Mr Spaven (Letters, October 14) asserts that the consultation process for the New Osbaldwick development is a sham.
Despite their protestations the Meadlands Area Residents Association (MARA) have done very well indeed out of this dialogue.
Is it a sham that:
At MARA's request, all homes on the perimeter of Meadlands are to be bungalows.
Although First York's preferred route was through Fifth Avenue and Meadlands to Bad Bargain Lane, this was changed at their request.
The only two sections of the development to carry construction traffic will be Osbaldwick and Fifth Avenue.
All pylons on the site are to be removed, which will benefit MARA along with the other three quarters.
Mr Hughes of MARA claims (New village consultation is a sham, September 26) that by the addition of the 125 homes to be built adjacent to Meadland's present 120 houses, the existing residents "would be badly affected by noise, pollution and dangers caused by a five or six-fold increase in traffic."
How can this be possible from a two-fold increase in the number of houses?
Finally, none of the "implications" referred to in Mr Spaven's letter will affect Meadlands, apart from some increase in traffic.
Frank W Wilson,
Osbaldwick Village, York.
Updated: 11:20 Saturday, October 18, 2003
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article