We have our first 2 metre high highways weed
Westfield Councillors to debate what to do about building works at public meeting tomorrow
Bowling club building site not on the agenda?
The Westfield Councillors are right to insist on more information being provided on building works in the area, when they meet tomorrow (Wednesday)
However, they will be meeting only a few metres away from the spoil heaps and site compound which has been constructed on the Council owned land to the rear of the Library.
Some explanation for the decision to allow the contractors to use this Council owned site will be expected. It is an issue that is not likely to go away.
Some residents still hope that Council will offer some sort of compensation for the problems that have been caused by the use of the compound
Elsewhere, the Lowfields development saga continues.
There has still not been any explanation about how the York Council came to mislead residents about the inclusion of a “police station” and health centre/GP surgery in the original consultation plans.
Both these promises turned out to be bogus. It is unclear what will happen to what, otherwise, will be unused plots on the east of the site.
On Ascot Way, access arrangements, for the heavy plant needed to complete the demolition of Windsor House, remain unclear. It seems that access for the plant will be via Kingsway West and Ascot Way It is clear that the roads are too narrow in the area to avoid major damage to adjacent verges and paths. A “one way” system has been suggested but not confirmed.
There are real concerns that the bus route will be obstructed by the likely congestion
The original hope had been that more parking lay-bys would have been provided by now.
…..and the problem of the promised replacement for the all weather games area seems to be no closer to resolution. The existing MUGA has already been converted into a building compound.
There is no word about the proposed alternative site on the Thanet Road Sports Area although officials were asked to follow this up 3 months ago.
Residents will no doubt be hoping that some answers emerge from the meeting
What’s on in York: July events in west York
Another planning forum for Westfield – we think not
The York Council has started consultation on whether to recognise an “Acomb and Westfield Neighbourhood Forum”
A small group of residents, mainly living in the Front Street area, want to establish a “neighbourhood plan”. It would supplement the Councils own Local Plan which will be subject to a public hearing over the summer months.
Unfortunately, the area they hope to cover includes the whole of the Acomb and Westfield wards (approximately 10,000 homes). It would stretch from Foxwood to Boroughbridge Road, encompassing a disparate group of neighbourhoods with little obvious community of interest.
If agreed, it would be by far the largest such plan in the York area. In the main those plans that have been approved cover smaller villages. All have a shared commonality of interests.
Westfield is not short of groups which seek to influence Council policy.
There are several Residents Associations, a “planning panel” (which scrutinises planning applications), a “ward team” and a “ward committee” together with several “action groups” which tend to focus on stimulating, or preventing, specific developments.
Adding an additional tier of representation, although only a consultative body, would involve additional costs and could lead to confusion about roles and responsibilities.
When it comes down to it, Foxwood has little in common with Chapelfields or the Gladstone Street area.
It has even less shared interest with Ouse Acres and vice versa. Arguably Foxwood has more in common with the Woodthorpe area.
In our view, this proposal represents an unwelcome diversion and could take resources away from the key task of raising public service standards in the area. Residents Associations are bested suited – and of the right scale – to identify changes that need to be made in local neighbourhoods.
They deserve more Council support.
In most built up sub-urban areas, there is little scope for redevelopment anyway with the focus being to retain existing open spaces. There is an opportunity for more public open space on land lying between the existing development and the A1237 bypass. The proposed Neighbourhood Plan boundaries exclude this land from consideration.
Ward Councillors are already aware of the need to move the extra public open space issue forward.
There may be a case for a neighbourhood plan covering the Acomb village conservation area and its immediate environs.
The “forum” organisers would be wise to focus on a smaller area like this – where there may be a need for more clarity on its future – rather than try to “boil the, proverbial, ocean”.
In the meantime residents should email the Council to oppose this unnecessary proposal.
What’s on in York: Gardening competition
Organised by the Foxwood Residents Association
Latest planning applications for the Westfield Ward
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
—-
Windsor House 22 Ascot Way York YO24 4QZ
Non-material amendment to application 18/01467/GRG3 – Reduction of building size – Alterations to building elevations – Changing main roof type to grey single ply membrane from a metal standing seam. – Change gutter detail to some of the single storey eaves – Replace rounded corners with squared corners – Reduction in pitch of the single storey roofs – Reduction in depths to Activity Room window brick and the addition of a pressed metal window surround.
Ref. No: 19/01198/NONMAT
——
7 Bachelor Hill York YO24 3BD
Installation of access ramp to front
Ref. No: 19/01154/FUL
——
48 Wetherby Road Acomb York YO26 5BY
Two storey side and single storey rear extension (resubmission).
Ref. No: 19/00998/FUL
———
Thomas Of York Ltd 55 – 57 York Road Acomb York YO24 4LN
Display of 2 no. non-illuminated projecting signs, 4 no. illuminated fascia signs, and 4 no. non illuminated vinyl graphics to the windows
Ref. No: 19/01096/ADV
——
Watermeadows Ltd 19 York Road Acomb York YO24 4LW
Proposal Condition 3 of 18/01730/FUL (Conversion and extension of apartment and commercial premises into 5no. apartments with office space (class B1) to include one and two storey rear extension and railings to front).
Reference AOD/19/00204
——
Representations can be made in favour of, or in objection to, any application via the Planning on line web site. http://planningaccess.york.gov.uk/online-applications/
NB. The Council now no longer routinely consults neighbours by letter when an application is received
What’s on in York: Safeguarding event at Acomb Explore Library, Front Street on Tuesday
£1.5 million cost for 3 football pitches
£850,000 to come from Lowfields project
The York Council courted controversy 2 years ago when it announced that the “replacement” football pitches – for those lost to the Lowfields development – would be provided on a site lying between Tadcaster Road and Bishopthorpe.
The site is nearly 3 miles from Lowfield and does not have a direct public transport link.
In December 2017, the Councils Executive approved a £400,000 contribution from the Lowfields budget towards the Bishopthorpe plan. The project will provide a new home for the Bishopthorpe White Rose Football Club.
The new pitches must be ready before the new homes, being built at Lowfields, are occupied. Work on building the homes is due to start in August with road and some other infrastructure already in place.
Now a report to a meeting taking place next week reveals that the Council is to make a substantially greater contribution to the pitch project than has hitherto been admitted.
The Council will now, additionally, contribute £110,000 from Section 106 developer payments intended to provide alternative open space.
A further £300,000 will come from a “Lowfields developer contribution”. (The Council is, of course, the developer at Lowfields).
In total, therefore, the Council plans to spend around £850,000 on the scheme which, although it includes a clubhouse, now looks to be a very expensive way of providing 3 football pitches.
The Bishopthorpe football club itself will contribute £80,000, with the balance of £1/2 million coming from the Football Foundation.
Residents are bound to be angry about this latest example of Council duplicity.
There is land available much nearer Lowfields which would benefit from open space investment. There is, for example, under-used land located between the built-up area and the ring road off Askham Lane.
…But this seems to have been overlooked as the local authority continues to snub the Westfield area.
NB. It also appears that Council officials have made no progress in finding an alternative location for the Kingsway games area. That facility is now being used as a building compound. The Council agreed 3 months ago to seek an alternative site on a nearby sports area and was to have opened negotiations with the current occupiers. Little progress seems to have been made
York Council action on Public Rights of Way?
A couple of months ago the Local Government Ombudsman criticised the York Council for the time it was taking in dealing with applications to have Public Rights of Way (PROW) declared.
The Council has a long waiting list. It can sometimes take several years for the applications to be processed.
Two applications are to be considered by the Council at a meeting being held on 25th July. They concern public footpaths at the following locations
- between Chantry Lane, Bishopthorpe and Acaster Malbis
- in woodland adjacent to Windmill Lane, Heslington
The meeting on 18th July will be told that government legislation will make some aspects of PROW decision making simpler.
The Deregulation Act 2015 will have an effect on historic rights of way.
The Act makes changes to existing legislation affecting rights of way aimed at streamlining the application procedures for new rights of way under which landowners will have a greater say.
The key area of improvement relates to the process for determining applications.
Local Authorities are given the power to divert a route at the application stage should it not be suitable (for example where it runs through property such as working yards where there is a significant risk).
Other changes include restrictions on how long an application can remain at each stage of the process, gating of rights of way and the introduction of a basic evidence test. Many of the changes are aimed at ‘historic rights of way’ – routes based on documentary evidence from before 1949.
In order to provide certainty for landowners about what rights of way exist on their land, the government intends to close the definitive maps to claims of historic paths which existed before 1949 on 1 January 2026
NB. Amongst the PROW applications in the York Council queue to be considered is one, crossing Acomb Moor, linking Foxwood Lane to Osprey Close. Safety on the link has been criticised because of lack of maintenance of one of the stile accesses.
Good for the gardens .. and the weeds
Seems the City is set too be overwhelmed by weeds this week. Ideal growing conditions mean that areas which have not been treated for weed growth are rapidly turning green.
If left untreated, weeds can break up footpath surfaces and paving leading to costly repair bills.
