Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement


Plans revealed for new homes

Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image

Published Date:
12 January 2010
The most detailed plans ever published for the possible expansion of Northampton have been revealed.
Pages of documents showing where houses could be built in hundreds of streets and villages around Northampton, Daventry and Towcester have been published for the first time by the West Northamptonshire Joint Planning Unit (JPU).

The proposals are
so detailed they break the three towns into almost 900 separate areas, with numerous streets highlighted as possible targets for developers looking to build more than 48,000 houses between now and 2026.

The JPU has been keen to point out the publication of the documents does not mean any of the sites identified will certainly see development in the future.

But anti-expansion campaigners have accused the organisation of trying to sneak the plans under the radar to avoid negative responses from residents.

Roger Kingston, from campaign group The Northants Residents' Alliance, said: "This just looks to me like an open invitation for developers.

"And it just feels like the whole thing has been going on behind our backs.

"The last time they revealed plans like this, we all told them we didn't want them, but they're just carrying on as if nothing has happened."

The campaign group has also criticised the JPU for making the proposal documents difficult to find on its website.

Mr Kingston said: "Their website is pretty poor as it is, but to find these plans you have to know what you're looking for in the first place then keep on searching even further. It's doing anything but showing the big picture.

"But I would encourage everyone to go to the site and let the JPU know their views."

The Government has said it wants to see 62,125 new houses built in west Northamptonshire between 2001 and 2026.

So far, just under 14,000 of the houses have been built, leaving the JPU needing to find space for the remaining 48,000.

As part of its work, the JPU has looked at 885 separate sites spread out across Northampton, Daventry and Towcester.

Of those sites, more than 300 have been classed as "suitable for development" by the JPU while a further 281 have been classed as having 'potential'.

Click here to go to the website and see the development plans will affect you.



Page 1 of 2
Next Page »

  • Last Updated: 12 January 2010 9:19 AM
  • Source: Northampton Chron & Echo
  • Location: Northampton
 
Prev
1
Next
1

,

12/01/2010 11:14:12
Comment Reported Unsuitable By User
2

Steve@Moulton,

Northampton 12/01/2010 12:04:18
Well said St Lytham. Just because the opponents are more vocal, does not mean that is how the town thinks.
I often think these campaigners love the fight, and lose track of the real issues.

And they get support of people too ready to agree with them, and not knowing the full facts, and be against the official group the JPG in this case.
It makes me quite angry. SO I agree, it would be good to get an intelligent independent view in eth Chronicle on issues such as this.

A group knocked on our door 2 years ago, wanting a signature - campaigning against new houses.
The group and I all live in a house barely 10 years old built within the town, so how the hell can we complain???? We all need to live somewhere.
3

Hrolf.,

12/01/2010 13:29:08
The problem with this report is that it's based on out-of-date flawed information (some appears to have come from developers themselves), or admits to lack of information. Saying 'it's not known if its available' makes the whole expensive(?) procedure a waste of time and money.
The fact is, the JPU or councils don't own the land, and won't be developing it, so why waste time indicating what they think, maybe, perhaps they'd like done with it?

Frankly I'd be quite annoyed if I was one of the people living on some of those sites mentioned. Yes, they include areas already lived on, it's that incompetent.
4

,

12/01/2010 14:42:08
Comment Reported Unsuitable By User
5

Martin Hammersley,

Northampton 12/01/2010 15:31:47
Over the past few days I've noticed on these pages a number of indignant contributors (such as St Lytham above) berating the Chronicle & Echo because their comments have been removed.

Have you all not yet grasped the fact that:

1). No one at the Chronicle & Echo actually reads these comments
2). It is not the Chronicle & Echo who are removing the comments, it is members of the public.
3). These pages are not 'mentored' by anyone at the Chronicle & Echo and anyone, anywhere can delete comments - I very much doubt that reasons given for deletion are ever checked.

The C&E do need criticising - but not for deleting comments - because they don't. They need taking to task for their pretence - but this is not the place to do it because it is futile.
6

St Lytham,

The Beach 12/01/2010 17:51:44
The Chron should seek comments from Professionals like Planners, Property Professionals and Economists as to the rerasons Noprthampton Town & County need to expand. it's too easy to get comments from unqualified people as per this article!
7

St Lytham,

The Hut 12/01/2010 17:54:42
MP Brinley is opposed to Growth according to the Chron today. This is in line with his anti Cobblers expansion plans; anti Saints expansion plans; anti classroom space for Grange Park residents in Caroline Chisholm School. What does he positively support to move Northampton Town & County forward?
8

St Lytham,

The snow 12/01/2010 17:57:05
MP Keeble is right to support the population groth of Northampton Town & County as its the only way we can get better jobs & homes, better education & healthcare,better retail & leisure facilities. Its easy to say no and not offer a credible alternative to achieve the improvements we all need!
9

Peter31,

13/01/2010 18:01:08
Martin - Staff at the Chron do read the comments, I am one.

We have the ability to remove comments, as do members of the public.

If you try to remove one, you're asked for a reason, that reason is then checked by our staff.

If there was a reason it should be removed (if it's defamatory for example) it will remain removed, if it's not, we put it back up.

(sorry for the delay in replying by the way, it's been a busy couple of days!)
10

Martin Hammersley,

Northampton 14/01/2010 13:23:39
Well Peter31

I don't know who is trying to fool who, but unlike a lot of people who contribute to these pages I try not to express an opinion about something that I know nothing about. Of course you have the ability to remove comments - having the ability to do something and actually doing it are very far removed. I have a 'mole' at the C&E who tells me a very different story.

I stand by my orininal comments.

Prev
1
Next

 

Comment on this Story

 

In order to post comments you must Register or Sign In

 
 
RSS Feed of this article's comments
Delivery formats: RSS, Atom, Javascript & Email
 
 


Sister Newspapers:
Press Complaints Commission

This website and its associated newspaper adheres to the Press Complaints Commission’s Code of Practice. If you have a complaint about editorial content which relates to inaccuracy or intrusion, then contact the Editor by clicking here.

If you remain dissatisfied with the response provided then you can contact the PCC by clicking here.