Local democracy during coronavirus

During coronavirus, we've made some changes to how we're running council meetings. See our coronavirus updates for more information on meetings and decisions.

Agenda, decisions and minutes

Venue: Remote Meeting

Contact: Michelle Bennett 

Items
No. Item

25.

Declarations of Interest

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.

 

Minutes:

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.

 

He declared a personal non-prejudicial and non-pecuniary interest in Agenda Item 5. The Emergency Active Travel Fund, in that he had regularly attended the meetings of the York Cycle Campaign and the York Bus Forum; both of which had made written and verbal representations at this meeting.

26.

Minutes pdf icon PDF 145 KB

To approve and sign the minutes of the meeting held on 8 September 2020.

Minutes:

Resolved:  That the minutes of the Decision Session of the Executive Member for Transport held on 8 September 2020 be approved and signed at a later date by the Executive Member as a correct record.

27.

Public Participation

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, in order to facilitate the management of public participation at remote meetings.  The deadline for registering at this meeting is 5:00pm on Friday, 16 October 2020.

 

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 relevant Democracy Officer, on the details at the foot of the agenda.

 

Webcasting of Remote Public Meetings

 

Please note that, subject to available resources, this remote public meeting will be webcast including any registered public speakers who have given their permission. The remote public meeting can be viewed live and 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.

 

 

Minutes:

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

 

Agenda item 4). Hopgrove Lane South - Proposed Left Turn Lane at the junction of Malton Road.

Dr Karen Nash, local resident, spoke in support of this proposal and commented that she had noticed a significant increase in traffic since the Vanguard development at Monks Cross had opened and expressed concern that traffic levels would further increase once the new stadium with community facilities was fully open. Traffic was regularly backed up the whole length of Hopgrove Lane and posed problems in terms of noise, pollution and accessibility to properties. 

Cllr Fisher, Ward Member for Strensall, echoed the points made by the previous speaker.  He had petitioned for this proposal three years ago and had gained 170 signatures, demonstrating the clear need for this proposal.  The officer recommendation had been that no further action be taken on the grounds of cost and that the junction improvements would only be of benefit to car users, however, residents in the area had no choice but to use a car to get to Monks Cross as there were no buses, footpaths or safe cycle lanes.  He requested that the Executive Member either approve the proposed scheme or request further traffic modelling as to how the general transport and specific traffic situation at Hopgrove could be improved, with consideration to traffic lights and a cycle lane on Malton Road.  He also requested that the right turn not be prohibited.

Agenda item 5). Emergency Active Travel Fund

 

Mr Dave Merrett, local resident welcomed the majority of proposals in the officer report, particularly the provision of cycle lanes on Shipton Road north accompanied by the reduction in speed limit.  However, he had serious concerns regarding the removal of the ghost island and various right turn boxes between the Rawcliffe Lane junction and the Rawcliffe Bar park and ride site as approximately 90 per cent of potential users would be residents living either side of the cycle lane on Shipton Road.  There were a number of facilities on the west side of the road, therefore the ability to cross, for pedestrians and cyclists who may want to turn in and out of Shipton Road, was crucial, and would be made unsafe by this proposal and would result in a reduction of cyclists.  He was also disappointed with the removal of the temporary cycle lane at Castle Mills Bridge on Tower Street and requested that

bus and cycle lane measures be considered.

Mr Peter Sheaf, representative of York Cycle Campaign, echoed the points made by the previous speaker and added that he appreciated that the officer report had an openness to cycling as a viable means of transport throughout the City.  Regarding the officer recommendation of option 1 at Castle Mills Bridge on Tower Street Castle Bridge, he advised that further consideration be given to option 2 ‘to continue with the temporary restriction, with a periodic  ...  view the full minutes text for item 27.

28.

Hopgrove Lane South - Proposed Left Turn Lane pdf icon PDF 422 KB

This report prepared, in accordance with the decision by the Executive Member in 2018, in response to a petition presents the findings of preliminary investigations into the feasibility, likely cost, and impact of providing a left filter traffic lane on Hopgrove Lane South at its junction with Malton Road.


The Executive Member is asked to n
ote the findings of the preliminary feasibility investigations and instruct Officers not to progress the proposal any further.

 

Additional documents:

Decision:

 

Resolved: (i)      that the findings of the preliminary feasibility

investigations were noted and that officers were instructed not to progress the proposal any further. 

(ii)      that officers would continue to consult with local residents and Ward Members on experimental work in the area.

 

Reason:               The feasibility study responds to a petition received in 2018 requesting the provision of an extra traffic lane on Hopgrove Lane South aimed at reducing the delay currently experienced by drivers turning onto Malton Road. The officer recommendation is based on the assessment that, on balance, the time-savings for drivers would not outweigh the road safety concerns or justify the cost. There is also a risk that the proposal could attract more through traffic to Hopgrove Lane South, and have negative impacts on nearby villages.

 

Minutes:

The Executive Member considered a report, which had been prepared, in accordance with the decision by a former Executive Member in 2018, in response to a petition.  The report presented the findings of preliminary investigations into the feasibility, likely cost, and impact of providing a left filter traffic lane on Hopgrove Lane South at its junction with Malton Road.

 

The options available for consideration included:

a)           Approve the proposal:

Approve the proposal for detailed design and implementation (and allocation of the necessary budget in the 21/22 Capital Programme)

b)           Request further information to inform final decision:

Request a further report back after strategic traffic modelling is carried out (to help inform a final decision on the scheme being progressed and included in a future Capital Programme). As part of this modelling work other ways of modifying the operation of the junction would also be explored, such as prohibiting certain movements.

c)           Abandon the proposal:

Abandon the proposal now, and inform petitioners of the reasons (limited benefits, road safety concerns, costs etc.) 

 

The Executive Member enquired what option b), requesting further information, would entail.  The Head of Transport responded that option b) would involve making use of the new traffic model available in the New Year which focuses on traffic flows in the area and which could be used to look at that particular junction.

 

Having reviewed and considered key pieces of work undertaken as part of the feasibility assessment and having considered the points raised in written submissions received from: the Huntington and New Earswick Ward Councillors: Cllr Keith Orrell, Cllr Carol Runciman and Cllr Chris Cullwick; Cllr Doughty, Strensall Ward Member; the Stockton on the Forest Parish Council; together with the oral representations heard under the ‘Public Participation’ agenda item, all supportive of this scheme, the Executive Member instructed officers not to progress the proposal any further.  He wished to continue consultation with local residents and Ward Members to explore alternative measures to improve the specific traffic situation for local residents.  He mentioned that options may include prohibiting the right turn which was given as the main cause of delay, on a trial basis, putting in place temporary wands to block the right turn with clear signage that traffic has to turn left.  Officers advised that blocking the right turn could be costly as there would need to be a physical barrier rather than a temporary measure, along with the cost of signage which could make it more costly to do on a trial basis.

 

Resolved: (i)      that the findings of the preliminary feasibility

investigations were noted and that officers were instructed not to progress the proposal any further. 

(ii)      that officers would continue to consult with local residents and Ward Members on experimental work in the area.

 

Reason:               The feasibility study responds to a petition received in 2018 requesting the provision of an extra traffic lane on Hopgrove Lane South aimed at reducing the delay currently experienced by drivers turning onto Malton Road. The officer  ...  view the full minutes text for item 28.

29.

Emergency Active Travel Fund pdf icon PDF 801 KB

The Executive Member will consider a paper which discusses a number of schemes taken forward by City of York Council under the Emergency Active Travel Fund (EATF), a DfT programme launched in May 2020 to help promote social distancing and

greater use of active travel especially where previous capacity of the public transport system has been significantly reduced - as a result of the covid 19 pandemic. Funding could also be used to make changes to street layouts and footway widths to allow pedestrians to socially distance more effectively.

Additional documents:

Decision:

Resolved:           

 

That the Executive Member:

 

(i)           Noted the updates on the Emergency Active Travel 1 shown in Table 1.

(ii)         Agreed that the temporary one way restriction on Coppergate be extended and a consultation/ design process commenced to assess the feasibility of making the restriction permanent through a scheme in CYC’s Local Transport Plan capital programme

 

Reason:    The temporary scheme has successfully facilitated social distancing on Coppergate and offers the potential to improve the amenity of Coppergate and economic viability of businesses postpandemic.  The provision of a contraflow cycle lane in the scheme also helps cyclists making East-West trips across the city-centre.

 

(iii)        Agreed that the temporary cycle lane at Castle Mills Bridge on Tower Street be removed, but consideration be given to bus priority measures and cycle lanes as part of the Castle Gateway improvements to the area.

 

Reason: cyclists make up a small proportion of road users on this busy section of the inner ring road, and delays experienced as traffic levels have built back up particularly for buses at peak times can be reduced by removing the lane pending consideration of bus priority measures.

 

(iv)    Agreed that the proposed scheme for improvements to York’s North – South cycle route be taken forward to implementation, with the proposed restriction to Navigation Road taken forward to a consultation and normal decision making process.

 

Reason: This will allow timely delivery of the majority of the scheme whilst allowing a transparent decision to be made about the key safety element which requires a Traffic Regulation Order to implement the measures on Navigation Road.

 

(v)     Agreed that the proposed scheme for improvements to cycle lanes on Bootham be taken forward to implementation, with a consultation commenced on the rest of the Shipton Road cycle lane scheme, including the element which would require changes to residents’ parking on parts of Bootham.

 

Reason: This will allow timely delivery of the cycle route south of Clifton Green to tie in with proposed the St Mary’s – Bootham crossing, whilst allowing a transparent decision to be made about changes to parking and lanes on Bootham and Shipton Road north of the junction with Rawcliffe Lane, through the normal decision making process.

 

(vi)    Noted the list of schemes applied for to DFT under Emergency Active Travel 2 and agreed to write to the Secretary of State and request this scheme is fast tracked.

 

Reason: To enable work to commence as quickly as possible implementing new safe routes within the timescales required.

 

(vii)    Agreed to commence design work on some of the schemes within the EATF 2 programme, with initial design work on the A1237 scheme for safer walking and cycling on the bridge over the river and railway in particular, with a decision about implementing these schemes to be made at a future Decision Session, if funding is identified.

 

Reason: This would allow timely delivery of the schemes if EATF tranche 2 funding is forthcoming or schemes are otherwise identified as priority for other funding.  ...  view the full decision text for item 29.

Minutes:

The Executive Member considered a paper which discussed a number of schemes taken forward by City of York Council under the Emergency Active Travel Fund (EATF).  The paper made recommendations on the future of a number of temporary schemes within the EATF programme, specifically whether some of the traffic management measures in the programme should continue to be provided, or should be removed, and how capital schemes within the programme should be developed towards implementation. 

 

The report explored individual measures in respect of the following schemes:

·        The current one-way restriction (and contra-flow cycle lane) on Coppergate

·        The Castle Mills Bridge provision of a westbound cycle lane

·        The North-South city centre cycle route

·        The Shipton Road park and pedal scheme

 

with a range of options and recommendations as set out within the officer report.

 

A written representation had been received on behalf of the York Bus Forum, who had made specific suggestions in relation to

new temporary close to the existing stops in Piccadilly/ Merchantgate, and permanent bus stops to form part of a review of the current bus stops in the Clifford Street /Piccadilly/Merchantgate area.  They were also supportive of the introduction of bus priority measures, both as part of the Castle Gateway improvements, and to minimise the additional journey time for eastbound bus services diverted from Coppergate and had a number of suggestions in relation to how these measures should include bus priority on the Tower Street diversion.  Finally, they suggested that, as part of the Castle Gateway improvements, consideration should be given to replacing the current park and ride No 3 bus stop in Tower Street.  The Executive Member confirmed that these points would be added to the list of considered actions.

 

The Executive Member had noted the concerns of Mr Dave Merrits in his oral submission, regarding the removal of the ghost island and various right turn boxes between the Rawcliffe Lane junction and the Rawcliffe Bar and confirmed that all options would be explored to ensure the safety of pedestrians and cyclists.

 

Regarding extending the scheme on the current one-way restriction (and contra-flow cycle lane) on Coppergate, the Executive Member confirmed that the Council would purchase the cones and relevant equipment rather than make costly payments to lease this.  Improvements to signage would also be made.

 

The second tranche of EATF funding:

Officers reported that no further information had been received, beyond the generic response to all local authorities, which had been published as a supplement to the agenda for this meeting, regarding the second tranche of EATF funding which the Council applied for in early August.  The November Decision Session would consider the capital implications should this funding not be awarded.

 

Resolved:           

 

That the Executive Member:

 

Resolved:           

 

That the Executive Member:

 

(i)           Noted the updates on the Emergency Active Travel 1 shown in Table 1.

(ii)         Agreed that the temporary one way restriction on Coppergate be extended and a consultation/ design process commenced to assess the feasibility  ...  view the full minutes text for item 29.

 

Feedback
Back to the top of the page