Agenda, decisions and draft minutes

To receive and note apologies for absence.

There were no apologies.

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 disclosable pecuniary interests, or other registerable interests she might have in respect of business on the agenda, if she had not already done so in advance on the Register of Interests. None were declared.

To approve and sign the minutes of the Decision Session held on Tuesday, 13 May 2025.

Resolved:   That the minutes of the Decision Session held on Tuesday, 13 May 2025 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, 13 June 2025.

 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.

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

Councillor Stephen Fenton spoke on item 5, concerning the proposed changes; he welcomed the officers report and asked for a full list of crossing requests to be made available. Regarding item 6, he queried a point of ambiguity over inconsistent terminology in the report.

Councillor Andrew Waller spoke on item 5, concerning pedestrian crossing requests in Westfield Ward and safe routes to schools.

Councillor Keith Orrell spoke on item 5, concerning a crossing outside the Folk Hall Post Office. Cllr Runciman had presented a petition on this matter to council but was unable to attend the decision session due to a CQC inspection. The crossing had been approved 2 years ago, but the subsequent approval of a housing development on New Lane had led to its relocation and further delays.

Councillor Tony Fisher spoke on item 5, concerning a crossing application for York Road, Strensall. He discussed the growth of the industrial estate at Sheriff Hutton and the need for safe crossing points.

Councillor Anna Baxter spoke on item 5, concerning the benefits that the change of assessment criteria of crossing would have on the Hull Road ward.

Parish Councillor Tom Franklin spoke on item 5, on behalf of Clifton Without Parish Council. He welcomed the decision and stressed the importance of delivery.

Andy D’Agorne spoke on item 5, on behalf of York Green Party, in support of policy change and called for crossings on Thief Lane and Kent Street, taking full account of new developments in the area.

Andrew Mortimer spoke regarding the Active Travel Programme proposals for Badger Hill Primary School, noting that this scheme had been approved in 2024 by the previous Executive Member for Economy and Transport. He advised that there was concern at the school that this scheme had been cancelled since there had been no contact. He also wished to discuss parking in the ward which until last September had been funded by University of York. He asked what will happen to this going forward

The Executive Member confirmed that she would send Mr Mortimer a written reply on these issues.

Councillor Bob Webb registered to speak on item 5 but was unable to attend the decision session due to a prior commitment.

Councillor Nigel Ayre sent a written submission on item 5; this arrived after the deadline for Public Participation but at the Executive Member’s discretion this was taken into consideration in making her decision on the item.

This report proposes an updated active travel evaluation and prioritisation methodology which puts greater emphasis on need (including destinations) and potential future usage, it also puts forward a methodology for prioritising requests for dropped kerb crossings independently of the crossing evaluation.

The report also proposes to put all historic requests, including those rejected using the previous assessment methodologies, through the first stage of the proposed new assessment methodology (Sense Check) to quickly identify sites which are not appropriate, or can be dealt with by other work programmes, as a means of simplifying the task of tackling the significant backlog of requests.

Resolved:

i.    To approve the adoption of the revised evaluation and prioritisation methodology and delegate authority to the Director of City Development to commence the initial stage assessment of all requested sites, both current and historic. This will enable the backlog of requests, which have built up over the previous few years.

Reason:     The revised methodology is in line with current guidance and gives greater priority to need and future usage whilst addressing existing casualty issues and perception of danger of potential users. The methodology also enables prioritisation of specific requests for dropped kerb crossings to be undertaken independently of other crossings recognising this has its own separate budget.



ii.  To delegate authority to the Director of City Development to implement the active travel crossing programme and dropped kerb programme annually based on the outcomes of the revised evaluation and prioritisation process and the budgets allocated.

Reason:     To ensure there are no additional delays in implementing the two programmes each year once the Transport capital programme has been approved at Executive level.

This report was presented by the Transport Policy Manager, who advised that he written the previous 2016 methodology, and since then things had progressed, necessitating this update.

The Executive Member asked for clarification that the table within the report was based on existing measurements and had not been taken from new measurements. The Transport Policy Manager confirmed this and said that after a sense check new figures would need to be created.

The Executive Member stated that she was also pleased that different levels of vulnerability of road users had been considered and built into the formula, as this would help to make the city more accessible, ensure safety for young people walking to school and give disabled people confidence to travel.

The Executive Member thereby

Resolved:

i.    To approve the adoption of the revised evaluation and prioritisation methodology and delegate authority to the Director of City Development to commence the initial stage assessment of all requested sites, both current and historic. This will enable the backlog of requests, which have built up over the previous few years.

Reason:     The revised methodology is in line with current guidance and gives greater priority to need and future usage whilst addressing existing casualty issues and perception of danger of potential users. The methodology also enables prioritisation of specific requests for dropped kerb crossings to be undertaken independently of other crossings recognising this has its own separate budget.

ii.  To delegate authority to the Director of City Development to implement the active travel crossing programme and dropped kerb programme annually based on the outcomes of the revised evaluation and prioritisation process and the budgets allocated.

Reason:     To ensure there are no additional delays in implementing the two programmes each year once the Transport capital programme has been approved at Executive level.

This report provides an update on the process and consultation of developing a proposed Anti-Terrorism Traffic Regulation Order (ATTRO).  This was an approved action from the report presented to the Executive in October 2023, for consideration of changes to the City Centre Traffic Regulation Order.

The report also provides a recommendation on future actions in relation to the proposed ATTRO.

Resolved:  To approve Option 1 – authorising the Director of City Development or his delegated officer to carry statutory consultation and advertisement of the proposal to make an Anti-Terrorism Traffic Regulation Order (ATTRO) for the city centre.

Reason:     This option is in line with the decision made at the Executive decision session in October 2023 for development and consultation of an ATTRO. This option will allow the council the Council to progress the matter and undertake the consultation following on from the development of the ATTRO.



The report was presented by Traffic Management Team Leader, who discussed officer recommendations concerning the Anti-Terrorism Traffic Regulation Order (ATTRO) and how the proposals would impact the city centre.

He acknowledged errors in terminology and contradictory wording that had been raised in public participation, assuring speakers that they would be corrected. Further acknowledging public participation, he also reassured speakers that day-to-day foot street traffic would not be impacted by the proposed order.

The Executive Member asked officers about the changes to current policing powers should the proposed Anti-Terrorism Traffic Regulation Order come into effect. The Traffic Management Team Leader advised that if the ATTRO were triggered, the Police would take control of city centre for the duration of the emergency.

The Executive Member noted that the order would keep the city centre safe from terrorist attacks and was in line with the preferences expressed in the council’s 2023 blue badge consultation.

Resolved:  To approve Option 1 – authorising the Director of City Development or his delegated officer to carry statutory consultation and advertisement of the proposal to make an Anti-Terrorism Traffic Regulation Order (ATTRO) for the city centre.

Reason:     This option is in line with the decision made at the Executive decision session in October 2023 for development and consultation of an ATTRO. This option will allow the council the Council to progress the matter and undertake the consultation following on from the development of the ATTRO.