PEOPLE power has saved Clifford's Tower from a controversial new neighbour - but councillors still hope something can be salvaged from the £60 million scheme to extend York's Coppergate Centre.

City of York Council's planning committee voted yesterday for officers to draw up a report on why Land Securities' application for a shopping complex between the tower and Piccadilly should be refused.

Although this is not an outright refusal of the scheme, it is in line with Government guidelines on the procedures for rejecting applications and councillors also hope it will give the company a chance to re-think the unpopular parts of its plan before the final decision is taken.

Speaking to the Evening Press after the meeting, planning committee chairman Councillor Dave Merrett said last-minute information on the detrimental effect on air quality caused by increased traffic had helped him make his own decision to reject the scheme, which has been heavily criticised.

On a recent site visit, when chalk lines and cherry pickers were used to give councillors an idea of the scale of the development, local residents heckled to make their opposition known and architects, historians and conservationists have all raised objections.

"We do actually listen - as you can see from this decision," said Coun Merrett.

"It is extremely disappointing in the sense that it is vital for the future of the city that we strengthen our retailing position.

"We have to work with the developers to find an alternative solution that better matches York people's concerns.

"We hope Land Securities will recognise what the York public have been saying and find a different way to achieve a mutually beneficial development."

Richard Akers, Land Securities senior development surveyor, said it was still too early to say whether it would resubmit a plan which could find favour with local people by moving the development further away from Clifford's Tower.

"Our existing Coppergate Centre continues to be a very successful feature of York's city centre retail scheme," he said.

"We are long-term investors and have held investments in York since 1960 and plan to continue to play an active part in the development of the city."

Opposition group, the York Alliance, greeted the council's decision with delight. "The committee displayed wisdom and courage and is to be congratulated for protecting the heritage of this ancient city from insensitive overdevelopment," said a spokesman.

Why mighty shops scheme bit the dust

The £60 million scheme to extend York's Coppergate Centre has been dramatically thrown out by planners. Chief Reporter MIKE LAYCOCK examines the troubled background to the project

IT has been seen as the city centre's answer to cut-throat competition from out-of-town shopping complexes. It has also been seen as a disastrous intrusion into the city's historic core, the neighbour-from-hell for Clifford's Tower.

But whether you like it or not, you've certainly had plenty of time to consider how the area between the historic tower and Piccadilly should be re-developed.

The saga began in the early 1990s, when the former York City Council unveiled a £50 million development scheme for the site, occupied primarily by a handy but unattractive shoppers' car park.

The ambitious project involved new shops, including a massive department store, flats, an extension to the nearby crown court complex and a new wide bridge over the Foss. There would be extra multi-storey parking in Piccadilly to more than replace spaces lost near the tower.

It was the biggest shops development in the city centre since the Coppergate Centre was built in the late 1970s, and it would provide an effective answer to the competition posed by out-of-town shopping centres.

The plans won fairly widespread acclaim, although there were some concerns that the project might slew too much business away from the traditional retail heart of the city in Coney Street and Davygate. Then York waited for a firm planning application to come in ... and waited.

But, for several years, nothing happened. The national economy was faltering, and there wasn't the confidence for the then developers Wimpey to press ahead with the development.

Only earlier this year did Land Securities, who had taken over as developer for the scheme, finally lodge an application with City of York Council.

It differed from the original scheme in several ways. The crown court extension had disappeared. The complex was somewhat closer to Clifford's Tower. A caf development in Piccadilly resembled the Queen Mary liner, according to some critics. Caf Andros was also set for the chop.

Public uproar followed. People said the development was too close to the tower, they didn't like the ocean liner and they wanted to save the Caf Andros, a listed building.

The scheme was then revised to take account of such objections. The caf was saved from the demolition men. The ocean liner was replaced by a sleeker building (which some compared to a tram). And the height of the shops fronting on to the tower was reduced, but the complex remained as close as ever.

Some welcomed the changes, but this time, the campaign against the scheme became more concerted, co-ordinated by a new organisation known as the York Alliance. That opposition bore fruit yesterday when planners decided the scheme was unacceptable.

Converted for the new archive on 30 June 2000. Some images and formatting may have been lost in the conversion.