200 residents gather over Haxby development plans

York Press: Ian Cuthbertson Ian Cuthbertson

HUNDREDS of concerned residents turned out for a public meeting on development proposals for Haxby and Wigginton.

Ward councillor Ian Cuthbertson and campaigner Martin Lewis Crosby organised the event at Haxby and Wigginton Methodist Church to enable residents to discuss worries over plans which could see Haxby the site of massive development.

Cllr Cuthbertson said around 200 people attended. He said two sites around the villages included in the Local Plan Further Sites document, currently out to public consultation, were of particular concern to many, including a strategic site north of Haxby which could be developed in the first stage of the local plan, with 813 homes, and another “safeguarded” site adjoining it which could add another 712 homes in the second phase of the plan.

He added: “There is a lot of concern about infrastructure in the village. There are very limited access roads which run right into Haxby, and it is evident there would be a big effect.”

Cllr Cuthbertson said the total amount of development proposed for Haxby and Wigginton would take the villages back to a level of growth not seen since the 1960s and 70s.

The last of a string of public exhibitions was also held on Wednesday on the most recent round of consultation, with an event in Parliament Street giving people a chance to see the proposals in more detail, while individual “Village Design Statements” have been drawn up by Strensall with Towthorpe and Wheldrake.

The documents, which have been drawn up by parish councillors who are volunteers from the villages, set out how the communities want the special character of their villages to be safeguarded.

Both design statements were presented to the city council’s cabinet on Tuesday, when councillors approved the documents and agreed to let them go out to public consultation before they could be adopted as “supplementary planning documents” and be part of formal process developments need to go through.

The public consultation on the Further Sites document - the latest stage of the Local Plan - runs until Wednesday, July 16 and more details are online at york.gov.uk/localplan.

Comments (7)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

8:35am Fri 4 Jul 14

PKH says...

Paul Cordock wrote:
How many of the 200 complaining would not be living there if analogous objections had been upheld over the last 50 years?
Agreed the majority of Haxby and Wiggington was built on greenfield sites in the last 50 years. Haxby calls itself a town extra houses would enhance this claim.
[quote][p][bold]Paul Cordock[/bold] wrote: How many of the 200 complaining would not be living there if analogous objections had been upheld over the last 50 years?[/p][/quote]Agreed the majority of Haxby and Wiggington was built on greenfield sites in the last 50 years. Haxby calls itself a town extra houses would enhance this claim. PKH
  • Score: -2

9:16am Fri 4 Jul 14

Shouter says...

Nowhere is safe from this loony council. Fairly recently I read somewhere that they may even be allowed to grab land from neighbouring (more sensible) authorities to build on. Quite how the infrastructure will cope is questionable. Local schools, dentists, doctors etc are already full to capacity without adding even more to the population. No doubt the new houses that are built will be without garages and parking spaces, as this current council does not want anyone at all to drive anywhere!
Nowhere is safe from this loony council. Fairly recently I read somewhere that they may even be allowed to grab land from neighbouring (more sensible) authorities to build on. Quite how the infrastructure will cope is questionable. Local schools, dentists, doctors etc are already full to capacity without adding even more to the population. No doubt the new houses that are built will be without garages and parking spaces, as this current council does not want anyone at all to drive anywhere! Shouter
  • Score: 14

12:40pm Fri 4 Jul 14

NoMorePlease says...

"No doubt the new houses that are built will be without garages and parking spaces, as this current council does not want anyone at all to drive anywhere!"

Rubbish. Read up on the rules about parking provision for new builds. Pity your obvious anti-council prejudice takes away the truth of your comment about infrastructure
"No doubt the new houses that are built will be without garages and parking spaces, as this current council does not want anyone at all to drive anywhere!" Rubbish. Read up on the rules about parking provision for new builds. Pity your obvious anti-council prejudice takes away the truth of your comment about infrastructure NoMorePlease
  • Score: -4

12:53pm Fri 4 Jul 14

bolero says...

Shouter wrote:
Nowhere is safe from this loony council. Fairly recently I read somewhere that they may even be allowed to grab land from neighbouring (more sensible) authorities to build on. Quite how the infrastructure will cope is questionable. Local schools, dentists, doctors etc are already full to capacity without adding even more to the population. No doubt the new houses that are built will be without garages and parking spaces, as this current council does not want anyone at all to drive anywhere!
What a ridiculous statement; "without adding even more to the population". What do you suggest, sterilisation? Infrastructure is something which must be addressed obviously but that does not obviate the need to find more housing. As long it is not anywhere near where I live of course.
[quote][p][bold]Shouter[/bold] wrote: Nowhere is safe from this loony council. Fairly recently I read somewhere that they may even be allowed to grab land from neighbouring (more sensible) authorities to build on. Quite how the infrastructure will cope is questionable. Local schools, dentists, doctors etc are already full to capacity without adding even more to the population. No doubt the new houses that are built will be without garages and parking spaces, as this current council does not want anyone at all to drive anywhere![/p][/quote]What a ridiculous statement; "without adding even more to the population". What do you suggest, sterilisation? Infrastructure is something which must be addressed obviously but that does not obviate the need to find more housing. As long it is not anywhere near where I live of course. bolero
  • Score: 0

4:02pm Fri 4 Jul 14

ncov0310 says...

Half of the problem here is that haxby does not have the infrastructure in place to deal with this huge growth. If they had plans in place to add a new school and shops in the centre of this development, fine, but the schools are almost bursting as it is and it won't be long before jo ro is full. They might as well just build a new village somewhere else...oh wait, aren't they trying that as well?
Half of the problem here is that haxby does not have the infrastructure in place to deal with this huge growth. If they had plans in place to add a new school and shops in the centre of this development, fine, but the schools are almost bursting as it is and it won't be long before jo ro is full. They might as well just build a new village somewhere else...oh wait, aren't they trying that as well? ncov0310
  • Score: 7

5:09pm Fri 4 Jul 14

goatman says...

ncov is correct. Unless the supporting infrastructure is included in the development then it is unfair to the current residents to overload the amenities.
ncov is correct. Unless the supporting infrastructure is included in the development then it is unfair to the current residents to overload the amenities. goatman
  • Score: 7

4:06am Sat 5 Jul 14

Magicman! says...

If the development includes extra schools, shops, doctors/dentist surgeries, and so on, then it would be OK... although if being built further out from York than Haxby etc then thought should be given both to (a) building a new road giving access to the A64, and (b) the Highways Agency making the A64 dual carriageway to Malton so the new road aforementioned would have a suitable and safe junction without causing traffic tailbacks.
If the development includes extra schools, shops, doctors/dentist surgeries, and so on, then it would be OK... although if being built further out from York than Haxby etc then thought should be given both to (a) building a new road giving access to the A64, and (b) the Highways Agency making the A64 dual carriageway to Malton so the new road aforementioned would have a suitable and safe junction without causing traffic tailbacks. Magicman!
  • Score: 1

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