Frozen river, 25 Dec 2010

In recent days and weeks I’ve been looking through a lot of photos for some calendars I’m making, and have been reminded of the remarkable and rare sight of a frozen River Ouse, on this day, Christmas Day, in 2010.

It doesn’t feel like it was a whole nine years ago, but apparently it was.

I wrote about it at the time, and included some photos, quite small.

As I’m writing two pages today (partly to make up for not adding anything yesterday in my so-called ‘December Daily‘), I’m not going to add any more words to this page — please revisit the 2010 page for the contemporary account of The Days the Ouse Froze Over — but a couple of photos follow as a reminder of that very harsh winter weather at this time in 2010.

Geese on frozen Ouse, 25 Dec 2010

Frozen Ouse, Clifton, 25 Dec 2010

The post From the archives: a frozen Ouse, 25 Dec 2010 appeared first on York Stories.

Rawcliffe Meadows, 25 March 2019

Previously, before I had quite a lengthy summer break, we were looking at a phone box on Bootham. From there, heading out of town on the same road, we pass Clifton Green, and we’re on Shipton Road. We pass an entrance to Homestead Park, and to our left is increasing greenery, including Clifton Park, Clifton Ings, Rawcliffe Ings, and an area known as Rawcliffe Meadows. Beyond them is the River Ouse. A much-used Sustrans cycle/pedestrian route cuts through the meadows and the ings.

In this area of the ings are flood banks — barrier banks — built up in the late 20th century to try to contain and control the Ouse when it floods. There’s one close to the river’s edge, and another some distance away running through Rawcliffe Meadows.

The ings and the meadows here are part of my local patch, and through the course of more than a couple of decades living in the Clifton area I’ve walked and cycled through this precious landscape many times. Its preciousness wasn’t immediately obvious to me, as a younger person, but over the years the various details of it, observing the place over the years and the changing seasons, makes a more coherent picture, of its parts and its growth and its boundaries.

Anyway … I can’t go getting all lyrical and sentimental about it, because I’ve got to write a piece I’ve been trying to get together for some months, since I realised that the Environment Agency’s work to alter the flood defences also included this area, and involved quite a lot of environmental change/damage/destruction.

This has had some coverage, but not much. I wonder if it will get a lot more coverage when the many users of the cycle track and the many people who walk in Rawcliffe Meadows and the ings see the tree felling, and the works compound on the cornfield, and the removal of historic hedges and boundary walls. Probably later, in summers to come, people who pass through here will wonder why the wildflowers they used to see every summer are absent from the places they used to be. But it’s about much more than pretty wildflowers.

The planning applications to decide whether this work takes place are due to be decided by the planning committee on Thursday 12 September 2019. The scheme is recommended for approval. There are two applications, one for the barrier bank work and one for an access road into it.

19/00007/FULM  |  19/00009/FUL

Having looked at and absorbed as much of the information as I can, and having started reading it with as open a mind as possible, I have to say that the impact of the proposed scheme looks pretty disastrous to me, and it’s all quite depressing, though clearly the homes at the northern end of this area on and around Shipton Road need to be protected, after residents there have endured the trauma of their houses flooding in the past.

Flooding in York, as we know, has had devastating consequences for so many households, and businesses, so it would be difficult for councillors to vote against something that is being promoted as the way to protect the properties in the area. On the other hand, this proposed scheme is so environmentally damaging on so many levels.

A recent article in the local press, headed ‘Major York flood defence work delayed – by council planning process‘, seemed to be suggesting that something plainly entirely good and beneficial offered by the Environment Agency was being held up by the city council’s planning department being a bit slow/slack/rubbish. As I see it, the planning system is responding exactly as it should, taking time to gather the detail most of us don’t think about. Having looked at the further detail more closely I wish they’d delay it a bit longer. I don’t think most people realise what the impact of this is going to be over a large area.

There was so much complex detail that I couldn’t tackle it earlier as I didn’t know where to start. Thank goodness for the officer reports, summarising it. (On this link and this link.) Even then, these documents are quite long, and took a long time to read. I had to keep pausing and going off to do other things to keep it in perspective, as personally I found it a difficult read, realising what will be destroyed to raise and extend a flood bank.

I thought I’d include extracts from the officer reports that I found particularly striking. Many of them include the abbreviations SSSI – Site of Special Scientific Interest and SINC – Site of Importance for Nature Conservation. All these acronyms can be a bit alienating, but please don’t give up yet – we’re talking about a wildlife-rich area containing several different types of habitat, carefully managed and enhanced by many volunteers over many years. It’s described well in the officer report:

An ecologically high quality site is a product of living elements and their care, management and development over time. The use of the site by visiting wildlife is something to which wildlife becomes habituated over time.

We seem to have come to a time when all that is to be disturbed and damaged.

Officer’s opinion is that there will be a significant effect at a National level in the long term from the loss of SSSI habitat. There is uncertainty in the success of habitat creation and restoration, with time taken to reach target condition in the tens
of years (20-30yrs+), and only then with long term effort in management and monitoring

… There will be a permanent loss of 0.9ha of SSSI through the enlargement of the flood bank

… The 25.13ha of MG4 grassland in Clifton Ings and Rawcliffe Meadows SSSI is 1.67% of the National resource. The proposed development would have a permanent impact on approximately 2.3ha of the SSSI. It would be exceptional for the Local Planning Authority to permit such harm

The area affected includes not just the obvious part of the flood bank in the open meadowland where the cycle track is, but everything alongside the existing barrier bank and a large area continuing on from that in both directions, up to the Rawcliffe country park and into Homestead Park in the other direction. An area inhabited by many creatures, great and small, particularly in and around Rawcliffe Meadows.

… The SINC supports a medium breeding population of Great Crested Newts across several small ponds and scrapes. There will be disturbance and temporary loss to terrestrial habitat within 500m of breeding ponds.

… Using Natural England’s rapid risk assessment tool as a guide it is likely that works will result in wildlife offences and therefore works will have to be carried out under a European Protected Species Licence

… Trenches and other excavations should be backfilled before nightfall, or a ramp installed to allow amphibians and other fauna that may enter the excavations to easily exit.

As mentioned above, the work also requires an access road and a site compound, which involves another area of habitat destruction.

… The proposed works (access road and site compound) will result in the temporary loss of habitat for and disturbance to a range of protected and notable species.

… As well as farmland birds, there will be the temporary loss of habitat and disturbance for a range of other species including Roe Deer, Toads, Barn Owls, and Hedgehogs.

So that gives us some idea of the impact on the SSSI, and some of the creatures it supports. Perhaps most of us don’t fully understand the value of the SSSI, and most of us won’t have seen the larger mammals that inhabit the area (though regular visitors may have noticed foxes, quite often). But I think we all notice when trees are felled, and perhaps when hedges are removed. There’s going to be a fair bit of that kind of thing too.

… The new access will be approximately 26m wide where it ties into Shipton Road and will require a length of hedge to be removed.

That’s a hedge next to the main road, so perhaps that won’t be seen as too bad. But that’s just part of it.

Hedgerow and tree removal would occur, in particular where the embankment would run through the cornfield, along the general extent of the existing barrier (which is to be removed) and where the southern extension is proposed. The EA
have advised that works will be adjusted on site where possible to avoid loss and the impact as shown on the Tree Plan drawings are worse case scenario. This worse case scenario includes a significant length of mature native species
hedgerow alongside Clifton Park that it may not be possible to replant. The tree plans show approx 60 individual trees plus groups of trees will possibly have to be removed.

(Bold emphasis added to the above.)

Gate to the cornfield, site of the proposed access road and site compound

The area sounds like it will be barely recognisable in places, doesn’t it, once this work is underway.

There are other aspects that perhaps only seem like a loss to those of us who’ve got to know the place over many years. A characterful section of brick wall and old hedgerow mark one of the boundaries of the old Clifton Hospital site, and because they’re just inside the ‘dry side’ of the existing barrier bank they’re going to be removed too, thereby removing part of the landscape character and its history.

19th century brick wall, former boundary to Clifton Park Hospital

A report on the ‘cultural heritage’ of the area states:

Groundworks for the proposed raising of the Barrier Bank could impact on two areas of nondesignated ridge and furrow earthworks and a 19th century boundary wall associated with the former Clifton Hospital.

and states that:

The Scheme would not significantly alter the character of the historic landscape or how it is understood.

I disagree. Perhaps it’s only when you’ve lived near a place and walked through it and looked at it closely for decades in different light and at different times of day that you feel a connection to aspects of its heritage and understand their cultural importance. And also appreciate their quiet beauty.

Former boundary to Clifton Park Hospital, and the hospital’s chapel, April 2015

About 15 years ago when I first walked through Rawcliffe Meadows with a digital camera I was rather fascinated by that picturesque and characterful brick wall, and wondered about its significance. Once I recognised its significance I was glad it had been retained. It reminds me of the orchards of the former hospital.

It took me a while longer to recognise and appreciate the ridge and furrow remnant near Blue Beck.

Remnant of ridge and furrow near Blue Beck, Jan 2017

Homestead Park

It’s not just about the meadows and ings. The extension of the flood bank will affect other much-valued places alongside. Particularly worrying is the proposed work through part of Homestead Park, which risks ruining the wilder section of this much-loved park, but has presumably been agreed to by the Joseph Rowntree Trust. There’s no comment by them on the planning portal, and very little detail I could find, except that it presumably involves cutting down some trees. The plan for this area includes the suggestion

 Any felled logs could be retained on site and carved as sculpture, seating or play features

— it’s not logs that are felled, is it, it’s trees, which then become logs. As I recall there’s no shortage of logs in that area, but we may soon be lamenting our shortage of trees.

The Design and Access Statement (PDF here) includes towards the end details of how many vehicle movements are expected and what these heavy lorries will be bringing.

Extract from the Design and Access Statement – construction related traffic

From the dates on the above, it appears that the Environment Agency thought that work would be well underway by now.

‘Compensatory habitat’

There are of course proposals to try to make good some of the damage done, particularly to the SSSI parts of the work area. As the officer report states, ‘the Environment Agency’s proposals include the last resort of compensatory habitat.’

The compensatory habitat will be delivered on land adjacent to the SSSI and owned by the Environment Agency, known as Rawcliffe Ings. Rawcliffe Ings is some 12ha in area and is in the north-west corner of the application site (between
Rawcliffe Park and Ride and Country Park and the river)

I’m no expert, but I don’t think you can just roll up a wildflower meadow like a carpet and lay it somewhere else. According to the report, the replacement will be achieved through ‘translocation of turves, green hay spreading and collected seeds’. I hope that will work, but it seems to be generally acknowledged that it will take a long long time to become something akin to what’s there now.

Why is it recommended for approval?

The officer’s report acknowledges that

The proposed extension to the barrier bank and the pumping station are both in NPPF terms “inappropriate development”

– and that with regard to the effect on a SSSI  ‘it would be exceptional for the Local Planning Authority to permit such harm’.

All things considered then, one might wonder how this application then ends up being recommended for approval. As with all similar applications, harm and benefit is weighed up, and in this case, the officer report concludes that

The works are required due to issues with the stability of the existing bank and as part of a wider programme to improve flood defences throughout the city.

It outlines the ‘very special circumstances’ that lead to the recommendation to approve:

… the benefits of the scheme; managing and reducing flood risk are deemed to be very special circumstances which clearly outweigh the harm to the Green Belt and other identified harm and make the proposals acceptable in application of Green Belt policy.

…Approval is recommended because the proposed works will bring significant community benefit, by reducing flood risk to a considerable area.

Clearly, from the number of objections, many don’t agree and don’t see a significant community benefit in these proposals.

Though it appears it wouldn’t matter whether the planning committee approve it or not, as the report also reminds us that the Environment Agency has special powers.

The EA state that the bank needs repairs in any event and these would, if permission were not granted, be undertaken under the Reservoirs Act 1975 i.e. without planning permission.

So perhaps it just remains to send heartfelt thanks to the Friends of Rawcliffe Meadows for their work in this area over many decades.

I hope the end result of the Environment Agency’s work isn’t as devastating to the environment as it looks like it might be.

Thanks for reading this rather lengthy piece. Further information can be found in the links below.

. . . . .

I hope to write more frequently for these pages after my long summer break on gardening leave. After a day spent compiling the above, I would appreciate your virtual coffees even more than before. Thank you for your support of this long-running record of York and its changes.

. . . . .

Further information

Agenda for the planning committee meeting, which includes links to the officer reports quoted above

Friends of Rawcliffe Meadows website

Clifton Ings Barrier Bank – The Problem – from the Environment Agency

‘Rawcliffe was completely overlooked and constituents there feel neglected’ – MP Anne McIntosh on the floods in November 2000 and the effect on the Shipton Road area.

The post ‘Very special circumstances': impacts of the Clifton and Rawcliffe flood defence plans appeared first on York Stories.

Work begins on Scarborough Bridge (4 Dec 2018)

From one bridge, linked with the lines into the old station, to another bridge, carrying the York-Scarborough line into the current station.

Hurrah, the Scarborough Bridge upgrade has begun, the long-wished-for replacement of the cramped and inadequate pedestrian part of it. Work on the replacement structure, the fully accessible and rising-above-the-floods structure, is now underway. As far as I’m concerned this is probably one of the most exciting things that’s occurred in the local landscape in all the years I’ve been burbling on about York here on these pages.

A bridge is always a good thing, and new bridges across rivers are a particularly remarkable thing, and when they’re attached to a railway line they’re an even better thing, and when they’ll be used by as many people as this new upgraded one will be … well, I think it’s chuffing marvellous.

I’ve been along a few times over recent weeks to see if there was anything noticeably changed. I approached from the Marygate side. By late November most of the vegetation on the embankments had been cleared in the areas closest to the bridge. Here’s the Marygate side of the river:

Clearance work on the Marygate side of the bridge, 30 Nov 2018

A more impressive and striking view presented itself on my earlier wander that way, a few days before, when after peering through the fences on the Marygate side I turned around to cross the bridge to the station side, and saw the clearance work there:

Vegetation clearance by Scarborough Bridge reveals view of York Station (26 Nov 2018)

Normally I’d feel saddened by the sight of felled trees, but here, I wonder why those trees and the rather dull and litter-filled shrubbery were ever planted in the first place, because all that time they were blocking the view of the station. I stood there a while just looking across, beginning to get a better idea of how the whole new bridge deck was going to work here, what new angles on things it will open up. Looking at documents online isn’t quite the same as standing there and seeing the familiar view changed.

Then, on the bridge. The light wasn’t good by this point, so some digital enhancement of this photo was needed, but again, good to see the way being cleared for this narrow walkway I was on being replaced with something much wider and going straight across here …

From Scarborough Bridge, looking towards the station, 26 Nov 2018

… instead of ending at gloomy narrow steps, which we have to go down, then round a corner, up an alleyway and up a zigzag ramp to get to the end of the station. Imagine bypassing all that and going straight across from here, to the end of the station visible in the background, behind the steel fencing …

Scarborough Bridge: from the top of the steps (station end), 26 Nov 2018

But for now let’s take the existing route, going down the steps, to the corner of the alley by the sorting office, for a closer look at the clearance work on this side.

Vegetation clearance, by Scarborough Bridge, 26 Nov 2018

Then up the alleyway by the side of the sorting office, and up the zigzag ramp constructed a few years back. At its landing halfway up there’s a large steel fence stretching across, where we can look back towards Scarborough Bridge, and the rooftops beyond it.

From the edge of the station cycle ramp, looking back towards the bridge, 26 Nov 2018

When the steel fencing has gone, and the new accessible bridge comes in here, we might be better able to appreciate the rather nice view of the rooftops of the Bootham/Clifton area, with the spire of Clifton Methodist Church a clear landmark.

I’ve been surprised to see comments online recently from people who still think that the Scarborough Bridge upgrade work isn’t necessary, is a waste of money. I guess they’re people who don’t use it very often. The people who do rely on it to cross the river here, we know how difficult it is for so many people, and we all stand there being patient while parents struggle with getting pushchairs up the steps, and people with bikes try to push them as quickly as possible up the narrow bit of concrete at the side of the steps, and of course we never see anyone in a wheelchair crossing this bridge, because they can’t. For a major river crossing so close to a railway station in a city like York this is a ridiculous situation in the 21st century. So is the fact that any time there’s severe flooding the pedestrian part is inaccessible to everyone, as the bottom of the steps are covered in floodwater and outside the floodgate.

As shown in this photo, taken during the floods in September 2012:

Scarborough Bridge, steps inaccessible, during the September 2012 floods

And in this photo, taken during the floods in December 2015:

Scarborough Bridge, steps inaccessible, during the December 2015 floods

The new bridge, as it doesn’t rely on stepped access so close to the river, will still be accessible when the Ouse floods, as it does quite often.

Concerns were also raised about the heritage impact, in that the bridge work involves removing some of the stonework. Well, quite a bit of it. The parts being removed, those tall bits towering above the current pedestrian deck, aren’t, in my opinion, particularly beautiful. And, it has to be stressed, this bridge has been altered several times in its history, and doesn’t look like it did when first built. (See further information, below, for more on that.)

Since funding was secured, last year, there has been impressively quick progress on this project. It’s not that long since I wrote about the consultation on the ideas for the bridge upgrade, in July 2017, and then the submitted planning application, a year ago, in December 2017. The planning application was approved in March this year, and now here we are in the last month of 2018 with construction workers on site, working overnight at times, to get the work completed during the early months of 2019.

Further information

Scarborough Bridge, York, Statement of Significance (PDF). Prepared for Network Rail, October 2017 — discusses in some detail the many changes to the bridge since it was originally built, with plans and old photographs. Very clear and helpful in understanding those changes.

There were many interesting documents submitted with the planning application for this bridge work. They can be found on the planning portal: 17/03049/FULM. The report prepared for the planning committee meeting is a useful summary.

For my earlier pages on Scarborough Bridge, including historical notes, see all pages tagged Scarborough Bridge.

If you’re thinking that this work on Scarborough Bridge thing sounds familiar, from a few years back … it was the rail decks that were replaced at that time, the pedestrian walkway work had to wait until funding was available.

. . . . .

If you appreciate this independent and ad-free one-person effort to record York and its changes from a resident’s point of view then virtual coffees are always appreciated, and help to pay the hosting bills and power more pages. Thanks for your support.

The post Scarborough Bridge upgrade: photos and notes, as work begins appeared first on York Stories.

Blue Bridge, at the entrance to the ‘Foss Basin’

After crossing Blue Bridge, where we ended the previous page, I continued on from the confluence back towards town via the short length of towpath alongside the other side of the Foss, towards Castle Mills Bridge. This area is known as the Foss Basin. Again, as on previous pages, I find myself thinking about names, and looking at signs.

Before we ponder the names and the signs, a couple of ‘then and now’ views. Not going back many decades, just the one decade, to begin with.

Ten years ago, in July 2007, I went for one of my exploratory/photographic wanders and ended up here in the Foss Basin, taking a few photos, including this one, from the side of the Foss Barrier, towards the Castle Museum buildings in the distance.

Foss Basin from Foss Barrier, looking towards the castle area, 16 July 2007

No vessels moored here, in mid-July 2007. This may have been because of the high river levels and flooding in summer 2007. There are several men fishing, from the walkway on the right.

I revisited this July, ten years on, not quite to the day, but as near as I could manage.

Foss Basin from Foss Barrier, looking towards the castle area, 19 July 2017

There are bits of fencing up around the Foss Barrier structures to the left, because of the work to upgrade it. Here in the Foss Basin in 2017 several vessels are moored, including Selby Tony, aka the Arts Barge. No fishermen fishing, or at least not on the day I visited. There’s more greenery, from this viewpoint — the trees/shrubs have grown, most obviously.

Looking at images taken ten years apart in the same place prompts the question: what might the place look like ten years on from now? My Future York used the ten year period to encourage us to think ahead in a creative way, in a utopian kind of way. The My Castle Gateway consultation, currently gathering ideas, focuses on this particular part of York, an interconnected series of places now under the umbrella of ‘Castle Gateway’, of which the Foss Basin is a part.

It may not have changed much in the last ten years, but the changes a couple of centuries have brought are, as you might expect, more dramatic. This watercolour by Thomas Shotter Boys records how it used to look:

A view of Castle Mills bridge by Thomas Shotter Boys (Image courtesy of York Museums Trust. Public Domain)

And here’s the 2017 view. Ryedale House on Piccadilly is rather prominent, behind Castle Mills bridge.

It’s changed a bit … Castle Mills Bridge and the Foss Basin, July 2017

Castle Mills Bridge offers another good vantage point over the Foss Basin. Here’s another of my photos from July 2007.

Foss Basin from Castle Mills Bridge, 16 July 2007

In July this year, ten years on, also from Castle Mills Bridge:

Foss Basin from Castle Mills Bridge, 19 July 2017

At this end of things, the 2017 views seem less green than the 2007 ones. In the background is the scaffolding and other structures connected with the Foss Barrier upgrade. The most obvious thing is that the basin seems busier with barges and other vessels. Still quiet though, hardly anyone around.

Castle Mills lock from Castle Mills Bridge, 19 July 2017

This time I paid more attention to the details.

Castle Mills lock, detail, 19 July 2017

All the way from Stockton …

Castle Mills lock, detail, 19 July 2017

A highlight was again the wildlife, swans and their cygnets this time. The cygnets approached with low excited cheeps, then drifted off again, towards the confluence.

Cygnets in the Foss Basin, 19 July 2017

The naming of places

I wondered how long the term ‘Foss Basin’ has been in use. It sounds comparatively modern. In a book published in 1911 Thomas Parsons Cooper mentions it as ‘the pool which we to-day designate the Foss Basin’. When the name came into use it’s hard to tell, but it doesn’t say much about the history of the place, and sounds rather drab.

Castle Mills, on the other hand, does serve to remind us of structures that once were here, by the banks of the Foss. Though hard to imagine all that now, with the traffic rushing by, up on Castle Mills Bridge.

There’s another evocative name here, on a sign on the wall by the steps down from Castle Mills Bridge.

‘Brownie Dyke’ sign, by Castle Mills Bridge/Foss Basin

I’m sure I remember a wooden sign here originally, decades back. I wanted to get a photo of its faded charms, and perhaps did so, but I can’t find it. (As I recall it was similar in style to the one on Marygate.)

It’s a lovely old name, isn’t it. I wanted to find out more about ‘Brownie Dyke’, but couldn’t find anything much from an online search, until I tried a different spelling. Searching for ‘Browney Dyke’ unlocked it, and found a few references.

Browney Dyke, mentioned in a guidebook from 1855

The sign on the wall raises thoughts/questions about how careful we should be when adding official names to a place. I wonder when the first official sign went up to denote ‘Brownie Dyke’, naming it with the ‘ie’ rather than ‘ey’. Perhaps if any new signs are added explaining the history of the place they could include this older variation of the spelling, to aid anyone researching.

Access, or lack of it

I realised, as part of my ponderings, that I don’t think I’ve ever walked all the way along the Brownie Dyke path alongside the Foss Basin until this recent visit in July 2017. On the occasions I’ve been in this area I’ve approached it from the Blue Bridge end, rather than the busy traffic of town, and after going to the Foss Barrier to take photos of the view towards the Castle Museum I’d backtrack to Blue Bridge and use the riverside path by the Ouse, past Tower Gardens, to get back into town. This seemed to make more sense than climbing the steps by Castle Mills bridge at ‘Brownie Dyke’, which only takes you onto a road that is usually too busy to cross safely.

Castle Mills bridge has been rebuilt several times. This one is rather dull.

Castle Mills Bridge, from Castle Mills lock

In This is York, published in the early 1950s, C B Knight describes the previous bridge, which sounds far more interesting: ‘Much of the original construction can still be traced if you walk down by the side of the bridge.’

Not much of interest in the construction of the present bridge here, but I was struck by this enticing view under it. Framed by the bridge, the opposite bank on the other side of the bridge looked attractive, with a small section of riverside path, and all that pleasing greenery.

A view through: under Castle Mills Bridge, 19 July 2017

Attractive but inaccessible. Railings prevent us getting close to the water by the lock, there’s no way of crossing to the other side and no continuation of the towpath under the bridge even if we could. That green area over there is only accessible at present from the back of the Castle Museum. (It’s the site of Raindale Mill, which I admired on a page some years back.)

Plans for the Castle Gateway area might include new extended riverside access here. It’s an idea many people are keen on. It would indeed be nice to be able to go under the bridge rather than over it into the traffic.

But we are going over it, for the next page, as we head for a small bit of land on the other side of Castle Mills lock.

Up the steps to the Travelodge …

Further information

History of Castle Mills Bridge – York Press

Archive images of Castle Mills

. . . . .

For notifications of new pages appearing here on York Stories join the mailing list or follow me on Twitter.

The post Castle Gateway studies: Brownie Dyke, Castle Mills, and the Foss Basin appeared first on York Stories.

Foss barrier, construction work in progress on temporary platform, 17 May 2016

Some weeks back a planning application was submitted in connection with the essential work on the (recently failed) Foss barrier. I’d been wondering what had happened to it and why I’d not heard any more about it. Here it is:

16/00803/FUL | Erection of 20m x 30.40m concrete platform to hold emergency meica kit with associated works | Foss Barrier Tower Street York

Meanwhile, a wander down there yesterday showed that work is well underway on this temporary platform which will, apparently, be in place for around two years.

If you want to see what it will look like when finished, see the ‘temporary platform visualisation’ via the link above. Or, alternatively, just wait a while, as it looks like it’s almost finished, a fact acknowledged in the email correspondence also available on the link above. ‘I would like to deal with the application as soon as possible given that the development is almost constructed on site.’

Email correspondence from the Environment Agency summarises the work currently underway:

the temporary platform which will elevate the MEICA kit above the extreme flood level to facilitate the major refurbishment works on the Foss Barrier pumping station will be in use for 18 months to 2 years according to our latest programme of works. This is an estimated date and we will continue to update the COYC throughout so we can advise the members of the public on the latest, estimated end date. Essentially, the Environment Agency wants to complete the major refurbishment works on the Foss Barrier as quickly as possible.

Difficult to see anyone objecting to these necessary works, after the failure of the barrier in December had such a devastating impact on so many homes and businesses. There are, inevitably, some letters from nearby properties expressing concerns, including one suggesting — jokingly I think — that because of the inconvenience a reduction in council tax payments could be arranged?

Interesting to see the rapid progress on this temporary platform. A couple more photos follow, and information about an event happening this weekend, where you can find out more.

Foss barrier, work on temporary platform, 17 May 2016

Work at the Foss barrier, temporary platform under construction, 17 May 2016

More information

The Environment Agency is holding a public exhibition this week, at Hotel 53, Piccadilly, York on Friday 20 May (12pm – 7pm) and Saturday 21 May (10am – 5pm).

There will be an opportunity for residents and businesses to comment on flood defence proposals, and Environment Agency and City of York Council staff will be on hand to discuss the proposals and give advice.

Visitors to the exhibition will also be able to see copies of the recently published Foss Barrier Investigation report.

The post Foss barrier: temporary platform under construction appeared first on York Stories.

Mind the floor … still repairing after the floods. Walmgate, May 2016

Earlier this month I headed up Walmgate, to take photos of the building featured on the previous page. I took a few more on the way there, including the photo above of a rather handsome doorway. A handwritten sign warned of an uneven floor, and building materials were visible through the glass.

It’s more than four months since parts of Walmgate and Fossgate were flooded by the overflowing Foss. Generally it’s all cleaned up. But some of the shops and restaurants aren’t quite there yet, months on. I was struck by the signs in the windows, and took photos of the ones I noticed.

Red Cross shop, Walmgate, 2 May 2016

Walmgate, Cats Protection League charity shop, 2 May 2016

Loch Fyne restaurant, by Foss Bridge, 2 May 2016

Blue Bicycle restaurant, Fossgate, 2 May 2016

Yesterday an independent report into the failure of the Foss Barrier was made available. The report (PDF) and a summary can be found on this link. It contains phrases like ‘ the event has identified a lack of resilience in the asset’s performance.’

The photos here are small reminders of the impact of this asset failure.

One of the frustrating things, as a local person, was seeing how the situation was presented in the media, as if the whole city was underwater. This has obvious effects on tourism — which of course the city relies on. Then of course the other side to that is the urgent need, later, to promote the ‘open for business’ message, as things get back to normal.

And of course things mainly are back to normal. Except for some homes and businesses they’re not anywhere near that yet. And a cluster of buildings in part of Walmgate and alongside Foss Bridge still have ground floors full of building materials stacked between recently replastered walls.

Inside, also visible through the windows of these still-closed premises, the new plug sockets, this time placed much higher up the walls, in case it happens again. Let’s hope it doesn’t.

Repairing a Walmgate shop after the floods

More information

On this site: see all pages tagged floods2015

I don’t normally advertise events, but I notice that there’s a charity show taking place on 16 May at the Grand Opera House, with proceeds going to The York Disaster Fund managed by Two Ridings Community Foundation. More information here.

There’s a public exhibition on Friday 20 May and Saturday 21 May at Hotel 53 in Piccadilly, York where residents can find out more about the work the Environment Agency is planning for York.

The post After the floods: apologies, Walmgate and Fossgate appeared first on York Stories.