Agenda item - Traffic Management Order Waiting Lists

This report advises on the likely cost of dealing with the items on the Traffic Management Order waiting lists and seeks guidance on which items to prioritise.

Resolved: (i) That the following options be approved in respect of orders to be added to the Transport Services work programme for delivery once funding has been identified, as recommended in the report:-

a) Modifications to aid cycle movement

To advertise all the suggested amendments once funding has been identified, using the legal minimum consultation (Option 1).

Reason: Because these are uncontroversial minor alterations that introduce improvements to the cycle network and contribute to the further encouragement of active travel options.

b) Redundant Restrictions

Subject to funding being identified, to advertise the removal of the old access restrictions and carry out some further investigation into the removal of the right turn prohibition from Lendal, to be brought back for consideration at a later date (Option 2).

Reason: Because these restrictions are not effective and no longer needed, and the ongoing maintenance is a needless drain on resources.

c) Changes to speed limits

To receive a report on these requests at a future Decision Session that will outline costs, potential for improvements and scheme priority, depending on resources (Option 1).

Reason: Because this has the potential to target limited resources to where there is scope for actual improvements.

(ii) That the work be prioritised as follows:

· Priority 1 – the modifications to aid cycle movement and the removal of redundant restrictions.

· Priority 2 – the speed limit review report.

· Priority 3 – the potential new restrictions.

Reason: Because the modifications and removals require no further investigation work and the speed limit report can be started, whereas the requests for new restrictions, if taken forward first, would have an adverse impact on other areas of workload and commitment.

The Executive Member considered a report which advised of the likely cost of dealing with the items on the Traffic Management Order waiting lists and sought guidance on which items to prioritise.

There was currently a backlog of around 20 traffic movement and 15 speed requests to be responded to, as listed in Annex A to the report. These had been split into 4 broad areas. Further details, and the estimated costs of taking forward each of the changes, were set out in Annexes B to E. It was noted that funding would need to be identified before progressing the schemes. The following options were presented in respect of each area:

a) Modifications to aid cycle movement:

· Option 1 – advertise all amendments, using minimum legal consultation as they were minor changes (recommended)

· Option 2 – advertise some of the amendments

· Option 3 – take no further action.

b) Redundant restrictions:

· Option 1 – advertise all amendments

· Option 2 – advertise removal of old access restrictions and consider removal of the right turn prohibition from Lendal after further investigation (recommended)

· Option 3 – take no further action.

c) Potential new restrictions:

· Option 1 – investigate all items further, provided capital funding is made available, and report back on each (recommended)

· Option 2- as above, except for the access restrictions.

d) Speed limit changes:

· Option 1 – note the intention to bring a report later in the year outlining costs, potential for improvement and scheme priority (recommended)

· Option 2 – defer this area of work until a later date.

In response to questions, officers confirmed that they would keep the programme under review but would require the approval of the Executive Member to add any further items.