Housing work at Germany Beck one step closer to starting

York Press: Germany Beck Germany Beck

THE biggest housing scheme in York has overcome another legal battle and is one step closer to work starting.

The High Court has refused permission for a judicial review of City of York Council’s decision to grant “reserved matters” planning permission to build 650 homes at Germany Beck.

Outline permission for the development was granted in 2007 after a public inquiry, while a “reserved matters” application was granted in relation to the appearance, landscaping, layout and scale of the site.

Those against the development claim the Battle of Fulford was fought there in 1066, and the site was prone to risk of flooding.

Campaigners also said they were concerned over risks to bats and air quality, and decided to appeal a previous High Court judgement in December, which found in favour of the developers.

This week’s decision, by the Honourable Mrs Justice Lang, stated the latest appeal against English Heritage, City of York Council and Persimmon Homes “does not disclose arguable grounds for judicial review”, and ruled the decision making was not “legally flawed”.

Councillor James Alexander, leader of City of York Council, welcomed the latest decision, and said he hoped it would mean the development could finally start.

He said: “Due process has been followed and people have exercised their legal rights, but legal challenges one after another have failed. An appeal of this decision may follow but I don’t believe that would bring about any other outcome.

“The debate needs to move on from some people being against the development of homes at any cost to working in partnership with councillors and developers to ensure much needed new homes meet the needs of local communities.

A public inquiry was held in 2006 and here we are eight years later with little progress made, it’s time to get these homes built.”

Comments (38)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

8:09am Mon 24 Feb 14

old_geezer says...

Stand by for "why did we do that?" in 10 years' time. Buyers should check they can get flood insurance before committing. And as for the traffic congestion ...
Stand by for "why did we do that?" in 10 years' time. Buyers should check they can get flood insurance before committing. And as for the traffic congestion ... old_geezer

8:15am Mon 24 Feb 14

NoNewsIsGoodNews says...

Those against the development claim the Battle of Fulford was fought there in 1066, and the site was prone to risk of flooding.

It won't be long until somebody finds a few Great Crested Newts.
[quote]Those against the development claim the Battle of Fulford was fought there in 1066, and the site was prone to risk of flooding.[/quote] It won't be long until somebody finds a few Great Crested Newts. NoNewsIsGoodNews

8:17am Mon 24 Feb 14

Tom6187 says...

old_geezer wrote:
Stand by for "why did we do that?" in 10 years' time. Buyers should check they can get flood insurance before committing. And as for the traffic congestion ...
York will be a car park by the time they've pushed through all these new building projects, they've not even given a thought to the congestion, I'm sure their answer will be to keep punishing car drivers and telling us all to cycle everywhere.
[quote][p][bold]old_geezer[/bold] wrote: Stand by for "why did we do that?" in 10 years' time. Buyers should check they can get flood insurance before committing. And as for the traffic congestion ...[/p][/quote]York will be a car park by the time they've pushed through all these new building projects, they've not even given a thought to the congestion, I'm sure their answer will be to keep punishing car drivers and telling us all to cycle everywhere. Tom6187

8:30am Mon 24 Feb 14

Woody G Mellor says...

The day the contractors move on to that land will be a black day for York and it's history. Any potential house buyers will be easily put off buying should they be given the facts as to why there shouldn't be development on that flood prone land. Keep those appeals coming, it's been delayed for eight years so far, let's keep delaying it and hopefully they will grow tired, give up and move elsewhere.
The day the contractors move on to that land will be a black day for York and it's history. Any potential house buyers will be easily put off buying should they be given the facts as to why there shouldn't be development on that flood prone land. Keep those appeals coming, it's been delayed for eight years so far, let's keep delaying it and hopefully they will grow tired, give up and move elsewhere. Woody G Mellor

8:52am Mon 24 Feb 14

smudge2 says...

Woody G Mellor wrote:
The day the contractors move on to that land will be a black day for York and it's history. Any potential house buyers will be easily put off buying should they be given the facts as to why there shouldn't be development on that flood prone land. Keep those appeals coming, it's been delayed for eight years so far, let's keep delaying it and hopefully they will grow tired, give up and move elsewhere.
If you gave wasted 8 years of your life worrying about a few houses being built that are quite frankly nothing to do with you then you must be a very sad person.As with derwent Thorpe you know it is going to happen so you need to move on and enjoy your life.
[quote][p][bold]Woody G Mellor[/bold] wrote: The day the contractors move on to that land will be a black day for York and it's history. Any potential house buyers will be easily put off buying should they be given the facts as to why there shouldn't be development on that flood prone land. Keep those appeals coming, it's been delayed for eight years so far, let's keep delaying it and hopefully they will grow tired, give up and move elsewhere.[/p][/quote]If you gave wasted 8 years of your life worrying about a few houses being built that are quite frankly nothing to do with you then you must be a very sad person.As with derwent Thorpe you know it is going to happen so you need to move on and enjoy your life. smudge2

9:04am Mon 24 Feb 14

Woody G Mellor says...

smudge2 wrote:
Woody G Mellor wrote:
The day the contractors move on to that land will be a black day for York and it's history. Any potential house buyers will be easily put off buying should they be given the facts as to why there shouldn't be development on that flood prone land. Keep those appeals coming, it's been delayed for eight years so far, let's keep delaying it and hopefully they will grow tired, give up and move elsewhere.
If you gave wasted 8 years of your life worrying about a few houses being built that are quite frankly nothing to do with you then you must be a very sad person.As with derwent Thorpe you know it is going to happen so you need to move on and enjoy your life.
I haven't given any years of my life worrying about it.

It's not "a few houses". It's around 650.

It does have something to do with me, I don't recall discussing it with you, so how would you know that?

I'm a very happy person and I enjoy life to the full.

Now, jog on.
[quote][p][bold]smudge2[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Woody G Mellor[/bold] wrote: The day the contractors move on to that land will be a black day for York and it's history. Any potential house buyers will be easily put off buying should they be given the facts as to why there shouldn't be development on that flood prone land. Keep those appeals coming, it's been delayed for eight years so far, let's keep delaying it and hopefully they will grow tired, give up and move elsewhere.[/p][/quote]If you gave wasted 8 years of your life worrying about a few houses being built that are quite frankly nothing to do with you then you must be a very sad person.As with derwent Thorpe you know it is going to happen so you need to move on and enjoy your life.[/p][/quote]I haven't given any years of my life worrying about it. It's not "a few houses". It's around 650. It does have something to do with me, I don't recall discussing it with you, so how would you know that? I'm a very happy person and I enjoy life to the full. Now, jog on. Woody G Mellor

9:27am Mon 24 Feb 14

smudge2 says...

Woody G Mellor wrote:
smudge2 wrote:
Woody G Mellor wrote:
The day the contractors move on to that land will be a black day for York and it's history. Any potential house buyers will be easily put off buying should they be given the facts as to why there shouldn't be development on that flood prone land. Keep those appeals coming, it's been delayed for eight years so far, let's keep delaying it and hopefully they will grow tired, give up and move elsewhere.
If you gave wasted 8 years of your life worrying about a few houses being built that are quite frankly nothing to do with you then you must be a very sad person.As with derwent Thorpe you know it is going to happen so you need to move on and enjoy your life.
I haven't given any years of my life worrying about it.

It's not "a few houses". It's around 650.

It does have something to do with me, I don't recall discussing it with you, so how would you know that?

I'm a very happy person and I enjoy life to the full.

Now, jog on.
Keep worrying Woody..Bye
[quote][p][bold]Woody G Mellor[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]smudge2[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Woody G Mellor[/bold] wrote: The day the contractors move on to that land will be a black day for York and it's history. Any potential house buyers will be easily put off buying should they be given the facts as to why there shouldn't be development on that flood prone land. Keep those appeals coming, it's been delayed for eight years so far, let's keep delaying it and hopefully they will grow tired, give up and move elsewhere.[/p][/quote]If you gave wasted 8 years of your life worrying about a few houses being built that are quite frankly nothing to do with you then you must be a very sad person.As with derwent Thorpe you know it is going to happen so you need to move on and enjoy your life.[/p][/quote]I haven't given any years of my life worrying about it. It's not "a few houses". It's around 650. It does have something to do with me, I don't recall discussing it with you, so how would you know that? I'm a very happy person and I enjoy life to the full. Now, jog on.[/p][/quote]Keep worrying Woody..Bye smudge2

9:51am Mon 24 Feb 14

roskoboskovic says...

on my travels both in the uk and abroad when i speak to people about my home town they invariably say what a wonderful city but we went there once but never again.especially during school holidays visitors queue to access the city and queue to leave the city and in between a charge a kings ranson to park.success councils have made it their business to destroy the flow of traffic with unnecessary traffic lights,bus stops and just too many houses.anyone who lives in the fulford road/fulford area as i do knows that the traffic has been excessive for many years but to even consider a 650 dwelling development in the area is sheer stupidity and that s before any flooding and environmental consequences.
on my travels both in the uk and abroad when i speak to people about my home town they invariably say what a wonderful city but we went there once but never again.especially during school holidays visitors queue to access the city and queue to leave the city and in between a charge a kings ranson to park.success councils have made it their business to destroy the flow of traffic with unnecessary traffic lights,bus stops and just too many houses.anyone who lives in the fulford road/fulford area as i do knows that the traffic has been excessive for many years but to even consider a 650 dwelling development in the area is sheer stupidity and that s before any flooding and environmental consequences. roskoboskovic

9:51am Mon 24 Feb 14

osbaldwicklane says...

If your jogging by Germany beck put your wellie,s on .
If your jogging by Germany beck put your wellie,s on . osbaldwicklane

10:12am Mon 24 Feb 14

Archiebold the 1st says...

Has anybody even looked into the plans and seen if there are new roads being built? or if as a responsible contractor they will apply flood prevention? Yes there are 650 new houses. Does that mean we are expecting another say 900 cars on the road? Or are they already on our roads? i.e people who move to York for work will prob drive into the centre anyway.

Don’t blame new developments for yorks traffic issues. Blame the morons in charge of transport.

Quiet frankly I don’t care if they build new houses in York. I'd like to see the city expand and new estates be built. Yeh its on a flood prone spot but do you all think that an architect and civil engineer would build something that will then leave them liable? No.. the fact is it will be built with drainage etc. Construction has moved on nowadays. Let them crack on as long as they provide new roads etc.

Everyone’s negative views on here are simply "this is my area and I don’t want others near it because I’m scared of change. I’m taking my bat and ball home." Why should you all even care if their houses flood? i don’t think its because you're all genuinely sincere? I think its just a smoke screen for you all being resistant to change.
Has anybody even looked into the plans and seen if there are new roads being built? or if as a responsible contractor they will apply flood prevention? Yes there are 650 new houses. Does that mean we are expecting another say 900 cars on the road? Or are they already on our roads? i.e people who move to York for work will prob drive into the centre anyway. Don’t blame new developments for yorks traffic issues. Blame the morons in charge of transport. Quiet frankly I don’t care if they build new houses in York. I'd like to see the city expand and new estates be built. Yeh its on a flood prone spot but do you all think that an architect and civil engineer would build something that will then leave them liable? No.. the fact is it will be built with drainage etc. Construction has moved on nowadays. Let them crack on as long as they provide new roads etc. Everyone’s negative views on here are simply "this is my area and I don’t want others near it because I’m scared of change. I’m taking my bat and ball home." Why should you all even care if their houses flood? i don’t think its because you're all genuinely sincere? I think its just a smoke screen for you all being resistant to change. Archiebold the 1st

10:32am Mon 24 Feb 14

Bo Jolly says...

Oh no! Someone mentioned the possibility of traffic congestion and the lack of any forward planning to mitigate it... The score adjuster will be along this evening to try to make sure we all think this is an abnormal concern
Oh no! Someone mentioned the possibility of traffic congestion and the lack of any forward planning to mitigate it... The score adjuster will be along this evening to try to make sure we all think this is an abnormal concern Bo Jolly

10:33am Mon 24 Feb 14

Alf Garnett says...

roskoboskovic wrote:
on my travels both in the uk and abroad when i speak to people about my home town they invariably say what a wonderful city but we went there once but never again.especially during school holidays visitors queue to access the city and queue to leave the city and in between a charge a kings ranson to park.success councils have made it their business to destroy the flow of traffic with unnecessary traffic lights,bus stops and just too many houses.anyone who lives in the fulford road/fulford area as i do knows that the traffic has been excessive for many years but to even consider a 650 dwelling development in the area is sheer stupidity and that s before any flooding and environmental consequences.
I know people who came from other European countries for a holiday in York and decided to live here, as we did. As for crowding and people during the holidays, which tourist cities have you been to that weren't choc-a-bloc during the season ? Be grateful that you live somewhere that people actually want to come to - and return. If York was as awful as you make out, why does it have one of England's most resilient economies ? As for congestion: massively overstated. Bad at rush times but pretty easy most of the time.
[quote][p][bold]roskoboskovic[/bold] wrote: on my travels both in the uk and abroad when i speak to people about my home town they invariably say what a wonderful city but we went there once but never again.especially during school holidays visitors queue to access the city and queue to leave the city and in between a charge a kings ranson to park.success councils have made it their business to destroy the flow of traffic with unnecessary traffic lights,bus stops and just too many houses.anyone who lives in the fulford road/fulford area as i do knows that the traffic has been excessive for many years but to even consider a 650 dwelling development in the area is sheer stupidity and that s before any flooding and environmental consequences.[/p][/quote]I know people who came from other European countries for a holiday in York and decided to live here, as we did. As for crowding and people during the holidays, which tourist cities have you been to that weren't choc-a-bloc during the season ? Be grateful that you live somewhere that people actually want to come to - and return. If York was as awful as you make out, why does it have one of England's most resilient economies ? As for congestion: massively overstated. Bad at rush times but pretty easy most of the time. Alf Garnett

11:08am Mon 24 Feb 14

pedalling paul says...

osbaldwicklane wrote:
If your jogging by Germany beck put your wellie,s on .
"your" jogging? Surely you mean "you're" jogging. Yet another example of misusing the possessive pronoun!!
And as for Archiebold the 1st blaming the "morons in charge of transport" rather than new developments, for york's traffic problems. Please don't assume that the transport planer's remit, is to try and accommodate every single car user in the City. We'd have to demolish the entire city centre for that.
[quote][p][bold]osbaldwicklane[/bold] wrote: If your jogging by Germany beck put your wellie,s on .[/p][/quote]"your" jogging? Surely you mean "you're" jogging. Yet another example of misusing the possessive pronoun!! And as for Archiebold the 1st blaming the "morons in charge of transport" rather than new developments, for york's traffic problems. Please don't assume that the transport planer's remit, is to try and accommodate every single car user in the City. We'd have to demolish the entire city centre for that. pedalling paul

11:11am Mon 24 Feb 14

powerwatt says...

It's a good job they aren't building the development in a high flood risk area...
It's a good job they aren't building the development in a high flood risk area... powerwatt

11:22am Mon 24 Feb 14

think! says...

This article confuses two separate legal challenges. The legal challenge referred to is NOT by Fulford Parish Council against York Council’s decision but an unrelated case regarding the 1066 Battle of Fulford against English Heritage. Both legal actions are still on-going.

James Alexander’s comments are a bit rich. Perhaps he should give some thought to why parish councils feel they need to take legal action and why communities feel badly let down by York Council. It is also particularly rich to read his suggestion that communities should work in partnership with the Council when York Council has so consistently ignored the concerns of Fulford residents.

Check out facebook helpsavefulford or twitter @helpsavefulford
This article confuses two separate legal challenges. The legal challenge referred to is NOT by Fulford Parish Council against York Council’s decision but an unrelated case regarding the 1066 Battle of Fulford against English Heritage. Both legal actions are still on-going. James Alexander’s comments are a bit rich. Perhaps he should give some thought to why parish councils feel they need to take legal action and why communities feel badly let down by York Council. It is also particularly rich to read his suggestion that communities should work in partnership with the Council when York Council has so consistently ignored the concerns of Fulford residents. Check out facebook helpsavefulford or twitter @helpsavefulford think!

11:52am Mon 24 Feb 14

Archiebold the 1st says...

pedalling paul wrote:
osbaldwicklane wrote: If your jogging by Germany beck put your wellie,s on .
"your" jogging? Surely you mean "you're" jogging. Yet another example of misusing the possessive pronoun!! And as for Archiebold the 1st blaming the "morons in charge of transport" rather than new developments, for york's traffic problems. Please don't assume that the transport planer's remit, is to try and accommodate every single car user in the City. We'd have to demolish the entire city centre for that.
Paul please don’t assume that cycling is the future of transportation, as if you think it is, you are sadly mistaken. Being able to tie my own shoe laces, believe it or not Paul, i do understand that a "transport planner"(lets be honest they aren’t really a planner as that involves looking at future demands etc) can not accommodate for every single car... but in York they can not accommodate for 1/4 of the cars. Yet they still cover their a@ses with three times the amount of traffic lights required and with sequencing more annoying and pointless then you’re comments.

So Paul may I point out that it also isn't the "transportation planners" job to plonk everywhere with cycle lanes that annoying people like you demand yet no one ever uses...Nor should they set traffic lights to block traffic up to accommodate cyclists that turn right.
[quote][p][bold]pedalling paul [/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]osbaldwicklane[/bold] wrote: If your jogging by Germany beck put your wellie,s on .[/p][/quote]"your" jogging? Surely you mean "you're" jogging. Yet another example of misusing the possessive pronoun!! And as for Archiebold the 1st blaming the "morons in charge of transport" rather than new developments, for york's traffic problems. Please don't assume that the transport planer's remit, is to try and accommodate every single car user in the City. We'd have to demolish the entire city centre for that.[/p][/quote]Paul please don’t assume that cycling is the future of transportation, as if you think it is, you are sadly mistaken. Being able to tie my own shoe laces, believe it or not Paul, i do understand that a "transport planner"(lets be honest they aren’t really a planner as that involves looking at future demands etc) can not accommodate for every single car... but in York they can not accommodate for 1/4 of the cars. Yet they still cover their a@ses with three times the amount of traffic lights required and with sequencing more annoying and pointless then you’re comments. So Paul may I point out that it also isn't the "transportation planners" job to plonk everywhere with cycle lanes that annoying people like you demand yet no one ever uses...Nor should they set traffic lights to block traffic up to accommodate cyclists that turn right. Archiebold the 1st

12:11pm Mon 24 Feb 14

greenmonkey says...

"Yeh its on a flood prone spot but do you all think that an architect and civil engineer would build something that will then leave them liable? No.. the fact is it will be built with drainage etc. Construction has moved on nowadays. Let them crack on as long as they provide new roads etc."
Certainly will be drainage planned to ensure the houses stay dry on basis of past rainfall experience. However if we had the rain that they have had in the south of England the 'storage area' in the design would be full to overflowing, affecting the new houses closest to Germany Beck. Also the plan involves raising the A19 with a new traffic light controlled junction, so the flooding from the Ouse in this area will be passed on more quickly downstream - check your flood insurance in Naburn, Bishopthorpe and Acaster Malbis because thats where the extra water will be heading once this is built. As for traffic there will be one access onto the A19 and a primary and secondary school on the doorstep so no point in driving for the 'school run' as it will be quicker to walk or cycle. Of course many interested in buying a house here will be attracted by the ease of driving along the A64 to Leeds for the well paid job needed to afford the mortgage - will help meet Leeds housing needs no doubt but add to commuting along the A64.
"Yeh its on a flood prone spot but do you all think that an architect and civil engineer would build something that will then leave them liable? No.. the fact is it will be built with drainage etc. Construction has moved on nowadays. Let them crack on as long as they provide new roads etc." Certainly will be drainage planned to ensure the houses stay dry on basis of past rainfall experience. However if we had the rain that they have had in the south of England the 'storage area' in the design would be full to overflowing, affecting the new houses closest to Germany Beck. Also the plan involves raising the A19 with a new traffic light controlled junction, so the flooding from the Ouse in this area will be passed on more quickly downstream - check your flood insurance in Naburn, Bishopthorpe and Acaster Malbis because thats where the extra water will be heading once this is built. As for traffic there will be one access onto the A19 and a primary and secondary school on the doorstep so no point in driving for the 'school run' as it will be quicker to walk or cycle. Of course many interested in buying a house here will be attracted by the ease of driving along the A64 to Leeds for the well paid job needed to afford the mortgage - will help meet Leeds housing needs no doubt but add to commuting along the A64. greenmonkey

12:15pm Mon 24 Feb 14

again says...

powerwatt wrote:
It's a good job they aren't building the development in a high flood risk area...
It would be, wouldn't it! But they are so it won't be.
[quote][p][bold]powerwatt[/bold] wrote: It's a good job they aren't building the development in a high flood risk area...[/p][/quote]It would be, wouldn't it! But they are so it won't be. again

12:23pm Mon 24 Feb 14

TheTruthHurts says...

pedalling paul wrote: Please don't assume that the transport planer's remit,


Yet you have the hypocrisy to correct someone else's mistake? Are you thick or somfing :-)
[quote] pedalling paul wrote: Please don't assume that the transport planer's remit, [/quote] Yet you have the hypocrisy to correct someone else's mistake? Are you thick or somfing :-) TheTruthHurts

12:54pm Mon 24 Feb 14

Semprini says...

Building on a flood plain. This can only end well.

For the developers and council at least, which is the main thing. Pity the poor saps who end up living there. Wouldn't it be good if the geniuses who voted for this folly are forced to live there?
Building on a flood plain. This can only end well. For the developers and council at least, which is the main thing. Pity the poor saps who end up living there. Wouldn't it be good if the geniuses who voted for this folly are forced to live there? Semprini

1:08pm Mon 24 Feb 14

MrChuckles says...

smudge2 wrote:
Woody G Mellor wrote:
The day the contractors move on to that land will be a black day for York and it's history. Any potential house buyers will be easily put off buying should they be given the facts as to why there shouldn't be development on that flood prone land. Keep those appeals coming, it's been delayed for eight years so far, let's keep delaying it and hopefully they will grow tired, give up and move elsewhere.
If you gave wasted 8 years of your life worrying about a few houses being built that are quite frankly nothing to do with you then you must be a very sad person.As with derwent Thorpe you know it is going to happen so you need to move on and enjoy your life.
What an absolute clown you are.
Nothing to do with us? 650 homes which will likely have a 1 to 2 cars each will have major consequences for everyone who drives or uses a bus. Especially when you take into consideration where they will be situated, one of the busiest roads in York already.
None the less, traffic aside this recipe for disaster and profit motivated c*ck up will be another considerable area of land covered with concrete. It's a flood plane. An defenses put in this area will merely move the flood elsewhere and continue the never ending tens of million pound game of pass the problem. It will also exacerbate current flooding and lets hope those who move into these homes do their research, sympathy will now be minimal from me.
Fool.
[quote][p][bold]smudge2[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Woody G Mellor[/bold] wrote: The day the contractors move on to that land will be a black day for York and it's history. Any potential house buyers will be easily put off buying should they be given the facts as to why there shouldn't be development on that flood prone land. Keep those appeals coming, it's been delayed for eight years so far, let's keep delaying it and hopefully they will grow tired, give up and move elsewhere.[/p][/quote]If you gave wasted 8 years of your life worrying about a few houses being built that are quite frankly nothing to do with you then you must be a very sad person.As with derwent Thorpe you know it is going to happen so you need to move on and enjoy your life.[/p][/quote]What an absolute clown you are. Nothing to do with us? 650 homes which will likely have a 1 to 2 cars each will have major consequences for everyone who drives or uses a bus. Especially when you take into consideration where they will be situated, one of the busiest roads in York already. None the less, traffic aside this recipe for disaster and profit motivated c*ck up will be another considerable area of land covered with concrete. It's a flood plane. An defenses put in this area will merely move the flood elsewhere and continue the never ending tens of million pound game of pass the problem. It will also exacerbate current flooding and lets hope those who move into these homes do their research, sympathy will now be minimal from me. Fool. MrChuckles

1:18pm Mon 24 Feb 14

MrChuckles says...

Archiebold the 1st wrote:
Has anybody even looked into the plans and seen if there are new roads being built? or if as a responsible contractor they will apply flood prevention? Yes there are 650 new houses. Does that mean we are expecting another say 900 cars on the road? Or are they already on our roads? i.e people who move to York for work will prob drive into the centre anyway.

Don’t blame new developments for yorks traffic issues. Blame the morons in charge of transport.

Quiet frankly I don’t care if they build new houses in York. I'd like to see the city expand and new estates be built. Yeh its on a flood prone spot but do you all think that an architect and civil engineer would build something that will then leave them liable? No.. the fact is it will be built with drainage etc. Construction has moved on nowadays. Let them crack on as long as they provide new roads etc.

Everyone’s negative views on here are simply "this is my area and I don’t want others near it because I’m scared of change. I’m taking my bat and ball home." Why should you all even care if their houses flood? i don’t think its because you're all genuinely sincere? I think its just a smoke screen for you all being resistant to change.
Yeh its on a flood prone spot but do you all think that an architect and civil engineer would build something that will then leave them liable?.......... errm Yes! You really think once the moneys in their pocket they care? HA! ££££££££££
£ Secondly, when will basic science come back into the brains of these people! You (sadly) can not fit more than a pint in a pint glass! You also can't make water magically vanish. This land has provided a natural function for centuries, hence why if you go for a walk down on this land at the moment it's so .. well... wet! Placing defenses in this area will merely move the problem on to areas that previously were rarely effected or will magnify the issue there.
This constant expectation to be able to "defend" an area so it can be exploited for profit in homes, combined with rising sea levels, more extreme weather, constant covering of land with concrete and tar-mac, extending urban river embankments (speeds up water flow and contains it) and also the slight issue of dredging (which is minimal influence in comparison to the others) is going to see one hell of a disaster in York within a couple of decades. It's the passivity of attitudes such as PantsSmudge2 and a minority of others that let the juggernaut of profiteers keep storming on.
Of course, we need sustainable housing, that doesn't take a rocket scientist but areas such as Germany Beck are not the answer to the housing issue.
Also important to add, affordable housing for York? More like profit off the A64 to route into Leeds.
[quote][p][bold]Archiebold the 1st[/bold] wrote: Has anybody even looked into the plans and seen if there are new roads being built? or if as a responsible contractor they will apply flood prevention? Yes there are 650 new houses. Does that mean we are expecting another say 900 cars on the road? Or are they already on our roads? i.e people who move to York for work will prob drive into the centre anyway. Don’t blame new developments for yorks traffic issues. Blame the morons in charge of transport. Quiet frankly I don’t care if they build new houses in York. I'd like to see the city expand and new estates be built. Yeh its on a flood prone spot but do you all think that an architect and civil engineer would build something that will then leave them liable? No.. the fact is it will be built with drainage etc. Construction has moved on nowadays. Let them crack on as long as they provide new roads etc. Everyone’s negative views on here are simply "this is my area and I don’t want others near it because I’m scared of change. I’m taking my bat and ball home." Why should you all even care if their houses flood? i don’t think its because you're all genuinely sincere? I think its just a smoke screen for you all being resistant to change.[/p][/quote]Yeh its on a flood prone spot but do you all think that an architect and civil engineer would build something that will then leave them liable?.......... errm Yes! You really think once the moneys in their pocket they care? HA! ££££££££££ £ Secondly, when will basic science come back into the brains of these people! You (sadly) can not fit more than a pint in a pint glass! You also can't make water magically vanish. This land has provided a natural function for centuries, hence why if you go for a walk down on this land at the moment it's so .. well... wet! Placing defenses in this area will merely move the problem on to areas that previously were rarely effected or will magnify the issue there. This constant expectation to be able to "defend" an area so it can be exploited for profit in homes, combined with rising sea levels, more extreme weather, constant covering of land with concrete and tar-mac, extending urban river embankments (speeds up water flow and contains it) and also the slight issue of dredging (which is minimal influence in comparison to the others) is going to see one hell of a disaster in York within a couple of decades. It's the passivity of attitudes such as PantsSmudge2 and a minority of others that let the juggernaut of profiteers keep storming on. Of course, we need sustainable housing, that doesn't take a rocket scientist but areas such as Germany Beck are not the answer to the housing issue. Also important to add, affordable housing for York? More like profit off the A64 to route into Leeds. MrChuckles

1:28pm Mon 24 Feb 14

Archiebold the 1st says...

MrChuckles wrote:
Archiebold the 1st wrote: Has anybody even looked into the plans and seen if there are new roads being built? or if as a responsible contractor they will apply flood prevention? Yes there are 650 new houses. Does that mean we are expecting another say 900 cars on the road? Or are they already on our roads? i.e people who move to York for work will prob drive into the centre anyway. Don’t blame new developments for yorks traffic issues. Blame the morons in charge of transport. Quiet frankly I don’t care if they build new houses in York. I'd like to see the city expand and new estates be built. Yeh its on a flood prone spot but do you all think that an architect and civil engineer would build something that will then leave them liable? No.. the fact is it will be built with drainage etc. Construction has moved on nowadays. Let them crack on as long as they provide new roads etc. Everyone’s negative views on here are simply "this is my area and I don’t want others near it because I’m scared of change. I’m taking my bat and ball home." Why should you all even care if their houses flood? i don’t think its because you're all genuinely sincere? I think its just a smoke screen for you all being resistant to change.
Yeh its on a flood prone spot but do you all think that an architect and civil engineer would build something that will then leave them liable?.......... errm Yes! You really think once the moneys in their pocket they care? HA! ££££££££££ £ Secondly, when will basic science come back into the brains of these people! You (sadly) can not fit more than a pint in a pint glass! You also can't make water magically vanish. This land has provided a natural function for centuries, hence why if you go for a walk down on this land at the moment it's so .. well... wet! Placing defenses in this area will merely move the problem on to areas that previously were rarely effected or will magnify the issue there. This constant expectation to be able to "defend" an area so it can be exploited for profit in homes, combined with rising sea levels, more extreme weather, constant covering of land with concrete and tar-mac, extending urban river embankments (speeds up water flow and contains it) and also the slight issue of dredging (which is minimal influence in comparison to the others) is going to see one hell of a disaster in York within a couple of decades. It's the passivity of attitudes such as PantsSmudge2 and a minority of others that let the juggernaut of profiteers keep storming on. Of course, we need sustainable housing, that doesn't take a rocket scientist but areas such as Germany Beck are not the answer to the housing issue. Also important to add, affordable housing for York? More like profit off the A64 to route into Leeds.
Well actually yes as they have to have personal insurance that leaves them liable for 12 years plus and to have one incident on it basically means you can no longer practice or are ruined from compensation. So I don’t see what is funny? would a professional construct something that will fail? no as he will be taken to court if it be 5 years 10 years or 15 years later..... idiot.

As for you can only fit a pint in a pint glass... i applaud your brains.. But did you know that a giant tank or gutter system of say 300m2 can hold more water then say 300m2 of clay and soil?? Its mental this science lark you know... imagine if in the age of iphones and computers we could only think of a basic excavated drainage solution to such a problem. Moron.
[quote][p][bold]MrChuckles[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Archiebold the 1st[/bold] wrote: Has anybody even looked into the plans and seen if there are new roads being built? or if as a responsible contractor they will apply flood prevention? Yes there are 650 new houses. Does that mean we are expecting another say 900 cars on the road? Or are they already on our roads? i.e people who move to York for work will prob drive into the centre anyway. Don’t blame new developments for yorks traffic issues. Blame the morons in charge of transport. Quiet frankly I don’t care if they build new houses in York. I'd like to see the city expand and new estates be built. Yeh its on a flood prone spot but do you all think that an architect and civil engineer would build something that will then leave them liable? No.. the fact is it will be built with drainage etc. Construction has moved on nowadays. Let them crack on as long as they provide new roads etc. Everyone’s negative views on here are simply "this is my area and I don’t want others near it because I’m scared of change. I’m taking my bat and ball home." Why should you all even care if their houses flood? i don’t think its because you're all genuinely sincere? I think its just a smoke screen for you all being resistant to change.[/p][/quote]Yeh its on a flood prone spot but do you all think that an architect and civil engineer would build something that will then leave them liable?.......... errm Yes! You really think once the moneys in their pocket they care? HA! ££££££££££ £ Secondly, when will basic science come back into the brains of these people! You (sadly) can not fit more than a pint in a pint glass! You also can't make water magically vanish. This land has provided a natural function for centuries, hence why if you go for a walk down on this land at the moment it's so .. well... wet! Placing defenses in this area will merely move the problem on to areas that previously were rarely effected or will magnify the issue there. This constant expectation to be able to "defend" an area so it can be exploited for profit in homes, combined with rising sea levels, more extreme weather, constant covering of land with concrete and tar-mac, extending urban river embankments (speeds up water flow and contains it) and also the slight issue of dredging (which is minimal influence in comparison to the others) is going to see one hell of a disaster in York within a couple of decades. It's the passivity of attitudes such as PantsSmudge2 and a minority of others that let the juggernaut of profiteers keep storming on. Of course, we need sustainable housing, that doesn't take a rocket scientist but areas such as Germany Beck are not the answer to the housing issue. Also important to add, affordable housing for York? More like profit off the A64 to route into Leeds.[/p][/quote]Well actually yes as they have to have personal insurance that leaves them liable for 12 years plus and to have one incident on it basically means you can no longer practice or are ruined from compensation. So I don’t see what is funny? would a professional construct something that will fail? no as he will be taken to court if it be 5 years 10 years or 15 years later..... idiot. As for you can only fit a pint in a pint glass... i applaud your brains.. But did you know that a giant tank or gutter system of say 300m2 can hold more water then say 300m2 of clay and soil?? Its mental this science lark you know... imagine if in the age of iphones and computers we could only think of a basic excavated drainage solution to such a problem. Moron. Archiebold the 1st

1:34pm Mon 24 Feb 14

TheTruthHurts says...

Archiebold the 1st wrote:
MrChuckles wrote:
Archiebold the 1st wrote: Has anybody even looked into the plans and seen if there are new roads being built? or if as a responsible contractor they will apply flood prevention? Yes there are 650 new houses. Does that mean we are expecting another say 900 cars on the road? Or are they already on our roads? i.e people who move to York for work will prob drive into the centre anyway. Don’t blame new developments for yorks traffic issues. Blame the morons in charge of transport. Quiet frankly I don’t care if they build new houses in York. I'd like to see the city expand and new estates be built. Yeh its on a flood prone spot but do you all think that an architect and civil engineer would build something that will then leave them liable? No.. the fact is it will be built with drainage etc. Construction has moved on nowadays. Let them crack on as long as they provide new roads etc. Everyone’s negative views on here are simply "this is my area and I don’t want others near it because I’m scared of change. I’m taking my bat and ball home." Why should you all even care if their houses flood? i don’t think its because you're all genuinely sincere? I think its just a smoke screen for you all being resistant to change.
Yeh its on a flood prone spot but do you all think that an architect and civil engineer would build something that will then leave them liable?.......... errm Yes! You really think once the moneys in their pocket they care? HA! ££££££££££ £ Secondly, when will basic science come back into the brains of these people! You (sadly) can not fit more than a pint in a pint glass! You also can't make water magically vanish. This land has provided a natural function for centuries, hence why if you go for a walk down on this land at the moment it's so .. well... wet! Placing defenses in this area will merely move the problem on to areas that previously were rarely effected or will magnify the issue there. This constant expectation to be able to "defend" an area so it can be exploited for profit in homes, combined with rising sea levels, more extreme weather, constant covering of land with concrete and tar-mac, extending urban river embankments (speeds up water flow and contains it) and also the slight issue of dredging (which is minimal influence in comparison to the others) is going to see one hell of a disaster in York within a couple of decades. It's the passivity of attitudes such as PantsSmudge2 and a minority of others that let the juggernaut of profiteers keep storming on. Of course, we need sustainable housing, that doesn't take a rocket scientist but areas such as Germany Beck are not the answer to the housing issue. Also important to add, affordable housing for York? More like profit off the A64 to route into Leeds.
Well actually yes as they have to have personal insurance that leaves them liable for 12 years plus and to have one incident on it basically means you can no longer practice or are ruined from compensation. So I don’t see what is funny? would a professional construct something that will fail? no as he will be taken to court if it be 5 years 10 years or 15 years later..... idiot.

As for you can only fit a pint in a pint glass... i applaud your brains.. But did you know that a giant tank or gutter system of say 300m2 can hold more water then say 300m2 of clay and soil?? Its mental this science lark you know... imagine if in the age of iphones and computers we could only think of a basic excavated drainage solution to such a problem. Moron.
300m2 water tank, is that what it proposed on the site?

That might be adequate for the odd wet spell but when that site is flooded 300m2 is but a fraction of what the ground holds at present.
[quote][p][bold]Archiebold the 1st[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]MrChuckles[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Archiebold the 1st[/bold] wrote: Has anybody even looked into the plans and seen if there are new roads being built? or if as a responsible contractor they will apply flood prevention? Yes there are 650 new houses. Does that mean we are expecting another say 900 cars on the road? Or are they already on our roads? i.e people who move to York for work will prob drive into the centre anyway. Don’t blame new developments for yorks traffic issues. Blame the morons in charge of transport. Quiet frankly I don’t care if they build new houses in York. I'd like to see the city expand and new estates be built. Yeh its on a flood prone spot but do you all think that an architect and civil engineer would build something that will then leave them liable? No.. the fact is it will be built with drainage etc. Construction has moved on nowadays. Let them crack on as long as they provide new roads etc. Everyone’s negative views on here are simply "this is my area and I don’t want others near it because I’m scared of change. I’m taking my bat and ball home." Why should you all even care if their houses flood? i don’t think its because you're all genuinely sincere? I think its just a smoke screen for you all being resistant to change.[/p][/quote]Yeh its on a flood prone spot but do you all think that an architect and civil engineer would build something that will then leave them liable?.......... errm Yes! You really think once the moneys in their pocket they care? HA! ££££££££££ £ Secondly, when will basic science come back into the brains of these people! You (sadly) can not fit more than a pint in a pint glass! You also can't make water magically vanish. This land has provided a natural function for centuries, hence why if you go for a walk down on this land at the moment it's so .. well... wet! Placing defenses in this area will merely move the problem on to areas that previously were rarely effected or will magnify the issue there. This constant expectation to be able to "defend" an area so it can be exploited for profit in homes, combined with rising sea levels, more extreme weather, constant covering of land with concrete and tar-mac, extending urban river embankments (speeds up water flow and contains it) and also the slight issue of dredging (which is minimal influence in comparison to the others) is going to see one hell of a disaster in York within a couple of decades. It's the passivity of attitudes such as PantsSmudge2 and a minority of others that let the juggernaut of profiteers keep storming on. Of course, we need sustainable housing, that doesn't take a rocket scientist but areas such as Germany Beck are not the answer to the housing issue. Also important to add, affordable housing for York? More like profit off the A64 to route into Leeds.[/p][/quote]Well actually yes as they have to have personal insurance that leaves them liable for 12 years plus and to have one incident on it basically means you can no longer practice or are ruined from compensation. So I don’t see what is funny? would a professional construct something that will fail? no as he will be taken to court if it be 5 years 10 years or 15 years later..... idiot. As for you can only fit a pint in a pint glass... i applaud your brains.. But did you know that a giant tank or gutter system of say 300m2 can hold more water then say 300m2 of clay and soil?? Its mental this science lark you know... imagine if in the age of iphones and computers we could only think of a basic excavated drainage solution to such a problem. Moron.[/p][/quote]300m2 water tank, is that what it proposed on the site? That might be adequate for the odd wet spell but when that site is flooded 300m2 is but a fraction of what the ground holds at present. TheTruthHurts

1:37pm Mon 24 Feb 14

TheTruthHurts says...

Also Archie i think you mean cubic metres of water not square metres.... Maybe think about that before calling other people names like moron :-)
Also Archie i think you mean cubic metres of water not square metres.... Maybe think about that before calling other people names like moron :-) TheTruthHurts

1:41pm Mon 24 Feb 14

Archiebold the 1st says...

TheTruthHurts wrote:
Archiebold the 1st wrote:
MrChuckles wrote:
Archiebold the 1st wrote: Has anybody even looked into the plans and seen if there are new roads being built? or if as a responsible contractor they will apply flood prevention? Yes there are 650 new houses. Does that mean we are expecting another say 900 cars on the road? Or are they already on our roads? i.e people who move to York for work will prob drive into the centre anyway. Don’t blame new developments for yorks traffic issues. Blame the morons in charge of transport. Quiet frankly I don’t care if they build new houses in York. I'd like to see the city expand and new estates be built. Yeh its on a flood prone spot but do you all think that an architect and civil engineer would build something that will then leave them liable? No.. the fact is it will be built with drainage etc. Construction has moved on nowadays. Let them crack on as long as they provide new roads etc. Everyone’s negative views on here are simply "this is my area and I don’t want others near it because I’m scared of change. I’m taking my bat and ball home." Why should you all even care if their houses flood? i don’t think its because you're all genuinely sincere? I think its just a smoke screen for you all being resistant to change.
Yeh its on a flood prone spot but do you all think that an architect and civil engineer would build something that will then leave them liable?.......... errm Yes! You really think once the moneys in their pocket they care? HA! ££££££££££ £ Secondly, when will basic science come back into the brains of these people! You (sadly) can not fit more than a pint in a pint glass! You also can't make water magically vanish. This land has provided a natural function for centuries, hence why if you go for a walk down on this land at the moment it's so .. well... wet! Placing defenses in this area will merely move the problem on to areas that previously were rarely effected or will magnify the issue there. This constant expectation to be able to "defend" an area so it can be exploited for profit in homes, combined with rising sea levels, more extreme weather, constant covering of land with concrete and tar-mac, extending urban river embankments (speeds up water flow and contains it) and also the slight issue of dredging (which is minimal influence in comparison to the others) is going to see one hell of a disaster in York within a couple of decades. It's the passivity of attitudes such as PantsSmudge2 and a minority of others that let the juggernaut of profiteers keep storming on. Of course, we need sustainable housing, that doesn't take a rocket scientist but areas such as Germany Beck are not the answer to the housing issue. Also important to add, affordable housing for York? More like profit off the A64 to route into Leeds.
Well actually yes as they have to have personal insurance that leaves them liable for 12 years plus and to have one incident on it basically means you can no longer practice or are ruined from compensation. So I don’t see what is funny? would a professional construct something that will fail? no as he will be taken to court if it be 5 years 10 years or 15 years later..... idiot. As for you can only fit a pint in a pint glass... i applaud your brains.. But did you know that a giant tank or gutter system of say 300m2 can hold more water then say 300m2 of clay and soil?? Its mental this science lark you know... imagine if in the age of iphones and computers we could only think of a basic excavated drainage solution to such a problem. Moron.
300m2 water tank, is that what it proposed on the site? That might be adequate for the odd wet spell but when that site is flooded 300m2 is but a fraction of what the ground holds at present.
no it was an example. .. a bit like the pint glass example above. i suspect the tank will be larger the 30m by 10m.... (and however tall should have read m3)
[quote][p][bold]TheTruthHurts[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Archiebold the 1st[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]MrChuckles[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Archiebold the 1st[/bold] wrote: Has anybody even looked into the plans and seen if there are new roads being built? or if as a responsible contractor they will apply flood prevention? Yes there are 650 new houses. Does that mean we are expecting another say 900 cars on the road? Or are they already on our roads? i.e people who move to York for work will prob drive into the centre anyway. Don’t blame new developments for yorks traffic issues. Blame the morons in charge of transport. Quiet frankly I don’t care if they build new houses in York. I'd like to see the city expand and new estates be built. Yeh its on a flood prone spot but do you all think that an architect and civil engineer would build something that will then leave them liable? No.. the fact is it will be built with drainage etc. Construction has moved on nowadays. Let them crack on as long as they provide new roads etc. Everyone’s negative views on here are simply "this is my area and I don’t want others near it because I’m scared of change. I’m taking my bat and ball home." Why should you all even care if their houses flood? i don’t think its because you're all genuinely sincere? I think its just a smoke screen for you all being resistant to change.[/p][/quote]Yeh its on a flood prone spot but do you all think that an architect and civil engineer would build something that will then leave them liable?.......... errm Yes! You really think once the moneys in their pocket they care? HA! ££££££££££ £ Secondly, when will basic science come back into the brains of these people! You (sadly) can not fit more than a pint in a pint glass! You also can't make water magically vanish. This land has provided a natural function for centuries, hence why if you go for a walk down on this land at the moment it's so .. well... wet! Placing defenses in this area will merely move the problem on to areas that previously were rarely effected or will magnify the issue there. This constant expectation to be able to "defend" an area so it can be exploited for profit in homes, combined with rising sea levels, more extreme weather, constant covering of land with concrete and tar-mac, extending urban river embankments (speeds up water flow and contains it) and also the slight issue of dredging (which is minimal influence in comparison to the others) is going to see one hell of a disaster in York within a couple of decades. It's the passivity of attitudes such as PantsSmudge2 and a minority of others that let the juggernaut of profiteers keep storming on. Of course, we need sustainable housing, that doesn't take a rocket scientist but areas such as Germany Beck are not the answer to the housing issue. Also important to add, affordable housing for York? More like profit off the A64 to route into Leeds.[/p][/quote]Well actually yes as they have to have personal insurance that leaves them liable for 12 years plus and to have one incident on it basically means you can no longer practice or are ruined from compensation. So I don’t see what is funny? would a professional construct something that will fail? no as he will be taken to court if it be 5 years 10 years or 15 years later..... idiot. As for you can only fit a pint in a pint glass... i applaud your brains.. But did you know that a giant tank or gutter system of say 300m2 can hold more water then say 300m2 of clay and soil?? Its mental this science lark you know... imagine if in the age of iphones and computers we could only think of a basic excavated drainage solution to such a problem. Moron.[/p][/quote]300m2 water tank, is that what it proposed on the site? That might be adequate for the odd wet spell but when that site is flooded 300m2 is but a fraction of what the ground holds at present.[/p][/quote]no it was an example. .. a bit like the pint glass example above. i suspect the tank will be larger the 30m by 10m.... (and however tall should have read m3) Archiebold the 1st

1:42pm Mon 24 Feb 14

Archiebold the 1st says...

TheTruthHurts wrote:
Also Archie i think you mean cubic metres of water not square metres.... Maybe think about that before calling other people names like moron :-)
hahaha i did spot that... its the next key to be fair... but it is a fact.
[quote][p][bold]TheTruthHurts[/bold] wrote: Also Archie i think you mean cubic metres of water not square metres.... Maybe think about that before calling other people names like moron :-)[/p][/quote]hahaha i did spot that... its the next key to be fair... but it is a fact. Archiebold the 1st

1:45pm Mon 24 Feb 14

Archiebold the 1st says...

TheTruthHurts wrote:
Also Archie i think you mean cubic metres of water not square metres.... Maybe think about that before calling other people names like moron :-)
haha although if my smm7 memory is correct arent pipes m2? :-)
[quote][p][bold]TheTruthHurts[/bold] wrote: Also Archie i think you mean cubic metres of water not square metres.... Maybe think about that before calling other people names like moron :-)[/p][/quote]haha although if my smm7 memory is correct arent pipes m2? :-) Archiebold the 1st

2:20pm Mon 24 Feb 14

Badgers Drift says...

Archiebold the 1st wrote:
TheTruthHurts wrote: Also Archie i think you mean cubic metres of water not square metres.... Maybe think about that before calling other people names like moron :-)
haha although if my smm7 memory is correct arent pipes m2? :-)
Pipes are measured in linear metres (the running length).

Excavation and filling is mesured by volume, in cubic metres (m3).

Water isn't a measureable material/trade, other than perhaps as a capacity of a tank, which would then be in litres.
[quote][p][bold]Archiebold the 1st[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]TheTruthHurts[/bold] wrote: Also Archie i think you mean cubic metres of water not square metres.... Maybe think about that before calling other people names like moron :-)[/p][/quote]haha although if my smm7 memory is correct arent pipes m2? :-)[/p][/quote]Pipes are measured in linear metres (the running length). Excavation and filling is mesured by volume, in cubic metres (m3). Water isn't a measureable material/trade, other than perhaps as a capacity of a tank, which would then be in litres. Badgers Drift

2:27pm Mon 24 Feb 14

Badgers Drift says...

There are still a couple of big hurdles to clear before this site commences.

1. The dispute between Persimmon and the buyer of Hogg Builders 200+ plots.
2. The level of affordable housing.

I don't think the start will be imminent.
There are still a couple of big hurdles to clear before this site commences. 1. The dispute between Persimmon and the buyer of Hogg Builders 200+ plots. 2. The level of affordable housing. I don't think the start will be imminent. Badgers Drift

5:11pm Mon 24 Feb 14

yorkie71 says...

I thought the government had just announced that no new builds can go ahead without flood defenses ?

What are the flood defenses being build here ?
I thought the government had just announced that no new builds can go ahead without flood defenses ? What are the flood defenses being build here ? yorkie71

7:56pm Mon 24 Feb 14

long distance depressive says...

Woody G Mellor wrote:
The day the contractors move on to that land will be a black day for York and it's history. Any potential house buyers will be easily put off buying should they be given the facts as to why there shouldn't be development on that flood prone land. Keep those appeals coming, it's been delayed for eight years so far, let's keep delaying it and hopefully they will grow tired, give up and move elsewhere.
The home insurance companies will be licking their lips at the thought of the premiums. As for the potential flooding...it will have to go somewhere so who down the road is going to suffer as a result of any work at Germany Beck? Mr Alexander will be long gone by then so he won't care either way.
[quote][p][bold]Woody G Mellor[/bold] wrote: The day the contractors move on to that land will be a black day for York and it's history. Any potential house buyers will be easily put off buying should they be given the facts as to why there shouldn't be development on that flood prone land. Keep those appeals coming, it's been delayed for eight years so far, let's keep delaying it and hopefully they will grow tired, give up and move elsewhere.[/p][/quote]The home insurance companies will be licking their lips at the thought of the premiums. As for the potential flooding...it will have to go somewhere so who down the road is going to suffer as a result of any work at Germany Beck? Mr Alexander will be long gone by then so he won't care either way. long distance depressive

10:41pm Mon 24 Feb 14

Woody G Mellor says...

Ho hum. I see the low life Sad'o' is altering the likes and dislike scores again.

So looking forward to the prosecution and public humiliation of this sad idiot.
Ho hum. I see the low life Sad'o' is altering the likes and dislike scores again. So looking forward to the prosecution and public humiliation of this sad idiot. Woody G Mellor

11:29pm Mon 24 Feb 14

Badger2 says...

The actual houses that get built there won't have much risk of flooding as most of the land they want to build on is higher up, everywhere else in the area and downstream on the Ouse is going to be at greater risk as the land down the side of the beck they want to build the only access road on has been underwater for weeks and is the only reason parts of Fulford didn't flood. When they fill all of it in to make the foundation of the road, there's a lot of water that has to go somewhere else so even if these houses don't flood as a result of this development, somebody else's will.
The actual houses that get built there won't have much risk of flooding as most of the land they want to build on is higher up, everywhere else in the area and downstream on the Ouse is going to be at greater risk as the land down the side of the beck they want to build the only access road on has been underwater for weeks and is the only reason parts of Fulford didn't flood. When they fill all of it in to make the foundation of the road, there's a lot of water that has to go somewhere else so even if these houses don't flood as a result of this development, somebody else's will. Badger2

12:36am Tue 25 Feb 14

think! says...

Actually, Badger2, there are quite a number of houses on the Germany Beck development that are in flood zone 2 and 3. Have a look at the Facebook page Help Save Fulford that has a plan of the Environment Agency map overlaid with the development plan.
Actually, Badger2, there are quite a number of houses on the Germany Beck development that are in flood zone 2 and 3. Have a look at the Facebook page Help Save Fulford that has a plan of the Environment Agency map overlaid with the development plan. think!

10:36am Tue 25 Feb 14

Batman Begins says...

pedalling paul wrote:
osbaldwicklane wrote:
If your jogging by Germany beck put your wellie,s on .
"your" jogging? Surely you mean "you're" jogging. Yet another example of misusing the possessive pronoun!!
And as for Archiebold the 1st blaming the "morons in charge of transport" rather than new developments, for york's traffic problems. Please don't assume that the transport planer's remit, is to try and accommodate every single car user in the City. We'd have to demolish the entire city centre for that.
surely this should read, "Please don't assume that it is the Transport Planner's remit,"?
[quote][p][bold]pedalling paul [/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]osbaldwicklane[/bold] wrote: If your jogging by Germany beck put your wellie,s on .[/p][/quote]"your" jogging? Surely you mean "you're" jogging. Yet another example of misusing the possessive pronoun!! And as for Archiebold the 1st blaming the "morons in charge of transport" rather than new developments, for york's traffic problems. Please don't assume that the transport planer's remit, is to try and accommodate every single car user in the City. We'd have to demolish the entire city centre for that.[/p][/quote]surely this should read, "Please don't assume that it is the Transport Planner's remit,"? Batman Begins

11:53am Tue 25 Feb 14

seatothewest says...

Just what York & England needs - yet another development on land prone to flooding!
Just what York & England needs - yet another development on land prone to flooding! seatothewest

7:29pm Tue 25 Feb 14

Digeorge says...

The disllikes and the like buttons on this thread are all astray Woody Mellor. I noted that when I liked something and it went to 'dislike'.

Bit misleading but agree with you on the issues of the flood plain.

It isn't rocket science that this is all to do with money and nothing else. I suppose when the rare Great Crested Newts come out they will stop, of course?

Just wondering how many times the site will be flooded before it gets all sold out - probably several!
The disllikes and the like buttons on this thread are all astray Woody Mellor. I noted that when I liked something and it went to 'dislike'. Bit misleading but agree with you on the issues of the flood plain. It isn't rocket science that this is all to do with money and nothing else. I suppose when the rare Great Crested Newts come out they will stop, of course? Just wondering how many times the site will be flooded before it gets all sold out - probably several! Digeorge

Comments are closed on this article.

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