Agenda item

This report outlines 3 options and recommends the implementation of Option A in relation to Deighton residents request to lower the speed limit to 40mph on the A19 between Escrick and the lay-by to the south of Gravel Pit Farm.

RESOLVED:  (i) That Option C, as detailed in the Officers report  be agreed as the preferred option.

                      (ii)   That Officers undertake a feasibility study into delivering Option C, in particular to examine reasonable costs for improvements to the lighting.

REASON:           To address concerns raised by local residents.

The Cabinet Member received a report which outlined 3 options in relation to a request from Deighton residents to lower the speed limit to 40mph on the A19 between Escrick and the layby to the south of Gravel Pit Farm.

Representations were received from a local resident, Wilson Clark who was in favour of lowering the speed limit from 60mph to 40mph. He gave a number of reasons to support this including;

·        That traffic turning southbound out of the village could not see cars coming north at 60mph due to the bend in the road.

·        That the access to the central island in the road for pedestrians was dangerous as it had been damaged by previous traffic collisions.

·        Farm traffic often protruded into the northbound lane.

·        That a proposed new development of an Anaerobic Digester plant at Deighton would cause an increase in traffic.

Further representations were received from David Dickman, another local resident. He also supported lowering the speed limit to 40 mph for a number of reasons including;

·        That a number of near misses had gone unrecorded at the junction showing how dangerous the current speed limit was, in particular how the driver of an ambulance was injured due to taking slightly too long to turn into the village.

·        Why 40 mph was the fastest speed that would allow safe access into the village, also compared with other villages in York that had 30 mph limits.

Additional representations were received from a local resident Tony Bramley. He spoke about how he was also in favour of reducing the speed limit from 60mph to 40mph for a number of reasons including;

·        That due to current traffic speeds that difficulties had been encountered by local residents in trying to cross the road safely.

·        That the illumination of the road was not very good, in particular the light on the pedestrian island was dim and the light at the bus stop in the village was broken.

Further representations were received from another local resident, Kevin Dixon. He spoke about how he felt that there was insufficient visibility at the junction to the village to allow for a 50mph speed limit. He felt that the Road Safety Audit that had been carried out had failed to consider road speed and visibility, and therefore the speed limit should not be raised to 50mph.

Councillor Barton, as the Ward Member, spoke about the lack of visibility at the road junction. He felt that it was not clear how the Police’s recommendation of 60mph would work with the existing traffic lights. He also felt that the number of visits made by Officers to monitor the traffic situation was incomparable to the views of residents, who had seen a number of collisions and had suffered problems with bus access. He urged the Cabinet Member to not agree to Option A in the Officer’s report, to introduce a 50mph speed limit as he felt it would be too expensive and would not solve existing residents concerns.

Officers informed the Cabinet Member that government regulations had recommended a 50mph speed limit in relation to the road at Deighton.

The Cabinet Member felt sympathetic to the concerns of local residents, and that the Police did have expertise in assessing the traffic speeds that they were restricted by resources. He felt that a detailed feasibility study needed to be carried out to examine the concerns raised. He also felt that a full scheme of lighting on the road would be expensive, but that a more limited scheme of improvements would be better, focused on pedestrian crossing points on the road.

RESOLVED:  (i) That Option C, as detailed in the Officers report  be agreed as the preferred option.

                      (ii)   That Officers undertake a feasibility study into delivering Option C, in particular to examine reasonable costs for improvements to the lighting.

REASON:           To address concerns raised by local residents.