Agenda and minutes

There were no disclosable pecuniary interests.

(a)  To agree the minutes of the meeting held on 8^th January 2024

(b)  Matters Arising

The minutes of the meeting on 8th January 2024 were agreed and signed as a true record. There were no matters arising.

Report of the Director of Transportation, Highways and Sustainability.

To consider the above petition bearing 94 signatures (paper petition 12/23 - 93 signatures, e-petition - 1 signature). The petition has been submitted by Councillor R Simpson, a Sherbourne Ward Councillor and the Petition Organiser, who has been invited to the meeting for the consideration of this item.

The Cabinet Member for City Services considered a report of the Director of Transportation, Highways and Sustainability in response to a petition that had been received, bearing 93 signatures, requesting that all the pavements on Albany Road be improved. The petition organiser, Councillor R Simpson, attended the meeting to speak on behalf of the petitioners.

In accordance with the City Council's procedure for dealing with petitions, those relating to highways maintenance were heard by the Cabinet Member for City Services. The Cabinet Member had considered the petition prior to this meeting and requested that the petition was dealt with by letter rather than a formal report being submitted to a meeting, to be able to deal with the matter more efficiently.

The determination letter advised that the Council would continue to monitor and repair intervention level defects with reactive maintenance until such time as Albany Road was included in the yearly capital programme. The letter stated that the Authority was unable to advise if Albany Road would be in the 2024/25 programme. On receipt of the determination letter, the Petition Organiser requested that the issue be considered by at a meeting of Cabinet Member for City Services.

Albany Road Footways were 1.7km in length, based on current rates for footway reconstruction it would cost £500k to replace the entire length, around half of the 2023/24 annual budget.

The Overall Condition Index (OCI) for the various sections of Albany Rd scored between 12 and 39, for context highest scoring OCI was 90. The higher the score the poorer the condition. There were 314 worse footways in Coventry within the asset management system. The Council currently reconstructed around 0.25% of the entire footway length each year.

The Albany Road footways had a Detailed Visual Inspection in 2021 and 2022, they would be due again in 2025 and 2026. An officer of the City Council had assessed the construction and overall condition of the footways, and it was noted that it was a mixture of flagged footways with a tarmac strip adjacent to the kerb and fully tarmac footway, all were in safe condition overall with some minor defects that would be carried out with reactive maintenance. The Highways Inspector also carried out an annual inspection and Albany Road was not listed in the annual inspection report in the 10 worst footways for each ward during the annual review of Highway Inspectors Highway Condition data and top ten in December 2023.

Councillor Simpson spoke on behalf of the petitioners highlighting:

·  The condition of footways in Earlsdon was one of the most reported issues at his Councillor Surgeries.

·  The extremely poor and dangerous condition of the footways.

·  The strength of feeling from local residents was evident in the number of petitioners that were in attendance at the Cabinet Member meeting, for consideration of the matter.

·  The need to recognise that part of Albany Road was directly outside the Earlsdon Retirement Village where there were residents with mobility issues and wheelchair and mobility scooter users.  ...  view the full minutes text for item 45.

Report of the Director of Transportation, Highways and Sustainability.

To consider the above petition bearing 68 signatures. The petition has been submitted by Councillor M Lapsa, a Westwood Ward Councillor and the Petition Sponsor, who has been invited to the meeting for the consideration of this item along with the Petition Organiser.

The Cabinet Member for City Services considered a report of the Director of Transportation, Highways and Sustainability in response to a petition that had been received, bearing 68 signatures, requesting a Residents’ Parking Scheme on Hathaway Road, a residential cul-de-sac off Tile Hill Lane that was subject to a ‘No Motor Vehicles except for access’ restriction. The petition was supported by Councillor M Lapsa, a Westwood Ward Councillor, who, together with the Petition Organiser, attended the meeting and spoke on behalf of the petitioners.

In accordance with the City Council's procedure for dealing with petitions, those relating to parking and road safety were heard by the Cabinet Member for City Services.  The Cabinet Member had considered the petition prior to this meeting and requested that the petition was dealt with by letter (determination letter) rather than a formal report being submitted to a meeting, to be able to deal with the matter more efficiently. On receipt of the determination letter, the Petition Organiser and Petition Sponsor requested that the issue be considered at a meeting of Cabinet Member for City Services.

The determination letter advised that the Council’s Residents’ Parking Policy stated that, for a road to be considered for a residents’ parking scheme, there must be less than 40% of spaces available during the daytime.  Parking surveys showed that Hathaway Road did not meet this criterion. For this reason, the request was declined.

The cost of introducing residents’ parking schemes was funded from the Highways Maintenance and Investment Capital Programme budget through the Local Transport Plan.

Councillor Lapsa and the petition organiser spoke on behalf of the petitioners highlighting that:

·  Although the Cul-de-sac had a ‘No Motor Vehicles Except for Access’ restriction, other vehicles were parking in the road including vehicles from local businesses in the area.

·  There was no enforcement of the parking restriction.

·  A residents parking scheme would identify those vehicles not eligible to park in the road.

·  Further surveys were needed at varying times and days of the week to ensure that the parking situation was captured in full.

·  The Council’s Residents’ Parking Policy appeared disconnected – 86% of residents supported the implementation of a residents parking scheme in Hataway Road however, the parking space available was not less than the 40% required for a Scheme.

·  The calculation process for available parking space was not clear.

·  Emergency vehicles could not gain access to properties due to the on-street parking.

·  The use of the turning circle was not available due to parked vehicles.

The Cabinet Member for City Services thanked Councillor Lapsa and the Petition Organiser for attending the meeting and outlining their concerns. She indicated that she was very concerned about the parking situation for residents and about access for emergency services and decided that the petition should be deferred to enable further investigations to be undertaken.

RESOLVED that the Cabinet Member for City Services:

1)  Notes the petitioners’ concerns.

2)  Agrees to defer the petition pending further investigation.

Report of the Director of Transportation, Highways and Sustainability

The Cabinet Member for City Services considered a report of the Director of Transportation, Highways and Sustainability that sought consideration of the consultation feedback and approval of the works to proceed with the delivery of the CCTMP Phase 2A Red Route and Phase 2B Cycle Route.

The City Centre Traffic Management Plan (CCTMP) was a series of interventions designed to manage traffic in the city centre with an aim to update on-street parking management to reduce the amount of traffic circulating within the centre, thereby improving bus service reliability, improve air quality through reducing queuing traffic, promote active travel, and facilitate the Coventry Very Light Rail (CVLR) City Centre Demonstrator track which would run from the railway station to the former Ikea building. CCTMP would be delivered in several phases:

Phase

1A  - High St Pedestrian Zone (in delivery)

1B  - Hales St Bus Gate (delivered – a separate objections report was live for this scheme)

2A  - Red route (this report)

2B  - City Centre cycle route (this report)

3  - Bus gates and traffic “zoning” (proposed)

The CCTMP covered the core city centre area generally within the ring road, with a spur out to the railway station. The area was currently covered by a 20 mph zone and a Restricted Parking Zone (RPZ). The CCTMP proposals retained the 20 mph zone but would involve the replacement of the blanket city centre with alternative parking arrangements. This change was required to facilitate the introduction of the “red route” on core public transport routes within the city centre, as legislation did not allow a red route approach to be applied within a RPZ area. 

The report covered Phase 2A of the CCTMP, which would see the removal of the existing RPZ, the introduction of new RPZs covering smaller areas of the core city centre, and the introduction of red route restrictions allowing mobile enforcement of parking restrictions to be introduced. On some other streets, traditional parking restrictions (using yellow lines) would be introduced. 

Later stages of CCTMP (Phase 3) would aim to make more permanent measures to create traffic management cells within the city centre whereby individual areas of the city were accessed directly from specific ring road junctions (for example, traffic accessing the University would use Junction 3 to enter and leave the area).

The existing RPZ was currently delineated on site with signage to distinguish start and end points, with on-street parking only permitted in designated, marked bays. No road markings were used to indicate where parking was not permitted. This proposed phase of CCTMP (2A) would remove portions of the existing Restricted Parking Zone and replace them with red and yellow lining to denote the parking restrictions.

Phase 2B of CCTMP would deliver a segregated cycleway in the city centre, funded through the Department for Transport’s Active Travel Fund tranche 4.  It would connect Greyfriars Green to Pool Meadow Bus Station, via Queen Victoria Road, Corporation Street, Hales Street and Fairfax Street.

RESOLVED that the Cabinet Member  ...  view the full minutes text for item 47.

Report of the Director of Transportation, Highways and Sustainability

The Cabinet Member for City Services considered a report of the Director of Transportation, Highways and Sustainability that sought approval to create sections of off carriageway cycle route by designating sections of footway as cycle track, utilising Council’s powers under Sections 65 and 66 of the Highways Act 1980, between London Road and Abbey Road.

As part of the proposals for the new residential development on London Road, currently going through planning under Whitley Pumping Station planning reference OUT/2020/2521, it was necessary to install a new junction to access the development in line with the planning approval. The new traffic signal-controlled junction between the new development access road, Abbey Road and London Road would include improved cycleway and footway facilities. The cycleway was being funded through the Coventry South Sustainable Transport Package, which formed part of the Council’s CRTST (City Region Sustainable Transport Settlement) programme as approved by Cabinet in August 2022 their minute 20/22 referred).

The proposals include widening of sections of the footway on the approach to the Abbey Road / London Road junction. The increased width would enable segregated facilities to be provided for cyclists and pedestrians. National design standards set out that cyclists should be physically separated from pedestrians and should not share space with pedestrians (where practicable). At crossings and junctions, cyclists should not share space used by pedestrians but should be provided with a separate parallel route (where practicable). The proposals met these requirements.

RESOLVED that the Cabinet Member for City Services approves the removal of footways and construction of cycle tracks over which the public have a right of way on foot between London Road and Abbey Road under Sections 65 and 66 of the Highways Act 1980 on the lengths of road as shown edged red in Appendix 1 to the report.

Report of the Director of Transportation, Highways and Sustainability

The Cabinet Member for City Services considered a report of the Director of Transportation, Highways and Sustainability in respect of petitions received relating to the portfolio of the Cabinet Member for City Services and how officers proposed to respond to them.

In June 2015, amendments to the Petitions Scheme, which formed part of the Constitution, were approved in order to provide flexibility, and streamline current practice. The change had reduced costs and bureaucracy and improved the service to the public. These amendments allowed for a petition to be dealt with or responded to by letter without being formally presented in a report to a Cabinet Member meeting.

In light of this, at the meeting of the Cabinet Member for Public Services on 15 March 2016, it was approved that a summary of those petitions received which were determined by letter, or where decisions were deferred pending further investigations, be reported to subsequent meetings of the Cabinet Member for Public Services (now Cabinet Member for City Services), where appropriate, for monitoring and transparency purposes.

Appendix A to the report set out petitions received relating to the portfolio of the Cabinet Member for City Services and how officers propose to respond to them.

RESOLVED that the Cabinet Member for City Services endorses the actions being taken by officers as set out in Section 2 and Appendix A of the report in response to the petitions received.

There are no outstanding issues

There were no outstanding issues.

Any other items of public business which the Cabinet Member decides to take as matters of urgency because of the special circumstances involved

There were no other items of public business.