|
City of York Council |
Committee Minutes |
|
|
Meeting |
Decision Session - Executive Member for Transport |
|
|
Date |
19 April 2022 |
|
|
Present |
Councillors D'Agorne |
|
|
|
|
|
56. Declarations of Interest
The Executive Member was asked to declare, at this point in the meeting, any personal interests, not included on the Register of Interests, or any prejudicial or disclosable pecuniary interests that he might have had in respect of business on the agenda.
The executive Member noted that he did not have any interest to declare but wished to highlight that agenda items 5, 8, and 9 all related to his ward of Fishergate.
57. Minutes
Resolved: That the minutes of the Decision Session of the Executive Member for Transport and Planning held on 22 March 2022 be approved and signed by the Executive Member as a correct record.
58. Public Participation
It was reported that there had been 9 registrations to speak at the meeting under the Council’s Public Participation Scheme.
Cllr Warters spoke in favour of the ePetition: CYC solve the University related parking, don’t just MOVE it, noting that the Council was only moving parking problems with its use of residents parking. He stated that the report recommendation would not solve parking problems and that the University of York needed to be made to address its parking.
Cllr Pavlovic also spoke in relation to the ePetition stating that while he recognised the issues faced by residents from displaced parking the residents parking for residents of Badger Hill had been the correct decision for residents and had solved parking in the area.
Cllr Rowley thanked residents that had engaged in the ePetition received and spoke in favour of the petition noting that he would not support extending parking restrictions and the use of double yellow lines. He noted that the University should take responsibility for its impact on parking in the city by encouraging a reduction in car use.
Tony Unwin spoke in favour of maintaining the status quo in relation to parking at 5-11 Main Street, Fulford. He noted that he had spoken with the church who were also now in favour of no changes being made to the residents parking scheme.
Cllr Fenton noted that a majority of residents had supported the introduction of a residents parking scheme for the Revival Estate and asked that the Executive Member support. He noted that issues on the estate were more in relation to dangerous parking and not a lack of parking and welcomed a review in relation to further restrictions and a possible 20 MPH speed limit.
Anwen Hughes requested that Alma Terrace & Alma Grove be implemented as part of the R70 Residents Priority Parking Scheme at the same time as Kilburn Road and not delayed to allow advertising for other streets.
Margaret James also spoke in favour of Alma Terrace & Alma Grove be implemented as part of the R70 Residents Priority Parking Scheme at the same time as Kilburn Road. She noted that student accommodation was set to be opened and that restrictions should be implemented before students brought more cars into the area.
Katherine Crocker noted that residents had begun the process for residents parking on Alma Terrace and Alma Grove in November 2018 and requested that further delays to implementation not be put in place. She also noted that the Council needed a plan to reduce cars coming into the city.
Marina Knight raised concerns about the safety of residents in the Revival Estate and asked that a residents parking scheme be introduced to reduce its use by York College students and staff parking in the estate. She noted that pavements were used for parking making pavements unusable for disabled residents and unsafe for children playing in the streets. She questioned the cost of permits being a reason not to introduce noting that most homes had room for two cars already.
59. ePetition: CYC solve the York University related parking, don't just MOVE it
The Executive Member considered the report and the epetition that had been received. Officers noted that university car parks had been monitored and it was concluded that they remained well used. Officers explained that there was the option to explore a residents parking scheme in the area, however, they noted that ward councillors were not in support of additional residential parking schemes.
The Executive Member noted that residents parking schemes were designed to give residents an advantage to park in their local area and acknowledged that there were issues of displaced parking from the university. He noted that the proposal to increase engagement with Archbishop Holgate School and University of York by the School Travel team was the correct response to try and reduce displaced parking in residential areas.
Resolved:
i. Approved the increased engagement of the School Travel team with the Archbishop Holgate School and University of York.
Reason: To help educate and encourage staff and students to
utilise alternative modes of transport and help reduce impact on nearby residential streets.
60. Consideration of representations received to the advertised R70 Residents Priority Parking Scheme for Kilburn Road, Alma Terrace and Alma Grove, Fishergate.
The Executive Member considered the recommendation and requested that Alma Grove and Alma Terrace not be delayed and be implemented into the R70 scheme with Kilburn Road and to advertise the other streets for inclusion. It was confirmed that an allotment had its own private parking in the area and that officers would maintain communication with the allotments management to ensure if they wish that they can put up correct signage to ensure parking spaces are not incorrectly used.
Reason:
i. Implement the advertised R70 scheme for Kilburn Road, Alma Grove, and Alma Terrace;
ii. Advertisement for the inclusion of Frances Street, Ambrose Street, Holly Terrace, Carey Street and Wenlock Terrace within the R70 residents parking area be implemented.
Reason: To provide the improved parking provision for residents of Kilburn Road, Alma Grove, and Alma Terrace, in line with the majority preferences received within the consultation and limited objections submitted to the advertised proposals from the nearby area. As well as allowing consultation to take place with the wider area regarding inclusion into the R70 scheme.
61. Consideration of representations received to the advertised Residents Priority Parking scheme for 5-11 Main Street Fulford – R67C
It was confirmed that the proposal was to uphold the objections received and take no further action with this item and not to amend the R67C scheme. The Executive Member agreed to this and asked that officers continue to monitor for future consideration if consideration if a new residents petition for residents parking.
Resolved:
i. That Option 3 be approved to uphold the objections and take no further action to formalise a residents priority parking scheme at this time but to continue to monitor and maintain on the list for future consideration if residents petition for residents parking and maintain.
Reason: To listen to residents’ concerns whilst taking into account the number of properties against the number of objections received. Consequently not disadvantaging residents by formalising parking restrictions which in turn reduces the available on street parking amenities.
62. Consideration of representations received following the advertisement of the Resident’s Priority Parking Scheme (Respark) on Revival Estate
The Executive Member agreed to uphold the objections received in relation to the R69 Residents Priority Parking Scheme. He noted that he didn’t consider a residents parking scheme as the solution to dangerous driving that had been reported on the Revival Estate and that this could potentially be addressed by other restrictions that could be implemented and it was confirmed that a proposed 20 MPH zone was scheduled to be considered.
Resolved:
i. Approved to uphold the objections received and take no further action in relation to the advertised R69 Residents Priority Parking Scheme.
Reason: Due to the objections received and impact that this will have on a number of residents of the area combined with the survey results which show that college parking is having a limited impact on parking levels on the estate.
ii. That the Revival Estate be added to the 2022 Annual Review of Traffic Restrictions.
Reason: Due to the representations made in relation to safety of
pedestrian/vehicles around the estate.
63. Consideration of objections received for 2020 Annual Review of Traffic Regulation Order Requests- St.Oswald’s Road
Officers introduced the report noting that the item had initially been considered as part of the annual review of traffic restrictions, however, two visits by officers had not identified the need for a no waiting zone. The Executive Member therefore agreed to implement lesser restrictions than advertised as outlined in the report.
Resolved:
i. Approved to implement a lesser restriction to the advertised proposal on St. Oswald Road and its junctions with Connaught Court and Love Lane. It is recommended to implement no waiting at any time restrictions to the junctions of Connaught Court and Love Lane.
Reason: Following receipt of the objections, further site visits were completed and found no obstruction issues between the junction of Connaught Court and Atcherley Close.
64. TSAR Traffic Signal Refurbishment – Barbican Road/Paragon Street
Officers introduced the report noting that there was no update to provide. They noted that the TSAR scheme focused on replacing life expired road signals, as well as, bringing junctions up to standards, and implement improvements which were easy to achieve within budget at the same time. The Executive Member welcomed the report and noted that the proposed changes should create additional space for pedestrians and reduce traffic speed into the Barbican Road box junction. Whether a two way cycle path could be introduced from the access from Wellington Road as well as the slip from Barbican Road were discussed and officers agreed to explore the possibility.
Resolved:
i. Approved the proposed design option presented in Annex A of the report.
Reason: To achieve the core aim of replacing the life-expired traffic signal asset to established TSAR programme standards such that it can continue operate and be repaired economically before it becomes unmaintainable. Additionally, the formalisation of the existing uncontrolled crossing facility over Barbican Road and the introduction of a new crossing of Paragon Street provides a significant improvement to pedestrian and cyclist safety at the junction and will assist in reducing existing levels of pedestrian/cyclist conflict at the south western corner of the junction which have previously been highlighted as an issue.
Cllr A D’Agorne, Executive Member for Transport
[The meeting started at 10.00 am and finished at 11.32 am].