Search Results for: "Housing waiting list" ...

That was the year that was – 2019

….Jan to March in west York in pictures

2019 commenced with controversy in the air. The children’s games area (known as a MUGA) on Kingsway West faced closure as part of a plan to enlarge Lincoln Court. Objectors – which included Sport England – were calmed by Council assurances that a replacement would be provided elsewhere in the ward. 12 months later and there is still no sign of a facility for children.

Volunteers were active in the area during the whole for the year. Monthly “whats’on” posters were produced and displayed on local noticeboards and social media.

What’s on Poster produced by the Foxwood Residents Association last February

Less good news in Lowfields, where the Council pressed on with the development on the football pitch. Once again alternative local facilities did not materialise. A plan from “Yorspace” to provide “communal ownership” style homes was also criticised by some local residents.

The plans for an extension to Lincoln Court, and the construction of a centre for disabled children on an adjacent site on Ascot Way, ran into more problems. The cost of the plans was found to be much higher than originally estimated. Design changes were made only weeks after the original had been given planning permission.

Some good news in February with the brief return of a skip service to Chapelfields. Unfortunately the service now appears only rarely with an increase in fly tipping one of the consequences

There was concern that some unstable trees like this one on Wetherby Road posed a safety hazard.

Trees were a popular topic of conversation during most of the year. There was broad agreement that more were needed to combat climate change. However, maintenance arrangements for existing trees – particularly those adjacent to footpaths – were hopelessly inadequate with many needing “crown lifting” to prevent accidents.

Elsewhere in the City car parking signage attracted comment. As long ago as 2003, real time information signs on approach roads to the City centre provided “real time” advanced information about parking space availability at different car parks around the City. The information was also available on the web. This mysteriously disappeared in 2012 since when congestion levels have increased as motorists drive round trying to find a space. In February, the Council appointed contractors with a remit to reintroduce the space availability service.

The Council announced that the existing Libraries management company would constinue in their role. The Council announced a £2 million boost for Acomb Library which would be expanded and fully modernised over the following 3 years. Unfortunately building works on the adjacent bowling club site would later compromise redevelopment options.

The landfill waste disposal site at Harewood Whin closed. York’s non recyclable rubbish is now incinerated at Allerton Park.

As work commenced at Lowfields on the road layout, one piece of good news was that the area was also being cleared of an invasive Knotweed infestation

The Council decided to proceed with its hugely expensive plan to provide a business club at the Guildhall. Several residents hoped that the upcoming Council elections might provide an opportunity for more reflection about the project.

Work had also started on a project to build 5 bungalows on a Council garage site on Newbury Avenue. With parking space already at a premium in the area, the main concern was the impact that vehicles, displaced from the garages, might have on parking availability.

The Post Office announced that it was closing its Lendal branch. A replacement would be provided in part of the nearby Smith’s store on Coney Street.

Later in the year it was revealed that the old Lendal PO building was likely to become a steakhouse.

There seemed to be never ending controversy over the “Spark” container village development in Piccadilly. The Council has granted the owners a 3 year lease on land formerly occupied by a tram depot. Spark failed to implement some of the planning conditions and a share of the developments profits – promised to the Council – did not materialise.

The Council was belatedly starting to get to grips with providing some sub-urban parking lay-bys. However, several of the projects were over 3 years behind schedule. Most came in a rush in March.

Fly tipping, dumping and litter were increasing problems in West York

The Coop launched an imaginative scheme where shoppers could nominate a local voluntary body to receive a grant based on what that had spent in a local store. The Foxwood Residents Association raised around £2000 from the scheme

The Joseph Rowntree Housing Trust also became more active in the Foxwood area. They tidied up the Teal Drive playground and would later in the year start a “drop in” open session at the local community centre. Sadly the slide disappeared from the playground and has not yet been restored.

The winter brought the usual problems with vehicle damage to grass verges. Part of the problem was the glacial progress being made in “eco grid” (matrix) surfacing of the verges to protect them .

The Council announced that it had produced a final, final draft Local Plan. The plan would define the size of the City for the next 25 years. Recent national population growth forecasts had been substantially refined downwards despite which some landowners and developers are currently trying to persuade an Inspector that the City should grow by more than 20%!

Following a relatively mild winter, Spring arrived in March and with it the daffodils that residents had been planting over the years.

and also other issues!

The Council was cautioned by the Ombudsman for taking several years to determine Public Right of Way (PROW) applications in the City. In west York an application for a PROW had been lodged with the council for the link across Acomb Moor which connects Foxwood Lane and Osprey Close. The York Council say it will determine the application in February 2020.

In Woodthorpe/Acomb Park a very controversial planning application was made which would have seen the area between Moor Lane and the Askham Bogs nature reserve developed. Although rejected by the local Planning Committee, the application was subject to an appeal the results of which are expected in the new year.

Flooding was never far from the news.

As well as Environment Agency works aimed at preventing flooding from rivers and water courses, the Council looked at the separate issue of surface water flooding. This relates the adequacy of drainage pipes in the urban area.

The efforts of the residents association had resulted in paths being strimmed in several areas. The areas concerned looked much improved.

The flashing speed warning sign on Wetherby Road had been removed. The sign had cautioned drivers entering the City at more than the 30 mph limit.

Councillors blamed each other for the disappearance of the sign

Empty Council garages were a source of irritation to some residents. They mean a loss of income (there are waiting lists for all garages) but also increase “on street” parking problems. One garage in Chapefields had been empty of over a year apparently waiting for a new door.

The Council published further options for the redevelopment of the Castle Piccadilly site. They would later seek planning permission for a replacement car park for Castle. It would be a multi storey building in St Georges Field.

A major revamp of the area around the railway station entrance was announced. The Queen Street bridge would be demolished.

More electric buses would be coming to York. Coincidentally an encouraging report (for bus operators) on public satisfaction with local services was published.

York Central – where next?

Following the recent decision by the Secretary of State not to call in the planning decision for York Central , City of York Council says it will “now continue to maintain momentum across the York Central site with the decision to release the next tranche of funding for the project”.

“The Council will now engage with its construction partner in finalising the design work for the enabling infrastructure; this includes the access road bridge and spine road through the site, a pedestrian bridge on Water End and a rail link to the NRM”.

There is no mention of addressing the “elephant in the room”. That is the major outstanding issue. – cycle/pedestrian movement from Leeman Road to the riverside and the City centre

The early plan showed a shared cycle track still using the (appalling) Marble Arch tunnel (which still has no waterproof membrane). Vehicle movements would be traffic light controlled, with public transport one of the main victims

This simply won’t do.

The Council needs to find an alternative route possibly via a new tunnel built to modern standards which provides access to the green spaces next to the river while also providing a traffic free cycle link to the City centre and beyond.

Te Council must address this issue in its imminent submission of a Reserved Matters planning application to open up the site.

The planning application will be funded partly by Homes England and partly from the York Central Capital budget agreed by Council in November 2018.

A report to the Councils Executive next week also sets out what opportunities can be taken, moving forward, to maximise the benefits of the York Central site; including a greater proportion of affordable homes, higher sustainable build standards, inclusion of York Central in the Clean Air Zone and an option to build a new bus lane ahead of schedule.

A report, published today, sets out the key benefits already secured, including:

· extensive pedestrian and cycle route provision into and through the site

· 20% of homes available at affordable rates,

· the highest sustainable design standards , and

· around £15m developer contributions to improve transport infrastructure to encourage more bus passengers, cyclists and pedestrians.

The report outlines that the council, while waiting for government decisions on planning and funding, will work with the York Central partnership to explore other measures to amplify these benefits.

For housing, this could mean a greater proportion of affordable homes, higher sustainable build standards and community self-build in early phases of the development.

To improve the environmental impact, the council could require sustainable energy generation on site, include York Central in the bus Clean Air Zone, increase the number of electric charging points and build a new bus lane ahead of schedule to increase more journeys by sustainable transport.

The report highlights the delays to the programme due to the referral of the planning decision to the Secretary of State, and the decision over an application for £77.1m to the government’s Housing Infrastructure Fund. The report asks the council to allocate £750,000 to fund early contractor involvement to finalise a planning application for the bridge and spine road which will allow access to the site from Water End.

The York Central Partnership (YCP) members, Homes England, Network Rail, The Railway Museum and City of York Council, have been working collaboratively for the past four years to develop proposals and assemble a £155m funding package for infrastructure works to unlock the brownfield land. City of York’s Council has played a key role in providing significant funding streams to help deliver the project and fund the enabling access and infrastructure works.

The approved outline planning application includes proposals to build 2,500 homes, 20 per cent of which will be affordable, and a commercial quarter creating up to 6,500 jobs adding a £1.16 billion boost to the economy.

The Executive meeting takes place on 18th July. The York Central report can be found by clicking here.

Work starts on Burnholme elderly persons accommodation

Work has stared on building a new 80 bed care home at the Burnholme site.

When completed, the Council will have the right to fill 25 of the beds

A lot of building work going on at Burnholme

Work is also proceeding on renovating sports facilities on the Burnholme site. A new library complex has already opened.

The care home being built on the Fordlands Road site (by Octopus Health care) will be completed in the summer of 2020. A site for another home has been reserved in the new York Central development.

The progress being made on these sites contrasts with other projects aimed at addressing the needs of the City’s increasing elderly population on the west of the City.

Tenders are only now being sought for the long awaited elderly persons facility on the Lowfields site. Other specialist homes on the west of the City, such as Windsor House and Lincoln Court have already been cleared of their elderly occupants.

One embarrassment for the Council, is the elderly persons home at Oakhaven. Residents were controversially moved from this building 3 years ago.

Despite some temporary uses, the building has remained largely unused ever since.

The Council has not been able to say when work on a replacement will start.

The Council says that it will start building houses at Lowfield this summer. Many will be “shared ownership” although there seems to have been little research done on the size of the market – among those on the waiting list – for this type of tenure.

There is, however, a lot of demand from older people – currently occupying large council and housing association houses – who want to “downsize” to bungalows or flats.

Work has started on constructing the Tudor Road access onto the Lowfields site. A new lay-by has been provided nearby.

While we remain critical of the Councils plan to build on the playing field at Lowfield, it also now seems that they may have got the mix of home types wrong.

There should have been more bungalows.

The issue of the Yorspace” communal housing development – which is not classified as “affordable” – has also still not been resolved.

New source of community information urges residents to Live Well York

City of York Council has worked alongside York CVS, Age UK, Explore York and Healthwatch York to create a growing source of high quality information and advice which promotes opportunities for residents to enjoy healthy, active and independent lives.

Live Well York supports the council’s commitment to early help and prevention, and to help people live independently and well. It has links provided by voluntary and community groups to information and advice on topics from travel, housing, carers, money and legal matters, while community activities and events are listed to encourage people to get involved with their community and combat isolation and loneliness.

Local people were involved in the development of the website and wanted a local artist to produce its signature artwork. York Museum and the Art Gallery Trust, through its Cultural Consortium for Wellbeing Service, commissioned the artwork and supported an event at York CVS. There, over 70 people took part in a collaborative event to inspire artist Stephen Lee Hodgkins. The resulting artwork features seven York community places which are among those hosting numerous projects and community opportunities which feature on the website.

Live Well York also links to the council’s new www.movemoreyork.co.uk for ideas and inspiration on keeping active, promoting physical wellbeing, activity and active travel. (more…)

York Council tenants newsletter costs criticised

A quarterly Council newsletter for tenants – costing around £7000 an edition to design, print and deliver – has been criticised.

The Streets Ahead magazine has been produced for several years and was recently subject to a re-tendering exercise.

The contract – which was awarded to a local company – covers design, editorial, printing and publication of the magazine. In total the current contract is worth £86,716.00 over 4 years

Additional costs are involved in delivering the magazine to 8000 Council tenants.

The news sheet can also be read “on line”

The Council has an inconsistent approach to providing tenants and residents with information. Housing staff rarely provide up to date information for the many public noticeboards that exist around the City.

Council web site garage leaflet. Not updated for over 6 months

Even the Council web site is sometimes hopelessly out of date.

For example, last year there was a major row when it was discovered that dozens of Council garages were lying empty despite there being a long waiting list of people wanting to rent them. The Council promised that information would be updated regularly.

6 months later and the leaflet displayed on the Councils web site has not been updated.

Potentially thousands of pounds a year in rental income is being lost while complaints about inadequate street parking continue to grow.

…and even “Streets Ahead” isn’t being used to advertise the garage vacancies.

Elderly in York to be hit as Tories plan to cut garden assistance scheme

Over a year ago, the York Council notified elderly and disabled people that it planned to scrap its garden assistance scheme. The scheme employs contractors to cut the hedges and lawns of elderly and disabled residents.

The plans produced a barrage of complaints and the threat was withdrawn

Now a report has revealed that a Tory Councillor is again planning to slash entitlement to the service. About 50% of current users will be told to make other arrangements.

It appears that some people aged over 70 with severe disabilities may continue to get the service from an estate “handymen”, but many others will miss out.

Story last year

The cuts are expected to save the Council around £40,000 a year.

The Tories claim that this cut is essential to balance the books. They forget that last week a review of the Housing Revenue Account revealed that it will have an average credit balance of over £30 million in each of the next 30 years.

This partly arises from the expected 1% per annum real terms increases in rents.

As well as kicking existing users off the programme, the report talks of establishing a “waiting list” for people who need the service.

The Councillor responsible for the proposal is Sam Lyle a youth who recently graduated from University. Quite what he knows about the challenges faced by many older residents will no doubt become clear over the next few days.

Fortunately, as we have reported before (left), there are a lot of caring students at the York and St Johns Universities who hopefully will prove to be part of the solution to this shabby proposal

In the meantime, the Council’s website is down. Anyone trying to Email Councillors is referred to a web page apparently containing a list of contact telephone numbers. http://democracy.york.gov.uk/mgCommitteeMailingList.aspx?ID=0

That web page is also currently unavailable!

Political posturing or considered debate? York Councillors opt for extra meetings

Three decisions taken by the new Council have been called in for further consideration.

The topics chosen are an eclectic mix of the important (new house building), the improbable (listing an derelict “malt house”) and the bizarre (objections to letting a new security contract)

Council house building and Newbury Avenue

Predictably the Labour group hope to divert attention away from their failure, over four years, to provide significant numbers of additional affordable homes in the City. They are “calling in” an Executive decision which sets out how more Council houses will be provided in the future. Despite the minority Labour (and Green) Groups now having a voice on the new style Executive, they are still opting to delay work starting on the new building programmes by calling for further reviews.

The “call in” specifically refers to the decision taken to review the demolition of a garage block in Newbury Avenue and replace it with 9 flats. This was the highly unpopular decision forced through by Labour when it had a Council majority. They failed to address concerns about lack of alternative car parking in the estate or the cumulative impact that additional building was having on the limited highways capacity in the area.

An alternative, much better located, site for new homes on Front Street – left derelict for 4 years by the last Council – had been suggested.

In calling in the item, Labour are also delaying a start on other – less controversial – Council housing developments in areas like Ordnance Lane.

There must be a suspicion that what Labour are really trying to do, is deflect attention away from an inquiry into their stewardship of the housing estate.

It has emerged recently that their flagship “Get York Building” programme collapsed 6 months ago when meetings were abandoned. They are likely to face some testing questions about the cost of “Get York Building” and its complete failure to achieve what its slogan title implied.

While the scale and location of new housing is clearly a matter of City wide significance, the same cannot be said of the other two issues.

Council security services

Three Green Councillors have called in the decisions made by the Executive on 25 June 2015 to “commence a procurement exercise for a comprehensive set of council wide security services, to include on site security services in all council properties, fire alarm response and investigations and the provision of the Council’s CCTV control room operation and ongoing maintenance”.

The Executive decision was simply to commence the procurement process.

It appears that the Greens are opposed to the outsourcing of CCTV monitoring although this is common place elsewhere.

They raise a series of question about the scope of the contract most of which could have been raised and answered before the Executive decision was taken.

Community Right to Bid under the Localism Act 2011 – Clementhorpe Malt House

The Council Leader – rightly – decided that this building, which has been empty since its use for storage ceased several years ago, could not reasonably be regarded as a “community asset”.

The building had been unused – and arguably an eyesore – for many years before a deal was brokered to convert it for residential use. The conversion seeks to tastefully incorporate some of the historic features of the building. The demand for malt houses is somewhat limited these days.

The fact of the matter is that, those who now feel that they want the building to be retained and in particular the local ward Councillors, have missed the boat.

They had many years to pursue an alternative use for the building but failed to do so.

The property has been sold and planning permission has been granted.

The Council should encourage the developers to get on with the building work and provide more homes on what is a brownfield site.

Hopefully the new more inclusive decision making process – due to be introduced in the autumn – will allow issues like these to be fully explored before decisions are taken.

Spurious “calling in” tactics simply waste time and tie up the Councils limited administrative resources.

York Local Plan – little common ground emerging

Fig 1 Economic growth forecasts click to view

Those York Councillors who attended a briefing session last week on the Local Plan will have found out little new.

The disconnect between Labour’s, highly optimistic, economic growth assumptions and population projections remain, although figures provided by specialist consultants are beginning to paint a more realistic picture.

A study by Oxford economists suggest that as many as 13,000 new jobs could be created in the City over the next 15 years. However, about half of these will simply replace jobs which are being lost.

Fig 2 Population growth click to view

The same team says that there could be an additional 24,300 people wanting to live in York by 2030. This would generate a demand for about 450 additional homes per year (see figs 1 and 2 right).

The Council has finally admitted that 75% of the projected population growth can be attributed to immigration, rather than “providing affordable homes for York families” – the claim used by Labour to justify their “Big City” growth plans in the past.

Fig 3 Summary click to enlarge

In summary (fig 3) the consultants conclude that the York economy should grow by around 2.8% on average each year.

The Local Plan agreed in February 2011 had agreed that around 550 additional homes were needed in the City each year.

Population projections vary enormously depending on when the calculation has been undertaken (see below)

Changing population projections

A second set of Consultants (ARUP) conceded that a straight projection of the 2011 estimates would produce an annual requirement for 638 homes pa.

They suggest that this should be increased to 838 to reflect an “assumed higher economic growth rate post 2021”.

It is this argument, about the level of economic growth that the City could sustain, that is likely to be the key area of debate as the Council moves forward to decide how many – and where – additional homes should be built.

If the lower figures are used then – taking into account an allowance for the large number of windfall opportunities which occur in York – it should be possible to produce a Plan which respects the City’s green field setting.

The other question which needs to be addressed honestly is whether the homes will actually be built?

Housing demand is increasing again following 5 years when house prices in the City have been stable. Over 5000 outstanding planning permissions currently exist but – partly as a result of the recession – house building levels have been sluggish (fig 4)

Fig 4 Housing completions in York click to enlarge

Some changes are likely with central government acting to remove the requirement for affordable housing quotas on developments of under 10 homes.

Council Housing

A review of the Councils policy on purchasing properties to rent on the open market is also overdue now with the recently announced 6 new (2 bedroomed) Council homes – scheduled to be built on a site on Pottery Lane* – apparently likely to cost over £170,000 each when site values are included.

There are dozens of modern 2 bedroomed property available on the open market for lower prices.

*Residents can view the plans for the Pottery Lane development on Thursday 11 December at St Wulstan’s Church, Fossway from 4pm – 6:30pm.

NB. The latest Council house waiting list figure for York show that it has reduced to 1348.

Labour Leadership contest

The new Leader of the Labour group on the York Council is also likely to become the new Leader of the City, albeit only for about 4 months.

The York electorate will have had no say in the making of this appointment. Hopefully Labour Councillors will belatedly offer some transparency in the process.

It would, therefore, be good to see potential candidates tell York residents what they think that they could bring to the job of Council Leader?

The Leadership of the City is important and under new regulations it is the Leader who makes all the Cabinet appointments.

The Council needs a Leader with experience. To hit the ground running you probably need to have been a member of the Council for 10 years, with another 10 years having been spent in business, education or administration. This should provide the minimum necessary range of knowledge and skills.

The Press have given their view on the runners and riders.

Several of the Councillors listed have less than 4 years service on the Council – meaning they have only ever won one election. Even the late incumbent, whose inexperience led to his eventual downfall, had served for over 4 years when he took up the post.

So you should rule out Levene, Cunningham Cross and Barnes as serious contenders.

Williams likewise but he may claim five years on the Plymouth Council gives him an edge, or at least some geographical flexibility. He is less tainted than many by the Alexander years having currently a low profile portfolio role on finance and internal management. Poor transparency, inadequate management information and sometimes chaotic customer service interfaces suggest that he has made little positive impact at West Offices. He does however have some work experience and indeed tries to juggle working in PR while drawing a Cabinet members salary. Has recently announced that he is leaving the Westfield Ward in search of a safer seat on the east of fhe City.

Some others have failed even more spectacularly with their portfolios.

TSL presided over indecision on Social Care resulting in projects like the Lowfields care village running 3 years behind schedule and with an auditors report published which criticised a huge budget deficit in care services. The number of affordable housing units built actually fell during her tenure. Her only recent “proper” job was running a coffee stall on the market albeit she now has a lot of experience on the Council. Likely to be more popular with the party activists than the City generally.
Dave Merrett, although more able than some would give credit for, failed as the Council Leader in 2002/3, suffering a heavy election defeat in May 2003 and is now tainted by the Lendal bridge scandal and the dogmatic, unnecessary and costly introduction of 20 mph zones. Many other transport projects ran behind schedule during the days of his regime. Has held an engineering job in the rail industry for many years and is the most experienced of the likely contenders.
Sonia Crisp is credited with putting the word vanity in “vanity projects”. Self publicity is no substitute for competence and she has still to explain the “Grand Departy” debacle. No relevant work experience.
Which leaves Julie Gunnell, last years Lord Mayor? Some might say that she jumped ship from the Alexander Cabinet in 2012 because she could see the way things were going. She remained publicly loyal to the old regime even when her father (Ken King) resigned from the Labour Group and became Leader of a rival “Independent Labour Group”. Julie Gunnell does have some administrative experience, has better interpersonal skills than most Councillors but is not the world’s most convincing public speaker. Still she improved during her year as Lord Mayor and may be someone who could calm a warring Council chamber for a few months. No doubt being named as dark horse on this web site will scupper her chances. Shame as one family holding the leaderships of two Groups on the Council would be another first for the City.

Odds

Williams evens

Gunnell 2/1

TSL 3/1

Cunningham Cross & Levene 5/1

Merrett 25/1

Barnes 50/1

Crisp 100/1

Others 250/1

« Previous
1
…
6
7
8
9
Next »