Agenda and minutes

At this point, 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.

Members were asked to declare, at this point in the meeting, any personal interests not included on the Register of Interests or any prejudicial or discloseable pecuniary interest that they might have in respect of the business on the agenda. None were declared.

To approve and sign the minutes of the meeting held on 18 September 2018.

Resolved:  That the minutes of the last meeting held on 18 September 2018 be approved as a correct record and then signed by the Chair subject to the attendance being amended to record Cllr Fenton attending the meeting as substitute for Cllr Cullwick and Cllr Fenton being added to the Residents’ Parking Task Group.

It is at this point in the meeting that members of the public who have registered their wish to speak can do so. The deadline for registering is by 5.00pm on Monday 19 November 2018.  Members of the public may speak on an item on the agenda or an issue within the Committee’s remit. To register, please contact the Democracy Officer responsible for the meeting (the contact details are available at the foot of the agenda).

Filming or Recording Meetings

Please note that, subject to available resources, this meeting will be filmed and webcast, or recorded, including 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 http://www.york.gov.uk/download/downloads/id/11406/protocol_for_webcasting_filming_and_recording_of_council_meetings_20160809.pdf

It was reported that there had been no registrations to speak under the Council’s Public Participation Scheme.

Executive approved the Asset Management Strategy for 2017-2022 on 28 September 2017 which set out the principles and approaches for taking forward the Corporate Asset Strategy.  This report focuses on the  Community and Operational Asset Strategy (CAS)  element of this  and sets out how  the CAS will be delivered.

Members considered a report which gave focus to the Community and Operational Asset Strategy (CAS) element of the Asset Management Strategy for 2017-2022. The Commercial Project Manager – Community Asset Strategy was in attendance to present the report. He set out how the CAS would be delivered. It was noted that included in the CAS were children’s centres, community centres, health and adult social care, libraries, parks, playing fields and open spaces, schools and office accommodation and operational sites. There should be a joined up approach for the delivery of services. Building were assets and wherever possible an asset should no longer be used for a single purpose. 

Members asked a number of questions to which it was confirmed that:

·        There had been a joined up approach to Bootham Park Hospital with the Council working with NHS Property Services and the Clinical Commissioning Group (CCG) to look at what can be delivered on that site rather than just sell it to a developer.

·        In relation to Children’s Centres the approach would be to look at how the space could be used best to deliver child related services. It was noted that a number of services were delivered at the Children’s Centres, which had a lease of 25 years. An explanation was given as to why a period of 25 years was chosen.

·        The previous Manor CE School site was not within the scope of the CAS as it fell within the scope of the former British Sugar site (which was included in the Local Plan).  During discussion on asset strategy it was suggested that there could be separate spatial and asset management strategies. 

·        Academy schools were included on the list of assets because it was decided to categorise them as schools. As schools converted to academies it had been considered whether the whole of the site was needed by the academy.

·        The CAS list included all the CYC owned and leased sites.

·        In relation to open spaces, officers had looked at how to get communities interested in those spaces. It was noted that a broad approach was needed to consider what was best in each location.

·        A number of community amenity spaces may be part of a highway.

·        Concerning whether surplus land could be leased, consideration would be given as land came forward and the market at that time.

·        There was leadership on joint projects with different governance arrangements in place for different projects. Bootham Park Hospital was a good example of this and an explanation of the leadership arrangement for this was given.

·        Discussions would be held regarding how the provision of Information Technology (IT) and Facilities Management (FM) on different sites would be taken forward.

Resolved: That the report be noted.

Reason:     To involve Members in the principles and approaches for taking forward the Corporate Asset Strategy.

This report provides an update on the current LEP review, the responses made to date and the implications for York.  

Members considered a report that provided an update on the current Local Enterprise Partnerships (LEP) review, the responses made to date and the implications for York.

The Head of Corporate Policy and City Partnerships was in attendance to present the report. He reported that a review of LEPs was announced in the Industrial Strategy White Paper. York was currently part of the Leeds City Region (LCR) and the York, North Yorkshire and East Riding (YNYER) LEPs and had has enjoyed positive working arrangements and benefits from both. Both the LEP and the YNYER had received a response from the Government saying there should be no overlapping borders and there was now an agreement to suggest a merger of the two footprints. An update on the YNYER Board meeting was provided and it was noted that the LCR Board meeting was to take place later that week. The governance arrangements for transition to a new LEP were explained.

In response to Member questions, Head of Corporate Policy and City Partnerships confirmed that:

·        There were separate conversations about South Yorkshire LEPs.

·        The final response concerning whether the East Riding would become part of the Humber LEP had not been received.

·        The composition of the LEP Boards would be discussed over the coming 6 months.

·        The role of combined authorities in Yorkshire was noted and the Head of Corporate Policy and City Partnership noted that the benefits of footprint of One Yorkshire had been articulated.

Resolved: That Members note the progress to date.

Reason:     To support York’s economic wellbeing.

This report seeks to define the scope of this work based on preliminary work by the informal Task Group from this committee in regard to the proposal made by Cllr D’Agorne to review CYC’s Residents’ Priority Parking Scheme. The topic registration form is included at Annex A.

The report sought to define the scope of work based on preliminary work undertaken by the informal Residents’ Parking Task Group in regard to the proposal made by Cllr D’Agorne to review CYC’s Residents’ Priority Parking Scheme. His topic registration form was included at Annex A. 

Cllr D’Agorne gave an update on the work of the Task Group. He noted that a number of other Local Authorities charged a third of the York charge (circa £100) for residents parking schemes.

The Parking Services Manager and Assistant Director Transport Highways and Environment were in attendance for the item. During robust discussion regarding the scope of the review a number of views were expressed.  Following discussion it was:

Resolved: That the Residents’ Parking Task Group needed to narrow its scope so that the review could be completed within a realistic timeframe.

Reason:     To undertake a meaningful scrutiny into Resident Parking Permits.

Members are asked to consider the Committee’s work plan for the municipal year.

Members considered the Committee’s work plan for the 2018/19 municipal year. Members discussed potential topics and it was agreed that the January meeting would include the following items:

·        Residents Parking Review

·        Economic Health of the City Centre

Resolved: That the work plan be approved subject to the inclusion of the items above and additional items to be agreed by email.

Reason:     To keep the Committee’s work plan updated.