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 noted that while he did not have a prejudicial or disclosable pecuniary interest to declare he commented that he lived close to Broadway which was subject to a decision regarding a traffic regulation order outlined in Agenda Item 4 Annex E1. It was also reported that in relation to Agenda Item 4 Annex E2 the Executive Member had spoken in favour of additional cycle provisions, however these ambitions would not affect the decision regarding a traffic regulation order on Fulford Road.

To approve and sign the minutes of the meeting held on 14 February 2022.

Resolved:  That the minutes of the Decision Session of the Executive Member for Transport held on 14 February 2022 be approved and signed by the Executive Member with the following amendments;

Minute 43- to read uninterrupted routes.

Minute 48- to note speed limits rather than speed reductions.

At this point in the meeting members of the public who have registered to speak can do so. Please note that our registration deadlines have changed to 2 working days before the meeting, in order to facilitate the management of public participation at our meetings. The deadline for registering is 5.00pm on Friday 18 March 2022 Members of the public can speak on agenda items or matters within the remit of the committee.

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 13 registrations to speak at the meeting under the Council’s Public Participation Scheme. However, 2 speakers did not attend the meeting.

Cllr Mark Warters outlined concerns that the introduction of restrictions and residents parking would only relocate parking problems to other parts of the city, and not solve parking issues within Osbaldwick, which were connected to the University.

Geoffrey Norton raised concerns regarding parking on Gale Lane should restrictions be implemented in front of the street’s shops. He was concerned that carers would struggle to park near properties they were visiting. He noted that he had requested a dropped curb outside his property to support parking, however, there was not the grant funding available to provide this.

David Burke supported restrictions being implemented on Land Harwood Road due to problems with delivery vehicles parking in the area. He noted that he did not believe the proposal would fully solve the issue but would be an improvement.

Richard Siddall outlined his support for restrictions being introduced on Tedder Road and Askham Croft as it was a key route for 50 properties in the area. Parking in the area currently made it hard for larger vehicles to travel and affected lines of sight for pedestrians and drivers.

Heather Lord voiced opposition to restrictions on Landalewood Road. She noted that she had not received a letter about the original proposals and that as she was not granted permission to widen her driveway the restrictions would negatively impact Parking on the street.

Andrew Mortimer opposed restrictions on Moore Avenue and Osbaldwick Lane as he felt they would not improve parking. He asked that a decision be postponed until after the Executive Member had considered a residents petition.

Cllr Kallum Taylor asked that the Executive Member agree to implement the proposal to remove the residents parking bays as outlined in annex J on Springfield Avenue and Beech Avenue to provide more parking for residents in the area. He noted that if additional action was required that Ward Members would raise it with the Executive Member.

Andrew Spittlehouse felt that the restrictions as proposed would not solve issues of lorries delivering to shops on Seventh Avenue. He noted that the alley next to the shop was used for turning and that lorries drive onto the pavement in order to exit.

Cllr Pete Kilbane requested that the Executive Member agree to not implement the proposal on Nunthorpe Road as it was for a lesser intervention than what had been previously advertised. He felt the changes agreed by the Executive to city centre access by the had negatively affected access for blue badge holders.

Flick Williams highlighted that the Council’s Equalities Impact Assessment had shown that some of the disabled residents of the city were unable to access the city centre, and that mitigating against the Council’s changes to the footstreets would not address the issues of access to the city centre.

David Harbourne spoke about how disabled people would  ...  view the full minutes text for item 51.

This report seeks the Executive Member to consider the representations received, in support and objection, to advertised proposals to amend the Traffic Regulation Order.

Resolved:

                      i.         That the following decisions relating to the traffic regulations order requests (Agenda Item 4) be implemented:

a.   Danebury Drive implement a lesser restriction than advertised as outlined in Annex A and include a 15 meter double yellow lines on north and south side of Rosedale Avenue at junction with Danebury Drive;

b.   Lidgett Grove/Beckfield Lane Junction implement a lesser restriction than advertised as outlined in Annex A;

c.   Plantation Drive implement as advertised;

d.   Copmanthorpe Lane/Appleton Road implement as advertised;

e.   Copmanthorpe Lane no further action;

f.     Acaster Lane and Main Street Junction implement a lesser restriction than advertised as outlined in Annex B;

g.   The Courtyard no further action;

h.   Canon’s Court implement as advertised;

i.     Clifton Dale implement as advertised;

j.     The Square implement as advertised;

k.   Chalfonts implement as advertised;

l.     Orchard Way/North Lane Junction implement as advertised;

m. Broadway implement a lesser restriction than advertised as outlined in Annex E and to write to those that will no longer have double yellow lines outside homes be written to about whether they would wish to have white bar markings;

n.   Fulford Road that a decision be delegated to the Director for Environment, Transport, and Planning to allow for Officers to confirm that Grange Garth parking bays would also be community parking bays before implementing;

o.   St. Mary’s and Frederic Street, R12: GM Parking Bays to complete a further review of the whole R12 zone with a view to all bays within the zone becoming Community Bays;

p.   South Lane no further action;

q.   Greenshaw Drive implement as advertised;

r.     Westfield Lane/Green Dike and Plantation Way Junction implement a lesser restriction than advertised with 8 meter restrictions on Plantation Way north and south side;

s.   Village Garth and The Village Junction implement as advertised;

t.     Glen Road/Harcourt Street implement as advertised;

u.   Monkton Road/Elmfield Avenue implement as advertised;

v.   Seventh Avenue implement as advertised;

w.  Elmfield Terrace/Stray Garth implement as advertised;

x.   Springfield Avenue/Beech Avenue implement as advertised;

y.   Severus Avenue/York Road junction take no further action;

z.   Acomb Road implement a lesser restriction than advertised as outlined in Annex J;

aa.              Thief Lane/Tandem Place implement as advertised;

bb.              Moore Avenue/Osbaldwick Lane take no further action until residents petition has been considered;

cc. Yearsley Crescent do not implement and advertise the restrictions on the other side of the street as residents and Ward Councillors have requested;

dd.              Nunthorpe Road take no further action until further consultation with Ward Councillors;

ee.              Scarcroft Road implement a lesser restriction than advertised as outlined in Annex M and a review of hours of operation of the residents parking zone R48;

ff.   Landalewood Road implement as advertised;

gg.              Oriel Grove/Rawcliffe Drive implement as advertised;

hh.              Millfield Lane implement as advertised;

ii.    Glebe Close take no further action;

jj.    Askham Croft implement as advertised;

kk. Askham Lane/Grange Lane implement as advertised;

ll.    Gale Lane no further action;

mm.           Dalton Hill/Main Street implement as advertised.

Reason:     To ensure that appropriate changes are made  ...  view the full decision text for item 52.

The Executive Member considered the representations received, in support and objection, to advertised proposals to amend the Traffic Regulation Order (“TRO”) that were presented as part of an annual review. Discussion took place regarding the officer proposals and the Executive Member agreed whether to implement as recommended, implement with amendments, or to uphold the objections and take no further action on each of the TRO proposals as outlined in the resolved.

Resolved:

                      i.         That the following decisions relating to the traffic regulations order requests (Agenda Item 4) be implemented:

a.   Danebury Drive implement a lesser restriction than advertised as outlined in Annex A and include a 15 meter double yellow lines on north and south side of Rosedale Avenue at junction with Danebury Drive;

b.   Lidgett Grove/Beckfield Lane Junction implement a lesser restriction than advertised as outlined in Annex A;

c.   Plantation Drive implement as advertised;

d.   Copmanthorpe Lane/Appleton Road implement as advertised;

e.   Copmanthorpe Lane no further action;

f.     Acaster Lane and Main Street Junction implement a lesser restriction than advertised as outlined in Annex B;

g.   The Courtyard no further action;

h.   Canon’s Court implement as advertised;

i.     Clifton Dale implement as advertised;

j.     The Square implement as advertised;

k.   Chalfonts implement as advertised;

l.     Orchard Way/North Lane Junction implement as advertised;

m. Broadway implement a lesser restriction than advertised as outlined in Annex E and to write to those that will no longer have double yellow lines outside homes be written to about whether they would wish to have white bar markings;

n.   Fulford Road that a decision be delegated to the Director for Environment, Transport, and Planning to allow for Officers to confirm that Grange Garth parking bays would also be community parking bays before implementing;

o.   St. Mary’s and Frederic Street, R12: GM Parking Bays to complete a further review of the whole R12 zone with a view to all bays within the zone becoming Community Bays;

p.   South Lane no further action;

q.   Greenshaw Drive implement as advertised;

r.     Westfield Lane/Green Dike and Plantation Way Junction implement a lesser restriction than advertised with 8 meter restrictions on Plantation Way north and south side;

s.   Village Garth and The Village Junction implement as advertised;

t.     Glen Road/Harcourt Street implement as advertised;

u.   Monkton Road/Elmfield Avenue implement as advertised;

v.   Seventh Avenue implement as advertised;

w.  Elmfield Terrace/Stray Garth implement as advertised;

x.   Springfield Avenue/Beech Avenue implement as advertised;

y.   Severus Avenue/York Road junction take no further action;

z.   Acomb Road implement a lesser restriction than advertised as outlined in Annex J;

aa.              Thief Lane/Tandem Place implement as advertised;

bb.              Moore Avenue/Osbaldwick Lane take no further action until residents petition has been considered;

cc.Yearsley Crescent do not implement and advertise the restrictions on the other side of the street as residents and Ward Councillors have requested;

dd.              Nunthorpe Road take no further action until further consultation with Ward Councillors;

ee.              Scarcroft Road implement a lesser restriction than advertised as outlined in Annex  ...  view the full minutes text for item 52.

This purpose of this report is to provide and update on the City Centre access action plans as agreed at 18 November 2021 Executive meeting.

Resolved:

                      i.         That the progress on City centre accessibility and the action plan be noted.

Reason:     To update the Executive Member on the progress of agreed actions.

                     ii.         that the dropped kerbs in the city centre programme be prioritised and to be funded from the Pedestrian and Cycling Schemes element of the Transport Capital Budget.

Reason:     As part of the access improvement work is the review of dropped kerbs in the City Centre footstreets. The intended funding for this work was subject to a bid, £250,000 to the Department for Transport for Active travel. The announcement on this funding is yet to be made. To mitigate this and to ensure this important work could proceed, one of the decisions at the 18th November 2021 Executive meeting in the “Consideration of Changes to the City Centre TrafficRegulation Order” paper was for the Executive Member for Transport to be delegated authority to fund this work through the Transport Capital Programme in the absence of an announcement from Government.

Officers noted that the report was an update on the actions agreed by the Executive regarding City Centre Accessibility, therefore, they noted that the Executive Member was not able to amend the decisions made at Executive. The Executive Member considered the report and noted that the Council’s engagement with residents and interested groups regarding city centre access should be enhanced by the appointment of an Access Officer and welcomed further engagement to improve access to the city.

Improving access across the city centre was discussed and it was noted that officers would propose in minute 55 to provide funding to deliver dropped curbs alongside cycle path improvements which would be funded by the Active Travel fund. The Executive Member felt that the Executive’s decision in relation to foot streets was not an easy decision to make and that this current program of work aimed to make the city centre as accessible as possible. 

Resolved:

                      i.         That the progress on City centre accessibility and the action plan be noted.

Reason:     To update the Executive Member on the progress of agreed actions.

                     ii.         that the dropped kerbs in the city centre programme be prioritised and to be funded from the Pedestrian and Cycling Schemes element of the Transport Capital Budget.

Reason:     As part of the access improvement work is the review of dropped kerbs in the City Centre footstreets. The intended funding for this work was subject to a bid, £250,000 to the Department for Transport for Active travel. The announcement on this funding is yet to be made. To mitigate this and to ensure this important work could proceed, one of the decisions at the 18th November 2021 Executive meeting in the “Consideration of Changes to the City Centre TrafficRegulation Order” paper was for the Executive Member for Transport to be delegated authority to fund this work through the Transport Capital Programme in the absence of an announcement from Government.

The current single direction flow of motorised traffic along Coppergate with a segregated contraflow cycle route was installed as an emergency active travel measure and provided under a Temporary Traffic Regulation Order (TTRO) as part of the coronavirus (COVID) response. This report seeks the Executive Members approval to make the current arrangements permanent, note the improved arrangements which have been implemented for a segregated cycle lane, and that upon completion of the bus study a further report is brought forward about the future operation of all traffic on Coppergate.

Resolved:

                      i.         Noted the improved arrangements have been implemented for a segregated cycle lane.

Reason:     Following vandalism the segregation infrastructure for the cycle route have been improved.

                     ii.         Requested officers commence work on the process of formal consultation to make the current arrangements permanent;

                    iii.        Delegated to the Director of Environment, Transport and Planning the authority to confirm the Traffic Regulation Order if no objections are received. If objections are received then a further report will be brought to the Executive Member.

Reason:     The current arrangements will need to be removed in June unless a decision is made to make it permanent.

                   iv.        Requested that upon completion of the bus study a further report is brought forward about the future operation of all traffic on Coppergate.

Reason:     To ensure the longer term future of Coppergate considers all the potential options.

The Executive Member welcomed the report and noted that the marked cycle lane on Coppergate was an improvement for cycling. He asked that officers commence work in order to enter a formal consultation regarding making the current arrangements permanent.

Resolved:

                      i.         Noted the improved arrangements have been implemented for a segregated cycle lane.

Reason:     Following vandalism the segregation infrastructure for the cycle route have been improved.

                     ii.         Requested officers commence work on the process of formal consultation to make the current arrangements permanent;

                    iii.        Delegated to the Director of Environment, Transport and Planning the authority to confirm the Traffic Regulation Order if no objections are received. If objections are received then a further report will be brought to the Executive Member.

Reason:     The current arrangements will need to be removed in June unless a decision is made to make it permanent.

                   iv.        Requested that upon completion of the bus study a further report is brought forward about the future operation of all traffic on Coppergate.

Reason:     To ensure the longer term future of Coppergate considers all the potential options.

This report sets out the programme of works to be delivered through the Directorate of Place Transport Capital Programme in 2022/23.

Resolved:

                      i.         Approved the proposed programme of Schemes for 2022/23.

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, including the Active Travel Programme.

The Executive Member agreed to the proposal for the funding of dropped curbs in the city centre as noted in minute 53 and noted that it would be included in the next Transport Capital Programme monitor report. The Executive Member reviewed the Transport Capital Programme and noted the need for changes required at Hazel Court to support the change to an electric fleet of vehicles. He asked that officers ensure that bridge maintenance work consider and join up with other maintenance work being undertaken across the transport network. He also noted that the Council was putting a high priority on the delivery of the Active Travel work.

Resolved:

                      i.         Approved the proposed programme of Schemes for 2022/23.

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, including the Active Travel Programme.