THE planning committee recently took the strong and correct decision to refuse permission for the large and, quite frankly, wrong housing development for the Skeldergate site (March 29).
Let us now hope a more human scheme can be worked out which is appropriate for Bishophill.
I was, however, concerned when in his opening remarks to the committee about the refused scheme, the acting chairman, Coun Brumby, said "we do not have to decide whether it is the best scheme - just whether it is acceptable".
This sort of thinking is far too defensive and sends out the wrong message to developers. Why on earth should we not insist on the best possible development for this site?
By this I do not mean gold-plated taps and marble bathrooms but superior architecture and innovation in energy saving - something to be in the running for a design award.
Few sites like this remain in the centre of York. Let us draw the line in the sand now, while we still have the chance.
Hugh Milne,
Tuke House,
Cromwell Road, York.
...I APPLAUD City of York Council planning committee's decision to reject the proposal by Bryant Homes to develop the NCP car park in Skeldergate.
During the debate, committee members expressed concern at the sheer size and scale of the proposed development of 145 flats within a conservation area inside the city walls. Surely if the site is to be developed, it should be done so with sensitivity to its surroundings and in character with such an historic city.
The planning committee's version of York reflects the views expressed by the residents of Bishophill. It is a shame the developers ignored those views with their profit-driven mass development, missing an opportunity of providing houses which could have contributed positively to the local area.
K Molloy,
Buckingham Street, York.The best for York
THE planning committee recently took the strong and correct decision to refuse permission for the large and, quite frankly, wrong housing development for the Skeldergate site (March 29).
Let us now hope a more human scheme can be worked out which is appropriate for Bishophill.
I was, however, concerned when in his opening remarks to the committee about the refused scheme, the acting chairman, Coun Brumby, said "we do not have to decide whether it is the best scheme - just whether it is acceptable".
This sort of thinking is far too defensive and sends out the wrong message to developers. Why on earth should we not insist on the best possible development for this site?
By this I do not mean gold-plated taps and marble bathrooms but superior architecture and innovation in energy saving - something to be in the running for a design award.
Few sites like this remain in the centre of York. Let us draw the line in the sand now, while we still have the chance.
Hugh Milne,
Tuke House,
Cromwell Road, York.
...I APPLAUD City of York Council planning committee's decision to reject the proposal by Bryant Homes to develop the NCP car park in Skeldergate.
During the debate, committee members expressed concern at the sheer size and scale of the proposed development of 145 flats within a conservation area inside the city walls. Surely if the site is to be developed, it should be done so with sensitivity to its surroundings and in character with such an historic city.
The planning committee's version of York reflects the views expressed by the residents of Bishophill. It is a shame the developers ignored those views with their profit-driven mass development, missing an opportunity of providing houses which could have contributed positively to the local area.
K Molloy,
Buckingham Street, York.
Updated: 11:14 Wednesday, April 10, 2002
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article