|
City of York Council |
Committee Minutes |
|
|
Meeting |
Executive |
|
|
Date |
4 November 2025 |
|
|
Present |
Councillors Douglas (Chair), Kilbane (Vice-Chair), Kent, Lomas, Pavlovic, Steels-Walshaw and Webb |
|
|
In attendance |
Councillor Ayre (Opposition Group Leader) |
|
155. Apologies for Absence
An apology for absence was submitted by Councillor Ravilious.
156. Declarations of Interest
There were no declarations of interest.
157. Exclusion of Press and Public
Whilst it was acknowledged that Annex A to agenda item 7 was classed as exempt for the reasons set out below, it was not anticipated that there was a need for Executive to consider it in private session.
Resolved: That the press and public be excluded from the meeting in relation to Annex A to agenda item 7 on the grounds that it contains information relating to the financial or business affairs of any particular person (including the authority holding that information). This information is classed as exempt under paragraph 3 of Schedule 12A to Section 100A of the Local Government Act 1972 (as revised by The Local Government (Access to Information) (Variation) Order 2006).
(Councillor Pavlovic joined the meeting at 4.32pm during the consideration of this item.)
158. Minutes
Resolved:That the minutes of the Executive meeting held on 7
October 2025 be approved and signed by the Chair as a correct
record.
159. Public Participation
It was reported that there had been four registrations to speak at the meeting under the Council’s Public Participation Scheme.
Dr Louise Hampson spoke in relation to agenda item 8, Major Projects – Castle and Eye of York Update Report and Next Steps. Dr Louise Hampson was part of University of York and had been closely involved with the consultations undertaken by the team working on Castle Gateway and the Castle Eye space projects focussed particularly on the area around Clifford's Tower and with the local Jewish community as well as other Jewish communities across the country and the world. This was an area of the city rich in history with overlapping and intersecting stories. But the national and international significance of the Jewish heritage around the events of 1190 were of exceptional importance. People came from all over the world to be in that space. Sometimes as individuals, but often in groups. They came to be in a space with enormous emotional and spiritual significance for them. Akin in many cases to a pilgrimage. For those that can, climbing the steep steps to go inside Clifford's Tower was a powerful experience. But for those who were unable to make the climb or for whom that experience was too intense, there needs to be a way of meeting those needs.
It was felt that development of this area offered a once in a generation opportunity to create a space within the wider plans for that area, which recognised the extraordinary significance of this intangible heritage, both in York's history and that of Jewish communities across the world. That it should offer people a place to step out of the bustle of other visitors and be able to take the time to reflect, to pray, to acknowledge what happened here and to be able to do so easily without fear of being in the way or being hurried on by the traffic of other users in that space. It was felt that this required clear delineation without being exclusionary and should be accompanied by interpretation which acknowledged that users needed accurate information about the events of 1190, but which sets this primary story sensitively into the wider context of the multivalent histories of that space in ways which allow people to engage with their own thoughts and reflections.
Whilst acknowledging and understanding that budgets had reduced, and some aspects of the wider scheme as originally envisaged have had to be reviewed, Executive was urged to ensure that permissions granted this fundamental principle of creating a defined, generous, beautiful, safe and inclusive gathering space in which this story was clearly and sensitively told and where everyone from large school groups exploring history to elderly people wanting to step out, sit down, and be with their own thoughts was not cut back. Current world events had made the circumstances and events of 1190 feel particularly resonant, and this scheme could and should be an opportunity to show that York not only knows its history but learns from it and can teach the rest of the world about it.
Lilian Coulson spoke in relation to agenda item 8, Major Projects – Castle and Eye of York Update Report and Next Steps. As a long-standing consultee York Liberal Jewish Community requested that the current proposals be amended to become more inclusive, better meet the needs of its current users, better telling its important history, and reflected York's values today.
To meet City of York Council’s financial constraints, it was suggested that the current phasing of some elements be reconsidered to ensure that what was included and implemented in phase one will be meaningful and perform its intended function.
The scheme's evolution has reinstated much needed blue badge parking, but the requested numerous seating areas around the pathway were now concentrated mainly around the large children's play area and the Eye of York with little along other main walkways of the Clifford Tower green space. And the removal of the event space included the removal of the 1190 memorial garden. Any commemoration, contemplation, prayer, and learning was now expected to take place on the new circular path to be built into the base of the mound around Clifford's Tower. The masterplan now annotated a single bench as the 1190 memorial space with potential for a future memorial subject to other unknown funding. It was requested that the 1190 memorial garden be reinstated to properly respect the history of this important site, explain what happened here, and as a place that showed that in York we move forward together. As a multifunctional space, it should be a commemoration for those who died here in 1190. A proper reflective space for those who wish to play and quietly think, an informed functional space where school and tour groups can learn about Clifford’s Tower and its history, a focal space for the annual Clifford’s Tower commemoration event, and a quiet seating area for all. All provided in a designated landscaped area where large numbers of people can sit and stand off the main walkways overlooking Clifford's Tower and away from the main children's play area.
It was proposed that the Memorial Garden be expanded to include something currently missing from our city. There was currently no peace garden in York, and where better to site it than at the heart of our city's former castle to provide a new welcoming space where people can sit and learn of our city's values together. Today we are an interfaith city and city of sanctuary where we regularly stand together against religious intolerance, racism and hate. With clear information about our past and our future, this 1190 memorial peace garden can tell our history and how we learn from it to encourage all who live and visit York to make it one city for all. This would provide perfect symmetry of the past and what we stand for in York for our future.
It was requested that the priorities for the current application and the first phase of implementation be reconsidered to reinstate the memorial garden and if funds were needed for this then the circular path could be deferred to a later phase when wider traffic considerations could be more easily resolved.
Councillor Rose spoke in relation to multiple agenda items. It was reported that the Executive agenda contained monumental pieces of work in relation to the anti-poverty strategy, neighbourhood model, numerous prospectus items, the Clifford's Tower area plans, the Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL), and much more. Obscured by the bigger items were many smaller improvements for residents. For instance, in the Acomb area alone, there had been positive work at Acomb Library, Energise, Westfield School, Lowfield, the multi-use games area, street lighting renewals, active travel schemes, a great places plan, and parts of the city's largest ever highways resurfacing programme. This was the real substance of what the council does alongside social care and it was therefore disappointing to see only two articles about these developments across the local press. That there was so much that York residents did not know about that benefit them. These positives were despite the greatest pressures on council finances.
It was felt that in relation to York Christmas Markets, the Human Rights Act, Article 2, did not mean spending all money eliminating every potential risk to life. It was about ensuring the appropriate balance. The police had its own view on balance, but the role of the police prevented true neutrality and meant that they could view balance differently to human rights groups and others. The council routinely weighed up all rights for all residents for this very reason.
Andrew Lowson representing York BID spoke in relation to agenda item 8, Major Projects – Castle and Eye of York Update Report and Next Steps. It was reported that there was still some nervousness from within the business community about how the removal of Castle Car Park will affect the footfall on the city.
Having been a member of the steering group for many years and some of those original mitigations, such as the multi-story car park at St. George's, the link bridge for Castle Mills, the new event space, those had all been removed from the scheme. This linked to the wider conversation on car parking and accessibility to the city. The spend data and anecdotes from businesses points that local spend is down since April and this was something York BID would look to bring to the attention of Executive as part of the upcoming car parking consultation. York BID welcomed the ambitions behind the Castle and the Eye of York project, particularly as this was a once in a generation opportunity to reshape one of our city's most important historic areas to make it greener and more welcoming. The businesses who supported this project were hopeful it will drive footfall, especially around the Coppergate area.
It was requested that progress on this project was balanced with practicality in relation to the closure of Castle Car Park. The report made clear that this would remove about 268 spaces with the mitigation focused on the Coppergate multi-story. It was stressed how vital it was that the Coppergate improvements were completed and fully operational before any closure took place. Those upgrades such as better signage, extended hours were not just cosmetic. They were essential to make Coppergate an attractive alternative, safe and convenient environment. Until those measures were in place, if Castle Car Park was removed, it could risk creating some pressures on accessibility and undermine some confidence in in the wider project.
There was also some disappointment expressed in relation to the proposed foot bridge linking Castle Mills and Eye of York, which had been removed from the scheme. That bridge was never simply just about convenience. It was about connectivity, encouraging footfall to flow naturally between different sites and developments. The council and its partners were urged to ensure that the footbridge remained firmly built into the castle mills development plans. It was not considered that the long-term success of the whole masterplan was dependent on seamless access and movement across the Foss.
160. 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 of agenda publication.
161. York Christmas Market 2025: Operation of Temporary Anti-Terrorism Traffic Regulation Order
The Director of City Development submitted a report which presented an update on the operation of a temporary Anti-Terrorism Traffic Regulation Order (ATTRO), following initial consideration by Executive at its meeting on 7 October 2025.
The following information was appended to the report:
- ATTRO Order
- ATTRO Notice of Making
- Recommended Excluded Vehicle Access Risk Assessment
- Recommended Controlled Vehicle Access Risk Assessment (Exempt from publication)
- Equalities Impact Assessment.
The following officers were in attendance for this item:
- Garry Taylor, Director of City Development
- Ben Murphy, Head of City Development.
The key areas of discussion were:
· The Director of City Development reported that there had been numerous meetings since the decision made at the October Executive meeting at multiple levels from bronze through to gold command, including engagement at national level in terms of specialist anti-terrorism advice. The only vehicles that were to be allowed were those that were from a known staffed organisation and fully vetted through the relevant processes and procedures.
· The Opposition Group Leader expressed concern that this was the second time that Elected Members had been presented with a report less than 24 hours before the meeting, which didn't give the public or opposition members sufficient time to read through all the details contained in the report. There were also some concerns around the financial issues contained in the report. In particular, the suggestion that the Mayor of York and North Yorkshire Combined Authority could find £102,000 towards cost mitigations. In addition, comments made at the last meeting which threatened the Christmas Market were particularly unhelpful and destabilised partners and businesses. It was welcomed that this report had started to step back on some of those threats about cancelling the York Christmas Market.
· The Executive Member highlighted the need to reflect on the work that happened between making the decision last year and then considering it again this year. Consideration of doing the market differently and all the risks and benefits. It had been anticipated based on the information available that it would be a matter of making a similar decision to last year. That the letter from the Chief Constable letter put the ruling administration in what was considered an impossible situation and there was a need to mitigate the harm. Officers were thanked for working at phenomenal pace since the last meeting to identify what could be done to limit the harm caused.
· In relation to exemptions, these were limited cases for very specific deliveries. It was not ordinary deliveries to shops. The advice of the Chief Constable was clear that no other traffic could be tolerated within the Hostile Vehicle Mitigation (HVM) zone. That advice was being followed. There was a need to take the responsibilities seriously and keep people as safe as possible. This was to be balanced against the impact of the decisions that might be made to limit those risks. Advice had been received from the Chief Constable, but also human rights experts.
· The Leader of the Council concluded that Executive was committed to ensuring that residents were not excluded from elements of their city. That was a highly important aspect, and it needed to be balanced against all the other considerations. There was a need to consider how the Christmas Market functioned if it could not accommodate all residents. That there was a need to find a way of doing that and that work was to start in early 2026, as referenced in the report.
Resolved (unanimously):
That Executive
i) Agrees the publication and implementation of the York (City Centre) (Anti-Terrorism Temporary Traffic Restrictions) Order 2025 (Annex A and B of the report).
ii) Notes the risk assessment at Annex C of the report and agrees the operational protocols to the scheme summarised at paragraphs 31-36, and included at confidential Annex D to the report, and the approach to excluding vehicular access set out at paragraphs 37-42 of the report. Agrees that any minor amendments to the arrangements be delegated to the Director of City Development (in consultation with the Leader) to agree with North Yorkshire Police.
iii) Agrees the risk and impact mitigation package summarised at paragraphs 31-42, and (in respect of risk mitigation measures) included at confidential Annex D of the report.
iv) Approves a temporary change of the Council’s policy on vehicle clamping and removals to enable the removal of vehicles parked in the protected area, within the HVM, during event hours after a Penalty Charge Notice (PCN) has been issued (as waiting and loading will be temporarily suspended), in accordance with the statutory guidance for local authorities in England on civil enforcement of parking contraventions.
v) Acknowledges the forecast additional costs of £102k to support the recommendations ii) and iii), and to seek to recover these costs (except where they relate to discretionary impact mitigation measures) from event operator Make it York.
vi) Agrees to receive a future report early in 2026 reviewing the strategic case for, and ongoing delivery arrangements associated with, the Christmas Market and other significant footfall city centre events.
Reason
vii) Having agreed to make the ATTRO in October’s Executive meeting, Executive must identify an approach to implementing the ATTRO which is reasonable and proportionate having fully considered all relevant matters, with all associated activity funded and deliverable. A further report reviewing the case for, and delivery arrangements associated with, the York Christmas Market and other largescale city centre events will allow for strategic city decision making around these future events.
162. Major Projects – Castle and Eye of York Update Report and Next Steps
The Director of City Development submitted a report which detailed the costs and funding package for the relevant works and/or services and sought delegations to allow such works and/or services to be procured.
The following information was appended to the report:
- Summary diagram: Scheme Development 2022 – 2025
- Castle Gateway Parking Options Paper
- Equalities Impact Assessment.
The following officers were in attendance for this item:
- Garry Taylor, Director of City Development
- Ben Murphy, Head of City Development.
The key areas of discussion were:
· In response to a query about some of the financial implications, the Director of City Development confirmed that there was additional revenue borrowing. In relation to parking data this was based on information collated by the Council. It related to income received over the course of the year, parking trends in relation to park and ride and city centre demand. Worst case revenue implications had been applied. There was reported to be significant car parking capacity, particularly at Coppergate. The report took account of peak times, such as Christmas and over the summer months, and on weekends. A strategic approach had been applied with a particular focus on the park and ride. It was noted that investment in the park and ride had been approved at the October Executive meeting.
· The Executive Member reported that there had been an evolution of plans which had resulted in significant changes. The development of a multi-story car park in the city centre had been removed on the basis that it did not fit with the transport strategy as it encouraged more cars into the city centre. The revised plans provided people in the city with family friendly green space. There had been some additional costs incurred due to the HVM measures that had been included on the advice of security experts. It was noted that blue badge parking had been retained in a space that was closest to large parts of the city centre and provided a significant number of car parking spaces. It was reported that there may be some additional borrowing, which was £1.5m if the amount could not be utilised from external sources.
Resolved (unanimously):
That Executive
b. Approves the total project funding package of up to £9.934m, to deliver the Castle and Eye of York and Coppergate car park works, comprised of both Council and external funding as set out from paragraph 56 of the report.
c. Approves the inclusion of the scheme in the York Prospectus (Executive agenda item 15) to seek additional external funding. In the event that the bid is not successful, approve the virement of £1.5m from the highways programme to the Castle Gateway scheme across the years 2026/27 to 2028/29.
d. Approves the improvements to be made to Coppergate car park to ensure that it is an attractive, safe and convenient alternative parking option for all users, including potential to extend hours of operation at an estimated cost of £200k (included in the £9.934m).
e. Approves the procurement of contractors and specialist support services to enable timely completion of the scheme (pending Planning ref 22/00209/FULM with further details submitted on 4th July 2025). The works are subject to the granting of planning permission.
f. Delegates authority to the Director of City Development, in consultation with the Director of Governance, Head of Procurement and the Director of Finance, to procure such contractors and/or consultants and to take such steps as are necessary to award and enter into any resulting contracts for works and/or services for the completion of the Scheme and the proposed works at Coppergate car park (including (where applicable) any and all planning agreements and/or highways/land agreements as required and any grant terms and conditions relating to any external funding bids as may be necessary) as well as any subsequent modification and/or extension to any such contracts post-award); (however for the sake of clarity this delegation is not for any requirements of either the Local Planning and/or Highways Authority). The delegations given in this recommendation must be exercised within the budgets approved within this report.
g. Agree the permanent closure of Castle Car Park to non-blue badge parking, from 2026 and accept the associated loss of income and unavoidable growth pressure in future revenue budget processes. Approve the associated package of mitigation (to include works to Coppergate Car Park and exploring potential future works to St George’s Field Surface Car Park - to be considered as part of the wider Movement and Place workstream both subject to the granting of any necessary planning permission). To note that during the construction period the car park will very likely be closed to all users, including blue badge holders, though the extent and impact of such closures on blue badge holders will be sought to be mitigated.
Reason:
h. To allow the progression of the Castle and Eye of York scheme to deliver this project which has been a longstanding development ambition of the city and partners. This will deliver transformative benefits across a range of outputs and outcomes. To finally realise key city benefits, with mechanisms in place to ensure appropriate management of budget and project risk profile, and to do so in a manner which mitigates any potential adverse impacts on Council revenue, transport networks and local businesses.
163. Capital Programme - Monitor Two 2025/26
The Director of Finance submitted a report which presented the projected outturn position for 2025/26 including any under/overspends and adjustments, along with requests to re-profile budgets to/from current and future years.
The following information was appended to the report:
· Capital Programme 2025/26 to 2029/30.
Debbie Mitchell, Director of Finance was in attendance for this item.
The key areas of discussion were:
· The Director of Finance reported that a significant slippage of around £18m had been identified on a range of schemes mainly due to a review of transport commitments. Details about individual schemes were provided in the report.
· The Opposition Group Leader expressed some concern about the stated spring 2026 delivery of the city centre sustainability corridor, which had been timed at the same time as works on Lendal Bridge. This was considered a high-risk strategy, particularly if work was to start on Castle Gateway. There was also some concern about a potential increase in charges for green bin services, which based on initial reporting was to be charged at £52.
· The Executive Member advised that the green bin charge was not for consideration at this meeting and no decision had been made. This was to be considered separately at a future meeting.
Resolved (unanimously):
That Executive
a) Recommends to Full Council the adjustments resulting in a decrease in the 2025/26 budget of £17.865m as detailed in the report.
b) Notes the 2025/26 revised budget of £162.466m as set out in paragraph 10 and Table 1 of the report.
c) Approves the virement of £1.3m between the Integrated Transport budget and Lendal Bridge budget to fund the additional works set out in the report.
d) Notes the restated capital programme for 2025/26 – 2029/30 as set out in Annex 1.
Reason: To enable the effective management and monitoring of the Council’s capital programme.
164. Quarter Two 2025/26 - Finance and Performance Monitor
The Director of Finance submitted a report which presented the projected financial position and the latest performance information for the period covering 1 April 2025 to 30 September 2025.
The following information was appended to the report:
- Quarter Two Performance Tables - City Outcomes and Council Delivery Indicators 2023-2027
- Council Plan Annual Update 2025.
Debbie Mitchell, Director of Finance was in attendance for this item.
The key areas of discussion were:
· The Director of Finance reported that there had been a worsening of the forecast overspend which was now just over £6m and the main area for that overspend was adult social care. The service had prioritised development of an action plan that sought to mitigate those pressures. Across the council, cost control measures and mitigations were to be established to manage identified pressures.
· In response to a query, the Executive Member advised that cycling data had been removed from the performance monitor whilst officers assessed exactly what the cycling index measured. At the same time officers were working on identifying more effective ways of monitoring how much people in the city walk, wheel and cycle. This aimed to give a more accurate picture of sustainable travel rather than focussing on how many people cycled past a particular point.
Resolved (unanimously):
That Executive
a) Notes the finance and performance information.
b) Notes and supports the need to undertake mitigation action identified within the report.
Reason: To ensure expenditure is kept within the approved budget.
c) Approves the extension to 31 December 2027 for the letter of credit to York Museums Trust as outlined in paragraphs 34-36 of the report.
Reason: To secure the financial viability and confidence in the Yorkshire Museum Trust.
d) Approves the second annual Council Plan Progress report for publication on the Council’s webpages.
Reason: To provide a review of activity undertaken by the Council that supports ambitions to make York a more equal, affordable, sustainable and healthy city.
In relation to acceptance of the funding from the York & North Yorkshire Combined Authority:
i) Accepts funding from the York and North Yorkshire Combined Authority, delegating authority to the Director for City Development to progress the below, in consultation with the Executive Member for the Economy and Culture, or the Executive Member for Climate Change and the Environment:
a) £2,390,000 from the Mayoral Investment Fund
b) £604,893 from the UK Shared Prosperity Fund
c) £3,066,209 from the Net Zero Fund.
The below is delegated to Chief Strategy Officer as below £250k
d) £216,000 from the Mayoral Renewables Fund.
ii) Accepts funding from the York and North Yorkshire Combined Authority, delegating authority to the Director of Housing and Communities in consultation with the Executive Member for Economy and Culture and Executive Member for Children, Young People and Education, for:
a) £120,000 from the Mayoral Investment Fund.
iii) Accepts funding from the York and North Yorkshire Combined Authority, delegating authority to the Director of Environment and Regulatory Services in consultation with the Executive Member for Transport for:
a) £4,423,000 for Local Highways Maintenance Funding.
iv) Accepts funding from the York and North Yorkshire Combined Authority, delegating authority to the Director of City Development in consultation with the Executive Member for Transport for:
a) £7,456,000 from the Local Transport Grant
b) £1,582,000 from the Integrated Transport Block
c) £190,000 from the Local Transport Resource Fund
d) £4,836,416 from the Department for Transport Bus Grant.
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.
165. Medium-Term Financial Strategy Update
The Director of Finance submitted a report which provided an update on the Medium-Term Financial Strategy along with an outline of the 2026/27 budget process.
Debbie Mitchell, Director of Finance was in attendance for this item.
The key areas of discussion were:
· The Director of Finance highlighted that the report set out some of the key assumptions for budget planning. It was advised that it was for Full Council to agree the budget, but there was a need to make some assumptions for financial planning. These assumptions remained under review and further updates were to be provided in due course.
· The Chancellor was setting out the national budget later this month. It was anticipated that individual funding allocations were to be announced around mid-December. The medium-term financial strategy update also set out the cumulative budget gap of £33.7 million. It outlined the main strategy for closing this forecast gap, which was predominantly from the council wide transformation programme together with maximising internal / external income and a continued focus on efficiency and reviewing contracts. It was unlikely that the Council could save £33.7m without considering some other cuts or reductions in service. That was another factor, and a programme of work had been established as part of a series of service reviews. Every service area was to be reviewed to help identify where savings could be made.
· The Executive Member acknowledged the financial challenges facing the Council over the next three years. Linked to this was the unknown outcome of the Fair Funding Review. A great deal of hard work had been undertaken in ensuring that the Council met its duty for setting a balanced budget.
Resolved (unanimously): That Executive agrees the Medium-Term Financial Strategy as outlined in the report.
Reason: To ensure the Council meets future financial challenges and produces a robust budget.
166. Treasury Management 2025/26 mid-year report and review of prudential indicators
The Director of Finance submitted a report which provided an update on treasury management activity for the first half of the 2025/26 financial year together with the latest update of prudential indicators.
Debbie Mitchell, Director of Finance was in attendance for this item.
In response to a specific query, the Director of Finance advised that in relation to the treasury, the level of cash was not reflective of a political decision. It was a deliberate strategy that had been agreed in terms of using cash balances to avoid the cost of borrowing. There had been no borrowing in advance of need. It had served the council well in terms of its borrowing costs, particularly in relation to only borrowing what was needed given the rates of return were incredibly low and the cost of borrowing was significantly higher than it was some years ago.
Resolved (unanimously):
That Executive notes
a) The 2025/26 Treasury Management activity for the period ending 30 September 2025; and
b) The Prudential Indicators outlined in Annex A of the report (updated where applicable) 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.
167. Community Infrastructure Levy
The Director of City Development submitted a report which considered the outcomes of the Examination and how to proceed with implementation of the Community Infrastructure Levy.
The following information was appended to the report:
- Submitted Community Infrastructure Levy Draft Charging Schedule (July 2025)
- Examiner’s report including Appendix with proposed modifications schedule
- Equalities Impact Appraisal.
The following officers were in attendance for this item:
- Garry Taylor, Director of City Development
- Alison Cooke, Head of Strategic Planning Policy.
The key areas of discussion were:
· It was queried whether there was potential for forward funding specific projects, for example Castle Gateway. The Director of City Development advised that there was a requirement for funding to be spent on development and infrastructure related activity. A separate report was to be presented to a future Executive meeting inviting Members to consider how to allocate the funding, particularly in terms of the split between major and community-based schemes.
· The Executive Member highlighted the benefits of a potential £18m additional funding from developers. He also wished to extend his thanks to Alison Cooke and her team for all their hard work over a short period of time. There was a need to address the infrastructure gap both locally and nationally. That the current system did not provide the mechanism for the delivery of key infrastructure and delivering communities where people were able to strive.
Resolved (unanimously):
That Executive
i)
Accepts the outcomes of the independent Examiner’s Report
(Annex B of the report), including modifications proposed by the
Examiner to ensure the Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) and
proposed Charging Schedule can be soundly implemented.
Reason: To ensure the Charging Schedule is legally compliant, robust, and capable of being implemented effectively, in line with the recommendations of the independent Examiner and national planning guidance.
ii) Recommends to Council that the draft CIL Charging Schedule be approved as set out in Annex A as modified by the Examiner as set out in Annex B of the report.
Reason: To allow the CIL Schedule to be legally adopted and implemented.
iii) Recommends that the implementation date for the Community Infrastructure Levy will take effect from 1 February 2026.
Reason: To agree to set a CIL implementation date that supports adequate preparation of internal systems and resources.
iv) Delegates authority to the Director of City Development to review the instalment policy and make any necessary further minor editorial changes to the Charging Schedule or a change to the implementation date, if necessary.
v) Delegates authority to the Director for Environment and Regulatory Services to agree publishing and necessary documentation for the introduction of CIL.
Reason: To enable timely and efficient progression of the CIL adoption process, ensuring operational readiness, sound implementation and regular monitoring.
vi) Notes that a further report regarding the spending of CIL will be brought to a future Executive for consideration.
Reason: To allow Executive to consider how to spend the CIL monies received.
(At this point the meeting was adjourned at 6.25pm and reconvened at 6.35pm.)
168. North Yorkshire and York Local Nature Recovery Strategy (LNRS) - Publication Draft
The Director of City Development submitted a report which provided an update on the Local Nature Recovery Strategy and presented recommendations in relation to the endorsement of the Publication Draft version of the North Yorkshire and York Local Nature Recovery Strategy.
The following information was appended to the report:
- Pre-Publication Local Nature Recovery Strategy Short Summary (consultation version, June 2025).
The following officers attended the meeting for this item:
- Garry Taylor, Director of City Development
- Alison Cooke, Head of Strategic Planning Policy
- Guy Hanson, Design and Conservation Manager.
The key areas of discussion were:
· Officers were thanked for the extensive work that had been undertaken, particularly as part of the consultation exercise working with local libraries to ensure as many York people as possible were involved.
· The Executive Member welcomed the overall trajectory of the Local Nature Recovery Strategy. That the opportunities across the region were huge in terms of nature recovery, so long as there was sufficient funding for total delivery. There were significant opportunities within York and particular reference was made to the positive work done as part of the green corridors project. City of York Council had a wealth of expertise in ecology and biodiversity and that had shone through in the consultation responses.
Resolved (unanimously):
That Executive
i) Notes the work that has been undertaken in relation to the
North Yorkshire and York Local Nature Recovery Strategy at pre-publication stage, comprising:
· The Local Habitat Map, which spatially identifies existing and potential areas for nature recovery.
· The Statement of Biodiversity Priorities, which sets out agreed ecological priorities and measures for habitat enhancement and creation.
Reason: To ensure these outputs are compliant under the Environment Act 2021, and capable of being implemented effectively as a reference point for future planning and environmental decisions.
ii) Delegates authority to the Directory of City Development, in
consultation with the Executive Member for Environment and Climate Emergency, to respond to North Yorkshire Council as the Responsible Authority within the statutory 28-day period following their issue of the Publication draft LNRS.
Reason: To allow a statutory response to be provided to the Regulation 15 stage consultation.
169. York’s Prospectus – Going for Good Growth with Innovation, Culture and Heritage at our heart
The Director of City Development submitted a report which presented York’s response to the York and North Yorkshire Combined Authority’s Local Growth Plan, known as York’s
Prospectus, Going for Good Growth with Innovation, Culture and Heritage at our heart.
The following information was appended to the report:
- York’s Prospectus – Going for Good Growth with Innovation, Culture and Heritage at our heart
- Equalities Impact Assessment.
The following officers were in attendance for this item:
- Garry Taylor, Director of City Development
- Claire Foale, Chief Strategy Officer
- Sam Blyth, Head of City Strategy and Corporate Programmes.
The Leader of the Council thanked officers for all their hard work both internally with colleagues in the council but also right across the city. It was a collaborative partnership approach which set out how we develop our city for the future and showed the ambition we had for our place and for the people in York.
Resolved (unanimously): That Executive approves York’s Prospectus as attached at Annex A to the report.
Reason: York’s Prospectus is York’s response to the Local Growth Plan. It is a continuation of the approved Mayoral Pipeline of Proposals. It has been developed in collaboration with city partners and sets out a series of projects that would support both delivery of the Local Growth Plan and 10-Year City Plan and Strategies.
Rejecting York’s Prospectus would mean council officers did not have a guide of priority projects to proactively attract investment into the city, with the risk that residents miss out on significant benefits as a result.
170. Tackling Poverty Today and Turning the Tide to Create Lasting Change: A Strategy and Strategic Action Plan for addressing Poverty in York 2025-2035
The Director of Housing and Communities submitted a report which presented for approval ‘Tackling Poverty Today and Turning the Tide to Create Lasting Change - A Strategy and Strategic Action Plan for addressing Poverty in York 2025-2035’ a 10-year strategy and action plan for tackling poverty in York.
The following information was appended to the report:
- 10-year anti-poverty strategy - Tackling Poverty Today and
Turning the Tide to Create Lasting Change - A Strategy and Strategic Action Plan for addressing Poverty in York 2025-2035
- Analysis of consultation feedback
- Equalities Impact Assessment.
The following officers were in attendance for this item:
- Pauline Stuchfield, Director of Housing and Communities
- Sam Blyth, Head of City Strategy and Corporate Programmes.
The key areas of discussion were:
· Officers advised that the Strategy and Strategic Action Plan had been developed and co-ordinated with partners. It had also been considered by the Corporate Scrutiny Committee. All those involved were thanked for their positive contribution as part of the extensive consultation exercise, which took place from August to October 2025.
· The Opposition Group Leader pointed out that it was important to recognise the work of the Rowntree family since it marked 100 years since Joseph Rowntree passed away with his work on pensions and welfare. In relation to the report, it covered many of the actions that were needed across the city both by council and its partners. It was felt that there was scope to provide more detail about the number of people that were going to be helped and that was an area that could be developed over time.
· The Executive Member emphasised the need to address hidden poverty. That York was an incredibly unequal City and that was one of the biggest issues faced. According to recent data, York had eight areas that were in the 20% most deprived in the country. Work was to be undertaken to establish monitoring arrangements to review the level of improvements. The Financial Inclusion Steering Group had an important role. There was a need to prepare for the future and support people to stop them falling into the poverty trap.
Resolved (unanimously): That Executive approves the 10-year strategy and action plan and endorses it for adoption by Full Council on behalf of the city of York.
Reason: In alignment with the Council Plan and 10-year strategies, the anti-poverty strategy and action plan, reflects the views of residents, communities, partners and Members, sets a direction of travel for the council and partners over the next 10 years to tackle poverty in York helping to support the most vulnerable in society.
171. City of York Council Neighbourhood Model - Implementation Phase
The Director of Housing and Communities submitted a report which presented detailed proposals for the implementation phase, agreement of a shared outcomes framework, and endorsement of the neighbourhood practice model.
The following information was appended to the report:
- Equalities Impact Assessment
- Shared Outcomes Framework
- York Neighbourhood Model Practice Framework.
The following officers were in attendance for this item:
- Pauline Stuchfield, Director of Housing and Communities
- Laura Williams, Assistant Director of Customer and Communities.
The key areas of discussion were:
· Members and officers thanked Laura Williams for all her hard work and extremely positive contribution to the Council who it was reported was attending her last Executive meeting before taking up a new role as Director at another local authority.
· The Executive Member welcomed the report which highlighted the importance of being able to access services and bringing organisations together as part of a systems-based approach. It was reported that the approach had received cross party support at Scrutiny Committee meetings.
· Another Executive Member discussed the important role of the communities team in implementing the approach. That it was about building health and care services where there was need in their community.
Resolved (unanimously):
That Executive
i) Notes the progress and plans made across Council teams and by partners, particularly in the health system, in developing and testing the Neighbourhood Model;
ii) Approves the Shared Outcomes Framework (Annex B of the report) and Practice Model (Annex C of the report) as the foundation for delivering integrated neighbourhood working across the city; and
iii) Approves the Governance Structure at paragraph 58 of the report.
Reason: To provide a plan for the implementation of a Neighbourhood Model for York.
172. Lord Mayoralty Points Allocation
The Director of Governance submitted a report which invited Executive to consider the points allocations for the Lord Mayoralty for the forthcoming municipal year, 2026/2027.
Bryn Roberts, Director of Governance, attended the meeting for this item.
Resolved (unanimously): That Executive agrees the points allocation for the Lord Mayoralty for the municipal year 2026/27 in accordance with the information presented in the table at paragraph 8 of the report.
Reason: To allow for the nomination to the office of Lord Mayor for the Municipal Year 2026/27.
173. Urgent Business
There were no urgent items of business to consider.
Councillor Douglas, Chair
(The meeting started at 4.30 pm and finished at 7.23pm).