Anger over plans for up to 2,000 new homes

Allan Charlesworth by the land at Earwsick, York, earmarked for housing

Allan Charlesworth by the land at Earwsick, York, earmarked for housing

First published in News
Last updated

VILLAGERS in York are mobilising ahead of a public meeting to discuss plans to build about 2,000 new homes on greenbelt land.

Allan Charlesworth, 68, a retired civil servant, said Earswick residents were horrified at the possibility of 88 hectares of land east of Strensall Road and adjacent to his home in Willow Grove being removed from the green belt under the revised draft Local Plan, which he claimed could mean around 2,000 houses eventually being built there.

As The Press reported in May, the Liberal Democrats got up a petition with more than 100 signatures opposing a proposed housing development on the land.

Mr Charlesworth said: "A developer has now arranged a public meeting for next month to look at possible plans.

"The proposed new development would totally swamp the current village, we'd lose our identity completely and the whole character of the area would change.

"We already have problems with drainage, we are a high water table area and the consequences of that many houses are unknown.

"It won't just affect our village. The additional volume of traffic caused by that many new homes will have a knock-on affect for the whole of the north of York, making journey times for people in Strensall and Sheriff Hutton far longer, not to mention the pollution and associated road safety issues."

Mr Charlesworth said a public meeting had been organised between 3pm-7pm at Earswick Village Hall on July 7.

The council launched a six-week long "Further Sites Consultation" on June 4, giving people the opportunity to comment on the Plan, which will guide housing, transport and employment developments in York over the next 15 years.

Mr Charlesworth urged anyone who can to come along and to take the chance to comment on the council's revised draft Local Plan ahead of the consultation closing on July 16.

Comments (41)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

8:13am Mon 30 Jun 14

Art Baker says...

NIMBY ALERT

NIMBY ALERT

Warning. My house should be the last ever built in (insert location here). My house has been here for ever and my village should be preserved untouched just like Beamish.
NIMBY ALERT NIMBY ALERT Warning. My house should be the last ever built in (insert location here). My house has been here for ever and my village should be preserved untouched just like Beamish. Art Baker
  • Score: -10

8:20am Mon 30 Jun 14

AnotherPointofView says...

Art Baker wrote:
NIMBY ALERT

NIMBY ALERT

Warning. My house should be the last ever built in (insert location here). My house has been here for ever and my village should be preserved untouched just like Beamish.
Numpty alert!

Of course people are going to be concerned when there are proposals of this magnitude.
[quote][p][bold]Art Baker[/bold] wrote: NIMBY ALERT NIMBY ALERT Warning. My house should be the last ever built in (insert location here). My house has been here for ever and my village should be preserved untouched just like Beamish.[/p][/quote]Numpty alert! Of course people are going to be concerned when there are proposals of this magnitude. AnotherPointofView
  • Score: 34

8:23am Mon 30 Jun 14

maybejustmaybe says...

We need new housing stock, they need to be built somewhere. Someone is going to be inconvenienced. Get over it.
We need new housing stock, they need to be built somewhere. Someone is going to be inconvenienced. Get over it. maybejustmaybe
  • Score: -10

8:24am Mon 30 Jun 14

Art Baker says...

AnotherPointofView wrote:
Art Baker wrote:
NIMBY ALERT

NIMBY ALERT

Warning. My house should be the last ever built in (insert location here). My house has been here for ever and my village should be preserved untouched just like Beamish.
Numpty alert!

Of course people are going to be concerned when there are proposals of this magnitude.
Splitting hairs over whether Mr Charlesworth is a nimby or a numpty. I'll go with the former, you choose the latter.
[quote][p][bold]AnotherPointofView[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Art Baker[/bold] wrote: NIMBY ALERT NIMBY ALERT Warning. My house should be the last ever built in (insert location here). My house has been here for ever and my village should be preserved untouched just like Beamish.[/p][/quote]Numpty alert! Of course people are going to be concerned when there are proposals of this magnitude.[/p][/quote]Splitting hairs over whether Mr Charlesworth is a nimby or a numpty. I'll go with the former, you choose the latter. Art Baker
  • Score: -33

8:24am Mon 30 Jun 14

julia brica says...

Art Baker ??????? Spouting the same rubbish as BUZZ Hmm
Art Baker ??????? Spouting the same rubbish as BUZZ Hmm julia brica
  • Score: 16

8:38am Mon 30 Jun 14

TheTruthHurts says...

Its not just them, a few villages are going to complain i know some friends got a flyer about it urging complaints in Poppleton for the proposed developments around there
Its not just them, a few villages are going to complain i know some friends got a flyer about it urging complaints in Poppleton for the proposed developments around there TheTruthHurts
  • Score: 15

8:47am Mon 30 Jun 14

bolero says...

I've said before on here, we all live on green belt land, otherwise where would we live?
I've said before on here, we all live on green belt land, otherwise where would we live? bolero
  • Score: 13

8:52am Mon 30 Jun 14

myselby says...

we want local housing for my family- but no one else- and can it be close to my perfect village, but not in or near it. and oh, we don't need social housing around here.
we want local housing for my family- but no one else- and can it be close to my perfect village, but not in or near it. and oh, we don't need social housing around here. myselby
  • Score: 9

9:11am Mon 30 Jun 14

anistasia says...

I know we need housing but adding on to a village apart from spoiling the area what about the infrastructure pipes need to be laid traffic will get worse and noise will rise.why have the council let this go through are they making money from the plans and once they're are built hoping council tax payers will move in.should use old building up first then brown belt sites before green belt are used.look what happened e
I know we need housing but adding on to a village apart from spoiling the area what about the infrastructure pipes need to be laid traffic will get worse and noise will rise.why have the council let this go through are they making money from the plans and once they're are built hoping council tax payers will move in.should use old building up first then brown belt sites before green belt are used.look what happened e anistasia
  • Score: 12

9:12am Mon 30 Jun 14

The Great Buda says...

myselby wrote:
we want local housing for my family- but no one else- and can it be close to my perfect village, but not in or near it. and oh, we don't need social housing around here.
Got it in a nutshell.

The poor "I'm alright Jack" attitude thats holding York back. Mr Charlesworth should sell up and move to Beamish.
[quote][p][bold]myselby[/bold] wrote: we want local housing for my family- but no one else- and can it be close to my perfect village, but not in or near it. and oh, we don't need social housing around here.[/p][/quote]Got it in a nutshell. The poor "I'm alright Jack" attitude thats holding York back. Mr Charlesworth should sell up and move to Beamish. The Great Buda
  • Score: -18

9:45am Mon 30 Jun 14

courier46 says...

The Great Buda wrote:
myselby wrote:
we want local housing for my family- but no one else- and can it be close to my perfect village, but not in or near it. and oh, we don't need social housing around here.Got it in a nutshell.

The poor "I'm alright JackThe I`m alright Jack attitude is taught very nicely by all our leaders ,fat cats and everyone else who has money and doesn't care about anyone below £1000 a week.If you`ve worked hard and got a nice property why should you stand by and let your whole way of life alter.
These houses are been let out to immigrants and people from outside of York so not for the people who live here. Also for the ones oin social housing who think it`s ok to move into £300,000 - £400,000 houses and think it`s ok to cause damage and anti social behaviour I would give them 2 strikes and out of the house ,the Tadcaster rd site has it`s fair share but the council take forever and a load of hassle to get them out.
[quote][p][bold]The Great Buda[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]myselby[/bold] wrote: we want local housing for my family- but no one else- and can it be close to my perfect village, but not in or near it. and oh, we don't need social housing around here.[/p][/quote]Got it in a nutshell. The poor "I'm alright JackThe I`m alright Jack attitude is taught very nicely by all our leaders ,fat cats and everyone else who has money and doesn't care about anyone below £1000 a week.If you`ve worked hard and got a nice property why should you stand by and let your whole way of life alter. These houses are been let out to immigrants and people from outside of York so not for the people who live here. Also for the ones oin social housing who think it`s ok to move into £300,000 - £400,000 houses and think it`s ok to cause damage and anti social behaviour I would give them 2 strikes and out of the house ,the Tadcaster rd site has it`s fair share but the council take forever and a load of hassle to get them out. courier46
  • Score: 15

10:29am Mon 30 Jun 14

Buzzz Light-year says...

julia brica wrote:
Art Baker ??????? Spouting the same rubbish as BUZZ Hmm
Hahahaha!
I don't even have to comment and the paranoid playground goading breaks out.

Ahem.
"I know I'm doing something right when my words cause so much upset with the likes of etc etc.
Long may I continue.
Buzzz.
Space Ranger of this Parish"

Lol! It's like fish in a barrel sometimes :-D
[quote][p][bold]julia brica[/bold] wrote: Art Baker ??????? Spouting the same rubbish as BUZZ Hmm[/p][/quote]Hahahaha! I don't even have to comment and the paranoid playground goading breaks out. Ahem. "I know I'm doing something right when my words cause so much upset with the likes of etc etc. Long may I continue. Buzzz. Space Ranger of this Parish" Lol! It's like fish in a barrel sometimes :-D Buzzz Light-year
  • Score: -10

10:33am Mon 30 Jun 14

asd says...

courier46 wrote:
The Great Buda wrote:
myselby wrote:
we want local housing for my family- but no one else- and can it be close to my perfect village, but not in or near it. and oh, we don't need social housing around here.Got it in a nutshell.

The poor "I'm alright JackThe I`m alright Jack attitude is taught very nicely by all our leaders ,fat cats and everyone else who has money and doesn't care about anyone below £1000 a week.If you`ve worked hard and got a nice property why should you stand by and let your whole way of life alter.
These houses are been let out to immigrants and people from outside of York so not for the people who live here. Also for the ones oin social housing who think it`s ok to move into £300,000 - £400,000 houses and think it`s ok to cause damage and anti social behaviour I would give them 2 strikes and out of the house ,the Tadcaster rd site has it`s fair share but the council take forever and a load of hassle to get them out.Proof please about immigrants taking up housing in York or is that your slanted opinion? Its about use York people needing social housing as there is not enough. Its the selfish i'm in my perfect village and i don't want commoners attitude that is a problem.
[quote][p][bold]courier46[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]The Great Buda[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]myselby[/bold] wrote: we want local housing for my family- but no one else- and can it be close to my perfect village, but not in or near it. and oh, we don't need social housing around here.[/p][/quote]Got it in a nutshell. The poor "I'm alright JackThe I`m alright Jack attitude is taught very nicely by all our leaders ,fat cats and everyone else who has money and doesn't care about anyone below £1000 a week.If you`ve worked hard and got a nice property why should you stand by and let your whole way of life alter. These houses are been let out to immigrants and people from outside of York so not for the people who live here. Also for the ones oin social housing who think it`s ok to move into £300,000 - £400,000 houses and think it`s ok to cause damage and anti social behaviour I would give them 2 strikes and out of the house ,the Tadcaster rd site has it`s fair share but the council take forever and a load of hassle to get them out.[/p][/quote]Proof please about immigrants taking up housing in York or is that your slanted opinion? Its about use York people needing social housing as there is not enough. Its the selfish i'm in my perfect village and i don't want commoners attitude that is a problem. asd
  • Score: -2

10:34am Mon 30 Jun 14

RingoStarr says...

Buzzz Light-year wrote:
julia brica wrote:
Art Baker ??????? Spouting the same rubbish as BUZZ Hmm
Hahahaha!
I don't even have to comment and the paranoid playground goading breaks out.

Ahem.
"I know I'm doing something right when my words cause so much upset with the likes of etc etc.
Long may I continue.
Buzzz.
Space Ranger of this Parish"

Lol! It's like fish in a barrel sometimes :-D
Careful Buzz, you're turning into Prattling Paul!.
[quote][p][bold]Buzzz Light-year[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]julia brica[/bold] wrote: Art Baker ??????? Spouting the same rubbish as BUZZ Hmm[/p][/quote]Hahahaha! I don't even have to comment and the paranoid playground goading breaks out. Ahem. "I know I'm doing something right when my words cause so much upset with the likes of etc etc. Long may I continue. Buzzz. Space Ranger of this Parish" Lol! It's like fish in a barrel sometimes :-D[/p][/quote]Careful Buzz, you're turning into Prattling Paul!. RingoStarr
  • Score: 15

10:49am Mon 30 Jun 14

again says...

myselby wrote:
we want local housing for my family- but no one else- and can it be close to my perfect village, but not in or near it. and oh, we don't need social housing around here.
People would be less opposed to housebuilders' plans if they ever made the area pleasanter to live.

As it is, builders are interested only in maximising profit and will do all they can to avoid providing amenities, instead preferring to cram in as many houses as possible.

Obviously the supply of land is a problem in the UK as not only is the 'green belt' regarded as sacrosanct but there are too many profiteers sitting on so-called 'land banks' for various reasons.
[quote][p][bold]myselby[/bold] wrote: we want local housing for my family- but no one else- and can it be close to my perfect village, but not in or near it. and oh, we don't need social housing around here.[/p][/quote]People would be less opposed to housebuilders' plans if they ever made the area pleasanter to live. As it is, builders are interested only in maximising profit and will do all they can to avoid providing amenities, instead preferring to cram in as many houses as possible. Obviously the supply of land is a problem in the UK as not only is the 'green belt' regarded as sacrosanct but there are too many profiteers sitting on so-called 'land banks' for various reasons. again
  • Score: 28

11:26am Mon 30 Jun 14

BL2 says...

There is no room for all the people that would occupy these new houses. No road space, no infrastructure and the loss of green land will end up causing huge problems in the future. Stop it now!
There is no room for all the people that would occupy these new houses. No road space, no infrastructure and the loss of green land will end up causing huge problems in the future. Stop it now! BL2
  • Score: -3

11:53am Mon 30 Jun 14

Grey Lady says...

Over the past few years there have been quite a few brown field sites come available, however, the current trend is to build student accommodation on them. The size of the University has doubled, increasing the number of students, and I know they have to live somewhere, but why to the detriment of the people of York.
In the last five years or so there has been student accommodation built in Navigation Road, Hull Road, Percy's Lane and Hungate, with more being built at the moment in Walmgate, James Street and Lawrence Street, all on brown field sites. These sites could have been used to build housing for families, or first time buyers, but in any case, people who want to live in York, because they work here, or because they have family here.
It's night time that those elected to represent the people of York actually did something for us, instead of pandering to the University and dare I say it, tourism.
Over the past few years there have been quite a few brown field sites come available, however, the current trend is to build student accommodation on them. The size of the University has doubled, increasing the number of students, and I know they have to live somewhere, but why to the detriment of the people of York. In the last five years or so there has been student accommodation built in Navigation Road, Hull Road, Percy's Lane and Hungate, with more being built at the moment in Walmgate, James Street and Lawrence Street, all on brown field sites. These sites could have been used to build housing for families, or first time buyers, but in any case, people who want to live in York, because they work here, or because they have family here. It's night time that those elected to represent the people of York actually did something for us, instead of pandering to the University and dare I say it, tourism. Grey Lady
  • Score: 29

12:30pm Mon 30 Jun 14

Art Baker says...

Grey Lady wrote:
Over the past few years there have been quite a few brown field sites come available, however, the current trend is to build student accommodation on them. The size of the University has doubled, increasing the number of students, and I know they have to live somewhere, but why to the detriment of the people of York.
In the last five years or so there has been student accommodation built in Navigation Road, Hull Road, Percy's Lane and Hungate, with more being built at the moment in Walmgate, James Street and Lawrence Street, all on brown field sites. These sites could have been used to build housing for families, or first time buyers, but in any case, people who want to live in York, because they work here, or because they have family here.
It's night time that those elected to represent the people of York actually did something for us, instead of pandering to the University and dare I say it, tourism.
So they should have put local houses for local people on the brown field sites and built the student accommodation on the green field sites? Is that what you are saying?

You need to lay off the Special Stuff for a while Tubs.
[quote][p][bold]Grey Lady[/bold] wrote: Over the past few years there have been quite a few brown field sites come available, however, the current trend is to build student accommodation on them. The size of the University has doubled, increasing the number of students, and I know they have to live somewhere, but why to the detriment of the people of York. In the last five years or so there has been student accommodation built in Navigation Road, Hull Road, Percy's Lane and Hungate, with more being built at the moment in Walmgate, James Street and Lawrence Street, all on brown field sites. These sites could have been used to build housing for families, or first time buyers, but in any case, people who want to live in York, because they work here, or because they have family here. It's night time that those elected to represent the people of York actually did something for us, instead of pandering to the University and dare I say it, tourism.[/p][/quote]So they should have put local houses for local people on the brown field sites and built the student accommodation on the green field sites? Is that what you are saying? You need to lay off the Special Stuff for a while Tubs. Art Baker
  • Score: -24

1:07pm Mon 30 Jun 14

hokey cokey says...

Art Baker wrote:
BL2 wrote: There is no room for all the people that would occupy these new houses. No road space, no infrastructure and the loss of green land will end up causing huge problems in the future. Stop it now!
You may not have noticed, but when a site is developed, the builders put roads in as well. They don't build houses in the middle of nowhere without connecting them to the existing network. They also connect the drains, water, electricity, gas and phones. Now, what part of the infrastructure is missing?
Perhaps the shops, the schools, the places of work, doctors surgery etc etc....all the things that generate people getting in their cars and driving somewhere because the cycle facilities are woeful and the bus takes too long / too expensive. Earswick has a particular problem as it has non of the above infrastructure so will generate extra car journeys. However, very little of Earswick was there more than 30 years ago so most of the current residents are on very shakey moral ground saying they dont want anything built on green belt land!!! THey should be putting their energy in to getting schools and shops built there and getting better links to other communities rather than hiding behind not in my back yard.
[quote][p][bold]Art Baker[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]BL2[/bold] wrote: There is no room for all the people that would occupy these new houses. No road space, no infrastructure and the loss of green land will end up causing huge problems in the future. Stop it now![/p][/quote]You may not have noticed, but when a site is developed, the builders put roads in as well. They don't build houses in the middle of nowhere without connecting them to the existing network. They also connect the drains, water, electricity, gas and phones. Now, what part of the infrastructure is missing?[/p][/quote]Perhaps the shops, the schools, the places of work, doctors surgery etc etc....all the things that generate people getting in their cars and driving somewhere because the cycle facilities are woeful and the bus takes too long / too expensive. Earswick has a particular problem as it has non of the above infrastructure so will generate extra car journeys. However, very little of Earswick was there more than 30 years ago so most of the current residents are on very shakey moral ground saying they dont want anything built on green belt land!!! THey should be putting their energy in to getting schools and shops built there and getting better links to other communities rather than hiding behind not in my back yard. hokey cokey
  • Score: -4

1:56pm Mon 30 Jun 14

RealMcoy says...

This is going to happen EVERYTIME a new development it looked into, at the end of the day York needs more houses, there is little to no land inside the ring road so any spare land there is going to be developed, NIMBYs wont like it, obviously but they need to get off their high horses and let the developers get on with it not keep throwing spanners in the works
This is going to happen EVERYTIME a new development it looked into, at the end of the day York needs more houses, there is little to no land inside the ring road so any spare land there is going to be developed, NIMBYs wont like it, obviously but they need to get off their high horses and let the developers get on with it not keep throwing spanners in the works RealMcoy
  • Score: -16

2:52pm Mon 30 Jun 14

piaggio1 says...

You know i did wonder bout them on taddy rd( old tech colledge...), dont u put a bid in for em if on council list??.....£400.000 house ? My how tother half live....
You know i did wonder bout them on taddy rd( old tech colledge...), dont u put a bid in for em if on council list??.....£400.000 house ? My how tother half live.... piaggio1
  • Score: -11

3:19pm Mon 30 Jun 14

bolero says...

I've no doubt that if this gentleman had stood where his own house is today say eighty/ninety years ago the background would not have been dissimilar to that shown in the photograph. Look at the old OS maps; there was virtually nothing there. The question of infrastructure is another matter and certainly needs to be addressed but that does not resolve the problem of where people are going to live. Show me a house, a street, an estate, a town or village that is not built on what was once green fields. Perhaps he should book a place on the first flight to Mars and set up house there.
I've no doubt that if this gentleman had stood where his own house is today say eighty/ninety years ago the background would not have been dissimilar to that shown in the photograph. Look at the old OS maps; there was virtually nothing there. The question of infrastructure is another matter and certainly needs to be addressed but that does not resolve the problem of where people are going to live. Show me a house, a street, an estate, a town or village that is not built on what was once green fields. Perhaps he should book a place on the first flight to Mars and set up house there. bolero
  • Score: -6

4:02pm Mon 30 Jun 14

mike.......durkin says...

thats good news...
thats good news... mike.......durkin
  • Score: -6

4:22pm Mon 30 Jun 14

Lamplighter says...

No, no, no! I live nowhere near this site but we need to stop building houses on green belt land, it's just not on!
No, no, no! I live nowhere near this site but we need to stop building houses on green belt land, it's just not on! Lamplighter
  • Score: 16

4:58pm Mon 30 Jun 14

spottycow says...

STOP MOANING on the east coast they are building nearly THREE THOUSAND new homes but there isnt any JOBS and the road between us and YORK is C R --- P i think its called planning for the FUTURE.
STOP MOANING on the east coast they are building nearly THREE THOUSAND new homes but there isnt any JOBS and the road between us and YORK is C R --- P i think its called planning for the FUTURE. spottycow
  • Score: -6

6:27pm Mon 30 Jun 14

PKH says...

Drainage will not be a great problem, as Earswick adjoins the river Foss.
Drainage will not be a great problem, as Earswick adjoins the river Foss. PKH
  • Score: -6

6:27pm Mon 30 Jun 14

Alfredd-g says...

What's so green about Mr Charlesworth's so called green belt? Just a load of fields, which are heavily polluted with fertilisers and pesticides which leach there way into our water supplies. Give me 2,000 houses anytime. At least they will be regulated in terms of pollution and environmental impact.
What's so green about Mr Charlesworth's so called green belt? Just a load of fields, which are heavily polluted with fertilisers and pesticides which leach there way into our water supplies. Give me 2,000 houses anytime. At least they will be regulated in terms of pollution and environmental impact. Alfredd-g
  • Score: -11

7:01pm Mon 30 Jun 14

mitch2nd says...

Look at the end of the day there are not enough houses, and while landlords keep outbidding people that in fact want to live in the house and until the Government step in and tax people buying to rent heavily to stopped them adding to their portfolios of misery then we need more houses

In the opinion of many buy to rent should be banned
Look at the end of the day there are not enough houses, and while landlords keep outbidding people that in fact want to live in the house and until the Government step in and tax people buying to rent heavily to stopped them adding to their portfolios of misery then we need more houses In the opinion of many buy to rent should be banned mitch2nd
  • Score: 10

10:16pm Mon 30 Jun 14

Jack Ham says...

This entire local plan process is a shambolic disgrace.

Building on greenfield whilst brownfield available should be made unlawful. Building without infrastructure is shortsighted. Building huge social housing developments within small villages is pure social engineering.
This entire local plan process is a shambolic disgrace. Building on greenfield whilst brownfield available should be made unlawful. Building without infrastructure is shortsighted. Building huge social housing developments within small villages is pure social engineering. Jack Ham
  • Score: 14

11:31pm Mon 30 Jun 14

akaroa says...

What work will these people do. There is nothing in York apart from tourism and mundane occupations. Industry disappeared some time ago. Living on the outskirts these incomers must commute, so its logical that traffic will increase More time queuing on the already heavily congested outer ring road.
What work will these people do. There is nothing in York apart from tourism and mundane occupations. Industry disappeared some time ago. Living on the outskirts these incomers must commute, so its logical that traffic will increase More time queuing on the already heavily congested outer ring road. akaroa
  • Score: 16

9:25am Tue 1 Jul 14

The Great Buda says...

akaroa wrote:
What work will these people do. There is nothing in York apart from tourism and mundane occupations. Industry disappeared some time ago. Living on the outskirts these incomers must commute, so its logical that traffic will increase More time queuing on the already heavily congested outer ring road.
These people already live in York. With their parents, flat sharing and so on and so on.

The people of York need and deserve the right to buy a house in York.
[quote][p][bold]akaroa[/bold] wrote: What work will these people do. There is nothing in York apart from tourism and mundane occupations. Industry disappeared some time ago. Living on the outskirts these incomers must commute, so its logical that traffic will increase More time queuing on the already heavily congested outer ring road.[/p][/quote]These people already live in York. With their parents, flat sharing and so on and so on. The people of York need and deserve the right to buy a house in York. The Great Buda
  • Score: -5

10:04am Tue 1 Jul 14

YorkCityLuke says...

What we need is population control, and the sooner the better. Building houses on green-belt land is terrible though, what is the point in having a 'green-belt' if nobody respects it?
What we need is population control, and the sooner the better. Building houses on green-belt land is terrible though, what is the point in having a 'green-belt' if nobody respects it? YorkCityLuke
  • Score: 11

11:27am Tue 1 Jul 14

another grump says...

anistasia wrote:
I know we need housing but adding on to a village apart from spoiling the area what about the infrastructure pipes need to be laid traffic will get worse and noise will rise.why have the council let this go through are they making money from the plans and once they're are built hoping council tax payers will move in.should use old building up first then brown belt sites before green belt are used.look what happened e
If you can point the council to enough land to build on Im sure they will use it rather than green belt. York is full. It needs to expand""become or make larger or more extensive."" Where do you expand. If not Earswick then Poppleton "We don't want it" OK Copmanthorpe "We don't want it" Etc Etc Etc.
[quote][p][bold]anistasia[/bold] wrote: I know we need housing but adding on to a village apart from spoiling the area what about the infrastructure pipes need to be laid traffic will get worse and noise will rise.why have the council let this go through are they making money from the plans and once they're are built hoping council tax payers will move in.should use old building up first then brown belt sites before green belt are used.look what happened e[/p][/quote]If you can point the council to enough land to build on Im sure they will use it rather than green belt. York is full. It needs to expand""become or make larger or more extensive."" Where do you expand. If not Earswick then Poppleton "We don't want it" OK Copmanthorpe "We don't want it" Etc Etc Etc. another grump
  • Score: 4

12:12pm Tue 1 Jul 14

YorkCityLuke says...

another grump wrote:
anistasia wrote:
I know we need housing but adding on to a village apart from spoiling the area what about the infrastructure pipes need to be laid traffic will get worse and noise will rise.why have the council let this go through are they making money from the plans and once they're are built hoping council tax payers will move in.should use old building up first then brown belt sites before green belt are used.look what happened e
If you can point the council to enough land to build on Im sure they will use it rather than green belt. York is full. It needs to expand""become or make larger or more extensive."" Where do you expand. If not Earswick then Poppleton "We don't want it" OK Copmanthorpe "We don't want it" Etc Etc Etc.
Why must York expand? Having a rapidly growing population just invites problems in transport and services which the City seems barely able to cope with even now. Plus if York grows into some sort of hellish urban sprawl, there is a very real risk of losing the character and appeal which make it such a desirable place in the first place. It's not in my back yard, but I still oppose this whole-heartedly.
[quote][p][bold]another grump[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]anistasia[/bold] wrote: I know we need housing but adding on to a village apart from spoiling the area what about the infrastructure pipes need to be laid traffic will get worse and noise will rise.why have the council let this go through are they making money from the plans and once they're are built hoping council tax payers will move in.should use old building up first then brown belt sites before green belt are used.look what happened e[/p][/quote]If you can point the council to enough land to build on Im sure they will use it rather than green belt. York is full. It needs to expand""become or make larger or more extensive."" Where do you expand. If not Earswick then Poppleton "We don't want it" OK Copmanthorpe "We don't want it" Etc Etc Etc.[/p][/quote]Why must York expand? Having a rapidly growing population just invites problems in transport and services which the City seems barely able to cope with even now. Plus if York grows into some sort of hellish urban sprawl, there is a very real risk of losing the character and appeal which make it such a desirable place in the first place. It's not in my back yard, but I still oppose this whole-heartedly. YorkCityLuke
  • Score: 12

3:55pm Tue 1 Jul 14

meme says...

If York does not expand get used to some hellish high house prices...demand and supply rules this equation
If York does not expand get used to some hellish high house prices...demand and supply rules this equation meme
  • Score: 1

4:32pm Tue 1 Jul 14

bolero says...

I'm alright jack. Thank you. Go and live somewhere else.
I'm alright jack. Thank you. Go and live somewhere else. bolero
  • Score: -7

4:33pm Tue 1 Jul 14

bolero says...

Is this really about `green belt` or is it more like `Incomers`!
Is this really about `green belt` or is it more like `Incomers`! bolero
  • Score: -4

5:19pm Tue 1 Jul 14

wallman says...

art baker tw*t of York with stupid comments
art baker tw*t of York with stupid comments wallman
  • Score: 0

9:51am Wed 2 Jul 14

YorkCityLuke says...

Art Baker wrote:
YorkCityLuke wrote:
another grump wrote:
anistasia wrote:
I know we need housing but adding on to a village apart from spoiling the area what about the infrastructure pipes need to be laid traffic will get worse and noise will rise.why have the council let this go through are they making money from the plans and once they're are built hoping council tax payers will move in.should use old building up first then brown belt sites before green belt are used.look what happened e
If you can point the council to enough land to build on Im sure they will use it rather than green belt. York is full. It needs to expand""become or make larger or more extensive."" Where do you expand. If not Earswick then Poppleton "We don't want it" OK Copmanthorpe "We don't want it" Etc Etc Etc.
Why must York expand? Having a rapidly growing population just invites problems in transport and services which the City seems barely able to cope with even now. Plus if York grows into some sort of hellish urban sprawl, there is a very real risk of losing the character and appeal which make it such a desirable place in the first place. It's not in my back yard, but I still oppose this whole-heartedly.
Do you live within the city walls on the site of some Roman or Viking dwelling? If not, you probably live in that hellish urban sprawl that you so object to.
So what, because I live in a house I should be in favour of houses being built anywhere and everywhere? To be honest, I like seeing housing development - when it's on brownfield sites. For some reason those areas never seem to get touched though. The largeish site on Haxby Road where the old optics factory used to be, for example, has been vacant for years -why are developers not being forced to bid for those areas before they permanently destroy green belt land?
[quote][p][bold]Art Baker[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]YorkCityLuke[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]another grump[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]anistasia[/bold] wrote: I know we need housing but adding on to a village apart from spoiling the area what about the infrastructure pipes need to be laid traffic will get worse and noise will rise.why have the council let this go through are they making money from the plans and once they're are built hoping council tax payers will move in.should use old building up first then brown belt sites before green belt are used.look what happened e[/p][/quote]If you can point the council to enough land to build on Im sure they will use it rather than green belt. York is full. It needs to expand""become or make larger or more extensive."" Where do you expand. If not Earswick then Poppleton "We don't want it" OK Copmanthorpe "We don't want it" Etc Etc Etc.[/p][/quote]Why must York expand? Having a rapidly growing population just invites problems in transport and services which the City seems barely able to cope with even now. Plus if York grows into some sort of hellish urban sprawl, there is a very real risk of losing the character and appeal which make it such a desirable place in the first place. It's not in my back yard, but I still oppose this whole-heartedly.[/p][/quote]Do you live within the city walls on the site of some Roman or Viking dwelling? If not, you probably live in that hellish urban sprawl that you so object to.[/p][/quote]So what, because I live in a house I should be in favour of houses being built anywhere and everywhere? To be honest, I like seeing housing development - when it's on brownfield sites. For some reason those areas never seem to get touched though. The largeish site on Haxby Road where the old optics factory used to be, for example, has been vacant for years -why are developers not being forced to bid for those areas before they permanently destroy green belt land? YorkCityLuke
  • Score: 13

10:21am Fri 4 Jul 14

another grump says...

YorkCityLuke wrote:
another grump wrote:
anistasia wrote:
I know we need housing but adding on to a village apart from spoiling the area what about the infrastructure pipes need to be laid traffic will get worse and noise will rise.why have the council let this go through are they making money from the plans and once they're are built hoping council tax payers will move in.should use old building up first then brown belt sites before green belt are used.look what happened e
If you can point the council to enough land to build on Im sure they will use it rather than green belt. York is full. It needs to expand""become or make larger or more extensive."" Where do you expand. If not Earswick then Poppleton "We don't want it" OK Copmanthorpe "We don't want it" Etc Etc Etc.
Why must York expand? Having a rapidly growing population just invites problems in transport and services which the City seems barely able to cope with even now. Plus if York grows into some sort of hellish urban sprawl, there is a very real risk of losing the character and appeal which make it such a desirable place in the first place. It's not in my back yard, but I still oppose this whole-heartedly.
You obviously don't have children who, when grown up, will need somewhere to live. If York doesn't expand where will the youth of today live Leeds?? Bradford?? York needs more housing to give to the needy and for the workers to buy or rent.
[quote][p][bold]YorkCityLuke[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]another grump[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]anistasia[/bold] wrote: I know we need housing but adding on to a village apart from spoiling the area what about the infrastructure pipes need to be laid traffic will get worse and noise will rise.why have the council let this go through are they making money from the plans and once they're are built hoping council tax payers will move in.should use old building up first then brown belt sites before green belt are used.look what happened e[/p][/quote]If you can point the council to enough land to build on Im sure they will use it rather than green belt. York is full. It needs to expand""become or make larger or more extensive."" Where do you expand. If not Earswick then Poppleton "We don't want it" OK Copmanthorpe "We don't want it" Etc Etc Etc.[/p][/quote]Why must York expand? Having a rapidly growing population just invites problems in transport and services which the City seems barely able to cope with even now. Plus if York grows into some sort of hellish urban sprawl, there is a very real risk of losing the character and appeal which make it such a desirable place in the first place. It's not in my back yard, but I still oppose this whole-heartedly.[/p][/quote]You obviously don't have children who, when grown up, will need somewhere to live. If York doesn't expand where will the youth of today live Leeds?? Bradford?? York needs more housing to give to the needy and for the workers to buy or rent. another grump
  • Score: -2

10:25am Fri 4 Jul 14

another grump says...

YorkCityLuke wrote:
What we need is population control, and the sooner the better. Building houses on green-belt land is terrible though, what is the point in having a 'green-belt' if nobody respects it?
""We need population control"" Is that a coded expression for no more immigrants or do you want a one child per family policy like China has/had.
[quote][p][bold]YorkCityLuke[/bold] wrote: What we need is population control, and the sooner the better. Building houses on green-belt land is terrible though, what is the point in having a 'green-belt' if nobody respects it?[/p][/quote]""We need population control"" Is that a coded expression for no more immigrants or do you want a one child per family policy like China has/had. another grump
  • Score: -2

Comments are closed on this article.

Send us your news, pictures and videos

Most read stories

Local Info

Enter your postcode, town or place name

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