Leaders of the campaign held a specially convened meeting to discuss their next move after hearing about the plans from the Evening News.

David Wormald, Michael Whitely and Rob Faley described the latest proposals from Malton-based Redworth Homes as "another ill-conceived plan."

The firm intends building six high-quality detached executive homes on 1.25 acres of land, known as Petts Wood, at the back of 54 Hackness Road.

The company's original plan was to build a nursing home but that was scrapped after talks with residents.

They then came forward in 2006 with a plan to demolish the existing house and build seven four-bedroom homes and a two-bedroom lodge-style house which would be sold at prices up to £500,000.

That triggered a 250-name petition and a protest meeting attended by 100 residents at Scalby Village Hall.

The firm said the homes will be set in an eco-friendly, landscaped woodland in a low-density environment and three will be allocated as affordable housing.

Joanne Williams, of Redworth Homes, said: "This revised application has been very carefully considered. We have taken on board the comments of residents living nearby and believe that, within our application, have addressed their concerns about the environment including wildlife and traffic.

"We will be retaining all the older trees on the land which will be complemented by a sympathetic, landscaping scheme and a protected wildlife zone by the beck. This will provide a very attractive, landscaped environment in which these high quality, individually designed homes will be built.

"It is important to stress that this is a low-density, sustainable development. This quality reflects the tone and feel of the area."

Redworth Homes said it will be working closely with award-winning sustainability and environmental design specialists LEDA on the development.

But a statement from the protesters said: "Redworth Homes are clearly trying to retrieve their ill-judged investment of over £800,000 in two properties in Hackness Road and Glynndale Drive, Newby.

"These 'garden grabbing' purchases were to gain access to 1.25 acres of potential building land which has ultimately proved to be inappropriate for development.

"Despite the apparent improvement in their marketing approach, this is still clearly a tick box exercise – the fundamental flaws that were present in the last application still exist, namely: the existing and increasing flood risk, environmental damage to the area, highways issues, unsuitable character of the development and damage to the remaining trees."

They also questioned how three of them could be "affordable" if they were supposed to be executive-style houses.

What do you think? You can leave your comments below.