Agenda item

The Committee considered a joint report of the Corporate Director for Regeneration and Local Services and the Portfolio Holder for Economic Regeneration which asked Members to make a decision in principle on the proposed Eleven Arches Traffic Management Experimental Traffic Regulation Order (ETRO), and to consider objections made during the consultation period (for copy see file of Minutes).

 

Members received a presentation by the Strategic Traffic Manager which gave details of the key areas on the highway network that were affected by the ETRO which had been introduced in accordance with the Traffic Management Plan to maintain road safety and minimise congestion during the Kynren events. The ETRO allowed the Council to monitor and review the effects of the restriction over a period of time and during the six month consultation period three objections had been received, details of which were included in the report.  Members had been provided a copy of each of the objections received.

 

Councillor J Allen, local Member was unable to attend the meeting but had provided written representations which were read out by the Clerk as follows:-

 

‘As the local ward member for Bishop Auckland Town I would like to object to two of the proposals contained within the report, these being proposals to restrict access to Public Right of Way 81, 85 and 86 and around the Unclassified Road 34.4.

 

With regard to Public Rights of Way 81, 85 and 86 - I and the local MP have received numerous complaints about a variety of interventions that have attempted to restrict public access to the Toronto to Brandon walkway, such as erecting barriers and misleading signs, and removing tourist signs.

 

I held a site meeting with local residents and the Strategic Traffic Manager on 4 May 2017 where a number of issues were raised, and these were formally shared following this meeting. As far as I am aware the issue regarding access is ongoing and certainly not resolved.

 

Although I am a Kynren volunteer I am first and foremost a Councillor and as such I have to act in the best interests of the people who voted for me and for the town I represent.

 

Having visited this particular site on a number of occasions I was staggered by the amount of people and diverse users of this popular pathway, from dog walkers, cyclists, disabled motorised scooters, joggers, walkers and running clubs. There is no doubt it is a very popular and well used local amenity which has been enjoyed by local residents and visiting tourists for many years.

 

With regard to proposed closure times, I am aware that visitors are choosing to attend Kynren much later this year as they have come to realise that once on site there is little to do, places to sit or shelter from if the weather is inclement. The Tribune is open 2 hours before the start of the show which are scheduled to take place between 9:30pm early season to 8:00pm late season. Therefore, visitors appear to be either coming later or staying in the town longer, which I am obviously keen to encourage. 

 

This was always the stated intention of Eleven Arches from the outset, the attraction Kynren was very much about creating opportunities to enable the towns businesses to benefit from the increased footfall and spending power of visitors which would have a positive impact on the local economy and regeneration of the town.

 

I would therefore like to object to the proposals to close this valuable local asset between 4:00pm and midnight between the show dates of July and September when the walkway is mostly likely to be used given the milder climate and lighter nights.

 

I believe these proposals are prohibitive and certainly not proportionate given the limited time visitors themselves can access the show. I would like to see the proposed closure increase from 4:00pm until 6:00pm, and that these permissions are temporary not permanent so that we can determine the appropriateness of these restrictions as and when the number of shows increase and visitor movement patterns become more apparent.

 

As to the proposals to permanently close the Unclassified Road 34.4 between 18:00 and 12:00am from the junction at the Market Place and the junction with Unclassified Road 34.5 Newfield. Unlike the above, I have not had the same number of complaints from local residents. However, since I received correspondence from an objector and looked into the matter further I feel that the proposals to permanently close the road between 18:00 and 12:00am is disproportionate and appear excessive given that the actual show does not start until 9:30pm at the latest and 8:00pm at the earliest, the limited amount of non-residential traffic choosing to use this road and the fact that residents are to be permitted to use the proposed road during the closure times.

 

I am also concerned about the free movement of non-residents wishing to visit local residents during the proposed road closure times. Would they be granted the same access? Would access be granted for instance for friends and family visiting residents or would they have to travel 4.2 miles extra or pay for taxis to take them back via the alternative route?

 

Anyone who has been in the Tribune would testify before the show start times that no driver would be distracted by the show or associated fireworks, nor would headlights interfere with the show production.

 

Therefore I would like to object to the proposal to permanently close this road between the suggested times and between associated junctions. I believe some of the reasons for closure are not relevant.

 

For instance, the integrity of the event does not fall within relevant legislation and that the proposed closure times are not proportionate and appear to be excessive as they restrict the free movements of local residents who will be prevented from going about their business in a normal fashion during the summer months without first having to have a conversation with an official as to whether or not they are allowed access to or from their properties.

 

As with the previous objection I believe these proposals are prohibitive and certainly not proportionate. I would like to see the proposed closure increase from 4:00pm until 7:00pm and reduced from 12:00am until 11.30pm, and that these permissions are temporary not permanent so that we can determine the appropriateness of these restrictions as and when the number of shows increase and visitor and resident movement patterns become more apparent.’

 

Councillor Kay was invited to address the Committee. He stated that although not in his division the road closure would affect the amenity of residents in his ward. The Member concurred with the views of Councillor Allen that the proposed closure of Unclassified Road 34.4 was excessive given the start times of 9.30pm for the shows early in the season and 8.00pm in September. The road was a useful route for the residents of Newfield to travel into the town. Vehicle flow might be small from the village but it was necessary. No road closure would be preferred but he asked the Committee to consider reducing the closure times if this was not considered to be viable. He also asked that the restrictions be temporary.

 

Councillor Kay was aware of the resident of a property on the opposite side of the River Wear who switched on all his house lights during the event and he could not see how car headlights would be a distraction. There were no road closures during the dress rehearsals and this had not caused any problems.

 

The Member also expressed concern with regard to the closure of Public Right of Way 81 where it crossed the old railway path. The railway path was well-used and its closure was detrimental to the amenity of users of the path.

 

At this point Councillor Kay left the meeting.

 

Mr Inskipp, objector was invited to address the Committee and stated that his objections related to the closure of the public rights of way. He agreed strongly with the views of both Councillors Allen and Kay, that the timing of the closures was wrong. He also considered that at the end of the closure period the paths should be re-opened promptly, which in his own personal experience had not occurred on two occasions, with the routes still closed at 9.30am the following morning.

 

Mr Northend, objector was invited to address the Committee. He agreed with the views of the Councillors and made the point that when the event started last year residents of Newfield had not been consulted on the road closure. He believed that it was an experimental traffic order because there was not a Traffic Management Plan in place. Unclassified Road 34.4 was an access route into the village and he personally used the road to walk back from the local pub; using an alternative route would cost £15-£20 by taxi. Local people should not be hindered from using the road. Drivers would not be distracted by the show or the fireworks as Kynren was not visible from the road, and there had been no problems during dress rehearsals.                         

 

The Strategic Traffic Manager responded to the issues raised. The Councillors had asked that the restrictions be not made permanent but this was not an option for consideration by the Committee as it was not possible to make a temporary Traffic Management Order. With regard to the comments made on the site visit about the impact on the railway path, he accepted that this route was very popular but it was not a Public Right of Way, and therefore not subject to an Order. The decision with regard to restricting its use was at the discretion of DCC as landowner. 

 

The timing of the footpath closures was considered to be valid in view of the volume of visitors, and to allow for staff who needed to be on-site in time for the arrival of the general public. Mr Inskipp had made a valid point that the footpaths should be re-opened as soon as the closure period ended, as this constituted an illegal obstruction of a Public Right of Way.

 

The Strategic Traffic Manager then addressed the objections of Mr Northend regarding the closure of Unclassified Road 34.4. The Committee was informed that residents who lived immediately next to the road had not objected to the closure. In terms of highway safety the Highways Authority considered that there was merit in closing the road as members of the public may use the route to watch the fireworks. However the Strategic Traffic Manager acknowledged that the timing of the closure could be amended to more closely reflect the show times.

 

Members considered the objections to the Order. Councillor Shuttleworth welcomed the economic benefits of Kynren but when local Members and residents had expressed concerns the Committee should give consideration to reducing the timings of the footpath closures and to the closure of Unclassified Road 34.4.

 

Councillor Milburn was of the view that the proposed timings were excessive. She accepted that there would be a lot of people on site but that volunteers would be familiar with what they needed to do.

 

Councillor Dunn stated that the Plan was a credit to the company. He had experienced the road closures personally and delays had been kept to a minimum. With regard to the Public Rights of Way, he agreed with the closure of PROW 86, and the closure of PROW 81 was wholly reasonable; it was not a significant diversion and was a means of keeping pedestrians safely away from traffic. However there would be no need to close PROW 81 where it crossed the railway path if there was clear signage. He also considered that it was not necessary to close the section of PROW 85 between car parks A and B, given the number of people using it. The Strategic Traffic Manager explained that only a short section of PROW 85 was closed from the junction to the railway path, where there were vehicles.

 

Councillor Dunn continued that he agreed with the Officers that from a safety point of view Unclassified Road 34.4 should be closed but that it should be for a much reduced time.

 

Following a question from Councillor Hopper, the Strategic Traffic Manager stated that if there were no closures people would be able to access the site at any time and the movement of 1000 volunteers on and off the site was a challenge. The volunteers were expected to be on site from around 4:00pm and visitors could be expected to arrive around an hour before the start of the show. The site was fairly dark, people were visiting the show who were not familiar with the area, and it was also very busy with cars and coaches. The closures helped to manage this.

 

Councillor Sexton made the point that there was no vehicle/pedestrian conflict during the show and residents could therefore use the Public Rights of Way during this period. The unclassified road 34.4 was a little used route and there was therefore no reason to close it at all.

 

The Member was informed that it would not be feasible to open and close the barriers to allow the PROWs to be used during the event, and that the key concern for objectors was the closure times.

 

Councillor Sexton asked if DCC staff were responsible for physically opening and closing the routes and was advised that this was undertaken by the Traffic Management Company who were on site at all times throughout the event.

 

Councillor Milburn sought clarification that if Kynren ceased the Order would no longer be in force and the Strategic Traffic Manager confirmed that this was the case. If another enterprise took over the site, it would be subject to its own Traffic Management Plan.

 

The point was made by Councillor McGaun that the purpose of the Order was to address health and safety concerns but he noted that the road closure was not in place during the dress rehearsals which were held during the darker nights. It had been said that the fireworks caused a distraction but he considered that a greater distraction for drivers was not knowing that the event was taking place.  Closing the road at 4:00pm when the event did not start until much later was disproportionate. He was minded to agree with the local members and local residents who knew the area well.

 

Councillor Hopper reiterated the earlier point that 1000 volunteers were expected to be on site from around 4:00pm and visitors were likely to arrive around an hour before the show.

 

Following consideration of the objections to the Order Councillor Dunn moved and Councillor Milburn seconded that PROWs 81, 85 and 86 be closed from 18:00 to midnight.

 

Councillor Dunn also moved that unclassified road 34.4 be closed from 19:00 to 11.30pm. Councillor Hugill seconded the motion.           

 

Councillor Sexton however was of the view that there was no reason to prohibit vehicles from using Unclassified Road 34.4 and moved that the road closure be removed from the Order. This was seconded by Councillor McGaun.

 

Upon votes being taken on the motions it was Resolved:

 

That the Committee recommends to the Director of Regeneration and Local Services who will make the decision in accordance with the Council’s scheme of delegation,  that the Various Roads, Bishop Auckland (Eleven Arches) Traffic Management Order be endorsed, subject to the following amendments:-

 

·         The parts of Public Rights of Way 81, 85 and 86 that are within the site boundary be closed between 18:00 and midnight.

·         The road closure in respect of Unclassified Road 34.4 be removed from the Order.