Electric Vehicle Charge Points (EVCPs) at The Chocolate Works

Update – June 2026

Recent correspondence (June 2026) received from City of York Council Planning Enforcement confirms:

• Phase 2 – “The issues you have raised regarding the interpretation of the planning conditions are still being reviewed by our legal team. Unfortunately, the matter is not straightforward and, in order to provide clear and definitive advice, additional time is required to review the planning policies that were in place at the time the application was determined.”
• Cocoa House – “In the meantime, the Local Planning Authority is considering the service of a Breach of Condition Notice in relation to Condition 6 of planning permission reference 17/01506/FUL.”
• Orange House – “In addition, a new enforcement case has been opened in respect of Condition 7 of planning permission reference 18/01934/FULM at The Orange House. You will shortly receive an automated email confirming that I am the case officer assigned to investigate this matter.”

While these developments represent progress, it should be noted that it has already taken more than 12 months to reach this stage and the timescale for any final determination remains uncertain!

Note: Although the correct number of EV Chargers have been installed at Orange House, it is possible they have been installed at incorrect positions as they were originally specified to serve Visitor Spaces.

Update – January 2026

Both Barratt/David Wilson Homes (B/DWH) and City of York Council (CYC) Planning continue to delay or avoid meeting their obligations regarding the provision of electric vehicle (EV) charging infrastructure across The Chocolate Works estate.

This update summarises the background, current position by development phase, and potential next steps.

Background

The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) came into effect on 27 March 2012 and sets out planning policy for England.
Paragraph 35 requires that planning approvals include provision for charging plug-in and other ultra-low emission vehicles.

The Chocolate Works development was approved under four principal planning permissions, each with different implications for EV charging. All of these approvals were granted after the introduction of the NPPF.

Planning History and EV Charging Conditions

1. Phase 1 – Planning Ref: 13/03429/REMM

• Application submitted: 16 October 2013
• Approval granted: 31 December 2013

This approval post-dated the introduction of the NPPF. However, CYC Planning failed to apply the national EV charging requirements when determining the application. As a result, no EV charging condition was imposed.

2. Phase 2 – Planning Ref: 14/01716/FULM

• Application submitted: 23 July 2014
• Approval granted: 24 February 2015

CYC Planning acknowledged the NPPF requirements and imposed a condition requiring the installation of a 13-amp external socket suitable for charging an electric vehicle.

3. Block J – Cocoa House (17/02874/FULM)

• Approval granted: 1 January 2019

The approval included a condition requiring the installation of three 13-amp external sockets suitable for EV charging.

4. Block K – Orange House

• Ten EV charging sockets have been installed in the Orange House car park.
• In planning terms, both CYC and B/DWH can be considered to have discharged their obligations.
• Bringing these chargers into operational use is now the responsibility of Yorkshire Housing.

Current Position

Phase 1

CYC Planning’s failure to apply the NPPF represents a significant policy error. However, from a practical standpoint, residents have very limited options:

• B/DWH was placed under no planning obligation to provide EV charging.
• Any complaint would be directed solely at CYC, not the developer.
• Even if upheld, a complaint is likely to result only in a reprimand, with no practical benefit for residents.

Conclusion: EV charging provision for Phase 1 is unlikely to be resolved.

Phase 2

A complaint was submitted to CYC Enforcement regarding B/DWH’s failure to comply with the EV charging condition.

• Enforcement initially resisted action, arguing that the condition was “made in the singular” and therefore unenforceable.
• This interpretation was challenged by reference to:
  • The Interpretation Act 1978 (section 6), which confirms that singular and plural terms are interchangeable unless stated otherwise.
  • Trump International Golf Club Scotland Ltd v The Scottish Ministers [2015] UKSC 74, which confirms that planning conditions must be interpreted in line with their intended purpose.

The suggestion that a single 13-amp socket could serve 229 properties is clearly untenable.

Following this challenge, CYC Enforcement referred the matter to CYC Legal Services.
The issue has now been with CYC’s lawyers for over six months (as at January 2026), with no visible progress.

Next step under consideration:
CWRA may escalate the matter via CYC’s formal complaints process (“Have Your Say”), with potential referral to the Local Government Ombudsman if delays continue.

Cocoa House (Block J)

The Cocoa House condition further highlights CYC’s limited understanding of EV charging infrastructure.

The condition requires three 13-amp sockets but does not clarify whether this means:

• Three sockets per apartment (illogical, as each apartment has one allocated space), or
• Three sockets for the entire block.

The only reasonable interpretation is three sockets for the block as a whole. While one socket for 229 Phase 2 properties is clearly inadequate, three sockets serving 18 apartments is at least plausible.

Although the condition predates the EV Smart Charging Regulations, retrospective compliance must meet the electrical regulations in force at the time of installation. This means that B/DWH must now install fully compliant EV charge points, in line with the EV Charge Point Regulations introduced in 2024, rather than simple 13-amp sockets.

CYC Enforcement has accepted this pragmatic approach and has instructed B/DWH to install the chargers. As expected, progress has been slow.

CYC Enforcement has indicated that an enforcement notice may be issued if B/DWH continues to delay, although this is unlikely without sustained pressure from residents.

Summary and Next Steps

• Phase 1: EV charging provision is effectively a lost cause.
• Phase 2: If CYC ultimately accepts our position, B/DWH will face significant challenges in achieving retrospective compliance.
• Potential compromise: CWRA may wish to explore a negotiated solution whereby B/DWH installs a number of strategically located shared (“public”) charge points for the benefit of all residents, potentially including Phase 1.
• Cocoa House: Should benefit from the installation of three compliant charge points in its car park at a future date.
• Orange House: Chargers are installed and connected, but Yorkshire Housing has yet to bring them into service.