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 draft minutes

Venue: The George Hudson Board Room - 1st Floor West Offices (F045). View directions

Contact: Robert Flintoft 

Webcast: Watch or listen to the meeting online

Items
No. Item

78.

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 confirmed he had none.

 

Cllr D’Agorne did note that he had held discussions with concerned parties in relation to the TSAR Traffic Signal Refurbishment – Bootham/Gillygate/St Leonards

Place. He also had held conversations with the Ward Councillors and Cycle Campaign in relation to Cycle Route Improvements (Nunnery Lane-Nunthorpe Grove). He also noted that the Petition for a Zebra Crossing at the Kent Street / Fawcett Street Junction was inside his ward. Finally he also confirmed that he was no longer a paid member of the York Cycle Campaign and had never held a position within the organisation.

 

79.

Minutes pdf icon PDF 204 KB

To approve and sign the minutes of the meeting held on 13 April 2021.

Minutes:

Resolved:  That the minutes of the Decision Session of the Executive Member for Transport and Planning held on 13 April 2021 be approved and signed by the Executive Member as a correct record; subject to a spelling correction and resolution iii of minute 76. to now read:

 

                   ‘Noted that the review is to be completed prior to the implementation of the permanent footstreet extension in September 2021, as is set out in the programme.

 

Reason:     To continue to improve the existing mitigations for those affected by the proposed permanent changes to the footstreets be made implemented in September 2021.’

80.

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. The deadline for registering at this meeting is at 5.00pm on Friday 7 May 2021.

 

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 a Public Meeting

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 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 ten registrations to speak at the meeting under the Council’s Public Participation Scheme.

 

Tom Franklin welcomed the public consultation but requested that a decision on TSAR traffic signal refurbishment be postponed until after the new Local Transport Plan as they considered neither option in the report acceptable.

 

Lee Spracklen noted the improved air quality at the Bootham junction due to the reduced number of cars in the first lockdown. He noted that he did not support either option in the report and that more needed to be done to reduce traffic and improve air quality.

 

Roger Pierce noted that option B was preferable regarding the TSAR traffic signal refurbishment, but requested a decision be deferred until a review of post Covid traffic levels could be undertaken. He also requested that the Council review the use of near side traffic indicators as visually impaired users found these difficult to use.

 

Robert Gordon also found option B preferable for the TSAR traffic signal refurbishment, but noted that it was unclear how this would affect traffic ques at the junction potentially creating further air quality issues and slowing down bus routes. He noted the potential benefits to residents and business of reduced traffic in the area, the need for cleaner forms of transportation, and therefore requested the item be postponed.

 

Anthony May raised concerns that neither option in the TSAR traffic signal refurbishment consultation was preferable for residents. He noted that while 55% of people wanted more space for pedestrians and cyclists, 59% also preferred option A which would not deliver this. He asked that a decision be postponed until after consultation had taken place on the outer ring road.

 

Niall McFerran also requested a postponement of a decision in relation to the TSAR traffic signal refurbishment. He noted that the junction currently favours cars over pedestrians and cyclists and confusion in lanes lead to traffic problems.

 

Martin Farrington raised concerns that the cycle route improvement item would increase traffic near homes on Scarcroft Road and the lose of parking would lower safety for residents. He raised a number of questions in relation to the diversion route and planning decisions in relation to the Environment Agency work.

 

John Singleton noted that the lose of parking on Scarcroft road which already had parking issues would create problems on nearby streets. He also noted that the increased speed of cars from a more open road would create a less safe street for residents.

 

Jo Skinner also raised safety concerns on Scarcroft road and noted concerns that communication and consultation on the changes had been insufficient. He noted that bringing cars closer to houses on the street would increase the danger to school children travelling to schools nearby.

 

Tim Pheby noted that the Terry Avenue cycle route was one of the best cycle routes in the city. He noted that the route proposed in the cycle route improvement item for while Terry Avenue would be closed did not meet  ...  view the full minutes text for item 80.

81.

STEP – Transport Data Platform pdf icon PDF 267 KB

This report updates the Member for Transport on the work done with the grant so far and requests approval to commission the STEP Transport Data Platform.

Decision:

Resolved

 

                      i.         That the item be deferred.

 

Reason:     To allow for further work to be undertaken on the STEP – Transport Data Platform.

Minutes:

Resolved

 

                      i.         That the item be deferred.

 

Reason:     To allow for further work to be undertaken on the STEP – Transport Data Platform.

82.

York’s response to the National Bus Strategy pdf icon PDF 163 KB

This report sets out how City of York Council will discharge the obligation placed on English local transport authorities to develop a Bus Service Improvement Plan by October 2021.

Decision:

Resolved

 

                      i.         The Executive Member endorsed the approach set out in the report and agreed to refer the item to the Executive meeting on 20th May 2021 as a decision of key importance.

 

Reason:     To allow timely development of a Bus Service Improvement Plan for York and mitigate against potential loss of Covid bus service support grant from July 2021. It will then allow a Bus Service Improvement Plan to be delivered in time for a decision on its adoption to be made at an Executive meeting in September 2021 – prior to the DfT’s deadline of October 2021.

Minutes:

The Executive Member considered the two options within the Government Strategy to either refranchise or enter a enhanced partnership with private bus service providers. It was noted that following discussions with nearby authorities the officers recommended negotiating an enhanced partnership. The work of the Quality Bus Partnership was noted including the electrification of some of York’s current buses. The Executive Member noted the Council should not rule out opting to refranchise but agreed to endorse and refer the item to the Executive.  

 

Resolved

 

                      i.         The Executive Member endorsed the approach set out in the report and agreed to refer the item to the Executive meeting on 20th May 2021 as a decision of key importance.

 

Reason:     To allow timely development of a Bus Service Improvement Plan for York and mitigate against potential loss of Covid bus service support grant from July 2021. It will then allow a Bus Service Improvement Plan to be delivered in time for a decision on its adoption to be made at an Executive meeting in September 2021 – prior to the DfT’s deadline of October 2021.

83.

York’s Local Transport Plan pdf icon PDF 422 KB

This report sets out a proposed scope, timescale and budget for York’s fourth Local Transport Plan.

Decision:

Resolved

 

                      i.         The Executive Member endorsed the approach set out in the paper and pass this report to Executive for consideration as a decision of key importance.

 

Reason:     This will allow timely delivery of York’s fourth Local Transport Plan.

Minutes:

York’s Local Transport Plan it was noted had another 10 years remaining, however, the implementation phase of the current Local Transport Plan had concluded. Therefore there was an opportunity to renew the plan and set new targets to be delivered.

 

Resolved

 

                      i.         The Executive Member endorsed the approach set out in the paper and pass this report to Executive for consideration as a decision of key importance.

 

Reason:     This will allow timely delivery of York’s fourth Local Transport Plan.

84.

Engagement Strategy – Local Transport Plan pdf icon PDF 241 KB

This report sets out an engagement strategy which places resident insight at the heart of the process to develop and implement York’s Local Transport Plan 4.

Additional documents:

Decision:

Resolved

 

                      i.         Approved the engagement plan set out in annex A, which secures involvement and influence of residents through the stages required to develop LTP 4.

 

Reason:     To ensure effective and inclusive engagement with residents, businesses, key stakeholders and other groups who travel into and through York.

Minutes:

The Executive Member noted the extensive engagement that was undertaken for the Local Transport Plan three which reached 14% of households, following on from this he approved the holistic strategy proposed in the report. He noted that behavioural change could be a cost effective way to promote greener forms of transportation and therefore the strategy should identify barriers to change and assist in finding ways to remove those barriers.

 

Resolved

 

                      i.         Approved the engagement plan set out in annex A, which secures involvement and influence of residents through the stages required to develop LTP 4.

 

Reason:     To ensure effective and inclusive engagement with residents, businesses, key stakeholders and other groups who travel into and through York.

85.

Update on E-Scooter Trials pdf icon PDF 225 KB

This paper provides an update on the progress of the e-scooter and e-bike trials in York, and sets out a proposal to further expand the service area, to include areas outside the Outer Ring Road.

Additional documents:

Decision:

Resolved

 

                   i.        To expand the service area that e-scooters and e-bikes can be hired and used to include areas outside the Outer Ring Road.

 

Reason:    To expand the trail to residents in areas outside the Outer Ring Road.

 

Minutes:

An update was provided on the Department for Transport E-scooter trail. Throughout the trail it was noted that the range of E-scooters and E-bikes had been gradually expanded. 78,000km had been travelled by using these vehicles with no road incidents reported and issues raised about parking bays and anti-social behaviour were raised with and address in collaboration with Tier the private provider for the scheme. It was noted that the trail was drawing to a close but the DfT were likely to extend.

 

Resolved

 

                   i.        To expand the service area that e-scooters and e-bikes can be hired and used to include areas outside the Outer Ring Road.

 

Reason:    To expand the trail to residents in areas outside the Outer Ring Road.

 

86.

TSAR Junction Alterations – Gillygate/Bootham/St Leonards Place pdf icon PDF 335 KB

This report presents the options to replace the traffic signalling equipment as the equipment’s life has expired and has become difficult and costly to maintain.

Additional documents:

Decision:

Resolved

 

                   i.        To defer a decision to allow for further modelling of post Covid traffic levels and how traffic could be diverted from the area. To also consider the prioritisation of public transport and the Local Transport Plan.

 

Reason:    To allow for further modelling before a decision is made.

Minutes:

It was confirmed that the TSAR programs primarily focused on the replacement of expired assets. This current scheme is sixth on the list of junctions needing replacement. Officers noted that a project in the Local Transport Plan would be unlikely this year and therefore recommended the replacement with ducts to allow for the potential of a larger junction change at a future date. The Executive Member noted his concerns that option A did not improve use of the junction for pedestrians or cyclists. With the results from the online survey both suggesting respondents wished for more space for pedestrians and cyclists but did not support option B. Therefore it was requested that further modelling of post Covid travel be undertaken before a decision and further consideration meet air quality targets.

 

Resolved

 

                   i.        To defer a decision to allow for further modelling of post Covid traffic levels and how traffic could be diverted from the area. To also consider the prioritisation of public transport and the Local Transport Plan.

 

Reason:    To allow for further modelling before a decision is made.

87.

Cycle Route Improvements (Nunnery Lane-Nunthorpe Grove) pdf icon PDF 247 KB

This report requests a decision on further development work to ensure that the initial designs are viable and that the concerns of the local residents are adequately assessed prior to a decision being taken on whether to progress the implementation of a scheme in the area.

Additional documents:

Decision:

Resolved

 

                   i.        Approved further investigation of improvements to the existing advisory Cycle Route between Nunnery Lane and Nunthorpe Grove.

                  ii.        Subject to the successful outcome of a Safety Audit to progress towards the delivery of route alignment changes which are indicatively shown on the drawing in Annex B.  But to exclude amendments to parking and the improvement to the crossing on Scarcroft Road.

                 iii.        Amendments to parking and the improvements to the crossing on Scarcroft Road to be considered as a future item to the Executive Member for Transport Decision Session.

 

Reason:    In order to adequately understand the impacts of the scheme and mitigate concerns raised by the residents impacted by the proposals.

 

Minutes:

Officers introduced the report noting the proposed improvements and the impact of the closing of Terry Avenue. Following concerns from local residents it was recommended that subject to the successful outcome of a Safety Audit the Council progress towards the delivery of route alignment changes and implement signage improvements, but exclude amendments to parking and the improvement to the crossing on Scarcroft Road.

 

Resolved

 

                   i.        Approved further investigation of improvements to the existing advisory Cycle Route between Nunnery Lane and Nunthorpe Grove.

                  ii.        Subject to the successful outcome of a Safety Audit to progress towards the delivery of route alignment changes which are indicatively shown on the drawing in Annex B.  But to exclude amendments to parking and the improvement to the crossing on Scarcroft Road.

                 iii.        Amendments to parking and the improvements to the crossing on Scarcroft Road to be considered as a future item to the Executive Member for Transport Decision Session.

 

Reason:    In order to adequately understand the impacts of the scheme and mitigate concerns raised by the residents impacted by the proposals.

 

88.

Receipt of a Petition for a Zebra Crossing at the Kent Street / Fawcett Street Junction pdf icon PDF 239 KB

The report acknowledges receipt of the petition for a Zebra Crossing at the Kent Street / Fawcett Street Junction and details how officers propose to take this request forward.

Decision:

Resolved

 

                      i.         Acknowledged receipt of the petition and instruct officers to put the site through the assessment process when traffic conditions return to some form of normality.

 

Reason:     To determine whether improved pedestrian crossing

facilities are justifiable and the type of facility which would be the most appropriate.

Minutes:

The petition was acknowledged and the Executive Member noted his support that officers to put the site through the assessment process when traffic conditions return to some form of normality.

 

Resolved

 

                      i.         Acknowledged receipt of the petition and instruct officers to put the site through the assessment process when traffic conditions return to some form of normality.

 

Reason:     To determine whether improved pedestrian crossing

facilities are justifiable and the type of facility which would be the most appropriate.

89.

Consideration of consultation results from Slingsby Grove, Royal Chase, Kensington Court, Regency Mews, 64-90A Tadcaster Road and St. Edwards Close following petitions being received requesting Residents’ Priority Parking pdf icon PDF 557 KB

To report the results following a consultation undertaken in January 2021 for all residential and business properties, and the affected properties that have frontages/access onto the proposed area. Then determine what action is deemed.

 

Additional documents:

Decision:

Resolved

 

                      i.         Approval was given be given to take no further action towards the implementation of Residents Priority parking on Slingsby Grove, Royal Chase, Regency Mews, Kensington Court and 64-90A Tadcaster Road, and remove the consulted area from the Residents Parking waiting list.

 

Reason:     66% of the respondents from the above properties were against the proposed scheme.

 

                     ii.         Approval was given to implement Residents Priority parking on St. Edwards Close with times of operation being 24 hours a day and 7 days a week.

 

Reason:     89% of respondents from St. Edwards Close were in

favour of the proposed scheme and the preferred times of operation were 24/7.

Minutes:

Officers noted all those that were consulted regarding a residents priority parking schemes. The Executive Member noted the high number responses and the concerns from business about parking and proposed that cycle parking could potentially support a reduce in parking.

 

Resolved

 

                      i.         Approval was given be given to take no further action towards the implementation of Residents Priority parking on Slingsby Grove, Royal Chase, Regency Mews, Kensington Court and 64-90A Tadcaster Road, and remove the consulted area from the Residents Parking waiting list.

 

Reason:     66% of the respondents from the above properties were against the proposed scheme.

 

                     ii.         Approval was given to implement Residents Priority parking on St. Edwards Close with times of operation being 24 hours a day and 7 days a week.

 

Reason:     89% of respondents from St. Edwards Close were in

favour of the proposed scheme and the preferred times of operation were 24/7.

90.

Consultation results regarding Resident Priority Parking for 5 to 11 Main Street, Fulford pdf icon PDF 257 KB

To report the consultation results for resident priority parking 5-11 Main Street, Fulford and to determine what action is appropriate.

Additional documents:

Decision:

Resolved

 

                      i.         Take forward a proposal for resident priority parking on the length of carriageway adjacent to 5-11 Main Street for the use of these properties only. 7 day a week, 24 hour restriction with 60 minutes for non-permit holders.

                     ii.         Additional lengths of no waiting at any time (double yellow lines) to be implemented to protect entrances to properties and improve sight lines. (plan included as Annex E(2).

                    iii.        The Ward Member to be consulted by officers about the possibility to introduce bollards with Ward funding to prevent parking on the grass verge.

 

Reason:    To provide residents priority for the limited carriageway space whilst trying to mitigate some of the concerns raised by St Oswald’s Church.

Minutes:

Officers and the Executive Member thanked the report author Sue Gill Traffic Project Officer as this was her last report for the Council. It was noted that due to the small number of properties a residents priority parking scheme would not usually be implemented. The concerns of the church were noted and it was requested that bollards be considered to protect the grass verge with the Ward Councillor as a potential ward scheme.

 

Resolved

 

                      i.         Take forward a proposal for resident priority parking on the length of carriageway adjacent to 5-11 Main Street for the use of these properties only. 7 day a week, 24 hour restriction with 60 minutes for non-permit holders.

                     ii.         Additional lengths of no waiting at any time (double yellow lines) to be implemented to protect entrances to properties and improve sight lines. (plan included as Annex E(2).

                    iii.        The Ward Member to be consulted by officers about the possibility to introduce bollards with Ward funding to prevent parking on the grass verge.

 

Reason:    To provide residents priority for the limited carriageway space whilst trying to mitigate some of the concerns raised by St Oswald’s Church.

 

Feedback
Back to the top of the page