Residents hold protest march over new homes proposal

Bradford Telegraph and Argus: Protesters in Thackley against plans to develop fields on land close to the village march round the area Protesters in Thackley against plans to develop fields on land close to the village march round the area

Campaigners angry at plans to build 330 homes on greenfield land staged a protest walk around the proposed development site on Saturday.

The 100-strong group of local residents were joined by David Ward, Liberal Democrat MP for Bradford East, and ward councillors including Liberal Democrat group leader Jeanette Sunderland.

Bradford Council planners are yet to deliver a verdict on the Persimmon Homes project for the 30-acre Cote Farm site on Leeds Road, Thackley.

Isobel Burgess, one of the protest organisers, said: “The people of Thackley do not want these houses, and do not need them. There are more than a thousand houses standing empty in the area already.

“The green fields are so precious to everyone who lives in this area, so we must try to save them.”

More than 1,000 people have made objections to the housing plans, organising an online petition and report to outline their arguments against the development.

The report states that the additional homes will lead to increased traffic congestion, added pressure on local schools and services, and potential flooding risks.

Residents are also concerned about the loss of green space and with it, a sense of identity for Thackley.

Councillor Sunderland (Idle, Thackley) said: “The main issues are traffic congestion, as people will queue for hours to get out of this new estate on a morning, and lack of infrastructure in terms of school places. Children that live close to local schools cannot get places in those schools. You cannot put hundreds more families into Idle and Thackley without dealing with that problem.”

Mr Ward said: “As a councillor, I fought against the development of Cote Farm more than 20 years ago. We were told at the time that the green land was there to provide a buffer between Windhill and Thackley, and now planners want that as well. There was a firm commitment to protect that land, and we want that commitment to be retained.

“There has already been an increase of housing in this area, and we have accepted that as making our contribution to the needs of Bradford, but there comes a point when other areas need to be looked at.

“There are hundreds of places in the city centre that could be converted back into homes. Developers clearly find it easier and cheaper to build on green space.”

Despite protestations from locals that 1,300 homes already stand empty in the Thackley and Idle area, Persimmon Homes has previously stressed its view that there is a recognised need for the proposed two, three, four and five-bedroom properties.

Wayne Gradwell, managing director at Persimmon Homes West Yorkshire, said previously of the Cote Farm site: “We have endeavoured to address the concerns of the local residents and have carried out in-depth reports.

“It is very important to us that we develop homes that serve the local community. We await a decision from Bradford Council.”

Comments (26)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

7:15am Mon 17 Mar 14

Victor Clayton says...

When it's gone, it's gone forever!
When it's gone, it's gone forever! Victor Clayton
  • Score: 9

8:33am Mon 17 Mar 14

linebacker2 says...

Do those people with the banner "Save Our Fields" actually own the fields in question?
Do those people with the banner "Save Our Fields" actually own the fields in question? linebacker2
  • Score: -4

8:42am Mon 17 Mar 14

eccythump says...

When I was a child I could walk out of my back door in Idle and meander down a winding country footpath, to Thackley, surrounded by green fields all the way. There are so few left now. I would hide in the long grasses, in the Sunshine with a good book, watching the clouds float by in the blue, blue, Summer skies. Hearing nothing but the soft breeze, the lowing of a nearby Milk Cow, or the occasional busy Bumble Bee. Where are these idylls for children nowadays ? How very, very, sad.
When I was a child I could walk out of my back door in Idle and meander down a winding country footpath, to Thackley, surrounded by green fields all the way. There are so few left now. I would hide in the long grasses, in the Sunshine with a good book, watching the clouds float by in the blue, blue, Summer skies. Hearing nothing but the soft breeze, the lowing of a nearby Milk Cow, or the occasional busy Bumble Bee. Where are these idylls for children nowadays ? How very, very, sad. eccythump
  • Score: 7

9:21am Mon 17 Mar 14

linebacker2 says...

eccythump wrote:
When I was a child I could walk out of my back door in Idle and meander down a winding country footpath, to Thackley, surrounded by green fields all the way. There are so few left now. I would hide in the long grasses, in the Sunshine with a good book, watching the clouds float by in the blue, blue, Summer skies. Hearing nothing but the soft breeze, the lowing of a nearby Milk Cow, or the occasional busy Bumble Bee. Where are these idylls for children nowadays ? How very, very, sad.
Look on google earth - there's loads of green space around the city.
[quote][p][bold]eccythump[/bold] wrote: When I was a child I could walk out of my back door in Idle and meander down a winding country footpath, to Thackley, surrounded by green fields all the way. There are so few left now. I would hide in the long grasses, in the Sunshine with a good book, watching the clouds float by in the blue, blue, Summer skies. Hearing nothing but the soft breeze, the lowing of a nearby Milk Cow, or the occasional busy Bumble Bee. Where are these idylls for children nowadays ? How very, very, sad.[/p][/quote]Look on google earth - there's loads of green space around the city. linebacker2
  • Score: 5

9:26am Mon 17 Mar 14

BaildonGuy says...

linebacker2 wrote:
eccythump wrote:
When I was a child I could walk out of my back door in Idle and meander down a winding country footpath, to Thackley, surrounded by green fields all the way. There are so few left now. I would hide in the long grasses, in the Sunshine with a good book, watching the clouds float by in the blue, blue, Summer skies. Hearing nothing but the soft breeze, the lowing of a nearby Milk Cow, or the occasional busy Bumble Bee. Where are these idylls for children nowadays ? How very, very, sad.
Look on google earth - there's loads of green space around the city.
Bradford has less access to rural areas than any other comparable city. It's another league table that we're at the bottom of.
[quote][p][bold]linebacker2[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]eccythump[/bold] wrote: When I was a child I could walk out of my back door in Idle and meander down a winding country footpath, to Thackley, surrounded by green fields all the way. There are so few left now. I would hide in the long grasses, in the Sunshine with a good book, watching the clouds float by in the blue, blue, Summer skies. Hearing nothing but the soft breeze, the lowing of a nearby Milk Cow, or the occasional busy Bumble Bee. Where are these idylls for children nowadays ? How very, very, sad.[/p][/quote]Look on google earth - there's loads of green space around the city.[/p][/quote]Bradford has less access to rural areas than any other comparable city. It's another league table that we're at the bottom of. BaildonGuy
  • Score: 4

9:30am Mon 17 Mar 14

BaildonGuy says...

This is all about the developers profits. Bradford is awash with brownfields and empty homes, -- 13000 at the last count. Since developers won't take these on the Council should, bringing them back onto the market will take the pressure off our few remaining green spaces.
This is all about the developers profits. Bradford is awash with brownfields and empty homes, -- 13000 at the last count. Since developers won't take these on the Council should, bringing them back onto the market will take the pressure off our few remaining green spaces. BaildonGuy
  • Score: 12

10:01am Mon 17 Mar 14

Grumpygirl says...

This inefficient and wasteful use of scarce resources is what happens when you allow a market free-for-all driven by Tory greed. If the economy was properly directed from the centre then developers would not be allowed to touch green fields until all the brownfields and empty properties had been used first.
This inefficient and wasteful use of scarce resources is what happens when you allow a market free-for-all driven by Tory greed. If the economy was properly directed from the centre then developers would not be allowed to touch green fields until all the brownfields and empty properties had been used first. Grumpygirl
  • Score: -4

10:15am Mon 17 Mar 14

Andy2010 says...

Grumpygirl wrote:
This inefficient and wasteful use of scarce resources is what happens when you allow a market free-for-all driven by Tory greed. If the economy was properly directed from the centre then developers would not be allowed to touch green fields until all the brownfields and empty properties had been used first.
Tory Greed lol

Give it a rest will ya Grumpy Girl...your almost as bad as Rollie

I would retort in that should Labour not have opened the countries door to mass immigration then we wouldn't need half the houses we do now.
[quote][p][bold]Grumpygirl[/bold] wrote: This inefficient and wasteful use of scarce resources is what happens when you allow a market free-for-all driven by Tory greed. If the economy was properly directed from the centre then developers would not be allowed to touch green fields until all the brownfields and empty properties had been used first.[/p][/quote]Tory Greed lol Give it a rest will ya Grumpy Girl...your almost as bad as Rollie I would retort in that should Labour not have opened the countries door to mass immigration then we wouldn't need half the houses we do now. Andy2010
  • Score: 15

10:19am Mon 17 Mar 14

linebacker2 says...

BaildonGuy wrote:
This is all about the developers profits. Bradford is awash with brownfields and empty homes, -- 13000 at the last count. Since developers won't take these on the Council should, bringing them back onto the market will take the pressure off our few remaining green spaces.
And I guess you'd be among the first to move into these dwellings you're proposing?
[quote][p][bold]BaildonGuy[/bold] wrote: This is all about the developers profits. Bradford is awash with brownfields and empty homes, -- 13000 at the last count. Since developers won't take these on the Council should, bringing them back onto the market will take the pressure off our few remaining green spaces.[/p][/quote]And I guess you'd be among the first to move into these dwellings you're proposing? linebacker2
  • Score: 8

10:44am Mon 17 Mar 14

Thackleygirl says...

Wayne Gradwell, managing director at Persimmon Homes West Yorkshire, said previously of the Cote Farm site: “We have endeavoured to address the concerns of the local residents and have carried out in-depth reports.

Persimmon Homes have NOT endeavoured to address the concerns of local residents nor have they LISTENED to local residents and their in-depth reports are somewhat questionable!
Wayne Gradwell, managing director at Persimmon Homes West Yorkshire, said previously of the Cote Farm site: “We have endeavoured to address the concerns of the local residents and have carried out in-depth reports. Persimmon Homes have NOT endeavoured to address the concerns of local residents nor have they LISTENED to local residents and their in-depth reports are somewhat questionable! Thackleygirl
  • Score: -3

11:17am Mon 17 Mar 14

BierleyBoy says...

Grumpygirl wrote:
This inefficient and wasteful use of scarce resources is what happens when you allow a market free-for-all driven by Tory greed. If the economy was properly directed from the centre then developers would not be allowed to touch green fields until all the brownfields and empty properties had been used first.
You are hilarious.
[quote][p][bold]Grumpygirl[/bold] wrote: This inefficient and wasteful use of scarce resources is what happens when you allow a market free-for-all driven by Tory greed. If the economy was properly directed from the centre then developers would not be allowed to touch green fields until all the brownfields and empty properties had been used first.[/p][/quote]You are hilarious. BierleyBoy
  • Score: 4

12:16pm Mon 17 Mar 14

Bone_idle18 says...

Whilst I'm not keen on the houses being built, the only real reason I can see is the lack of local school places.

I don't think the additional traffic will make much difference and I never actually see anyone using the fields apart from the few people who are lucky/rich enough to own horses.

however, the strain on local schools is more than enough reason to block any more development in the are.

Plus, out of 30-odd houses built across the road, there are sill some for sale, so the demand is obviously not that great.
Whilst I'm not keen on the houses being built, the only real reason I can see is the lack of local school places. I don't think the additional traffic will make much difference and I never actually see anyone using the fields apart from the few people who are lucky/rich enough to own horses. however, the strain on local schools is more than enough reason to block any more development in the are. Plus, out of 30-odd houses built across the road, there are sill some for sale, so the demand is obviously not that great. Bone_idle18
  • Score: 0

12:21pm Mon 17 Mar 14

Idlelord says...

Developers want profit - scale provides profit - renovating old homes does not and is actually subject to a ridiculous VAT penalty in addition.

Councils do not give a stuff about green fields or localism and even if they did, ultimately, they are toothless against the giant developers; men against boys.

Persimmon do not give a stuff about anything other than return on capital. Sadly, with scarce evidence of need nor any improvement in infrastructure these will be built.
Developers want profit - scale provides profit - renovating old homes does not and is actually subject to a ridiculous VAT penalty in addition. Councils do not give a stuff about green fields or localism and even if they did, ultimately, they are toothless against the giant developers; men against boys. Persimmon do not give a stuff about anything other than return on capital. Sadly, with scarce evidence of need nor any improvement in infrastructure these will be built. Idlelord
  • Score: 6

1:05pm Mon 17 Mar 14

mrsslot says...

Good campaign by those involved. I am obviously against it as I live in the area and we are already struggling with the local resources.
The council should be making developers target the brown field areas. I am all for that. I would rather see old run down, scruffy buildings attracting vandalism and crime being pulled down and housing put up - there are plenty of these areas to target first. Leave the greenfields alone.
Good campaign by those involved. I am obviously against it as I live in the area and we are already struggling with the local resources. The council should be making developers target the brown field areas. I am all for that. I would rather see old run down, scruffy buildings attracting vandalism and crime being pulled down and housing put up - there are plenty of these areas to target first. Leave the greenfields alone. mrsslot
  • Score: 0

1:56pm Mon 17 Mar 14

tinytoonster says...

mrsslot wrote:
Good campaign by those involved. I am obviously against it as I live in the area and we are already struggling with the local resources.
The council should be making developers target the brown field areas. I am all for that. I would rather see old run down, scruffy buildings attracting vandalism and crime being pulled down and housing put up - there are plenty of these areas to target first. Leave the greenfields alone.
correct but as my mate neil diamond says, MONEY TALKS.......
[quote][p][bold]mrsslot[/bold] wrote: Good campaign by those involved. I am obviously against it as I live in the area and we are already struggling with the local resources. The council should be making developers target the brown field areas. I am all for that. I would rather see old run down, scruffy buildings attracting vandalism and crime being pulled down and housing put up - there are plenty of these areas to target first. Leave the greenfields alone.[/p][/quote]correct but as my mate neil diamond says, MONEY TALKS....... tinytoonster
  • Score: 1

2:53pm Mon 17 Mar 14

Joedavid says...

mrsslot wrote:
Good campaign by those involved. I am obviously against it as I live in the area and we are already struggling with the local resources.
The council should be making developers target the brown field areas. I am all for that. I would rather see old run down, scruffy buildings attracting vandalism and crime being pulled down and housing put up - there are plenty of these areas to target first. Leave the greenfields alone.
Local resources will be bad there might even be worse, it's the same all over Bradford.
I guess the protesters houses and yours were greenfield once.
[quote][p][bold]mrsslot[/bold] wrote: Good campaign by those involved. I am obviously against it as I live in the area and we are already struggling with the local resources. The council should be making developers target the brown field areas. I am all for that. I would rather see old run down, scruffy buildings attracting vandalism and crime being pulled down and housing put up - there are plenty of these areas to target first. Leave the greenfields alone.[/p][/quote]Local resources will be bad there might even be worse, it's the same all over Bradford. I guess the protesters houses and yours were greenfield once. Joedavid
  • Score: 9

3:06pm Mon 17 Mar 14

Bone_idle18 says...

Joedavid wrote:
mrsslot wrote:
Good campaign by those involved. I am obviously against it as I live in the area and we are already struggling with the local resources.
The council should be making developers target the brown field areas. I am all for that. I would rather see old run down, scruffy buildings attracting vandalism and crime being pulled down and housing put up - there are plenty of these areas to target first. Leave the greenfields alone.
Local resources will be bad there might even be worse, it's the same all over Bradford.
I guess the protesters houses and yours were greenfield once.
suspect pretty much every building in the UK was once countryside.
[quote][p][bold]Joedavid[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]mrsslot[/bold] wrote: Good campaign by those involved. I am obviously against it as I live in the area and we are already struggling with the local resources. The council should be making developers target the brown field areas. I am all for that. I would rather see old run down, scruffy buildings attracting vandalism and crime being pulled down and housing put up - there are plenty of these areas to target first. Leave the greenfields alone.[/p][/quote]Local resources will be bad there might even be worse, it's the same all over Bradford. I guess the protesters houses and yours were greenfield once.[/p][/quote]suspect pretty much every building in the UK was once countryside. Bone_idle18
  • Score: 6

3:22pm Mon 17 Mar 14

linebacker2 says...

mrsslot wrote:
Good campaign by those involved. I am obviously against it as I live in the area and we are already struggling with the local resources.
The council should be making developers target the brown field areas. I am all for that. I would rather see old run down, scruffy buildings attracting vandalism and crime being pulled down and housing put up - there are plenty of these areas to target first. Leave the greenfields alone.
Here's a suggestion.

Why don't you and others in the locale move to the scruffy, run down areas you describe - if enough of you do it there'll be no need for extra housing in your area and the precious greenfields will be saved!
[quote][p][bold]mrsslot[/bold] wrote: Good campaign by those involved. I am obviously against it as I live in the area and we are already struggling with the local resources. The council should be making developers target the brown field areas. I am all for that. I would rather see old run down, scruffy buildings attracting vandalism and crime being pulled down and housing put up - there are plenty of these areas to target first. Leave the greenfields alone.[/p][/quote]Here's a suggestion. Why don't you and others in the locale move to the scruffy, run down areas you describe - if enough of you do it there'll be no need for extra housing in your area and the precious greenfields will be saved! linebacker2
  • Score: 5

3:37pm Mon 17 Mar 14

toni william says...

BaildonGuy wrote:
This is all about the developers profits. Bradford is awash with brownfields and empty homes, -- 13000 at the last count. Since developers won't take these on the Council should, bringing them back onto the market will take the pressure off our few remaining green spaces.
AND will you move out of Baildon to one of these Brownfield sites with the rest of the Nimbys? That's what developers are in business for, profits, and you forgot to add the greedy developer!!
[quote][p][bold]BaildonGuy[/bold] wrote: This is all about the developers profits. Bradford is awash with brownfields and empty homes, -- 13000 at the last count. Since developers won't take these on the Council should, bringing them back onto the market will take the pressure off our few remaining green spaces.[/p][/quote]AND will you move out of Baildon to one of these Brownfield sites with the rest of the Nimbys? That's what developers are in business for, profits, and you forgot to add the greedy developer!! toni william
  • Score: 1

3:38pm Mon 17 Mar 14

Andy2010 says...

linebacker2 wrote:
mrsslot wrote:
Good campaign by those involved. I am obviously against it as I live in the area and we are already struggling with the local resources.
The council should be making developers target the brown field areas. I am all for that. I would rather see old run down, scruffy buildings attracting vandalism and crime being pulled down and housing put up - there are plenty of these areas to target first. Leave the greenfields alone.
Here's a suggestion.

Why don't you and others in the locale move to the scruffy, run down areas you describe - if enough of you do it there'll be no need for extra housing in your area and the precious greenfields will be saved!
Cote Farm already is run down. it was nice when built (if you like that generic new house look) but in the past 5 years or so has turned into a right dump. Doesnt help literally looking over your back fence onto Windhill either
[quote][p][bold]linebacker2[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]mrsslot[/bold] wrote: Good campaign by those involved. I am obviously against it as I live in the area and we are already struggling with the local resources. The council should be making developers target the brown field areas. I am all for that. I would rather see old run down, scruffy buildings attracting vandalism and crime being pulled down and housing put up - there are plenty of these areas to target first. Leave the greenfields alone.[/p][/quote]Here's a suggestion. Why don't you and others in the locale move to the scruffy, run down areas you describe - if enough of you do it there'll be no need for extra housing in your area and the precious greenfields will be saved![/p][/quote]Cote Farm already is run down. it was nice when built (if you like that generic new house look) but in the past 5 years or so has turned into a right dump. Doesnt help literally looking over your back fence onto Windhill either Andy2010
  • Score: 4

4:25pm Mon 17 Mar 14

mrsslot says...

linebacker2 wrote:
mrsslot wrote:
Good campaign by those involved. I am obviously against it as I live in the area and we are already struggling with the local resources.
The council should be making developers target the brown field areas. I am all for that. I would rather see old run down, scruffy buildings attracting vandalism and crime being pulled down and housing put up - there are plenty of these areas to target first. Leave the greenfields alone.
Here's a suggestion.

Why don't you and others in the locale move to the scruffy, run down areas you describe - if enough of you do it there'll be no need for extra housing in your area and the precious greenfields will be saved!
Read my comment properly - I said buildings not areas. You can have run down buildings in all areas. Would you not like these areas to be improved providing a better view and impression of the areas that we live in - obviously not!.
Would you like it if the house you bought in an area lost value due to development of the area?.
Everyone has an opinion and they are entitled to comment without a stupid comment being made by someone who doesn't seem to care.
[quote][p][bold]linebacker2[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]mrsslot[/bold] wrote: Good campaign by those involved. I am obviously against it as I live in the area and we are already struggling with the local resources. The council should be making developers target the brown field areas. I am all for that. I would rather see old run down, scruffy buildings attracting vandalism and crime being pulled down and housing put up - there are plenty of these areas to target first. Leave the greenfields alone.[/p][/quote]Here's a suggestion. Why don't you and others in the locale move to the scruffy, run down areas you describe - if enough of you do it there'll be no need for extra housing in your area and the precious greenfields will be saved![/p][/quote]Read my comment properly - I said buildings not areas. You can have run down buildings in all areas. Would you not like these areas to be improved providing a better view and impression of the areas that we live in - obviously not!. Would you like it if the house you bought in an area lost value due to development of the area?. Everyone has an opinion and they are entitled to comment without a stupid comment being made by someone who doesn't seem to care. mrsslot
  • Score: -2

4:27pm Mon 17 Mar 14

Bone_idle18 says...

Andy2010 wrote:
linebacker2 wrote:
mrsslot wrote:
Good campaign by those involved. I am obviously against it as I live in the area and we are already struggling with the local resources.
The council should be making developers target the brown field areas. I am all for that. I would rather see old run down, scruffy buildings attracting vandalism and crime being pulled down and housing put up - there are plenty of these areas to target first. Leave the greenfields alone.
Here's a suggestion.

Why don't you and others in the locale move to the scruffy, run down areas you describe - if enough of you do it there'll be no need for extra housing in your area and the precious greenfields will be saved!
Cote Farm already is run down. it was nice when built (if you like that generic new house look) but in the past 5 years or so has turned into a right dump. Doesnt help literally looking over your back fence onto Windhill either
It's not my style, but I wouldn't say it was a dump. Just like most new build using fake stone, they tend to date quickly.
[quote][p][bold]Andy2010[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]linebacker2[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]mrsslot[/bold] wrote: Good campaign by those involved. I am obviously against it as I live in the area and we are already struggling with the local resources. The council should be making developers target the brown field areas. I am all for that. I would rather see old run down, scruffy buildings attracting vandalism and crime being pulled down and housing put up - there are plenty of these areas to target first. Leave the greenfields alone.[/p][/quote]Here's a suggestion. Why don't you and others in the locale move to the scruffy, run down areas you describe - if enough of you do it there'll be no need for extra housing in your area and the precious greenfields will be saved![/p][/quote]Cote Farm already is run down. it was nice when built (if you like that generic new house look) but in the past 5 years or so has turned into a right dump. Doesnt help literally looking over your back fence onto Windhill either[/p][/quote]It's not my style, but I wouldn't say it was a dump. Just like most new build using fake stone, they tend to date quickly. Bone_idle18
  • Score: 7

4:38pm Mon 17 Mar 14

linebacker2 says...

mrsslot wrote:
linebacker2 wrote:
mrsslot wrote:
Good campaign by those involved. I am obviously against it as I live in the area and we are already struggling with the local resources.
The council should be making developers target the brown field areas. I am all for that. I would rather see old run down, scruffy buildings attracting vandalism and crime being pulled down and housing put up - there are plenty of these areas to target first. Leave the greenfields alone.
Here's a suggestion.

Why don't you and others in the locale move to the scruffy, run down areas you describe - if enough of you do it there'll be no need for extra housing in your area and the precious greenfields will be saved!
Read my comment properly - I said buildings not areas. You can have run down buildings in all areas. Would you not like these areas to be improved providing a better view and impression of the areas that we live in - obviously not!.
Would you like it if the house you bought in an area lost value due to development of the area?.
Everyone has an opinion and they are entitled to comment without a stupid comment being made by someone who doesn't seem to care.
So developers are "greedy" because they want to run their business at a profit, but is not also greed on your part as you've admitted (unlike most other nimbys) that your real concern is your own house price?
[quote][p][bold]mrsslot[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]linebacker2[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]mrsslot[/bold] wrote: Good campaign by those involved. I am obviously against it as I live in the area and we are already struggling with the local resources. The council should be making developers target the brown field areas. I am all for that. I would rather see old run down, scruffy buildings attracting vandalism and crime being pulled down and housing put up - there are plenty of these areas to target first. Leave the greenfields alone.[/p][/quote]Here's a suggestion. Why don't you and others in the locale move to the scruffy, run down areas you describe - if enough of you do it there'll be no need for extra housing in your area and the precious greenfields will be saved![/p][/quote]Read my comment properly - I said buildings not areas. You can have run down buildings in all areas. Would you not like these areas to be improved providing a better view and impression of the areas that we live in - obviously not!. Would you like it if the house you bought in an area lost value due to development of the area?. Everyone has an opinion and they are entitled to comment without a stupid comment being made by someone who doesn't seem to care.[/p][/quote]So developers are "greedy" because they want to run their business at a profit, but is not also greed on your part as you've admitted (unlike most other nimbys) that your real concern is your own house price? linebacker2
  • Score: 3

4:48pm Mon 17 Mar 14

mrsslot says...

linebacker2 wrote:
mrsslot wrote:
linebacker2 wrote:
mrsslot wrote:
Good campaign by those involved. I am obviously against it as I live in the area and we are already struggling with the local resources.
The council should be making developers target the brown field areas. I am all for that. I would rather see old run down, scruffy buildings attracting vandalism and crime being pulled down and housing put up - there are plenty of these areas to target first. Leave the greenfields alone.
Here's a suggestion.

Why don't you and others in the locale move to the scruffy, run down areas you describe - if enough of you do it there'll be no need for extra housing in your area and the precious greenfields will be saved!
Read my comment properly - I said buildings not areas. You can have run down buildings in all areas. Would you not like these areas to be improved providing a better view and impression of the areas that we live in - obviously not!.
Would you like it if the house you bought in an area lost value due to development of the area?.
Everyone has an opinion and they are entitled to comment without a stupid comment being made by someone who doesn't seem to care.
So developers are "greedy" because they want to run their business at a profit, but is not also greed on your part as you've admitted (unlike most other nimbys) that your real concern is your own house price?
Have I said they are greedy? Every business has to make money, and why is it greed that I don't want to loose money on my house which will be my childrens inheritance? Its called looking after your family and living a life.
[quote][p][bold]linebacker2[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]mrsslot[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]linebacker2[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]mrsslot[/bold] wrote: Good campaign by those involved. I am obviously against it as I live in the area and we are already struggling with the local resources. The council should be making developers target the brown field areas. I am all for that. I would rather see old run down, scruffy buildings attracting vandalism and crime being pulled down and housing put up - there are plenty of these areas to target first. Leave the greenfields alone.[/p][/quote]Here's a suggestion. Why don't you and others in the locale move to the scruffy, run down areas you describe - if enough of you do it there'll be no need for extra housing in your area and the precious greenfields will be saved![/p][/quote]Read my comment properly - I said buildings not areas. You can have run down buildings in all areas. Would you not like these areas to be improved providing a better view and impression of the areas that we live in - obviously not!. Would you like it if the house you bought in an area lost value due to development of the area?. Everyone has an opinion and they are entitled to comment without a stupid comment being made by someone who doesn't seem to care.[/p][/quote]So developers are "greedy" because they want to run their business at a profit, but is not also greed on your part as you've admitted (unlike most other nimbys) that your real concern is your own house price?[/p][/quote]Have I said they are greedy? Every business has to make money, and why is it greed that I don't want to loose money on my house which will be my childrens inheritance? Its called looking after your family and living a life. mrsslot
  • Score: -1

5:24pm Mon 17 Mar 14

Andy2010 says...

mrsslot wrote:
linebacker2 wrote:
mrsslot wrote:
linebacker2 wrote:
mrsslot wrote:
Good campaign by those involved. I am obviously against it as I live in the area and we are already struggling with the local resources.
The council should be making developers target the brown field areas. I am all for that. I would rather see old run down, scruffy buildings attracting vandalism and crime being pulled down and housing put up - there are plenty of these areas to target first. Leave the greenfields alone.
Here's a suggestion.

Why don't you and others in the locale move to the scruffy, run down areas you describe - if enough of you do it there'll be no need for extra housing in your area and the precious greenfields will be saved!
Read my comment properly - I said buildings not areas. You can have run down buildings in all areas. Would you not like these areas to be improved providing a better view and impression of the areas that we live in - obviously not!.
Would you like it if the house you bought in an area lost value due to development of the area?.
Everyone has an opinion and they are entitled to comment without a stupid comment being made by someone who doesn't seem to care.
So developers are "greedy" because they want to run their business at a profit, but is not also greed on your part as you've admitted (unlike most other nimbys) that your real concern is your own house price?
Have I said they are greedy? Every business has to make money, and why is it greed that I don't want to loose money on my house which will be my childrens inheritance? Its called looking after your family and living a life.
Irony overload !!
[quote][p][bold]mrsslot[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]linebacker2[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]mrsslot[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]linebacker2[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]mrsslot[/bold] wrote: Good campaign by those involved. I am obviously against it as I live in the area and we are already struggling with the local resources. The council should be making developers target the brown field areas. I am all for that. I would rather see old run down, scruffy buildings attracting vandalism and crime being pulled down and housing put up - there are plenty of these areas to target first. Leave the greenfields alone.[/p][/quote]Here's a suggestion. Why don't you and others in the locale move to the scruffy, run down areas you describe - if enough of you do it there'll be no need for extra housing in your area and the precious greenfields will be saved![/p][/quote]Read my comment properly - I said buildings not areas. You can have run down buildings in all areas. Would you not like these areas to be improved providing a better view and impression of the areas that we live in - obviously not!. Would you like it if the house you bought in an area lost value due to development of the area?. Everyone has an opinion and they are entitled to comment without a stupid comment being made by someone who doesn't seem to care.[/p][/quote]So developers are "greedy" because they want to run their business at a profit, but is not also greed on your part as you've admitted (unlike most other nimbys) that your real concern is your own house price?[/p][/quote]Have I said they are greedy? Every business has to make money, and why is it greed that I don't want to loose money on my house which will be my childrens inheritance? Its called looking after your family and living a life.[/p][/quote]Irony overload !! Andy2010
  • Score: 2

9:09pm Mon 17 Mar 14

Grumpygirl says...

linebacker2 wrote:
mrsslot wrote:
linebacker2 wrote:
mrsslot wrote:
Good campaign by those involved. I am obviously against it as I live in the area and we are already struggling with the local resources.
The council should be making developers target the brown field areas. I am all for that. I would rather see old run down, scruffy buildings attracting vandalism and crime being pulled down and housing put up - there are plenty of these areas to target first. Leave the greenfields alone.
Here's a suggestion.

Why don't you and others in the locale move to the scruffy, run down areas you describe - if enough of you do it there'll be no need for extra housing in your area and the precious greenfields will be saved!
Read my comment properly - I said buildings not areas. You can have run down buildings in all areas. Would you not like these areas to be improved providing a better view and impression of the areas that we live in - obviously not!.
Would you like it if the house you bought in an area lost value due to development of the area?.
Everyone has an opinion and they are entitled to comment without a stupid comment being made by someone who doesn't seem to care.
So developers are "greedy" because they want to run their business at a profit, but is not also greed on your part as you've admitted (unlike most other nimbys) that your real concern is your own house price?
Missing the point again linebacker. Nobody's arguing that businesses need to run at a profit. The point here is that developers could still build on brownfields or refurbish empty properties and make a profit selling them. Normally this would be seen as a win-win situation for developer, environment and the community.

Unfortunately developers make more profit destroying greenfields, and, in the greed-is-good flavour of capitalism promoted by the Tories, maximising profit at whatever cost to the community and the environment is seen as a good thing. We no longer have a win-win situation, but one that is one-sided and promotes inequality. This is the difference between the Tories irresponsible capitalism and Labour's responsible capitalism.
[quote][p][bold]linebacker2[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]mrsslot[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]linebacker2[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]mrsslot[/bold] wrote: Good campaign by those involved. I am obviously against it as I live in the area and we are already struggling with the local resources. The council should be making developers target the brown field areas. I am all for that. I would rather see old run down, scruffy buildings attracting vandalism and crime being pulled down and housing put up - there are plenty of these areas to target first. Leave the greenfields alone.[/p][/quote]Here's a suggestion. Why don't you and others in the locale move to the scruffy, run down areas you describe - if enough of you do it there'll be no need for extra housing in your area and the precious greenfields will be saved![/p][/quote]Read my comment properly - I said buildings not areas. You can have run down buildings in all areas. Would you not like these areas to be improved providing a better view and impression of the areas that we live in - obviously not!. Would you like it if the house you bought in an area lost value due to development of the area?. Everyone has an opinion and they are entitled to comment without a stupid comment being made by someone who doesn't seem to care.[/p][/quote]So developers are "greedy" because they want to run their business at a profit, but is not also greed on your part as you've admitted (unlike most other nimbys) that your real concern is your own house price?[/p][/quote]Missing the point again linebacker. Nobody's arguing that businesses need to run at a profit. The point here is that developers could still build on brownfields or refurbish empty properties and make a profit selling them. Normally this would be seen as a win-win situation for developer, environment and the community. Unfortunately developers make more profit destroying greenfields, and, in the greed-is-good flavour of capitalism promoted by the Tories, maximising profit at whatever cost to the community and the environment is seen as a good thing. We no longer have a win-win situation, but one that is one-sided and promotes inequality. This is the difference between the Tories irresponsible capitalism and Labour's responsible capitalism. Grumpygirl
  • Score: -2

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