Significant changes to Lowfields Plans

Planning applications (see below) have been submitted which would see changes made to the Lowfields development. Many are relatively minor although some may cause concern for neighbours

Working hours

Saturday working until 3:00pm will be allowed on parts of the site. A Council official has already agreed to these changes which will permit work to continue on internal works, external paving and brick laying.

Officials say that the proposal is in line with government relaxations in the wake of the pandemic and lockdown restrictions.

The concession lasts until 2nd June 2021.

Boundaries

The perimeter railings are now to be retained. This proposal will be welcomed by many. The railings are generally in good condition and offer enhanced security protection.

Likely to be less welcome is a plan to install a 1.8 meter high closed boarded fence immediately behind the railings. While this may improve privacy, such arrangements have not proved to be successful elsewhere (Hob Stone, Cornlands Road/Redder Rad snicket).

The are maintenance problems for both sets of fences. Progress for mammals like hedgehogs is obstructed by close boarded fences, while an opportunity for compensatory planting is missed.

Undergrowth inevitably builds up between the two layers which is difficult to control.

We will be writing to the planning authorities to say that the inner fence should be replaced with screen planting, which would be better for both wildlife and for the environment.

Other changes

A complete list of changes is reproduced below.

The ridge and eves heights on the houses are being reduced while photovoltaic cells are being installed to generate power.

There still has been no statement from the Council about the future of the site reserved for “public buildings” or of the Yorspace communal living plots.

York transport and planning policies stalling

The decision of the York Councils planning committee to delay a decision, on a plan to replace the Castle Car park with a multi storey alternative at St Georges Field, throws into contrast the conflicting policies of the present Council.

The multi-story option emerged after nearly 2 years of public agonising. £2.2 million has already been spent on design work, consultants fees and consultation costs. The resulting plan didn’t suit everyone (including us) but it did present a way forward.

Multi storey car parks are usually ugly, there can be security issues, they concentrate vehicle movements onto limited sections of the road network and – in the case of the St Georges Field site – park visitors to far away from their ultimate destinations whether that be shops, work or hospitality outlets.

The Council had submitted its planning application despite already acknowledging that changes to the Castle car might have to wait until the, Coronavirus prompted recession, has eased.

No great problem.

The Castle car park has been there for decades and it is the parking location of first choice for many shoppers and visitors. In July and August this summer it was rammed full.

Castle car park full to overflowing this summer

Now a Planning Committee has rejected the St Georges Field plan by 8 votes to 7. The key vote was cast by Cllr J Barker a hitherto low profile LibDem Councillor from Poppleton. The same meeting also deferred consideration of a new housing scheme on the former Castle Mills car park site.

That car park was lost to general use over a year ago and is still unavailable.

Like the odd decision last year, when Labour Councillors bounced the Council into pledging to stop through traffic from using Lendal Bridge, the impracticalities and contradictions in policy now threatened the economic recovery of the City.

The Council has said it will spend £40,000 consulting on the future of car parking in the City centre. If it appoints consultants to undertake the exercise then they will come under pressure from sectional interest groups including the “folksy fringe” who really don’t want any city centre car parking provision at all.

Personal transport remains the preferred mode for getting around for many people. Post COVID, cycling levels have fallen and public transport use has collapsed.

Meanwhile the number of City centre shops going into administration is creeping upwards.

The beginning of the new year – traditionally a poor time of year for traders – may see even more businesses facing ruin.

Some consistency from the York Council is required to avoid an economic collapse

York Central

Residents will wake up this morning to discover that the York central development has passed another milestone. It now has the necessary planning permissions to permit a start to be made on site.

A Public Inquiry will still be held to determine whether Leeman Road near the Railway Museum can be stopped up.

Overall the development should provide a welcome boost for jobs and homes in the City.

The Council has, however, failed to recognise the importance of “first impressions” and the practicalities of accessing the site by various modes of transport.

*Accesses to the York Central site are unwelcoming*

The proposed one way system through the Leeman Road tunnel is ridiculous. It means more congestion and a cycle ride which will be both awkward and – in wet weather – unnecessarily unpleasant.

The access from Wilton Rise is hopeless for all but the fittest cyclists and is totally inaccessible for the disabled. The promised new cycle bridge from Chancery Rise should have been incorporated in the latest planning application but no Councillor seems to have had the guts to highlight the issue.

So off to a bad start then.

Lets hope the developers come up with some solutions to these issues before the new properties are occupied.

Sparks fanned as Council lets down taxpayers

The controversial Spark container village on Piccadilly will not have to provide a rent bond or guarantor for their new lease.

The requirements were agreed in February by Executive Councillor Nigel Ayre as part of a package aimed at securing taxpayers interests.

The Spark owners had promised a share of profits on the scheme when, in 2016, they first promoted the idea of moving second hand shipping containers onto the Piccadilly site.

The profits never materialised and there were delays in making rent payments and in fulfilling planning conditions.

Other causes of concern related to the appearance of the site – which is located in a Conservation Area – and the effect on nearby residential properties.

Yesterday Cllr Ayre caved into pressure and ditched the conditions which had been aimed at securing the councils financial interests.

He was warned by lawyers that, under current government COVID regulations, the Council might be unable to take back possession of the site even if rent arrears built up.

Currently the site is occupied on a “tenancy at will” basis.

The decision has drawn criticism from other traders and professionals one of whom has called for an inquiry into the whole affair (left).

Giant phone mast refused planning permission

Residents have won their battle to prevent a huge 5G phone mast being erected on Bellhouse Way.

The 20 metre high mast would have been located next to the Foxwood Community Centre.

The proposal from Hutchinson/Clarke Telecom was heavily criticised by the residents association, ward Councillors and neighbours. They were concerned that the mast would dominate the residential streetscape, affect footpath widths, impede sight lines and could have facilitated criminals to use the cabinets to gain access to nearby properties.

The Council gives the impact on visual amenity as its main reason for refusing the application. The full decision notice can be read by clicking here

While the Telecoms Company could appeal against the decision we hope that they will now stand back and reflect.

A more obvious location for their mast would be on Foxwood Lane next to the Thanet Road sports area.This is well away from the nearest dwelling.

The existing mast cabinets could be moved there as could those which are currently located at the entrance to the Rugby Club car park (which also cause sight line problems for drivers).

Still, at least in this case, the Council seems to have heeded the views of the local community.

Residents to lose influence on planning decisions

The York Council will consider next week its reaction to controversial changes to planning laws being promoted by the government.

Although some of the proposals will be welcomed – they include commitments to green space and tree planting – other look set to reduce the amount of influence that local communities have on what is built in their area.

The government also seems to be willing to address the problem of delays on sites which already have planning permission (e.g. the British Sugar site on Boroughbridge Road) and other derelict sites that developers have put in their “land banks” (e.g. the site next to the Barbican).

There are no proposals, however, which would force Local Authorities to release unused land and empty buildings for reuse.

But the general drift away from community control on planning applications will be seen by many as a step in the wrong direction. Zoning land for “Growth” (areas suitable for substantial development), “Renewal” (areas suitable for development), and areas that are “Protected” (e.g. Green Belt) simply ignores the knock on effect that the scale and timing of development can have on a local community .

The proposal also sets the percentage of affordable homes which must be provided in new developments of over 50 homes, and how they will be allocated (first time buyers will be offered 25% of them)

The proposals will allow retail premises to change to offices, or vice versa, without the need for planning permission.

Existing legislation allows for permitted development rights to be used which facilitate the conversation of existing offices to residential units.

The report also confirms that 14 developers in York have applied since March to extend the working hours on their sites. The concession will end in March 2021.

Residents can respond to the consultation via this link (click).

Still time to share your views on Station plans says Council

We are reminding people to have their say on plans to improve York Station Front with the removal of Queen Street Bridge and a reorganisation of the transport interchange in front of the station.

Comments on the new plans can be made until Thursday 20 August. People will still be able to make representations after this date. Following this, a report will be taken to the planning committee later this year.

The revised plans, which have been submitted for consultation, follow comments raised throughout the 2019 Station front planning process. As part of this, an addendum will be included to modify several areas of the original planning application, following further consultation with partners, residents and station users.

The key changes to the scheme include:

A redesigned multi-storey car park. After consulting with Historic England, plans for the car park have been revised to better respect the heritage of the railway and York RI. This will also move all the station parking into one area making it better visually.
The layout of parcel square has been redesigned so it is more in keeping with station heritage, and in consultation with existing parcel square tenants to give them a new location in the remodelled station.
On-street parking spaces removed from Queen Street to allow a safer cycle route to promote active travel, whilst reducing congestion around the station.

(more…)

Gale Lane flats plan grows larger

A committee will decide whether to agree to a proposal to provide 8 flats and 2 bungalows on the site of 61A Gale Lane.

While the redevelopment of the site has been on the cards for several years the developers plans have grown over the years.

In 2017 planning permission was granted for 5 apartments plus a pair of bungalows.

A year later and this had grown to 7 apartments plus the bungalows.

The latest revision would see an even larger development.

One of the main areas of objection is likely to be traffic generation with additional vehicle movements adding to those being generated by the adjacent “Lowfield Green” development.

Residents wishing to object to the plans can do so at the planning committee meeting (click) which takes place on Thursday 20th August.

Further objections can be registered through the Councils on line portal https://planningaccess.york.gov.uk/online-applications/ quoting Reference 20/00494/FULM &/or by email to planning.comments@york.gov.uk

British Sugar Site

Much of the British Sugar development site on Boroughbridge Road has now been levelled. It remains unclear when construction of the long delayed homes will start.

In the meantime one resident has commented that some of the trees on the site – scheduled for retention because they provide a wildlife habitat – seem to have disappeared. The Council has been asked to investigate.

The old Manor school site does not seem to have been affected,.

Sparks set to fly over Spark decision

There has been an angry response to the planning committees decision to extend the planning permission for the Spark container village on Piccadilly. They agreed to a 2 year extension although the government was only suggesting a 12 month, post COVID-19, relaxation.

A prominent local architect Matthew Laverack has now written to the media to criticise the decision (right).

It has been claimed that some members did not declare an interest in the application despite close contacts with the applicants. Several are believed to be customers of the establishment. Some had made representations in favour of an extension of the lease on the site while others were executive members covered by the code of collective responsibility.

This has prompted allegations of cronyism and a complaint has been lodged under the Councillors “code of conduct.” It is likely that the investigation into any such complaints would take months to resolve. Spark will be able to continue to trade in the interim, provided that they adhere to the terms of the planning consent and fulfil the requirements of the proposed lease extension.

Spark have yet to make any net rent or profit share payments. When last published, some business rates payments were also outstanding. The businesses modest contribution had not even covered the costs to the taxpayer of providing services to the site.

In 2016 Spark had forecast a surplus of £213,000 on operations over a 3 year period.

Cllr Nigel Ayre agreed at a meeting which took place on 14^th February to renew the Spark lease for 2 years. However, in the light of the large number of complaints from residents and the failure of Spark to make payments to the Council, several conditions were imposed (see left) .

The current lease has ended so the business is operating on a “tenancy at will”.

Taxpayers will be looking very closely over the next few weeks to see whether all the lease conditions have been fulfilled.

If not then the site will need to be cleared.

Even if only used for car parking, it would at least bring in an income for the Council. It could provide, in what are difficult times, accessible spaces which could benefit other City centre small traders not least those operating in the Shambles market. .

Sadly the impending recession means that the opportunity to permanently redevelop the Piccadilly site for the benefit of the City may have passed the Council by for now at least.

« Previous
1
2
3
4
…
27
Next »