Councillor's plea to change name of City of York Council new headquarters

THE historic building which is to become York’s new £32 million council headquarters is to keep its current name – despite calls for a leading councillor for it to be given a new title.

City of York Council will move into its state-of-the-art civic base at West Offices, in Station Rise – a former railway station – in March through a project which the authority says will save £17 million over the next 25 years, as its accommodation portfolio is cut from 17 buildings around the city to only two.

Work on the scheme is nearing completion, with the building including the council’s customer centre. It has now been confirmed the HQ will continue to be known as West Offices in order to respect its history and the role it once played as a rail hub.

However, Coun Ian Gillies, who leads the authority’s Conservative group, has written to its chief executive Kersten England saying he believes the West Offices name should be consigned to history and the HQ should instead have a title reflecting its civic status.

He said: “It is important, as far as I am concerned, for the council to ‘own’ the building, and in order to do that, we need to delete the West Offices label. This has railway connections and while the history needs to be respected, we need to move on. The West Offices name is now history – we do not have North, East or South Offices, so it is the start of a new era and we should take the opportunity for the future.”

Coun Gillies said he had given some thought to an “appropriate name” for the new HQ, and said: “I cannot get away from ‘City Hall’. It says everything regarding the function with the walls of the headquarters, and it is simply and relevant. I have canvassed thoughts among those both within the authority and in the city, and nobody has come up with anything better.”

Coun Julie Gunnell, cabinet member for corporate services, said continuing the West Offices name would “reflect the building's historic links to the city's long-standing connection with the rail industry”, adding that the authority was “excited” at the prospect of starting its move into the new HQ from the start of next month.

The move will be completed in March and Coun Gunnell said it would mean “more efficient and joined-up” services for residents.

The keys to the HQ were handed over to the council, which says the project will be completed within budget, last month. West Offices’s transformation has been taking shape over the last 20 months, being led by York-based S Harrison Developments and Buccleuch Property with building work being carried out by Miller Construction.

Comments(15)

Old_Man says...
10:03am Wed 16 Jan 13

Idiot Cllr. Gillies! Typical of a Tory to try and delete (in his own words) part of York's railway heritage. I mean, that's just what the Tories did in the 1980s isn't it but on a national scale?

A better suggestion would be to "delete" Cllrs. Gillies, Alexander etc and put York in the hands of people with a modicum of competence.

Scarlet Pimpernel says...
10:51am Wed 16 Jan 13

I note that the comments facility on yesterday's letter by Coun Gunnell was disallowed, but not this story, giving further cause for concern that Labour councillors are stifling debate by requesting that the press do this.

Coun Gunnell justified the £1.4m expenditure on new desks and chairs for the offices, by saying that using the councils existing furniture would mean that they coundn't accommodate all the staff at West Offices. Yet, in her letter she wrote this...

"Having partners such as the CAB in the same building not only generates income but also makes sense from the perspective of residents accessing multiple services"

This confirms that the council didn't use all the office space so let it out to CAB. Yet more porky pies by the Labour cabinet ?

pedalling paul says...
12:50pm Wed 16 Jan 13

I recall moves many years ago to commemorate the much respected Ken Appleby, one of the last BR Area Managers for York. Perhaps this is an appropriate opportunity.
Mind you with the old HQ being informally known as the "Kremlin" and Hudson House as "Hassle Castle" others may have their own thoughts..........

xtc says...
1:01pm Wed 16 Jan 13

Still going to be a bad service so what's in a name?lipstick on a pig and all that!

Mulgrave says...
1:24pm Wed 16 Jan 13

Its about 150 years after the rest of Yorkshire built status symbol town halls, and as a comment on yesterdays letter by Cllr Gunnell, how on earth does she know how many people will need to actually visit the offices, which are not particually conveniently situated unless you live or work in the city centre, over the next 25 years?

I am in my 50's and wouldn't see the need to visit the offices as an email or phone call is far simpler, although of course some will still need a more personal service. Also an efficient council spending its money wisely will generate less need to complain and request services and action.

York1900 says...
2:03pm Wed 16 Jan 13

How much would it cost to change the name Too much as councilors would want to do some thing that ran in to thousands of pounds

tobefair says...
3:57pm Wed 16 Jan 13

Why don't they put it out to private consultants. I'm sure they could come up with a title and it would only cost a few thousand!

Buzz Light-year says...
6:38pm Wed 16 Jan 13

Scarlet Pimpernel wrote:
I note that the comments facility on yesterday's letter by Coun Gunnell was disallowed, but not this story, giving further cause for concern that Labour councillors are stifling debate by requesting that the press do this

Agreed. Looks very suspicious.

However, it's vehemently denied more than once on Twitter by The Press MD and top editor.

Buzz Light-year says...
6:43pm Wed 16 Jan 13

I agree and disagree with Ian Gillies.
It would be good to bring in a new name for West Offices but City Hall is absolutely rubbish, it's unoriginal, hackneyed and stuffy.

nowthen says...
7:04pm Wed 16 Jan 13

How about " The Kremlin " .

nearlyman says...
8:38pm Wed 16 Jan 13

'Alexandergate' ?

jgycfc says...
11:23pm Wed 16 Jan 13

Hold on, hold on...

If the press figures here are right, I'm missing something... It was meant to be a saving of money long term, right? Well here it's quoting that it cost £32 million yet with a saving of £17 million over 25 years.

So a "Saving" of £680k per annum from this, reduced by inflation (and debts owed) I presume?

Does this "Saving" figure also include the cost of not listening to English Heritage over the Hungate disaster? How much was lost on that sheer arrogance of CYC planning?

Also with such a relatively small saving per year (which clearly excludes all the stuff that's been deemed "Operational" in this, who on earth signed it off?

Either someone who has access to what the savings actually are, or how this latest poor show of "savings" has actually been derived, or the Press, please, please use your usual "Investigatory Journalism" aka FOI request, and get the full cost of this Please.

Also it's based on, I suspect, off-loading offices on day 1 that are no longer used, right?

Shambolic. But back to the story, so is Gillies, and I bet JA does want it renamed to something like Alexandergate nearlyman...

We'll have the JA Sports Arena, JAlexandergate and any of the stuff that he tries to sell that doesn't belong to him (e.g. carparks like the "lefty-Fascist" streak he has) there's a clause to name it JA related.

nearlyman says...
12:07am Thu 17 Jan 13

Actually I just re read the story...the project will save £17 million over 25 years ?..................i
s this not a drop in the ocean when set against the £650,000 we are apparently paying each month in debt repayment ?

PinzaC55 says...
7:11pm Thu 17 Jan 13

Money Eater?
Wallers Revenge?
Disney Castle?

yorkborn66 says...
1:18am Fri 18 Jan 13

Bull Sh**ers Palace

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree