You may have arrived from Twitter to read what I originally described as a rant. The rant has been removed from this page.

Instead … the word ‘thoughtful’ is often used to describe things written for this site, and I’d rather be thinking than ranting. So for now — covering many of the same issues, connected with City of York Council and its plans and visions — I’d like to draw attention to some earlier pages on this site. Still relevant, not only relevant to the rant but to current concerns and recurring themes and things we should all perhaps be concerned about. Particularly …

The (draft) Local Plan for York

Ah … the summer of 2013, when we sat on the grass making daisy chains and reading the thousands of pages making up the draft Local Plan, after queuing for hours outside the Guildhall so we could get our hands on a copy and be the first to read it.

No, not really. But as a recent Press story shows, there was some metaphorical banging on the Guildhall doors by a citizen who works hard to make sure that the oft-mentioned ‘transparency’ is working as it should be: Ombudsman criticises York council over draft Local Plan papers. You can also follow Gwen Swinburn on Twitter. (And perhaps follow me on Twitter at the same time.)

The draft Local Plan will one day become an actual Local Plan, and it will shape future development of the city. So it will have an impact for everyone who lives and works here. So although it’s quite a boring sounding thing, and too massive for anyone to get their head around completely, here are a few thoughts I had last year about the parts of it I managed to engage with.

— All pages tagged ‘Local Plan’

Ways of seeing the city: and Local Plan promotion

Connected with the above, an article promoting the council leader and the council’s Local Plan provoked some thought, and this — Ways of seeing. It’s one of the most important pieces of writing I’ve done for this site, I think.

I wondered whether the city really has improved massively and whether it really is all because of the current administration, and why everyone seemed so delighted at York being described as like a chunk of the affluent south-east. And tried to describe why people of my age often feel like we’ve lost so much of ‘our city’.

Lendal Bridge

The rant originally occupying this page was partly inspired by the chaos and wasted resources of the recently ended ‘Lendal Bridge trial’. More on that soon. Meanwhile:

— All pages tagged ‘Lendal Bridge’

And ‘reinvigorating’

Back in September I wrote a piece on some of the thoughts I’d had in response to the ‘Reinvigorate York’ work in King’s Square. It questioned whose ‘aesthetic sense’ was leading these transformations, and I guess it was also about what we’ve come to call ‘engagement’, and why we often get engaged only when it’s too late and things are already being pulled up/chopped down/demolished.

— A changing aesthetic

I have to say that from my perspective there has been definite evidence of ‘listening’, since I wrote the above. Something the council are said never to do. The plans for King’s Square have been subtly altered to preserve a tree, for example. Elsewhere, in plans for Fossgate and Exhibition Square, it was noticeable that the plans favoured keeping much of the existing paving, rather than expensive repaving.

— Pages tagged ‘King’s Square’

— Pages tagged ‘reinvigoration’

And heritage

Well, there are bits of heritage all over this website. In fact it’s mainly about heritage, built heritage, generally the kind of buildings not part of the tourist trail. Local List buildings, with no statutory protection, landmarks in their areas. Many have been demolished, some are about to be. Burnholme WMC is boarded up and awaits demolition. City of York Council, through some clever ‘weighting’ in their weighing up of options, doomed the Airspeed building to demolition. Or so it seems at the time of writing. That annoys me more than Lendal Bridge. I wish the processes involved had been challenged as much as the Lendal Bridge trial has been.

— Pages tagged ‘Burnholme WMC’

— Pages tagged ‘Airspeed’

Thankfully there are many people asking questions, encouraging engagement from as many people as possible, and trying to find ways to protect our heritage assets. I haven’t had time to write about this yet, but recommend:

— a recent article in York Mix, by Helen Graham and …

— this piece in the Press by Stephen Lewis, on the same project, here focussing on the area around Clifford’s Tower

And 20mph zones? …

Another current controversy … which was briefly mentioned in the removed rant …

The people who drive too fast down my street make me swear quietly to myself. Expensive signage wouldn’t stop them, though supporters of the signage seem to think it will have magical powers to transform behaviours and improve health and probably stop wars even. To me, it just seems like more pointless signs, more money wasted, and that’s all I can say.

And who do I think I am … being so opinionated?

Just an ordinary resident. Someone who had the time to observe, and to think about some of the issues, and write about them. I don’t have the time free to do that now, but I know that many other people, like me, have become more ‘engaged’ in recent years with the plans and visions that impact on our lives in this city. I hope that continues and that it builds some bridges, and results in less of the ‘them and us’ conflict I’m seeing a lot of on Twitter and elsewhere. And that I don’t have to write any more rants.

And your thoughts?

Please fill in my survey on York and its changes, where you can also give your views on this website.

The post Not ranting, but thinking … appeared first on York Stories.

King’s Square phase 2 work: Feb 2014 update, with mulberry tree retained. (c) City of York Council

The proposal for ‘phase 2′ of the King’s Square work has been released, and is online and available for public viewing on this page on the council’s website (with background information on this link).

The proposal for the raised area is rather different from the original plan approved in April last year. I’m assuming that the changed plan, though titled ‘proposal’, doesn’t have to go for Cabinet approval again, as the phase 2 work begins this week.

The main points of interest:

• The mulberry tree and its planter will be retained and refurbished, with the railings around the top removed
• The raised area  will be given a ‘deep clean’
• Broken flagstones on the raised area will be replaced, and some of the gravestones reset where necessary

Can I hear everyone shouting ‘hurrah’? Everyone who says the council never listens, everyone who said the square was basically fine as it was and just needed some cleaning and repair … I think it should be acknowledged that the way King’s Square will look is quite different to how it might have been, without input and comment from residents.

‘Option 1′ for King’s Square – with mulberry tree removed – approved in April 2013. (c) City of York Council

Council-bashing is very popular at the moment, particularly over the Lendal Bridge fiasco (and in that case, fair enough). But ‘the council’ is many many people in different departments. And here, in King’s Square, we see definite evidence of listening, taking note, adapting plans in the light of public reaction.

I guess we should reserve judgement for now, until we see how it actually turns out. I still fear that a forgotten memorial plaque might end up in a skip, because it’s small and dirty and not particularly visible on the bench it’s on. (Maybe Barnitts can take care of it and clean it up with one of their tins of Brasso.)

Just details – but meaningful ones – what makes the place – not the ‘visions’. This is York. It’s all about details, layers, all the centuries, and including the most recent. And the reminders of our lives within that context, in this place.

I don’t know how many people joined my ‘save the mulberry tree‘ campaign, sending emails of concern/protest. Thank you if you did. It was a very low-key campaign, but might have got more exciting, had the emails of concern failed …

@GSwinburn @YorkStories, @kelbirdy and I have discussed a chaining to the railings on this one. Pointless destruction.

— Julie Digs (@Julie_Digs) February 17, 2014

The post Retaining a sense of place? King’s Square, phase 2 appeared first on York Stories.

King’s Square reflections. Photo: Tony Cole

The ‘reinvigoration’ of King’s Square is due to resume soon. Attention so far has focussed on the new, expensive, mirror-like paving. I hoped the photographic possibilities its reflections offered would be captured by someone. Tony Cole has, in these beautiful photos (used with permission).

We can see trees reflected here. If the phase 2 work follows the original plan then the smaller tree will be removed. I wonder if they’ll carefully cut it to pieces or just go at it straight through the trunk with a chainsaw.

Never a nice sight to see, but happening more and more to trees in the city centre, for various reasons. Usually for reasons of safety, because the tree is diseased, or leaning. Neither of these things applies here. There’s nothing wrong with the tree at all. Have a look, if you haven’t already. (It’s actually the best looking tree of the four, in terms of shape.)

Its removal was approved because someone – who? – decided the planter it is in is aesthetically displeasing. This may have been Sir Ron Cooke, or Dave Merrett, or the Reinvigorate York group as a whole.

King’s Square reflections. Photo: Tony Cole

But, you may be thinking, we were consulted on the plans. Not about the mulberry tree we weren’t. Its demise had already been decided. I responded to the consultation, along with just under 200 other people, but probably didn’t mention it either. Because at the time I was busy with other things, hadn’t looked properly, couldn’t picture which tree it was, thought it must be not worth keeping, trusted their judgement.

When I looked properly later, and every time I’ve seen it since, I’ve wanted to challenge whatever ‘aesthetic’ judgement led to the decision that the whole thing needs destroying.

Mulberry tree, King’s Square, June 2013

This tree which the ‘Reinvigorate York’ plans would remove is perhaps the most vigorous thing in the square. Certainly in summer, in full leaf.

It was planted in a ceremony mentioned in the Press (see below), and has a plaque marking that event. The plaque is on the railings, on top of the planter.

The whole ensemble does look ugly at present. But could so easily be improved, without chainsaws being involved.

The nasty railings could (should) be removed. The old Christmas lights still wrapped around the tree should have been removed long ago. Once the railings are gone, the litter and weeds and cheap-looking slate chippings around the tree’s base could be cleared away. Perhaps an ornate/attractive iron guard could be put there instead.

Metal bench around mulberry tree, King’s Square

The bench, metal, curved, is actually rather elegant, or could be, if cleaned and repainted. Perhaps extended further round the brick planter, if the brick planter is thought so ugly. I’ve sat here often and thought it was more comfortable than the standard wooden ones, which seem to be for people with longer legs.

It might be, of course, that following the largely negative reaction to ‘phase 1′ of the work here in King’s Square, the original plans approved may have changed in some ways. Here’s hoping.

Even if you’re not a soppy tree-hugger like me, I don’t see how anyone can justify destroying this perfectly healthy young tree because of the planter it was put in. And even if you don’t care about trees in the slightest, everyone should be thinking about, and perhaps questioning, whose ‘aesthetics’ decide such things, and whether we’re all happy to leave them to it.

If we’re not, then we should be filling in the questionnaire/consultation about the next ‘Reinvigorate York’ initiative, which will be remodelling another square soon.

Planting the mulberry tree, 2001

From The Press, 3 March 2001:

‘Pensioner to plant new tree in square

A NEW tree is to be planted in York’s King’s Square by a pensioner who remembers playing there as a child.

 

Joyce Douglas, 82, who is still a keen gardener, has been invited to do the honours at next Tuesday’s ceremony by City of York Council.

 

A weeping ash tree which stood in the square for 80 years was felled last year because of concerns over safety.

 

But a young mulberry tree has been given to the council by Lewis Tree Surgery of Wheldrake and this will be planted at a special ceremony by Mrs Douglas, who was born at 1 Shambles in 1919.

 

Her family ran the well-known George Ackroyd’s furniture shop and sale rooms at the top of Shambles.

 

She also remembers a church which stood near her home and said she often played in the churchyard that occupied King’s Square in the years of her early childhood.

 

The two remaining lime trees were also originally in the churchyard in the 1800s, well before the church was demolished in 1937.

 

Mrs Douglas said: “I was very disappointed when the tree had to be removed last year – I regularly walk through King’s Square and the trees bring some of the country into the heart of York.

 

“However I am delighted to be invited to help with this planting ceremony and hope that this new tree will bring much pleasure to residents and visitors in the future.”

 

Mrs Douglas will be helping the council to plant the tree at a ceremony with the Lord Mayor of York, Councillor Shn Braund, and the council’s arboricultural officer, Harvey Lowson.

 

Mr Lowson said: “We are honoured that Mrs Douglas has agreed to plant the tree and I would love to think that I will still be planting trees when I am in my 80s.

 

“The donated mulberry tree should make an attractive tree and not grow too large as the square is partially shaded by buildings.”

 

A safety inspection on the previous weeping ash tree in the raised brick planter last September established that it was in a poor structural condition and needed to be removed for safety reasons.

 

The new tree will have protective railings constructed around it and a commemorative plaque fitted to mark the occasion.’

People of York, we need to preserve Joyce’s tree, don’t we.

More information

Plan of preferred final design – My understanding is that this is the design option approved by Cabinet on 2 April 2013, though what we have as a result of phase 1 of the work doesn’t look much like this representation.

Footnote

King’s Square reflections. Photo: Tony Cole

I emailed Guy Hanson at City of York Council on 28 Jan to ask about the plans for the tree. I emailed again a few days ago as I hadn’t heard anything (and wanted to know whether I needed to write this page, or not). I had a brief reply saying they’re ‘reviewing the proposals’ regarding the tree and will get back to me.

I thought I should write this page anyway, after what happened with ‘phase 1′. When I wrote so many pages, last year, about the planned changes, it appeared that no one else (or very few people) cared about the paving. Turned out lots of people cared. Maybe no one cares about Joyce’s mulberry tree, but if you do, perhaps you’ll want to email guy.hanson@york.gov.uk and cllr.dmerrett@york.gov.uk and say so.

Update, 2014

The plans have been revised and the mulberry tree is to be retained.

The post Musings on a mulberry tree: King’s Square, phase 2 appeared first on York Stories.

Exhibition Square, 1870s? © City of York Council

There are many photographs of Exhibition Square in the City of York archives, illustrating the changes in over a century of use. Seems a good time to look at some, in the light of the current consultation. (Archive images used with permission.)

First, this photo from its early days. Our eyes are drawn to the splendid Minster and Bootham Bar, but here for the purposes of this page we’re focussing on the foreground. Note the ‘random lumps of stone’ style edging around some kind of flowerbed in front of the art gallery (known as the Exhibition Building, back then, when new). From the abbey, perhaps, like the stone around the Museum Gardens. Note also the massive tree to the left.

Exhibition Square, 1880s © City of York Council

Here’s a better view of the massive tree, from around the same time. Before the construction of the square and Exhibition Building this area was known as ‘Bearpark’s Garden’. (Not because it was a park with bears in it, but because it was used as a nursery garden by a Mr Bearpark.) This large mature tree must have been retained from that time.

Modern developments often try to retain mature trees on site and it would appear that our Victorian forebears valued them too. Or this one, anyway, in this location.

Exhibition Square, 1880s © City of York Council

The paved surface back then was a mixture of materials, larger slabs near the art gallery and smaller setts further out.

Exhibition Square, 1900s © City of York Council

A little while later and the impressive mature tree has gone, replaced by two young trees.

Exhibition Square, Etty statue unveiled, Feb 1911

By 1911 they’ve been removed. The statue to William Etty is erected in this small garden area in the square in front of the art gallery.

This photo is one of several taken on the day of the statue’s unveiling (including a nice image of the moment of the ‘reveal’). It was clearly an important event, just over a century ago.

Etty statue in Exhibition Square, 1920s © City of York Council

In the 1920s, Etty settles in to his protected garden area, with adverts for cultural happenings resting against the railings around him.

In the 1940s. Cars cluster around the Etty statue, as they did until about 1971 © City of York Council

A lovely image of a rainy day in the 1940s. Cars cluster around Etty, all facing inwards, like an appreciative audience.

Etty stands rock solid, just the same, while the square changes around him, for decades filling with cars, and more recently, open-top buses for the tourists.

A photo in Patrick Nuttgen’s book York (Studio Vista, 1970) shows that the space around Etty has been reduced to the bare minimum by the end of the 1960s. There’s just a thin strip of paving, only a little wider than his plinth, in front of and behind it. The square by this time has marked parking bays, white lines on the tarmac. Parking now is more regimented than it was in the 1940s. The one car parked there faces outwards, ready for the off and not paying any attention to Etty.

Etty statue decorated during the ‘yarn bomb’ event, 2 Feb 2013

In 1971 the square changed again, and a fountain was placed near Etty’s plinth. The next page will focus on this fountain. Meanwhile here’s an image taken more recently. Etty’s plinth decorated with knitting and brightly coloured yarn, during last year’s yarn bomb event.

What will Etty be looking out across in the 21st century I wonder. Perhaps he won’t be looking the same way, but will be shifted across to the side of the square to look at King’s Manor instead, as in one of the ideas suggested in the proposals currently open for consultation. Perhaps he’ll look out across a new water feature/fountain.

Our idea of what’s appropriate for our cities changes over the generations. The Esher report, published in the late 1960s, includes an illustration of proposals for the square back then. Most striking is the suggestion that a line of lime trees should be planted to mark the boundary where the square meets the road. Lime trees. If you want to see what happens to lime trees in urban environments look on Burton Stone Lane or at the pathetic remnants of trees at the front of St John’s on Lord Mayor’s Walk, and on Penley Grove Street.

No more big trees anymore. We don’t have the room. If Esher’s trees had been planted they’d be felled now to fit in a bus stop, as a tree on Museum Street will be soon.

Etty’s standing there through all this, sighing perhaps silently in stony statue-like way.

I noticed he’s got a Twitter account, hasn’t said much, just one message.

The post Etty and decades of change, in a city square appeared first on York Stories.

Exhibition Square, June 2007

A good thing about the council’s ‘Reinvigorate York’ projects and the accompanying consultations is that they make us pay closer attention to places we perhaps take for granted. What the King’s Square saga showed is that it’s obviously better if we contribute our thoughts on the plans before the point when features are being removed and the paving is being lifted.

So I hope word is getting round about the current consultation (running until 21 Feb) and that we’ll fill in the survey/consultation form.

The online survey/consultation seems to be a combined questionnaire covering all three schemes. If so that’s a shame as many of us may have strong feelings about one particular project but not the other two. Reading the information takes long enough. I wonder how many people will comment via the consultation form. More than for King’s Square, I hope.

Anyway, the projects are:

Fossgate, May 2013

Fossgate

Fossgate improvements – City of York council information

It has been mentioned often over the years that Fossgate should perhaps become another daytime footstreet, and these proposals implement that. I don’t have an opinion on this, if you do, comments welcome below.

The plans also include repaving of the two entrances to the street (from Walmgate and from Pavement) and areas of pavement widening, which could include seating. I assume this must mean benches, not cafe seating, as Fossgate is very narrow.

Exhibition Square: paving and fountain

Exhibition Square

Exhibition Square & Theatre Interchange improvements – City of York council info

The available information suggests that these plans are not as radical and destructive as the King’s Square changes seemed. The Yorkstone paving is to be retained and added to, rather than lifted. The plan is to extend the paving with reclaimed stone (the slabs recently lifted from King’s Square, perhaps).

Whether this is a change of approach in the light of the response to King’s Square, or was always the plan, I don’t know. It would appear that the paving slabs in Exhibition Square also date from the 1970s, as before then the area was mainly used for car parking, right up to the front of the gallery.

I’ve already written about Etty and the fountain.

Other suggested changes include reducing the size of the parking bay, and relocating the bus shelter. From my point of view, as a pedestrian who regularly walks across this area, these seem like good ideas. I can’t say I’ve ever thought ‘I do wish someone would move that bus stop’, but now they mention it, yes, it would be easier if all us pedestrians passing weren’t behind funneled into the fairly narrow space behind it.

I don’t like the sound of ‘coloured asphalt’ across the road in front of Bootham Bar. Particularly if it’s reddish in colour, which would be a bit loud and attention-grabbing? When really it should be Bootham Bar claiming our attention. Particularly on a summer’s evening when its old stone glows in the late sunlight. I hope CYC keep their coloured asphalt away from here. Though the junction’s not looking that great at the moment, cluttered with Lendal Bridge closure signage.

Duncombe Place/Blake St

Duncombe Place/Blake St junction, Sept 2013

Duncombe Place & Blake Street Junction improvements – City of York council information

They’re right, it’s a daft clutter at present, with the raised flowerbed and triangle of bits of road. But again, ‘coloured asphalt’ is proposed, again it’s supposed to be an impressive view, towards the main focus, the Minster, and I wonder if a wide band of coloured asphalt leaping into that famous view would be an improvement?

How to have your say

Press release, info on online consultation and staffed consultation events

Background on individual projects – see links under headings above

Online consultation/questionnaire

… And please share, spread the word

Please share the information about the consultation as widely as possible, particularly highlighting the Exhibition Square ideas/proposals.

Many people were upset – and yes, I chose that word carefully, as concerned/angry doesn’t quite describe it – by the changes to King’s Square. They didn’t realise that there had been a consultation about that project. More community ‘engagement’ means more chance of more of us having a city we can feel happy about, rather than feeling angry, disenfranchised and ignored.

. . . . .

The post More ‘reinvigoration': have your say appeared first on York Stories.

Exhibition Square, from art gallery entrance, 2007

Following on from the ‘reinvigoration’ of King’s Square, consultation has begun on more ‘Reinvigorate York’ projects, including Exhibition Square.

A previously released artist’s impression of the square, in the Lendal Bridge trial leaflet, showed the square without the Etty statue in the middle of it, raising concerns that the statue was going to be relocated.

I assumed that this might be because of changing tastes, and that Etty on his plinth was seen as a bit old-fashioned. Or that it’s inconvenient having him right in the middle of the square, blocking any grand approach perhaps envisaged to the art gallery’s front doors when it reopens after its massive refurbishment.

But no. According to the Reinvigorate York information, relocation is necessary because Etty has been under attack from the adjacent fountain.

Etty statue, recently cleaned, and art gallery, 2004

Here he is in 2004, not long after he was cleaned, looking very white.

Etty statue, July 2012

And here he is in July 2012. He does look a bit of an embarrassment, since he got covered in some kind of lichen/mossy growth. He’s got his own little ecosystem growing on him, and statues aren’t supposed to look like that.

So we have to decide whether we want the Etty statue or the fountain, as according to the Reinvigorate York documents, they can’t live happily together anymore.

“Conservation specialists have recommended that the statue and fountain should be physically separated to help to stop the statue being further eroded by water splashing from the fountain.”

Get Etty away from that fountain! It’s eating him!

Fountain, Exhibition Square

The fountain dates from 1971. It was provided by York Civic Trust.

As Ron Cooke – trustee and former chairman of the Civic Trust – is involved in the Reinvigorate York project I think we can assume that the suggested removal of the fountain is okay with the Trust. So I guess they could have gone ahead and decided to remove it without asking for our views.

After the generally unpopular and controversial remodelling of King’s Square, which involved the removal of some attractive and appropriate paving dating from the 1970s, there’s perhaps a bit of a shift in attitude, a response to public opinion. I’m imagining the discussions as these plans for Exhibition Square were drawn up: ‘Etty’s being eaten away by fountain based erosion. He’s a listed structure though so we might have to leave him there. So we might have to get rid of the fountain. It’s dated anyway. A bit 1970s.’ Looks of concern all round. ‘But you know how attached they were to those 1970s cobbles …’

Reinvigorate York, City of York Council, Exhibition Square artist’s impression

So one of the possible redesigns has the 1970s fountain retained in the middle of the square. Stuck on its own, looking a bit rubbish, too wide, too intrusive, not very interesting. Etty has been shuffled off to the side.

What Etty looks upon. Summer evening, 2007

I’m not a massive fan of statues on plinths, but this one is an important part of York’s story, and it was carefully placed here, so Etty was ‘looking’ at the city walls, Bootham Bar. Its positioning is perfect. It might be inconvenient now, I can see that, but, like Paul Woosey’s bench and the mulberry tree in King’s Square, its position is crucial to its meaning. If you shuffle Etty off to the side of the square then he’s looking at King’s Manor instead. Which removes so much of the story and context that we might as well stick him in West Bank Park in Holgate, with the statue of Queen Victoria.

So, 1970s fountain or the Etty statue? Which do we want to keep? Reinvigorate York consultation and information here, and comments welcome below.

The post Etty under attack from 1970s fountain appeared first on York Stories.