Agenda item

PETITION - WESTFIELD LANE, BRADFORD

Previous Reference: Minute 9 (2018/19)

 

The Strategic Director, Place will present a report (Document “O”) which gives the Committee an update on a petition requesting the closure of Westfield Lane, Bradford which was originally considered on 5 July 2018.

 

At that time, the Committee requested that a weekend traffic survey be undertaken and an update report be provided. Accordingly, Document “O” reminds Members of the original traffic surveys undertaken and provides details of further surveys which were carried out over five days in November 2018.

 

Recommended –

 

(1)  That no further action be taken on the request for additional traffic management measures on Westfield Lane.

 

(2)  That the lead petitioner be informed accordingly.

 

(Regeneration & Environment Overview  &Scrutiny Committee)

 

(Andrew Smith – 01274 434674)

 

Minutes:

Previous Reference: Minute 9 (2018/19)

 

The Strategic Director, Place presented a report (Document “O”) which gave the Committee an update on a petition requesting the closure of Westfield Lane, Bradford which had originally been considered on 5 July 2018.

 

At that time, the Committee had requested that a weekend traffic survey be undertaken and an update report be provided. Accordingly, Document “O” reminded Members of the original traffic surveys undertaken and provided details of further surveys which were carried out over five days in November 2018.

 

A local resident attended the meeting and expressed some concern about the outcome of the surveys, noting that 15% of road users were still travelling at over 30mph and advising members that, although only one accident was reported, there had been at least four incidents of collisions resulting in trauma for those involved and for local people who witnessed the incidents or aided those involved. He also advised that his property had been damaged by a vehicle;  that he had incurred expense as a result and that his neighbour had been similarly affected. He considered that local feeling was that a fatality would have to occur before any action was taken.

 

In response, the Principal Engineer, Traffic and Road Safety highlighted the information within the report which showed that average speeds were well within the limit and that the proportion of drivers exceeding the speed limit was very low. Officers concentrated their efforts on collisions where the Police were in attendance as their remit was to reduce casualties and injuries to persons rather than property. He confirmed that there was no question of waiting for a fatality, rather that the reduction of collisions was the imperative. He also advised that there was extant traffic calming on Westfield Lane which had been in place for some time and which was having an effect as speeds were so low and only one collision which met the criteria had occurred.

 

Members then questioned the Principal Engineer in respect of the report, asking:-

·         For how long each day was data collected ?

·         What was the process for converting the lane to a 20mph zone ?

·         Was it reasonable to expect drivers to drive at 20mph without a speed limit being imposed ?

·         What would be the cost of traffic calming and what was the budget for the entire year ?

·         Had traffic calming measures ever been installed where there had been no incidence of casualties ?

·         If a scheme was prepared for this lane would it have to be considered by two Area Committees as it ran through two constituencies ?

·         Were there any schools on Westfield Lane ? 

·         Would it be possible to prepare a group order for more than one road and would that affect the cost of the order ?

 

In response, the Principal Engineer advised that three surveys had been undertaken, each one for a period of several days and in each case, the monitoring equipment ran for 24 hours per day over the period in question.

 

He also stated that the process for instituting a 20mph zone involved the making of a legal order, which attracted a cost of approximately £10,000. He stated that speeds on this lane were not such that this type of order was considered appropriate. He explained that, where drivers maintained speeds in the low 20mph range, it was practicable to impose a 20mph limit but where speeds were a little higher, it would not be possible to achieve the necessary reduction without additional calming measures. The cost of extra calming on Westfield Lane would be in the region of £40-50,000 and the total budget for this type of work for the Area Committee was only £40,000 for the year.

 

He advised that calming had been installed in areas where there had been no casualties but that there had been other factors to consider such as significantly higher driving speeds.

 

If a traffic calming scheme was considered for this location, it would have to be put before both relevant Area Committees for decision, but it was pointed out that the recommendation was for no action to be taken in respect of this location. It was also confirmed that  there were no schools on Westfield Lane.

 

Members were advised that a group order could be prepared and was a cost effective measure, however costs could go up if additional signage was required.

 

In response to a question from the resident, it was confirmed that any traffic regulation order must be publicised and that anyone could object.

 

A member stated that there were a significant number of roads in the area covered by the Committee which, in an ideal world, would all benefit from some form of calming, however, there was no budget for such an extensive programme. He also accepted that local residents were upset but stated that there was no easy remedy for people’s decision to drive at speed. He asked the Principal Engineer to confirm that none of the three surveys had taken place in half term, as had been claimed by a local resident. The Principal Engineer confirmed that all three surveys had taken place in term time and had run both in the week and at weekends purposely to capture all road user groups.     

 

Resolved –

 

(1)  That no further action be taken on the request for additional traffic management measures on Westfield Lane.

 

(2)  That the lead petitioner be informed accordingly.

 

ACTION: Strategic Director, Place

 

(Regeneration & Environment Overview  &Scrutiny Committee)

 

Supporting documents: