In the Grimsby Telegraph dated June 26 there was an advertisement for 433 acres of land between Peaks Parkway and Humberston Road.  It stated that it has a Local Plan allocation for 1,500 houses, which is news to me.  I thought the plan only included a relatively small area to the west of Humberston Road.

I know a lot of posters here don't bother with the Telegraph.  You can get more information from the Brown & Co website.  I am intrigued that it says "In addition to the allocated residential land, there is significant potential for further development in the future on other parts of the property".

I don't suppose there are many people in Grimsby who have four million pounds to buy Weelsby Hall Farm.  Perhaps the non-chairman would be interested?

It won't happen if yellow crested brown bellied hammer head rayed t!t winged newts are in residence   ;)

Quoted from White_shorts

In the Grimsby Telegraph dated June 26 there was an advertisement for 433 acres of land between Peaks Parkway and Humberston Road.  It stated that it has a Local Plan allocation for 1,500 houses, which is news to me.  I thought the plan only included a relatively small area to the west of Humberston Road.

I know a lot of posters here don't bother with the Telegraph.  You can get more information from the Brown & Co website.  I am intrigued that it says "In addition to the allocated residential land, there is significant potential for further development in the future on other parts of the property".

I don't suppose there are many people in Grimsby who have four million pounds to buy Weelsby Hall Farm.  Perhaps the non-chairman would be interested?

That’s a shame. Weelsby Woods will be hemmed in. Nice way to walk out to the country currently.

I hope this link works for you:

[url]https://www.brown-co.com/properties/12456875/sales[/url]

I would not object to houses on Peaks Parkway if they paid for a new stadium at Freeman Street.

Quoted from White_shorts

I hope this link works for you:

[url]https://www.brown-co.com/properties/12456875/sales[/url]

I would not object to houses on Peaks Parkway if they paid for a new stadium at Freeman Street.

I would.  There's more than enough brown belt land in Grimsby and the surrounding areas to avoid building on land like this.  There's simply no need for it.  Peaks Parkway runs through green land on either side and sadly it's getting eaten up by housing developments.

This isn't a NIMBY style post.  I'm well aware that there will be a need for extra houses in the area but the amount of space in the central areas that are derelict or nearly derelict is far too great, in my opinion, to consider building on green land.  

The stadium in Freeman Street has to be one that's about overall community benefit.  Eating up green land a few miles down the road to pay for it doesn't work for me, it totally negates any benefit.  

I know it's difficult to sell new houses in areas that aren't perhaps as desirable as others but the future need for housing and the stadium should both be seen as an opportunity to breathe new life into areas, not to dig up some old farm land and put up loads of identikit houses.

The problem is, that a lot of the brownfield sites (sites with existing or previous building on) are heavily contaminated making planning difficult, + demolition costs of complete site repurposing are pretty high...

Quoted from Mariner8

The problem is, that a lot of the brownfield sites (sites with existing or previous building on) are heavily contaminated making planning difficult, + demolition costs of complete site repurposing are pretty high...

Got to be done sooner or later or do we just migrate towns around the country, hoping that the old bits will eventually fall down and the land become cleansed of contamination naturally over the centuries? Either the state does it at taxpayer expense (like happened on the Greenwich Peninsula in the 90s) or the developer does it at their own expense.

It's about time that the council/s started taking action about sites (and buildings) being left unkempt and having detrimental affects on areas surrounding them. Half the time I wonder if it's because they can't be ar5ed or if it's because they can't see it or simply don't care

Am sure that colleges are crying out for apprentices to practice their talents somewhere, so why not with regenerating deprived areas or getting 'community service' offenders into said area

Quoted from WOZOFGRIMSBY

It's about time that the council/s started taking action about sites (and buildings) being left unkempt and having detrimental affects on areas surrounding them. Half the time I wonder if it's because they can't be ar5ed or if it's because they can't see it or simply don't care

Am sure that colleges are crying out for apprentices to practice their talents somewhere, so why not with regenerating deprived areas or getting 'community service' offenders into said area

It’d be a good idea if the government gave them the power and resources to enforce that.

Quoted from KingstonMariner

Got to be done sooner or later or do we just migrate towns around the country, hoping that the old bits will eventually fall down and the land become cleansed of contamination naturally over the centuries? Either the state does it at taxpayer expense (like happened on the Greenwich Peninsula in the 90s) or the developer does it at their own expense.

Definitely!  

Let's face it, there's plenty of wasteful use of tax payers money that could be redirected to clearing brownfield areas.  

Once we use the greenfield areas, that's it.  They're gone.  You only have to look at satellite images above the Grimsby area to see the creep towards the southern areas of the county towards Holton-Le-Clay, Tetney and beyond...  How long before Louth and Grimsby join up?

How likely is it that Weelsby Hall Farm will remain agricultural land? If you recall, in addition to fast food takeaways next to the crematorium, Mr Fenty said 1,600 houses were required to pay for the Peaks Parkway stadium.

I think the town has to think carefully about this. As attractive as it might seem to live on the edge of town as it now is, and as easy as it might be to develop this land compared to brownfield sites, it will soon (i.e. a few dacades) be the goose that smashes its own golden egg.  Those nice streets that currently run alongside the open land will become just more streets surrounded by more streets and become less desirable to live in so slowly those people will migrate to the new edge of town. The areas a bit further behind them will themsleves become less desirabel and so people will gradually drift out of those. Before you know it, you've created more rundown areas, just further away from the East Marsh. And you start the process all over again (except you have to jump even further next time because you've already developed all the land heading in towards Grimsby from Waltham and New Waltham. So bang goes Ashby-cum-Fenby and Brigsley.

Much better to find a way of making older run down areas nicer places to live in. Not as easy mind. And certainly takes more imagination and vision.

The deadline for bids was noon today. I wonder if the board scraped together a few million pounds to try to secure the land. It might be useful if the ABP deal falls through.

Lets face it I'm not local so not a NIMBY but the only reason they want to build houses at Peaks Parkway is they will sell for more and most money is made from larger detached properties. Agreed no one will want to spend 250k/300K on a 3 bed detached around Eaat Marsh/Docks, but how about lots of nice 2 bed semis for young couples/professionals who cant afford the kind of prices all but a couple of dozen of the 100s that will get bulit at PP. It happens all the time round here ' we promise blah blah that the new development will be 40% affordable (so they get planning permission) but once its half built they say its not economical and only build a couple of cheaper houses. Sorry gone non footy I'm afraid.

Quoted from Madeleymariner

Lets face it I'm not local so not a NIMBY but the only reason they want to build houses at Peaks Parkway is they will sell for more and most money is made from larger detached properties. Agreed no one will want to spend 250k/300K on a 3 bed detached around East Marsh/Docks, but how about lots of nice 2 bed semis for young couples/professionals who cant afford the kind of prices all but a couple of dozen of the 100s that will get built at PP. It happens all the time round here ' we promise blah blah that the new development will be 40% affordable (so they get planning permission) but once its half built they say its not economical and only build a couple of cheaper houses. Sorry gone non footy I'm afraid.

The docks stadium will need paying for somehow. I don't think you could fit 1,600 houses on the Freeman Street flats site.

Quoted from White_shorts

The docks stadium will need paying for somehow. I don't think you could fit 1,600 houses on the Freeman Street flats site.

if you built say six tower blocks with 90 flats in each then you would be a third of the way to that figure...then maybe build some low rise flats and maisonettes alongside them.....add some coloured wall panels for architectural interest then someone could be onto a winner.  ;)