City of York Council

Committee Minutes

Meeting

Decision Session - Executive Member for Transport

Date

3 November 2020

Present

Councillor D'Agorne

 

<AI1>

30.        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 had a non-prejudicial interest regarding Scarborough Bridge to Bootham Park Cycle & Pedestrian Route Improvements as he had held a number of conversation regarding the scheme prior to the meeting.

 

The Executive Member noted a non-prejudicial in relation to Green Dykes Lane – Proposed Puffin Pedestrian Crossing as it would be part funded by Fishergate Ward, for which he was a Ward Member.

 

</AI1>

<AI2>

31.        Minutes

 

Resolved: That the minutes of the Decision Session of the Executive Member for Transport held on 20 October 2020 be approved and signed at a later date by the Executive Member as a correct record.

 

</AI2>

<AI3>

32.        Public Participation

 

It was reported that there had been nine registrations to speak at the meeting under the Council’s Public Participation Scheme. However, due to technical issues only eight of the registered speakers were able to participate in the meeting.

 

Roger Wools spoke in relation to item 4 and noted that they were against the proposed changes to the Bootham area, due to concerns it would damage the heritage of the area and affect the grade 2 listed Bootham Park gates.

 

Helen Strain spoke against the proposals in item 4 due to concerns that the work would negatively affect the grade 2 listed Penn House. They also raised concerns about traffic and light pollution outside Penn House if the proposed traffic lights were installed.

 

Anya Julius also spoke in relation to item 4 and raised concerns regarding the safety for cyclists turning out of Mary Gate and the dangers presented by a the busy road. They noted their concerns that the proposed traffic lights would cause problems at the junction.

 

Simon Boyle raised his concerns about the consultation process in relation to item 4. He highlighted that due to multiple occupancy in the area not all residents might have seen leaflets on the consultation and that there had been no drop in sessions for residents.

 

Cllr M Pavlovic spoke in favour of the proposals in item 7. He highlighted the importance of installing a crossing to improve safety on Greendykes Lane and noted his desire to see the work undertaken as soon as possible.

 

Martin Emerson also spoke in favour of the installing of a puffin crossing on Greendykes Lane, he noted the Traffic Survey recommending traffic lights which he would have supported but was happy to see a crossing installed noting support in the area including St Lawrence School.

 

Cllr A Hollyer spoke in relation to item 8 and noted that the proposals for option one in the report were supported by the Ward Councillors for the area due to the need for a new crossing on York Road. He also provided a submission from the lead petitioner Marie Dowling who had campaigned for a crossing to be installed.

 

Alison Hume spoke about the future of the extended city centre footstreets which would be considered by the Executive on 26 November. She raised concerns that the extension of the footstreets would make the city centre closed to people with disabilities.

 

Tracey Moran was registered to speak in objection to the crossing on York Road Haxby, but was unable to participate in the meeting due to technical reasons. 

 

</AI3>

<AI4>

33.        Scarborough Bridge to Bootham Park Cycle Route Improvements

 

The Executive Member considered the report and officers confirmed that the work undertaken, would be done so in consultation with the Council’s conservation team and the Civic Trust. It was confirmed that officers had explored alternative proposals but that the proposal in option 1 would be the safest proposal with the signals being installed on St Marys. It was also confirmed that the proposal would include the one off resurfacing of the privately owned road to remove pot holes and make the route safer for cyclists and pedestrians.

 

The consultation process was discussed and it was confirmed that this type of scheme would not see notices put up in the area. Officers also confirmed that consultation responses were considered after the 12th October date which they had been requested by.

 

The Executive Member considered and discussed the proposed cycle route which would pass St Marys car park. It was confirmed that to install a 4.5m cycle path, around 44 parking spaces would be lost, the Executive Member agreed that a narrower path should be installed in order to prevent the loss of so many parking spaces. However, he did request that if possible the work be undertaken in a way that would require minimal alternations if the Council wished to install a wider cycle path in the future.

 

Resolved:

 

                      i.       The Executive Member noted the results of public consultation on these proposals;

                     ii.       Approval was granted to the proposed schemes as outlined and progress to detailed design in option 1;

                    iii.       Approval was granted for the construction of the proposed schemes as outlined, if no significant changes are needed as a result of the detailed design;

                   iv.       That as part of the Stage 3 Safety Audit the Council monitors the use of the path by both cyclists and pedestrians;

                     v.       That officers consider the placement of street lighting to ensure future proofing wherever possible.

 

Reason:     The recommended schemes will enhance and promote a cycle/pedestrian and accessible route from York Station to Bootham Park and York Hospital, whilst complementing the recent upgrade of Scarborough Bridge and its approaches from the city centre. The improvements to this route will improve access and options for active travel users – cyclists and pedestrians, as well as those with mobility issues.

 

 

 

</AI4>

<AI5>

34.        TSAR Traffic Signal Refurbishment - Wigginton Road / Crichton Avenue YK2221

 

The proposals in the report were considered and the Executive Member outlined his support to install the additional controlled pedestrian crossing at the same time as refurbishing the signal. He also enquired about a tree that could obstruct the signal and officers confirmed that options regarding the tree were being considered in consultation with tree surgeons. 

 

Resolved:

 

                      i.       Approve the proposed signal refurbishment with additional controlled pedestrian crossings shown in the drawing at Annex C.

 

Reason:     This will achieve the core aim of replacing the life-expired traffic signal asset such that it can continue be operated and repaired economically.

 

</AI5>

<AI6>

35.        Economy & Place Transport Capital Programme – 2020/21 Monitor 1

 

Officers introduced the report and the Executive Member considered and approved the 2020/21 Economy & Place Transport Capital Programme and the budget changes outlined in Annex 2 to the report.

 

Resolved:

 

                      i.       The amendments to the 2020/21 Economy & Place

Transport Capital Programme were approved.

                     ii.       The Executive Member noted the progress of schemes in the Transport Capital Programme and the Emergency Active Travel Fund programme.

 

Reason:     To implement the Council’s transport strategy identified in York’s third Local Transport Plan and the Council Priorities, and deliver schemes identified in the council’s Transport Programme.

 

</AI6>

<AI7>

36.        Green Dykes Lane – Proposed Puffin Pedestrian Crossing

 

The Executive Member considered the report and officers confirmed the work which had been taken which had led to identifying the proposed placement of the crossing. This included ensuring the crossing would remain desire line and therefore encourage use and therefore safe crossing on a busy road. The Executive Member considered that there had been a submission against the proposal but agreed to the schemes and noted the positives of the use of a railing leading to the crossing that would encourage use at this location.

 

Resolved:

 

                   i.        The Executive Member approved the scheme as shown in Annex A to provide a crossing point on Green Dykes Lane.

 

Reason:     To provide a safe and formal crossing point on Green

Dykes Lane, which is in close proximity to the University of York and a local primary school.

 

</AI7>

<AI8>

37.        York Road, Haxby – Proposed Zebra Crossing

 

Officers introduced the report and outlined an objection to the proposed scheme which had been received from a resident which was also highlighted in the report. Officers outlined that the beacons at the crossing would have a halo of LED lights which would minimise light pollution and would also be silent. It was also outlined that access would continue to be available to properties which were close to the crossing.

 

The Executive Member agreed to the proposals as set out, but requested that officers liaise with residents to ensure that the scheme is completed in the most sympathetic way possible.

 

Resolved:

 

                      i.       The Executive Member approved the scheme shown in Annex A and requested that officers liaise with local residents to ensure that the scheme is undertaken in as sympathetic way as possible.

 

Reason:     To provide a safe and formal crossing point on York Road, Haxby, a road which is in close proximity the three local schools, a local residential home for the elderly, and Ethel Ward playing field. Which is the largest leisure facility in Haxby.

 

 

</AI8>

<TRAILER_SECTION>

 

 

 

 

Councillor A D’Agorne, Executive Member

[The meeting started at 10.12 am and finished at 12.00 pm].

</TRAILER_SECTION>

 

<LAYOUT_SECTION>

 

FIELD_SUMMARY

 

 

</LAYOUT_SECTION>

<TITLE_ONLY_LAYOUT_SECTION>

 

 

</TITLE_ONLY_LAYOUT_SECTION>

<HEADING_LAYOUT_SECTION>

FIELD_TITLE

 

</HEADING_LAYOUT_SECTION>

<TITLED_COMMENT_LAYOUT_SECTION>

FIELD_TITLE

 

 

</ TITLED_COMMENT_LAYOUT_SECTION>

<COMMENT_LAYOUT_SECTION>

FIELD_SUMMARY

 

</ COMMENT_LAYOUT_SECTION>

 

<SUBNUMBER_LAYOUT_SECTION>

2a)                                                                                                                                    FIELD_TITLE

 

FIELD_SUMMARY

</SUBNUMBER_LAYOUT_SECTION>

 

<TITLE_ONLY_SUBNUMBER_LAYOUT_SECTION>

2b)                                                                                                                                    FIELD_TITLE

 

</TITLE_ONLY_SUBNUMBER_LAYOUT_SECTION>