Letters round-up

First, she conveniently omits to mention that Lord Justice Sullivan in the Court of Appeal disagreed with Mr Justice Gilbart, who was only considering whether the case should have a hearing, and said that the case had merit and ought to proceed to a full hearing. It is customary to take more notice of a decision in the higher court and troubling that a councillor, indeed leader of the council, should choose to ignore this.

Secondly, it was not a matter of two High Court judges taking different views. It was only Mr Justice Dove who heard the detailed arguments of barristers for both parties. He, in a very lengthy and reasoned judgment, found against the council on four grounds.

Perhaps most importantly he found that the planning officer’s report to the committee was significantly misleading and did not give any adequate reason to differ from the conclusion reached by the Planning Inspector in the livestock market site appeal. The planning officer wrongly, as the judge found, advised that the livestock market site was not sequentially preferable to Wentworth Street. Secondly, and linked to that, the judge found the officer’s report significantly mislead members about whether the livestock market site was part of the town centre, even though the Secretary of State’s inspector had found it to be so in what the judge said was a well-reasoned decision. The conclusions which the officer reached and members adopted were found to be unlawful.

Most people who know Malton well would regard the livestock market site to be more a part of the town centre than Wentworth Street car park.

Coun Cowling implies in her statement that the issue is open for reconsideration by the council at a future date. However, she omits to say that absent a fundamental change in circumstances members will be bound by both the decision and reasoning in the High Court and also the planning appeal decision on the livestock market site.

The council has a duty to keep its planning function separate from its land ownership aspirations, and must make planning decisions without being influenced by anything other than planning matters.

This debacle, and one must remember that the council owns Wentworth Street car park, has cost council tax and business rate payers in Ryedale (not just those in Malton) a vast sum of money. The council was previously ordered to pay the appellant’s costs in the livestock market appeal and now has been ordered to pay the Fitzwilliam Estate’s costs also in the High Court case. While not yet assessed in the recent case, the total of that and the planning appeal with the council’s own professional fees, not to mention the value of officers’ time, must be approaching £500,000.

This substantial sum would and could have been better spent on services for the community, especially in these times when council’s are hard-strapped for cash. Council tax payers will no doubt be looking to see what recourse they have.

Peter Lawrence, York, former Malton and Old Malton resident

A FEW weeks ago I was reported in your paper commenting on the secrecy under which Ryedale District Council was conducting the sale of our car park.

I say our car park because the Wentworth Street car park belongs to all Ryedale residents and is a benefit available to all residents who visit Malton for any reason.

The judge has now condemned the report on four different counts and we should remember that the report was prepared as true and impartial, by and for the council as evidence to the planning committee.

This is not the first time. Remember the flawed report presented for the planning application for the livestock market site which was refused by the committee and allowed on appeal.

Who will resign over this fiasco? The chief executive? Head of planning? The legal advisor? The leader of council? Surely, they all knew what was going on. Was it their view that the sale of the car park must succeed at any cost?

Someone should take responsibility for squandering nearly £500,000 of Ryedale taxpayers’ money.

Denys Townsend, Malton Town Council

Let’s just enjoy

WHAT a difference a few weeks and a bit of prejudice makes in Helmsley. The weekend of June 20 and 21 saw the annual Farmyard Party arranged by the Motorcycle Action Group. Normally, the Market Place is full of bikers and there is a good atmosphere as they enjoy a few drinks, do a bit of shopping and generally behave themselves.

All the bikes are parked in neat rows on display and the bikers themselves are really friendly, talking to onlookers about their machines.

Usually there is a single police vehicle offering motorbike safety leaflets. But not this year. On the Friday evening there was the usual road safety vehicle, a police 4X4, a traffic car and three motorbikes. Unfortunately, this gave an impression of intimidation, as though no noisy bikes would be tolerated and it had a negative impact on the whole atmosphere with bikers choosing to stay away.

Fast forward to a following weekend when we were invaded by steam engines, tractors, classic cars and vintage bikes for the steam fair. Where were the police? Nowhere. Not a single car or bike. It seems to me that the perception is that bikers are all drunken thugs who break the law and need to be heavily supervised. However, for me it’s the steam fair that blocks the Market Place and approaching roads.

Personally, I think both events are great for Helmsley and I know of some people who travel for over an hour just to take in the atmosphere of both events.

If the police are going to clamp down on the bikers and ensure they do not cause disruption on the roads, then surely they should be doing the same for the steam fair. How about just letting both groups enjoy their weekends and have a discrete police presence in case it is needed. There will always be people who do not want either group to choke up the Market Place, but it’s a big draw for visitors who make the journey to witness both events.

If the police want to be heavy handed I fear it may have the adverse effect of putting people off coming along in the first place. All trade is good trade. Let’s show everyone a warm and friendly welcome.

Helmsley resident, name and address supplied

School’s challenge

THE article in last week’s paper, “Call to look again at planned school site” featured the views of Ryedale councillors for Norton regarding the proposed extension at Brooklyn House of Norton School.

The article was accompanied by a photo, taken by the two councillors, who came onto school premises without authorisation, a faux pas which could have been easily avoided.

They laid a great deal of emphasis on the inconvenience to motorists as a result of the proposal, but nothing about the current strain on the school to accommodate increasing pupil numbers and the measures it is making to fit a quart into a pint pot. This increase in numbers is partly due to the forecasted and current rise in the need for places, but is also due to the great esteem in which the school is held by parents as a result of the teaching and learning standards of outstanding staff led by an exceptional head teacher.

The article would have been better balanced if any of the councillors had visited the school and spoken to the headteacher. Instead, we have the view of another headteacher – unconnected to the school – with no opportunity for Norton School to respond. The school has extended an invitation to all the councillors who featured in the article to visit the school to ensure any further comments they may wish to make are based on a detailed understanding of issues facing the school.

Readers should be aware of the procedures and hoops which have to be jumped through in order to build a new school – it is a bit like trying to catch fog. Norton School faces difficulties and the article did nothing to allow the readers an opportunity to empathise with its challenges.

Linda McCarthy, chairman of the governors, Norton School

Shelve High Malton

RODDY BUSHELL seems to imply that the methods West Malton Residents Group are using are somehow not in keeping with the highways authority in assessing traffic. Yet our traffic report is accepted and selectively quoted alongside its own and Ryedale District Council’s surveys in the Estate’s recently updated transport assessment. Our survey was done methodically and correctly according to guidelines, yet neither the highways authority nor the Estate have demonstrated methodically and statistically why our figures should be different from the Estate’s figures. Given our survey was undertaken over three days on each site, compared to their single day, our survey is more reliable.

We found substantial amounts of traffic, averaging 63 car equivalent vehicles in the morning peak, from Horsemarket Road turning left at the war memorial then right onto York Road, where the Estate’s survey found none.

We also found more than double the traffic turning right from Middlecave Road (west) towards town than the Estate did. If the Estate’s figures are unrepresentative, how can they reliably present future projections of traffic? Further, no traffic modelling of capacity at Butcher Corner has been undertaken, there has been no tracking of the scale of existing queues in their data, and traffic modelling has not been done to take account of the proposed school. The recent handing in of a 444-signature petition against High Malton shows that residents are overwhelmingly opposed to the High Malton housing application of 500 houses, with its alien five-storey high-rise elements ruining views of the surrounding countryside. Malton and Old Malton already have 650 new houses on the way, increasing its population by about a third, and Ryedale now has nearly six years of recognised deliverable housing supply.

We do not need High Malton. Instead, let people decide where houses should go in the consultation on the Local Plan.

Ian Conlan, Malton

Up in smoke

SMOKING cigarettes was once hailed as a cure for a sore throat. No one dreamt that it would one day be found to cause cancer. So too with cars. Until very recently, we were encouraged to buy diesel. We were promised more MPG from a clean-burning fuel that was better for the environment. Only the last part was rubbish.

It is now well known that emissions from diesel cars, vans and wagons, react with ozone to create nitrogen dioxide (NO2) that causes cancer and cardiovascular disease and asthma. Once again, we’ve been framed.

Many people are still unaware that Malton We Love is one of the most NO2 polluted towns in North Yorkshire and yet Ryedale is still hell-bent, for economic reasons, on ramming more and more housing development, traffic and toxic emissions into Malton.

A current Fitzwilliam (Malton) Estate planning application acknowledges that its New Malton development will increase air pollution, but includes a list of mitigating measures to offset the rise in NO2, reverse global warming, and combat anti-social behaviour at the same time. Welcome to High Malton – Twinned with Kyoto.

Simultaneously anticipating an increase in violent crime, as well as acid rain, the applicant has pledged to provide future occupants of High Malton with “personal attack alarms and also umbrellas to encourage residents/employees to walk or cycle,” and “negotiate a discount for residents and employees of the development with cycle/outdoor-wear retailers”.

The list reads like a script from Have I Got News For You.

So, in future, do not be surprised, or startled, if you see karate-chopping and kimono-clad New Maltonians twirling Malton We Love branded umbrellas and coughing, or performing tea ceremonies, in the aisles at Lidl.

It was always part of the plan.

Simon Thackray, Brawby

Post the facts

LORRAINE ALLANSON complains of intimidation (“New campaign group launched to support Ryedale fracking plan”, July 15), yet she is the only person on either side of the fracking debate to have had online posts removed and her account blocked from a major regional newspaper for making offensive personal comments about those on the other side of the argument.

The intimidation is only coming from one direction, and it’s not from the anti-fracking side. We are happy to have the argument on the facts without stooping to personal attack. Cast the beam out of your own eye first Mrs Allanson.

Steven White, Great Edstone

Join our group

PICKERING Events Group has just held its third annual family day, which was very successful, indeed our best yet, the weather for a change played its part.

For the family day to continue we need more committee members. The committee meets four or five times a year and meetings usually take just over the hour.

The family day is a great way of getting to know people and is fun for the youngsters. It would be sad for this event not to continue. The present committee members have really enjoyed putting on the event each year and we are sure any new members would be too. To get involved, call Fred on 01751 474211.

Fred Downes, secretary Pickering Events Group