Agenda item

The Committee considered a report of the Corporate Director, Regeneration and Economic Development which detailed objections received to a formal consultation on the proposed traffic regulation orders controlling access restrictions at Durham Gate, Thinford (for copy see file of Minutes).

The Committee were informed that due to an administrative oversight, objectors to the proposals had not been invited to present their objections to the Committee during initial consideration of the issue.  Necessary measures had been taken to extend the legal notification and objection period to enable objectors to prepare the grounds for their objections.

The Committee were informed that the development at Durham Gate would generate demand for access from car drivers, pubic transport users, cyclists and pedestrians given the mixed use of industrial, commercial and residential for the site.  It had been estimated that up to an additional 7,000 car trips per day, 525 pedestrians trips per day and 680 public transport trips per day could be made to the development in addition to the current traffic on the network.  The associated increased traffic levels would result in Thinford roundabout being signalised and the central island and approaches reengineered.  The Committee were shown a number of slides, detailed in the Appendices to the report, which showed the direction and flow of traffic together with the proposed traffic regulation orders.

The Committee noted the objections of Green Lane Residents Association detailed in the report who had worked with developers, officers of the Council, the Cabinet Portfolio holder and local member with regard to a number of concerns relating to the development.  The Business Manager advised the Committee that the residents association had sought to restrict vehicular use of Green Lane by way of a suggested prohibition of entry, except for access, at the junction of Green Lane and Enterprise Way.

The residents association had also objected to the proposed ‘No Entry’ at Enterprise Way, the restrictions at York Hill Road and the amended speed limit on the grounds that the installation of a bus gate had been omitted from the final development proposals.  The residents association had commented that there would be potential for ‘rat running’ through Green Lane to and from the development and had argued that the restriction on York Hill Road would divert traffic to Green Lane.

Durham Constabulary had objected the proposed ‘no entry’ restrictions on the grounds of enforceability.

James Burtenshaw, Secretary of Green Lane Residents Association informed the Committee of the resident associations objections detailed in the report, which included:-

·        the validity of the traffic models used by consultants to evaluate junction operation;

·        concern that there were no access restrictions proposed for Green Lane;

·        the removal of a bus gate from the development which enabled rat-running to take place;

·        access to Enterprise Way would be the principle access to the development;

·        the internal road layout linking Enterprise Way and the development would also encourage rat running;

Mr Burtinshaw informed the Committee that over and above these issues the residents association objected to the restriction of cars and light vehicles at York Hill Road junction as it was contrary to Highways policy and encouraged undesirable journeys and created rat-running.

There was no justification for car and light vehicle restriction, due to the fact that traffic data had confirmed that 127 cars and light vehicles would be diverted per hour at the peak of the morning.  This would equate to two vehicles per minute and the group could not see the need to divert them from the western approach access.

The knock-on effect of the restriction would mean that diverted cars and light vehicles could choose to travel up the A167 roundabout and travel back down York Hill Road.  This would have no effect on York Hill Road and it would increase longer undesirable journeys.

Mr Burtinshaw commented that the residents group supported the original proposals to restrict Heavy Goods Vehicles which would protect York Hill Road, however, the addendum to this would significantly impact upon Green Lane.

The residents association had provided a suggested replacement to schedules 1 and 2 of the traffic order which in terms of schedule one, would prohibit left turns by heavy goods vehicles from Meadowfield Avenue into York Hill Road. Schedule 2 would prohibit a right turn by heavy goods vehicles from York Hill Road East into York Hill Road West. Both suggested replacements to the schedules would accord with the original transport assessment made in September 2008.

The Chairman thanked Mr Burtinshaw for his presentation and invited Ms Ros Pluck who addressed the Committee on behalf of Durham Constabulary who had objected to the ‘no entry’ restriction on Enterprise Way and was based on the grounds that the constabulary consider it ‘unsatisfactory’ that compliance could only be achieved by signage.

Ms Pluck expressed concern of the double-sided no-entry and wished to separate residential and commercial traffic. The constabulary indicated that they would support other measures such as rising bollards which the Fire Service could also use.  A back-to-back ‘no-entry’ would be difficult to enforce and the Constabulary requested that the Council consider other appropriate measures. Should the Council pursue the arrangement as indicated at present the constabulary would seek transgression from the law as it would set a potential road safety risk at the location.

The Business Manager informed the Committee that the no-entry issue at the location had been discussed at length.  The Fire Service were not keen on the potential use of a rising bollard and the resultant technical issues that can arise once installed.

Councillor Foster, local member and Cabinet Portfolio Holder for Regeneration and Economic Development informed the Committee that he appreciated the work of the Green Lane Residents Association and Council officers. The development itself would create many jobs.  The aim of the development was to keep industrial, commercial and housing as separate as possible.  Councillor Foster acknowledged the concerns of Green Lane Residents Association of increased traffic on Green Lane and traffic numbers.  As a local member for the area, Councillor Foster had insisted on careful monitoring of this area, hopefully on a quarterly basis. Councillor Foster also asked that officer work jointly with the Police and Fire Services on the ‘no entry’ restriction.

Councillor Tomlinson agreed with the comments of the Police in terms of policing the no-entry and expressed concern at the use of rising bollards given the issues that can arise.

Resolved

That the recommendations contained in the report be approved and that necessary measures be taken to review the operation of the scheme during the first six months and provide an update to the Highways Committee as appropriate.