Date 24/10/2011. Date 04/11/2011. Date 25/10/2011. Date 10/11/2011. Date 25/10/2011. Date 25/10/2011. Date 10/11/2011.

Transcription

1 DELEGATED POWERS REPORT NO SUBJECT: Traffic Signal Review, Junction of Oakleigh Road North and the A1000 Control sheet All of the following actions MUST be completed at each stage of the process and the signed and dated report MUST be passed to the Governance Service for publishing All reports 1. Governance Service receive draft report Name of GSO Andrew Charlwood Date 24/10/ Governance Service cleared draft report as being constitutionally appropriate 3. Finance clearance obtained (report author to complete) 4. Staff and other resources issues clearance obtained (report author to complete) 5. Trade Union response received (Staffing issues only) 6. Legal clearance obtained from (report author to complete) 7. Policy & Partnerships clearance obtained (report author to complete) 8. Equalities & Diversity clearance obtained (report author to complete) 9. The above process has been checked and verified by Director, Head of Service or Deputy 10. Signed & dated report, scanned or hard copy received by Governance Service for publishing 11. Report published by Governance Service to website 12. Head of Service informed report is published Date 04/11/2011 Name of Fin. officer Alex Altman Date 25/10/2011 Name of Res. officer N/A Date Name of TU rep. N/A Date Name of Legal officer Poonam Rajput Date 10/11/2011 Name of P&P officer Andrew Nathan Date 25/10/2011 Name of officer Andrew Nathan Date 25/10/2011 Name Pam Wharfe Date 10/11/2011 Date 11/11/2011 Date 17/11/2011 Date 17/11/2011 Key decisions only: 13. Expiry of call-in period Date N/A 14. Report circulated for call-in purposes to Business Management OSC members & copied to Cabinet Members & Head of Service Name of GSO Date N/A

2 ACTION TAKEN BY CABINET MEMBER(S) UNDER DELEGATED POWERS (EXECUTIVE FUNCTION) Subject: Cabinet Member(s) Traffic Signal Review, Junction of Oakleigh Road North and the A1000 Cabinet Member for Environment Date of decision 10 November 2011 Summary Officer Contributors Status (public or exempt) Wards affected Enclosures Reason for exemption from call-in (if appropriate) Decision to maintain the trial suspension of the pedestrian crossing controlling traffic entering Oakleigh Road North. Pam Wharfe, Interim Director of Environment, Planning and Regeneration Public Totteridge and Oakleigh wards None Not applicable Contact for further information: Pam Wharfe, Interim Director Environment Planning and Regeneration, Serial No. 1489

3 1. RELEVANT PREVIOUS DECISIONS September 2011, Item 6 decision of the Chipping Barnet Environment Area Sub-Committee, where it was resolved that officers be instructed to investigate the feasibility of re-instating the pedestrian crossing lights at the Oakleigh Road North / Whetstone High Road junction. 2. CORPORATE PRIORITIES AND POLICY CONSIDERATIONS 2.1 Reviewing the appropriateness of traffic signals in the borough will contribute to the One Barnet Plan and Corporate Plan priority A Successful London Suburb by keeping traffic moving. Unnecessary traffic signals cause delays and their reduction would better cater for the transport needs of Barnet today and into the future. 2.2 The London Mayor s Transport Strategy also addresses these areas through: Proposal 30: The Mayor, through TfL, and working with the London boroughs and other stakeholders, will introduce measures to smooth traffic flow to manage congestion These measures will include c) upgrading, rationalising or removing traffic management equipment and optimising timings at signal controlled junctions to keep traffic moving 3. RISK MANAGEMENT ISSUES 3.1 Removal of traffic signal control, especially for pedestrians, is an emotive issue and may contribute to negative publicity and public perceptions regarding safety. A structured procedure for considering the impacts of the proposal will mitigate this to some extent. 3.2 It is not possible to mitigate entirely the risk that an accident or accidents may take place shortly after implementation. There is also a risk that the removal of facilities could disadvantage some equalities groups, leading to legal challenge and adverse publicity. 3.3 It is therefore appropriate to establish a formal procedure in due course to ensure that, should similar opportunities for the consideration of removal of traffic signals present themselves, the potential impacts on groups with protected characteristics are given due regard and consideration of mitigation measures put in place in consultation with representative groups or individuals to minimise this risk. However, I am satisfied that this scheme is fully aligned with the council s approach to traffic management and has support at the highest level of the council, and that the opportunity be taken whilst the trial continues to establish and refine the aforementioned procedure. 3.4 There is a cost associated with any changes to the traffic signals. In order to limit this it is therefore preferable that a consensus is reached before any further action is taken with regards to the pedestrian crossing.

4 4. EQUALITIES AND DIVERSITY ISSUES 4.1 Section 149 of the Equality Act 2010 which places and strengthens the duty on public authorities to advance equality of opportunity came into effect on 5 April This includes giving due regard to the need to advance equality of opportunity and, remove or minimise disadvantages related to particular protected characteristics and to take steps to meet the different needs that result including taking account of disabled persons' disabilities. 4.3 Traffic signal controlled junctions and stand-alone pedestrian crossings provide assistance to many pedestrians crossing busy roads. They can provide particular benefits for members of the community who are less able to judge whether it is safe to cross, or less confident that they can do so. This may include disabled people, elderly people and children and their carers. 4.4 Signal controlled crossings whether stand-alone or at a junction usually incorporate audible and/or tactile signals (bleeping or a rotating cone beneath the push button unit) to assist blind or partially sighted users. 4.5 The positive invitation to cross can also provide reassurance that may allow wheelchair users and others with reduced mobility to cross more easily and allow learning disabled people or children to cross independently when they might otherwise not be able to. Parents and other carers supervising small children may also find the reassurance of a signalled crossing particularly helpful. 4.6 The extent to which users of individual junctions and crossings are reliant on traffic signals for safety and to allow them to travel around the borough confidently will vary depending on the levels of vehicular and pedestrian traffic and the mix of users due to the local environment and facilities e.g. town centre, local schools etc. 4.7 If crossing opportunities are high enough, consideration of the permanent removal of the signal facility in due course is considered possible without adversely affecting users. Site observations have shown that a large proportion of pedestrian already cross at this location outside of the green man invitation period. This is due to the relatively short crossing distance and availability of breaks in the incoming traffic. 4.8 As well as an engineering assessment, the review procedure mentioned in paragraph 3.3 will include carrying out a site specific equality impact assessment taking into account the characteristics of the location and likely users and consultation with stakeholders representative of older people, disabled people (sight, mobility, learning disability), children and carers.. 5. USE OF RESOURCES IMPLICATIONS (Finance, Procurement, Performance & Value for Money, Staffing, IT, Property, Sustainability) 5.1 Finance: Traffic signal maintenance payments made to Transport for London (TfL) amount to some 460,000 per annum (2011/12). Annual maintenance costs per aspect (an aspect can be thought of as a lightbulb so each red, amber or green light, each red or green man signal, and each push button unit are an aspect) is

5 currently approximately 80 (although costs in older units may be more). A stand alone pedestrian crossing would have at least 18 aspects so the annual maintenance cost would be at least 1,440. A simple cross roads junction without pedestrian signals would have at least 24 aspects so an annual maintenance cost of at least 1,920 and a cross roads with pedestrian signals on each arm would have at least 48 aspects so an annual cost of at least 3,840. More complex arrangements would cost appreciably more. 5.2 The removal of aspects, such as the one controlling the pedestrian crossing in Oakleigh Road, will lead to an annual saving for the borough in maintenance costs. 5.3 Costs associated with removal of signals and introduction of different methods of control where appropriate would be secured from available Local Implementation Plan funding provided by TfL under s159 of the GLA Act 1999 to help implement the Mayors Transport Strategy. 5.4 Procurement: Works to the traffic signals would have to be procured through Transport for London as operator of the equipment. Other highway works would be procured through the borough s highway term contracts. 5.5 Performance & Value for Money: Assuming the equality issues can be adequately addressed, the proposals would reduce delay and frustration currently experienced at the location. 5.6 There are no Staffing, IT or Property implications arising out of this report. 5.7 Sustainability: Reducing traffic signal aspects will also reduce the electricity requirement for the signals leading to indirect reductions in CO 2 emissions. Less stop-start driving also contributes to reduced emissions from road traffic. 6. LEGAL ISSUES 6.1 The Traffic Management Act 2004 places an obligation on authorities to ensure the expeditious movement of traffic on their road network. 6.2 The GLA Act 1999 s275 and the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984 s74a provides for Transport for London to operate and maintain traffic signals on borough roads. 6.3 The Equality Act 2010 s149 places a duty on public authorities to advance equality of opportunity. 6.4 As referred to at 5.3 above. 7. CONSTITUTIONAL POWERS 7.1 Part 3 (Responsibility for Functions), paragraph 3.3 of the Council s Constitution states that Cabinet Members powers include the power to discharge the executive functions that fall within their portfolio, whether or not they are also delegated to officers, except for matters specifically reserved to Council, Cabinet or Cabinet Committees.

6 7.2 Part 3 (Responsibility for Functions), paragraph 3.2 of the Council s Constitution details the responsibilities of the Cabinet Member for Environment which includes all matters relating to the development and management of the environment, including: the street scene including pavements and all classes of roads; parking provision; and transport and transport initiatives. 8. BACKGROUND INFORMATION 8.1 Controlled pedestrian crossings on both Totteridge Lane and Oakleigh Road North were introduced in 2005/06 to address local concerns on the basis that the new facilities could be accommodated with minimum impact on the junction s operation. 8.2 Despite numerous timing reviews the last five years have shown that it was not possible to accommodate the large volume of traffic going through the junction and provide controlled pedestrian crossing facilities on these arms while maintaining acceptable service levels with the current junction s layout. 8.3 While the redevelopment of nearby sites might provide opportunities for the necessary large scale review of the junction, it was felt that the situation could not be left to carry on much longer. Based on the inconclusive nature of the safety records following the installation of the pedestrian crossings, officers, in consultation Cabinet Member for Environment, informed the emergency services and local ward members of their intention to carry out a trial removal of the crossing facilities thus reverting it back to its previous method of operation (prior to the 2005/06). 8.4 The trial commenced on 1 st March 2011 and was planned to run for a minimum period of six months during which both traffic condition and local feedback would be collected. Consideration of public comment following the removal of the crossing facility in Totteridge Lane led to the re-introduction of that green man on April 1 st. The trial has continued since with only the green man controlling traffic entering Oakleigh Road North being suspended. 8.5 Operation of the junction has been monitored on an ad hoc basis from the commencement of the trial with a view to ensuring that traffic movement and in particular pedestrian safety has not been compromised to an extent that immediate cessation of the trial would have been recommended. Generally, the junction appears to have benefitted from improved vehicle movement following the removal of the pedestrian aspects, whilst no adverse pedestrian safety implications have manifested themselves either through the ad hoc observations or via the Council s accident database that records personal injury accidents (PIA) on the borough s road network. Available data to 31 July 2011 shows no pedestrian PIAs at this location and officers have not been made aware of any such accidents subsequent to this date. 8.6 The trial scheme was discussed at the 20 September 2011 meeting of the Chipping Barnet Area Environment Sub-Committee where it was resolved that officers be instructed to investigate the feasibility of re-instating the pedestrian crossing lights at the Oakleigh Road North / Whetstone High Road junction. It is considered that the continuation of the trial whilst more detailed evaluation takes place aligns with

7 this resolution as consideration of the appropriateness of re-instatement or permanent removal of this crossing facility will be inherent within the study. 8.7 In light of the above it is proposed to withhold from making a decision on the future of the scheme until the review procedure has been completed which is anticipated to be in the first half of LIST OF BACKGROUND PAPERS 9.1 None 10. DECISION OF THE CABINET MEMBER(S) I authorise the following action: 10.1 Maintain the trial suspension of the pedestrian crossing at the Oakleigh Road North / Whetstone High Road junction, whilst a more detailed review is carried with a view to using the results from this review to determine whether or not the pedestrian crossing should be permanently removed or not. Signed Councillor Brian Coleman Cabinet Member for Environment Date 10/11/2011