Agenda item

This report provides an update on the management of vehicle speeds across the city. The report has been split into 3 elements which are all closely linked – Speed Review Process Update, Review of Speed Management Engineering Programme and Vehicle Activated Sign Review.

Resolved:           That the executive Member agreed to the following:

                             Part 1 – Speed Review Process Update

That the Executive Member  approved Option 1, and agreed with the findings and recommendations of the report as a cost effective, and evidence led solution to provide the appropriate level of investigation to community speed concerns.

Reason:          So that all locations identified, from past reports as well as this current report, are considered for appropriate speed reduction measures on clear and equal guidelines.

                             Part 2 – Review of Speed Management Engineering Programme.

i) Approve the proposed programme of schemes (Annex A-P sites) and authorise officers to undertake further consultation and advertisement of speed limit orders as necessary, and to implement the measures if no objections are received. Any measures which receive objections should be reported back to the Executive Member for a decision. With the following amendments:

·        Removal of the Common Lane, Dunnington Scheme from the programme to allow for further investigation of speeds between it’s junction with the A1079 and the village entrance.

·        To include in the Consultation for Wetherby Road the 60mph limit on Wetherby Road (Acomb) to the A1237 be reduced to 40mph in a similar way to neighbouring junctions

·        York Road, Strensall to remain in the programme with a view to bringing back the matter to an Executive Member Decision Session if the consultation proves the scheme to be controversial amongst residents.

ii) Authorise officers to carry out additional speed surveys (Annex Q and R sites) and to carry forward these sites for further assessment in the 2016/17 programme.

iii) Approve the inclusion of further feasibility work for the three sites with speed limit issues (Annex S) in the ongoing programme of speed management schemes.

Reason:              To deliver measures to address speed complaints raised by local residents.

                             Part 3 – Vehicle Activated Sign Review

                             Approved Option 2 and:

i. To retain the existing criteria for speed limit VAS, which is:

a) That Local Transport Plan (LTP) funding will only be used where the 85%ile speed equals or exceeds the signed limit by 10%+2mph (i.e. 35mph in a 30mph limit, and 46mph in a 40mph limit). This would be consistent with the speed enforcement thresholds employed by the police (ACPO guidelines).

b) Where this funding criteria is not quite met, a Ward Committee or Parish Council may still wish to fund the installation of a VAS. In this situation, a threshold of 85%ile speeds being 10% above the speed limit should be adopted (i.e.33mph in a 30mph limit and 44mph in a 40mph limit).

Reason:              To ensure a consistent approach and targeted use of LTP resources. In the case of Ward Committee and Parish Council funding this allows the use of VAS where there are real concerns about the speed of traffic but where the stricter criteria for LTP funding is not met.

ii. To establish criteria for the provision of hazard warning VAS based on at least one recorded injury accident in the previous three years, with reports of inappropriate speed (which may be within the posted speed limit) .

Reason:              To make sure hazard warning VAS are used appropriately.

iii. The existing system of monitoring should be replaced by collection and analysis of speed data before installation and three months after.

Reason:              To focus future monitoring and review, where it is most needed.

iv. VAS to be reviewed as and when they develop faults applying the criteria in i. and ii. above. If the site meets the criteria, it is recommended that the VAS is repaired or replaced. If they do not, the sign and post should be removed and the site disbanded.

Reason:              To address the issue of maintenance, longer term monitoring, and review the site objectively when the sign is not present.

v. To consider the need for future allocations for t   the review and aftercare of LTP funded signs. Ward committee or Parish Councils are expected to fund any maintenance (if they so wish) if they originally purchased the signs.  

Reason:              To address the current maintenance funding shortfall and ensure the VAS stock is maintained at sites where the signs are warranted.

The Executive Member considered a report which gave a Speed Management Update and which had been split into 3 elements.

Part 1 Speed Review Process Update

The report provided the Executive Member with an update on the collaborative Speed Review Process set up under the 95 Alive Partnership and provided an overview of the locations from 2013, 2014 & 2015 where concerns about traffic speeds had been raised, and provided an update on progress towards assessing these against the agreed prioritisation framework.

The Executive Member noted the report and approved option 1.

Part 2 Review of the Speed Management Engineering Programme

The report provided the Executive Member with details of the speed management schemes which had been referred for an engineering solution and sought approval for the detailed 2015/16 speed management programme.

In relation to the comments made by the Public Speakers and Ward Members, Officers advised as follows:

·        In relation to the Dunnington Scheme, Officers were aware that there were still concerns about the proposals and were happy to look at the scheme again. As such, the scheme would be taken out of the programme at present to allow for further investigation.

·        Officers felt that the Strensall Road scheme should remain in the programme to enable consultation to continue. In relation to the Sheriff Hutton Road scheme, this was already being dealt with and would be brought back to the Executive Member at a later date.

·        In relation to the Wetherby Road scheme, Officers were already aware of the issues raised by Councillor Waller. The comments about a 40mph buffer were noted and would be incorporated into the ongoing consultation. Receipt of a 42 signature petition at the end of the Decision Session was also acknowledged.

·        For all of the schemes above, if strong representations were received then a further report would be brought back to an Executive Member Decision Session.

The Executive Member was happy to approve the speed management programme with the suggested amendments.

Part 3 Vehicle Activated Signs Review

The report sought approval for an updated Vehicle Activated Sign (VAS) policy to include:

·        The criteria that a site would have to meet before a VAS can be considered.

·        Monitoring of existing and new sites and;

·        The future maintenance of VAS

The Executive Member queried whether it would be possible to research the cost of different types of VAS so that the Council has cost information available upon request as a number of Parish Council’s have queried costs in the past. Officers confirmed they could look into this.

Resolved:           That the executive Member agreed to the following:

                             Part 1 – Speed Review Process Update

That the Executive Member  approved Option 1, and agreed with the findings and recommendations of the report as a cost effective, and evidence led solution to provide the appropriate level of investigation to community speed concerns.

Reason:          So that all locations identified, from past reports as well as this current report, are considered for appropriate speed reduction measures on clear and equal guidelines.

                             Part 2 – Review of Speed Management Engineering Programme.

i) Approve the proposed programme of schemes (Annex A-P sites) and authorise officers to undertake further consultation and advertisement of speed limit orders as necessary, and to implement the measures if no objections are received. Any measures which receive objections should be reported back to the Executive Member for a decision. With the following amendments:

·        Removal of the Common Lane, Dunnington Scheme from the programme to allow for further investigation of speeds between it’s junction with the A1079 and the village entrance.

·        To include in the Consultation for Wetherby Road the 60mph limit on Wetherby Road (Acomb) to the A1237 be reduced to 40mph in a similar way to neighbouring junctions.

·        York Road, Strensall to remain in the programme with a view to bringing back the matter to an Executive Member Decision Session if the consultation proves the scheme to be controversial amongst residents.

ii) Authorise officers to carry out additional speed surveys (Annex Q and R sites) and to carry forward these sites for further assessment in the 2016/17 programme.

iii) Approve the inclusion of further feasibility work for the three sites with speed limit issues (Annex S) in the ongoing programme of speed management schemes.

Reason:              To deliver measures to address speed complaints raised by local residents.

                             Part 3 – Vehicle Activated Sign Review

                             Approved Option 2 and:

i. To retain the existing criteria for speed limit VAS, which is:

a) That Local Transport Plan (LTP) funding will only be used where the 85%ile speed equals or exceeds the signed limit by 10%+2mph (i.e. 35mph in a 30mph limit, and 46mph in a 40mph limit). This would be consistent with the speed enforcement thresholds employed by the police (ACPO guidelines).

b) Where this funding criteria is not quite met, a Ward Committee or Parish Council may still wish to fund the installation of a VAS. In this situation, a threshold of 85%ile speeds being 10% above the speed limit should be adopted (i.e.33mph in a 30mph limit and 44mph in a 40mph limit).

Reason:              To ensure a consistent approach and targeted use of LTP resources. In the case of Ward Committee and Parish Council funding this allows the use of VAS where there are real concerns about the speed of traffic but where the stricter criteria for LTP funding is not met.

ii. To establish criteria for the provision of hazard warning VAS based on at least one recorded injury accident in the previous three years, with reports of inappropriate speed (which may be within the posted speed limit) .

Reason:              To make sure hazard warning VAS are used appropriately.

iii. The existing system of monitoring should be replaced by collection and analysis of speed data before installation and three months after.

Reason:              To focus future monitoring and review, where it is most needed.

iv. VAS to be reviewed as and when they develop faults applying the criteria in i. and ii. above. If the site meets the criteria, it is recommended that the VAS is repaired or replaced. If they do not, the sign and post should be removed and the site disbanded.

Reason:              To address the issue of maintenance, longer term monitoring, and review the site objectively when the sign is not present.

v. To consider the need for future allocations for t   the review and aftercare of LTP funded signs. Ward committee or Parish Councils are expected to fund any maintenance (if they so wish) if they originally purchased the signs.  

Reason:              To address the current maintenance funding shortfall and ensure the VAS stock is maintained at sites where the signs are warranted.