Agenda, decisions and minutes

At this point in the meeting, the Executive Member is asked to declare any disclosable pecuniary interest, or other registerable interest, they might have in respect of business on this agenda, if they have not already done so in advance on the Register of Interests. The disclosure must include the nature of the interest.

An interest must also be disclosed in the meeting when it becomes apparent to the member during the meeting.

[Please see attached sheet for further guidance for Members].

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 they might have in respect of the business on the agenda. None were declared.

To approve and sign the minutes of the Decision Session held on 11 July 2023.

Resolved:  That the minutes of the Decision Session held on 11 July be approved and signed by the Executive Member as a correct record.

At this point in the meeting members of the public who have registered to speak can do so. Members of the public may speak on agenda items or on matters within the remit of the committee.

Please note that our registration deadlines have changed to 2 working days before the meeting. The deadline for registering at this meeting is at 5.00pm on Friday 8 September 2023.

 To register to speak please visit www.york.gov.uk/AttendCouncilMeetings to fill out an online registration form. If you have any questions about the registration form or the meeting please contact the Democracy Officer for the meeting whose details can be found at the foot of the agenda.

Webcasting of Public Meetings

Please note that, subject to available resources, this public meeting will be webcast including any registered public speakers who have given their permission. The public meeting can be viewed on demand at www.york.gov.uk/webcasts.

During coronavirus, we've made some changes to how we're running council meetings. See our coronavirus updates (www.york.gov.uk/COVIDDemocracy) for more information on meetings and decisions.

It was reported that there had been 10 registrations to speak at the session under the Council’s Public Participation Scheme.

Councillor Warters spoke on agenda items 4 - Acknowledgement of Petitions and the lack of discussion with ward Councillors. He also spoke on 5 - Annual Review of Traffic Regulation Order Requests where he objected to annex P1, explaining that the parking issues at this location were created by the Council and that the planned action would just displace the problem elsewhere. He requested that this item be rejected and called for Officers to consult with ward and parish Councillors to find a solution.

Councillor Warters then read out a statement on behalf of Dunnington Parish Council on item 8 - Speed Limit Traffic Regulation Order Amendments - Pre Consultation who objected to the Officer recommendation for a number of reasons, including that the item did not receive any due consideration and that there was no logic in waiting 12 months for the Bishopthorpe Experimental Traffic Order (ETO) to be completed, amongst others.

Gwen Swinburn spoke on unlawful spending and the issue of Officer delegation, which were rarely reported. She stated that Officers pick and choose what to record and this keeps Members and residents in the dark, namely on the suspended Highways Design Guide. She then asked for a written reply on the results of the adoption of Government House Road in 2021.

John Young also spoke on agenda item 4, namely the Race Day petition, and explained that residents were not notified of the erection of the barriers and road closures. He explained that the area had never previously had any issues with race day traffic and that the barriers were often not taken down in time. He noted that there was no support for the barriers from local residents and asked Officers why there was no notification nor consultation for them.

Councillor Nicholls questioned the length of the proposed changes detailed in annex B1 of agenda item 5 before welcoming the Officer recommendations detailed in agenda item 8 in regards to the Bishopthorpe ETO. He explained that without this decision, the partial 20mph speed limits would cause confusion and an increase in road signs. He then stated that the village speed watch and Parish Council supported the recommendations before commenting on some of the objections raised. He concluded by asking for further support for the village speed watch.

Andy D’Arogne spoke on the delay of the transport strategy and the local cycling and walking infrastructure plan. He commented on the need for a basic funded bus priority measures and warned that the stalling of the active travel programme may result in undermined funding bids. He then spoke on agenda item 8, stating that the trials for Bishopthorpe and Dunnington should go ahead and then commenting on agenda item 4, namely the Farrar St petition, stating that the wishes of long term residents should not be ignored.

Christopher Tregellis also spoke on agenda item 5, namely on  ...  view the full minutes text for item 9.

This report presents and addresses a number of petitions that have been submitted to Highways and Transport.

Resolved: That the Executive Member noted the receipt of the petitions and reviewed the recommendations against each petition below:

(i)           Strensall Cycle Path

·        Note that connecting Strensall with Huntington and Earswick has provisionally been identified as a priority route as part of the Local Walking and Cycling Infrastructure Plan.

(ii)         Haxby Moor Road Resurface

·        Due to the condition and priority of an intervention, no action would be taken in terms of the scheduled highway maintenance programme currently. An inspection of the condition would be undertaken and any reactive maintenance required would be delivered.

(iii)        Stockton-on-the-Forest Resurface

·        Due to the condition and priority of an intervention, no action would be taken in terms of the scheduled highway maintenance programme currently. An inspection of the condition would be undertaken and any reactive maintenance required would be delivered.

(iv)        Improve Road Safety - Hopgrove, York A1036 Malton Road

·        More detailed work on measure was requested and would be considered as part of the Transport Capital Programme in 2024/25.

(v)         Farrar Street ResPark

·        That the addition of this area to the residents parking waiting list was approved and the extent of the potential consultation area was considered when it reaches the top of the list.

(vi)        Garrow Hill Avenue, petition for inclusion in the Residents Parking Zone

·        That the addition of this area to the residents parking waiting list was approved and the extent of the potential consultation area was considered when it reaches the top of the list.

(vii)      Removal of Race Day Barriers on the Junctions of Albermarle and Count de Burgh with Queen Victoria Street in South Bank

·        Note that the Council would engage with residents and Ward Councillors to review traffic management in the area ahead to the next race season.

Reason:To respond to residents’ concerns and implement, if possible, the appropriate measure.

The Executive Member considered a report which acknowledged and addressed a number of petitions that had been submitted to Highways and Transport. The Director for Environment, Transport and Planning provided an overview and recommendations against each petition. It was then;

Resolved: That the Executive Member noted the receipt of the petitions and reviewed the recommendations against each petition below:

(i)           Strensall Cycle Path

·        Note that connecting Strensall with Huntington and Earswick has provisionally been identified as a priority route as part of the Local Walking and Cycling Infrastructure Plan.

(ii)         Haxby Moor Road Resurface

·        Due to the condition and priority of an intervention, no action would be taken in terms of the scheduled highway maintenance programme currently. An inspection of the condition would be undertaken and any reactive maintenance required would be delivered.

(iii)        Stockton-on-the-Forest Resurface

·        Due to the condition and priority of an intervention, no action would be taken in terms of the scheduled highway maintenance programme currently. An inspection of the condition would be undertaken and any reactive maintenance required would be delivered.

(iv)        Improve Road Safety - Hopgrove, York A1036 Malton Road

·        More detailed work on measure was requested and would be considered as part of the Transport Capital Programme in 2024/25.

(v)         Farrar Street ResPark

·        That the addition of this area to the residents parking waiting list was approved and the extent of the potential consultation area was considered when it reaches the top of the list.

(vi)        Garrow Hill Avenue, petition for inclusion in the Residents Parking Zone

·        That the addition of this area to the residents parking waiting list was approved and the extent of the potential consultation area was considered when it reaches the top of the list.

(vii)      Removal of Race Day Barriers on the Junctions of Albermarle and Count de Burgh with Queen Victoria Street in South Bank

·        Note that the Council would engage with residents and Ward Councillors to review traffic management in the area ahead to the next race season.

Reason:To respond to residents’ concerns and implement, if possible, the appropriate measure.

This report requests approval advertise and implement the amendments to the Traffic Regulation Order required to introduce the restrictions detailed in Annexes A to U.

Resolved:

i.             That each item in the Annexes A to U, with the exception of G2, be progressed as per the Officer recommendations listed.

ii.            That Annex G2 be advertised at a greater length and progressed to the statutory consultation process to amend the Traffic Regulation Order.

Reason: To provide the Council with the opportunity to progress the proposals to the Statutory Consultation for the amendment of the TRO, which is a legal requirement.

The Executive Member considered a report which requested approval to advertise and implement the amendments to the Traffic Regulation Order requested to introduce the restrictions detailed in Annexes A to U of the report.

The Director for Environment, Transport and Planning and the Traffic Management Team Leader outlined the report and detailed the objections/questions by Councillors and residents raised to the transport team. It was then;

Resolved:

i.             That each item in the Annexes A to U, with the exception of G2, be progressed as per the Officer recommendations listed.

ii.            That Annex G2 be advertised at a greater length and progressed to the statutory consultation process to amend the Traffic Regulation Order.

Reason: To provide the Council with the opportunity to progress the proposals to the Statutory Consultation for the amendment of the TRO, which is a legal requirement.

The report updates the Executive Member on the consultation for the new enforcement powers for Local Authorities under part 6 of the Traffic Management Act (TMA) 2004 and a pilot of these powers to enforce the one-way Micklegate traffic restriction.

Resolved:

     i.        That the findings of the public consultation be noted:

·        The feedback was supportive of the application to share measures with North Yorkshire Police on moving traffic offences under part 6 of the Traffic Management Act 2004;

·        The feedback was supportive of a pilot scheme on Micklegate;

    ii.        That it be noted that on the basis of the positive response to the consultation, the Director for Transport, Environment and Planning will apply to the Department for Transport to take on the responsibilities for enforcement of part 6 of the Traffic Management Act 2004 as per the delegation in the April 2022 report.

   iii.        That it be delegated to the Director of Environment, Transport and Planning for the implementation of the pilot to enforce the one-way Micklegate traffic restriction. This will be funded from existing Transport budgets. This is following the Officer Decision to commence the consultation exercise and change the location from Lendal to Micklegate for the reasons in the officer decision report.

Reason: To ensure the safety of the Highway network is further strengthened

The Executive Member considered a report which provided an update on the consultation for the new enforcement powers for Local Authorities under part 6 of the Traffic Management Act (TMA) 2004 and a pilot of these powers to enforce the one-way Micklegate traffic restriction.

The Parking Services Manager detailed the report and noted that a 6-week consultation in line with the Department of Transport guidance was conducted and that the feedback was supportive of both the application to share powers with North Yorkshire Police on moving traffic offences and the Micklegate pilot scheme. He also explained that a traffic survey was completed in July 2023 where approximately 50 vehicles passed through Micklegate bar illegally before noting that North Yorkshire Police supported the scheme in principle.

In response to questions from the Executive Member, the Officer confirmed that the use of these powers and technology would be extended to existing traffic restrictions in the city in the future. He also noted that the aim of traffic restriction was to ensure compliance and that there would be a 6 month warning period for vehicles passing through before a penalty charge notice was issued.

The Executive Member asked Officers to consider the placement of the ANPR cameras and;

Resolved:

     i.        That the findings of the public consultation be noted:

·        The feedback was supportive of the application to share measures with North Yorkshire Police on moving traffic offences under part 6 of the Traffic Management Act 2004;

·        The feedback was supportive of a pilot scheme on Micklegate;

    ii.        That it be noted that on the basis of the positive response to the consultation, the Director for Transport, Environment and Planning will apply to the Department for Transport to take on the responsibilities for enforcement of part 6 of the Traffic Management Act 2004 as per the delegation in the April 2022 report.

   iii.        That it be delegated to the Director of Environment, Transport and Planning for the implementation of the pilot to enforce the one-way Micklegate traffic restriction. This will be funded from existing Transport budgets. This is following the Officer Decision to commence the consultation exercise and change the location from Lendal to Micklegate for the reasons in the officer decision report.

Reason: To ensure the safety of the Highway network is further strengthened

This report presents an update on the issues to be resolved for the adoption of the prospective highways within The Granary estate to progress.

Resolved:

i.             That the issues which hindered the adoption process be noted.

ii.            That the actions taken by Council officers to date to seek to resolve those issues be noted.

iii.          That the Executive Member support continued efforts by officers of the Council to find a solution to the issues, working with Persimmon, Redrow and Yorkshire Water.

iv.          That a meeting with the ward Councillors, Persimmon, Redrow and Yorkshire Water be held.

Reason: to update the Executive Member and petitioners on the role of the Council and progress in resolving the issues.

The Executive Member considered a report which provided an update on the issues to be resolved for the adoption of the prospective highways within The Granary estate to progress.

The Head of Highways Access and Development outlined the report and explained that the Council had limited powers but would continue to work with Yorkshire Water, Persimmon and Redrow to attempt to find a solution. She also proposed a meeting with the ward Councillors to provide an update.

Resolved:

i.             That the issues which hindered the adoption process be noted.

ii.            That the actions taken by Council officers to date to seek to resolve those issues be noted.

iii.          That the Executive Member support continued efforts by officers of the Council to find a solution to the issues, working with Persimmon, Redrow and Yorkshire Water.

iv.          That a meeting with the ward Councillors, Persimmon, Redrow and Yorkshire Water be held.

Reason: to update the Executive Member and petitioners on the role of the Council and progress in resolving the issues.

Following several requests for speed limits to be amended or extended, the Executive Member is asked to make a decision whether to undertake statutory consultation or to take no further action on the proposals.

Resolved:

i.             That the statutory consultation process for the following sites be deferred:

·        New Lane, Huntington

·        North Lane, Huntington

·        Dunnington

ii.            That no further action be taken on the New Road, Hessay proposal.

iii.          That the statutory consultation process for A59 Boroughbridge Road be approved.

iv.          That an Experimental Traffic Order subject to further analysis on permanent speed change be implemented for Bishopthorpe.

v.           That it be noted that as part of the review of a new Local Transport Plan the issue of speeds can be reviewed in a wider policy context and that could form part of the consultation on Local Transport Strategy

Reason: To consider citizen requests and consider against the Department for Transport guidance and Police views alongside the Councils own policies.

The Executive Member considered a report which examined the requests received for speed limits to be amended or extended and was asked to make a decision on whether to undertake the statutory consultation or take no further action on the proposals.

The Director of Transport, Highways and Environment and the Traffic Projects Officer presented the report, and representatives from North Yorkshire Police were present to answer questions. The Traffic Projects Officer outlined each location that had a request for a revised speed limit and it was;

Resolved:

i.             That the statutory consultation process for New Lane, Huntington be deferred.

Reason: Owing to submitted planning applications, this may need to be reviewed in the future.

ii.            That the statutory consultation process for North Lane, Huntington be deferred.

Reason: Owing to approved development, this may will need to be reviewed in the future as part of the conditions of planning permission approval.

iii.          That the statutory consultation process for Dunnington be deferred.

Reason: to await outcome of decision for proposal vi. below.

iv.          That no further action be taken on the New Road, Hessay proposal.

Reason: The existing speed limits were appropriate due to the surrounding environment.

v.           That the statutory consultation process for A59 Boroughbridge Road be approved.

Reason: There were indications are these were appropriate speed limits due to the surrounding environment.

vi.          That an Experimental Traffic Order subject to further analysis on permanent speed change be implemented for Bishopthorpe.

Reason: Many of the roads in the village do not satisfy the Department for Transport criteria for 20mph limit so this would allow for data to be captured at 3 and 9 months and would provide reliable data for analysis and to inform future similar requests.

vii.         That it be noted that as part of the review of a new Local Transport Plan the issue of speeds can be reviewed in a wider policy context and that could form part of the consultation on Local Transport Strategy.

Reason: To consider citizen requests and consider against the Department for Transport guidance and Police views alongside the Councils own policies.

Following several requests for speed limits to be amended or extended, statutory consultation for these requests has taken place with relevant stakeholders. The Executive Member for Economy and Transport is asked to make a final decision on if the proposed new speed limits are implemented or not.

Resolved:

i.             That the revised speed limit as advertised for the following sites be implemented:

·        Haxby Road (Clarence Gardens) - 20mph

·        Wetherby Road Rufforth (Primary School) - 20mph

Reason: There were indications are these were appropriate speed limits due to the surrounding environment.

ii.            That the revised speed limit for Montague Road and Keble Park Estates be deferred.

Reason: To await the outcome of the Bishopthorpe Experimental Traffic Order as detailed in agenda item 8.

iii.          That no further action be taken in the following sites:

·        Sutton Road, Wigginton

·        Bradley Lane, Rufforth

Reason: The existing speed limits were appropriate due to the surrounding environment.

The Executive Member considered a report which examined the requests received for speed limits to be amended or extended and was asked to make a final decision on whether to implement the new speed limits.

The Director of Transport, Highways and Environment and the Traffic Projects Officer presented the report, and representatives from North Yorkshire Police were present to answer questions. The Traffic Projects Officer outlined each location that had a request for a revised speed limit and it was;

Resolved:

i.             That the revised speed limit as advertised for the following sites be implemented:

·        Haxby Road (Clarence Gardens) - 20mph

·        Wetherby Road Rufforth (Primary School) - 20mph

Reason: There were indications are these were appropriate speed limits due to the surrounding environment.

ii.            That the revised speed limit for Montague Road and Keble Park Estates be deferred.

Reason: To await the outcome of the Bishopthorpe Experimental Traffic Order as detailed in agenda item 8.

iii.          That no further action be taken in the following sites:

·        Sutton Road, Wigginton

·        Bradley Lane, Rufforth

Reason: The existing speed limits were appropriate due to the surrounding environment.