York’s licensing committee will again consider the vexed question of UBER private hire vehicles operating in York when they meet next week.
A decision on what, if any, action should be taken is due to be taken by the Councils Executive on 26th September.
The Council has now published a formal legal opinion on whether UBER vehicles, registered with other local authorities can legally accept bookings in York. The council’s position is that, provided the three licences required in relation to a private hire vehicle (operator, driver and vehicle) have all been issued by the same authority, then the private hire vehicle can undertake journeys anywhere in England and Wales. This opinion can be read by clicking here
The meeting report reveals that national legislation is
planned which will aim to clear up the confusion about what private hire
vehicles can and can’t do and where.
In the meantime, officials are recommending that there is no
change to the Councils existing policies.
We have sympathy for both sides in this argument. The local
trade may be partly motivated by protectionism. But passenger safety is of
paramount importance and standards do appear to vary across the region.
This seems to us like a suitable case on which the West
Yorkshire Combined Authority (which includes York) could take a lead.
On the other hand, in a modern world, being able to summon a
private hire vehicle using a smartphone app seems like a “no brainer”. If the App
tells you what the vehicle will be, when it will arrive, who will be driving it
and how much the journey will cost, then all to the good.
The York licencing department does need to crack down on unlawful
pick-ups and prevent private hire vehicles (from all companies) from “lurking”
near taxi ranks and in busy areas.
That would be the best use of resources and Council officials
time.
A York Councillor has been told, in a response to a Freedom of Information request, that it doesn’t know what the cost of clearing fly tipping in the City is.
284 cases of fly tipping have been reported in the last month. Guildhall, Micklegate, Westfield and Holgate wards worst affected.
The Councillor claims that new charges and access restrictions to the City’s recycling centres are resulting in more fly tipping.
There are certainly issues to be addressed in both east and west York.
The York Council says that it will give more powers to local residents to influence how resources are used in 4 key public service areas.
They are:
Increased ward budgets.
A “Safer Communities” fund to meet residents’ priorities.
More ward control of spending on highways to meet
residents’ priorities
Timely delivery of Housing Environmental
Improvement Schemes (HEIP). NB.These are tenant funded.
The plans are
broadly to be welcomed.
Over the last 8
years the number of locally determined improvement schemes has declined while those
that have been approved have faced unacceptable delays in implementation.
One set of new parking
laybys in the Westfield area took over 4 years to plan and construct.
Askham Lane lay by took 4 years to complete
A reportto the Councils executive meeting this week, paints a confused picture of what is wrong with the current “ward committee” process and what might replace it.
Councillor
dominated “Ward teams” will stand in for residents associations where the latter
do not exist.
£250,000 has been allocated to wards for them to spend making local communities “safer”. Although joint working with the police is proposed, the major issue – an institutional reluctance to expand the use of technology solutions such as CCTV – remains. So, the most that residents will likely see will be “target hardening” style initiatives.
Two additional staff
members are to be employed helping to administer ward committee improvements. Last
year £157,000 of ward budget was not spent. This is put down to process delays.
£500,000 is being allocated for local highways improvements (road and footpaths). A further £500,000 is allocated for “walking and cycling” improvements. The irony, that better highways maintenance is the best way of encouraging safe walking and cycling, appears to be lost on the report authors.
Perhaps School Street will now be resurfaced?
The £1 million simply
should be added to the road and footpath resurfacing budget.
The budget is classified
as “capital” meaning that it must be spent on an asset with a long lifespan.
That would seem to rule out a crash programme aimed at removing the trees, hedges
and weeds which obstruct many existing foot and cycle paths.
The idea of recognising and responding to local concerns is the right one though.
Poor highway maintenance is invariably the most criticised local public service in residents satisfaction polls.
The Council plans to introduce a “6 stage” process in allocating the estate improvement budget. As the main criticisms of the existing process is that it is cumbersome and slow, the introduction of additional bureaucratic stages is unlikely to be welcomed.
The report talks of the provision of parking lay-by taking up to 24 months to complete. In the past, the use of contractors had cut this target time down to less than 4 months. Councils should return to the old procedure where Residents Associations/Parish Councils took responsibility for drawing up improvement lists.
Walton Place footpaths need repairs
Finally, the report
talks of using a mechanistic formulae for assessing the “social value” of each
project. As a way of spending scarce public resources this is a discredited
approach. The value of projects can best be determined by door to door surveys thus
giving residents a chance to directly influence their neighbourhood.
The report does not propose any PFIs to monitor progress on any of these programmes.
It does, however, require decisions to be made in public and with a public record. Regular “on line” updates are proposed (although these have been promised in the past but have never been produced in a timely or accessible way)
There are no proposals
which would provide better support for Residents Associations. The Council
recently refused to even publicise RA activities on its web site.
How much locally?
The Council has published a list indicating the amounts that will be available to spend in each ward. In Westfield (one of the largest wards) during the present financial year that totals £55,878
With highways (£63,830)
and safer communities fund (£17,181). That figure increases to nearly £120,000
over 4 years.
To put that into context a 4 space parking bay
costs around £10,000, while the resurfacing of Stonegate is costing £1/2
million this year.
Temporary measures introduced to protect York’s busiest city centre spaces from terrorist attacks could be made permanent by City of York Council next week.
Phase 1 of the vehicle exclusion zone
The Council’s Executive will consider the results of a trial restricting vehicle access to the busiest city centre streets during footstreet hours (10:30-17:00) at its meeting next Thursday (29 August)
The Councils consultation revealed major conflicts with the wishes of groups representing disabled people
More disabled parking is planned for Piccadilly
It has been criticised by a former Tory Councillor who said on social media “Almost everyone wants to pedestrianise our city centre. It should be about improving it and supporting business growth in difficult times…not terrorism”
Changes were introduced last November following police counter terrorism advice for long-term measures to combat the ongoing threat of ‘vehicle as weapon attacks’ like those seen recently in Toronto, London and Nice.
If approved, a sliding bollard system would restrict access to Parliament Street, St Sampson’s Square, High Ousegate and Spurriergate, Coney Street, Davygate, Finkle Street, Church Street and Jubbergate during footstreet hours (10:30-17:00).
“Sliding” bollards are planned for the entrances to several streets.
The Executive introduced the measures on a temporary basis to allow for work to understand the impact of restricted access on key groups, including disabled people and others with limited mobility within a core part of the city centre.
The council commissioned studies of how blue badge parking changed throughout the period, alongside a series of workshops with individuals and groups representing disabled people in York.
In addition to the available parking on the streets next to the restricted area, the executive will consider mitigation proposals including:
• continued access to St Sampson’s Square for Dial and Ride services
• creating blue badge parking on the traffic-restricted section of Piccadilly, and converting the taxi rank to blue badge parking during the day time (10:00-18:00)
• extending the parking time restrictions outside Explore on Museum Street from 2 to 3 hours
• supporting marketing efforts for alternative services like Shopmobility and Dial and Ride
*If approved, the Piccadilly changes would be subject to a traffic regulation order change. The proposed changes would be advertised for up a three week period to allow for objections before a decision can be made.
Experiments with rising bollards in the past in York have encountered reliability issues. Reliability and maintenance costs are not considered in trhe Council report.
City centre future
The same meeting will consider launching a consultation exerciseon the future of the City centre retail area. The area has change a lot in recent years with several shops being replaced by pubs and restaurants.
Problems with drunken behaviour have increased.
If approved, an engagement exercise “following the principles of early and ongoing public involvement, pioneered on the Castle Gateway regeneration scheme”, would begin in the new year.
This would deliver a “strategic vision for the city centre to guide future development, regeneration and investment decisions”.
The proposal has the support of the York BID and “Make it York”.
The Council report fails to address the needs of sub-urban high streets like Front Street
Residents, businesses and community groups are being asked to comment on how City of York Council can help them achieve the best quality of life in the city.
Highways England have confirmed that the Council is responsible for removing weed growth on former trunk roads like the A59. Hopefully “cleaner” will come before “greener” in the York Councils list of priorities when addressing highway obstructions
Through the council plan consultation, City of York Council is wanting to hear from residents, businesses and community groups and ask them to comment on eight suggested outcomes for the council over the next four years. They are:
Good health and wellbeing
Well paid jobs and an inclusive economy
Getting around sustainably
A better start for children and young people
A greener and cleaner city
Creating homes and world-class infrastructure
Safe communities and culture for all
An open and effective council.
As well as comment on these themes and what they mean to them, residents, businesses and community groups will also be asked what they think the council could do to achieve the outcomes and what they could do in support.
Residents without online access will also have the chance to contribute their views at venues around the city or add their thoughts to pop-up boards in public spaces or other activities taking place across the city.
Councillor Keith Aspden, Leader of City of York Councilsaid: “Residents, businesses and community groups make York such a fantastic place to live and work. We want to hear from them what we can do to deliver against the suggested outcomes and how they may be able to support this journey to being a cleaner, healthier city with an inclusive economy.”
“Once complete, this plan will set our ambitious vision for the future of the city and set clear expectations on how we propose to deliver improvements for residents, against which we will monitor delivery and measure performance.
“We look forward to hearing suggestions from people about what our priorities should be.”
Councillor Andy D’Agorne, Deputy Leader of City of York Council said: “The council plan is important so we can clearly set out what we hope to achieve over the course of the next four years. These proposals acknowledge the need for us to address the climate emergency declared by full council and listen to residents’ ideas about what the council should do to address this. We would like to hear what actions individuals, businesses and organisations might take to support this work.
“As well as climate change, the proposed outcomes also consider a range of social, economic and environmental factors we are keen to prioritise and ensures the city supports a good quality of life for residents.
“We look forward to hearing from residents, businesses and local community groups. We think it is really important they have a chance to discuss and play a part in the work we will be doing over the next four years and want to hear their views and suggestions.”
York Council needs to have a plan to remedy high profile problems.
“Bottle” bridge is back
Fresh set of bottles and cans disfigure Ouse Bridge in York. It should be possible to fine the culprits, there are CCTV cameras in the area.Nearby this years crop of parapet weeds are now in flower. No attempt has been made by the Council to remove them despite fears that they may affect the structural stability of the bridge. The issue was first reported in May but the Council has still not respondedWe’ve some sympathy with the Council’s grass cutters who have struggled with wet weather this week. Means that several verges, like this is Kingsthorpe, are now overgrown The grass cutters task isn’t made any easier if garden waste and other material is dumped on verges!A lot of highway trees are now showing signs of “sucker” growth round the lower trunks. These can cause a problem with sight lines. Easier to control is weed growth around street furniture. Many lampposts haven’t been strimmed or treated with weed killer this summer. Footpath widths are gradually being reduced following the failure of the Council to undertake any edging work over the winter period. There are calls now for the weed control function to be taken back “in house” by the Council next summer. The staff employed could be used on verge edging and tree maintenance work during the winter period. Narrow footpath width and poor surface on Kingsway West forcing pedestrians to walk on vergeThanks to the Councils Community Safety Unit at the York Council who agreed on Thursday to have the accumulated rubbish in the little Green lane garage area removed.It’s not just in west York that problems with weed growth on traffic islands is a significant issue. Above from Cllr Mark Warters illustrates the problem on the A166.
Thanks to Osbaldwick Councillor Mark Waters – a professional horticulturalist – we have identified one of the weeds that is damaging road and footpath surfaces on the west of the City
Horsetail (Equisetum arvense), often called
mare’s tail, is an invasive, deep-rooted perennial weed that will spread
quickly to form a dense carpet of foliage, crowding out less vigorous plants in
beds and borders.
The RHS
says that horsetail “is persistent, and several applications of a strong weed
killer – possibly over a number of years – may be necessary to
completely eradicate the problem”
Horsetail has appeared in several areas in west York. These include the Council garage areas on Kingsway West and on little Green Lane. It is already doing considerable damage to the recently bitmaced forecourt access road at Green Lane.
We will now be formally submitting an official complaint about lack of action on weed growth in several areas. For example, weeds reported in early May on the Beaconsfield Street back lane have still not been cut back. It is a similar picture at many traffic islands
Some bushes have been cut back from the entrance to the Thanet Road cycle path but tree roots are destroying the surface. The white lines need to be refreshed and the signs on Bellhouse Way also need to be refurbished. (Photos above Thanet Road Cycle track)
Boundary hedge owners are asked to check that, following the recent warm/damp weather, thorn branches are not blocking public paths. The Council says that their contractors have started to spray weed killer on paths but are impeded by the rain. Unfortunately there are now many instances of footpaths and gutters being blocked with weeds. (Photos from top left above, Wordsworth Crescent, Wharfe Drive and Foxwood Lane)
All issues have been reported via the Councils “do it on line” service (click)
For the first time in nearly 3 years, the Councils Executive will review what is happening with the “Yorspace” communal housing project at Lowfield. A meeting, being held on 26th September, will consider “Progress and Opportunities for Self and Community Build Housing” in the City.
Development site
The report comes in the wake of concerns being expressed about a large discount being agreed, by a Council official, for the transfer of a building plot to the Yorspace “Community Benefit” Society .
Although Yorspace haven’t
endeared themselves to the existing local community in Westfield, because of
their trenchant support for the development of the playing field which is
adjacent to their site, the main concern relates to the “affordability” of the
homes that they hope to construct.
A Council official, at aprivate meeting held in August 2017, agreed an “exclusivity agreement” to sell the land to what was then styled as a “Mutual Home Ownership Society”. The official decided that a discount could be offered because individuals would not benefit financially from the deal. Homeowners would buy shares in the Co-op in return for the leasehold of a property. When they move on, they can sell the shares.
No alternative proposals for the land were considered, there was no analysis of the advantages of communal ownership compared to those offered by the construction of (say) more Council houses on the land or indeed the possibility of an open market sale with the proceeds being used to quickly increase the availability of social housing in the City.
The report in 2017 gave an estimate of the value of the site. That figure remains confidential. Another “behind closed doors” meeting held in January of this year valued the land – after discount – at £300,000.
Another, smaller,
site at Lowfields recently sold for over £400,000.
The Council justified its decision by quoting
Section 123 of the Local Government Act 1972 which allow authorities to dispose
of land other than at its full value.
However, that power
is heavily constrained.
The issue with this
sale relates to the absence of an “end occupier” agreement. Council officials confirmed,
when considering amendments to the Local Plan, that this development would not
be classified as “affordable”. This is because there is currently no
requirement for the shareholder in the Co-op to be in housing need.
The Council could have insisted that, in return for any discount, the homes must be occupied by low income families or, at least, by transferring existing social tenants.
In effect, taxpayers may be subsidising the housing costs of relatively wealthy individuals.
Hopefully, the new report
will candidly address these issues.
When the land sale was approved, Yorspace agreed to complete their development within 3 years. No work has started there or on the adjacent “self-build” plots. No construction timetables have been published.
NB. We have submitted a FOI request for information on the Council’s “shared ownership” programme. The last report (to another “behind closed doors” meeting held last year) suggested that such a model would not be of interest to existing social tenants or those on the waiting list. The Councils Executive has yet to review progress on this scheme (which accounts for a significant proportion of new build plans for the City)
