Below are the latest planning applications received by the York Council for the Westfield ward.
Full details can be found by clicking the application reference.
—-
Former Lowfield School Dijon Avenue York
Non-material amendment to permitted application 17/02428/FULM to change HT06 house from 2no. bedroom to 3no. bedroom, amend footprints and window sizes to brick dimensions, change materials and window locations on elevations, install roof mounted PV to apartments and 71no. dwellings, change masterplan setting out, reduce ridge and eave heights to all house types by 50 to 610mm, and change boundary treatments
One of the major issues with the development is the length of time that builders will be on the site (and adjacent roads). Residents were assured that 3 years would be the maximum.
That now looks to be very optimistic.
Nothing more has been heard of the Communal housing scheme (Yorspace). It is not even clear whether they have completed the purchase of their plot.
The Council itself is only now seeking tenders for the sheltered elderly persons accommodation. So that element is effectively 18 months behind schedule.
And, of course, there is still no word on the promised community facilities. Residents were delays rightly sceptical about whether the Health Centre and police station would ever materilise. It seems increasingly unlikely that they ever will.
It is significant that the Councils latest capital budget update report makes no direct reference to Lowfields. It simply shows that, of the total £24 million cost of building the houses, £16.5 million will be spent before then end of March 2021.
The black farce that is the York Local Plan process has taken a step sideways.
A letter from the appointed inspectors has ordered the Council to consult on the recent changes it has made to documents which should by now have been formally approved and implemented.
The consultation will take up to 6 weeks to complete.
It can only start as and when the Council gets round to publishing details of the latest changes that it proposes to make to the City’s Green Belt boundaries.
The letter concludes by saying that the examination in public will not recommence until June at the earliest. It will probably be held as a “virtual” (on-line) meeting.
We have said before, the Local Plan process is fundamentally flawed.
It is based on the proposition that it is possible to predict the economic and social changes which will occur over a 20 year period.
BREXIT and the pandemic have put paid to that notion.
We would all struggle to predict how the York economy will look this time next year, let alone in 2040.
Yet the Local Plan could see vast swathes of the City blighted as planners seek to allocate sites to house 790 additional families each year.
That level of job growth to support such inward migration is simply is not going to happen in the post pandemic world.
Below are the latest planning applications received by the York Council for the Westfield ward.
Full details can be found by clicking the application reference.
—-
9 Front Street
9 Front Street York YO24 3BW
Proposal Conversion of 2no. retail units to form single retail unit with external alterations to include replacement shopfront, external seating area to front and replacement door and external condenser to rear at 7-9 Front Street
Fell mixed group of Sycamore, Hornbeam and Beech trees within the hedge line; dead wood, crown thin and crown lift to 4 metres 2no. Hornbeam trees – tree works in a Conservation Area
Non-material amendment to permitted application 17/00848/FUL to allow retention of internal staircase following removal of access to ground floor shop unit
UPDATE – New representations have now been made by the York Council to the Planning Inspector. They can be viewed by clicking here
The latest exchange of correspondence, between planning inspectors appointed by the government and the City of York Council, on the proposed “Local Plan” simply serves to highlight how difficult it is to produce a robust proposal which can stand the test of time.
Controversial plan was to have been determined in February 2019.
The latest exchange concerns apparent lack of justification for the Green Belt boundaries. These heavily influence the size of the area allocated for new housing in the City.
It is not a new argument.
It is nearly 20 years since York embarked on an attempt to update its strategic plan. It came close to success in 2011 when aproposal was ready to be sent off to the planning inspectorate.
Of the five drafts that have seen the light of day, this was perhaps the one which achieved the broadest consensus. It envisaged building an additional 575 homes in the City each year for 30 years
In the main it was some developers and the political fringe who objected to it.
A change of political control saw an inexperienced Labour administration adopt a newproposalwhich would have seen the City increase in size by 25%. The stance contributed to them being booted out of office 4 years later.
Anotherattempt was made but was again jeopardised by the unexpected(in this case the decision to close barracks in the City).
It would be 2019 before the revised plan was ready to be submitted.
It still included a higher growth rate for housing than was necessary to sustain the existing City. It anticipated large amounts of “inward migration” to fill the extra jobs and homes that were envisaged. But again, changing government policies, unstable population growth forecasts and then coronavirus combined to halt the final “examination in public” part of the process.
Now the inspector wants the Council to withdraw its proposals and start again. That would mean more delay, plus expenditure of another £x million for taxpayers with no guarantee that a plan would be approved at the end of the process.
Planning inspectors are paid a fee of around £1000 a day! Some may feel that they have a vested interest in prevarication
The Council has opted to try to provide more information to move things forward.
There are vested interests at work for whom delays are an advantage.
Lack of a strategic blueprint means that developers can chance their arm by submitting planning applications on wholly unsuitable sites in the Green Belt. Schemes at Moor Lane and Boroughbridge Road are recent examples.
Existing York Green Belt boundaries.
Getting a Local Plan adopted is pretty much impossible given the current high level of central government interference.
The City needs to be able to get on and determine its own future. The ballot box provides a safety net against the adoption of extreme policies.
What will happen, before the detached hand of a North Yorkshire Mayor tries to seize the reins of power, remains to be seen.
Hopefully the Council and the planning inspector will now find a way to move forward more quickly.
The proposal to build a multi storey car park on the St Georges Field site received planning permission yesterday. The car park is intended as a replacement for the Castle Car park which would be grassed over.
Castle car park last summer
We have said before that we believe this site is too far from the City centre shops to help to sustain the retail economy.
The Castle car park is the most heavily used in the City. One key reason is that it is within comfortable walking distance for those carrying heavy items of shopping.
The drift to out of city retail centers would continue with the City centre left as a visitor attraction hub sustaining only, what is left of, the pubs and restaurants that may survive the pandemic
The pandemic has changed all the numbers.
It now simply makes no sense to spend £55 million on a scheme which could lose the City much needed jobs
The Council should shelve the plans. They should not be bought off by government financial bribes. The country needs to invest wisely to maximise economic recovery.
The City can tolerate the Castle car park for another decade.
In the interim, the Council can make plans which recognise that personal transport will remain a popular method of moving people from the suburbs and region into the City centre. It is a matter of individual choice.
In future the vehicles used may, however, be battery powered.
The idea of having the area, within the inner road road, designated as an Ultra Low Emission Zone (ULEZ) may well be one that has now found its time.
The move to home working – and with it greatly reduced congestion and emission levels in the central area – provides the Council with some thinking time.
A quieter City centre would be bad news for many service based shops, hair dressers etc., They will be hoping that visitors would expand to fill the gap in trade left by office workers.
The Councils draft budget for 2021/22 anticipates a £375,000 saving on office costs– a clear indication that the authority itself believes that many staff will never return to West Offices. The same will be true of other City Centre companies
The Councils budget also contains a commitment to borrow £2.5 million to spend on the Castle Piccadilly scheme. In addition the £28.2 million proposals to construct flats at Castle Mills are budgeted separately
That would simply add to the additional interest and redemption costs of £1.6 million which will account for much of the 1.9% increase in Council Tax levels from 1st April. (The remaining 3% hike is earmarked for social care).
So time now for some prudent revisions to the Councils investment plans.
Below are the latest planning applications received by the York Council for the Westfield ward.
Full details can be found by clicking the application reference
—-
11 Thoresby Road York YO24 3EL
Erection of single storey extension extending 4.5 metres beyond the rear wall of the original house, with a height to the eaves of 2.39 metres and a total height of 3.865 metres
Former Lowfield School 
