Agenda item

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 our meetings. The deadline for registering at this meeting is 5.00pm on Thursday, 2 December 2021.

 

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 on the details at the foot of the 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'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 6 registrations to speak at the meeting under the Council’s Public Participation Scheme.

 

5 speakers spoke on agenda item 4, Called-In Item: Strategic Reviews of City Centre Access and Council Car Parking.

 

Anthony May spoke on behalf of the York Civic Trust and he confirmed he had been involved in providing advice to cities on parking strategy for over 50 years. He addressed the incompleteness of the current Strategic Parking Review, the failure to consider the wider requirements of the Local Transport Plan and the misunderstandings within the report. He felt the review, as it stood, was deficient as a basis for deciding on the proposed multi-storey car park on St George’s Field.

 

Johnny Hayes, a local resident, expressed his concerns regarding the Strategic Parking Review which he felt was an asset management report. He felt the report was misinformed, light on accurate car parking data and full of spurious assumptions.

 

Christopher Copland, a local resident, responded to the three questions used in the tier two assessment of the parking review. He explained why he felt the questions and answers were flawed.

 

Jamie Wood spoke as one of the local residents identified as co-authoring a car park report. He raised his concerns regarding the quality of the evidence base that was made available to him. He felt there was no evidence base to indicate what the excess demand would be if Castle Car Park was closed without replacement and whether this demand could be met by existing stock.

 

Greg Marsden, a Professor of Transport Governance at the Institute of Transport Studies at the University of Leeds and a resident of York, explained why he felt the Strategic Review document was deficient and spoke on the shortcomings of aspects of the evidence base in which decisions were being proposed to be taken.

 

David Harbourne spoke on what he felt was the Council’s failure to comply with the constitution and statutory requirements before and at the 8 November 2021 scrutiny meeting and the failure to consider all options regarding blue badge holder access to the city centre. He addressed the governance arrangements and the response he had received to his freedom of information request. He felt that the meeting on the 8 November contravened statutory provisions relating to the public provision of information and should not have taken place and consequently called upon the decisions taken by the Executive to be set aside to allow the meeting to be rerun.  The Chair agreed to pass his comments onto the Monitoring Officer.

 

It was also noted that 2 written representations had been received regarding agenda item 4, as follows:

 

J Trythall raised concerns about the proposal to construct a multi-storey car park on the St George’s Field site, particularly addressing the loss of amenity and that more work should be undertaken to understand the consequences of erecting the car park. She also noted that it was misleading to state that access to St George’s Field did not pass through a residential area.

 

K Ravilious was greatly concerned by the standard of the Strategic Review. She felt the quality of the data was poor and that it considered car parks in isolation and was not informed by the policy directions in the forthcoming Local Transport Plan.

 

 

 

Feedback
Back to the top of the page