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 disclosable pecuniary interests, or other registerable interests she might have in the 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 8 October 2024.

Resolved:   That the minutes of the Decision Session held on 8 October 2024 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 November 2024.

 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 two registrations to speak at the session under the Council’s Public Participation Scheme. Both speakers were in attendance.

Cllr R Melly spoke on item 6; she stated that people living in HMOs did not currently have the same parking rights as people who own a home, suggesting this excluded young people and those on a low income. She proposed reform of the system. She suggested that the current system was opaque and confusing.

Mr P Lindsay spoke on item 5; advising that he owned a property on the corner of Walker Lane. He stated his belief that Walker Lane was unsuitable for two-way traffic and said he would like to see it made one-way from North Lane to Main Street and the speed limit reduced. He showed the Executive Member and officers photographs evidencing damage from heavy traffic and advised that there was a danger posed by HGVs knocking signage which he thought could presage collision with pedestrians if left unchecked.

This report requests approval to undertake Statutory Consultation to amend the Traffic Regulation Order (TRO) to propose a One-Way restriction on Walker Lane, Wheldrake.

Resolved:   To approve Option B, which is to progress to statutory consultation to propose an amendment to the TRO and make Walker Lane one-way south to north from Main Street to North Lane.

Reason:      This eliminates the risk of vehicular conflict, meets the majority of consultees wishes, and provides better visibility owing to the ‘visplay’ available at the Walker Lane/North Lane junction.

Risk may remain of vehicles turning too sharply into Walker Lane striking the structure of 45 Main Street (as has previously happened), but this is thought less likely as the possibility of opposing conflict with oncoming vehicles has been eliminated.

The Traffic Management Team Leader presented the report. He advised that it had been prompted by a request from a resident and upon consultation, all local residents had agreed that further traffic restrictions were appropriate; the recommendation was that North Lane to Main Street become one-way.

The Executive Member agreed that this was a really narrow road and that changes to the TRO were important both for safety reasons and for the purposes of honouring the Council’s policy of promoting increased use of sustainable means of transport; in this instance walking.

The Director of Environment, Planning and Transport confirmed that if the Executive Member were to approve officer recommendations, this matter would proceed to formal consultation on a wider basis.

Resolved: To approve Option B, which is to progress to statutory consultation to propose an amendment to the TRO and make Walker Lane one-way south to north from Main Street to North Lane.

Reason:      This eliminates the risk of vehicular conflict, meets the majority of consultees wishes, and provides better visibility owing to the ‘visplay’ available at the Walker Lane/North Lane junction.

Risk may remain of vehicles turning too sharply into Walker Lane striking the structure of 45 Main Street (as has previously happened), but this is thought less likely as the possibility of opposing conflict with oncoming vehicles has been eliminated.

This report recommends the removal of the HMO permit and moving all HMO properties to household permits.

Resolved:  To approve Option C, which is to remove the HMO Permit completely from the available permits. This would require all HMO permit holders moving to household permits with the inflationary cost for second and third permits, all properties would be restricted to three permits.

Reason:     This removes confusion for the applicant and customer service officers, who advise on permits in respect of HMO types.  Although there may be some changes due to capacity, these should not be large.

The Traffic Management Team Leader presented; he explained that a change in legislation had meant that more properties were now recognised as Houses of Multiple Occupancy (HMOs); residents of which were entitled to purchase specific permits from the Council allowing them to park in designated bays, and this potentially meant inequality between residents of a property classified HMO and residents of otherwise similar residential housing.

Officers recommended proceeding to consultation over a change of parking permits, in order that all residents would receive a “household” one, and “HMO” parking permits would be phased out. This would ultimately lead to increased fees for HMO residents, and officers proposed to have present HMO permits run their full course as opposed to terminating permits early and starting new permits immediately.

The Executive Member requested and received clarification that there would be a grace period. She remarked that while there was no easy and obvious solution to this issue, the current system was not equitable, and while the proposed system also had challenges, it was more equitable for all residents on a street.

Resolved:  To approve Option C, which is to remove the HMO Permit completely from the available permits. This would require all HMO permit holders moving to household permits with the inflationary cost for second and third permits, all properties would be restricted to three permits.

Reason:     This removes confusion for the applicant and customer service officers, who advise on permits in respect of HMO types.  Although there may be some changes due to capacity, these should not be large.