A MOTHER says she is heartbroken after planners blocked proposals to install a lift at their York home for her quadriplegic son.

Lisa Parker said the blow came after she raised more than £5,000 towards a £10,000 fundraising target to help meet the cost of the lift, thanks to fantastic support from the community.

The Press reported in October how Lisa's son Max, four, had to be carried upstairs to his bedroom and the bathroom of their home in Campleshon Road, South Bank, after developing cerebral palsy and dystonia when he was born 13 weeks prematurely.

Lisa and her husband Mark said Max, who attends Hob Moor Oaks School, was getting heavier and they now wanted to build a two-storey extension which could contain a lift shaft, so they could keep the dining room for their family, which also includes two other children, Lily and Ben.

Fundraising events included a charity auction held at St Chad's Church Hall.

But Lisa has now revealed that City of York Council's planning department turned down an initial planning application in August and had now said it would refuse permission a second time.

In a formal complaint to the council, she claimed her architect was asked to speak to a planning official before submitting new plans and claimed she subsequently received assurances from officials that the plans were 'fine.'

She said that following delays, she received a call last month saying the plans would be refused unless they were altered, but she believed there was insufficient time to redesign the scheme.

"After all of our hard work, communication and working together to get the plans right – to be told one week before the deadline that the plans need changing yet again is disgraceful, heart-breaking, stressful, frustrating and very much a complete waste of our time and effort," she claimed.

"We do not have time to waste. Max is getting bigger and is still being carried up and down stairs by his parents. We are a family of five and we need the space and area for us all to live together."

A council report on the Parker's first application said the extension would be harmful to the amenity of neighbours, and would be 'an overbearing and oppressive structure which will cause significant harm to the outlook from the adjacent rear habitable rooms and spaces of this property.'

Jonathan Carr, the council's head of development services and regeneration, told The Press: “While we are sympathetic towards Ms Parker’s case and we have offered free advice on how the development might be amended, as in all cases the authority has to also bear in mind the effect on neighbouring property and residents.

“Following discussions we agreed that a revised application could be submitted, but also offered guidance on what needed to be changed to ensure the scheme had less impact.

“The submitted scheme did not address the concerns and the council has agreed an extension of time until January 9 to allow revisions to be made. The applicant has since stated that she does not wish to formally submit the amended scheme that her agent has produced, but there is still an opportunity for this to happen before a decision is made.”

Asked about Mrs Parker's claims that officials said the revised plans were 'fine,' a council spokeswoman added: "We did not agree that the plans were acceptable in terms of the acceptability of the proposal in planning terms. Rather we agreed that the plans were acceptable for submission, mentioning that further assessment would be required on site and that further revisions may be required."