VILLAGERS have decided by a narrow majority to support proposals to make Stockton-on-the-Forest a conservation area.

The debate has divided opinion among residents, with some seeing conservation status as a way of preserving the village's character, and others fearing it will merely add red tape to minor planning applications.

The City of York Council asked villagers for their response to its proposal to designate Stockton a conservation area. Last night, members of the parish council voted by three to two in favour of the scheme.

The outcome makes it more likely that before the end of the year Stockton-on-the-Forest will join 17 other villages around the city that are subject to strict planning regulations.

It is a victory for those villagers who saw conservation status as a means of putting the brakes on new developments - and an associated rise in traffic. They say the volume and speed of traffic in the village is already far in excess of what they consider to be safe.

Diane Robson, of The Village, said: "I am very pleased at the outcome because I think it reflects the views of the villagers who want to keep Stockton as it is now. It will also enable the local authority to restrict new businesses which would otherwise contribute to extra traffic in the village. It is not just speed that is the problems, but HGVs coming through. The village is already at saturation point."

But last night's decision is a blow to others, including the parish council chairman, Cyril Harrison, who believes conservation status would be a hindrance, not a help. Mr Harrison, who last night voted against the proposal, said: "I felt that it would not benefit the village because it restricts people who want to make small changes to their properties."

And it would not, he believes, prevent other developments from being granted planning permission.

He said the cost of acquiring the special status, though not great, was a waste of money. "It could be better spent on schools or, better still, on repairing footpaths, which we have constantly been on about," he said.

"Quite frankly, I am disappointed but there we are. You win some and you lose some."

Converted for the new archive on 30 June 2000. Some images and formatting may have been lost in the conversion.