Campaigners submit Local Plan petition as consultation ends

From left, Elvington campaigners, John Gallery Philip Brown, Martin Povey, Jo Wedgewood and Beverly Flatt

From left, Elvington campaigners, John Gallery Philip Brown, Martin Povey, Jo Wedgewood and Beverly Flatt

First published in News
Last updated

CAMPAIGNERS from a village near York have submitted a 400-signature petition to City of York Council as the consultation over the authority's revised draft Local Plan came to an end.

Members of the Keep Elvington Rural group were protesting against housing proposals which they claim could eventually see the village population doubling in size, putting huge extra pressure on facilities such as the village school and surgery.

They were also objecting to plans to create a new travellers' site in the heart of the village and extend an existing temporary showpeople's site, and for a massive expansion of the industrial estate on the former Elvington Airfield, said group member Martin Povey.

He said residents weren't opposed to any expansion of the village but to the sheer scale of the proposed developments, which threatened to turn a rural village into an urban sprawl.

The council launched its six-week 'Further Sites Consultation" last month, giving people the opportunity to comment on major plans for housing, transport and employment developments in York over the next 15 years. It sought opinions on new sites that came forward during an initial consultation last year, which attracted more than 14,000 responses.

Mike Slater, assistant director of City and Environmental Services, said yesterday that following the closure of the consultation, all views and feedback would be considered as the Local Plan progressed.

"There will be a further city-wide consultation on the whole plan later this year," he said. "The magnitude of the consultation before this more targeted consultation period is still felt by everyone and echoed by over 14,000 representations made by developers, land owners, residents and businesses - which is the largest amount of responses we've ever received during a consultation.

"The comments received during the orginal and further sites consultation are important in shaping the next stage of the plan.

“Whilst we still have some time to go before the plan is adopted, we do recognise that the biggest challenges for York are the city's need for more affordable housing for residents, delivering more jobs, and protecting York's unique built and green environment for future generations - and through the Local Plan we hope to achieve this.

"Following the next round of consultation the plan will be submitted for independent examination by a government inspector."

Comments (16)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

9:55am Thu 17 Jul 14

courier46 says...

This plan is too big and too fast,i don't blame the residents one bit for trying to protect there whole way of life which will be totally changed (and not for the better) if the local plan goes ahead!
This plan is too big and too fast,i don't blame the residents one bit for trying to protect there whole way of life which will be totally changed (and not for the better) if the local plan goes ahead! courier46
  • Score: 16

10:23am Thu 17 Jul 14

BethFoxhunter96 says...

We have a growing population and need to build more houses. In 10 years time I hope to be able to buy a house but will not be able to if there are none available.

It is always going to be difficult and traumatic for rural communities who are asked to expand. But the world can not stand still, we can not keep our little patch how it is because that means everyone else's patch has to change even more so.

I hope CYC show care and sensitivity in the new local plan, and equal care and sensitivity when dealing with the very real views of the communities involved as we all make this change. It is going to require real leadership, compromise on all sides and expertise to deliver these homes across the city.

Bethany.
We have a growing population and need to build more houses. In 10 years time I hope to be able to buy a house but will not be able to if there are none available. It is always going to be difficult and traumatic for rural communities who are asked to expand. But the world can not stand still, we can not keep our little patch how it is because that means everyone else's patch has to change even more so. I hope CYC show care and sensitivity in the new local plan, and equal care and sensitivity when dealing with the very real views of the communities involved as we all make this change. It is going to require real leadership, compromise on all sides and expertise to deliver these homes across the city. Bethany. BethFoxhunter96
  • Score: -4

10:23am Thu 17 Jul 14

X5019c says...

"plans to create a new travellers' site in the heart of the village"

Please name the idiot that dreamt up this nonsense.
I would love to know their reasons behind this most stupid of proposals.
"plans to create a new travellers' site in the heart of the village" Please name the idiot that dreamt up this nonsense. I would love to know their reasons behind this most stupid of proposals. X5019c
  • Score: 18

10:38am Thu 17 Jul 14

courier46 says...

BethFoxhunter96 wrote:
We have a growing population and need to build more houses. In 10 years time I hope to be able to buy a house but will not be able to if there are none available.

It is always going to be difficult and traumatic for rural communities who are asked to expand. But the world can not stand still, we can not keep our little patch how it is because that means everyone else's patch has to change even more so.

I hope CYC show care and sensitivity in the new local plan, and equal care and sensitivity when dealing with the very real views of the communities involved as we all make this change. It is going to require real leadership, compromise on all sides and expertise to deliver these homes across the city.

Bethany.
That is the point,these idiots are not real leaders and will crack a nut with a hammer and there plans will not be in the best interests of anyone.
I presume your a hard worker as you say you are hoping to buy a house well be careful before you buy it because the council seem to be putting in a lot of tennents who don`t care less about there neighbours and cause upset ,as in the site at the old college on Tadcaster Rd.
[quote][p][bold]BethFoxhunter96[/bold] wrote: We have a growing population and need to build more houses. In 10 years time I hope to be able to buy a house but will not be able to if there are none available. It is always going to be difficult and traumatic for rural communities who are asked to expand. But the world can not stand still, we can not keep our little patch how it is because that means everyone else's patch has to change even more so. I hope CYC show care and sensitivity in the new local plan, and equal care and sensitivity when dealing with the very real views of the communities involved as we all make this change. It is going to require real leadership, compromise on all sides and expertise to deliver these homes across the city. Bethany.[/p][/quote]That is the point,these idiots are not real leaders and will crack a nut with a hammer and there plans will not be in the best interests of anyone. I presume your a hard worker as you say you are hoping to buy a house well be careful before you buy it because the council seem to be putting in a lot of tennents who don`t care less about there neighbours and cause upset ,as in the site at the old college on Tadcaster Rd. courier46
  • Score: 8

11:03am Thu 17 Jul 14

BethFoxhunter96 says...

courier46 wrote:
BethFoxhunter96 wrote:
We have a growing population and need to build more houses. In 10 years time I hope to be able to buy a house but will not be able to if there are none available.

It is always going to be difficult and traumatic for rural communities who are asked to expand. But the world can not stand still, we can not keep our little patch how it is because that means everyone else's patch has to change even more so.

I hope CYC show care and sensitivity in the new local plan, and equal care and sensitivity when dealing with the very real views of the communities involved as we all make this change. It is going to require real leadership, compromise on all sides and expertise to deliver these homes across the city.

Bethany.
That is the point,these idiots are not real leaders and will crack a nut with a hammer and there plans will not be in the best interests of anyone.
I presume your a hard worker as you say you are hoping to buy a house well be careful before you buy it because the council seem to be putting in a lot of tennents who don`t care less about there neighbours and cause upset ,as in the site at the old college on Tadcaster Rd.
That is the point,these idiots are not real leaders and will crack a nut with a hammer and there plans will not be in the best interests of anyone. I presume your a hard worker as you say you are hoping to buy a house well be careful before you buy it because the council seem to be putting in a lot of tennents who don`t care less about there neighbours and cause upset ,as in the site at the old college on Tadcaster Rd.


Thank you for the advice, I will consider where to buy very carefully! I don't really understand what you mean about neighbours, presumably nuisance neighbours or those "from hell?" I do not think that is a council leadership problem let alone a political one and certainly happens all over the country. Unfortunately annoying or abusive neighbours happens all the time and the long and ardous route to resolution / eviction isn't nice for anyone but is at least there.

I am unsure what you mean buy your sledgehammer and nut analogy. Do you think there are too many houses marked in the draft local plan? Personally I don't think there are enough. I would like to see lots more "garden city" type development around the ring road and far more denser units provided on brown field sites. They are not "as nice" as the leafy suburb areas about make ideal starter homes for young people like me. Bethany.
[quote][p][bold]courier46[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]BethFoxhunter96[/bold] wrote: We have a growing population and need to build more houses. In 10 years time I hope to be able to buy a house but will not be able to if there are none available. It is always going to be difficult and traumatic for rural communities who are asked to expand. But the world can not stand still, we can not keep our little patch how it is because that means everyone else's patch has to change even more so. I hope CYC show care and sensitivity in the new local plan, and equal care and sensitivity when dealing with the very real views of the communities involved as we all make this change. It is going to require real leadership, compromise on all sides and expertise to deliver these homes across the city. Bethany.[/p][/quote]That is the point,these idiots are not real leaders and will crack a nut with a hammer and there plans will not be in the best interests of anyone. I presume your a hard worker as you say you are hoping to buy a house well be careful before you buy it because the council seem to be putting in a lot of tennents who don`t care less about there neighbours and cause upset ,as in the site at the old college on Tadcaster Rd.[/p][/quote][quote]That is the point,these idiots are not real leaders and will crack a nut with a hammer and there plans will not be in the best interests of anyone. I presume your a hard worker as you say you are hoping to buy a house well be careful before you buy it because the council seem to be putting in a lot of tennents who don`t care less about there neighbours and cause upset ,as in the site at the old college on Tadcaster Rd.[/quote] Thank you for the advice, I will consider where to buy very carefully! I don't really understand what you mean about neighbours, presumably nuisance neighbours or those "from hell?" I do not think that is a council leadership problem let alone a political one and certainly happens all over the country. Unfortunately annoying or abusive neighbours happens all the time and the long and ardous route to resolution / eviction isn't nice for anyone but is at least there. I am unsure what you mean buy your sledgehammer and nut analogy. Do you think there are too many houses marked in the draft local plan? Personally I don't think there are enough. I would like to see lots more "garden city" type development around the ring road and far more denser units provided on brown field sites. They are not "as nice" as the leafy suburb areas about make ideal starter homes for young people like me. Bethany. BethFoxhunter96
  • Score: -8

11:23am Thu 17 Jul 14

courier46 says...

BethFoxhunter96 wrote:
courier46 wrote:
BethFoxhunter96 wrote:
We have a growing population and need to build more houses. In 10 years time I hope to be able to buy a house but will not be able to if there are none available.

It is always going to be difficult and traumatic for rural communities who are asked to expand. But the world can not stand still, we can not keep our little patch how it is because that means everyone else's patch has to change even more so.

I hope CYC show care and sensitivity in the new local plan, and equal care and sensitivity when dealing with the very real views of the communities involved as we all make this change. It is going to require real leadership, compromise on all sides and expertise to deliver these homes across the city.

Bethany.
That is the point,these idiots are not real leaders and will crack a nut with a hammer and there plans will not be in the best interests of anyone.
I presume your a hard worker as you say you are hoping to buy a house well be careful before you buy it because the council seem to be putting in a lot of tennents who don`t care less about there neighbours and cause upset ,as in the site at the old college on Tadcaster Rd.
That is the point,these idiots are not real leaders and will crack a nut with a hammer and there plans will not be in the best interests of anyone. I presume your a hard worker as you say you are hoping to buy a house well be careful before you buy it because the council seem to be putting in a lot of tennents who don`t care less about there neighbours and cause upset ,as in the site at the old college on Tadcaster Rd.


Thank you for the advice, I will consider where to buy very carefully! I don't really understand what you mean about neighbours, presumably nuisance neighbours or those "from hell?" I do not think that is a council leadership problem let alone a political one and certainly happens all over the country. Unfortunately annoying or abusive neighbours happens all the time and the long and ardous route to resolution / eviction isn't nice for anyone but is at least there.

I am unsure what you mean buy your sledgehammer and nut analogy. Do you think there are too many houses marked in the draft local plan? Personally I don't think there are enough. I would like to see lots more "garden city" type development around the ring road and far more denser units provided on brown field sites. They are not "as nice" as the leafy suburb areas about make ideal starter homes for young people like me. Bethany.
What i mean about the neighbours ,is that the council have so many (i think it`s 20 percent ) council housing on new develpments and of that 20 percent you will find that there is probably 5 - 10 percent who dont give a toss or respect there neighbours- swearing in street ,football in street,parties spilling in street and general aggressive and anti social behaviour.Now this is the councils problem as they put these sort in with decent people and ,yes they can be evicted but this can take up to four years of hell (yes i`ve been near it and still have friends who are going through it).They take too long to evict these people who are not grateful for beautiful houses.As far as amounts,yes i do think there are way too many houses 22,000 to be precise that`s about 80,000- 100,000 people ,it will destroy Yorks beauty and turn it into another Leeds
[quote][p][bold]BethFoxhunter96[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]courier46[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]BethFoxhunter96[/bold] wrote: We have a growing population and need to build more houses. In 10 years time I hope to be able to buy a house but will not be able to if there are none available. It is always going to be difficult and traumatic for rural communities who are asked to expand. But the world can not stand still, we can not keep our little patch how it is because that means everyone else's patch has to change even more so. I hope CYC show care and sensitivity in the new local plan, and equal care and sensitivity when dealing with the very real views of the communities involved as we all make this change. It is going to require real leadership, compromise on all sides and expertise to deliver these homes across the city. Bethany.[/p][/quote]That is the point,these idiots are not real leaders and will crack a nut with a hammer and there plans will not be in the best interests of anyone. I presume your a hard worker as you say you are hoping to buy a house well be careful before you buy it because the council seem to be putting in a lot of tennents who don`t care less about there neighbours and cause upset ,as in the site at the old college on Tadcaster Rd.[/p][/quote][quote]That is the point,these idiots are not real leaders and will crack a nut with a hammer and there plans will not be in the best interests of anyone. I presume your a hard worker as you say you are hoping to buy a house well be careful before you buy it because the council seem to be putting in a lot of tennents who don`t care less about there neighbours and cause upset ,as in the site at the old college on Tadcaster Rd.[/quote] Thank you for the advice, I will consider where to buy very carefully! I don't really understand what you mean about neighbours, presumably nuisance neighbours or those "from hell?" I do not think that is a council leadership problem let alone a political one and certainly happens all over the country. Unfortunately annoying or abusive neighbours happens all the time and the long and ardous route to resolution / eviction isn't nice for anyone but is at least there. I am unsure what you mean buy your sledgehammer and nut analogy. Do you think there are too many houses marked in the draft local plan? Personally I don't think there are enough. I would like to see lots more "garden city" type development around the ring road and far more denser units provided on brown field sites. They are not "as nice" as the leafy suburb areas about make ideal starter homes for young people like me. Bethany.[/p][/quote]What i mean about the neighbours ,is that the council have so many (i think it`s 20 percent ) council housing on new develpments and of that 20 percent you will find that there is probably 5 - 10 percent who dont give a toss or respect there neighbours- swearing in street ,football in street,parties spilling in street and general aggressive and anti social behaviour.Now this is the councils problem as they put these sort in with decent people and ,yes they can be evicted but this can take up to four years of hell (yes i`ve been near it and still have friends who are going through it).They take too long to evict these people who are not grateful for beautiful houses.As far as amounts,yes i do think there are way too many houses 22,000 to be precise that`s about 80,000- 100,000 people ,it will destroy Yorks beauty and turn it into another Leeds courier46
  • Score: 4

11:29am Thu 17 Jul 14

Kevin Turvey says...

‘X5019c says...
"plans to create a new travellers' site in the heart of the village"

Please name the idiot that dreamt up this nonsense.
I would love to know their reasons behind this most stupid of proposals.’


Somebody they don’t like live there?
‘X5019c says... "plans to create a new travellers' site in the heart of the village" Please name the idiot that dreamt up this nonsense. I would love to know their reasons behind this most stupid of proposals.’ Somebody they don’t like live there? Kevin Turvey
  • Score: 3

11:39am Thu 17 Jul 14

The Great Buda says...

I note that not one of the people in the photo used for the story is below 40.

I note that not one of the people in the photo is going to struggle to buy a house in which to raise their children.

I note that the people in the photo are nothing more than NIMBY's trying to prevent others from enjoying a decent and fair shot at a good life.

The people in the photo should be ignored.
I note that not one of the people in the photo used for the story is below 40. I note that not one of the people in the photo is going to struggle to buy a house in which to raise their children. I note that the people in the photo are nothing more than NIMBY's trying to prevent others from enjoying a decent and fair shot at a good life. The people in the photo should be ignored. The Great Buda
  • Score: 0

11:50am Thu 17 Jul 14

BethFoxhunter96 says...

What i mean about the neighbours ,is that the council have so many (i think it`s 20 percent ) council housing on new develpments and of that 20 percent you will find that there is probably 5 - 10 percent who dont give a toss or respect there neighbours- swearing in street ,football in street,parties spilling in street and general aggressive and anti social behaviour.Now this is the councils problem as they put these sort in with decent people and ,yes they can be evicted but this can take up to four years of hell (yes i`ve been near it and still have friends who are going through it).They take too long to evict these people who are not grateful for beautiful houses.

This is an entirely separate discussion, and I wouldn't really want to divide people into "these people" and "decent people". 20% is frankly a ridiculous suggestion.

As far as amounts,yes i do think there are way too many houses 22,000 to be precise that`s about 80,000- 100,000 people ,it will destroy Yorks beauty and turn it into another Leeds


It won't destroy York's beauty. It will affect the character of a lot of places. This isn't anything new and has been going on since the Dark Ages when we started to chop down trees to make way for fields and hamlets. What we need to do is manage it well and make the houses and new communities as sustainable, energy friendly as possible, ensuring the correct balance of infrastructure and amenity space, and ensuring people who already live in these places are listened to and respected. What we can't do is stop building. I don't believe in York becoming a rich man's ghetto.

I also take exception to your suggestion that Leeds isn't beautiful or an attractive place to live.
[quote]What i mean about the neighbours ,is that the council have so many (i think it`s 20 percent ) council housing on new develpments and of that 20 percent you will find that there is probably 5 - 10 percent who dont give a toss or respect there neighbours- swearing in street ,football in street,parties spilling in street and general aggressive and anti social behaviour.Now this is the councils problem as they put these sort in with decent people and ,yes they can be evicted but this can take up to four years of hell (yes i`ve been near it and still have friends who are going through it).They take too long to evict these people who are not grateful for beautiful houses.[/quote] This is an entirely separate discussion, and I wouldn't really want to divide people into "these people" and "decent people". 20% is frankly a ridiculous suggestion. [quote]As far as amounts,yes i do think there are way too many houses 22,000 to be precise that`s about 80,000- 100,000 people ,it will destroy Yorks beauty and turn it into another Leeds[/quote] It won't destroy York's beauty. It will affect the character of a lot of places. This isn't anything new and has been going on since the Dark Ages when we started to chop down trees to make way for fields and hamlets. What we need to do is manage it well and make the houses and new communities as sustainable, energy friendly as possible, ensuring the correct balance of infrastructure and amenity space, and ensuring people who already live in these places are listened to and respected. What we can't do is stop building. I don't believe in York becoming a rich man's ghetto. I also take exception to your suggestion that Leeds isn't beautiful or an attractive place to live. BethFoxhunter96
  • Score: -1

12:44pm Thu 17 Jul 14

thedrof says...

courier46, you posts reek of prejudice, the vast majority of people living in Social Housing ordinary people.

The selfishness of these NIMBYs is astounding, who have no regard for the young of today or future generations. The only way were going to solve the housing crisis is by building more homes.
courier46, you posts reek of prejudice, the vast majority of people living in Social Housing ordinary people. The selfishness of these NIMBYs is astounding, who have no regard for the young of today or future generations. The only way were going to solve the housing crisis is by building more homes. thedrof
  • Score: -1

12:49pm Thu 17 Jul 14

PKH says...

X5019c wrote:
"plans to create a new travellers' site in the heart of the village"

Please name the idiot that dreamt up this nonsense.
I would love to know their reasons behind this most stupid of proposals.
Someone who is sick and tired of Elvington residence moaning about motor sport on the airfield maybe.
[quote][p][bold]X5019c[/bold] wrote: "plans to create a new travellers' site in the heart of the village" Please name the idiot that dreamt up this nonsense. I would love to know their reasons behind this most stupid of proposals.[/p][/quote]Someone who is sick and tired of Elvington residence moaning about motor sport on the airfield maybe. PKH
  • Score: 6

12:56pm Thu 17 Jul 14

CaroleBaines says...

thedrof wrote:
courier46, you posts reek of prejudice, the vast majority of people living in Social Housing ordinary people.

The selfishness of these NIMBYs is astounding, who have no regard for the young of today or future generations. The only way were going to solve the housing crisis is by building more homes.
Absolutely. Courier46 seems to judge people purely on what sort of home they live in. Such generalisation is highly unintelligent at best, downright prejudiced at worst. Not the sort of image I want my city to portray, this kind of thinking is what fuels the evils of racism. People are people, not crass generalisation based on what sort of property they can afford.
[quote][p][bold]thedrof[/bold] wrote: courier46, you posts reek of prejudice, the vast majority of people living in Social Housing ordinary people. The selfishness of these NIMBYs is astounding, who have no regard for the young of today or future generations. The only way were going to solve the housing crisis is by building more homes.[/p][/quote]Absolutely. Courier46 seems to judge people purely on what sort of home they live in. Such generalisation is highly unintelligent at best, downright prejudiced at worst. Not the sort of image I want my city to portray, this kind of thinking is what fuels the evils of racism. People are people, not crass generalisation based on what sort of property they can afford. CaroleBaines
  • Score: 5

1:30pm Thu 17 Jul 14

AGuyFromStrensall says...

BethFoxhunter96 wrote:
What i mean about the neighbours ,is that the council have so many (i think it`s 20 percent ) council housing on new develpments and of that 20 percent you will find that there is probably 5 - 10 percent who dont give a toss or respect there neighbours- swearing in street ,football in street,parties spilling in street and general aggressive and anti social behaviour.Now this is the councils problem as they put these sort in with decent people and ,yes they can be evicted but this can take up to four years of hell (yes i`ve been near it and still have friends who are going through it).They take too long to evict these people who are not grateful for beautiful houses.

This is an entirely separate discussion, and I wouldn't really want to divide people into "these people" and "decent people". 20% is frankly a ridiculous suggestion.

As far as amounts,yes i do think there are way too many houses 22,000 to be precise that`s about 80,000- 100,000 people ,it will destroy Yorks beauty and turn it into another Leeds


It won't destroy York's beauty. It will affect the character of a lot of places. This isn't anything new and has been going on since the Dark Ages when we started to chop down trees to make way for fields and hamlets. What we need to do is manage it well and make the houses and new communities as sustainable, energy friendly as possible, ensuring the correct balance of infrastructure and amenity space, and ensuring people who already live in these places are listened to and respected. What we can't do is stop building. I don't believe in York becoming a rich man's ghetto.

I also take exception to your suggestion that Leeds isn't beautiful or an attractive place to live.
Bethany, I was in a similar situation to you having to save up in the last few years and paying prices the previous generation never even dreamed up so good luck in that attempt.

Sadly having lived in a couple of areas now with the housing association quotas and knowing other people who have/are too I'm sad to say you are wrong on the 20% thing. At best that's an accurate figure and at worst it's an underestimate.
Sadly even though we've spent years saving up every spare penny to get the house, we are put next to people who pay less than their cigarette bill a month to live in the same home type then therefore have no investment or interest in looking after it or the area.

Unfortunately this is government (not local) policy for all new housing estates so we're stuck with it...
[quote][p][bold]BethFoxhunter96[/bold] wrote: [quote]What i mean about the neighbours ,is that the council have so many (i think it`s 20 percent ) council housing on new develpments and of that 20 percent you will find that there is probably 5 - 10 percent who dont give a toss or respect there neighbours- swearing in street ,football in street,parties spilling in street and general aggressive and anti social behaviour.Now this is the councils problem as they put these sort in with decent people and ,yes they can be evicted but this can take up to four years of hell (yes i`ve been near it and still have friends who are going through it).They take too long to evict these people who are not grateful for beautiful houses.[/quote] This is an entirely separate discussion, and I wouldn't really want to divide people into "these people" and "decent people". 20% is frankly a ridiculous suggestion. [quote]As far as amounts,yes i do think there are way too many houses 22,000 to be precise that`s about 80,000- 100,000 people ,it will destroy Yorks beauty and turn it into another Leeds[/quote] It won't destroy York's beauty. It will affect the character of a lot of places. This isn't anything new and has been going on since the Dark Ages when we started to chop down trees to make way for fields and hamlets. What we need to do is manage it well and make the houses and new communities as sustainable, energy friendly as possible, ensuring the correct balance of infrastructure and amenity space, and ensuring people who already live in these places are listened to and respected. What we can't do is stop building. I don't believe in York becoming a rich man's ghetto. I also take exception to your suggestion that Leeds isn't beautiful or an attractive place to live.[/p][/quote]Bethany, I was in a similar situation to you having to save up in the last few years and paying prices the previous generation never even dreamed up so good luck in that attempt. Sadly having lived in a couple of areas now with the housing association quotas and knowing other people who have/are too I'm sad to say you are wrong on the 20% thing. At best that's an accurate figure and at worst it's an underestimate. Sadly even though we've spent years saving up every spare penny to get the house, we are put next to people who pay less than their cigarette bill a month to live in the same home type then therefore have no investment or interest in looking after it or the area. Unfortunately this is government (not local) policy for all new housing estates so we're stuck with it... AGuyFromStrensall
  • Score: 4

1:30pm Thu 17 Jul 14

AGuyFromStrensall says...

BethFoxhunter96 wrote:
What i mean about the neighbours ,is that the council have so many (i think it`s 20 percent ) council housing on new develpments and of that 20 percent you will find that there is probably 5 - 10 percent who dont give a toss or respect there neighbours- swearing in street ,football in street,parties spilling in street and general aggressive and anti social behaviour.Now this is the councils problem as they put these sort in with decent people and ,yes they can be evicted but this can take up to four years of hell (yes i`ve been near it and still have friends who are going through it).They take too long to evict these people who are not grateful for beautiful houses.

This is an entirely separate discussion, and I wouldn't really want to divide people into "these people" and "decent people". 20% is frankly a ridiculous suggestion.

As far as amounts,yes i do think there are way too many houses 22,000 to be precise that`s about 80,000- 100,000 people ,it will destroy Yorks beauty and turn it into another Leeds


It won't destroy York's beauty. It will affect the character of a lot of places. This isn't anything new and has been going on since the Dark Ages when we started to chop down trees to make way for fields and hamlets. What we need to do is manage it well and make the houses and new communities as sustainable, energy friendly as possible, ensuring the correct balance of infrastructure and amenity space, and ensuring people who already live in these places are listened to and respected. What we can't do is stop building. I don't believe in York becoming a rich man's ghetto.

I also take exception to your suggestion that Leeds isn't beautiful or an attractive place to live.
Bethany, I was in a similar situation to you having to save up in the last few years and paying prices the previous generation never even dreamed up so good luck in that attempt.

Sadly having lived in a couple of areas now with the housing association quotas and knowing other people who have/are too I'm sad to say you are wrong on the 20% thing. At best that's an accurate figure and at worst it's an underestimate.
Sadly even though we've spent years saving up every spare penny to get the house, we are put next to people who pay less than their cigarette bill a month to live in the same home type then therefore have no investment or interest in looking after it or the area.

Unfortunately this is government (not local) policy for all new housing estates so we're stuck with it...
[quote][p][bold]BethFoxhunter96[/bold] wrote: [quote]What i mean about the neighbours ,is that the council have so many (i think it`s 20 percent ) council housing on new develpments and of that 20 percent you will find that there is probably 5 - 10 percent who dont give a toss or respect there neighbours- swearing in street ,football in street,parties spilling in street and general aggressive and anti social behaviour.Now this is the councils problem as they put these sort in with decent people and ,yes they can be evicted but this can take up to four years of hell (yes i`ve been near it and still have friends who are going through it).They take too long to evict these people who are not grateful for beautiful houses.[/quote] This is an entirely separate discussion, and I wouldn't really want to divide people into "these people" and "decent people". 20% is frankly a ridiculous suggestion. [quote]As far as amounts,yes i do think there are way too many houses 22,000 to be precise that`s about 80,000- 100,000 people ,it will destroy Yorks beauty and turn it into another Leeds[/quote] It won't destroy York's beauty. It will affect the character of a lot of places. This isn't anything new and has been going on since the Dark Ages when we started to chop down trees to make way for fields and hamlets. What we need to do is manage it well and make the houses and new communities as sustainable, energy friendly as possible, ensuring the correct balance of infrastructure and amenity space, and ensuring people who already live in these places are listened to and respected. What we can't do is stop building. I don't believe in York becoming a rich man's ghetto. I also take exception to your suggestion that Leeds isn't beautiful or an attractive place to live.[/p][/quote]Bethany, I was in a similar situation to you having to save up in the last few years and paying prices the previous generation never even dreamed up so good luck in that attempt. Sadly having lived in a couple of areas now with the housing association quotas and knowing other people who have/are too I'm sad to say you are wrong on the 20% thing. At best that's an accurate figure and at worst it's an underestimate. Sadly even though we've spent years saving up every spare penny to get the house, we are put next to people who pay less than their cigarette bill a month to live in the same home type then therefore have no investment or interest in looking after it or the area. Unfortunately this is government (not local) policy for all new housing estates so we're stuck with it... AGuyFromStrensall
  • Score: 5

7:39pm Thu 17 Jul 14

courier46 says...

CaroleBaines wrote:
thedrof wrote:
courier46, you posts reek of prejudice, the vast majority of people living in Social Housing ordinary people.

The selfishness of these NIMBYs is astounding, who have no regard for the young of today or future generations. The only way were going to solve the housing crisis is by building more homes.
Absolutely. Courier46 seems to judge people purely on what sort of home they live in. Such generalisation is highly unintelligent at best, downright prejudiced at worst. Not the sort of image I want my city to portray, this kind of thinking is what fuels the evils of racism. People are people, not crass generalisation based on what sort of property they can afford.
Nimby and proud of it ,i want to live in peace and quiet with out ,footballs hitting windows and swearing yobs drunk in the street.I dont want to see kids out of control with parents who think they cant do wrong.Parents who dont have respect for anyone.I lived on a council estate for 45 years of my life and seen it all.The fault is with our politcians who seen to think its ok to take 4 years to evict hell neighbours,why would you want to buy a beautiful house and have hell neighbours who dont respect anybody.I dont want my city to portray a lot of things a lot of them will only get worse by building the numbers of houses suggested.Wonder where you live Carole,bet it`s pretty nice hmmm?
[quote][p][bold]CaroleBaines[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]thedrof[/bold] wrote: courier46, you posts reek of prejudice, the vast majority of people living in Social Housing ordinary people. The selfishness of these NIMBYs is astounding, who have no regard for the young of today or future generations. The only way were going to solve the housing crisis is by building more homes.[/p][/quote]Absolutely. Courier46 seems to judge people purely on what sort of home they live in. Such generalisation is highly unintelligent at best, downright prejudiced at worst. Not the sort of image I want my city to portray, this kind of thinking is what fuels the evils of racism. People are people, not crass generalisation based on what sort of property they can afford.[/p][/quote]Nimby and proud of it ,i want to live in peace and quiet with out ,footballs hitting windows and swearing yobs drunk in the street.I dont want to see kids out of control with parents who think they cant do wrong.Parents who dont have respect for anyone.I lived on a council estate for 45 years of my life and seen it all.The fault is with our politcians who seen to think its ok to take 4 years to evict hell neighbours,why would you want to buy a beautiful house and have hell neighbours who dont respect anybody.I dont want my city to portray a lot of things a lot of them will only get worse by building the numbers of houses suggested.Wonder where you live Carole,bet it`s pretty nice hmmm? courier46
  • Score: 0

7:49pm Thu 17 Jul 14

courier46 says...

BethFoxhunter96 wrote:
What i mean about the neighbours ,is that the council have so many (i think it`s 20 percent ) council housing on new develpments and of that 20 percent you will find that there is probably 5 - 10 percent who dont give a toss or respect there neighbours- swearing in street ,football in street,parties spilling in street and general aggressive and anti social behaviour.Now this is the councils problem as they put these sort in with decent people and ,yes they can be evicted but this can take up to four years of hell (yes i`ve been near it and still have friends who are going through it).They take too long to evict these people who are not grateful for beautiful houses.

This is an entirely separate discussion, and I wouldn't really want to divide people into "these people" and "decent people". 20% is frankly a ridiculous suggestion.

As far as amounts,yes i do think there are way too many houses 22,000 to be precise that`s about 80,000- 100,000 people ,it will destroy Yorks beauty and turn it into another Leeds


It won't destroy York's beauty. It will affect the character of a lot of places. This isn't anything new and has been going on since the Dark Ages when we started to chop down trees to make way for fields and hamlets. What we need to do is manage it well and make the houses and new communities as sustainable, energy friendly as possible, ensuring the correct balance of infrastructure and amenity space, and ensuring people who already live in these places are listened to and respected. What we can't do is stop building. I don't believe in York becoming a rich man's ghetto.

I also take exception to your suggestion that Leeds isn't beautiful or an attractive place to live.
I have lived in this city for 54 years and would no way live in Leeds that`s my choice,you( if 17) have not had a chance, to see how York was and how it`s changing, in my and a great deal of others peoples opinions it will be too many houses and people.Yorks character is in not being to big, we cant cope on many fronts.Changing the subject i hope you dont foxhunt or follow this vile horror.
[quote][p][bold]BethFoxhunter96[/bold] wrote: [quote]What i mean about the neighbours ,is that the council have so many (i think it`s 20 percent ) council housing on new develpments and of that 20 percent you will find that there is probably 5 - 10 percent who dont give a toss or respect there neighbours- swearing in street ,football in street,parties spilling in street and general aggressive and anti social behaviour.Now this is the councils problem as they put these sort in with decent people and ,yes they can be evicted but this can take up to four years of hell (yes i`ve been near it and still have friends who are going through it).They take too long to evict these people who are not grateful for beautiful houses.[/quote] This is an entirely separate discussion, and I wouldn't really want to divide people into "these people" and "decent people". 20% is frankly a ridiculous suggestion. [quote]As far as amounts,yes i do think there are way too many houses 22,000 to be precise that`s about 80,000- 100,000 people ,it will destroy Yorks beauty and turn it into another Leeds[/quote] It won't destroy York's beauty. It will affect the character of a lot of places. This isn't anything new and has been going on since the Dark Ages when we started to chop down trees to make way for fields and hamlets. What we need to do is manage it well and make the houses and new communities as sustainable, energy friendly as possible, ensuring the correct balance of infrastructure and amenity space, and ensuring people who already live in these places are listened to and respected. What we can't do is stop building. I don't believe in York becoming a rich man's ghetto. I also take exception to your suggestion that Leeds isn't beautiful or an attractive place to live.[/p][/quote]I have lived in this city for 54 years and would no way live in Leeds that`s my choice,you( if 17) have not had a chance, to see how York was and how it`s changing, in my and a great deal of others peoples opinions it will be too many houses and people.Yorks character is in not being to big, we cant cope on many fronts.Changing the subject i hope you dont foxhunt or follow this vile horror. courier46
  • 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