Agenda and minutes

At this point Members are asked to declare any personal or prejudicial interests they may have in the business on this agenda.

Members were invited to declare at this point in the meeting any personal or prejudicial interests, other than the standing declarations, that they might have in the business on the agenda.

None were declared.

To approve and sign the minutes of the last meeting of the Economic & City Development Overview & Scrutiny Committee held on 17 May 2010.

RESOLVED:             That the minutes of the meeting of the Economic and City Development Overview and Scrutiny Committee held on 17 May 2010 be approved and signed by the Chair as a correct record.

It is at this point in the meeting that members of the public who have registered their wish to speak can do so. The deadline for registering is by Monday 12 July  at 5pm.

To register please contact the Democracy Officer for the meeting, on the details at the foot of this agenda.

It was reported that there had been no registrations to speak under the Council’s Public Participation Scheme.

This report presents the Committee’s work plan for the forthcoming year.  Members are asked to consider any additions and/or amendments they may wish to make.

Members considered the Committee’s work plan for 2010/11 together with extracts from the Forward Plan related to the Committee’s remit.

RESOLVED:(i)  That the work plan and Forward Plan extracts be noted.

(ii)               That the following items be added to the work plan: ¹

·        A report on the future of Yorkshire Forward be brought to the Committee’s meeting in September.

·        An update report on major developments within the city such as; Terry’s, Hungate and West Offices.

·        An update report on major transport initiatives and issues arising from them.

·        An update report on the Broadway Shops Councillor Call for Action(CCfA).

·        The final report arising from the Newgate Market scrutiny review.

·        An update report on the ‘Acceptance of Euros-Gillygate Pilot Scheme’.

REASON:                                                      To assist in the planning of work for this committee.                                                       

This report asks Members to consider whether they would like to proceed with the proposed scrutiny topic on the acceptance of Euros by York businesses.

Members received an update report on a proposed scrutiny topic for review on the acceptance of Euros by York Businesses. This was originally submitted by Councillor Alexander.

Members received a presentation from the Director of Visit York that set out the objectives of the Gillygate Pilot Scheme.

In response to questions from Members, the Director confirmed that:

• The pilot scheme had already started in Gillygate and people had been enquiring about it.
• The pilot could continue from six weeks to two months, to allow the scheme’s popularity to be assessed.
• Once the results had been collated, the findings would be reported to the Committee.

Members also queried:

• To what extent the scheme would cause confusion amongst visitors, in that only some businesses in the city would accept Euros not all businesses.
• To what extent the scheme would take into account fluctuations in the currency exchange rate in regards to businesses exchanging their Euro takings into Pound Sterling.
• Whether the scheme was more about marketing the sense of acceptance of the Euro as a currency rather than actually using Euros to sell and buy items in the city.

RESOLVED:             (i)            That the presentation be noted.

(ii)               That an update report from Visit York on the outcome of the pilot scheme be received by the Committee at a future meeting.

REASON:                              In order to address the issues outlined within the topic registration form.

This report provides details of the 2009/10 outturn position for both finance and performance in City Strategy and Housing Services. 

Members received an information report which provided details of the 2009/10 outturn position on finance and performance in City Strategy and Housing Services.

Members received clarification from the Council’s Finance Manager on issues they raised relating to variance in budgets in Planning and the measurement of performance of initiatives.

RESOLVED:             That the report be noted.

REASON:                  To update the Committee of the final finance and performance position for 2009/10.

Members are asked to consider the Executive reports attached atAppendix 1 and 3 to this report and decide whether they wish to take any further action in relation to them.

Members considered a report which presented two reports received at the Executive meeting on 30 March 2010 and invited them to decide whether they wished to take any further action in relation to these. The reports entitled ‘Traffic Management at York Railway Station’ and ‘York Northwest Area Action Plan’ were annexed to the cover report, together with copies of the Executive minutes on those items.

Officers at the meeting provided the following additional information in relation to the York Railway Station report:

• A capacity study conducted by East Coast had indicated that there was no business case for them to change the car parking arrangements at the station. (possibly due to the fact that the operating franchise held by East Coast was due to end in 2012.)
• East Coast were conducting a pilot study looking at similar traffic issues being encountered at Newcastle Central station, one outcome of which could be the removal of the taxis from the portico immediately outside the station. If successful at managing the traffic issues encountered there, this could be rolled out across all stations on the East Coast Mainline.
• In relation to the FTR buses, there were issues about how the buses ‘docked’ at their islands and the passage of cyclists around these.
• The apparent under-use of the car park at Leeman Road was probably due to the fact that there were no direction signs to this car park, which was owned by a private company and not East Coast.

Some Members raised safety concerns in relation to pedestrians using the cycle lane as a safety zone and to the restrictive movement of the FTR buses meaning that the mirrors on the vehicles would not be able to see cyclists using the lane.

In their update to Members regarding the report on the York Northwest Area Action Plan, Officers answered queries relating to the British Sugar Site. They informed Members of two meetings in the near future that would discuss future plans for the site; an inception meeting on the masterplan for the site with Associated British Foods and a Ward Committee to consult with local residents.

In response to additional queries from Members Officers stated that;

·        It was currently a good time to plan for the future of this project as the recession had led to a lull in development, which meant that more planning could take place.

·        The York NorthWest site was very large and that it might be better to consider it as several small sites rather than one large site.

·        Investigation was currently taking place to identify alternative funding sources for investment in the site.

·        Money from the Eco Settlement Plan would be used in the transport plan for the site.

RESOLVED:             That the two reports on Traffic Management at York Railway Station and York North West be noted.

REASON:                  To keep the Committee informed of progress in areas of ongoing work within their remit.    

This report asks Members to consider whether they would like to proceed with a scrutiny review on the Adoption of New Estates.

Members received a report on a proposed Scrutiny Topic in relation to the Adoption of New Estates. This topic was proposed by Councillor Watt, who was in attendance at the meeting.

Councillor Simpson Laing had also submitted a  request for a scrutiny review on a similar topic ‘the implementation of planning conditions and the adoption of new estates’ in summer 2009. She was unable to attend the meeting, but had previously circulated why she felt that her topic should still go ahead. These comments have been attached as an annex to the published agenda.

Councillor Watt spoke in support of his proposed topic, stating that there was a need for a scrutiny review to look into how to improve the timescale of action being taken to adopt estates by the Council.

Officers from the Council’s City Development Team at the meeting stated that the timescale of the adoption of new estates, relied on developers, and other parties involved in the building process, completing their parts of the process before the Council could adopt and maintain them. Traffic Regulation Orders were sometimes put in place before the road was adopted.

In response to Members’ suggestions that Planning Enforcement be examined as a scrutiny review, this topic had already been reviewed and the Committee would be updated on the findings of this at a later date.

RESOLVED:             (i)            That the report be noted.

(ii)               That the proposed Scrutiny Topics not be progressed to review.

REASON:                  Due to legal constraints, the Committee is unable to set a suitable remit to address the concerns raised in the topic registration forms.