Agenda and minutes

At this point Members are asked to declare any personal or prejudicial interests they may have in the business on this agenda.

Members were invited to declare at this point in the meeting any personal or prejudicial interests they might have in the business on the agenda.

Councillor Merrett declared a personal non-prejudicial interest in Agenda Item 5 (Water End Cycle Scheme Evaluation) as an honorary member of the Cyclists' Touring Club, a member of Cycling England, a member of the York Cycle Campaign and as the Authorities Cycling Champion.

Councillor Simpson-Laing declared a personal non-prejudicial interest in Agenda Item 6 (A Low Emission Strategy for York) as she lived adjacent to a possible future Air Quality Management Area.

Councillor Alexander declared a personal non-prejudicial interest in Agenda Item 6 (A Low Emission Strategy for York) as he lived on Holgate Road which had been mentioned in the report as a high pollution area.

At this point in the meeting, members of the public who have registered their wish to speak regarding an item on the agenda or an issue within the Committee’s remit can do so. The deadline for registering is 5:00 pm on Friday, 11 June 2010.  

It was reported that there had been two registrations to speak at the meeting under the Council’s Public Participation Scheme. It was agreed that these would be taken under the individual agenda items.

To approve and sign the minutes of the SMC (Calling In) meeting held on 4 May 2010.

RESOLVED:             That the minutes of the last meeting of the Scrutiny Management (Calling In) meeting held on 4 May 2010 be approved and signed by the Chair as a correct record.

To consider the decisions made by the Executive Member for City Strategy on 1 June 2010 with regard to the above item, which have been called in by Councillors Horton, Pierce, and Simpson-Laing in accordance with the provisions of the Council’s Constitution.  A cover report is attached setting out the reasons for the call-in and the remit and powers of the Scrutiny Management Committee (Calling In) in relation to the call-in procedure, together with the original report to and decisions of the Executive Member.

Members received a report, which asked them to consider the decisions made by the Executive Member for City Strategy on 1 June 2010 in response to the receipt of two petitions requesting 20mph speed limits. The first covering Sovereign Park and the second for Dodsworth Avenue.

Details of the Executive Members decisions were attached as Annex 1 to the report. The original report to the Executive Member Decision Session was attached as Annex 2. The decisions had been called in by Councillors Horton, Pierce and Simpson-Laing on the grounds that:

 “Despite the fact that the proposal 'ticks all the boxes' of the criteria arbitrarily imposed by the Executive Member at the end of 2009 other than no reportable accidents in the last 3 years, the Executive Member has refused to move the item up the priority list where many of the suggested schemes above it fall short of meeting many of the criteria.  The lack of recordable accidents is down to the fact that the estate has only been occupied in the last 3 years and the highways only adopted recently making the criterion difficult to meet.

The Executive Member's insistence that until the city-wide consultation on 20 mph schemes across the City's residential areas is concluded, he is not prepared to move on any 20 mph scheme.”

Members were invited to decide whether to confirm the decisions of the Executive Member (Option A) or to refer them back to the Executive for reconsideration (Option B).

Councillor Horton addressed the meeting on behalf of the Calling-In Members. He confirmed that the call in only related to the request for a 20mph speed limit at Sovereign Park. He went onto reiterate the reason given for the calling in and detailed how Sovereign Park met and in some cases exceeded the prioritisation criteria for the implementation of such a scheme. He pointed out the overwhelming public support.

Representations in support of the scheme were received from a resident of Sovereign Park. She referred to the high percentage of young families living on the estate and confirmed that the Community Police Officer had witnessed a number of incidents involving children and vehicles in the area. She also referred to the road layout, which included blind bends and a lack of pavements, which exacerbated the dangers near to the play area. She pointed out that the petition, had received 233 signatures with 87% in support of the scheme.

Officers referred to references at the Executive Member Decision Session to injury accidents not being recorded on unadopted highways. Confirmation had now been received from the Police that injury accidents were recorded on unadopted highways but that these were not included in the official statistics provided to the DfT and that no injury accidents had been reported in Sovereign Pak in the last 3 years.

Following further discussion Cllr Galvin moved and Cllr Simpson-Laing seconded, that Option B be approved and the matter referred back to the Executive insofar as it related to Sovereign Park (Minute  ...  view the full minutes text for item 4.

To consider the decisions made by the Executive Member for City Strategy on 1 June 2010 with regard to the above item, which have been called in by Councillors Douglas, King and Scottin accordance with the provisions of the Council’s Constitution.  A cover report is attached setting out the reasons for the call-in and the remit and powers of the Scrutiny Management Committee (Calling In) in relation to the call-in procedure, together with the original report to and decisions of the Executive Member.

Note: The annexes to the original report to the Executive Member have been made available on-line only and are not included in the agenda pack or the printed copies.  Copies may be obtained from Democratic Services if required.

The Committee considered a report which asked them to consider the decisions made by the Executive Member for City Strategy on 1 June 2010 following on from the outcome of the Water End cycle scheme and the effectiveness of the scheme in encouraging increases in cycling levels. 

Details of the Executive Member’s decisions were attached as Annex 1 to the report. The original report to the Executive Member Decision Session was attached as Annex 2. The decisions had been called in by Councillors Douglas, King and Scott on the grounds that:

“The Executive Member misdirected himself

·        He failed to approach the report objectively and to make proper enquiries of the Officers

·        He failed to consider the definition of a "success" of the cycling scheme

·        He failed to consider whether the traffic implications of the cycling scheme are proportionate and legitimate consequence of the scheme

·        He failed to take any positive action to alleviate the problems identified by residents of Westminster Road and the Avenue

·        He failed to honour his commitment to re-instate the left hand turn lane at the Clifton Green Junction as promised at the City Strategy EMAP of October 2008

·        He failed to consider the reputational issues identified in the report to the City Strategy EMAP of October 2008 and to take steps to resolve them.

The Executive Member has pre-determined his response to the Scrutiny Committee report before it has been before the Executive Committee.

The Executive Member has reached a decision that no reasonable Executive Member could have reached.”

Members were invited to decide whether to confirm the decisions of the Executive Member (Option A) or to refer them back to the Executive for reconsideration (Option B).

Representations were heard from a resident of Westminster Road who referred to the dramatic increase in traffic on Westminster Road/The Avenue following changes made by the Council at the Water End junction.  He referred to recommendations in the Highway Design Guide and requested Members to support point closure without delay, which the majority of residents supported to improve conditions for local residents.

Councillor Scott then firstly addressed the meeting on behalf of the Calling-In members. He referred to a report to the October 2008 EMAP when a commitment had been given to undertake traffic studies and reinstate the Water End junction if rat running became a problem. He therefore requested point closure with a rising bollard to avoid further disruption to local residents. Another ‘calling in’ member, Cllr King then addressed the meeting before Cllr Pierce outlined the views of the Scrutiny Task Group on Water End, as the Chair.

Cllr Merrett moved, and Cllr Simpson-Laing seconded, that Option B be approved and Resolutions 5i) to iv) (Water End Cycle Scheme) referred back to the Executive with a recommendation that the Executive Member be asked to: confirm the terms under which he considered the Water End cycle scheme a success and to reconsider resolutions ii) to iv) in the light of the emerging final report of the Councillor Call  ...  view the full minutes text for item 5.

To consider the decisions made by the Executive on 8 June 2010 with regard to the above item, which have been called in by Councillors Alexander, Gunnell and Kingin accordance with the provisions of the Council’s Constitution.  A cover report is attached setting out the reasons for the call-in and the remit and powers of the Scrutiny Management Committee (Calling In) in relation to the call-in procedure, together with the original report to and decisions of the Executive.

Members received a report, which asked them to consider the decisions made by the Executive on 8 June 2010 in response to a report, which sought approval for the development of an overarching low emission strategy for York and provided an update on the Council’s successful joint bid with Leeds City Council to become regional low emission champions.

Details of the Executives decisions were attached as Annex 1 to the report. The original report to the Executive Member Decision Session was attached as Annex 2. The decisions had been called in by Councillors Alexander, Gunnell and King on the grounds that:

“(i)          The Executive has given no clear steer to officers in terms of urgently addressing the deteriorating air quality position in York in a meaningful way, given the extremely concerning levels of damage to health, nor even of specifying when the Low Emission Strategy is to be delivered by.

(ii)          Whilst recognising the need to co-ordinate the Air Quality and Carbon Management strategies, the Executive is wrong to arbitrarily decide to subordinate the Air Quality strategy to the Carbon Management programme.

(iii)             The Executive should have elevated the status of the Air Quality Steering Group in order that regular progress reports go direct to the relevant Executive Members/Executive, as one important step in addressing the serious risk to health in the city from poor air quality.”

Members were invited to decide whether to confirm the decisions of the Executive Member (Option A) or to refer them back to the Executive for reconsideration (Option B).

Councillor King addressed the meeting on behalf of the Calling-In members. He pointed out that the Councils carbon reduction targets were not being met and that air quality in the city had worsened. He referred to a number of breach areas and to the number of premature deaths caused by this pollution. He stated that drastic action was immediately required to bring levels to acceptable limits.

Officers confirmed that they were in position to develop the strategy by the end of the year and that currently measures were being put in place in an effort to improve air quality in the city.

Councillor Alexander then moved, and Cllr Merrett seconded, that Option B be approved and the matter be referred back to the Executive with a recommendation that the Executive should note the urgency of developing a Low Emissions Strategy for York and request its production before November with the strategy detailing by when the various standards, actions and targets should be met. On being put to the vote, this proposal was CARRIED and it was

RESOLVED:     That Option B be approved and the matter be referred back to the Executive with a request that they should note the urgency of developing a Low Emissions Strategy for York and request its production before November with the strategy detailing by when the various standards, actions and targets should be met.

REASON:                  In accordance with the requirements of the Council’s calling-in procedure and the reasons given for  ...  view the full minutes text for item 6.