Agenda item

To receive a report from the Director of City Development updating the committee on the Council’s Local Transport Strategy, including on how this interacts with work being undertaken by the York and North Yorkshire Combined Authority in this area. (Report to follow)

The report was presented by the Head of Transport Policy and Travel Behaviour (Tom Horner) and the Head of Transport Projects (Joshua Singer).

Before beginning, the Head of Transport Projects highlighted one correction in point 2 of the report – which stated more inclusive cycle parking had been installed at Blake Street; this work was in fact incomplete at the time of the meeting. 

He explained that this update intended to provide delivery and progress updates towards the Local Transport Strategy (LTS) and to address challenges faced by the authority, especially with regard to implementation following the creation of the York and North Yorkshire Combined Authority. He singled out progress with regard to the rollout of real-time information screens with audio description at 127 bus stops, wider progress of bus stop accessibility and securing of a £1.9million transport funding grant from the Mayoral Combined Authority, covering cycle storage, speed reduction, active travel and pedestrian crossings, all commencing this financial year.

He also discussed emerging issues – advising that officers were working alongside the Combined Authority to develop a multi-year programme to commit to more enhanced corridor projects. The Combined Authority had provided headlines to apportion this funding as active travel, bus access/punctuality, rail stations, road safety, congestion reduction and integrated corridor and play schemes. He noted that whilst the Combined Authority were producing their own Local Transport Plan, they recognised that York’s LTS was already well developed and would be a key part of that plan.

He highlighted challenges, with the key areas being delivery resource – his team had not existed at the start of the LTS and this was mitigated through dedicated transport capital project function, they had recently undertaken recruitment to bolster this further. He also discussed client resource – taking concept ideas into feasibility, modelling data to form a meaningful and impactful project. He noted that disruption was posed by the creation of the Combined Authority – previously money had been received directly from the Department for Transport, and had needed to switch to working with the Combined Authority to bid for external grants.

He then asked the ommittee to consider the format and frequency of future updates on the Local Transport Strategy and its implementation, given the information set out by the report and presentation.

The chair thanked him for his report and his work alongside the Combined Authority. He then requested an update on the Movement and Place plan.

The Head of Transport Projects answered that the tender for this was now live, and interested parties were bidding as part of the procurement exercise. Following the conclusion of the procurement exercise he expected to have more information as the plan emerged. He anticipated the tender process to take another three months, adding that he would confirm this with procurement colleagues.

Members acknowledged the tender approaching completion – asking how much later the plan would then come back to the scrutiny committee, what was likely to be in it, and what actions were likely to arise from it?

The Head of Transport Projects responded that this was linked to multi-year settlement with Combined Authority – he anticipated towards the back end of that four-year period the outputs of Movement and Place would be received in terms of deliverable projects.

Members asked if this meant the process therefore started now with a four-year lead time and he responded that outputs would 2027/28 to 2029/30 at which point the outcomes of the movement and place plan would be turned into deliverable projects.

The committee asked whether there were any natural capacity gains from the Combined Authority finding its feet and requiring less direct input from the local authority. The Head of Transport Projects noted that as the Combined Authority matured and its processes became better established and understood, the council would increasingly be able to adapt processes and align its resources.

Members asked whether in future a progress tracker for each project could be provided on reports – e.g. design stage, planning stage, implementation. The Head of Transport Projects acknowledged officers would definitely take this suggestion on board for demonstrating the progress of the Local Transport Strategy at the scrutiny committee and to other groups.

Members noted that while the report confirmed projects had been commissioned, it did not clearly indicate to what extent these projects had been financed or completed. Members expressed concern at the lack of detail and transparency, and asked that in future officers deliver more information on projects, details of prioritisation and explanation as to why some schemes were not progressed, rather than members needing to request these piece by piece. If the committee was provided with this detail, it would minimise individual questions to officers from the committee and therefore lessen the time taken for officers to respond to these requests.

The Head of Transport Projects agreed that officers aimed to achieve this too, and committed to evolving programme management processes in order to produce this information going forwards.

The committee asked what made an inclusive/accessible cycle parking different from regular parking. The Head of Transport Projects explained that this was mostly to do with additional space around the cycle parking building out from the kerb.

[Cllr Taylor left the meeting at 7:51pm]

Members asked when the York and North Yorkshire Combined Authority Local Transport Plan was expected to be complete. The Head of Transport Projects answered that the Combined Authority had assured officers this was “currently being developed at pace” and a significant amount of movement had been observed in recent months, but he was unable to personally commit to a specific timeline yet. The Chair clarified that the Combined Authority had stated a draft of the Local Transport Plan would be ready in May, it would be consulted on over the summer and then a final agreed Local Transport Plan would be ready this year.

The committee asked for an update on the Castle Gateway project, since planning for the removal of the carpark had now been approved; members wanted to know whether there would be any ensuing implications for travel around the city.

The Head of Transport Projects spoke on his team’s elements – noting that the City Development team were leading on this project. He stated that various options were being considered regarding alternative parking arrangements, with the key preference being for improved facilities outside the city (such as Park and Ride sites incorporating overnight parking), but they were also looking at improvements to Coppergate car park to allow additional parking provision there, accepting that some redistribution across city would ultimately be necessary.

Members again raised the issue of barriers to access; in the current year 80 were being dealt with, and extrapolating this over another 2-3 years, this would cover 240-300. Members noted there were actually something like 800-1000 barriers, so some were inevitably being left over. The committee asked how these were being prioritised? The Head of Transport Projects admitted that progress had been slower to get off the ground due to resourcing issues. His team were looking at ramping up as much as possible, progressing to the hundreds or two-hundreds in one year going forwards. He conceded there may well be over 1000 barriers in the city, and if any were left over officers would endeavour to secure additional funding and a continued programme to remove these. He reiterated that his team’s intention was to tackle as many as was feasible, acknowledging that some of the sites were incredibly complex, and therefore when prioritising a balance must be sought between recognising areas that attract a level of footfall that would benefit most from removal, but also acknowledging where focusing on one complex site might mean delaying 25 more straightforward ones.

Members asked whether officers still planned to address all barriers to access and the Head of Transport Projects responded that his team would aim to do this until they reached the point that funding prohibited this and they needed to go elsewhere. He committed to removing as many as possible.

The Executive Member for Transport added that part of the approach for prioritisation was to look at continuous routes without barriers, citing an ongoing University of Westminster study in the city regarding the impact of barrier removal; this involved camera monitoring a year before and after removal of barriers, informing officers of any changes in antisocial behaviour, goods access, wheelchair access, etc. She noted that this study would help inform how, where and when barriers would be removed.

The committee asked about the real-time information on buses – and how members could follow up with officers on this issue. Examples were cited where the boards were not displaying the real-time timetables or the accessible audio button was not functioning, and officers had not responded to ward councillors’ correspondence within a reasonable timeframe.  The Head of Transport Projects advised that he would discuss the examples raised with the relevant team, and could demonstrate this specific progress in detail.

The committee discussed format and frequency of future updates, advising officers of their clear agreement that more information was required in the future; they set a timeline of six months for the team to report back with additional details – eg. how barriers are selected for removal, about changes to freight, details from the University of Westminster study and how the active travel programme was being prioritised. They also noted that many members would have schemes within their ward that they deemed high priority, and it would be useful to see officers’ rationale of in prioritising these.

Members asked whether Movement and Place would be at a stage to be reviewed in six months, given it was currently out for tender. The Executive Member for Transport explained that there were some elements the council would want to bring forward faster, as part of the request of the contract, such as a highway design guide which was urgently needed. She agreed it would be good to lay out where things were regarding the Movement and Place plan on  returning to scrutiny, as there would be different elements at different points.

Members asked whether it would be useful to ask the Combined Authority to give the same presentation to the CYC Place Scrutiny Committee that they would give to its York and North Yorkshire Combined Authority equivalent. The Chair suggested that this was a fair request and committed to formally asking the Combined Authority about this, since it ultimately would be dealt with at YNYCA level. He agreed that it could be included at this committee with regard to the City of York area elements. The Head of Transport Projects confirmed that at the stage where the Capital Programme was approved, an executive report would be prepared and available for the committee giving the detail of more scheme by scheme programme by programme.

The committee then

Resolved:   To consider the format and frequency of future updates on the Local Transport Strategy Implementation.

Reason:      This will be used to inform the Executive decision-making process of the views of the Place Scrutiny Committee in relation to the Local Transport Strategy.