Agenda and minutes

There were no disclosable pecuniary interests.

(a)  To agree the minutes of the meeting held on 18^th September 2024

(b)  Matters Arising

The minutes of the meeting held on 18^th September 2024 were agreed and signed as a true record. There were no matters arising.

Report of the Director of City Services and Commercial

To consider the above petition bearing 9 signatures. The petition is being sponsored by Councillor T Sawdon, a Wainbody Ward Councillor who, along with the Petition Organiser, has been invited to the meeting for the consideration of this item.

(Officer:  R Little)

The Cabinet Member for City Services considered a report of the Director of City Services and Commercial, which responded to a petition requesting that residents be allowed to place stones on grass verges to protect vehicles from parking.

The petition submitted contained 9 signatures and in accordance with the City Council’s procedure for dealing with petitions, those related to road safety and parking issues were heard by the Cabinet Member for City Services.  On receipt of the Determination Letter, the Petition Organiser advised he wanted the issue to be considered at a Cabinet Member for City Services meeting.

A report indicated the determination letter had advised that under Section 148 and 149 of The Highways Act 1980, the Council would not allow objects, including stones to be placed on public highways.  Objects placed on the highway by residents caused hazards to the public who had a right to pass and repass the public highway freely and in a safe manner.  Along with the verge protection programme of work, options would continue to be explored to protect grass verges from overriding.

Councillor J Blundell and the Petition Organiser spoke in support of the petition, highlighting the following points:

·  The residents of Green Lane had been protecting the grass verges in this way for the past 40 years. 

·  Pedestrians used the pavement, not the grass verge on Green Lane, and therefore the stones were not a hazard to them.

·  Green Lane was only a tier 3 road, despite being very busy. 

·  The rules regarding stones on the grass verges should be rolled out city-wide.

·  To date, there had been no accidents due to the stones on the verges in Green Lane and the residents were prepared to carry out maintenance of the verges.

·  Enforcement in Green Lane was significant however, residents had seen other verges across the city where enforcement was not carried out.

Officers responded, advising of Council’s responsibilities under The Highways Act which was not to allow objects on the highway and explaining that a tier system was in place however, Green Lane was in tier 3 and therefore not as high priority as tier 1 roads.  Alternative verge protection measures were being investigated however, the budget was small. 

Councillor Heaven also spoke in support of the petition, requesting officers investigate alternatives for protecting the grass verges.

The Cabinet Member for City Services, Councillor P Hetherton referred to consistency across the city and suggested officers investigate alternative methods to protect verges from vehicle parking, taking into account the legal opinion.

RESOLVED that the Cabinet Member for City Services:

1)  Note the petitioners’ concerns.

2)  Look at other methods to protect verges from vehicle parking including options which the Council would be prepared to provide consent to, for residents to deliver.

Report of the Director of City Services and Commercial

To consider the above petition bearing 97 signatures (24 e-signatures, 73 paper signatures). The petition is being sponsored by Councillor B Mosterman, a Cheylesmore Ward Councillor who, along with the Petition Organiser, has been invited to the meeting for the consideration of this item.

(Officer: R Little)

The Cabinet Member for City Services considered a report of the Director of City Services and Commercial, which responded to a petition requesting that the footway on Leaf Lane be resurfaced.

The petition submitted contained 97 signatures and in accordance with the City Council’s procedure for dealing with petitions, those related to road safety and parking issues were heard by the Cabinet Member for City Services. 

On receipt of the Determination Letter, the Petition Organiser advised she wanted the issue to be considered at a Cabinet Member for City Services meeting.

A report indicated the determination letter had advised that officers would continue to monitor and repair intervention level defects with reactive maintenance until such time as Leaf Lane was included in the yearly capital programme however, at this juncture, officers were unable to advise if this would be included in the 2025/26 programme.

Councillor B Mosterman and the Petition Organiser spoke in support of the petition, highlighting the following points:

• After heavy rainfall, major ponding in several areas was apparent which did not drain away efficiently.
• Weeds growing in between the paving slabs made walking slippery and unsafe, especially after rainfall.
• Many local residents were elderly and reluctant to walk on the pavement due to its slippery and uneven surface.

Officers responded, advising condition surveys had been carried out but the ponding had not been factored in, only the uneven flags and the trip hazards.  A site visit with the Petition Organiser after rainfall, to look at possible further options, was agreed.

RESOLVED that the Cabinet Member for City Services:

1)  Note the petitioners’ concerns.

2)  Endorse the actions confirmed by the determination letter to the petition organiser as set out in paragraphs 2.1 & 2.2 of the report.

3)  Officers to meet with the Petition Organiser on site to discuss possible further options.

Report of the Director of City Services and Commercial

To consider the above petition bearing 64 signatures.

The petition is being sponsored by Councillor G Ridley, a Woodlands Ward Councillor who, along with the Petition Organiser, has been invited to the meeting for the consideration of this item.

(Officer: D Keaney)

The Cabinet Member for City Services considered a report of the Director of City Services and Commercial, which responded to a petition requesting the installation of a pedestrian crossing at the top end of Eastern Green Road/Alspath Lane, around the Unicorn Pub and Unicorn Avenue shops.

The petition submitted contained 64 signatures and in accordance with the City Council’s procedure for dealing with petitions, those related to road safety and parking issues were heard by the Cabinet Member for City Services. 

On receipt of the Determination Letter, the Petition Organiser requested that the issue be considered at a Cabinet Member for City Services meeting.

A report indicated that following receipt of the petition, site inspections had been undertaken to assess the feasibility of the request and to identify if any alternative measures could be implemented to aid pedestrians crossing the road. 

Due to the road environment and alignment, the provision of a pedestrian crossing at the location requested had been found not to be achievable without significant vegetation removal and road realignment and surveys of pedestrian demand at the location did not justify such a scheme.  Alternative options, including the provision of informal crossing facilities at alternative locations along the length of Eastern Green Road and Alspath Lane had been considered and proposals for Lower Eastern Green Lane in the vicinity of Park Hill School reviewed.

Should a scheme be identified, this could be delivered as part of the 2025/26 Local Network Improvement Plan funding allocation, at which time opportunities for match funding from Severn Trent Water would be explored.

Petition Sponsor, Councillor G Ridley, spoke in support of the petition, paying tribute to the residents who had brought forward this community led petition which recognised the problem on the road.  He highlighted the following points:

·  There was an issue on this part of the highway and there had been accidents and a fatality in the past.

·  Longer term solutions should be investigated, such as average speed cameras.

·  The measures on Lower Eastern Green Road were promising and encouraging.

Officers responded, advising concerns had been addressed on that part of the highway including traffic counts, looking at the desire lines and a site visit with the Petition Sponsor, Councillor G Ridley had been undertaken.

RESOLVED that the Cabinet Member for City Services:

1)  Note the petitioners’ concerns.

2)  Endorse that a pedestrian crossing facility is not provided on Alspath Lane at Unicorn Avenue for the reasons set out within the report.

3)  Approve that the feasibility of improvements to pedestrian accessibility being made on Lower Eastern Green Lane in the vicinity of Park Hill Primary School is investigated, in consultation with Woodlands Ward Councillors.

4)  Subject to recommendation 3, should a viable scheme be identified that it be accelerated for delivery as part of the 2025/26 Traffic Management programme.

Report of the Director of City Services and Commercial

Note:  The objector has been invited to the meeting for the consideration of this item

(Officers:  Caron Archer/David Keaney)

The Cabinet Member for City Services considered a report of the Director of City Services and Commercial concerning an objection that had been received to a Traffic Regulation Order advertised on 1 August 2024, relating to a proposed 30mph speed limit for both Gibbet Hill Road and Stoneleigh Road.

Stoneleigh Road and Gibbet Hill Road were local distributor roads providing access between Kenilworth Bypass (A46), Kenilworth Road (A429) and the University of Warwick Campus.

A reduction of the current 40mph speed limit to 30mph was proposed to improve amenity for vulnerable road users (pedestrians and cyclists), reduce vehicle speeds, improve road safety and address speeding concerns of residents.

As a result, a 30mph speed limit had been proposed for both Gibbet Hill Road and Stoneleigh Road with the corresponding Traffic Regulation Order (TRO) being formally advertised on 1 August 2024.  During the statutory 21 day consultation period, one objection and one endorsement were received.  Both were contacted and provided with further information to clarify and address any concerns.  Discussions were positive however, the single objection remained and in accordance with the City Council's procedure for dealing with objections to TROs, including Experimental TROs, they were reported to the Cabinet Member for City Services for a decision as to how to proceed.

If the TRO were to be approved, the cost to introduce the changes would be funded from the 2024/25 Traffic Management allocation of the capital funded Local Network Improvement Plan.

A resident of Stoneleigh Road attended the meeting and raised further issues regarding the lack of footway on certain sections of Stoneleigh Road. 

Councillor Blundell endorsed the resident of Stoneleigh Roads’ concerns, referring to Section 106 monies being generated from the new development at Woodfield School, which would contribute to improving safety on Stoneleigh Road and Gibbet Hill Road. 

Councillor Heaven spoke in support of the TRO and future speed reducing measures.

The Cabinet Member for City Services suggested a site visit by officers be undertaken as well as installing Vehicle Activated Signs (VAS).

RESOLVED that the Cabinet Member for City Services:

1)  Consider the objection to the proposed reduction of speed limit on Stoneleigh Road and Gibbet Hill Road.

2)  Subject to recommendation 1, approve the City of Coventry (Stoneleigh Road & Gibbet Hill Road) (40mph Speed Limit) Revocation Order 2024 is made operational.

Report of the Director of City Services and Commercial

Note:  The objector has been invited to the meeting for the consideration of this item

(Officer: Shamala Gadgil)

The Cabinet Member for City Services considered a report of the Director of City Services and Commercial, which responded to objections to a proposed Traffic Regulation Order (TRO).  There were two objections: one to the proposed waiting restrictions order and one to the proposed bus gate order.  The statutory objection period closed on 29^th August 2024 and in accordance with the City Council's procedure for dealing with objections to TROs, including Experimental TROs, they are reported to the Cabinet Member for City Services for a decision as to how to proceed.

The City Centre Traffic Management Plan (CCTMP) was as series of interventions designed to manage traffic in the city centre with an aim of reducing the amount of traffic circulating within the centre, thereby improving bus reliability, improving air quality by reducing queuing traffic, promoting active travel, and facilitating the Coventry Very Light Rail (CVLR) City Centre Demonstrator track that would run from the railway station to the former Ikea building.

The CCTMP covered the core city centre area located within the ring road, with a spur out to the railway station.  The area was covered by a 20mph zone and a Restricted Parking Zone (RPZ).  The CCTMP proposal was to retain the 20mph zone but involve the replacement of the blanket city centre RPZ with traditional lined parking restrictions, and smaller areas of Restricted Parking Zone.  This change was required to facilitate the introduction of a “red route” on core public transport routes within the city.

Four Traffic Regulation Order (TROs) were advertised on 8 August 2024 as part of the proposed traffic management changes.

The 4 Orders removed an area of the existing city centre RPZ, leaving a smaller RPZ covering a core area of the city centre, introduce red route restrictions and use traditional waiting restriction markings (double yellow lines) on some other streets within the city centre.  In addition, the proposals improved access for pedal cycles by creating exemptions to some existing one-way roads and create a new bus gate on Greyfriars Road. The bus gate on Greyfriars Road restricted traffic entering or exiting the road other than buses, bicycles, hackney carriages.

The cost of introducing the TROs, if approved, would be grant funded.

RESOLVED that the Cabinet Member for City Services:

1)  Consider the objections received to the proposed TRO’s

2)  Subject to recommendation 1 approve the implementation of the City of Coventry (City Centre) (Permitted Parking Area and Special Parking Area) (Designation, Waiting Restrictions, Loading Restrictions, Loading Areas and Street Parking Places) Order 2024.

3)  Subject to recommendation 1, approve the implementation of the City of Coventry (Greyfriars Road) (Bus Gate and Revocation) Order 2024).

Report of the Director of City Services and Commercial.

The Cabinet Member for City Services considered a report of the Director of City Services in respect of petitions received relating to the portfolio of the Cabinet Member.

In June 2015, amendments to the Petitions Scheme, which forms part of the Constitution, were approved in order to provide flexibility and streamline current practice.  This change had reduced costs and bureaucracy and improved the service to the public.

These amendments allow 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 are deferred pending further investigations, be reported to subsequent meetings of the Cabinet Member for Public Services (now amended to Cabinet Member for City Services), where appropriate, for monitoring and transparency purposes.

Appendix A to the report set out petitions received and how officers proposed 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.