|
City of York Council |
Committee Minutes |
|
|
Meeting |
Executive |
|
|
Date |
7 July 2026 |
|
|
Present |
Councillors Douglas (Chair), Kilbane, Kent, Pavlovic, Ravilious, Steels-Walshaw and Webb (Vice-Chair) |
|
|
In attendance |
Councillor Fenton (Opposition Group Member) |
|
10. Apologies for Absence
Apologies for absence were received from Councillor Lomas and Opposition Group Leader, Councillor Ayre.
Notification had been received that Councillor Fenton was to substitute for Councillor Ayre.
11. Declarations of Interest
There were no declarations of interest.
12. Public Participation
It was reported that there had been nine registrations to speak at the meeting under the Council’s Public Participation Scheme.
Flick Williams spoke remotely in relation to agenda item 10, ‘Bus Priority in York City Centre: The Rougier Route’. Flick welcomed the decision to offer exemptions to blue badge holders and hackney carriages. It was in line with the Council's obligations under the public sector equality duty. However, there was some concern that the exemption was not to be extended to private hire vehicles transporting SEND students to and from schools and colleges. Flick expressed support for the comments made by Streamline Taxis that had been published in the agenda supplement. That the exemption should apply to all locally licensed taxi companies. Also, the continued emphasis on the scheme operating as a trial raised concerns that blue badge holder exemptions could be subsequently removed. This should not be predicated on volume of blue badge use since every disabled person's need for access was equally valid.
Mark Venables spoke remotely in relation to agenda item 10, ‘Bus Priority in York City Centre: The Rougier Route’. Mark spoke on behalf of York Civic Trust, Transport Advisory Group. It was reported that York Civic Trust strongly supported the council's proposals for this scheme. That it would significantly improve bus journeys and enhance safety for walkers, wheelers, and cyclists. It also offered an opportunity to enhance the public realm and York Civic Trust was ready to assist in realising the potential for this. There was some concern at the further delay in introducing the scheme which was originally planned for implementation in 2025. Delaying implementation until four months before the council elections presented a risk that the scheme would become a political battleground.
Andrew McGuinness spoke remotely in relation to agenda item 10, ‘Bus Priority in York City Centre: The Rougier Route’. Andrew spoke in in his capacity as Chair of the Enhanced Partnership Bus Forum. It was stated that buses remained Britain's most widely used form of public transport, providing essential connections for people traveling to work, education, healthcare, and local services. However, one significant challenge undermined their effectiveness, and that was congestion. A recent report highlighted that England needed faster buses and that bus speeds had fallen to unacceptably low levels. Average bus speeds were just 7.8mph in congested urban areas increasing to only 9.5 mph in other cities. The report estimated that increasing average bus journey speed by 10% would generate an additional 147 million passenger journeys each year while delivering savings and wider economic benefits worth around £5b nationally. These findings reinforced national evidence that improving bus reliability was not simply about making buses faster. It was about making public transport more attractive, reducing operating costs and supporting local businesses.
Doreen Magill spoke remotely in relation to agenda item 10, ‘Bus Priority in York City Centre: The Rougier Route’. Doreen spoke on behalf of York Bus Forum. It was stated that the main issue was about congestion and everyone, including motorists would benefit if these issues were addressed. The only solution was public transport, specifically buses. The key to a good bus service was encouraging people to use it. The Rougier Route was not expected to solve all the problems, but it would help. It was the first step to encourage people to use buses, which would free up space to move around more easily.
Andy D’Gorne spoke remotely in relation to agenda item 10, ‘Bus Priority in York City Centre: The Rougier Route’. It was stated that York Green Party welcomed the report, a much-needed boost to bus services, albeit slipping again into the most politically contentious timing. There was concern that some suggestions made during the consultation were either not referenced or glossed over in the report and needed to be closely monitored. Firstly, the scheme’s operation until 11.00pm was likely to result in illegal right turns into Coney Street. The solution could be an amendment to the foot street order to enable the hostile vehicle mitigation (HVM) barriers at this point to remain closed between 5.00pm and 11.00pm. Secondly, changing Tanner Road, Tough Green and Micklegate roads to one way with cycle contraflow was expected to increase speeds and should be countered by extending the Bishophill 20 mph provision to cover these streets, which would no longer serve as through routes for most of the time. There was also a need for a point closure or camera to ensure that Barker Lane was not used as a vehicle shortcut to Mickelgate on the diversion loop. Finally, there should be further liaison before the scheme commenced with both the Grand Hotel and the NCP car park whose operations would be significantly disrupted by the introduction of a one-way flow at the bottom end of the Tanner row section.
John Iredale spoke in relation to agenda item 10, ‘Bus Priority in York City Centre: The Rougier Route’. John spoke on behalf of Bishophill Action Group. It was stated that the consultation opportunities had been thorough and well attended by residents. There was significant support for improvements to the bus transit times and for improvements for pedestrians and cyclists resulting from reduced traffic flows. Suggestions about issues within the Bishophill area had been addressed and the proposals modified. It was acknowledged that there was to be a review of the scheme once the experimental phase had been completed. It was pointed out that Bishophill Action Group were in favour of a 20mph central zone in York.
Diane Roworth spoke in relation to agenda item 10, ‘Bus Priority in York City Centre: The Rougier Route’. Diane spoke on behalf of York Access Forum and York Disability Rights Forum. There was support for allowing blue badge holders and hackney carriages to use the bus gate alongside emergency and other essential vehicles. This proposal recognised the important principle that a vehicle carrying a blue badge was an essential vehicle for its user. It was important to note that a blue badge was not a privilege. It was a mitigation to overcome the limitations of an impairment or disability. It was about levelling the playing field as far as possible. It was noted that other private hire vehicles were not exempt and that no provision had been made for community transport schemes. It was requested that these two areas received further consideration to ensure that no disabled people lost out on their ability to use the streets that they currently had access to.
Stephen Moyle spoke in relation to agenda item 10, ‘Bus Priority in York City Centre: The Rougier Route’. Stephen spoke on behalf of First Bus Group in York. It was stated that First Bus Group strongly supported the Rougier Route because it addressed the issue of bus reliability, which was one of the biggest challenges facing public transport in York. That every day buses were delayed by congestion through the city centre. When one bus was held up it impacted on every trip the vehicle was due to make for the rest of the day. That meant passengers arrived late for work, education, medical appointments, and any other important commitments that they had. It also meant that more buses and drivers were needed to maintain the same timetable, which increased costs and reduced efficiencies. The proposed scheme allowed buses carrying thousands of passengers each day to move more reliably through the city. Faster and more consistent journey times for passengers would help encourage more people to use public transport instead of driving and therefore help tackle the issue of congestion. The scheme would help unlock economic, social and environmental benefits. The Rougier Route was considered a positive step towards a better transport network for York. The bus operator supported the Council to approve the trial and allow the scheme to demonstrate its benefits.
Rachel Robinson spoke in relation to agenda item 11 ‘Fulford Cemetery / Bereavement Services’. Rachel spoke on behalf of Fulford Parish Council (the current owners of Fulford Cemetery). It was stated that the parish council fully supported the proposals for City of York Council (CYC) to take over the management of Fulford Cemetery from the parish council and to terminate the 2006 burial services agreement, as set out in the report. It was pointed out that Fulford Cemetery was unlike any other parish council managed cemetery. It was the only cemetery in the country owned and managed by a parish providing burial services on behalf of the unitary authority. It had been clear to the parish council for some time that a city-wide operation such as Fulford Cemetery required city level resources. It was stated that CYC had managed much of the cemetery operations since August 2025 and the agreement had been extended to August 2027. Since August 2025, the benefits of the support and professional expertise from the CYC cemetery supervisor, the cemetery administrator and from bereavement services had been evident financially, administratively and in terms of industry and public perception. Additionally, the coordination of volunteering ventures by CYC communities team had also proved extremely valuable in terms of assistance with the maintenance of the grounds, encouraging community engagement, positive feedback, and giving the volunteers a real sense of investment in the site's future. The recommendations provided an opportunity for CYC to have control over York's burial services and the income generated by them.
13. Exclusion of Press and Public
Whilst it was acknowledged that Annex 2 to agenda item 11 was classed as exempt for the reasons set out below, it was not anticipated that there was a need for Executive to consider the documents in private session.
Resolved: That the press and public be excluded from the meeting in relation to Annex 2 to agenda item 11 on the grounds that it contains information in relation to the following:
· Information relating to the financial or business affairs of any particular person (including the authority holding that information); and
· Information relating to any consultations or negotiations, or contemplated consultations or negotiations, in connection with any labour relations matter arising between the authority or a Minister of the Crown and employees of, or office-holders under, the authority.
The above information is classed as exempt under paragraphs 3 and 4 of Schedule 12A to Section 100A of the Local Government Act 1972 (as revised by The Local Government (Access to Information) (Variation) Order 2006).
It is also considered that the public interest in maintaining the exemption outweighs the public interest in disclosing the information.
14. Minutes
Resolved: That the minutes of the Executive meeting held on 2
June 2026 be approved and then signed by the Chair as a
correct record.
15. Forward Plan
Members received and noted details of the items that were on the Forward Plan for the next two Executive meetings at the time the agenda was published.
16. 2025/26 Finance and Performance Outturn
The Director of Finance submitted a report which provided a year end analysis of the overall finance and performance position for the year.
The following annexes were attached to the report:
· Quarter 4 Performance Tables – City Outcomes and Council Delivery Indicators 2023-2027
· York Learning Accountability Statement
· Parking Income and Expenditure and Highway and Transport Expenditure.
Debbie Mitchell, Director of Finance, presented the report.
The Leader of the Council highlighted increased budget pressures, particularly in relation to adult social care. This had impacted on other services to bring the budget under the expected overspend. Millions of pounds had been spent on adult social services. It was noted that the Care Quality Commission (CQC) had rated the service as ‘requiring improvement’ in December 2025. An improvement advisor from Department of Health and Social Care was working with the team to bring the spend under control.
Resolved (unanimously) –
That Executive
a) Notes the finance and performance information within the report and agrees that the underspend of £1.498m will be added to council general reserves.
Reason: To ensure expenditure is kept within the approved budget.
b) Accepts funding from the York and North Yorkshire Combined Authority delegating authority to the Director of Children’s Services to progress the below in consultation with the Deputy Leader / Executive Member for Children, Young People and Education:
i) £1,448,630 Adult Skills Fund
ii) £603,665 Connect to Work.
c) Accepts funding from the York and North Yorkshire Combined Authority delegating authority to the Director of City Development to progress the below in consultation with the Executive Member for Transport:
i) £1,120,000 Active Travel Fund.
d) Accepts funding from the York and North Yorkshire Combined Authority delegating authority to the Director of City Development to progress the below in consultation with the Executive Member for Economy and Culture:
i) £84,900 Vibrant and Sustainable High Streets
ii) £206,000 for three years Local Growth Funding.
Reason: To secure funding to progress programmes of work related to each funding stream to enable activity that will support a more prosperous, affordable, accessible and equal city.
e) Approves the York Learning Accountability Statement at the annex to this report ahead of publication.
Reason: To enable the council to receive funding in order to deliver courses through York Learning service.
17. Treasury Management annual report and review of Prudential Indicators for 2025/26
The Director of Finance submitted a report which provided an update on Treasury Management activity and the outturn position for the 2025/26 financial year.
The following annex was attached to the report:
· Prudential Indicators 2025/26 Outturn (31 March 2026).
Debbie Mitchell, Director of Finance, presented the report.
Resolved (unanimously):
That Executive notes
a) The 2025/26 performance and outturn position of Treasury Management activity.
b) The 2025/26 outturn Prudential Indicators outlined in Annex A to the report and notes the compliance with all indicators.
Reason: To ensure the continued effective operation and performance of the Council’s Treasury Management function and ensure that all Council treasury activity is prudent, affordable and sustainable and complies with policies set.
18. Capital Programme Outturn 2025/26 and Revisions to the 2026/27 - 2029/30 Programme
The Director of Finance submitted a report which set out the capital programme outturn position for 2025/26, which included any under/overspends and adjustments, along with an update to the future years programme.
The following annex was attached to the report:
- Capital Programme 2026/27 to 2029/30.
Debbie Mitchell, Director of Finance, presented the report. It was advised that an amendment was required in relation to paragraph 10 recommendation v). This sentence was to be deleted on the basis that the information was already contained in recommendation c) to the report.
In response to a query, the Executive Member for Transport clarified that resources transferred to the Station Gateway scheme were from schemes where there was insufficient officer capacity to deliver these. These mostly related to traffic signal replacements. Staff had since been recruited to posts and all programmes were back on pace.
The Leader of the Council highlighted the positive transformation of the Station Gateway scheme. Reference was also made to the challenges and risks associated with a lack of effective programme management and oversight during the initial stages. This had resulted in necessary changes to the scheme. Some of these related to unknowns, for example, the Victorian flyover, which required engineering works to be undertaken. There had also been a significant increase in construction costs.
The Leader of the Council emphasised the positive contribution of York Museums Trust whilst also noting the significant cost of maintaining historic buildings in York. The Arts Council was thanked for supporting the capital request that had been submitted to fix the roof at the Yorkshire Museum. It was hoped there would be further support for historic assets in York, particularly given the financial constraints currently faced.
Resolved (unanimously):
That Executive
a) In relation to the capital programme outturn
i) Notes the 2025/26 capital outturn position of £81.948m and approves the requests for re-profiling totalling £58.432m from the 2025/26 programme to future years.
ii) Notes the adjustments to schemes increasing expenditure in 2025/26 by a net £1.346m.
iii) Recommends to Full Council the restated 2026/27 to 2029/30 programme of £441.313m as summarised in Table 3 and detailed in Annex 1 to the report.
iv) Approves the virement of £5.4m from Integrated Transport to fund the updated spend forecast on York Station Gateway.
Reason: To enable the effective management and monitoring of the council’s capital programme.
b) In relation to the Yorkshire Museum Capital Scheme
i) To authorise officers to commence work with York Museums and Gallery Trust (YMT) and Arts Council England (ACE) to identify and agree a lawful and deliverable form of security for ACE’s contribution to the Yorkshire Museum roof works, and to delegate authority to the Director of City Development, in consultation with the Executive Member for Economy and Culture, the Director of Governance and the Director of Finance, to negotiate and enter into any necessary agreements to give effect to the preferred form of security, including (where required):
· amendments to the 2009 Yorkshire Museum and Gardens Charitable Scheme, subject to Charity Commission approval;
· any documents required to create or support the agreed security for ACE;
· any lease or property arrangements required to facilitate the agreed form of security;
· any necessary landlord consents from the Council to YMT to facilitate the agreed form of security;
· any required applications to HM Land Registry, the Charity Commissioner, Companies House, or any other regulator; and
· any consents required to enable the roof works to proceed.
ii) Subject to the above, to approve the award of £200,000 match funding to the York Museums and Gallery Trust towards the improvement works for the roof and rainwater goods at the Yorkshire Museum, alongside the allocation of a further £300,000 for future match funding if successful and to delegate authority to the Director of City Development in consultation with the Director of Finance and the Director of Governance, to finalise and execute a grant funding agreement with the York Museums and Gallery Trust.
iii) Allocates the £500,000 match funding from Capital Contingency.
Reason: To ensure that any charge created at the Yorkshire Museum is in line with the existing arrangements the Yorkshire Museum between CYC and YMT.
To enable YMT’s acceptance of the grant funding, and all grant
funding arrangements, are in compliance with the Subsidy Control Act 2022, the Council’s Constitution, and the Council’s Financial Regulations.
c) In relation to the funding from the Local Authority Housing Fund (round 4) from MHCLG, are recommended to:
i) Accepts grant funding from the MHCLG of £888k, by delegating authority to the S151 Officer to sign the Memorandum of Understanding.
ii) Recommends to Full Council, the approval of additional borrowing up to £938k to match fund the scheme.
iii) Delegates authority to the Director for City Development to progress the purchase of 6 homes for the HRA.
Reason: To ensure the Council’s acceptance of the funding is in line with the Council’s Constitution and Financial Regulations.
19. Bus Priority in York City Centre: The Rougier Route
The Director of City Development submitted a report which presented the results of public consultation into bus priority in York City Centre and requested approval to deliver bus priority on George Hudson Street and Micklegate (between Micklegate / George Hudson Street and Micklegate / Skeldergate / North Street / Ouse Bridge junctions) on an experimental basis.
The following annexes were attached to the report:
· Rougier Route Proposals Plan
· Rougier Route Consultation Summary
· Traffic Modelling Summary
· Human Rights and Equality Assessment
· Parking and Moving Traffic Offences Enforcement Policy.
Tom Horner, Head of Transport, Policy and Travel Behaviour, presented the report.
The Executive Member highlighted the issue of congestion. It was reported that 80% of respondents to the consultation had identified congestion as their top concern in the city. To accommodate growth and support a vibrant visitor economy there was a need to address this issue. One of the main ways of dealing with this issue was enabling more people to use public transport. Currently buses were stuck in the same traffic as everyone else with average speed in the city centre at less than four miles per hour. Areas had been identified where the proposed bus priority scheme would bring the most widespread benefit.
The Executive Member acknowledged that there was congestion in other areas of the city but pointed out that there was a need to start somewhere. The Rougier Route would deliver the greatest benefits. Slow bus speeds resulted in higher running costs for bus operators and that in turn resulted in an increase in ticket prices for passengers. People were unwilling to travel on unreliable and expensive buses. An investment in the Rougier Route was much needed. It would increase bus reliability, reduce bus operating costs, and enabled bus operators to add more services, reduce ticket costs, and increase passenger numbers.
Officers were thanked for the level of thought, detail and time that had gone into this piece of work. It was also the result of an extensive consultation exercise. Over 2,000 people had responded to the consultation, which included drop-in sessions with stakeholders and included individuals that had attended today’s Executive meeting to speak. It demonstrated that people in the city were engaged and had provided valuable feedback. As a result of the feedback, some adaptations to the plans had been made.
The Executive Member report that there were still some outstanding concerns to resolve. It was stressed that it was a trial scheme and that approval of the recommendations enabled
officers to start looking at the detail of how the scheme works. It was anticipated that some adjustments may be required with some unexpected consequences and tweaks needed. It was advised that for the first six months there were to be no fines. Warning letters were to be issued to people who had made a mistake and did not know about the scheme.
Resolved (unanimously):
That Executive
a) Allocates £2m of BSIP1 funding and £350k of YNYMCA Bus Grant funding to implement the Rougier Route on an experimental basis.
Reason: To deliver bus journey time and reliability improvements and to enable the potential benefits and disbenefits to be fully evaluated prior to a permanent decision being made.
b) Delegates authority to the Director of City Development to implement the Rougier Route Proposals on an experimental basis allowing exemptions initially for buses, emergency services, Blue Badge holders and Hackney Carriages.
Reason: To ensure expedient delivery of the project.
c) Delegates authority to the Director of City Development to amend the conditions of the Traffic Regulation Orders associated with the Rougier Route project during the trial period if required.
Reason: To allow the Traffic Regulation Orders to adapt to
evidence gathered during the trial period.
d) Notes the contents of the petition.
Reason: To consider the views of petitioners when making a
decision on the Rougier Route project.
e) Approves the City of York Council Parking and Moving Traffic Offences Enforcement Policy.
Reason: To update the policy in line with the powers the Council
now holds.
20. Fulford Cemetery / Bereavement Services
The Director of Communities submitted a report which invited Executive to decide whether City of York Council should accept the proposals set out in the report and take over the management of the Cemetery from Fulford Parish Council (FPC) and terminate the 2006 Burial Services Agreement early or consider any other options to minimise the impact on burial ground provision and capacity in York.
The following annexes were attached to the report:
· FPC letter re-affirming request
· FPC letter including proposed terms and conditions (exempt from publication)
· The 2025 agreement
· Human Rights and Equalities Assessment.
Pauline Stuchfield, Director of Communities, and Eilidh Carricker Head of Corporate Customer Services, were both in attendance for this item.
The Executive Member (Ward Member) highlighted that this had been a challenging situation. That it was unusual for a Parish Council to run a city cemetery. It was reported that there had been a reduction in burials and an increase in cremations. That had left the cemetery in a financially difficult situation and unable to manage it. The grounds were overgrown and residents and visitors were distressed when visiting their loved ones. It resulted in CYC entering into an agreement with Fulford Parish Council to manage the cemetery on a temporary basis. This had resulted in a positive turnaround due to collaborative working between the Parish Council, CYC and volunteers, particularly Friends of Fulford Cemetery and staff at the Stay City Hotel.
The Leader of the Council emphasised the positive approach undertaken by the Parish Council, the local community and council officers to tackle this sensitive issue in an efficient and business-like manner to ensure a viable cemetery in the city. It was hoped that the people of York recognised the positive benefits and improvements that collective work could deliver.
Resolved (unanimously):
That Executive
a) Approves Option 2 (paragraph 50 to the report) as follows:
To delegate authority to the Director of Communities (in consultation with the Director of Finance and Director of Governance) to commence negotiations with Fulford Parish Council (FPC) for the proposed handover of the Cemetery to City of York Council (CYC) and to negotiate and conclude all necessary legal documentation for this purpose; and
b) Approves Option A (paragraph 51 to the report) The termination of the 2006 Burial Services Agreement without the full 36 months' notice period, and to delegate authority to the Director of Communities (in consultation with the Director of Finance and Director of Governance) to negotiate and conclude all necessary legal documentation for this purpose.
Reason: To mitigate the ongoing financial risk to CYC and use the opportunity to generate income and to safeguard a long-term burial space for CYC residents.
21. Urgent Business
There were no urgent items of business to consider.
Councillor Douglas, Chair
(The meeting started at 4.30 pm and finished at 6.15 pm).