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 they may have in respect of business on this agenda.

At this point in the meeting, the Executive Member was asked to declare any personal, prejudicial or disclosable pecuniary interests that he might have in relation to the business on the agenda. No additional interests were declared.

To approve and sign the minutes of the Decision Session held on 14 July 2016.

Resolved: That the minutes of the last Decision Session held on 14 July be signed and then approved by the Executive Member as a correct record subject to:

In Minute 14 – Public Participation - Definitive Map Modification Order: Hoisty Field, Fulford

                 The addition of the word ‘not’, prior to the words ‘make an order...’ to Graham Cheyne’s comments.

At this point in the meeting, members of the public who have registered their wish to speak at the meeting can do so. The deadline for registering is Wednesday 10 August 2016 at 5:00pm

Members of the public may speak on an item on the agenda or an issue within the Executive Member’s remit,

Filming, Recording or Webcasting Meetings

Please note this meeting may be filmed and webcast or audio

recorded and that includes any registered public speakers, who

have given their permission. This broadcast can be viewed at

http://www.york.gov.uk/webcasts. or, sound recorded, this will

be uploaded onto the Council 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 Officer (whose 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

http://www.york.gov.uk/downloads/file/6453/protocol_for_webcast

ing_filming_and_recording_of_council_meetingspdf

It was reported that there had been two registrations to speak at the meeting under the Council’s Public Participation Scheme on the following items:

Consideration of the Objection Received to a Proposed Amendment to the York Parking, Stopping and Waiting Traffic Regulation Order 2014: R16: St Benedict's Road, Residents' Priority Parking on Clement Street

Yvonne Speight, spoke on behalf of Abbey Signs, in favour of the amendments to resident’s parking on Clement Street. She informed the Executive Member that, whilst the plan meant the removal of two existing spaces, the dropped kerb would ensure ease of access and would allow parking for additional vehicles off-road. Mrs. Speight also explained that the current situation meant that it was impossible to pass parked cars, and rendered the turning circle unusable, forcing residents to reverse onto Nunnery Lane.

Safe Routes to School – Sheriff Hutton Road, Strensall/ The Village

Tony Fisher, speaking behalf of Strensall Parish Council, explained that local residents were generally in support of the report’s recommendations. He informed the Executive Member that the lack of a safe crossing in the village meant an increased number of parents drove their children to school, which did not help traffic conditions. He explained that whilst the Parish Council were aware of the budget constraints, they felt further action would be required when funds allowed. Mr. Fisher also requested the installation of the riverside gate prior to the start of the 2016/17 school year and questioned the effectiveness of the Vehicle Activated Sign and hatch marking. Mr. Fisher finished by reiterating the need for a pedestrian refuge and a 20 mph speed limit in the centre of the village.

The purpose of this report is to facilitate changes to the R16 Residents’ Priority Parking zone (Respark) to allow vehicle access to a private parking area to rear of 113 Nunnery Lane accessed from Clement Street.

Resolved:  That the proposed amendments to the York Parking, Stopping and Waiting Traffic Regulation Order 2014 in respect of the R16: Resident’s Priority Parking zone in St Benedict’s Road/Clement Street be implemented as advertised. 

Reason:     To facilitate legitimate vehicle access from the public highway onto private land.

The Executive Member received a report which asked him to consider amendments to the York, Stopping Parking and Waiting Traffic Regulation Order (TRO) in order to facilitate changes to the R16 Residents ? Priority Parking zone (Respark) to allow vehicle access to a private parking area to the rear of 113 Nunnery Lane accessed from Clement Street.

It was noted that one objection had been received relating to the loss of parking on Clement Street, details of which were outlined in the report. It was confirmed that the Executive Member had received full details of the objection and was aware of the concerns raised. The Executive Member stated that he felt Officers had provided a full representation of the objection at the meeting.

Consideration was then given to the following options:

1. Implement the proposal as advertised.      

2. Uphold the objection and leave the residents parking amenity on Clement Street unaltered.

Resolved:  That the proposed amendments to the York Parking, Stopping and Waiting Traffic Regulation Order 2014 in respect of the R16: Resident’s Priority Parking zone in St Benedict’s Road/Clement Street be implemented as advertised. 

Reason:     To facilitate legitimate vehicle access from the public highway onto private land.

This report details the findings of a feasibility study into pedestrian safety at the junction of The Village and Sheriff Hutton Road, Strensall. The report also includes the results of consultation on a proposal to provide a vehicle activated sign on Sheriff Hutton Road, and seeks a decision on implementing the scheme.

Resolved:  That approval be given to Option (i), the introduction of warning signs, as shown at Annex E of the report, changes to the riverside path access, as shown at Annex B, and the provision of a hatch marking to tighten the entry radius at the junction of Sheriff Hutton Road/The Village, shown at Annex F.

Reason:    This option provides a value for money safety scheme which aims to make crossing the road safer.

The Executive Member received a report which presented him with the findings of a feasibility study into pedestrian safety at the junction of The Village and Sheriff Hutton Road, Strensall. The report also included the results of consultation on a proposal to provide a vehicle activated sign on Sheriff Hutton Road, and sought a decision on implementing the scheme.

Officers responded to the concerns raised by the public speaker and clarified that the measures suggested would be a starting point and that the road hatching would be reviewed at Stage 3 and 4 of the Road Safety Audit.

In respect of the Parish Council’s request to fit the gate prior to the start of the new school year, Officers stated this would be fitted as soon as was reasonably practicable, following necessary riverside works.

The Executive Member highlighted the possible use of Ward funds to assist  the Parish Council with the mitigation of traffic problems in the village.

Consideration was then given to the following options:

(i) – Approve the introduction of the proposed signs (Annex E), along with the changes to the riverside path access (Annex B). Additionally approve the provision of a hatch marking to tighten the entry radius at the junction (Annex F).

(ii) – As option (i) but with revisions as the Executive Member deems appropriate.

(iii) – Do nothing, reallocate spend elsewhere.

Resolved:  That approval be given to Option (i), the introduction of warning signs, as shown at Annex E of the report, changes to the riverside path access, as shown at Annex B, and the provision of a hatch marking to tighten the entry radius at the junction of Sheriff Hutton Road/The Village, shown at Annex F.

Reason:    This option provides a value for money safety scheme which aims to make crossing the road safer.

The purpose of this report is to agree a process for development of a new methodology for evaluating and prioritising pedestrian crossing improvement requests. 

Resolved:  That the staged process approach proposed in Option 1, be adopted to deal with the 2016/17 budget allocation for pedestrian crossing improvements using a new methodology to evaluate and prioritise pedestrian crossing requests for future financial years.

Reason:     To ensure the 2016/17 budget allocation is spent on delivering improvements for local residents and that the list of outstanding pedestrian crossing requests can be assessed taking into account appropriate factors.

The Executive Member considered a report which sought to agree a process for the development of a new methodology for evaluating and prioritising pedestrian crossing improvement requests. It was noted that the resulting prioritised list would be used to influence sites for investigation, and implemented as appropriate, from future years’ Transport Capital Programmes.

The Executive Member noted Councillor Craghill’s comments in respect of this item and he confirmed that the issue of suppressed demand was already covered within the new process and that any further investment would be  dealt with as part of the budget process.

The Executive Member then considered the following options:

Option 1: Adopt the staged process proposed in paragraph 9 of the report, to deal with 2016/17 schemes and the prioritising of sites using the new formula identified in Annex B.

Option 2: Adopt the staged process proposed in paragraph 9 of the report to deal with 2016/17 schemes and the prioritising of sites using the existing formula.

Option 3: Use the 16/17 budget to review the existing formula and undertake surveys to enable the full request list to be prioritised

Resolved:  That the staged process approach proposed in Option         1, be adopted to deal with the 2016/17 budget allocation for pedestrian crossing improvements using a new methodology to evaluate and prioritise pedestrian crossing requests for future financial years.

Reason:     To ensure the 2016/17 budget allocation is spent on delivering improvements for local residents and that the list of outstanding pedestrian crossing requests can be assessed taking into account appropriate factors.