developments in East Leeds this link to a report in the YEP website may be of interest (the topic is also on page 21 of today's YEP). http://www.yorkshireeveningpost.co.uk/n ... -1-5199205