Agenda, decisions and minutes

At this point in the meeting, Members are asked to declare:

·        any personal interests not included on the Register of Interests

·        any prejudicial interests or

·        any disclosable pecuniary interests

which they may have in respect of business on this agenda.

The Executive Member was asked to declare any personal, prejudicial or pecuniary interests he may have in the business on the agenda.  None were declared.

To approve and sign the minutes of the meeting held on 23^rd July 2015.

Resolved:  That the minutes of the Decision Session held on 23 July 2015 be approved and signed as a correct record.

At this point in the meeting, members of the public who have registered their wish to speak at the meeting can do so. The deadline for registering is 5:00pm on Wednesday 9^th September 2015. 

Members of the public may speak on an item on the agenda or an issue within the Cabinet Member’s remit,

Filming or Recording Meetings

Please note this meeting may be filmed and webcast and that includes any registered public speakers, who have given their permission.  This broadcast can be viewed at http://www.york.gov.uk/webcasts.

Residents are welcome to photograph, film or record Councillors and Officers at all meetings open to the press and public. This includes the use of social media reporting, i.e. tweeting.  Anyone wishing to film, record or take photos at any public meeting should contact the Democracy Officer (whose contact details are at the foot of this agenda) in advance of the meeting.

The Council’s protocol on Webcasting, Filming & Recording of Meetings ensures that these practices are carried out in a manner both respectful to the conduct of the meeting and all those present.  It can be viewed at: https://www.york.gov.uk/downloads/file/6453/protocol_for_webcasting_filming_and_recording_council_meetingspdf

It was reported that there had been three registrations to speak at the meeting under the Council’s Public Participation Scheme and that two Members of Council had also registered to speak. 

Councillor Brooks spoke in respect of agenda item 4 (Proposal to designate Hassacarr Nature Reserve as a Statutory Local Nature Reserve by delegation of function).  She stated that she was Vice-Chair of Dunnington Parish Council who owned the land.  Councillor Brooks requested that the Executive Member agreed to option 1 in the report, as this would open up opportunities for grants.  She stated that the land was much loved by the village.

Councillor Aspden spoke in respect of agenda item 6 (Waiting Restrictions Heslington Lane, Broadway – Hull Road Ward and Fulford and Heslington Ward).  He outlined some of the issues, including accidents and near miss incidents that had taken place.  Councillor Aspden stated that it was important that the Council and University worked together to address the problems.  He stated that the proposals had strong support from residents and urged the Executive Member to introduce the restrictions in accordance with the advertised proposal.

Councillor Aspden also spoke in respect of agenda item 7 (Proposed Enhancements to the University Road Pedestrian Crossing and Cycle Route Scheme).   He thanked officers for attending the site visit, as previously residents had not been consulted.  Councillor Aspden requested that the Executive Member considered delaying the implementation of the speed cushions but agreed to the installation of a new crossing refuge on a trial basis.

Ms Annaliese Emmans Dean, local resident, spoke in respect of agenda item 7 (Proposed Enhancements to the University Road Pedestrian Crossing and Cycle Route Scheme).   She stated that officers had not listened to the concerns that had been raised and there had been a lack of consultation.  There were equalities issues that had not been acknowledged, including the use of speed cushions which caused particular problems for people with osteoporosis.  A flat, safe crossing would be a better option.

Mr Andrew Collingwood, local resident, spoke in respect of agenda item 7 (Proposed Enhancements to the University Road Pedestrian Crossing and Cycle Route Scheme).   He stated that he was against the introduction of more speed humps.  They caused particular difficulties for drivers of small cars.  Mr Collingwood stated that action needed to be taken in respect of bus lay-bys.

Mr Nicholas Allen spoke on behalf of the Parish Council and the Village Trust in respect of agenda item 7 (Proposed Enhancements to the University Road Pedestrian Crossing and Cycle Route Scheme).   He stated that he was pleased that a site visit had taken place, as previously there did not appear to have been any consultation.  He expressed concern that a lay-by was being used as a loading bay by the university and stated that it should be used for buses, as the present arrangements were causing queuing.  He stated that he would prefer to see a zebra crossing and that the arrangements should be time limited and further consultation carried  ...  view the full minutes text for item 15.

This report proposes that City of York Council supports the application to declare Hassacarr Nature Reserve as a Local Nature Reserve (LNR) albeit that the land is within the ownership of Dunnington Parish Council.

Resolved:  That the Executive Member approves Option 1, to endorse that the City of York Council delegates its functions under Section 21 of the National Parks and Access to the Countryside Act, 1949 to Dunnington Parish Council in this one instance such that Hassacarr Nature Reserve be designated as a Local Nature Reserve.

Reason:     The designation as an LNR will bring positive benefits to the local community and to the site itself.  It will help preserve and enhance the site for future years, send a positive message to the local community, and ensure good management practices are followed in consultation with Natural England.

The Executive Member considered a report which proposed that City of York Council supported the application to declare Hassacarr Nature Reserve as a Local Nature Reserve (LNR) albeit that the land is within the ownership of Dunnington Parish Council. 

The Executive Member considered the following options:

·        Option 1: City of York Council endorses the application to declare Hassacarr Nature Reserve as a Local Nature Reserve by delegating powers to Dunnington Parish Council in this one instance.  This would avoid the need to have a nature reserve agreement regarding the management of the land.

·        Option 2: City of York Council enters a (nature reserve) agreement with the Parish Council regarding the management of the land under the auspices of section 7 of Natural Environment and Rural Communities (NERC) Act 2006.

·        Option 3: City of York Council does not endorse the application to declare Hassacarr Nature Reserve as a Local Nature Reserve.

Resolved:  That the Executive Member approves Option 1, to endorse that the City of York Council delegates its functions under Section 21 of the National Parks and Access to the Countryside Act, 1949 to Dunnington Parish Council in this one instance such that Hassacarr Nature Reserve be designated as a Local Nature Reserve.

Reason:     The designation as an LNR will bring positive benefits to the local community and to the site itself.  It will help preserve and enhance the site for future years, send a positive message to the local community, and ensure good management practices are followed in consultation with Natural England.

This report sets out a revised scheme proposal for Jockey Lane cycle and pedestrian improvements in response to various issues that have arisen since the previous scheme was approved.

The Executive Member considered a report which set out a revised scheme proposal in response to various issues that had arisen since the previous scheme was approved.

Resolved:  That Option ii be approved i.e. the scheme as proposed in Annex C of the report be implemented, with the exception of the proposed Toucan crossing facility which should be made a Parallel Crossing facility as soon as national regulations make this possible, and a Zebra in the meantime (as per Annex D of the report).  In addition, the savings achieved from changing the form of crossing facility be used to enable a full carriageway resurfacing scheme between the New Lane and Kathryn Avenue junctions.

Reason:     There would be significant advantages in implementing the scheme with the amended crossing proposals shown in Annex D.  This should bring down the overall cost of the scheme to around £115k and the savings would release money to allow a full resurfacing scheme to be carried out in conjunction with the proposed maintenance allocation.

The Executive Member considered a report which set out a revised scheme proposal in response to various issues that had arisen since the previous scheme was approved.

Officers stated that there had been a change in terminology used and that references in the report to “tiger crossings” should be replaced with “parallel crossings”.

The Executive Member considered the following options:

·        Option i:     Implement the scheme as proposed in Annex C (with a Toucan crossing)

·        Option ii:    Implement the scheme with a Zebra Crossing point as shown in Annex D now and replace it with a Parallel Crossing when it is legal to do so.

·        Option iii:   Postpone the project until the legislation is in place to introduce a Parallel Crossing on Jockey Lane without doing the Interim Phase Annex D.

·        Option iv:   Do nothing.

Resolved:  That Option ii be approved i.e. the scheme as proposed in Annex C of the report be implemented, with the exception of the proposed Toucan crossing facility which should be made a Parallel Crossing facility as soon as national regulations make this possible, and a Zebra in the meantime (as per Annex D of the report).  In addition, the savings achieved from changing the form of crossing facility be used to enable a full carriageway resurfacing scheme between the New Lane and Kathryn Avenue junctions.

Reason:     There would be significant advantages in implementing the scheme with the amended crossing proposals shown in Annex D.  This should bring down the overall cost of the scheme to around £115k and the savings would release money to allow a full resurfacing scheme to be carried out in conjunction with the proposed maintenance allocation.

The purpose of this report is to consider objections and comments received to the advertised proposal to introduce waiting restrictions along parts of Heslington Lane, Broadway and Heath Moor Drive. A decision is then required as to how to proceed with the proposed restrictions.

Resolved:  That the restrictions be introduced in accordance with the advertised proposal.

Reason:     To improve traffic flow along the important arterial roads, while also preventing the current parking being displaced further along these main roads or onto the grass verges.

The Executive Member considered a report which detailed objections and comments received to the advertised proposal to introduce waiting restrictions along parts of Heslington Lane, Broadway and Heath Moor Drive.  The Executive Member was asked to determine how to proceed with the proposed restrictions.

The Executive Member considered the following options:

·        Option 1:    Introduction of the restrictions in accordance with the advertised proposal.

·        Option 2:    Implement a revised less restrictive version of the advertised proposal.

·        Option 3:    Take no action.

Resolved:  That the restrictions be introduced in accordance with the advertised proposal.

Reason:     To improve traffic flow along the important arterial roads, while also preventing the current parking being displaced further along these main roads or onto the grass verges.

This report presents information to show how the University Road scheme is currently operating, and outlines a number of proposed enhancements. 

Resolved:  (i)      That the following additions to the scheme be

                             approved subject to a six month trial:

·        Two extra pairs of speed cushions with central islands, as shown in Annex B of the report, to make the 20mph Zone more effective.

·        A new crossing refuge located at the speed table near the bus stops, as shown in Annex C of the report, to increase pedestrian safety in the busiest crossing location.

(ii)      That it be noted that officers are currently working with the University to encourage greater use of the new cycle path.  This involves installing various additional direction signs, plus extra signs and markings at all the entry points to make the status of the path more obvious, and publicising the facility to students.

(iii)     That the Executive Member confirmed acceptance of the University’s view that the provision of an additional set of steps to the footbridge on the Market Square side of University Road is unnecessary, and noted the University’s financial contribution to the scheme.

Reasons:   (i)      The additional measures will improve the

safety of all road users, in particular university students crossing University Road, and encourage greater use of the new cycle route.

                   (ii)      It is considered that the provision of additional

                             steps to the Library footbridge is not necessary.

(iii)     The University has offered to contribute extra funding to improve the scheme.

The Executive Member considered a report on the University Road pedestrian crossing and cycle route scheme which detailed how the scheme was currently operating and which outlined a number of proposed enhancements.

The Executive Member considered the following options:

·        Option 1:    Approve the scheme additions (extra speed cushions and central refuge) as shown in Annexes B and C.

·        Option 2:    Reject the proposed scheme amendments and retain the existing layout.

The Executive Member questioned officers as to whether it would be feasible to implement some of the measures but delay installing other measures such as the speed cushions.  Officers stated that they did not recommend this strategy as it was important to reduce the distance between the measures.  Physical measures were the most effective strategy to reduce speed and had been included in the original consultation. 

The Executive Member sought clarification regarding the lay-by that was used by the university.  Officers confirmed that the lay-by was used as a servicing point by the university and the university would be likely to be opposed to losing that facility.  Bus companies were reluctant to use lay-bys as it was difficult for buses then to re-enter the traffic flow.

Officers were asked if equalities duties had been addressed.  They stated that the proposals did not breach equalities requirements and they believed that the right balance had been achieved.

The Executive Member asked about the measures that would be in place to seek to ensure the safety of people getting off the buses.  Officers explained the crossing points and safe refuge that would be in place.

The Executive Member stated that he did have reservations about aspect of the scheme and had noted the issues that had been raised by the registered speakers.  Nevertheless, in order to achieve the most effective results, he accepted that it was necessary to implement all of the additions to the scheme that had been detailed.  It was, however, important that the measures were reviewed to ascertain their effectiveness and that action taken should be reversible.

Resolved:  (i)      That the following additions to the scheme be

                             approved subject to a six month trial:

·        Two extra pairs of speed cushions with central islands, as shown in Annex B of the report, to make the 20mph Zone more effective.

·        A new crossing refuge located at the speed table near the bus stops, as shown in Annex C of the report, to increase pedestrian safety in the busiest crossing location.

(ii)      That it be noted that officers are currently working with the University to encourage greater use of the new cycle path.  This involves installing various additional direction signs, plus extra signs and markings at all the entry points to make the status of the path more obvious, and publicising the facility to students.

(iii)     That the Executive Member confirmed acceptance of the University’s view that the provision of an additional set of steps to the footbridge on the Market Square side of University Road is unnecessary, and noted the University’s financial  ...  view the full minutes text for item 19.

This report identifies the proposed changes to the 2015/16 City and Environmental Services Capital Programme to take account of carryover funding from 2014/15.

Resolved:  (i)      That the carryover schemes and adjustments set

out in Annexes 1 and 2 of the report be approved.

                   (ii)      That the increase to the 2015/16 City and

Environmental Services capital programme budget, subject to the approval of the Executive, be noted.

Reason:              To enable the effective management and

                             monitoring of the council’s capital programme.

The Executive Member considered a report which identified the proposed changes to the 2015/16 City and Environmental Services Capital Programme to take account of carryover funding from 2014/15.  The report also proposed adjustments to scheme allocations to align with the latest cost estimates and delivery projections.

Resolved:  (i)      That the carryover schemes and adjustments set

out in Annexes 1 and 2 of the report be approved.

                   (ii)      That the increase to the 2015/16 City and

Environmental Services capital programme budget, subject to the approval of the Executive, be noted.

Reason:              To enable the effective management and

                             monitoring of the council’s capital programme.