SCAG Notice Board

Skelmanthorpe Community Action Group.

Government's " presumption in favour of development" poses the greatest threat to the countryside in our lifetime.

Anyone reading the Examiner over recent months will be aware of the campaigns to prevent development on farmland at Lindley Moor where Kirklees is pressing ahead with planning permission despite widespread opposition from local people.

Nearer to home building is progressing in Scissett behind the swimming pool despite many years of successful campaigning by local people to prevent it. If that is not bad enough proposals for open cast mining a large tract of land on the fringes of Clayton West have been put forward for Council permission. Anyone who remembers the outcropping of the early 1950's will remember the damage to the environment and the mess this form of mining creates.

The next few years could see the greatest loss of farmland in our lifetime.

The skyline, around us, is already dotted with windmills and if government plans go ahead the Pennines will become a prime site for large-scale wind farm operations. All of this is placing great pressure on farmland and this is before the government's revision of planning procedures comes into effect. With a key element of the new approach to planning being "a presumption in favour of development" many are beginning to see the Localisation Bill as a developers charter. If these plans go ahead we are likely to see the greatest loss of farmland in our lifetime over the next few years.

There is growing concern across the country about the threat this new planning approach presents, with the Campaign for the Protection of Rural England leading the campaign against the proposals. Hundreds of local action groups have sprung up around the country in recent years as people have lost confidence in the ability of their councillors and MP's to prevent unwanted development. Skelmanthorpe Community Action Group was one of the first in our area but almost every village in Kirklees now has an action group fighting to protect local green spaces.

The need for economic growth seems to be fuelling this drive to make planning consent easier. But, while we can all accept the need to boost the economy, concreting over large sections of the countryside at a time when our growing population will place ever greater demands on food production, seems a short sighted approach. How can any government be sure that we can continue to import a large proportion of the food we eat? With greater competition for food from countries like China and a growing world population we may find that we have to produce more food at home. How will we do that when the land is gone?

Its time to be active in protecting the countryside.

If you are concerned about the future of the countryside now is the time to become active. If you are against the new planning proposals which will have "a presumption in favour of development " Please contact any of the following people and make your views known:

Grant Shapps MP at grant@grantshapps.com

Eric.picles@communities.gsi.gov.uk

simon.reevell,mp@parliament.uk

Or why not write to David Cameron at 10 Downing Street, London SW1A 2AA to let him know you are against further large scale developments in the countryside.

SCAG isn't just about protecting the countryside.

While preventing unwanted developments is a key part of our activities SCAG also exists to try to improve the quality of life in our village. Over the years we have campaigned, with success, on a number of issues such as the provision of the school crossing, changes to dangerous junctions, road repairs and removal of litter.

Clean up campaign.

Last year we organised a clean up around the skate park and football pitches and pressed the council to provide more litterbins. There are now several large bins around the park, but sadly many of the youngsters, using the skate board park, ignore the bins and simply throw their empty bottles and rubbish on the ground. If you have a family member who uses the park please ask them to use the bins provided so we can keep the park clean.

Flood prevention.

One of our longest running campaigns has been to try to get the bridge at Parkgate cleared of debris to prevent flooding at times of heavy rain. After four years of persistence and help from our local MP Simon Reevell we have finally succeeded in getting the work done.

Annual General Meeting 19 October.

If you would like to know more about our activities or wish to become an active member of SCAG why not come to our AGM at 7.30 pm on Wednesday 19 October at St Aidan's Church? Or if you would prefer to talk to us on an informal basis why not attend our coffee morning on Saturday 1 October at the Council offices in Skelmanthorpe?

IMPORTANT

YOUR FEEDBACK IS URGENTLY NEEDED

How many times do you receive a telephone call, open your post or turn on your computer to find you have unexpectedly won a prize in a prize draw or lottery or receive a knock at the door from an unwanted and pushy salesman?

In a bid to deter such activity, in 2007, the entire village of Skelmanthorpe became a Cold Calling Control Zone.

The aim of these zones is to arm residents with the knowledge and skills to protect themselves against scammers and fraudsters, rogue traders, doorstep criminals and bogus callers and to prevent any instances of cold calling occurring.

West Yorkshire Trading Standards are now working closely with residents from the zones to collect valuable feedback on the success of the scheme. This is the perfect opportunity for residents to highlight the positive elements but also to provide suggestions to improve the zones and ensure they are as efficient as possible. Education Officers will also be on hand to answer any questions and to advise on current issues and scams to be aware of.

If you are from a group (or attend a group) that would be keen to get involved, and would like your say please don’t hesitate to get in touch to book your workshop.

For more information, please contact Sally Dodgson or Rashad Basharat on the details below

Sally Dodgson

0113 289820 or e mail sdodgon@wyjs.org.uk

Rashad Basharat

0113 3441 680 or email rbasharat@wyjs.org.uk

Is Kirklees plan for 35,000 new jobs just pie in the sky?

The newly released Local Development Framework states that Kirklees will need to create 35,000 new jobs by 2028 and to achieve this will need to use 270 hectares of land, mostly in the green belt. This is a huge number of new jobs and begs the question of just where they are going to come from?

One of the sites selected for this industrial expansion is in the small village of Clayton West, which serves as an example of Kirklees planning department's flawed thinking. Clayton West along with the neighbouring villages of Scissett, Skelmanthorpe and Denby Dale have all been targeted for substantial housing development too, with the new LDF proposing1200 new homes for these villages. This represents an overall growth of well over 25%.

Clayton West has been allocated 18 hectares of industrial development on greenland, with the aim of attracting employers to the area. This is a huge development for such a small village and presumably the planners expect jobs to be created for the occupants of the 1200 new homes to be spread across the other local villages. But what are the chances of this happening?

Jobs lost from declining industries have never been replaced.

All four villages developed around the textile and coal mining industries. Forty years ago there were several local mills employing hundreds of people and a substantial mining industry. These industries were supported by a number of ancillary industries, such as light engineering. Most of the people had local employment.

Over the last thirty years both industries have declined to the point where they have almost disappeared and the supporting industries have largely gone with them. There is very little in the way of local employment in any of the villages today and most people commute to work elsewhere.

Over that thirty-year period no major employer has moved into the area to take up the pool of labour left by the decline of these industries. The empty mills and pitheads have become small business units or retail outlets, employing a few people each. Many mills have units available for businesses to move into and although a substantial number of new industrial units have been built, many are still unoccupied.

If no substantial employers have moved into the area over the past 30 years, why is Kirklees so confident that they will do so in the next 17 years?

The planners of Kirklees fail to recognise that the world has changed. Huddersfield and Dewsbury have also lost their textile and engineering industries, which were the basis for employment in the towns. Over the past thirty years they too have not seen an influx of large businesses employing hundreds of people. There has been nothing comparable to the textile industry that has disappeared, and if 35000 jobs are to be created it will surely require new employers who employ thousands of people rather than a handful each.

If Kirklees has failed to attract major industries, even during one of the longest sustained economic booms in British history, why will it suddenly do so in future? What will change to attract employers here? Where will these 35000 jobs come from?

Manufacturing is unlikely to provide the new jobs required.

Its unlikely they will come from manufacturing, as these industries continue to shed people and only 30,000 people have full or part time jobs in this sector within Kirklees out of a total workforce of 188,000. Covering the countryside with 270 acres of industrial development hardly seems a good plan, when its very unlikely large scale manufacturing of any kind will return to the area.

The biggest area of growth is the service sector where 111,000 people (73.9% of the workforce) are employed within Kirklees. These jobs range from hotel and catering to transport, education and public services. Most employers in this sector, other than public services, are relatively small businesses employing small numbers of people. Crucially, most of them are based in the major towns. If there are to be more jobs it's likely this is the sector they will come from, but many are likely to be part time.

Public services employ 25% of the workforce in Kirklees.

It would be interesting to know how many full time jobs have been created in Kirklees in the past 17 years. Have we managed to create 35000 new jobs during the good times? Who have been the employers showing the greatest growth over that period? I suspect Kirklees Council has been one of them and the University is probably another, since the statistics show 41,700 people are employed in public services in Kirklees, easily the biggest single employers. Neither is likely to continue to grow in future given the economic situation, so the new jobs are unlikely to come from here.

What happens if the jobs aren't created?

So if the jobs aren't created but Kirklees persists in building 26000 new homes what will be the result? Kirklees will certainly profit from the increased Council tax, but at what cost? 26000 homes means an influx of some 50,000 people. There will be a need to upgrade the already inadequate roads, to provide more parking places, more places in schools for the new arrivals, more care for an even larger number of elderly people in future, new sewage systems, more refuse collection, more medical care and so on.

If the jobs don't come there will be an ever-growing unemployment bill, as the new arrivals are added to the 17,500 people currently unemployed in Kirklees. If we can't create jobs for the 17,500 unemployed we already have how will we create jobs for thousands more?

More development adds to Kirklees problems.

If anyone cares to do the maths they will see the numbers don't stack up, it will cost Kirklees Council more than it can possibly gain in increased income, so why do they want to do it? Even worse it will mean even more competition for the few jobs there are and an ever-greater army of people commuting to work elsewhere.

One thing is certain, if the houses are built the people will come, attracted to our area by the lower costs of living here rather than in Leeds or Manchester. Kirklees will get the costs but few of the benefits of a rising population. For the people who live in Kirklees it will be a nightmare of congestion and the quality of life will be ruined forever. Only the developers will profit.

Who says we have to grow? Not growing could be an option.

Perhaps its time for a radical rethink? If we don't build more houses there won't be an influx of another 50000 people. There won't be a need to try to create 35000 new jobs; people will relocate to the places where there are jobs for them. Kirklees won't need to spend millions attracting businesses or supporting a growing army of people. It could then focus on trying to get its decaying infrastructure up to scratch to cope with the people who are already here.

Perhaps we could focus on finding jobs for the 17,500 people currently unemployed before we make the problem bigger.

Perhaps we can focus on building affordable houses for local young people who can't afford to get their foot on the property ladder, rather than five bedroom homes for commuters. Perhaps too we can start to build homes more suited to a growing number of elderly people. These are the homes the developers never want to build and despite promises always seem to manage to avoid building.

Bigger does not mean better.

Bigger does not mean better, in most cases it means worse, at least for the people who live here. The task of trying to supply all that is needed for the existing population is already defeating the Council and the planned job cuts will make matters worse. Where is the evidence that making Kirklees even bigger will improve things for the people who live here?

So before we concrete over the countryside how about spending some time checking out the assumptions on which the plans are based? We might find they are wide of the mark of what is really needed.

Richard Graham 21 January 2011

SCAG_ldf_Article21_Jan_11[1].pdf

LAST CHANCE TO OPPOSE THE LDF

The closing date for comments on the new LDF which proposes building an additional 500 houses in Skelmanthorpe is 13 Fevruary. We need to ensure we send in our objections to the plan so if you haven't yet done so please object today.

You can E mail your objections to jobsandhomes@kirklees.gov.uk or by post to:

Local Development Framework, Startegic Development Service, PO Box B93, Civic centre 3, Huddersfield HD1 2JR.

letter_ldf_2011.doc

Kirklees have scheduled their LDF Consultation meeting to be held at 7.30pm on Tuesday 2nd February 11 at Huddersfield Town Hall.

Can you please tell your friends and neighbours of the details for the meeting. It is vital that we get a good turnout at the Town Hall to get our points across.

In the recent article in the Examiner about the LDF Councillor Pinnock intimated that opponents of the LDF were misleading residents about the amount of green land ear marked for development. I hope you will give equal coverage and prominence to the objectors side of the story. Starting with a statement of the following facts, all taken from the details of the LDF published in the Councils own magazine, Together.

1. The LDF calls for seven sites, all on Green Belt land to be set aside for industrial development. Five of these sites are up to 30 hectares in size, while two are for 30 hectares or more i.e.with no specified upper limit. This adds up to a minimum of 210 hectares all on Green Belt land that could be used for business development.

2. The LDF also calls for six other sites all on Green Belt land to be used for housing development. One of these sites in S. Dewsbury is for up to 2300 houses. Another in North Huddersfield is for up to 500 homes. While the other four are for up to 200 houses each. This makes a total of up to 3600 houses, which could all be built on Green Belt land. This equivalent to two villages both the size of Skelmanthorpe, to be built on the green belt.

This represents a huge amount of Green Belt land, which is supposed to be protected from development, being handed over to the developers. Kirklees seems to have forgotten the responsibility to protect the Green Belt and in the LDF has re-defined Green Belt land as "Open land which seperates one town or settlement from the next." There is no mention at all in this definition of the land having been protected to preserve the green spaces around settlements. So under this definition any land can be used for development.

Many of the people raising objections are from the small villages surrounding Huddersfield and Dewsbury which will bear the brunt of this development on the Green Belt. They know that there is no local demand for the hundreds of houses the council wants to build. The new houses will be filled by people moving in from the surrounding cities who will commute to work elsewhere. At the end of all this building there will still be no affordable homes for local young people or homes suitable for a growing number of elderly residents.

They also know there is no demand for further industrial development since in the thirty years since the demise of both the textile industry and the coal mining industry, no major employers have moved into the villages to take up the pool of labour released from these declining industries. Almost everyone now commutes to work elsewhere. Empty mill units are plentiful and newly built industrial units stand empty. Why build more? Why should employers flock to these areas now when they have failed to do so for the past 30 years?

3. These developments are in addition to five other areas of land already identified for business development. One of these is for 30 hectares or more while the four others are for up to 30 hectares each. Potentially this is another 150 hectares for business use. It is not specified how much of this is also Green Belt land.

Kirklees wants all this green belt land as part of its drive to produce 35000 more jobs and 26,000 more houses over the next 17 years. What isn't stated is that the 35,000 jobs will be needed BECAUSE Kirklees is insisting on building 26,000 houses, which will inevitably draw more people into the area. The stated reason is that the economy will grow by 20% over that period and this will produce 35,000 jobs. Though there is no evidence that this rate of growth, if it happens, will result in 35,000 jobs. Indeed it is unlikely that employment in Kirklees grew by anything like 35000 over the past 17 years, which included the longest period of prosperity England has enjoyed since World War Two. Why should it do so in future?

There are currently 188,000 people employed in Kirklees only 30,000 of whom are employed in manufacturing. It seems unlikley this sector will produce the necessary jobs. Nearly 74% of the working population of Kirklees (111,000) work in services this includes over 41,000 working for public services or education. Given the current government cuts it is unlikely public services will grow by a significant number in the years ahead. This leaves the the rest of the service sector from hotels and catering to finance and IT to take up the slack. Will this sector be able to produce 35,000 jobs, a growth of 50%?

What will be the consequences, for Kirklees, of building 26,000 houses, drawing in a potential growth in population of 50,000 people, if the new jobs don't materialise? Kirklees Council and the existing population will suffer all the costs associated with such growth in houses and population ( new roads, sewage systems, water and electricity supply, increased costs of education, social services, policing, health care etc) but what will be the benefits?

With 17,000 people currently unemployed wouldn't it make more sense to try to find employment for these people before drawing in thousands more people to compete for jobs? So why not make housing development DEPENDENT on the numbers of new jobs created, so new people are only brought into the area IF there are jobs for them to come to?

One thing is certain once we build on the green belt the land is gone for ever. The attractive landscape around our villages will be lost for future generations. Build the houses and the commuters will certainly come to fill them and our attractive small communities will develop into towns with a completely different character. Surely the time has come to rethink the continuous drive for growth before we concrete over all the countryside. Bigger doesn't mean better for the rural communities on the fringes of Kirklees. Nor I suspect does it mean better for the larger cities of Huddersfield and Dewsbury

Skelmanthorpe needs you to save its green spaces!

Attend the public meeting at St Augustine's Church, Scissett at 7.30pm on 12 January 2011.

New housing threat to Skelmanthorpe.

Kirklees published its latest plans for local housing development on 23 November 2010. It will hold consultation meetings throughout the area between 6 December and the first week in February, before making final decisions about where to build the 26,000 houses it has decided are needed.

The new proposal calls for 1250 houses to be built in our area, spread between Skelmanthorpe, Scissett, Clayton West and Denby Dale. The largest number (500) is proposed for Skelmanthorpe. This is despite the resounding rejection of all previous plans, by local residents, over the past 5 years. For more information on the proposals visit www.kirklees.gov.uk/jobsandhomes

If you don't want the council to ride rough shod over your wishes attend the meeting on 12 January 2011.

Skelmanthorpe does not need large numbers of additional houses to be filled with people who commute to work in Leeds, Huddersfield, Sheffield, Wakefield or Manchester. Our roads are already overloaded with traffic at peak times. It does need some low cost housing for our young people and more houses suitable for a growing number of elderly people. Yet these are the houses the developers don't want to build.

We already have significant problems with traffic on our inadequate roads and parking is a major problem in the evenings and weekends. Local schools and medical services are already fully committed. A substantial increase in housing will cause huge damage to the environment and the quality of life here. So if you care about where you live come to the meeting and make your voice heard.

Our green spaces are special and worth fighting for.

Most of the people who live in Skelmanthorpe recognise that the countryside around the village is special and needs to be preserved for future generations. We believe we all have a responsibility to help keep it free of large-scale housing developments. If you want your children and grandchildren to grow up in sight of green fields, hills and woodlands come to the meeting and make your views known.

Please tell your neighbours, friends and relatives and urge them to attend the meeting, we need maximum support to defeat these proposals.

Skelmanthorpe Community Action Group Annual General Meeting.

The meeting was held at St Aidan's Parish Church, Skelmanthorpe on Wednesday 3 November 2010 at 7.30 pm.

The Chair Helen France opened the meeting welcoming those attending and gave a review of SCAG' s activities during the past year.

Annual report.

SCAG'S objectives.

Skelmanthorpe Community Action Group was formed to fight large-scale housing development that could threaten the local environment and the village way of life of the people who live in Skelmanthorpe.

The group also exists to help any resident raise and address issues where, acting alone their voice might not be heard.

1. Housing developments.

SCAG has successfully helped the people of Skelmanthorpe fight two inappropriate LDF proposals for development in our area. It is anticipated that the new proposals, to be published towards the end of November 2010, may require SCAG to mount a third campaign to help protect the village from unwanted development.

2. SCAG web site.

SCAG continues to publish information about its activities on a dedicated web site www.skelmanthorpeaction.co.uk. During the past year we have taken over maintenance of the site ourselves. A significant update is planned for the year ahead.

3.Bovis Homes Development.

Kirklees has been slow to action the road safety measures contained in the planning agreement for this development, especially the traffic calming measures. SCAG is actively chasing up these issues.

4.Village survey.

SCAG has continued to action the issues raised by the village survey and we are greatly indebted to the support of our local councillors, especially Elaine Ward, who has worked very hard on our behalf.

Currently work is being carried out on traffic calming measures along Commercial Road to reduce speeding through the village, which was one of the main concerns raised in the survey.

The Police have responded to requests for action to reduce anti social behaviour and now make regular patrols through the village.

5. Flooding at Parkgate.

SCAG succeeded in getting the bridge at Parkgate cleared of debris last year but heavy rain has caused a new build up under the bridge, increasing the flooding risk. Kirklees has refused to clear the bridge again, giving a lack of funds as the reason. SCAG will continue the campaign to get the bridge cleared as it presents a real threat to the people living in Parkgate.

6. Poor road surfaces.

SCAG campaigned for road repairs following last winters damage to the local roads. Some roads have been resurfaced but the technique used has resulted in a very poor surface and there are concerns that another hard winter will result in more damage.

7. Wood Street junction.

SCAG has succeeded in getting changes made to the dangerous junction at Wood Street. Kirklees has not done everything requested but there is some improvement. The sight line to the left continues to be a problem at this junction.

8. Community Policing.

Skelmanthorpe now has two officers who regularly patrol the streets. They hold regular monthly meetings with SCAG to discuss local needs and have made an impact on anti social behaviour.

9. Kirklees Community Action network (KCAM).

KCAM is a network of seven local community action groups across Kirklees, formed to give us the strongest possible voice in raising issues about housing developments in Kirklees. SCAG is a founding member of this group and is active within it.

10.Marker Stones.

After over two years of effort the new Skelmanthorpe Marker stones are now in place at each end of the village. Our sincere thanks to all the people who have helped us to get the stones in place.

11. The skate park.

The skate park has been a source of concern and complaint for the residents who live near the park, mainly due to problems with anti social behaviour.

The skate park has been moved temporarily, but this is not a final solution to the problem. The skate park itself is in a poor state of repair. SCAG will press for a new skate park to be erected in a permanent location where it will not present problems to local residents.

12. Big clean up campaign.

SCAG organised a clean up campaign to remove litter from the village. Fifty sacks of litter were collected from the area around the Co-op and the football pitches. Kirklees has been informed about the problems and has installed more litterbins near the football pitches.

13 Village Notice board.

This board, located near the Co-op car park is available for use by any voluntary organisation in the community. Helen France of SCAG is a key holder.

14. Parking problems.

Parking is a growing problem and SCAG is working with Kirklees to try to increase the number of parking spaces available in the village.

15. Gritting.

Last years harsh winter revealed real problems with the councils gritting policy. Too little salt was stocked before the winter started, this resulted in many roads not being gritted when the snow arrived. SCAG has campaigned for higher stock levels, more gritting capability and for more clarity about which roads will be gritted.

16. Help for the community.

SCAG has helped a number of individuals with such problems as dealing with anti- social behaviour and in fighting unwanted building developments.

17 Social events.

Over the year SCAG has held a number of social events as a means of funding our activities. These events are open to all.

18. Financial position.

A full set of accounts is available for inspection. SCAG has a healthy cash position but may need to raise more funding if, as expected, there is a need to fight a new round of development proposals from Kirklees in 2011.

Election of officers.

All the current committee members put themselves forward for re-election. There were no alternative candidates so all committee members will continue in office for a further year.

Other business.

The meeting was informed that Kirklees will issue a revised LDF with new house building targets on 23 November. There will then follow a consultation process starting on 6 December and ending at the start of the last week in February. The nature of this consultation process is not known.

SCAG will inform the community when this information is available and will undertake to organise a campaign against any proposals that threaten the way of life of our community.

Members are urged to visit the SCAG website for further information about plans to fight the new LDF.

All press cuttings are reproduced here for information only and SCAG acknowledges all rights of their respective publishers/authors. Items older than three months can be found on the Archivee page.