Leeman statue and surrounding roads, from the city walls, 7 May 2021

On the way to look at 2 Rougier Street, and Rougier Street in general, I got distracted by Hudson Quarter, just inside the walls, and then stopped to briefly admire the springtime loveliness pictured above, just outside the walls. The trees here are splendid in the springtime, and perhaps best appreciated from up on the city walls.

Beneath the trees, a lot of road. Several different roads, which I’m never quite sure of the names of. Down there we have a Station Road, a Station Rise, and apparently a bit of road called Station Avenue. Right at the back there is the start of Leeman Road, before it heads off out of town past the Railway Museum.

George Leeman looks out over it all. His statue used to be in the middle of the road, but was moved to one side of it, presumably to better improve the traffic flow, here in this area where the busy roads meet.

In the old days, before all the traffic, he had quite an open space to gaze out upon. An old postcard, showing the view back the other way towards the Station Hotel, calls it ‘Leeman Square’.

From thecardindex.com

Changed quite a bit, hasn’t it. In the area where the Leeman statue stood we now have a triangular traffic island for pedestrians.

And across the road junction, in the centre of this collection of roads is a small park area, apparently called ‘Triangular Gardens’. I’ve written about it before, at some length, inspired by some old photos I have of it from 1983.

I wondered if this area was mentioned in the Hutchinson and Palliser guide to York, published in 1980, and often good for a personal opinion. It was:

‘The open space between Station Hotel, walls, and Yorkshire Museum across the river could be one of the great urban landscapes of England. Instead it is parcelled off into little parks-development plots, spiced with road signs.’

Still parcelled off, and still with a lot of road signs.

I had to descend into this area as the short section of the city walls approaching Lendal Bridge is closed for repairs. That meant coming down the steps by the archway in the walls where those cars on the right have come through. It’s not a pedestrian-friendly place, with all these bits of busy road, particularly if you come off the walls walk there and want to get to the Leeman Road bit and over Lendal Bridge. Behind the Leeman statue, the pavement turns into cobbles and then narrows down to nothing much by the time you reach the archway near Lendal Bridge. So the pedestrian stuck behind the Leeman statue, as I was, tries to cross there, with traffic coming from various directions.

I’ve just read, in C B Knight’s book about York, a detailed description of how the roads in this area developed from the Thief Lane that was here before. It was a bit confusing, so I end up looking at old maps.

Firstly, this area as it’s shown on the 1852 map, that handsome thing we’ve looked at bits of quite a few times before, available to view online at yorkmaps.net.

Extract from 1852 map of York

The green and pink line going diagonally across is the city walls. So I reckon my photo at the top of the page was taken roughly where that line ends at the bottom of this section of the map.

Back then, a railway coal depot occupied this area of land. Back then, the station was inside the walls (the area we’ve just walked past on the previous page). When the station we now use was built outside the walls, this area changed dramatically. By the time of the 1891 OS map, the road layout in this area was basically as it is now, various sections of road meeting, and going through arches in the city walls, with that triangular area left in the middle.

1891 map of Station Road and Leeman Road area, just outside the city walls (from old-maps.co.uk)

‘Leeman’s monument’ pictured above is also shown.

The modern Google map aerial view may also be of interest, for comparison.

A photo taken from the walls in this section a little further along, some years back, with the Triangular Gardens in the centre:

From the city walls, towards ‘Triangular Gardens’, 24 April 2016

I’m not sure if the recently approved plans to improve the area around the front of the station include this part a little further towards town.

Looking at the old maps leads to another page …

. . . . .

Ko-fi coffees are currently powering these pages. It seems to be working quite well, and supporting the thing I’m not officially calling a ‘May daily’ even though it is, at present. Thanks for your continued support, and kind comments.

The post ‘Leeman Square’, triangular gardens, and confusing roads appeared first on York Stories.

Queen Street bridge, with the railway station behind, from the city walls, 26 Nov 2018

From Hudson House, built on part of the old railway station site, just inside the city walls, to Queen Street bridge, close to the current railway station, just outside the city walls.

Hudson House has been demolished, and it looks likely that Queen Street bridge will also be demolished, as part of the plans for the station front and the area around it.

This was on the agenda at the recent council executive meeting on 29 November. The report prepared for it (PDF on this link) ‘sets out progress to date on the above scheme and seeks approval to submit a planning application and proceed to work with partners on the detailed scheme in the Spring’. As approval was granted, a planning application for changes in this area will follow in due course.

There are many aspects to the proposals. A consultation over the summer provided information on the various aspects of the redesign, which looks interesting and has been generally welcomed (though there are some specific concerns, raised at the meeting this week, more on that later perhaps).

Here on York Stories I’ve often liked to focus on lesser-known aspects of the local environment, and Queen Street bridge probably comes in to that category.

The bridge on Queen Street was built to cross the railway lines that once went through the city walls to the old station (see the previous page). The site of the old station has changed a lot over the years, and no longer has railway lines. Queen Street Bridge has therefore been redundant as a bridge for many decades.

Here’s a photo from the archives taken from Queen Street bridge, showing the railway lines going under it and through the city walls.

How it used to be around here: taken from Queen St bridge, showing the railway lines still in use through the arches in the city walls (source & more info)

I’ve taken many photos on and around Queen Street bridge, and was pleased to find that I have one that’s taken from more or less the same place, as it looked this summer, 2018:

Taken from Queen St bridge, showing the arch in the city walls in Aug 2018. Hudson House development site beyond

The Hudson House site is visible through the archway, and in the background so is the end of West Offices.

Queen Street bridge isn’t generally recognised as a bridge, these days, and that’s not surprising, as many of us will have never seen anything travelling underneath it. I remember as a teenager catching buses from Acomb into town, and how the buses would follow this bit of road close to the city walls, rounding the corner here, with the station building mainly below, and I never gave it a thought. It was just a bit of road. An elevated bit of road.

It takes a while to fully appreciate the histories/levels/layers of a place.

Queen Street bridge, looking towards the Railway Institute, 1 July 2018

The bridge was built in 1877-8, close to the corner of the city walls, surprisingly close.

Anyone looking down on the bridge from the city walls might notice that between the old stone of the walls and the rather more recent bridge are these steps, at one time accessed from a gate on the bridge. Another apparently more recent gate has also been added at the top of the steps.

Steps, and litter, between Queen Street bridge and the city walls, 3 Oct 2018

I wonder how long it is since anyone went up or down these steps. This stepped area appears to be serving no purpose apart from being an informal litter bin, a dead debris-collecting space.

The demolition of the bridge would open up views of this part of the city walls, the arches here, where the trains used to come in.

On Queen Street bridge, looking down on the archways cut through the city walls (1 July 2018)

On Queen Street bridge, looking down on archways cut through the city walls (1 July 2018)

The bridge has clearly changed a bit since it was built, and from above just looks quite modern and concretey.

Queen Street bridge, looking from the city walls, 26 Nov 2018

Further information from York Civic Trust explains some of the history of the bridge and why it now looks more modern and concretey:

The bridge, built in 1877-8 to replace a level crossing which had existed since 1839, served to admit railway tracks across this street into a railway terminal depot within the city wall. Although new station facilities were provided outwith the City Walls with the opening of the current station in 1877, the North Eastern Railway (NER) wished to retain railway access across Queen Street, although their use of the tracks would be considerably reduced. Railway use of the level crossing fell considerably with the opening of the 1877 station, road use however rose greatly, so the bridge was built at the behest of York Corporation during 1877-8. The Bridge was modified in 1909, with the two northernmost arches being replaced by a single steel-girder span. In conjunction with the corporation having acquired horse-drawn street tramways, and a move to electrify them, the bridge was widened by moving the pedestrian footways out onto extensions flanking either side of the bridge. These were constructed at the city’s expense using reinforced-concrete stanchions; a good relation had existed for some years between the NER and the ‘Hennebique ferro-concrete’ consultant L.G. Mouchel. The bridge ceased to span railway tracks in the mid-1960s with the building of Hudson House. By the 1970s, the concrete structure was beginning to pull away from the original bridge, possibly as a result of vehicles mounting the pavement, so work was carried out to bond these back in and address damage to the bridge parapets.

(source (PDF))

There is impressive 19th century brickwork underneath it, in parts of the tunnels visible from the level of the station car park alongside. But from all other angles it looks rather awkward now, a concretey thing rising up out of car park and blocked off with steel fencing.

Queen St bridge from the car park area by the station, city walls and RI buildings behind, 16 Feb 2016

All it does is to restrict all the traffic here to using it, while there’s a lot of land just below it and around it that could be remodelled to fit better with the needs of the 21st century city.

Queen St bridge from the access road through the Railway Institute buildings, 16 Feb 2016

Walking round the walls from Micklegate Bar to the front of the station and looking outwards from the walls it’s clear what space could be opened up if it wasn’t here. It’s not just the bit in the corner, noticeably raised up for the tunnels below for the trains, but the whole slope into it. On the city walls walkway, not far from Micklegate Bar, Queen Street starts to rise up in level to meet the bridge that once crossed railway lines:

From the walls, not far from Micklegate Bar, the road rises towards Queen St bridge (26 Nov 2018)

Then we approach the corner, with the Railway Institute buildings (several, of various dates) in their proud position, close to the ‘new’ (current) railway station.

Railway Institute buildings and Queen Street bridge, looking from the city walls, 26 Nov 2018

Then we’re at the corner of the city’s historic walls, with the end of the railway station platforms on the right, and the Railway Institute buildings straight ahead.

Railway Institute buildings and Queen Street bridge, looking from the city walls, 26 Nov 2018

Back in early 2016, when a public consultation on plans for the whole York Central/station area asked for our views, there were concerns about the future of the Railway Institute buildings. Back then I wrote about those buildings and Queen Street bridge, and felt quite strongly that none of these structures should be demolished, as they’re so important in illustrating the railway heritage here, and the line of the old lines in to the old station.

But since then, as we have had more detailed plans of how changes here might make better use of the space, and benefit everyone who uses the current station, and travels to it and past it (whether in vehicles, on foot, or by bike), I can see that the demolition of Queen Street’s bridge does make sense.

More importantly, in the wider plans, the Railway Institute buildings are to stay in place, though one small building, the band room, looks likely to be demolished, as a planned road won’t fit round it.

Much more could be said about the wider plans for the area, and many interesting comments were raised in the discussion at the executive meeting this week. More later perhaps on other aspects.

For now though, I want to zoom in on the previous image …

Queen Street bridge, cycle lane ‘END’, 26 Nov 2018

In the middle of Queen Street’s bridge, somewhat randomly, a marked cycle lane on the road reaches its ‘END’.

Quite what people cycling here are supposed to do at this point isn’t clear. It’s the old-style ‘we’ve done our best on this cycle lane thing, but, oops sorry, that’s it for now. There might be a bit more further down, not sure.’

If the bridge is demolished then it makes more space for everyone. This space should I hope work better for all road users, and pedestrians.

On the 2016 page focused on this area I wanted to see the bridge kept because its arches underneath seemed like they’d provide a good traffic-free route for cyclists, if opened up rather than fenced off and blocked. I imagined us being able to cycle through them and the arches in the city walls here, along the remaining access road to the side of the Hudson House site, to the NER war memorial and West Offices.

Some of the information provided in the consultation this summer included a diagram suggesting this link past Hudson House might be part of the redesign of the wider area. Other plans didn’t include this link. So I’m not sure whether it’s part of the plans or not.

The planning application documents I’ve since looked at relating to the Hudson House development indicate that the site, as bought by Palace Capital, includes the part of the access road alongside it. In other words, as I understand it, it’s private land.

For the sake of the city’s heritage, and our understanding of it, I hope that this line of travel will be part of the wider scheme. If the removal of Queen Street bridge is supposed to help us better appreciate the heritage/cultural value of those 19th century arches cut through the walls — which is one of the reasons given for the bridge’s demolition — then cycle/pedestrian lines of travel through them, and to the old station they served, are a crucial part of it. We can look at them already, from the bridge, as I’ve pictured above. Travelling through them, like the trains used to, that’s the bit I’m interested in.

No doubt it will become clearer in due course …

… But for now, I’m really keen to move on to another bridge, and exciting developments there, at last. Enhancement, replacement, and long awaited … (update: ooh, here’s that page.)

. . . . .

York Stories is a resident’s record of York and its changes. I write about what I know, and raise questions about what I don’t know. I recognise, as many people do, the value of local knowledge, and do my best here to share the perspectives and thoughts of this particular resident, born in the city in the late 1960s, observing the changes. I’ve always aimed to represent things as clearly as possible to as wide a readership as possible, as accurately as possible. It takes a while to do that, and to reach the standard I always aim for. If you’ve found it of value then virtual coffees are always appreciated. Thanks to everyone who supports these York Stories in this way.

The post Queen Street bridge, and the station front plans appeared first on York Stories.

By the Railway Institute buildings, April 2006

In which I humbly suggest that Queen Street should be left as it is, particularly if proposed changes adversely affect the Railway Institute buildings, and that the York Central development should make better use of what’s already there …

(But there’s an update to this page, in light of the 2018 plans.)

As the initial consultation period for the York Central plans ends soon – having been extended to 18 February – I really must make an attempt to approach a couple of its most important aspects in more detail. Or at least the ones I find most important and feel in some way qualified to comment on.

Let’s approach it via Queen Street, to start with. Round by the station, over Queen Street bridge. That high curve giving a fine view of the curved station roof, one curve reflecting others, in a pleasing fashion. Here’s a photo from some years back.

Station from Queen Street, 1 Aug 2004

One of the proposals in the York Central plan is to lose the bridge bit and lower the road level, which the ‘vision’ suggests will make everything lovely at the front of York’s station and make the traffic flow freely for evermore, or something. It looks like another of those ideas of improvement that cost a load of money but don’t bring any actual improvements and instead destroy things of interest and value.

The demolition idea seems to come up every now and then. A few years back (2012) the Press reported that York’s Queen Street bridge could be demolished to make way for bus station.

Queen Street bridge seems an odd name, it’s just Queen Street to most of us, but it once bridged railway lines, when the building now known as the council headquarters — West Offices — was the city’s railway station, before the present station was built. The lines into it went under here. Understanding that means understanding a crucial part of the 19th century development of the city, and what remains here helps us to understand it.

From the car park near the station you used to be able to look at what’s underneath the raised part of Queen Street. What’s underneath it is some of that handsome curving brickwork you get under bridges built over the railways in the 19th century. Or at least it was here in 2007 when I took the following photo, and I assume it still is. When I visited this afternoon the area seems more fenced and gated off than it used to be.

Under Queen Street, 27 June 2007

From the curved brick, if you turn back and look from those old tunnels, you can see railway buildings also associated with those early days of the railway here in York, alongside what used to be railway lines, but is now car park.

Railway Institute buildings (former rail workshops), 26 April 2006

Which takes us to the …

Railway Institute

A recent Press story highlighted fears that the plans for the removal of the Queen Street bridge could involve the demolition of some of the RI’s buildings. The York Central consultation ‘exhibition boards’ document, regarding the possible demolition of the Queen Street bridge, refers to the ‘potential removal or adaptation of the Railway Institute buildings’.

As any removal of these culturally and historically significant buildings would be indefensible, I assume it won’t happen. But perhaps we should all make it clear that it shouldn’t happen, by emailing our views.

These buildings are impressive, the way they sit in the landscape here, particularly as you look out from the city walls. Since the 1980s, heading back to Acomb, I’ve admired this view, and taken many photos of the long roofs here, looking across to Holgate, over the years.

Railway Institute/former railway workshops, 1 June 2013

It’s not just about views, of course, it’s much more important than that. We should all support the Railway Institute and its facilities, whether or not we use them. They’re part of this city’s cultural heritage and they’ve managed to survive into the 21st century.

I can’t see how the demolition of Queen Street bridge would improve anything. Those tunnels underneath would be an excellent pedestrian and cycle access route if opened up rather than fenced off and gated as at present. I walked round there this afternoon, the existing structures sit beautifully in the landscape, the fences and gates make no sense. Remove them, and make better use of what’s already there. Invest in the existing buildings rather than thinking we can build anything better. I don’t believe we can.

Working with the existing structures, preserving the story of this corner of York, helps us and future generations appreciate how the railway used to come in to the city, into the walls, before the current station was built.

The more you study a place the more you get to understand that pathways and boundaries and old lines of travel are a crucial part of the story and soul of a place. Heritage isn’t just about pretty buildings. I wish more of us could appreciate that.

I don’t have time to go into great detail regarding the previous life of the rail workshops, but there’s more information below, and a lot more available online, and comments adding additional info are welcome, as always.

On first impressions, the York Central plans look like they might destroy more than they create.

Comments can be made via email to: yorkcentral@york.gov.uk and more information can be found at www.york.gov.uk/yorkcentral which has links to the proposals and information on how to comment. If you’d prefer to give your views via the online questionnaire it’s on this link. The deadline for comment is 18 February.

Queen Street bridge, and the bar walls, April 2006

Further information/notes

The draft Local List says of the main York Railway Institute building:

built in 1889, “to convey information and spread education on a variety of subjects”. From the beginning, it has offered educational facilities for railway employees and has fulfilled a social and welfare function by providing accommodation for a wide range of recreational activities, associations and clubs. It is included because of its unbroken connection with the railway history of York and for its important contribution to the education and wellbeing of the railway work force and the wider public in York. Almost contemporary with the building of the present York railway station, it forms an important part of the setting of this grade II* listed building.

And of the buildings alongside, housing important sports facilities:

Two parallel ranges adjacent to the Railway Institute, constructed as Locomotive Erecting Shops for the North Eastern Railway Company. The block nearest the RI incorporates the remains of a North & North Midlands wagon repair workshop of the 1840s. This was extended in the1850s and a smith’s shop added, to provide workshops for the newly formed North Eastern Railway Company. Around 1884 the building was raised and converted to provide the No.2 Locomotive Erecting Shop where the locomotives were repaired and sometimes constructed. The second block was purpose built as No.1 Locomotive Erecting Shop in 1879. These blocks of workshops are now rare survivals of a considerably larger group of buildings which represent the development of the railway industry in York during the nineteenth century. This specially applies to the No.2 Erecting Shop which incorporates the remains of an extremely early railway building dating from the 1840s. Much of this history has already been lost through past demolitions in the vicinity. Additionally, they provide the visual and historic context and setting for the grade II* listed York Railway Station and the grade II listed YNM Railway Co. water tank and workshop adjacent.

Queen St before the bridge: 1852 map

Update, 2018

As there are now more detailed plans progressing, I’ve written an update, regarding the bridge and plans for the area around it: Queen Street bridge, and the station front plans (3 Dec 2018).

The post Approaching York Central: Queen St and the RI buildings appeared first on York Stories.

King’s Square and Colliergate with yellow lines added, December 2015

King’s Square … I feel a need to return to it, having just referred to it in a comment earlier.

I often feel a need to return to it. Both literally, because it’s a nice place to sit awhile, and in terms of writing about it on here. In the ‘tag cloud’ at the bottom of these pages it’s the biggest thing.

King’s Square was a place where, in recent years, what we might call ‘top down’ visions of ‘improvement’ met their match in what we might call ‘people power’.

Call it what you like, it seemed significant to me, the public reaction to this ‘reinvigoration’. In many ways significant. On many levels. Including a massive increase in visitor numbers to this site when I wrote about the Daily Mail article.

There are a couple of reasons to mention it again now. Partly that the square just had double yellow lines painted around it. And also because two years ago today I put together a page about the debate prompted by Michelle Wyatt’s petition on the ‘reinvigoration’ work here. Do have a look, it’s interesting, including many of the comments made by councillors (and it took hours to type out all those comments).

So that was then. And then we ended up with some compromise on some of the aspects of the square, and the raised area had only a light touch in the end, not the massive (mulberry tree-removing) overhaul originally planned.

Now, in late 2015, yellow lines have (re)appeared in the roadside bits of King’s Square. Pretty much similar to the yellow lines on the old tarmac that was here before.

Just a small thing, a detail. Well, kind of. Except that this paint is decorating really expensive stonework which we couldn’t really afford in the first place and didn’t actually need.

There’s been a problem with people parking where they shouldn’t. Before the yellow lines appeared in recent days, last month the benches were moved back, relocated, to try to discourage this.

And then, the paint.

Was it worth it, the ‘investment’ in King’s Square? It’s smoother, so therefore perhaps easier to walk across. Though not if it has wet leaves on it and you’ve got smooth-soled shoes on, as you may slip. On dry days, looking across from the raised area, it looked wider and paler and quite aesthetically pleasing, I thought.

But essentially we’ve ended up having spent tons of money on something where in the end we’ve had to paint the same old yellow lines all over it as it had before. Meaning that the smooth ‘world class’/’Milton Keynes’ (what it was supposed to look like/what people have said it looks like) look of it is now broken by lines of yellow paint.

Two years on from the council debate on the King’s Square work, I wonder how many of us have grown to like it where we perhaps didn’t like it at first?

Like or loathe it, the main point is:

‘You’ve spent half a million pounds, and the debt on that, the interest, is £45,000 a year for 25 years.’
(Cllr Paul Healey, speaking during the debate in December 2013)

Worthwhile investment?

King’s Square cart tracks and setts (2007) and replacement (2013)

More information

York Mix article on the reinstatement of the yellow lines

Steve Galloway’s blog post from last month on the traffic problems in King’s Square

. . . . .

Championing 1970s cobbles and spending hours and hours typing up comments made by councillors … that’s me that is … if you find these pages useful and interesting please consider supporting this ‘record of York and its changes’. Thank you.

Lisa @YorkStories

The post King’s Square: was it worth it? appeared first on York Stories.

Attention now turns to whether to rid the city of another recent invasion: 20 mph signs. Here’s one example, at the entrance to Skelton Court, off the street of Clifton, near Clifton Green.

Skelton Court isn’t just a cul-de-sac, it’s a very short cul-de-sac — its end wall is visible from the archway at its entrance. Here’s an idea of the length of it, on Google Street View.

I’m not a driver, so don’t claim to be an expert, but I doubt very much that anyone has ever attempted to enter Skelton Court at more than 20 mph, or that it’s likely that anyone ever would, sign or no sign. Which means the sign is a complete waste of money. And there are apparently many other essentially pointless examples cluttering up the place.

Obviously they’re not doing any actual harm, but they are rather irritating to many residents, including me, for a couple of reasons. Partly because of the cost of them – around £500,000-£600,000. This money apparently didn’t come from our council tax — which would have made me really quite furious — but from some special budget from central government. But it’s still a lot of money, in an age of many cutbacks in funding for more important things.

The other argument against them is that all this signage is just more ‘street clutter’.

The introduction of these signs seems to have been a project instigated and enthusiastically supported by former Labour councillor Anna Semlyen, so much so that perhaps we could call them Semlyen Signs.

And they might soon be gone, suggests the current administration’s executive member for transport, Cllr Ian Gillies, as reported in the press and radio coverage today.

I’m finding it difficult to understand what benefit there might be in taking them away, now they’re there. Won’t that just cost more? Paying people to go round the suburbs dismantling them? And then what? Stick them all in a shed somewhere? Sell them for scrap?

It looks more like some kind of symbolic gesture, like Cllr Gillies and colleagues want to remove the Semlyen Signs as some kind of visible indicator of how this current administration intends to reclaim the city from all that Lefty stuff from before. Maybe when Conservative-voting drivers pass these signs they see them like some kind of offensive Lefty/Labour flag, stuck there to claim control of the territory and boss us all about.

A comment from Ian Gillies in the Press article today suggests that this may be the case:

“Some of the signs are in ridiculous places – on small streets where you couldn’t get up to that speed anyway. It was political dogma that put them there.”

He’s kind of right on that dogma thing. These signs, when Anna Semlyen and other ’20s Plenty’ supporters talk about them, are presented as having far more power and impact than any painted number on some metal stuck on a pole could possibly have. Even as a Lefty cyclist pedestrian kind of person I’ve found all this quite baffling. It’s now suggested by Anna Semlyen that the removal of the signs will lead to some dramatic results:

“The biggest problem in health is people not doing enough physical exercise. How on earth are you going to get people doing more physical activities if you take away lower road speeds?

As if in the streets with 20mph signs we are of course all running about doing aerobics on the verges and if those signs go we’ll all just flop on our sofas and eat chips all day.

If you find the signs irritating and dogmatic, or think they have the power to magically transform neighbourhoods into healthy peaceful utopias, or perhaps have an opinion somewhere in between, do feel free to add a comment.

A footnote

This website is completely independent, receives no external funding, costs money to host and a lot of time to write. If you’d like to support this work and help pay the hosting costs you can do so via this link.
Thank you
Lisa @YorkStories

The post Dogma and debate: 20mph signs appeared first on York Stories.

Charabanc outing, outside the White Swan Piccadilly. (c) City of York Council (York Images)

I’ve also recently chanced upon an image from the city archives taken outside the White Swan, around a hundred years ago. In the background is the same stretch of its Piccadilly frontage where the ‘relics‘ are displayed. Back then it was quite new and hadn’t yet had modern shopfronts inserted (the present White Swan dates from 1912, and replaced an earlier White Swan Hotel).

The people pictured here appear to be going on an outing, in a charabanc. Basically an early bus. This one’s quite a posh charabanc, motorised. It looks like it has the numberplate ‘DN 1′,  which I always understood was the Lord Mayor’s vehicle – in more recent times at least. (If you know more about this photo or the vehicle in it, please add a comment.)

In my own family history archives I also have a couple of images which appear to have been taken at the beginning of a charabanc outing, at around the same time. But in Hull, and we were poor, and our charabanc was horse-drawn.

Charabanc outing, from Hull

The girl third on the right is my maternal grandmother, Doris.

Do hop on the charabanc and join us. There’s the posh motorised York charabanc and the working class Hull charabanc, pick whichever one suits best. I’m going for the one with a horse, without flags. I’m not quite sure where we’re going next. They don’t look comfortable so short journeys are probably preferable.

The post All aboard the charabanc appeared first on York Stories.