Three-minute plan to protect the green belt

THE cabinet councillor responsible for planning, Dave Merrett, says a Local Plan will not be implemented until 2015 (The Press, October 17).

The Government is obviously not going to protect our city’s green belt, and looks likely to decide on local planning applications until we have a plan in operation.

To save Mr Merrett time and effort, and also undesired green belt development, the following Local Plan can be submitted today: York will seek to develop all suitable brownfield sites, and until that avenue has been exhausted, no green belt land will be considered for development.

Three minutes thought instead of three years of procrastination.

Geoff Robb, Hunters Close, Dunnington.

Comments(8)

Scarlet Pimpernel says...
11:24am Mon 22 Oct 12

The council's plan to develop brownfield sites has failed - owing to excessive, unworkable affordable housing demands.

They have two choices; to drop the AH targets to 10% and hope this is sufficient to provide the necessary incentive for the large stalled sites to be acquired and started, or, allow widespread use of greenbelt land that will inevitably come forward owing to the planning vacuum they have created.

Either way, their housing trajectory and targets for housing will not be met in the next five years, and York will continue to suffer the damage caused by the ill-conceived and massively harmful 50% affordable policy that was illegitimately kept in place for almost six years. The blame rests with Coun Merrett and Coun Simpson-Laing, with Coun Alexander being complicit because he has not had the balls to do anything about the malaise under his leadership. It's obvious who the de facto leaders are, isn't it ?

ColdAsChristmas says...
7:24pm Mon 22 Oct 12

Scarlet P, Green belt development is totally out of the question, once destroyed then gone for ever. In any case, York is well over populated as it is and more houses will not ease the gridlock or the wait for a GP appointment etc! Take a reality check.

capt spaulding says...
1:12pm Tue 23 Oct 12

Steady on Cold as that smacks of pulling the ladder up behind you. In other words Nimbyism.

Scarlet Pimpernel says...
4:48pm Tue 23 Oct 12

ColdAsChristmas wrote:
Scarlet P, Green belt development is totally out of the question, once destroyed then gone for ever. In any case, York is well over populated as it is and more houses will not ease the gridlock or the wait for a GP appointment etc! Take a reality check.
The same can be said of most of the UK - it's overpopulated. Like it or not, it's going to get a whole lot worse, and there is nothing you can do about it. The need for more housing is also going to get more and more demanding, and unless the greenbelt is released for development to allow more housing to be built, you will get uncontrolled widespread squatting and Dale Farms popping up in epidemic proportions. The housing crisis is far worse than politicians and the government let on, and unless they get to grips with it, the consequences will be frightening. As they say, you ain't seen nothing yet !!!

ColdAsChristmas says...
6:36pm Tue 23 Oct 12

As a global warming alarmist (Chris Field) said seven years ago: 'It's worse than we thought.'
I asked for a reality check and looks like I got one.
One has to ask what our border control agency are doing and then for the benefit of UK and EU British residents, what are the birth control agencies doing to put a halt to this mess?
Captain, we can leave the ladder down and sink the ship with all aboard if you like or show some leadership and good management sense.
Scarlet P, sounds like you think we are doomed and just trying to keep us afloat a little bit longer. What happened to sustainability or is that just windmill talk? Talking of which, what did happen to the York Council wind turbine off James Street?

Scarlet Pimpernel says...
1:03am Wed 24 Oct 12

ColdAsChristmas
The housing crisis is down to two things; too many immigrants and not enough housing being built - both things brought about by mismanagement and meddling by irresponsible, blinkered politicians !,

Magicman! says...
3:16am Wed 24 Oct 12

Birth Control might be one avenue to go down, but is highly contraversial. Personally, if I had my way the law would be such that once a person or couple start claiming benefits it is then illegal for them to have children whilst still on benefits and getting subsidised housing - if they cannot afford to rent/buy their own house because they don't have jobs, then they shouldn't then be spending money on kids, money coming from everybody else whilst then these people are transferred to a bigger more sought-after type of house because having a kid racks them up on the eligibility list for housing.

capt spaulding says...
9:50am Wed 24 Oct 12

Magicman! wrote:
Birth Control might be one avenue to go down, but is highly contraversial. Personally, if I had my way the law would be such that once a person or couple start claiming benefits it is then illegal for them to have children whilst still on benefits and getting subsidised housing - if they cannot afford to rent/buy their own house because they don't have jobs, then they shouldn't then be spending money on kids, money coming from everybody else whilst then these people are transferred to a bigger more sought-after type of house because having a kid racks them up on the eligibility list for housing.
Wow, ever seen Pythons the Meaning of Life. Too many Kids so they will all have to go to the experimental lab.

Wave your wand elsewhere mate. The systems been in place for decades and here to stay.

Only Mother nature can control things to the extent that you allude to, usualy in the form of a war or the Black death

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree