Agenda, decisions and minutes

At this point in the meeting, Members are asked to declare any disclosable pecuniary interest or other registerable interest they might have in respect of business on this agenda, if they have not already done so in advance on the Register of Interests.

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.

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 are set as 2 working days before the meeting, in order to facilitate the management of public participation at our meetings. The deadline for registering at this meeting is 5:00pm on Friday 17 March 2023.

To register to speak please visit www.york.gov.uk/AttendCouncilMeetings to fill in an online registration form. If you have any questions about the registration form or the meeting, please contact Democratic Services. Contact details can be found at the foot of this agenda.

Webcasting of Public Meetings

Please note that, subject to available resources, this meeting will be webcast including any registered public speakers who have given their permission. The meeting can be viewed live and on demand at www.york.gov.uk/webcasts.

During coronavirus, we made some changes to how we ran council meetings, including facilitating remote participation by public speakers. See our updates (www.york.gov.uk/COVIDDemocracy) for more information on meetings and decisions.

It was reported that there had been 10 registrations to speak at the meeting under the Council’s Public Participation Scheme.

Gwen Swinburn noted that she felt highways related decisions had not been brought to the Transport Decision Session. She asked that a metal railing be installed on Monkgate to make it safer for pedestrians. Finally she asked for clarification on legal status of the tarmac work the Council had undertaken on Springfield Close which was private land.

Cllr Melly outlined her disappointment in both the report on the Acomb Road scheme and the lack of progress in the Active Travel Programme.  She raised concern that the Leeman Road closure was going ahead despite work to improve the riverside path not being completed. Finally she enquired as to why Hospital Fields Road was having Active Travel work undertaken when it scored lower other areas that were not being worked on.

Cllr K Taylor raised concerns regarding the riverside path which did not have funding assigned to complete all improvements outlined for the route, which was a key route into town for residents losing access through Leeman Road. He also raised concern that the Council recommendations would not solve issues on Acomb Road.

Kate Ravilious raised concern that the Council’s active travel scheme were not following the Councils own LCWIP. They raised concern that the Council was biding for millions of pounds for schemes over which it expected to be assigned and were delivering some schemes which didn’t improve cycling. Noting that Hospital Fields Road was not in the Council’s top 10 priorities they asked that the Council drop the scheme and prioritise elsewhere.

Lucy Steels-Walshaw part of Leeman Road Residents association. She thanked Ward Councillors for their help and noted concern that access to the city centre was not being improved for Leeman Road Residents who would lose their road into the city. She welcomed improving lighting and CCTV on the riverside path but was concerned the Council did not present a plan B should the Council not receive sufficient funding to finish improving the path.

Joanna Gawthorpe highlighted the work undertaken at Acomb Road School to promote active travel. She highlighted concerns about safety for pupils attending the school currently and asked for improvements to area to make it safer to walk and cycle.

Zenia Chapman raised concerns that the Council’s recommendations regarding Acomb Road would not make it safer for pedestrians and cyclists. She highlighted that poor pay had prevented the employing of a new crossing officer. She noted her concern that it would take a child being harmed by traffic for sufficient action to be taken.

David Finch Chair of Fiends of Leeman Park outlined that the riverside path was important but was left out of the York Central project, despite this he noted that the inspector expected the Council to improve the path as part of the work being done for the York Central project. Therefore he noted his disappointment that he felt the Council had reduced  ...  view the full minutes text for item 70.

The purpose of this paper is to update the Executive Member on progress on Road Safety concerns identified on Acomb Road.

Resolved:

                      i.         That the council promote and relaunch the existing campaign to recruit a school crossing patroller on Acomb Road;

                     ii.         That officers work with HR to review school crossing patrol role and terms and conditions;

                    iii.        That a review of the policy for pedestrian crossings and bring to an Executive Member decision session;

                   iv.        To collect speed data currently on Acomb Road to determine the level of compliance with the 30mph limit;

                     v.        Add the section of Acomb Road in the vicinity of the crossing points to Acomb Primary school and West Bank park to the Speed Limit review programme to see whether the speed limit can be reduced to 20mph;

                   vi.        Ensure that speed limits review form part of the considerations of the Acomb Road Active Travel scheme;

                  vii.        Noted Ward scheme to improve conditions for cyclists and Safer route to school schemes on Hamilton Drive;

                 viii.        Ensure the 30mph speed limit issue is reviewed

as part of these schemes on Hamilton Drive;

                   ix.        Officers to explore the feasibility of crossing improvements on Acomb Road including collecting the data on pedestrian and traffic movements to see if this meets the criteria in Department for Transport guidance and Council policy for a safe place for a pedestrian crossing;

                     x.        That a traffic modelling review the impact of a banned right turn from Grantham Drive onto Acomb Road be undertaken;

                   xi.        Delegate to the Director of Environment, Transport and Planning a review of the lining on West Bank and advertise a Traffic Regulation Order.  Delegate to the Director Environment, Transport and Planning for implementation if there are no objections;

                  xii.        Implement signage improvements where

identified;

Reason:     To respond to resident concerns around road safety in the area.

Officers outlined the report and confirmed that

road safety was taken seriously with an aim to deliver appropriate and proportionate measures. It was confirmed that concerns were raised regarding Acomb Road and Hamilton Drive and that petitions were being collected by residents. Officers confirmed from sight visits that there was an increased level of traffic around school drop off time. It was confirmed that additional resource was being put in place to appoint a new Crossing Patrol Officer and that work was being undertaken with HR to review the job role as it was confirmed that the Council was struggling to appoint to the post across the city. 

It was confirmed that the Council did not have recent speed data for the streets in question and would aim to collect data to

identify locations of most concern and would include as part of the Acomb Road active travel scheme.

The Executive Member considered and approved the recommendations adding to recommendation 11 the council advertise the Traffic Regulation Order should additional yellow lining be required on West Bank and to delegate to the Director of Environment, Transport and Planning to implement if there are no objections.

Resolved:

                      i.         That the council promote and relaunch the existing campaign to recruit a school crossing patroller on Acomb Road;

                     ii.         That officers work with HR to review school crossing patrol role and terms and conditions;

                    iii.        That a review of the policy for pedestrian crossings and bring to an Executive Member decision session;

                   iv.        To collect speed data currently on Acomb Road to determine the level of compliance with the 30mph limit;

                     v.        Add the section of Acomb Road in the vicinity of the crossing points to Acomb Primary school and West Bank park to the Speed Limit review programme to see whether the speed limit can be reduced to 20mph;

                   vi.        Ensure that speed limits review form part of the considerations of the Acomb Road Active Travel scheme;

                  vii.        Noted Ward scheme to improve conditions for cyclists and Safer route to school schemes on Hamilton Drive;

                 viii.        Ensure the 30mph speed limit issue is reviewed as part of these schemes on Hamilton Drive;

                   ix.        Officers to explore the feasibility of crossing improvements on Acomb Road including collecting the data on pedestrian and traffic movements to see if this meets the criteria in Department for Transport guidance and Council policy for a safe place for a pedestrian crossing;

                     x.        That a traffic modelling review the impact of a banned right turn from Grantham Drive onto Acomb Road be undertaken;

                   xi.        Delegate to the Director of Environment, Transport and Planning a review of the lining on West Bank and advertise a Traffic Regulation Order. Delegate to the Director Environment, Transport and Planning for implementation if there are no objections;

                  xii.        Implement signage improvements where identified;

Reason:     To respond to resident concerns around road safety

in the area.

This report provides an update on the progress of the Active Travel Programme and asks the Executive Member to note this update.

Resolved:

                      i.         Noted the update on the progress of the Active Travel Programme contained within this report;

Reason:     To provide information to the public and the Member on the current status of the Active Travel Programme.

                     ii.         Noted the update contained within this report covering the recent ATF4 bid submission;

Reason:     To provide information to the public regarding the request for funding submitted to Active Travel England.

                    iii.        Approved the “A19 Phase 1 Interventions” Project Outline (Option 1).

It should be noted that a decision on the implementation of the crossing is not being sought at this time. A further public decision on the proposals will be presented after feasibility work has been completed;

Reason:     To agree the scope of the project, to ensure it is aligned with stakeholder expectations.

                   iv.        Noted the results of the Riverside Path Consultation, the initial feasibility work undertaken by Aecom and the current funding gap;

Reason:     To understand the options for improving the route and the priorities for the local residents.

                     v.        Approved the progression of Option 2 to deliver the scheme on a phased basis commencing with the higher priority affordable items (lighting & CCTV) and undertake further development work within the current budget.

Reason:     Progressing with Phase 1 of the path upgrade (lighting and CCTV) allows progress to be made on-site whilst further work is undertaken on the feasibility of the full scheme.

Officers introduced the Active Travel Programme update and confirmed that the existing priorities for the programme had been agreed by the Executive in 2022. They noted that allocations for tranche 4 Active Travel funding was likely to be lower than previous allocations due to central government budget cuts. It was noted that many schemes in the LCWIP were at an early stage which was why some lower priority schemes which were ready for consultation were currently being progressed. Officers confirmed that in conversations with Active Travel England that bids should be separated to focus on those that are ready for delivery and those that were longer term schemes.  

The Executive Member considered a number of schemes in the programme including the Riverside Path which was raised during public participation. Officers confirmed that residents had been consulted with responses focusing on additional lighting for the path as well as raising and widening the path to reduce the number of days the path was unpassable due to flooding. Officers confirmed that they were recommending to deliver in stages focusing on affordable parts of the scheme such as lighting and CCTV. Should the Council not be successful in getting sufficient funding to deliver the other parts of the scheme it was confirmed that a new report would be brought to a Transport Decision Session for consideration how to move forward. Lighting underneath Scarborough Bridge was discussed and the Executive Member asked that it be included in work on the Riverside Path. Signage was also discussed around Scarborough Bridge.  

Resolved:

                      i.         Noted the update on the progress of the Active Travel Programme contained within this report;

Reason:     To provide information to the public and the Member

on the current status of the Active Travel Programme.

                     ii.         Noted the update contained within this report covering the recent ATF4 bid submission;

Reason:     To provide information to the public regarding the

request for funding submitted to Active Travel

England.

                    iii.        Approved the “A19 Phase 1 Interventions” Project

Outline (Option 1). It should be noted that a decision on the implementation of the crossing is not being sought at this time. A further public decision on the proposals will be presented after feasibility work has been completed;

Reason:     To agree the scope of the project, to ensure it is

aligned with stakeholder expectations.

                   iv.        Noted the results of the Riverside Path Consultation,

the initial feasibility work undertaken by Aecom and

the current funding gap;

Reason:     To understand the options for improving the route

and the priorities for the local residents.

                     v.        Approved the progression of Option 2 to deliver the scheme on a phased basis commencing with the higher priority affordable items (lighting & CCTV) and undertake further development work within the

current budget.

Reason:     Progressing with Phase 1 of the path upgrade

(lighting and CCTV) allows progress to be made onsite whilst further work is undertaken on the

feasibility of the full scheme.

This report summarises the findings received in the public consultation period. An analysis of the public consultation has been undertaken and presents options for delivery of the scheme and requests a decision to confirm which proposal will be delivered.

Resolved:

                   i.        Approved the advertisement of amendments to the Traffic Regulation Order (TRO) to implement the parking restrictions required by all design options;

                  ii.        Noted the Executive Members preference for scheme A;

                 iii.        Officers were requested to expand the scope of the project to include the traffic signals, particularly for cyclists, at the junction of Hospital Fields Road and Fulford Road.

                iv.        Officers were asked to review how the cycle lane interfaces with the advance stop line especially for cyclists going straight on from Hospital Fields Road.

                  v.        Development of the scheme to be brought back to a future decision session before progressing to a detailed design stage.

Reason:    To respond to the comments made by the public to improve safety.

Officers introduced the report outlining the scheme, it was noted that Hospital Fields Road was part of the east west cycle link so was a strategic route for the city. The Executive Member was presented with three options for delivery and enquired about the proposals having segregation one way. Officers confirmed that

this due to the limited road space with industrial vehicles. The Executive Member enquired about the junction joining Fulford Road and altering the traffic signals and cycle lane interface to make it safer for cyclists going straight on. It was confirmed that the junction had not been within the scope of the scheme and therefore the Executive Member requested that these be reviewed by officers and that schemes be brought back to an Executive Member decision session.

Resolved:

                   i.        Approved the advertisement of amendments to the

Traffic Regulation Order (TRO) to implement the

parking restrictions required by all design options;

                  ii.        Noted the Executive Members preference for

scheme A;

                 iii.        Officers were requested to expand the scope of the project to include the traffic signals, particularly for cyclists, at the junction of Hospital Fields Road and Fulford Road.

                iv.        Officers were asked to review how the cycle lane

interfaces with the advance stop line especially for

cyclists going straight on from Hospital Fields Road.

                  v.        Development of the scheme to be brought back to a

future decision session before progressing to a

detailed design stage.

Reason:     To respond to the comments made by the public to

improve safety.

The purpose of this paper is to present and allow the consideration of the recommendations on the Digital Parking system from the Economy and Place Scrutiny Committee in November 2022.

Resolved:

                      i.         Noted the response to the scrutiny recommendations detailed within paragraph 25 of this report;

                     ii.         Noted that the council’s use of digital services is to ensure that the customer centre resources can be targeted at those customers who need the most support;

                    iii.        Noted that non digital customers can access paper visitor permits through the customer centre;

                   iv.        Noted a parking user group has been set up and the first meeting has occurred;

                     v.        Noted that a new version of the customer parking portal will go live in the summer;

                   vi.        The parking user group be requested to undertake some early testing of the customer portal of the new system before it goes live to the public.

                  vii.        Requested that the parking user group reviews the customer journey for non-digital customers of the new system particularly around visitor vouchers.

                 viii.        Recommendations from the user group will be reported to a future Executive Member Decision Session taking into account any budgetary implications of the recommendations.

                   ix.        Noted the lesson learnt of the need for early engagement and lessons learnt.

Reason:     To respond to the recommendations of the Economy and Place Scrutiny Committee to ensure lessons are learned to improve the approach to parking for customers and residents.

Officers introduced the report, it was confirmed that the Economy and Strategic Planning Policy and Scrutiny Committee had undertaken a review into parking and have made a series of recommendations for the Executive Member to consider.

It was confirmed that some non-digital users were still struggling to access paper parking permits and officers confirmed that they would encourage individuals to get in touch with the Council about these problems. It was noted that the Council recorded customer services calls so problems raised in calls could be reviewed. Officers were also asking that the Parking User Group to undertake additional work around the customer portal. It was also confirmed that call volume regarding parking permits had begun to fall suggesting less individuals accessing these permits were still having issues.

The Executive Member considered the recommendations outlined in the report and agreed with these recommendations.

Resolved:

                      i.         Noted the response to the scrutiny recommendations detailed within paragraph 25 of this report;

                     ii.         Noted that the council’s use of digital services is to

ensure that the customer centre resources can be

targeted at those customers who need the most support;

                    iii.        Noted that non digital customers can access paper visitor permits through the customer centre;

                   iv.        Noted a parking user group has been set up and the first meeting has occurred;

                     v.        Noted that a new version of the customer parking  portal will go live in the summer;

                   vi.        The parking user group be requested to undertake some early testing of the customer portal of the new system before it goes live to the public.

                  vii.        Requested that the parking user group reviews the customer journey for non-digital customers of the new system particularly around visitor vouchers.

                 viii.        Recommendations from the user group will be reported to a future Executive Member Decision Session taking into account any budgetary implications of the recommendations.

                   ix.        Noted the lesson learnt of the need for early engagement and lessons learnt.

Reason:     To respond to the recommendations of the Economy

and Place Scrutiny Committee to ensure lessons are learned to improve the approach to parking for customers and residents.