Agenda, decisions and draft minutes

To receive and note apologies for absence.

There were no apologies.

At this point in the meeting, the Executive Member is 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 disclosure must include the nature of the interest.

An interest must also be disclosed in the meeting when it becomes apparent to the member during the meeting.

[Please see attached sheet for further guidance for Members].

The Executive Member was asked to declare, at this point in the meeting, any disclosable pecuniary interests, or other registerable interests she might have in the respect of business on the agenda, if she had not already done so in advance on the Register of Interests. None were declared.

To approve and sign the minutes of the Decision Session held on Monday, 20 January 2025.

Resolved:   That the minutes of the Decision Session held on 20 January 2025 be approved and signed by the Executive Member as a correct record.

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. The deadline for registering at this meeting is at 5.00pm on Friday, 7 March 2025.

 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.

It was reported that there had been 8 registrations to speak at the session under the Council’s Public Participation Scheme.

Andrew Beattie spoke on item 6 supporting the recommended option, and the original proposition. He noted that many Government House Road residents were keen to progress this item.

Rachel Gilbert-Cornish spoke on item 6, and her concerns that a 24-hour parking ban and cutting off the access to river Ouse for dog walkers and others represented misapplication of the law and governance procedure. She also said that the park and ride was not suitable for the sort of access that these people needed and instead of a blanket ban she urged for limited parking to allow family access.

Cllr Steels-Walshaw spoke on item 7, thanking officers for their work on the report and consultation. She supported the proposed solution allowing church parking on Sundays and for services, and safer access to St Barnabas school.

Tim Kinslow spoke on item 7, noting that the council always had a responsibility for maintenance of the church access road and had fully adopted this road due to the river path, the church retracted its objection to this adoption on a good will basis because the had advised it had no plan for traffic regulation impacting parking. He said the Riverside path was a great way to connect communities but noted that the Leeman Road area represents a community requiring access in itself.

Reverend Paul Millard spoke on item 7 as the vicar of St Barnabas Church, stating his concern for option 2a locking down parking. He observed that when parking for a wedding or a funeral, parishioners would already likely be stressed, and being forced to search the wider area for suitable parking would add to this stress. He noted that some residents were not so disabled as to require a blue badge yet did still require car to access church, and strict parking regulations would restrict their ability to attend. He proposed a possible permit-based parking system for the church.

Peter Hale spoke on item 7 as member of the Parochial Church Council, discussing the impact of the removal of parking on Jubilee Terrace on the local community, church and disabled access. He felt the item as presented to him at the PCC was very different from the item as presented today, reading out the item initially presented to him which he felt was worded so as to avoid objection from local residents. He said he felt that an option to deter commuters while still permitting church parking would be good. He pointed out that York Central development would likely make St Barnabas the place of worship for a larger community but this item was removing the option to park.

Robyn Jankel spoke on item 7 on behalf of York Cycle Campaign, to support the recommendations for proceeding with the route upgrades. She stated this would be of great benefit to the cycling community and she was in favour of the overall  ...  view the full minutes text for item 42.

This report reviews the Statutory Consultation information and survey data from the Experimental Traffic Regulation Order for the introduction of loading and Blue Badge Bays in Blake Street and Lendal, and in Davygate.

Resolved:   To approve Option 1 – Making the existing ETRO permanent.

Reason:      This option is in line with the Council priority of improving the accessibility of the city centre, so making the bay permanent would align with the core priorities of the administration.  The surveys showed that the use of the area had increased during the ETRO, which helps to show they have been positively received.

The Traffic Management Team Leader presented a review of the Experimental Traffic Regulation Order introducing Blue Badge Parking and Loading Bays in Pedestrian Areas of Blake Street, Lendal and Davygate.

The Executive Member acknowledged officers’ recommendation to make the Experimental Traffic Regulation Order permanent, and to thereby facilitate access to the city centre for everybody. She added that there was further work to be done regarding Blue Badges, but otherwise

Resolved:   To approve Option 1 – Making the existing ETRO permanent.

Reason:      This option is in line with the Council priority of improving the accessibility of the city centre, so making the bay permanent would align with the core priorities of the administration.  The surveys showed that the use of the area had increased during the ETRO, which helps to show they have been positively received.

This report considers the representations received to the statutory consultation to the Notice of Proposal for the amendment of the Traffic Regulation Order, advertised on 13 September 2024, which proposed to extend the existing Resident Parking (ResPark) zone R23 (Westminster Road) to include properties on Government House Road along with the introduction of no waiting at any time restrictions (Double Yellow Lines) on Water End Slip Road, and determine what future actions are appropriate.

Resolved:   To recommend Option 1, amending the Traffic Regulation Order to introduce new Residents’ Priority Parking restrictions for Government House Road, to operate 24 hours Monday to Sunday, to be an extension of R23. In addition, it is recommended to introduce No Waiting at any Time restrictions (Double Yellow Lines) on Water End Slip Road to restrict parking 24 hours a day as outlined on the plan included as Annex E. Signs will be placed on street at the entrance to Government House Road and additional double yellow lines would be marked on Water End Slip Road

Reason:      This was the recommended option as it supported the Council’s Local Transport Strategy objectives, supported residents’ cycle and pedestrian access needs to the cycle route networks and riverside paths, addressed the parking displacement issues which would arise if restrictions were only implemented in one area, and acknowledged the views of the majority of residents on Government House Road.

A TRO may be made where it appears expedient to the Council to do so for any of the reasons set out in section 1(1)(a) to (g) of the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984. The TRO also needs to meet the wider duty of the Council under section 122 of that Act.

The recommended option would meet the purposes in sections 1(1) (a) (c) (d) and (f) of the 1984 Act – namely for:

a.    avoiding danger to persons or other traffic using the road or any other road or for preventing the likelihood of any such arising;

b.    for facilitating the passage on the road or any other road of any class of traffic (including pedestrians);

c.    for preventing the use of the road by vehicular traffic of a kind which, or its use by vehicular traffic in a manner which, is unsuitable having regard to the existing character of the road or adjoining property; and

d.    for preserving or improving the amenities of the area through which the road runs.

This option meets the Council’s duty under section 122(1) of the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984 as it would:

a.    Support the “convenient and safe movement of vehicular and other traffic (including pedestrians) and the provision of suitable and adequate parking facilities on and off the highway” (RTRA 1984, Section 122(1). The changes proposed will make the Slip Road safer to use for people walking and cycling to access the riverside whilst ensuring that on street parking remains available for residents and Blue Badge holders;

b.    “Consider the effect on the amenities of any locality affected” (RTRA 1984, Section 122(2)(b)). By restricting parking on the slip road, accessibility to the riverside amenity by walking, cycling and wheeling is improved. Local amenity for the residents of Government House Road would also be protected by reducing the risk of parking displacement through the Resident Parking scheme.

c.    Consider “any other matters appearing to the local authority to be relevant” (RTRA 1984, Section 122(2)(d)). Consideration has been given to the Council’s Local Transport Strategy and  ...  view the full decision text for item 44.

The report was presented by the Director of Environment, Transport and Planning, who noted that this issue was returning before the Executive Member, having originally been presented in July 2024.

He responded to public participation, clarifying that this was not a total ban on parking but an institution of residents only parking; meaning that residents may purchase a parking permit to use the road, preventing displacement parking.

He clarified that the majority of residents who had responded supported officers’ recommendations, but that officers had received both support and objection in the consultation process.

He responded to concerns about accessing the river, noting that Option 2 (which was not the recommended option) would permit limited parking for this purpose. He further noted that there had been one additional written objection on this subject, received after the official deadline, but that this objection followed the same lines as those already published.

He further responded to public participation noting that whenever a proposed traffic regulation order is advertised, officers go to the emergency services as a routine part of the consultation process.

The Executive Member stressed the importance of considering Government House Road and the Water End Slip Road in tandem for this item, despite one being a residential street and the other a slip road accessing the river, changing the parking restrictions on one in isolation would inevitable have an adverse impact on the other.

She summarised that the request for residents parking on Government House Road had been received in September 2020, and since then most the residents had consistently supported the proposition of a residents parking zone.

She stated that the adjacent Water End Slip Road provides an important link between the orbital active travel route and the Riverside active travel route, and the Executive’s transport strategy included a commitment to enabling travel sustainable travel (via foot or bike). Having parking on the Slip Road means that this route was often blocked by parked cars and vehicles turning within a tight and steep place, thus making it a hazardous environment for anyone walking, wheeling and cycling.

She concluded that by removing the car parking from that road, those wishing to travel by active modes are prioritised and a safe link is created between two strategic active travel routes.

The Executive Member noted that Marygate and Esplanade carparks are available for those wishing to access the river for purposes discussed in public participation. Officers confirmed that Blue Badge holders will still be permitted limited parking here for access, and walkers and wheelers will have free access to the river and cycle path. It was therefore

Resolved:   To recommend Option 1, amending the Traffic Regulation Order to introduce new Residents’ Priority Parking restrictions for Government House Road, to operate 24 hours Monday to Sunday, to be an extension of R23. In addition, it is recommended to introduce No Waiting at any Time restrictions (Double Yellow Lines) on Water End Slip Road to restrict parking 24 hours a day as outlined on the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 44.

This report aims to outline the necessary steps and approvals required to advance the Riverside Path Improvement Scheme to the next stages of the project governance process. It seeks to secure authorisation to proceed to detailed design and construction, planning permissions, and any other essential resources or endorsements needed to move forward with the project implementation.

Resolved:   To approve Option 2, progressing a separately resourced and funded project to identify and confirm the remedial works required to improve Riverside Embankment stability, as set out within the “Options Analysis and Evidential Basis – Riverside Embankment Stability” section of this report and Annex B, and provide recommendations to a future Executive Member Decision Session and progress the Riverside Path Improvement scheme to detailed design based on the scheme proposals and preliminary design inclusions set out within the “Options Analysis and Evidential Basis - Affordable Scheme” section of this report (beginning at paragraph 91) but delay construction until the dependency on the Riverside Embankment Stability issue is fully determined and resolved.

                    Also to approve the following delegations of authority:

·       To Approve the procurement of a Principal Contractor and Principal Designer for the Riverside Path Improvement scheme and delegate authority to the Director of Environment, Transport & Planning (in consultation with the Director of Governance and the Head of Procurement) to take such steps as are necessary to procure, award and enter into the resulting contracts and the identification of the remedial works required results in the construction costs being in excess of the Key Decision threshold, a further report will be presented to a future Executive meeting.

·       To delegate authority to the Director of Environment, Transport and Planning to proceed with all necessary technical work, including preparation of a detailed design, investigation and conduct of diversions of statutory-undertakers apparatus to enable the works in regard of the Riverside Path Improvement Scheme.

·       To delegate authority to the Director of Environment, Transport and Planning to approve the final design to be delivered for the Riverside Path Improvement scheme unless the scheme objectives or cost tolerances cannot be met without significant alteration to the preliminary design in which case a further report will be submitted to a future Executive Member Decision Session

·       To Delegate authority to the Director of Environment, Transport, and Planning, in consultation with the Director of Finance, to carry out any necessary value engineering to ensure the Riverside Path Improvement scheme remains within budget.

·       To approve the submission of any relevant planning application(s) required to deliver the Riverside Path Improvement Scheme affordable solution and delegate authority to the Director of Environment, Transport and Planning to do so.

·       To approve the advertisement of an amendment to the Traffic Regulation order to introduce ‘Prohibition of cycling’ restrictions on the Aldborough Way access ramp to the Riverside Path as part of the Riverside Path Improvement Scheme.

·       To introduce ‘No waiting at any time’ restrictions on Jubilee Terrace as part of the Riverside Path Improvement Scheme in respect of traffic management and to approve any statutory consultation which may be required for this option.

Also regarding Scheme Design:

·       To approve Option 1, proceeding with the affordable scheme as presented during the public consultation. Advertise no waiting at any time restrictions (double yellow lines) to the length of Jubilee Terrace outside the church as part of a formal Traffic Regulation Order process. This option meets  ...  view the full decision text for item 45.

The Head of Highways and Transport and Transport Project Manager presented the report. They noted that this report did not seek an immediate decision to implement the proposed changes, rather officers sought to advertise the proposed action.

The Executive Member responded to public participation which had expressed concern at the speed of progress, she acknowledged that this plan was an investment designed to last and officers needed to properly consider the stabilising of the riverbank so that the improvements would last for many generations to come. Any work done may need to be phased with this end in mind, but the intention was to progress the scheme as fast as possible.

The Executive Member also acknowledged public concern over the eight parking spaces proposed for reduction, weighing the potential needs of up to eight families against those of the large number of residents that would be afforded safer foot and wheel access to the school and Riverside Path without concern for cars.

She noted that there was unrestricted on street parking on Salisbury Terrace and Jubilee Terrace nearby and there was still reasonable provision within the Traffic Regulation Order for those wishing to attend weddings and funerals at the church; the double yellow lines would also still allow for loading and unloading of vehicles at the church without a time limit.

The Executive Member stated that she was still considering the access for Blue Badge parking for church access, but the current decision was to progress to consultation. She also expressed disappointment that it had not been possible to dovetail this scheme with the Leeman Road closure to provide better support to residents.

The Executive Member thereby

Resolved:   To approve Option 2, progressing a separately resourced and funded project to identify and confirm the remedial works required to improve Riverside Embankment stability, as set out within the “Options Analysis and Evidential Basis – Riverside Embankment Stability” section of this report and Annex B, and provide recommendations to a future Executive Member Decision Session and progress the Riverside Path Improvement scheme to detailed design based on the scheme proposals and preliminary design inclusions set out within the “Options Analysis and Evidential Basis - Affordable Scheme” section of this report (beginning at paragraph 91) but delay construction until the dependency on the Riverside Embankment Stability issue is fully determined and resolved.

                    Also to approve the following delegations of authority:

·       To Approve the procurement of a Principal Contractor and Principal Designer for the Riverside Path Improvement scheme and delegate authority to the Director of Environment, Transport & Planning (in consultation with the Director of Governance and the Head of Procurement) to take such steps as are necessary to procure, award and enter into the resulting contracts and the identification of the remedial works required results in the construction costs being in excess of the Key Decision threshold, a further report will be presented to a future Executive meeting.

·       To delegate authority to the Director of Environment, Transport and Planning to proceed with all necessary  ...  view the full minutes text for item 45.