30% abandon telephone calls to York Council

Benefits, parking charges and Council Tax top issues

The Council has revealed that it continues to face increasing demands for its services form local residents. A recent Council meeting heard that around 25,000 telephone calls were dealt with in October.

Of these around 30% were abandoned by the caller before they received a reply.

York Council Customer Services. click to download

York Council Customer Services. click to download

There is similar pressure in dealing with personal callers to West Offices.

Around 11,000 people visited during October.

Credit to the Council as it is now making its customer service performance figures available on line. Click here to see the latest update.

For the latest week published (w/e 12th December) around 4000 rang the Council with a reply obtained, on average, in 35 seconds.

There were also around 3000 visitors to West Offices

The Council does not publish the time it takes to respond to Email requests.

To reduce costs it desperately needs to encourage more people to use its “report it” internet systems. Residents are being encouraged to set up personal accounts (click here) which allow reports of issues to be made as well as payments to be processed.

The Council has promised that by April anyone using this channel to report issues will be able to see what progress the Council is making in resolving the complaint.

Currently the Council has to manually re-input any data received from customers using popular web based contact systems such as My Council

£11.9 million highways resurfacing boost for York

Potholes

The government has stepped in to give York an additional £2 million a year to tackle the road maintenance backlog.

Details of the announcement can be found by clicking here

The York Council gained notoriety in 2012 by halving the amount that it invested in repairing local footpaths and roads.

They continued the policy into 2013 with a large backlog of repairs developing.

Investment only returned to 2011 levels this year.

The York Council announced its provisional resurfacing programme for 2015 a couple of weeks ago. The government announcement means that this list should now more than double in size.

York Community Centre users fight cuts

Users of the Burton Stone Community Centre have joined their counterparts in Foxwood, Chapelfields and Bell Farm in criticising Labours plans for the future of their facilities.

Burton Stone community centre future unclear

Burton Stone community centre future unclear

A petition from the York Coronary Support Trust is being considered at a decision meeting on 27th November. The petition expresses concerns that the Council plan, to outsource the management of the centre, could lead to the organisation’s 4 fitness sessions each week being interrupted.

As at other community centres around the City, Labour are planning to eliminate all support subsidies by 1st April 2015.

In the case of Burton Stone, the centre will in future by predominately used to provide “a day activity programme for over 60 adults with a learning disability and/or autism between 9:00 – 5:00 Monday & Friday”.

New LibDem Councillor Andrew Waller has been leading the campaign to have Council grants to the City’s community centres restored.

A grant of £15,000 a year to each would allow a part time caretaker to be employed, raising the possibility of increased opening hours and hence community use.

Most York Community Centre rely heavily on volunteers to manage and sustain them.

Free meeting room offer at Gale Farm Court

The residents of Gale Farm Court, the sheltered accommodation unit for older people which is located on Front Street, have come up with a novel way of making better use of their community room.Rock band

They are offering free use of the room – which can accommodate up to 40 people – to local groups who need a meeting space.

The residents will permit free use of the room with priority being given to groups who might let residents join in with their activities.

Obviously this offer is likely to be of particular interest to craft, further education and discussion groups who are in need of additional participants, but it may also go some way to satisfying the demand for space at places like Energise and the Library which are sometimes over subscribed.

Any group that is interested should communicate their details and requirements to:

Kerrie Smith|Sheltered Housing Scheme Manager

t: 01904 552298 |m: 07825680637| e: kerrie.smith@york.gov.uk

 

Castlegate closure to be challenged

Opposition parties on the York Council have called in for reconsideration a plan to close the Castlegate youth advice and help centre.

Castlegate centre

The meeting will take place on 31st October and the reports can be read by clicking here

The Castlegate centre provides information, support and counselling for young people aged between 16-25 in York,

Probably the main issue concerns the proposal to transfer some youth advice services to West Offices.

It is difficult to think of a less suitable location.

The building can be intimidating, reception arrangements busy (see article above) and occasionally chaotic – despite the best endeavours of staff.

It is also noisy because of the atrium design.

The Council may wish to move the service to a more affordable location but West Offices would be a poor choice.

Ouse Bridge weeds in rude good health

Ouse bridge weeds 25th September 2014

Ouse bridge weeds 25th September 2014

Almost 4 months after the weed growth on Ouse Bridge was first reported to the Council they continue to thrive.

The Council agreed in the summer to ensure that they were treated with weed killer but – if the process ever took place – it has proved to be ineffective.

Great shame as the bridge is well used by both residents and tourists and the undergrowth is a poor advert for the City centre.

Hopefully the Council will act before the structural integrity of the bridge is compromised.

We now understand that they are to try to pull the weeds by hand

 

Increase in cost of Community Stadium is bad news for taxpayers

Future of Waterworld and Yearsley pools under threat

08-27-2014-08-48-27-555

Labour are circulating a glossy brochure ahead of the publication of a report on the future of leisure provision in the City. Private briefings to staff and media have raised serious issues about the future of swimming and other facilities in the City.

The project will now cost £37 million in total with Greenwich Leisure (who have operated Waterworld for the last 3 years) taking on responsibility for all major sporting and swimming facilities in the City.

Greenwich Leisure are a CIC although the level of local York engagement – if any – in their management decisions and structure has yet to be announced.

Community Stadium

The project will cost taxpayers £8 million more than originally budgeted. It had been expected that a 6000 seater stadium and replacement athletics track could be built for the £12 million contribution from the John Lewis development. The Council would have contributed only the value of the Huntington Stadium site (conservatively assessed as £4.1 million). The Football Foundation would have put in the £2 million that it had loaned against the value of a redeveloped Bootham Crescent.

Later Labour said that they would spend the £4 million contingency included in the Councils budget for the project. This had been included as a potential loan which would be repaid from stadium income.

Now Labour are stating that they will borrow an additional £4 million bringing the taxpayers contribution up to £8 million in total, with the stadium capacity increased to 8000 (it costs roughly £1 million for every additional bank of 1000 seats).

It is highly unlikely that such an additional burden could be passed on to the Football and Rugby clubs with details of their rental agreements not having yet been revealed.

At a time when the campaign for” safe standing” – backed by the Liberal Democrats is gaining momentum – local fans will be bemused that the design does not appear to provide for rail seats (although this modification could still be made)

Council taxpayers will be responsible for the debt repayment charges on the amount borrowed which will be around £600,000 a year. It is far from clear where this money will come from although some additional “commercial elements” have been designed into the scheme.

Given the controversy about out of city centre shopping, this raises doubts about how long the planning process might take and with it the ability of any contractor to meet a July 2016 opening date.

Waterworld

Waterworld and its associated gym will close in December.

A new pool and gym will be designed into the stadium. However it will be more conventional than Waterworld with only a small “fun” pool included.

Waterworld is only 20 years old and with that kind of life one wonders how durable such facilities now are? (The Barbican pool lasted for 40 years, Yearsley is over 100 years old)

Since the opening of the Sports Village on Hull Road, the Council has met national standards for the provision of swimming pools. There is insufficient demand to pay for an additional swimming pool (which is why Labour quietly dropped their plans for a city centre pool).

Yearsley Pool

Under Labours plans, the opening of the new pool at Huntington will mean the end of the Council subsidy (around £250k pa) for the Yearsley pool. The unique 50 yard pool has fought off two previous attempts by Labour to close it although ironically in early 2011 – following a £1 million refit undertaken by the then LibDem controlled Council – Labour invented a bogus “closure” rumour and campaigned against something that was not going to happen. A new boiler was fitted at the pool meaning that the steam heat supply from the Nestle site could not attract disproportionately high charges.

Yearsley Pool

Yearsley Pool

Labour have now performed a 180 degree policy about turn.

The only chance for the pool would be for users to acquire the site and run it independently as a community asset. However it is highly unlikely that that increased admission charges could make up the financial deficit – more so as it would have to complete with three other modern pools in the City not to mention those at several independent sports clubs, hotels and schools.

Its only hope would be for Nestle to relent and allow a profitable gym to be added although this might involve them losing some car parking space.

Energise

The management of Energise – the sports facility on Cornlands Road – seems less threatened by the take over plans.

The centre is very popular and no doubt Greenwich Leisure will want to keep it that way. However standardisation of charges and facilities, together with focusing some types of provision at just one site, may prove to be a challenge in the future.

No guarantees are being offered on admission charges although heavy competition from the private sector may help to keep them down.

What next?

The Stadium project is running over two years behind timetable. The publication of a report, for decision by the Councils Cabinet on 9th September, is belated but welcome.

Residents will be looking very carefully at the business plan for the new facility as the Council – which will remain the freeholder – does not want to risk having to step in to recover a failing project a few years down the line (as happened in Huddersfield a few years ago).

The changes to the retail component of the project do raise planning issues that may take some time to resolve, jeopardising the construction start date..

Whether a July 2016 opening date is realistic remains to be seen.

Acomb public toilets to reopen

The York Council has said that the public toilets in Acomb, closed for over 2 months, will be reopened shortly.Acomb toilets closed 2 1400 hours 25th July 2014

Apparently the refurbishment has been completed and they are now only waiting for a new lock to arrive and be fitted.

The Council has (rightly) been heavily criticised, first for not providing a replacement temporary facility, and more recently for not putting a notice on the toilets saying what progress was being made and when the facility would reopen.

The Council has however warned that repair work to the roof of the building is outstanding and that this may be done in September.

That could involve another closure period!

Acomb Rates Discount – list of properties published

Mystery deepens over Council decision as FOI response reveals only 4 empty units may be affected.

11-15 Front Street

11-15 Front Street

The Labour Cabinet came under fire earlier in the month when it nodded through a proposal to give 50% Rates relief to any empty property in the “Acomb” area that was brought back into use.

Now the Councils list of empty retail (and commercial) properties in the YO24 and YO26 area has been published.

The list reveals that the main “problem” property (which is also very prominent) is 11 – 15 Front Street (part of which was formerly occupied by Superdrug). We understand that the property was sold be the Coop Bank a couple of years ago and is now understood to be back on the market.

Many will feel that this site needs redeveloping although what Rates discount would apply to new properties remains unclear.

As we have said before, there is a good case for improving on the government scheme which gives a Rates discount on re-occupied properties which have been empty for more than 12 months.

However if discounts apply from day one then this could rightly be regarded as unfair competition by existing traders.

It was pointed out at the time, that the area of benefit was ill defined and – if it was intended to boost the Front Street area – then it needed to be focussed on longer term empty properties.

With the recession now ending it appeared that most shops had either been occupied or were under offer. Some prime sites are now understood to be changing hands at a premium.

The LibDems submitted the following comments to the meeting earlier in the month

The Liberal Democrat Group was disappointed that the Labour Cabinet did not support a comprehensive regeneration proposal for Front Street at July’s full Council.

This proposal, which uses powers given to Councils by the Coalition Government, seems to have been cobbled together in a rush – as the rewrites in the paper published on the council website indicate. Key details such as which exact area the discount will apply within are missing (the council papers refer only to “Acomb”). The paper does not explain why the scheme is restricted to retail premises (the similar Government scheme refers to all businesses) and it does not explain how temporary ‘pop-up’ units will affect entitlements.

We would also like further information on how the process will work given the September deadline for applications. The concern that the discount could be used by national chains, moving into prime sites immediately as leases become available, is not addressed and no alternative proposals are considered e.g. focusing discounts on properties which have been empty for over 3 months (business rates are not payable on a commercial property for the first 3 months that it is empty).

The Council needs to act promptly to clear u the confusion caused by its decision