From Nicola M
Thursday, 19 July 2007

I have spent today objecting once again to the underhand tactics of Revegate, who have now commenced work with a digger on the land adjacent to the canalside. They have caused destruction to the landscape, trees and presumably wildlife habitate once again. They have even scrawled on the tarmac - no parking so that they can get their noisy digger in and out of the land! I have complained to the Council, the Environmental Health (they are still destructing land and trees at 8.15 this evening!)

Despite numerous residents asking the worker employed who he is working for he has refused to answer any of our questions. This is just plain wrong. If, and it's a big if, any planning goes ahead on the land, it would be a good couple of years off and meanwhile the land and wildlife habitate is completely destroyed. There has to be something wrong with the way our legal system works if anyone can simply set a digger rolling on open land, even from the point of view of noise or pollution to neighbouring properties?

The council have offered to investigate, but since nothing has happened following our complaints regarding the other piece of land adjacent to the station. I do not hold out much hope.

From F. Wilson
Sunday, 22 July 2007

I think you're right Nicola.

Anyone who wants to see the attitude of the Council has only to think back to Chainsaw Tuesday and the lack of subsequent action taken.

From Paul D
Monday, 23 July 2007

Calderdale have yet to convince me that they haven't cut a deal with these developers. For example, how can a developer cut an access road through an earth bank onto greenbelt land? Why are these excavations, within yards of a public footpath, not securely fenced? Why has the original clause on the planning permission (to grub up and reinstate) not been pursued/protected? If this is indeed a development, then where are the barriers, signs and safety warnings? In short, why the lack of action on the part of Calderdale MBC, its elected members and paid officials at Mayroyd. I think it's time we were told.

From F. Wilson
Tuesday, 24 July 2007

Good point Paul.

I would like to know what the new (recently elected) councillors for the area have to say.I'm not holding my breath for any action from them either.

From Cllr Janet Battye
Wednesday, 25 July 2007

Which site/area are we talking about? Something was said about tree-felling/thinning behind Mayroyd House a few weeks ago but the people I was talking with said that they were dealing with it.

I'm expecting to be out-and-about around Hebden Bridge this afternoon with the new Group Director for Regeneration and Development (Ian Thompson) so we'll go and have a look! He's in charge of planning etc etc.

From Nicola M
Wednesday, 25 July 2007

It's not the same piece of land. It's the land adjacent to it on the opposite side of the river, going through from Mayroyd Mill near the lock. They've basically flattened the land in what looks like an attempt to form a roadway through to the other side, where they've already been causing damage. There is no current access, so presumably they'd want to stick a bridge of some sort across. I guess the current bridge across simply would not withstand machinery.

From Paul D
Monday, 23 July 2007

Nicola, I’ve just had another look at the new application (07/00979/CON) and as you know the developer owns the land on both sides of the river Calder and also owns the access road running in front of the recently converted mill.

There is no permission to build a bridge over the river, or construct a new access road, just as there is no permission to develop the land on the other side of the river, near the rail (Crow Nest) tunnel. However, the new plans don’t set out clearly what the landscaping of these areas will consist of and the developer may be exploiting the ambiguity. Basically, if they get permission to develop the mill using the new plans, they don’t have to adhere to the previous requirement to grub up the car park, reinstate the trees, protect the wildlife corridor, etc.

The reason they are exposing a bit of industrial archaeology could be to buttress the case for any change of use. The old footbridge steels are still running across the river on the Mayroyd side and an old floor pan has been dug out on the Crow Nest side. Neither changes the fact that it remains greenbelt land, but Calderdale got a bloody nose on the browning up at Luddenden Foot and may shy away from fighting this one. I think the clincher would be granting the visitor parking on the land near Carr Lane. If this gets passed then the case for protecting the land at the Mayroyd Lane end weakens. Without having to submit clear plans for the land and with the potential precedent of a change of use of part of it, they’d be able to submit plans that would include developing the site, take it to appeal and win in the high court.

Calderdale are either going to get suckered, or have cut a deal. Either way I don’t rate them, so if Janet our councillor would like to get this new bloke involved let’s hope he’s got more sense than the rest of his office. It’s not about opposing change, it’s how the change is being forced on us that stinks. Calderdale are sat by whilst the community is harrassed. No doubt they collected photographic evidence of the browning up when these concerns were first raised three months ago. Or more likley they didn't, so have no record of the state of the land before all this mess was created - tossers.

From Nicola M
Thursday, 26 July 2007

Thanks for this Paul - very helpful. Some of this to be fair to one of the Council guys was implied to me, re trying to basically look like brownfield site. They did take photographs of the first work which went on and which are also documented on these pages. The second day of work that we're talking about here was all done a bit quick. I have personally taken photographs of what they were up to on the day etc.

From Paul D
Friday, 27 July 2007

Excellent, maybe I'm too harsh on CMBC, they're not exactly well resourced. Also, the plans for landscaping will be submitted at some point. I don't know why the future of this land is even being questioned it's so important. I can see that the Carr Lane end is possibly much more brownfield, but if we lost this visual and wildlife amenity Hebden Bridge would be just another urban sprawl.