York villagers demand Local Plan to be withdrawn

Paul Doughty

Paul Doughty

Updated in News

ELVINGTON Parish Council has hit out at the city council's plans for their village after three meetings saw hundreds turn out to oppose proposals.

The parish council has issued a statement setting out its opposition to two travellers sites, a residential development, and two industrial sites all included in the "Further Sites" consultation document for the draft Local Plan.

They are objecting to the five sites - some of which would be "strategic sites" to be developed straight away, and others which would be safeguarded for future development - on the grounds they are disproportionately large and would cause major problems to a small rural village like Elvington.

The parish council statement said: "This Local Plan, as it stands, fails to reflect the wishes of an overwhelming majority of the local community and should be withdrawn for further consideration."

The council's consultation of Further Sites to be added to the draft local plan ends next week with the final date for submissions on Wednesday, July 16.

Now action group Keep Elvington Rural! is calling on the council to extend the consultation period beyond Wednesday, as they say many residents and businesses in the village did not know about the plans or the deadline for responses.

The group is to host a 'drop-in' at Elvington Car Boot sale between 9am and 12.30pm on Sunday to give people more information.

Opposition also been voiced on plans for Earswick and Woodthorpe, and land near the Designer Outlet.

Yorkshire Wildlife Trust is opposing housing plans for Moor Lane, Woodthorpe, which is says could threaten the fragile ecosystem of nearby Askham Bog nature reserve.

Now the Trust has produced a video talking about the damage a nearby housing development could cause, and urging people to submit their objections to the consultation.

Fulford Community Orchard has also objected to possible developments near its site - on land south of the Designer Outlet.

The community group is concerned about the harm the proposed transport or employment use for the agricultural greenbelt land, which forms part of a local wildlife corridor could do, as well as the proposal to make the Designer Outlet land priority for leisure rather than retail use.

In Earswick, a public exhibition was held on Monday about proposals for a large housing development on land east of the village.

Now MP Julian Sturdy and councillor Paul Doughty have added their voices to objections to the scheme. Cllr Doughty said he was unhappy that the proposed development, for up to 1,500 homes on current greenbelt land, has been presented as a "fait accompli" and would overwhelm the village of 360 houses.

The council is to run a further consultation on the Local Plan in the autumn giving people chance to comment on the whole draft plan before it is scrutinised by a government planning inspector.

Comments (10)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

1:28pm Sat 12 Jul 14

Jack Ham says...

From day one with their underhand attempt to sell of a Union Terrace car park, this Labour administration have ignored and held in contempt the views, values and hopes of York people.

From one shambolic, expensive disaster to another we are now at a point where the city is on the brink of financial collapse and yet the blinkered, dogmatic, patronising and ultimately futile policies of James Alexander & co continue.

At the moment many are yet to grasp the awful enormity of what Labour plans to do to the city within its Local Plan. Even so, communities are fighting back, people are rallying, placards are going up and protest groups forming.

We are fortunate we have some politicians (of all colours) who out their residents first. I suspect there might still be one or two senior CYC staff who feel the same.

These people now need to come forward - join those like Evlington Action Group, the Wildlife Trust, Sturdy, Doughty etc and shout very loudly 'NO!'
From day one with their underhand attempt to sell of a Union Terrace car park, this Labour administration have ignored and held in contempt the views, values and hopes of York people. From one shambolic, expensive disaster to another we are now at a point where the city is on the brink of financial collapse and yet the blinkered, dogmatic, patronising and ultimately futile policies of James Alexander & co continue. At the moment many are yet to grasp the awful enormity of what Labour plans to do to the city within its Local Plan. Even so, communities are fighting back, people are rallying, placards are going up and protest groups forming. We are fortunate we have some politicians (of all colours) who out their residents first. I suspect there might still be one or two senior CYC staff who feel the same. These people now need to come forward - join those like Evlington Action Group, the Wildlife Trust, Sturdy, Doughty etc and shout very loudly 'NO!' Jack Ham
  • Score: -19

4:14pm Sat 12 Jul 14

piaggio1 says...

16,11pm why have all the comments been closed on the useless numpty.s from the clowncil????
Me thinks some were a bit of home truths.
16,11pm why have all the comments been closed on the useless numpty.s from the clowncil???? Me thinks some were a bit of home truths. piaggio1
  • Score: -11

4:17pm Sat 12 Jul 14

piaggio1 says...

Plenty of room at west office.s.get about 6 pitches there..an i.m certain the joe rows trust can accomadate em on their propertys.!!!!!
Plenty of room at west office.s.get about 6 pitches there..an i.m certain the joe rows trust can accomadate em on their propertys.!!!!! piaggio1
  • Score: -10

6:19pm Sat 12 Jul 14

Joggal says...

CYC council clearly believes that it has the authority to totally disregard National Planning Policy for Gypsies, Travellers and Showpeople and to even overturn an existing Planning Inspectorate ruling which has already rejected one of the proposed Traveller sites contained in the Local Plan. Such unbelievable arrogance ! We, the council tax paying public who they are supposedly paid to serve, should collectively call for a vote of no confidence in this 'rogue' council and demand top-level resignations.
CYC council clearly believes that it has the authority to totally disregard National Planning Policy for Gypsies, Travellers and Showpeople and to even overturn an existing Planning Inspectorate ruling which has already rejected one of the proposed Traveller sites contained in the Local Plan. Such unbelievable arrogance ! We, the council tax paying public who they are supposedly paid to serve, should collectively call for a vote of no confidence in this 'rogue' council and demand top-level resignations. Joggal
  • Score: -12

10:37pm Sat 12 Jul 14

missfedup says...

Jack Ham wrote:
From day one with their underhand attempt to sell of a Union Terrace car park, this Labour administration have ignored and held in contempt the views, values and hopes of York people.

From one shambolic, expensive disaster to another we are now at a point where the city is on the brink of financial collapse and yet the blinkered, dogmatic, patronising and ultimately futile policies of James Alexander & co continue.

At the moment many are yet to grasp the awful enormity of what Labour plans to do to the city within its Local Plan. Even so, communities are fighting back, people are rallying, placards are going up and protest groups forming.

We are fortunate we have some politicians (of all colours) who out their residents first. I suspect there might still be one or two senior CYC staff who feel the same.

These people now need to come forward - join those like Evlington Action Group, the Wildlife Trust, Sturdy, Doughty etc and shout very loudly 'NO!'
Completely agree with you Jack Ham. The few at the top of the tree are planning on changing the very character and setting of York and it's villages with their out of control Local Plan.
Hundreds objected to the proposed new town of Clifton Gate last year, yet it still remains a strategic site of 3500 houses despite it being on the worst congested stretch of the A1237.
Interesting Fact...
The consortium of developers of Clifton Gate held a 'Community Planning Weekend' in Wigginton hall this wknd. It would appear that Bill Woolley (Planning boss at the Council up until retirement 3 years ago) is now heading up the TW Fields part of the Clifton Gate development.
And we are meant to believe this is a democracy? This Council do not care one iota about residents' views. The leaders have their own political agenda which they are determined to push through.
Placards and banners are definitely on the way. How about a march on West Offices during the next 'consultation'?
Council, you need to start listening to the people of York. And by the way, for the next public consultation in the Autumn, do us a favour and actually INFORM us about it. This 'Further Sites' consultation has been a joke. No one even knew about it.
[quote][p][bold]Jack Ham[/bold] wrote: From day one with their underhand attempt to sell of a Union Terrace car park, this Labour administration have ignored and held in contempt the views, values and hopes of York people. From one shambolic, expensive disaster to another we are now at a point where the city is on the brink of financial collapse and yet the blinkered, dogmatic, patronising and ultimately futile policies of James Alexander & co continue. At the moment many are yet to grasp the awful enormity of what Labour plans to do to the city within its Local Plan. Even so, communities are fighting back, people are rallying, placards are going up and protest groups forming. We are fortunate we have some politicians (of all colours) who out their residents first. I suspect there might still be one or two senior CYC staff who feel the same. These people now need to come forward - join those like Evlington Action Group, the Wildlife Trust, Sturdy, Doughty etc and shout very loudly 'NO!'[/p][/quote]Completely agree with you Jack Ham. The few at the top of the tree are planning on changing the very character and setting of York and it's villages with their out of control Local Plan. Hundreds objected to the proposed new town of Clifton Gate last year, yet it still remains a strategic site of 3500 houses despite it being on the worst congested stretch of the A1237. Interesting Fact... The consortium of developers of Clifton Gate held a 'Community Planning Weekend' in Wigginton hall this wknd. It would appear that Bill Woolley (Planning boss at the Council up until retirement 3 years ago) is now heading up the TW Fields part of the Clifton Gate development. And we are meant to believe this is a democracy? This Council do not care one iota about residents' views. The leaders have their own political agenda which they are determined to push through. Placards and banners are definitely on the way. How about a march on West Offices during the next 'consultation'? Council, you need to start listening to the people of York. And by the way, for the next public consultation in the Autumn, do us a favour and actually INFORM us about it. This 'Further Sites' consultation has been a joke. No one even knew about it. missfedup
  • Score: -12

6:37pm Sun 13 Jul 14

Joggal says...

Residents of York ........ please inundate the council by Tuesday with demands (email: localplan@york.gov.u
k) to extend this Local Plan Additional Sites consultation period. The warning given and timescale allotted for responses has been woefully short.
Residents of York ........ please inundate the council by Tuesday with demands (email: localplan@york.gov.u k) to extend this Local Plan Additional Sites consultation period. The warning given and timescale allotted for responses has been woefully short. Joggal
  • Score: -12

10:55am Mon 14 Jul 14

meme says...

There is a fundamental issue here
Nobody wants big developments on their doorstep BUT the only way York can satisfy demand ids by developing on greenbelt in someone's back yard!
If we are to try to keep prices of housing even vaguely realistic we need more homes but where. perhaps sites should be identified where there is the least objection but these tend to be way from existing housing and therefore unacceptable to the council
This is Gordian knot that cannot be untied.
There is a fundamental issue here Nobody wants big developments on their doorstep BUT the only way York can satisfy demand ids by developing on greenbelt in someone's back yard! If we are to try to keep prices of housing even vaguely realistic we need more homes but where. perhaps sites should be identified where there is the least objection but these tend to be way from existing housing and therefore unacceptable to the council This is Gordian knot that cannot be untied. meme
  • Score: 12

10:58am Mon 14 Jul 14

meme says...

does anyone think it right that the man who forced a planning application through, that drove a huge hole in existing planning policies ie Monks Cross retail scheme, then retires from the council , goes to work for the developer and then acts on behalf of some of the same developers to get a planning application through............s
omething is wrong about this
does anyone think it right that the man who forced a planning application through, that drove a huge hole in existing planning policies ie Monks Cross retail scheme, then retires from the council , goes to work for the developer and then acts on behalf of some of the same developers to get a planning application through............s omething is wrong about this meme
  • Score: -14

5:16pm Mon 14 Jul 14

TheTruthHurts says...

meme wrote:
does anyone think it right that the man who forced a planning application through, that drove a huge hole in existing planning policies ie Monks Cross retail scheme, then retires from the council , goes to work for the developer and then acts on behalf of some of the same developers to get a planning application through............s

omething is wrong about this
Is that true?? If so then it absolutely stinks, and why arent the press more interested in these sort of connections?
[quote][p][bold]meme[/bold] wrote: does anyone think it right that the man who forced a planning application through, that drove a huge hole in existing planning policies ie Monks Cross retail scheme, then retires from the council , goes to work for the developer and then acts on behalf of some of the same developers to get a planning application through............s omething is wrong about this[/p][/quote]Is that true?? If so then it absolutely stinks, and why arent the press more interested in these sort of connections? TheTruthHurts
  • Score: -11

10:12pm Mon 14 Jul 14

missfedup says...

TheTruthHurts wrote:
meme wrote:
does anyone think it right that the man who forced a planning application through, that drove a huge hole in existing planning policies ie Monks Cross retail scheme, then retires from the council , goes to work for the developer and then acts on behalf of some of the same developers to get a planning application through............s


omething is wrong about this
Is that true?? If so then it absolutely stinks, and why arent the press more interested in these sort of connections?
Yes it's true.
Bill Woolley, ex Director of City and Environmental Services (Planning) at York City Council, is now heading up the development company TW Fields of the 'Clifton Gate' consortium. Handy isn't it?
No wonder residents of Haxby, Wigginton and Skelton received 'Community Planning Weekend' fliers from the developers that suggested Clifton Gate is a 'done deal'. No doubt Mr Woolley has plenty of pals left at the Council...
It certainly would be interesting to see the Press running an article about this connection.
In fact, the Clifton Gate developers are doing a "feed-back" session tomorrow night; Tues 15th July at 7pm at Wigginton Parish Hall, to display their 'vision' of what 3500 houses opposite Clifton Moor on 3 square miles of Green Belt could look like. Bill Woolley will be there. Why doesn't someone from the Press get out there and ask him to comment on what essentially could be seen as a major conflict of interest?
[quote][p][bold]TheTruthHurts[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]meme[/bold] wrote: does anyone think it right that the man who forced a planning application through, that drove a huge hole in existing planning policies ie Monks Cross retail scheme, then retires from the council , goes to work for the developer and then acts on behalf of some of the same developers to get a planning application through............s omething is wrong about this[/p][/quote]Is that true?? If so then it absolutely stinks, and why arent the press more interested in these sort of connections?[/p][/quote]Yes it's true. Bill Woolley, ex Director of City and Environmental Services (Planning) at York City Council, is now heading up the development company TW Fields of the 'Clifton Gate' consortium. Handy isn't it? No wonder residents of Haxby, Wigginton and Skelton received 'Community Planning Weekend' fliers from the developers that suggested Clifton Gate is a 'done deal'. No doubt Mr Woolley has plenty of pals left at the Council... It certainly would be interesting to see the Press running an article about this connection. In fact, the Clifton Gate developers are doing a "feed-back" session tomorrow night; Tues 15th July at 7pm at Wigginton Parish Hall, to display their 'vision' of what 3500 houses opposite Clifton Moor on 3 square miles of Green Belt could look like. Bill Woolley will be there. Why doesn't someone from the Press get out there and ask him to comment on what essentially could be seen as a major conflict of interest? missfedup
  • Score: -21
Post a comment

Remember you are personally responsible for what you post on this site and must abide by our site terms. Do not post anything that is false, abusive or malicious. If you wish to complain, please use the ‘report this post’ link.

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