Bizarre twist in footfall pantomime

With the Council resolutely refusing to reveal the reduction in the number of shoppers using the City centre since the Lendal Bridge restrictions were introduced, they have today announced investment in yet more “footfall” cameras.

Many will wonder whether spending money on more cameras can be justified when the authority apparently don’t want to believe the results of its existing two cameras (which are located in Parliament Street and Coney Street).

A beleaguered Council Leadership has agreed though that the decline in the numbers accessing the City centre over recent years is higher than in similar City’s elsewhere.

The Labour Leadership was quick to celebrate increased footfall in the run up to Christmas 2011 but since then a huge increase in car parking charges, and steps to further reduce on street parking, have taken their toll.

Now, the way that the Lendal Bridge restrictions have been introduced is already having a major impact on the City’s reputation with visitors and potential shoppers.

The Council seem to be following a strategy based on a new saying, “If you don’t like the facts, spend more money looking for alternative facts”

The Council has not revealed how much it intends to spend on the additional cameras.

York Labour Councillors reveal cunning plan?

Site capacity for new homes – draft Local Plan. click to enlarge

Labour Councillor Dave Merrett seems to have overstepped accepted guidelines when welcoming a planning application for the Our Lady’s school site.

He was quoted in the local paper as supporting a plan to build 56 homes on the site – almost double the number allocated in the Local Plan that Cllr Merrett approved in the spring.

If approved at the meeting on 21st November, the proposal would mean that the green space, school nature reserve and children’s playground will all be lost.

Normally executive Councillors avoid commenting publicly on planning applications once they have been submitted. They allow normal consultation with residents to take place before a cross party planning committee meeting decides on the merits of each proposal.

A public intervention by an executive Councillor could be deemed to be putting undue pressure on the planning officers who work in his department and who will author reports recommending approval or rejection of an application.

Officials are understood to have said already that the density on the development – at 82 homes per hectare based on the existing built footprint- is in excess of what would normally be permitted in a sub-urban location.

Meanwhile the Council Leader is also interfering in the planning processes.

Following on from his public opposition to converting unused shops into residential accommodation, he told the last Council meeting, when questioned about the higher number of housing units coming forward on brownfield sites that,

sessions site

“the important distinction between the positions of the Liberal Democrats, and the Conservatives it has to be said, is that the other parties believe those living in central wards should have housing built on any spare piece of land anywhere near them and outer wards should continue to enjoy protection against any development anywhere near them”.

“The truth is housing should be built in both central and outer areas where it can be shown to contribute to tackling the city’s housing crisis at the same time as protecting residents’ local amenity”.

In fact over recent months it is central area sites that are seeing high densities proposed with Our Lady’s school only the latest in a long line which includes the former Press offices in Walmgate, the Burnholme club and several dozen others.

The Council Leader may, however, be confused about what constitutes “central wards”.

——————
NB. The Planning committee will consider next week a proposal to build 59 homes on the former Sessions site on Huntington Road. Of these 20% will be “affordable”

The density of the proposed development is just over 32 dwellings per hectare, and would be more densely developed than the surrounding residential areas. However this figure appears to be in conflict with the figures shown in the draft Local Plan.

The draft Local plan showed only 17 homes being built on this (0.47 hectare) site

Double standards hit Acomb bus passengers.

Acomb Front Street information terminal. Out of order for over 2 years

As the Council starts its project to spend £500,000 on a city centre bus rank, residents of Acomb can be forgiven for thinking that they are the poor relations.

It is now 2 years since the public transport information point on Front Street ceased working.

The Council promise Rougier Street bus stop users “use of lighting and public art to make the facilities generally more attractive, and a better place to spend time waiting for a bus”

Meanwhile Acomb passengers must wait in the rain with no “next bus” displays.

The Council has said that it won’t even “grit” most of the number 24 bus route in winter.

The Council should either bring the information screen back into use or remove it.

It serves only as a memorial to the double standards of a Labour Council which has got its priorities so badly wrong.

Council tenants unhappy with York Council as performance slips

Tenant satisfaction with the way that the Council runs its housing operation has fallen over the last year.

A report, produced by the newly-formed “Tenant Scrutiny Panel”, looks at how the council has performed in the previous 12 months.

click to enlarge

On most measures the Councils performance has declined.

• The number of tenants satisfied with repairs and maintenance fell from 85% to 82% while satisfaction with “the general condition of their home” fell from 83% to 81%.

• Only 55% of tenant adaptations were completed on time compared to 85% the previous year.

• Tenants satisfied with the standard of their new homes fell from 66% to 60%.

• There was an improvement in the time taken to relet empty properties although at 25 days this was worse than is achieved by several other Councils.

• Tenants satisfied with ”involvement in management & decisions” fell from 53% to 51%

• Tenants satisfied with” the outcome of their complaint” was only 34% compared to a target of 70%

• It took longer to remove graffiti.

• Nine out of 10 tenants responding to the Tenant Satisfaction Survey were satisfied with their neighbourhood as a place to live.

The results mirror the growing dissatisfaction levels revealed by the Councils more general “big survey” the results of which were revealed last month.

To view the full report click here