I REFER to the refusal of the planning application for the construction of a farm shop and cafe on land adjacent to the golf driving range in Silsden.

I think the decision is hypocritical and ludicrous. It doesn’t make any sense whatsoever.

The photograph which accompanied your news article doesn’t show the full aspect of the site and is deceiving, it looks as though there are no other buildings there, when there is the driving range building and also a vape shop.

The majority of Silsden residents supported this application – there were 875 letters of support.

I’m not sure if the journalist who wrote the article has looked into the site and surrounding area; an increase in the volume of traffic and the fact the site is green belt land were reasons given for refusal, yet the council has passed thousands of houses most of which are built on green belt land, and also floodplain which was another reason for this refusal.

The development built at the top of Bolton Road is a sprawling one over green belt land and there are many more houses to be built in the area. There were trees that had protection orders felled there – I pointed this out and was told that "unfortunately they were in the way of the development". What is the point of having protection orders?

My point is that the farm shop and cafe would be used, people want it. It would be an asset to Silsden and would be a local business, not a supermarket. The increase in traffic would not be a problem as it is going to increase anyway with all the new housing. The roundabout at the by-pass end will bring a lot of cars in that way so will not affect the town.

The floodplain has been built on right down the by-pass; this farm shop will not add to urban sprawl as they describe in another reason for refusal. Just over the by-pass there are many industrial sites, and the large Barratt housing estate is built on floodplain/green belt but was still passed.

Amanda Wass, Silsden

* Email your letters to alistair.shand@keighleynews.co.uk