Agenda item

See PDF for copy of presentation slides.

Discussion/ questions

1.     The premise of answers in presentation is based on presumption that cars are allowed through - remove them and the design changes altogether. At the start of engagement

(March 24) Phase 2 work state there would be no change to use of the road. This would require consultation with businesses/ traders and residents. 

 

2.     Some blue badge holders did not vote for change to current blue badge bays.

 

3.     Who will police the illegal parking when people reverse onto the pavement?

 

4.     Who will clean up the mess on Front Street after benches used? We have had planters before, feral children pull plants out, shops must clean up the mess when they come to work.

a.     Acknowledge risk this could happen, cannot promise that it won’t happen.  The proposal is a balance noting the direction that people want to see for Front Street, to make space a nice environment, then community will start to look after it which will be more of a deterrent to anti-social behaviour. Boyes have shared a case when children pulled plants out, they put the plants back in the boxes and it didn’t happen again.  Need to include young people in the design of mural/ artwork, instil a sense ownership.  We will carry out parking enforcement at the start of new scheme to help deter/ change behaviour.  There isn’t a dedicated traffic warden for Acomb.

 

5.     Thank you for listening and taking on board community feedback.  Why “Greater Acomb” on signage? Love the logo, could move cycle racks closer to buildings to create more space, and use the oak leaf logo to top and tail the racks.

a.     We propose to use the logo not the wording.

b.     Greater Acomb Community Forum (GACF): when forum was set up many people said that they feel they live in Acomb despite not being within the ward, idea was to pull all areas together.

 

6.     Could the planter outside the Gateway Centre have a Christmas tree in it?  Sustainable solution don’t have to be broad leaf trees.

 

7.     WALOB thanked team, it has been a long road to get here. Remind people of the £1M regeneration grant, went awry in Phase 1, we feel that a one level open space is needed to get the best out of the street.  The different colourings and goodwill gestures on the road will still be a road with restrictions and kerbs.  Would love to see evidence of commitment to pedestrianisation surveys, and clarification of the future direction of travel.  We worry that once the current funding is spent then that’s it for Acomb.

a.     Cllr Coles:  A feasibility study is in the phase 2 proposal.  The risk is that if we delay more then we won’t spend the current funding by the deadline, therefore there is a balance to strike.

b.     Cllr Lomas: The feasibility study cost and timeline is in the July Executive report and is an important part of the scheme to demonstrate ambition after the current UKSPF funding to rectify phase 1 bollards, we need a longer-term plan of what we could do.

 

8.     WALOB How much of phase 2 funding is allocated to feasibility study?  Spent £26k on 2021 consultant Future of Acomb Front Street study.

a.     £5-10k depending on final scope. Question 15B of survey asked what people’s future vision of pedestrianisation looked like, ranging from the current situation to a full closure to all vehicles.  The community response was split, so we also want to explore what experimental TRO could offer towards a solution. It may not be necessary to close the entire street, or we may be able to get there over time in incremental steps.  The impact on businesses and deliveries must be understood, and mitigation options explored.  It would need to work for everybody.

 

9.     York city centre is the biggest pedestrianised are in the UK, Coney Street doesn’t have kerbs, look at the possibilities on our doorstep.

a.     Cllr Lomas: A feasibility study would include making the street accessible for all.  Coney Street was designed 30 years ago and doesn’t meet current access design guidance, whereby if vehicles use the street at any time, then carriageway has to have kerbs or a line of bollards to delineate space for traffic and pedestrians.  The council’s Access Officer and chair of York Access Forum have been involved and are here tonight to avoid making mistakes in this design.  We now have a legal duty to make public realm accessible, the feasibility study will try to find best way forward towards a more pedestrian friendly space.

 

10. GACF have carried out litter picks and found that Front Street wasn’t too bad, but there were lots of cigarette ends which are likely to end up in the new planters.  Will there be more bins?

a.     Yes, 2 additional bins are proposed, one near the betting shop.

 

11.Thank you to officers and councillors for tackling the problem and looking towards full pedestrianisation and an area that the whole community can be proud of.  Behaviour change is possible (e.g., dog mess used to be commonplace in the street, yet now gets frowned upon).  If we create a beautiful place that is loved, used and accessible to the community then in return the community will look after it.  I look forward to Phase 3, filled with great activities.  Be brave, challenge central government and legislation, look at examples in Europe.  Putting kerbs back into Coney Street is ridiculous, why protect people from cars, just get rid of the cars.

 

12.Front Street stretches to Co-op and beyond the library.  The silly totem signpost should say ‘Front Street’ not ‘Greater Acomb’.

 

13.Post Office traffic and queues are horrendous, changing blue badge from 2 to 1 space will make it worse.  Blue badge holders can park on double yellow lines. Council have removed motorcycle parking from in front of the old school, we should put more blue badge spaces there.

a.     York Access Forum Chair supported this and requested another blue badge space is provided so there is the same number of fully accessible spaces.

b.     Action: Team will investigate previous motorcycle parking.

 

14.York Access Forum Chair supports clear walkways - wonderful.  Will the junction at the end of Carr Lane have a clear route through for pedestrians in the welcome gateway space?

a.     Have reinstated a clear route across neck of entrance (to Halifax seating) and have moved bench/ bin to provide clear route to Greengrocers.  The March engagement design showed 2 sculptural benches, but having worked on a technical drawing then only one would comfortably fit in the space.

 

15.Pleasing to see a council making steps to improve the public environment (not withstanding Phase 1) with new street furniture and an ambition for further pedestrianisation.  I assume we won’t be introducing homeless spikes on the benches which would strip out the soul of any regeneration project?

a.     We trailed new accessible bench designs in phase 1 and propose to use those. No spikes!

 

16.Do the survey results suggest more or less disabled people using Acomb ‘v’ city centre?

a.     Cllr Lomas: we don’t have comparable data, nationally approximately 20% of the population has a form of disability, whereas 108 of 900 respondents were blue badge holders = 15%.  Not all people with a disability have a blue badge.  Whilst blue badge holders were unable to access the city centre, disabled people did report using out of town shopping centres instead, but less so for Acomb as the spaces were not properly accessible. 

 

17.Like the logo design - inclusivity/ diversity.

 

18. Have never seen a traffic warden in Acomb, so how will the blue badge spaces be enforced?  Could local enforcement officers volunteer?

a.     Cllr Lomas: The current bays are not properly marked and therefore any enforcement would be open to challenge.  As and when we deliver the new scheme, the council’s civic enforcement team will focus on enforcement for an initial period.  There isn’t a budget for a traffic warden in Acomb.

 

19.Could we have only blue badge parking on Front Street, no need for wardens?

a.     Deliveries need access too.

Access Officer

Have lived in Acomb in the past and liked the buzz of the place. Saw phase 1 bollards – how many?! Want to highlight an understanding of why we want to make the blue badge bays better. Some people don’t use the current bays with Wheelchair Accessible Vehicles, as there is no guarantee that you will be able to get in/ out of the vehicle if someone parks close and blocks you in.  The current spaces are not marked out correctly and so are not enforceable.  We know from working with communities, and Applefields School, that this is the case, and that people don’t use their own centre because they cannot park there.  6 spaces that reduce travel anxiety are better than 7 spaces that people don’t want to use.  If a 7^th space can still be found, then great.  Changes to re-open two routes in the city centre have increased usage of city centre by disabled people.  These changes in Acomb would mean that people who live here can be part of the community and contribute to local businesses (purple pound).  Make businesses more accessible at the same time would bring more income, and more diversity.  I have experience of working with authorities for 30 years – not easy, must battle with other disciplines and comply with legislation but this team (Regeneration) is dedicated to getting what the community want.  Is pedestrianisation good for all?  Yes, including disabled people, but it must be safe.

University of York, Common Room Project

Ran the Street Life Project based on Coney Street, and have come to help the council collect feedback this evening, looking at 3 points:

·        Planters – expertise in the room, help care for them

·        Materials – benefits/ challenges

·        Events/ activities – what kinds of events, who would organise, how could community facilitate/ support

Post-it’s on CYC plans

·        New bin please at Methodist Church bus stop

·        Green Lane junction – prioritise pedestrians, default to green man, not green light for cars.

 

Context

A meeting on 10th July 2024 was organised by CYC to share Phase 2 designs for Acomb Front Street in the light of analysis of the results of an engagement survey (yielding 900 responses to 63 questions and 5337 comments), six stakeholder meetings (Greater Acomb Community Forum, Joint Acomb, Westfield and Holgate Ward Committee, What a Load of Bollards, Acomb Alive, York Access Forum and The Place).

The aim of these consultations was to listen to the community’s views and focus on placemaking and accessibility.

Four key elements were highlighted, specifically

?       Enhancing the High Street

?       Crating a more accessible destination

?       Extending the benefits beyond the High Street

?       Longer term aspirations

 

The limitations imposed by two consecutive pre-election periods were explained, and the timing of the 10th July was noted as the first opportunity for CYC and the Joint Ward Committee to share the results of the analysis and design proposals with the community.

 

Scope of the meeting and facilitation by University of York’s Common Room project

The scope of the meeting and timetable of Phase 2 works was discussed, with particular attention was paid to the scope of UK Shared Prosperity Funding deadlines. This helped manage expectations for the potential to change/alter the high level design principles, and the opportunity for further feedback via meeting facilitators from the University of York’s ‘Common Room’ project.

General comments about the presentation and high level design principles were also captured verbally and added to the post-it notes by attendees.

Feedback was elicited on three specific areas

1.     The look and feel of Front Street

2.     Planters and seating designs

3.     Using Front Street for community and public events and activities

 

General comments and themes emerging from the evening

CYC’s approach to community consultation and presentation

This was warmly welcomed. Several participants explicitly and publicly praised CYC for listening to community and stakeholder concerns about the previous design interventions and use of UK Shared Prosperity Funding.

CYC (JSD’s) presentation was praised by several attendees for its level of detailed explanation of responses, including balance of opinions, clarity of statistical graphics and specific mapping back onto individual questions.

The visualisations (on screen and printed) were also highlighted as particularly helpful in enabling people to get a sense of the feel as well as the look of the scheme.

 

Branding and signage

The Greater Acomb Neighbourhood Forum design proposals and logo were warmly welcomed by attendees. There was interest in extending the design ideas to street furniture (e.g. cycle racks).

“Love the logo design”

 

Pedestrianisation

Although initial comments focused on the difficult issue of pedestrianisation, the clear explanation from CYC that:
i)pedestrianisation was not achievable within the scope of current funding

ii)there was not yet a clear consensus about pedestrianisation but

iii)proposals would move users towards an understanding of what pedestrianisation might be like (from surface details to raised tables)

iv)none of the details being proposed would mitigate against future pedestrianisation and thus would not be money wasted

A range of views was also captured by additional post-it note comments:

In favour of measured proposals exploring and monitoring future pedestrianisation:

“Love the removal/change to flat surface at crossings to reduce vibration problems.”

“Just as a preventative measure for a short term a camera where the roads are levelled to catch offenders early”

In favour of future pedestrianisation:

“Be sure to keep pursuing pedestrianisation and make sure people know you are doing that or they will lose faith!”

But also expressing some concerns:

“I really like the ideas put forward tonight. Personally I would not  want full pedestrianisation; I think current restrictions are about right.”

“To completely pedestrianise Front Street will kill off existing businesses. We need cars to have access for people who can’t walk from Morrisons.”

 

Parking

The principle of retaining as many blue badge parking places as possible whilst ensuring that they met current accessibility requirements - and thus user needs - was broadly welcomed.

“If parking spaces only for deliveries & disabled then many problems solved! 1. Less cars will park. 2. They will park appropriately.”

“It is vital that we keep the same amount of blue badge spaces. There is [sic] also plenty of extra blue badge spaces at Morrisons.”

“All the parking spaces are disabled. Reduces horrible view of parked cars and stops bad parking practice.”

“Scotland has made pavement parking illegal - why not York, UK?”

 

Wider issues of road safety were also raised:

“Possibly reduce speed on York Road at Carr Lane junction as this is getting dangerous.”

“Find cyclists £40 for riding on pavements & wrong way on 1 way street.”

 

The Common Room Consultation Analysis

1.The look and feel of Front Street.

Q: Phase 2 proposals for Front Street include new fixed benches and seating, but what should they be made of? Wood, metal, recycled materials?

Please tell us what kinds of materials you would like to be used and why?

 

1.1 Street Furniture

The design details and proposals for new seating, including the use of recycled materials was broadly welcomed but comments emphasised the need for a coherence in the design through the use of materials or through the use of colour (see also comments about painting bollards and planters, too).

“Really like the curved recycled materials bench & would like to see uniformity with the other benches in the area (by using the same (or similar) materials and design).”

“Durable materials - willing to see recycled plastic if it works (ie long lasting, not easily damaged). Consistent style needed throughout.”

“Recycled wood effect benches and planters are fine but all street furniture needs to tie together either by colour/style or material.”

“Paint the retained bollards in various shades of green to complement the scheme. Cheap and very effective. Paint existing benches too.”

 

There was also interest in extending the design aesthetic of the GACF logo to the street furniture:

“Can the cycle racks be artistic, e.g. use leaf design to make a rack. These could top & tail the others. I have seen pigs at Swinegate in another area.”

“Bike racks in shape of logo leaf’”

 

as well as practical suggestions about their location
“Can the cycle racks be moved nearer the shop/Gateway Centre to create more event space?”

 

The proposal for a new community noticeboard was welcomed:

“Community noticeboard separate from council noticeboard.”

 

 Lighting was also mentioned as a way of enhancing the street

“Extra street lighting for evening in winter (welcoming view).

 

1.2 Road surface

There was a specific and positive response about the proposals to change the material and colour of the road surface.

“Love the colour of the road surface in Phase 2. It feels a pedestrian space.”

 

There was also interest in extending the design proposals and details to surrounding streets:

“Tidy up side alley from Beech Grove to Front Street. Buff tarmac on side alleys? Murals?”

 

1.3 Artistic enhancements

Several comments responded positively to the idea of artistic interventions in the street as part of future funded projects (see also ideas for an Arts Festival in Events).

“Murals above the shop fronts will transform Front Street. The 60s architecture lends itself to being painted. Use the colours from the shop frontage, signage above.”

 

2. Bollards and planters

Q: Phase 2 of Acomb Front Street responds to community feedback which suggested reducing the number of bollards and replacing them with a combination of planters and seating. Please tell us what kinds of plants you’d like to see used in the planters and what ideas you might have for how Acomb Front Street could be kept looking its best all year round.

 

There was considerable enthusiasm for involvement in co-designing planting, especially from the Greater Acomb Community Forum members who were interested in being involved in maintenance and could be invited to coordinate this?

“Make sure the planting is unified, appropriate and long lasting. Think about weather/south/north facing etc. Use an expert and have a group who look after it (e.. GACF).

“Teams of volunteers could support different planters for weeding, watering and litter picking. Contact GACF - we are happy to be involved!”

“I would be very happy to advise on planting with my experience and happy to plant and look after plants. All planters need a min. Of 40cm depth - absolute minimum.”

“If more trees go into the ground porous resin must not be used as the soil here is sand and cannot retain moisture - not enough gets through to roots. One existing tree has already died and the others will go if we have a dry summer - the existing surface under the trees here needs removing, mulch or gravel instead. I know it’s messy but it’s necessary.”

“Can the planter outside the Gateway Centre have a Norway Spruce/Christmas tree? Something that can be dressed as a Christmas tree in winter?”

“Pollinator friendly plants only”. No bedding plants!”

 

Concerns expressed during the meeting about the inappropriate use of planters was also addressed by CYC in its presentation and the proposed solution was echoed in comments:

“Cigarette bins next to planters would stop people using them as cigarette bins.”

 

The importance of prioritising funding of planters was also emphasised:

“The money that would be spent removing bollards would be better spent on the planters and seating.”

 

3. Events and activities

Q: Community feedback suggested strong support for using Front Street more often for community activities from markets to other kinds of events. What kinds of activities and events would you like to see happen on Front Street?

 

There was a general and positive view that greater use of the street for public events and activities would gradually encourage further activity and public use:

“Remember that behaviours can change and if we create a space that looks cared for, things can change.”

 

Specific ideas for future events included:

“Front Street Festival?”

“Bilbo [sic, Bilbao?] have a 2 week competition every 2 years. It is spaces 2 x 3m and they create an outdoor artistic design using plants. Lots of people attend. It is inspirational.”

 

Conclusion

Notwithstanding the constraints imposed by election restrictions, the approach to consultation and presentation at the Joint Ward Committee was extremely well-received by those attending.

Some early concerns and strong opinions voiced were addressed directly by the level of detailed analysis of community responses, with CYC demonstrating a commitment to listening to a diversity of views and balancing these within the constraints and opportunities of UK Shared Prosperity Funding Phase 2 timetable of spend and delivery.

 

Key recommendations are that:

?       An approach to creating raised tables, changing surface materials, installing more planters and trees, alongside greater community use of Front Street was broadly welcomed and will provide a stepped, gradual move towards greater community use which will provide a platform for longer term discussion of pedestrianisation.

?       Greater Acomb Community Forum could provide an important channel for future community engagement with, and care for, planters, alongside specific expertise in selection of plants and their long-term sustainability.

?       Increased community use of Acomb Front Street, including events and activities, is welcomed but further work will be needed to encourage community groups to own/organise this.