CITY councillors unanimously rejected British Sugar’s plans to develop the site of its former Acomb factory last night.

The company wants to build 1,100 houses on a 100-acre site between Plantation Drive and Millfield Road to the north of Boroughbridge Road.

But it does not propose to build any houses that could be afforded by people on lower incomes - and councillor after councillor said it was critical that it did.

They also rejected the outline plans on other grounds including a lack of necessary infrastructure.

A Government planning inspector will hold a public inquiry into the plans from January 16.

Proposing that the planning committee reject the plans, Cllr Ann Reid said people could not believe that a site as big as the British Sugar plant could not support some affordable houses.

Cllr Andy D’Agorne said: “Affordable housing on this big site is critical in terms of providing our need for it in this city.”

He also said that having affordable housing would reduce the impact the development would have on traffic on the Outer Ring Road.

British Sugar claims that the costs of preparing the site, derelict since 2007, makes it impossible for it to construct affordable houses.

The council disputes the cost put by British Sugar on environmental and other matters relating to the Acomb site including professional services.

Cllr Michael Pavlovic suggested officers look at the costs for a British Sugar site in Telford which provided 10 per cent affordable houses.

Earlier this year British Sugar appealed against the delay by the council in deciding decide whether to give it outline planning permission. Cllr Reid said the scheme was too big to be fully assessed in the normal timescale.

The committee was not deciding whether to refuse the application, but to decide the council stance before the Government inspector.

Talks between council officers and British Sugar are continuing.

Council officers have sent the matter before the full planning committee so councillors can decide whether or not to back their officers’ assessment of the scheme.

They will also discuss how the council will present its case to the planning inspector.

Officers are recommending councillors to consider the plans as though there was no appeal and to “refuse” the application.

In his report, Mike Slater, assistant director for planning at the council, writes: “Although officers objections to the scheme since the appeal was made have, through negotiation, been reduced there are still a number of important matters that are still unresolved.”

In a statement before the meeting, a British Sugar spokesman said the company was aware of all the council’s concerns.

“British Sugar is continuing to work closely with City of York Council on these final outstanding matters and very much hopes to be in a position to secure the outline planning permission from the council later this year or very early next.”