Agenda item

The Committee considered a report of the Corporate Director, Neighbourhood Services which had been considered at a meeting of the Highways Committee on 23 March 2012 (for copy see file of Minutes).  A decision had been deferred to enable a site visit to be carried out in order for the Committee to familiarise themselves with the layout of the area and to see at first hand some of the issues discussed at the previous meeting.

The Strategic Highways Manager informed the Committee that Members had now had the opportunity to visit Rotary Way, where they crossed the road, walked the area and observed visibility at key locations.  Following comments made at the previous meeting by Councillor Wilkes, the Strategic Highways Manager accepted, following the site visit, that the planted area did obscure visibility at the roundabout of the crossing area identified as an alternative in the Equality Impact Assessment.  In the event of any footpath being constructed in the location concerned, removal of vegetation would need to occur.

Referring to the Equality Impact Assessment, Councillor Todd accepted the issue that traffic speed would be lower at the crossing point towards the roundabout which the proposed footpath would lead onto, however, the reality of the situation was that if a footpath was constructed, people would still attempt to cross the road at the junction to Hag House development rather than walk the length of the footpath.

Councillor Stradling echoed the points raised by Councillor Todd and commented that he felt a great deal of sympathy with the residents of the properties at the Hag House development.  Councillor Stradling felt that a speed restriction should be imposed on the length of the road, given the traffic speeds observed during the site visit, adding that the volume of traffic was more reminiscent of that of a town centre road, rather than a rural road.

The Strategic Highways Manager informed the Committee that road was classed as being rural in nature, because it was a single carriageway with no frontage development.  Advice from the Department for Transport was that motorists tended to drive to the environment and the reality of the situation was that even if a speed limit was imposed, the likelihood would be that traffic would continue to travel at the same speed as they do at the present time.

Councillor Blakey suggested that an additional traffic survey be undertaken over and above the survey already carried out, given the fact that traffic was moderate during the site visit, however, it was her view that the road could be a lot busier at other times and this needed to be taken into consideration.

Concerns were expressed by Councillors Naylor and Turnbull that the installation of a pedestrian island would potentially pose more of a danger and encourage people to cross into a local pet shop service area, which would be an added danger.

On balance, the Committee felt that some issues raised had not been given due consideration and researched within the equality impact assessment.  The Committee suggested that further research and deliberation would need to take place before the Committee could conclude the issue.

Resolved

That further research be undertaken on other possible options available, together with a further traffic survey and be reported back to the Committee in due course.