200 speak out on huge York housing plan (From York Press)

What do they hope to achieve by increased consultation ? The councils planning officers are there to oversee the reserved matters submissions to ensure that the design, layout, materials etc are appropriate. A committee of disparate residents with their varied views and agendas would just cause total chaos. The real agenda of these people is to delay, frustrate or hopefully stop development. There have been too many delays already, and more consultation on matters that the planning officers are better qualified to sort out is just a stalling tactic.

The biggest hurdle that this project has to overcome, is the unworkable affordable housing quota. Until the council agree to a substantial reduction, as has been proven to be necessary, by last week's request by the developers of Hungate, this development will remain stalled. Meanwhile York's housing crisis worsens owing to the council's failure on housing numbers.

My advice to the 200 signatories, is to organise themselves, identify and prioritise their objectives and requirements and present these to Persimmon in a coordinated fashion, using Coun Aspden as their representative. There is time to do this while the delays caused by the affordable housing quota continue. Rather than bleating about it, get on with it !

Mr Crabtree, I have told you before, only to be met with abuse rather than a logical argument regarding too many people in this City already. Another 700 homes is not going to make things any better for for the people in the affected area and the effects would be felt throughout the city.
http://www.google.co
.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q
=population%20growth
%20in%20york%20engla
nd&source=web&cd=4&s
qi=2&ved=0CF8QFjAD&u
rl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.
yorkpress.co.uk%2Fne
ws%2F9820529.Census_
shows_population_gro
wth_in_York%2F&ei=md
oMUI3bO6bI0QWEs_WsCg
&usg=AFQjCNELMPsox_o
6clB89biV_nxBNIZ1jg
The link provided shows a 9.2% increase in York's population in the last ten years alone.
One appreciates that CoYC see this as an opportunity to raise more revenue but that comes at a big cost. The Fulford Councillor is right to lead an objection and I hope he is successful and that this puts an end to the matter.

But Cold as Christmas; like it or not the 700 new houses have already been approved in principle. The residents group cannot overturn this. So what is the point of this consultation petition? What the objectors really want is to stop the development altogether - not to influence the minute final details.

what amazes me is all this extra housing brings in extra council tax, so with more people paying, why does the tax not go down....

its supposed to cost us more as more people mean more services provided, but thats not adding up for me....

only a small amount of what we pay goes to services with the rest going to pay off gvmnt interest payments and bolster fat cat pensions of the councillors....

Yes the planning has been approved.
But we all now know to be true that they cant make money on it.
Hungate, case in point.
All Persimmon and Hoggs can do is delay tactics. Hope for better times to come and for Cof Y Council to accept reality and drop the blackmail 106 and affordable theft.

Nicely helped along by councilor Aspden.

Its another Derwenthorpe
Locals who will not give up and just cost us all lots of money with an inevitable result which delays the scheme but ultimately it will be built when its profitable for the developer
I'm all for democracy and social inclusion but we have gone too far now!

200 people speak out ........ in a village of 2000 ish ??

Some Fulford residents support Germany Beck ....... but our councillor isn't interested to hear comments of support ?

Get them built !

Stupidyorkpeople wrote:
200 people speak out ........ in a village of 2000 ish ?? Some Fulford residents support Germany Beck ....... but our councillor isn't interested to hear comments of support ? Get them built !

Well said 'stupidyorkpeople'. You make a very valid point about councillors, they only hear what they want to hear. They represent the views of the people they represent, but, only when it suits their views/politics.

ColdAsChristmas wrote:
Mr Crabtree, I have told you before, only to be met with abuse rather than a logical argument regarding too many people in this City already. Another 700 homes is not going to make things any better for for the people in the affected area and the effects would be felt throughout the city. http://www.google.co .uk/url?sa=t&rct
=j&q =population%20growth %20in%20york%20engla nd&source=web&am
p;cd=4&s qi=2&ved=0CF8QFj
AD&u rl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww. yorkpress.co.uk%2Fne ws%2F9820529.Census_ shows_population_gro wth_in_York%2F&e
i=md oMUI3bO6bI0QWEs_WsCg &usg=AFQjCNELMPs
ox_o 6clB89biV_nxBNIZ1jg The link provided shows a 9.2% increase in York's population in the last ten years alone. One appreciates that CoYC see this as an opportunity to raise more revenue but that comes at a big cost. The Fulford Councillor is right to lead an objection and I hope he is successful and that this puts an end to the matter.

So it's logical to stop building houses in York when there is a massive need. ? The problem is a national one - not enough houses and millions in need.

Planning permission has been granted, and the council have a duty to ensure a supply of new homes in accordance with their local plan. The target is 800 homes a year, but for the last five years it has averaged just under 470/year, so there is already a backlog/shortfall of around 1,650. This site needs to get started to deliver much needed housing, and Fulford objectors and the Council need to allow this to happen.

Ridiculous and where are the new roads to take all the extra traffic. In any case, what is wrong with the brown field sites such as Nestle and Terry's?
If we go on at this rate there will be nowhere left to bury our dead. Before you mention cremation; have you seen the imposed so call green charges lately.
We keep making more people but we are not making land and once developed our green spaces are gone for good. Stop it!

I'll tell you what is wrong with Nestlé and Terry's sites. Too much blackmail. Too much affordable housing. Too big a risk. Too easy to go bust.

That is why no one is coming forward to take them on.

lezyork1966 wrote:
what amazes me is all this extra housing brings in extra council tax, so with more people paying, why does the tax not go down....

its supposed to cost us more as more people mean more services provided, but thats not adding up for me....

only a small amount of what we pay goes to services with the rest going to pay off gvmnt interest payments and bolster fat cat pensions of the councillors....

Plus with a lot of people on the list for council housing, the council has an obligation to provide accommodation for the most vunerable - at a cost to the taxpayer. If there were more homes there'd be less people the council has to pay to accommodate in hotels etc.
Things like affordable housing have to be provided to make this happen though - if developers can't get around the idea of not making big profits through building as many houses as possible on postage-stamp plots of land then these housing developments won't go ahead... I'm suprised we haven't yet seen houses getting built they the buildings down Shambles, overhanging the road to get more room space for less land!

Germany Beck is a joke now... it's been sitting there FOR YEARS with nothing happening.

Magicman! wrote:

lezyork1966 wrote: what amazes me is all this extra housing brings in extra council tax, so with more people paying, why does the tax not go down.... its supposed to cost us more as more people mean more services provided, but thats not adding up for me.... only a small amount of what we pay goes to services with the rest going to pay off gvmnt interest payments and bolster fat cat pensions of the councillors....

Plus with a lot of people on the list for council housing, the council has an obligation to provide accommodation for the most vunerable - at a cost to the taxpayer. If there were more homes there'd be less people the council has to pay to accommodate in hotels etc. Things like affordable housing have to be provided to make this happen though - if developers can't get around the idea of not making big profits through building as many houses as possible on postage-stamp plots of land then these housing developments won't go ahead... I'm suprised we haven't yet seen houses getting built they the buildings down Shambles, overhanging the road to get more room space for less land! Germany Beck is a joke now... it's been sitting there FOR YEARS with nothing happening.

Germany Beck, Hungate, Terry's, Nestle, Water Lane - all with planning, all stood still. York's main housing sites unable to start because of the Council's unworkable affordable housing targets.

York Council are the JOKE !