398-name petition

When compared to the potential 16500 people that could have houses (assuming 2 people per house)

398 people ojecting does seem that bad.

Its monstrous that anyone can even begin to consider building more houses in an area so badly served by road infrastructure. Why not build next to the duelled part of the A64? The green belt area around York is far too large and close. The belt needs letting out. York must be the smallest city in the country with such a large green belt.

I misread that headline- thank heavens for the extra 'p'

York must be the smallest city in the country with such a large green belt.

But isn't that one of the very reasons that makes York the place that it is?

Don't get me wrong, we probably do need more houses or at least a solution to dampen the demand for houses, but as we all know there are good brown field development opportunities coming to the city.

These may not provide a whole solution, but they will go some way to helping. Although the planners need to get this right, which personally I don't think that they do that often, as provision for such things as schools/shops/medica
l facilities/bars/rest
aurants/bus routes etc etc always seem woefully inadequate.

There is a great deal of political posturing going on
How can anyone say they are for or against this at this stage as no one knows what the plans are.
Just suppose they include dualling the whole of the Northern Ring Road or are proposing NO car access at all or a new tram to get to the City centre? These sorts of things may make it acceptible
I have no idea if the idea is good or bad until I see all the plans and surely thats how any rational person would react....assess the facts then make up our minds
What I do know is that some green land is going to have to go under concrete if York is to grow and satisfy the demand for houses and this hads to be somewhere around the ring road. The brownfield sites will NOT satisy all the demand needed and we are delusional if we believe they will

are we going to loose even morte land that used to be for flooding when the banks burst. hey more insurance claims for the future.

I said it on Tuesday and I'll say it again:-

"For once I find myself agreeing with the current council leaders. York's infrastructure can barely cope as it is - the public transport is shocking and expensive, the roads are heavily congested, council services etc are dwindling. On what planet do the instigators of this scheme live?

Lets be honest here. The developers are in it for one thing and one thing only - profit and huge amounts of it. They don't want to build an "eco-town" as it takes too much off their margins. They have only offered to do it because that is the only way they stand a chance of getting permission to build on green belt land.

I am no fan of Galloway and his chronies but at least they live here and experience the same shocking congestion etc that we do. Do we really want a faceless beaurocrat in London dictating what can and can't be built on our doorstep? The chances are, the "decision maker" may not even have visited York, let alone taken a trip round the A1237 during rush hour. The existing residents already have to queue for ages to get into town in the morning - add onto that another 5000 homes - CHAOS!! They may offer to dual the ring road, but they can't dual the main routes into York such as the A19, Huntington Road, Haxby Road etc.

And will the Press please STOP calling it an "eco-town". That suggests it will be a seperate entity away from York. In reality, what is being proposed is an "eco-suburb" of York which could decimate the character of our ancient town. Based on what I have read, suburbs and villages like Haxby and Wigginton will be nearer to this "eco-town" than York - I presume that they will no longer be considered as part of York if the development goes ahead!!"

And for those who truly don't appreciate how bad the road and infrastructure are around there, try taking a trip from Haxby or Wigginton into the city centre between 8-8.30am, or try getting from the A64 to Clifton Moor or Monks Cross - it's a nightmare!

Lets also be very brutal about the homes. Yes we need more homes. How many of the proposed properties will the average York dweller be able to afford? Not many I fear! And how many will be bought by people on an "investment" or "but to let" basis? York wouldn't have a housing shortage if

A)People were taxed appropriately on their 2nd, 3rd and 4th homes and

B)Homes were priced at £150000 and below thereby allowing households with an income of approx £30k some chance of obtaining mortgage facilities.

clever developers who bypassed the council & went straight to govenment as they thought they'd get it passed no probs by them .

"Eco-tiwn" has a nice ring, but as pointed out, the developers are in it solely for the money. Will the infrastructure be "eco", e.g. truly attractive public transport, water harvesting, local electricity generation, anaerobic sewage digestion, composting, non-trad building materials etc? What about accessible social amenities - parks and play areas, schools and libraries? What about local shopping? "Eco-town" shouldn't just mean good loft insulation and triple glazing, but the same number of cars as anywhere else.

Several councillors including Dave Taylor, of the Green Party, and Labour's Janet Looker spoke in favour of the concept of eco-towns, but said the Clifton Gate scheme was inappropriate.

Yes it is ineppropriate in the clifton possition.
Rufforth, Elvington, Acaster Malbis airfeilds would be better.
The Question of infrastructure:
Make the developer build new roads into York and an addiqute bus service provided by the CYC.

If we are to be constrained by such a tight green belt then we need to go upwards. However no buildings seem to go higher than 4 storeys so its going to be an ever increasing problem. Only the rich can will be allowed to live here eventually.

ouserower wrote:
If we are to be constrained by such a tight green belt then we need to go upwards. However no buildings seem to go higher than 4 storeys so its going to be an ever increasing problem. Only the rich can will be allowed to live here eventually.

I may be wrong but I believe that there are strict height limits imposed in York due to the historical buildings in the city - namely the Minster - being obscured. This shouldn't change, it's a good policy. Just because of economic and housing problems, we shouldn't risk ruining the city centre with taller buildings.

I can well understand the need to keep buildings around the Minster at a lower height but such a restriction should not apply in say Acomb etc. Well away from the centre. If we cannot build outwards or upwards then York is going to face severe problems in the future. Action needs to be taken now.

ouserower wrote:
I can well understand the need to keep buildings around the Minster at a lower height but such a restriction should not apply in say Acomb etc. Well away from the centre. If we cannot build outwards or upwards then York is going to face severe problems in the future. Action needs to be taken now.

Fair point,I guess common sense needs to prevail as usual!

You can see the Minster on nearly every major road when approaching the City, and this is part of the charm of the place. York doesn`t need more houses, it needs more manufacturing jobs that would bring decent wages, and then York people would be abble to afford York houses.

York is in desperate need of homes people can afford - so that chucks out pretty much everything built inside the ring road area, as these are all apartment blocks aimed at southerners getting second homes who are not contributing to the city's economy.

These houses will not only plug the huge gaping hole needed for homes, but the developer will provide money for dualling the A1237. The infastructure would be revised to meet the demand. in the 1960's huge areas of York were built:- Haxby eastfield area right up to Wigginton, Bishopthorpe and Copmanthorpe, Stockton-on-the-fore
st, Strensall, Skelton - all these places must be more than 5000 homes yet these houses got built. Why? because the councillors knew it'd bring money into the city and theyr wen't all NIMBY's with their heads up their big fat ar$es who don't give a flying **** about the welfare of this city's residents or economy.

I bet the only reason the council are objecting to the development is because the developer didn't ask the council for permission because they knew the council would place restrictions or demand money from the developer!