Silsden Cam Bookmark and Share


Donate to Yorkshire Air Ambulanceback to Have Your Say !!!! | back to forum index | login | sign up | help | latest topics | search

Forums Home > Have Your Say !!!! > NEW HOUSING ON GREENBELT - Why Us?


Replies in this thread : 5



Website Member
Posts : 4954

Website Member

08/10/2018 : 11:36:12      reply with quote

Leeds green belt should be spared from development, say government inspectors

Green belt areas of Leeds originally earmarked for housing are now set to be protected, following a statement from government planning inspectors.

The current site allocations plan sets out a requirement for 66,000 new homes in Leeds from 2012-2028. But the inspectors have suggested that the council only needs to provide for housing needs up to 2023. This would mean creating a new site allocations plan for housing needs after 2023.

At the same time, the council is also undertaking a core strategy selective review, to look at housing requirement based on new evidence. This recommends a lower future target of 51,952 new homes between 2017 and 2033.

..... and BRADFORD.....?

Bradford has decided Silsden is a great place to build new houses on our greenbelt. It has a train link to bradford and more importantly LEEDS. It's a easy target to build houses where they can get money from builders and the 'new house' building grant from the government for each new house built, and there is an ongoing Council Tax revenue when the houses are built. No inner city problems which require a lot of money to be spent and the infrastructure problems (traffic problems and flooding etc) can be fudged for years to come with sticky plaster politics.

When you read the report above from the Yorkshire Evening Post just remember there are 2 trains for every one that go to Bradford, the trains to Leeds are longer and they have standing room only by the time you get to Bingley. You can always get a seat going to Bradford.

click for more information

Website Member
Posts : 3212

Website Member

08/10/2018 : 13:09:14      reply with quote

David Knights Keighley News
1 hr

We plan to publish a two-page article this week about the challenges facing Silsden due to housing developments: specifically the pressure on infrastructure such as roads, electricity/gas supply, sewerage, education, education, community facilities; and whether further housing developments should be discouraged/banned once the council’s target of 1,200 new homes is reached.
Our main focus will be on long-awaited proposals for an eastern bypass – should the relief road be built as a matter of priority? Would it solve the town’s traffic problems? Should the proposed ‘enabling road’ from Bolton Road to Hawber Cote road be extended around Swartha etc to create a relief road? What about the effects on fields/footpaths/nature etc?
I would particularly welcome comments from Silsden businesses and groups likely to be affected either way – by the housing growth or by a bypass. I need comments by first thing tomorrow (Tuesday). 01535 606611
click for more information

Website Member
Posts : 755

Website Member

10/10/2018 : 18:24:11      reply with quote

When I moved to Silsden over twenty years ago it was in the expectation that the town would grow and develope. it has, but not as fast as I expected. The railway station is just too far for most people to walk to, this being the main attraction as a commuter town.

The NIMBY activities were to be expected, so no surprise there. Protecting 'ones place in the country' obviously must trump providing homes for other people, including I suspect in many cases for their own children. Also if they build to many homes and everyone has somewhere to live then it will mean the value of all houses will fall substancially. This is simple economics, supply and demand.

If the infrastructure and public transport had been better then it would cetainly have grown quicker. A simple bridge with steps over the Aire Valley road would suffice for the fit few that make the journey regularly. To encourage more cyclists actually requires a dedicated cycle way as well as a sophisiticated bridge with gentle ramps.

A public transport system that is really integrated, with buses and trains meeting would also make sense. This really requires improved road access to the station, again something that is going to cost. While the car is king and must be catered for at the expsense of everything else then there is little chance of any improvements there.

There is a tendency also to 'blame Bradford' for all the supposed ills. Bradford is our main local government provider. However instead of being funded soley by local taxes, ie the rates, they have seen more and more control taken up by central government. Housing is a classic example where local authorities have not been allowed to build new council housing in sufficient quantity. Surprise surprise the problem has climbed the political ladder and they are going to be allowed to borrow more to build more. Whether they will or not depends on then being forced to sell off their efforts. Right to buy (council houses) certainly got the votes in, it also helped create the current housing problem.

Of course 'right to buy' at a 20% discount could be made to apply to the private rental market. A real property owning democracy.

Basically you have got what you voted for. Less taxes mean less services.

There is no such thing as a free lunch.

click for more information

Corky Yorky
Website Member
Posts : 302

Website Member

24/10/2018 : 08:06:34      reply with quote

A very interesting article from Today 24/Oct/2018
click for more information

Website Member
Posts : 3991

Website Member

24/10/2018 : 08:20:52      reply with quote

this post has been edited 1 time(s)

well put old miner could`nt av done better myself,my saying THE MORE WE BREED THE MORE HOUSES WE NEED.could you just imagine it "SILSDEN CITY"
click for more information

Website Member
Posts : 62

Website Member

24/10/2018 : 14:42:55      reply with quote

I don’t disagree with Miner but....the system doesn’t work
Brownfield sites should be utilised but developers don’t want the hassle of clearing a site, nor do they want the costs of cleaning up a potentially hazardous site
Developers ALWAYS want a ‘get out clause’ on building affordable profit in that
Nor do they want to pay infrastructure costs, roads, schools, services, healthcare you name it
You just have to look at Leeds to see it’s becoming an anonymous city with a distinct have and have nots
click for more information

Replies in this thread : 5

Post Reply


refresh page   

latest topics

sale / wanted
have your say
looking for..
skippy greengrass

DON'T FORGET THE SUBJECT IS >>>>>>>>   Forums Home > Have Your Say !!!! > NEW HOUSING ON GREENBELT - Why Us?  


  , © 2017

webenquiries to