Agenda, decisions and minutes

At this point in the meeting, the Executive Member is asked to declare:

·        any personal interests not included on the Register of Interests

·        any prejudicial interests or

·        any disclosable pecuniary interests

which he may have in respect of business on this agenda.

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 that he might have had in respect of business on the agenda.  

The Executive Member declared a personal non-prejudicial interest in the items in his ward Fishergate, in that he had received petitions or spoken with residents. 

He also declared a non-prejudicial interest in agenda item 12, Cycling in High Petergate, as a long-term supporter of York Cycle Campaign.

To approve and sign the minutes of the meetings held on:

(i)           19 September 2019, and

(ii)         29 August 2019.

Resolved:  That the minutes of the following Decision Sessions of the Executive Member for Transport and Planning held on:

·        19 September, and

·        29 August

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. The deadline for registering is 4.00pm on Wednesday 23 October 2019.  Members of the public can speak on agenda items or matters within the Executive Member’s remit.

To register to speak please contact the Democracy Officers for the meeting, on the details at the foot of the agenda.

Filming, Recording or Webcasting Meetings

Please note that, subject to available resources, this meeting will be filmed and webcast, or recorded, including any registered public speakers who have given their permission. The broadcast can be viewed at http://www.york.gov.uk/webcasts or, if recorded, this will be uploaded onto the Council’s website following the meeting.

Residents are welcome to photograph, film or record Councillors and Officers at all meetings open to the press and public. This includes the use of social media reporting, i.e. tweeting. Anyone wishing to film, record or take photos at any public meeting should contact the Democracy Officers (contact details are at the foot of this agenda) in advance of the meeting.

The Council’s protocol on Webcasting, Filming & Recording of Meetings ensures that these practices are carried out in a manner both respectful to the conduct of the meeting and all those present.  It can be viewed at

https://www.york.gov.uk/downloads/file/11406/protocol_for_webcasting_filming_and_recording_of_council_meetings_20160809

It was reported that there had been 20 registrations to speak at the meeting under the Council’s Public Participation Scheme. 

The Executive Member  announced that he would invite each speaker to speak during consideration of the item to which their comments related , rather than hear all registered speakers under the Public Participation item.

The Executive Member will receive a report to re-consider expanding the existing 20mph speed limit in the Osbaldwick area to include several through routes that were originally omitted from the 20mph scheme with the aim of reducing the overall number of signs in the area.

Resolved: That option 3 for progressing to the formal Traffic Regulation Order process be approved.

Reason:     To respond to the concerns of local residents relating to vehicle speed and the number of traffic signs in the village area and to reduce the future ongoing maintenance costs due to the removal of so many signs and poles.

The Executive Member received a report which recommended expanding the existing 20mph speed limit in the Osbaldwick area to include several through routes that were originally omitted from the 20mph scheme with the aim of reducing the overall number of signs in the area.

The following options were available:

Option 1 – No further action.

Option 2 – Advertise a 20mph speed limit Traffic Regulation Order (TRO) to Tranby Avenue, Osbaldwick Village area, the new estate to the north of the village, Murton Lane and a short section of Osbaldwick Lane. 

Option 3 – Advertise a 20mph speed limit TRO to cover the Osbaldwick area shown in Annex D. This is the recommended option because it achieves the most in terms of reduced speeds, impact on the village streetscape and future maintenance costs.

Councillor Warters, Ward Member for Osbaldwick & Derwent,  spoke in support of the recommended option.

Resolved: That option 3 for progressing to the formal Traffic Regulation Order process be approved.

Reason:     To respond to the concerns of local residents relating to vehicle speed and the number of traffic signs in the village area and to reduce the future ongoing maintenance costs due to the removal of so many signs and poles.

The Executive Member will consider a report requesting approval to advertise the amendments to the Traffic Regulation Order (TRO) required to introduce the restrictions detailed in Annexes A to U. In addition, approval is requested to implement the amendments to the Traffic Regulation Order (TRO).

Resolved: 

(i)           That the recommended approach for each request as identified in Annexes A to U be approved with the exception of the following:

·        E9 – requested officers to take forward the alternative option on the report and advertise restrictions on south west of the carriageway due to long-term obstructive parking issues.

·        G3 – Agreed to advertise a length of No Waiting at Any Time restrictions on the south side of the carriageway adjacent to 42 – 54 Heslington Lane as requested by the resident.

·        G6 – Resolved to take no action at this time and highlighted the need for further consultation with residents regarding parking, which may lead to a residents parking zone.

·        H2 – Requested officers to take forward a short length of No Waiting at any Time restrictions at the junction of Landsdowne Terrace with the Access Road leading to Granville Terrace for improved access for larger vehicles.

·        I2 – Resolved to take forward Option 2 on the report, to implement as advertised in December 2017, as requested by Ward Councillors and residents.

·        J6 – Requested officers to take forward junction protection waiting restrictions (double yellow lines) at the junction of Tang Hall Lane and Walney Road/Wolfe Avenue with no action to be taken at the junction of Melrosegate/Wolfe Avenue in order to protect

·        M1 – Approved the officer recommended option with the addition of a timed restriction to allow 1 hour parking on the south side of the carriageway on Deramore Drive to facilitate parking for the children’s play area at the request of the Ward Councillor

·        U2 – Requested officers to replace part of the recommended waiting restrictions on the south east side on Broad Highway with a School Clearway to prevent loading/unloading activities at school peak hours

(ii)         That any objections received to the legal advertisement to the proposed amendments to the TRO’s would be taken for consideration at a subsequent Decision Session.

(iii)        Approved the implementation of any amendments to the TRO’s if there were no objections raised in respect of the advertised changes.

Reason:     To ensure that appropriate changes are made to traffic restrictions to address concerns raised by residents.

(iv)        (Residents Parking associated with Monks Cross Stadium). Approved the use of S.106 agreement funding to cover permit costs for 2 years and to review the scheme before 2 years are up.

Reason:     To mitigate the effects the stadium development may have on the local community.

The Executive Member considered a report reviewing Traffic Regulation Order (TRO) requests from 2018.  Approval was requested to advertise the amendments to the TRO required to introduce the restrictions detailed in Annexes A to U. In addition, if there were no objections raised with regard to the above proposals, approval was requested to implement the amendments to the TRO as set out in the officer’s report.  Approval was also requested for confirming the funding from the S.106 agreement for permits for a residents parking scheme close to the new Monks Cross stadium (Annex W).

The following options were available:

A.      Approve the officers recommendation for proposals to be advertised, or not, for each location.

B.      Defer the proposal for further information to be brought back to a subsequent Decision meeting.

C.      Amend the proposal depending on circumstances.

Representations were heard from the following registered speakers on the issues mentioned below:

Cllr Fenton, Ward Councillor for Dringhouses and Woodthorpe – expressed concerns about congestion causing access problems for buses and for residents of properties off North Lane.

Cllr Doughty, Ward Councillor for Strensall spoke about the parking issues associated with collection of pupils from after school clubs at Robert Wilkinson School.  He considered that any extension to double yellow lines should be subject to results of consultation directly affected and those nearby

Councillor Pavlovic, Ward Councillor for Hull Road expressed concern regarding the proposed restrictions in front of the play park on the south side of the carriageway on Deramore Drive as he did not want to discourage families from using the park.

Emilie Smeaton, local resident in Robin Grove, Holgate Ward,  spoke in support of the recommended option for parking restrictions as there had been so much tension in this area due to inconsiderate parking mainly by non-residents.

Resolved: 

(i)           That the recommended approach for each request as identified in Annexes A to U be approved with the exception of the following:

·        E9 – requested officers to take forward the alternative option on the report and advertise restrictions on south west of the carriageway due to long-term obstructive parking issues.

·        G3 – Agreed to advertise a length of No Waiting at Any Time restrictions on the south side of the carriageway adjacent to 42 – 54 Heslington Lane as requested by the resident.

·        G6 – Resolved to take no action at this time and highlighted the need for further consultation with residents regarding parking, which may lead to a residents parking zone.

·        H2 – Requested officers to take forward a short length of No Waiting at any Time restrictions at the junction of Landsdowne Terrace with the Access Road leading to Granville Terrace for improved access for larger vehicles.

·        I2 – Resolved to take forward Option 2 on the report, to implement as advertised in December 2017, as requested by Ward Councillors and residents.

·        J6 – Requested officers to take forward junction protection waiting restrictions (double yellow lines) at the junction of Tang Hall Lane and Walney Road/Wolfe Avenue  ...  view the full minutes text for item 28.

Members will receive a report that outlines consideration of representations received, in support and objection, to advertised proposals to amend the Traffic Regulation Order.

Resolved: 

(i)           That the recommended approach for each request as identified in Annexes A to G be approved with the exception of A2.

(ii)         Regarding annex A2, that option 2 of the officer’s report, to uphold the objections and take no further action,  be taken forward, as requested by Ward Councillors and residents.

Reason:    To ensure that appropriate changes are made to

traffic restrictions to address concerns raised.

The Executive Member received the report to consider the representations received, in support and objection, to advertised proposals to amend the Traffic Regulation Order (TRO)

The options available for each item were:

a)   Implement as advertised

b)   Uphold the objections and take no further action

c)   Uphold the objections in part and implement a lesser restriction that advertised

Representations were heard from the following registered speakers on the issues mentioned below:

Peter Smith, local resident to the Hull Road Ward spoke about Newland Park Drive/Newland Park Close at Hull Road Ward (Annex D). This area is subject to heavy parking during University terms.  The junction has very little or no visibility.  He requested that the  proposed restrictions be extended.  He also requested that restrictions on the west side of Newland Park Close be extended to the boundary line of Number 6 Newland Park Close as this was another dangerous part of the junction.

In response to Mr Smith’s concerns regarding accuracy of measurements the Traffic Project Officer confirmed that all measurements had been checked and that the Council’s legal team could confirm this.   

The Executive Member was keen to implement the scheme as advertised and to continue to monitor the area for the concerns raised by Mr Smith, so as to avoid any delay in the implementation of this scheme. 

Cllr Pavlovic, Ward Member for Hull Road, spoke on both Newland Park Drive/ Newland Park Close and Carlton Avenue/ Hull Road junction, in support of the recommended option commenting that the proposed restrictions were urgently required and would need to be monitored to see if the restrictions extend as far as they should to address the concerns raised. 

On Carlton Avenue/ Hull Road junction, the officer report had stated that no comments had been received from Councillors Pavlovic and Norman, however both had submitted comments.

Resolved: 

(i)           That the recommended approach for each request as identified in Annexes A to G be approved with the exception of A2.

(ii)         Regarding annex A2, that option 2 of the officer’s report, to uphold the objections and take no further action,  be taken forward, as requested by Ward Councillors and residents.

Reason:    To ensure that appropriate changes are made to

traffic restrictions to address concerns raised.

The Executive Member will receive a report on the resident parking  consultation results for Clifton Dale and Pasture Farm undertaken between January and March 2019 and determine the appropriate action.

Resolved: That the Council advertises an amendment to the York Parking, Stopping and Waiting Traffic Regulation Order to introduce Residents’ Priority Parking Areas for the following:

·        Clifton Dale - Option 1

·        Pasture Farm Close – Option 1

Reason:     To progress the majority views of the residents consulted.

The Executive Member received the report detailing the consultation results for Clifton Dale and Pasture Farm Close, undertaken between January and March 2019.

The options available were:

Option 1 - Advertise an amendment to the Traffic Regulation Order

to include a Residents’ Priority Parking Area for Pasture Farm Close to operate 24 hours, 7 days a week.  To include an extension of no waiting at any time restrictions (double yellow lines) as shown on the enclosed plan (Annex B3).  This was the recommended option because it reflects the majority opinion.

Option 2 - No further action at this time

Resolved: That the Council advertises an amendment to the York Parking, Stopping and Waiting Traffic Regulation Order to introduce Residents’ Priority Parking Areas for the following:

·        Clifton Dale - Option 1

·        Pasture Farm Close – Option 1

Reason:     To progress the majority views of the residents consulted.

The Executive Member will consider this report which seeks Approval in Principle to undertake detailed preparatory work and implement a set of measures on an experimental basis aimed at trialling the removal of through traffic from The Groves area to improve the environment for local residents.

Resolved:

(i)           That a firm set of designs be drawn up to achieve road closure Layout Option 1 shown in Annex C put forward by the consultants.

Reason:     to confirm the ability / practicality to take these                             measures forward

(ii)         Approval in Principle for the implementation of an Experimental Traffic Regulation Order (TRO) in line with Layout Option 1 be granted subject to the outcome of detailed design, with approval of the detail of the implementation delegated to the Assistant Director Transport, Highways and Environment after consultation with the Executive Member and Ward Members.

Reason:     Because although the modelling indicates the impact on the surrounding road network is potentially acceptable there is the possibility that actual driver behaviour will have a greater impact than anticipated not only on the immediate road network but also on the local residents the scheme is designed to benefit.

(iii)        That an Experimental TRO be implemented to merge the existing Residents parking zones in the area when the road closures are taken forward.

Reason:     Because the proposed changes to the vehicle routes in the area do not fit with the existing residents parking zone boundaries and this will likely have an impact on how and where residents choose to park.

(iv)        That the Experimental TRO does not commence until the planned roadworks have been completed in the Lord Mayor’s Walk area.

Reason:     Because the experiment needs to be conducted at a time when road and traffic conditions are not impacted by temporary circumstances.

(v)         That authority be delegated to the Assistant Director Transport, Highways and Environment in consultation with the Executive Member for Transport and Ward Members to approve any amendment to the Experimental TRO considered desirable during the course of the experiment, including suspension or ending of the Experimental TRO.

Reason:     Because this allows the greatest level of flexibility to respond to unexpected issues in a timely manner.

The Executive Member received the report which sought Approval in Principle to undertake detailed preparatory work and implement a set of measures on an experimental basis aimed at trialling the removal of through traffic from The Groves area.  The significant level of through traffic had been identified as having an adverse effect on the local community in the feedback arising from consultation and surveys undertaken for the Groves Regeneration Project.

The options available were:

1.   Option 1 – Note the outcome of the consultations but take no action at present. Not a recommended option.

2.   Option 2 – Approve further work be carried out to determine the practicality of proposals to implement Layout Option 1. This will include Road closures, changes to the permitted movements and changes to waiting restrictions which may be required to provide space for the revised vehicle movements. Is a recommended option.

3.   Option 3 – Approve further work be carried out to determine the practicality of proposals to implement Layout Option 2. This will include Road closures and changes to the permitted movements, changes to the waiting restrictions. Not a recommended option.

4.   Option 4 – depending on options 2 and 3 above approve the taking forward of a permanent TRO proposal.  Not a recommended option.

5.   Option 5 - depending on options 2 and 3 above, approve the introduction of an Experimental TRO after works on the local road network have been completed - currently programmed for April 2020. Is a recommended option.

6.   Option 6 –depending on option 4 or 5 above approve the taking forward of a permanent TRO or an Experimental TRO to merge the existing Residents Parking zones as shown in Annex D. Is a recommended option

Representations were heard from the following registered speakers on the issues mentioned below:

Mr Roger Pierce, local resident and former Councillor spoke on behalf of Professor Tony May who was Chair of the Civic Trust Transport Group, who was in support of the removal of through traffic from the Groves area to be in the public interest. 

Mr James Euesden, a resident of Penley’s Grove Street, spoke in support of the removal of through traffic from The Groves area. 

He considered that there was currently a high volume of traffic and a number of problems associated with that, particularly as there were two schools in the area.  He reported that the 20mph speed restriction was often exceeded. There had been two occasions where there were sink holes and road works which had forced traffic to slow, during which time, it had been a lot more pleasant and safer for residents. 

Mr Ed Lott and Ms Marilyn Rowe, local residents, also spoke in support of the recommendations made in the officer’s report.  They reported that the weight and speed restrictions in the area were frequently ignored.  The road is used as a cut-through to Lowther Street.  They considered it to be difficult and often dangerous for families to walk through area which  ...  view the full minutes text for item 31.

The Executive Member will receive the report to confirm a regular review of requests for Traffic Regulation Orders relating to the movement of traffic and to report the receipt of a petition in the form of a questionnaire requesting the introduction of a weight restriction on the B1228 through Elvington.

Resolved:

(i)           To approve option 1 – to approve the process of considering requests for Traffic Regulation Orders relating to the movement of vehicles to be compiled into a list for regular review

Reason:   Because this helps ensure greater consistency, aids workload planning and achieves resource savings.

(ii)         To approve option 2 - the inclusion of the Elvington weight restriction request on the waiting list.

Reason: Because this helps ensure greater consistency, aids workload planning and achieves resource savings.

The Executive Member received the report which confirmed a regular review of requests for Traffic Regulation Orders relating to the movement of traffic and which reported the receipt of a petition in the form of a questionnaire requesting the introduction of a weight restriction on the B1228 through Elvington.

The Executive Member confirmed that officers had drawn his attention to errors in the report about the date of the election and the date the survey was undertaken.

The options available were:

1.   Option 1 – Approve the process of considering requests for Traffic Regulation Orders relating to the movement of vehicles to be compiled into a list for regular review.

2.   Option 2 – Approve the inclusion of the Elvington weight restriction on to the waiting list for further investigation.

3.   Option 3 – Note the Elvington weight restriction petition but take no further action.

Suzie Mercer, previous Ward Member Elvington, spoke on this item.  There had been 354 questionnaire/petitions submitted to the Council requesting that a weight restriction be implemented on the B1228 main road through Elvington.  She requested weight restrictions in line with the restrictions on the surrounding areas.  She considered that the problem was arising from vehicles from outside of that area.

Officers responded that there were a significant number of large vehicles that travel through Elvington.  There had been a weight restriction on the bridge which had resulted in restricting those  from the neighbouring East Riding area, access to business premises.  A number of similar requests for weight restrictions to other areas had been submitted.  It was necessary to compile these requests relating to the movement of traffic into a list for regular review (similar to what is done for waiting restrictions) to help ensure a consistent use of orders and better manage resources.  These would be reviewed in the New Year. 

Resolved:

(i)           To approve option 1 – to approve the process of considering requests for Traffic Regulation Orders relating to the movement of vehicles to be compiled into a list for regular review.

Reason:   Because this helps ensure greater consistency, aids workload planning and achieves resource savings.

(ii)         To approve option 2 - the inclusion of the Elvington weight restriction request on the waiting list.

Reason: Because this helps ensure greater consistency, aids workload planning and achieves resource savings.

The Executive Member to consider a report to approve the proposed junction alterations.

            Resolved:

(i)       That Option 1 – the proposed junction layout shown in drawing Annex A be approved. 

(ii)      That further consideration and consultation be undertaken with ward councillors particularly in relation to the central refuge point and the impact of a right turn ban and further to this, that decisions on adjustments be delegated to the Assistant Director Transport, Highways and Environment in consultation with the Executive Member.

Reasons:

·        This option achieves the core aim of replacing the life-expired traffic signal asset such that it can continue be operated and repaired economically.

·        This option has no negative impact on junction capacity. Any option which reduces junction capacity would have a cumulative effect on congestion in this area if the proposed experimental Traffic Regulation Order in The Groves is implemented.

The Executive Member received the report which provided options for consideration the proposed junction alterations at Monkgate Bar.  The traffic signalling equipment at this junction had life expired and had become difficult and costly to maintain, and would need to be replaced.  The Traffic Signal Asset Renewal (TSAR) programme is the means by which life expired traffic signal assets across the city are refurbished.  Although the programme was primarily about asset renewal, there was scope to take advantage of the opportunity to make improvements whilst refurbishing the equipment.

The options available were:

Option 1 – Approve the proposed junction layout shown in drawing

Annex A.

Option 2 – Approve the proposed junction layout as shown in

drawing Annex B.

Option 3 – Do not approve the presented options.

Representations were heard from the following registered speakers on the issues mentioned below:

Ms Janice Gray, local resident spoke on this item  to highlight her concerns regarding traffic congestion as a result of these proposals and further traffic congestion at Lord Mayors Walk as traffic will no longer be able to drive through the Groves.

Mr Roger Pearce, local resident and former Councillor, spoke on behalf of Professor Tony May, Chairman of the Civic Trust Transport Group, expressing concern regarding the use of a pelican crossing and the proposed widening of the refuge points at Lord Mayor’s walk not being large enough and suggested that this scheme should be deferred for further consideration.

Councillor Craghill, spoke in favour of recommended Option 1.  She considered that the current crossings on Lord Mayor’s Walk seem to work reasonably well and the proposed widening of the refuge and crossing points on Lord Mayor’s Walk and addition of the uncontrolled crossing south of the Bar would be welcome improvements. 

The Transport Systems Project Manager and the Assistant Director for Transport, Highways and Environment provided the following information in response to questions from the Executive Member and in response to some of the concerns that had been raised by the registered speakers:

·        Other schemes had not been considered as the need arose to address this area specifically due to the need to replace the traffic signals.

·        On the pedestrian island, informal crossing a higher green man signal would also be added.

·        Regarding the right turn from Lord Mayor’s Walk into Monkgate, and the possibility of removing a lane. The officer confirmed that the design had shown that this would not be viable.

·        Highlighted the need to take into account any potential knock on effects whilst the changes in the Groves are in an experimental phase. 

·        Officers had intended that the work would be undertaken early next year, a deferral of this item would delay this project.

          Resolved:

(i)       That Option 1 – the proposed junction layout shown in drawing Annex A be approved. 

(ii)      That further consideration and consultation be undertaken with ward councillors particularly in relation to the central refuge point and the impact of a right turn ban  ...  view the full minutes text for item 33.

The Executive Member to consider the report which advises on the receipt of and updates on five petitions.

Resolved:

(i)   That the petitions and the update on responses / action taken so far for Tudor Road / Gale Lane and Thanet Road be noted.

(ii)     That the request for a revised speed limit on Towthorpe Road be added to the workload.

Reason: Because actions have been identified for the issues raised and for the speed limit request there is a waiting list of other similar issues due to be considered.

(iii)    That the request for a Public Inquiry and the anticipated action following the adoption of the Local Plan be noted.

Reason: Because a public inquiry would not be appropriate.

(iv)    The current £5 charge for non-P&R parking at Monks Cross P&R site will be maintained and not increased, which reflects the Executive Member for Finance & Performance statement at Full Council, and will be subject to a joint decision by Executive Members for Transport and Finance and Performance if any changes are proposed.

Reason:   Because the impact of the stadium activities on the P&R operation cannot be accurately determined until the stadium has opened.

The Executive Member received a report that advised on the receipt of and updates on five petitions.

The options available were:

Option 1 – Note the petition and the update on responses / action

taken so far.

Option 2 – Note the petition and add the issue to the workload list

for further investigation. This is the recommended option for Towthorpe Road, and the parking charge at Monks Cross Park and Ride.

Option 3 – Note the petition and take no action.

Representations were heard from the following registered speakers on the issues mentioned below:

Ms Steph Hayle (Community and Wellbeing Officer , University of York Students' Union) spoke about their request for a public inquiry into “York’s Failing Transport System”. Their BUStice petition had received over 2000 signatures.  She stated that this concern impacts on everyone as expensive bus fares cause more people to drive. 

Officers responded that the York Civic Trust were undertaking a lot of work on this in anticipation of transport plans being revised. 

Councillor Pavlovic, Ward Member Hull Road, spoke about the length of time residents have to wait from the time an application in relation to resident parking schemes are received, to implementation.  He considered that these applications needed to be fast tracked or the guidance stating approximate processing time should either be removed or more accurate.

The Executive Member responded that a staff resource had recently been appointed to address these concerns.  This would be reviewed in due course.

Cllr Doughty, Ward Member Strensall, spoke on concerns regarding the petition at Towthorpe Road concerning the speed of some road users requesting that the 60mph national speed limit be reduced to 40mh for the section of road between Towthorpe Road and the junction with Strensall Road.  There had been several barn conversions near doubling dwelling properties and several safety concerns had been reported. 

The following information was provided in response to the above questions from that speaker:

The Transport Planning Manager responded that the public transport review would be considering this.  For consistency this issue would be considered at the same time as other requests for changes to speed limits. 

Resolved:

(i)           That the petitions and the update on responses / action taken so far for Tudor Road / Gale Lane and Thanet Road be noted.

(ii)         That the request for a revised speed limit on Towthorpe Road be added to the workload.

Reason:    Because actions have been identified for the issues raised and for the speed limit request there is a waiting list of other similar issues due to be considered.

(iii)        That the request for a Public Inquiry and the anticipated action following the adoption of the Local Plan be noted.

Reason:     Because a public inquiry would not be appropriate.

(iv)        The current £5 charge for non-P&R parking at Monks Cross P&R site will be maintained and not increased, which reflects the Executive Member for Finance & Performance statement at Full Council, and will be subject to a  ...  view the full minutes text for item 34.

The Executive Member to receive the report which seeks approval to introduce an Experimental Traffic Regulation Order (ETRO) to permit cycling in High Petergate during Footstreet hours (i.e. 10:30 – 17:00) on a trial basis.

Resolved:

that the introduction of an ETRO to permit cycling in High Petergate in a southerly direction (i.e. from Bootham Bar to Duncombe Place) during the Footstreet hours (10:30 – 17:00) be approved, with a report back after 6 months operation, including consultation feedback, to decide if this should be made permanent.

Reason:

To assess if this change improves cycle safety and convenience without introducing safety issues for pedestrians, and to better inform future decisions on the operation of the Footstreets.

The Executive Member received the report which sought approval to introduce an Experimental Traffic Regulation Order (ETRO) to permit cycling in High Petergate during Footstreet hours (i.e. 10:30 – 17:00) on a trial basis.

Representations were heard from the following registered speakers on the issues mentioned below:

Andy Shrimpton, spoke on behalf of the York Cycle Campaign considered that this route, given that it forms part of the desire line for cyclists trying to avoid the city centre via Deangate and Aldwalk, is one that is vastly prefereable to navigating the convoluted route around St. Leaonard’s Place, and one that should be re-opened to cyclists.

Cllr Denise Craghill Ward Member Guildhall,  had submitted a written representation which the Executive Member read out.  She welcomed the experimental nature of this change and could see potential pros and cons. If the volume of cyclists were to increase this could be more challenging.  The advantage is that the majority are commuter cyclists who pass that way earlier in the morning than tourists. 

The Transport Project Manager responded that the experimental period and extensive consultation would be initially for six months before a report on this and the responses to the consultation, would be received at this Decision Session.

The Executive Member considered that this Experimental Traffic Regulation Order should commence as soon as possible.

Resolved: That the introduction of an ETRO to permit cycling in

High Petergate in a southerly direction (i.e. from Bootham Bar to Duncombe Place) during the Footstreet hours (10:30 – 17:00) be approved, with a report back after 6 months operation, including consultation feedback, to decide if this should be made permanent.

Reason:     To assess if this change improves cycle safety and convenience without introducing safety issues for pedestrians, and to better inform future decisions on the operation of the Footstreets.

The Executive Member will receive the report which sets out progress to date on schemes in the 2019/20 Economy & Place Transport Capital Programme, and proposed adjustments to scheme allocations to align with the latest cost estimates and delivery projections.

Resolved:

(i)           That a briefing note will be prepared on the junction at Holtby scheme to enable the Executive Member to make a decision on whether the scheme could be included in the 2020/21 Capital Programme and this would be shared with the Ward Member and Parish Council.

(ii)         That the amendments to the 2019/20 Economy & Place Transport Capital Programme be approved.

(iii)        That the decrease to the 2019/20 Economy & Place    Transport Capital Programme, as set out in the report  to the 29 August 2019 Executive meeting be noted.

Reason: To implement the council’s transport strategy identified in York’s third Local Transport Plan and the Council Priorities, and deliver schemes identified in the council’s Transport Programme.

This does not reflect what was said at the meeting.

A briefing note is to be prepared to enable the Executive Member to make a decision on whether the scheme could be included in the 2020/21 Capital Programme and this would be shared with the Ward Member and Parish Council.

No timescale was included.

The Executive Member received the report that set out progress to date on schemes in the 2019/20 Economy & Place Transport Capital Programme, and proposed adjustments to scheme allocations to align with the latest cost estimates and delivery projections.

Cllr Warters, Ward Member for Osbaldwick and Derwent, spoke in support of concerns that had been raised by Holtby Parish Council regarding traffic flow being directed through Holtby due to signage.  He also read out a prepared statement on behalf of local resident Mr John Foley, in relation to Holtby, expressing his disappointment that this work had not been included on the 2019/20 Transport Capital Programme Schemes.  Holtby Parish Councillor, Peter Broadley, spoke enquiring when the scheme at Holtby would be undertaken. 

In response to questions on Holtby, The Head of Transport explained that officers were considering the estimated costs for the scheme.  They had recently received the utility costs which had been substantially higher than anticipated. 

Resolved:

(i)           That a briefing note will be prepared on the junction at Holtby scheme to enable the Executive Member to make a decision on whether the scheme could be included in the 2020/21 Capital Programme and this would be shared with Ward Members and the Parish Council.

(i)     That the amendments to the 2019/20 Economy & Place Transport Capital Programme be approved.

(ii)    That the decrease to the 2019/20 Economy & Place    Transport Capital Programme, as set out in the report  to the 29 August 2019 Executive meeting be noted.

Reason: To implement the council’s transport strategy identified in York’s third Local Transport Plan and the Council Priorities, and deliver schemes identified in the council’s Transport Programme.

Any other business which the Executive Member considers urgent under the Local Government Act 1972.