Assessment of Requests for Traffic Mirrors to be erected on the Highway. Yes. Yes

Transcription

1 Name of meeting: Cabinet Date: 10 March 2015 Title of report: Assessment of Requests for Traffic Mirrors to be erected on the Highway Is it likely to result in spending or saving 250k or more, or to have a significant effect on two or more electoral wards? Is it in the Council s Forward Plan? No Yes Is it eligible for call in by Scrutiny? Date signed off by Director & name Is it signed off by the Director of Resources? Is it signed off by the Assistant Director Legal, Governance & Monitoring? Cabinet member portfolio Yes Jacqui Gedman 23/02/15 David Smith 27/02/15 Julie Muscroft 22/02/15 Place (Investment and Housing) Electoral wards affected: Ward councillors consulted: Public or private: All Wards No Public 1. Purpose of report To consider the contents of this report and approve the criteria the Service proposes to use when assessing requests for traffic mirrors, when the Department for Transport (DfT) delegate the authority for decision making to Local Authorities, in the near future. 2. Key points 2.1 The Department for Transport (DfT) classify traffic mirrors as traffic signs, but, they are not included in Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions 2002 (TSRGD). As a result, they are unauthorised traffic signs 2.2 As with any Unauthorised traffic sign, Highway Authorities are currently able to apply to the DfT, for permission to erect them, and mirrors can be approved for erection, but are done so on an individual site by site basis, where they feel such a measure is justified.

2 2.3 Currently the DfT consider that traffic mirrors should only be used as an absolute last resort, due to the following drawbacks; a. They are a poor substitute for a direct driver sightline. b. The image in a convex mirror is small, and it is difficult to judge the speeds of approaching vehicles. c. Driver attention can be diverted from looking at immediate surroundings. d. They do not perform well in bright sunlight. e. They can become misaligned. f. They are often the target of vandalism or theft. g. They become weathered and faded over time. h. They are an expensive maintenance liability. 2.4 With the above points in mind, the DfT have applied the following criteria when assessing requests for traffic mirrors; a. The site in question must have a demonstrable history of injury accidents where poor visibility is a contributory factor. b. The reduced sightline must not be due to an object which can be realistically removed, such as a parked vehicle or overhanging foliage. c. A mirror cannot be used to serve a private access onto the Highway. 2.5 The DfT are now reviewing TSRGD and have indicated, during consultation, that the consideration of such requests for traffic mirrors will shortly be devolved to local Highway Authorities, and as a result the Service wish Cabinet to consider approving the use of the same criteria currently used by the DfT. If these criteria are not met, then the request to erect a traffic mirror will be refused. 2.6 Appendix 1 shows the information sheet / Application form to be sent to anyone who makes a request, in the future, for traffic mirrors. 3. Implications for the Council It will become the responsibility of Council to assess future requests for traffic mirrors. A set of criteria is therefore required to allow officers to consider requests in an auditable and even-handed manner. If a criteria is not approved, it will be difficult to make decisions on applications, and any traffic mirror placed on the highway will become a future maintenance liability, against reducing budgets. 4. Officer recommendations and reasons That the criteria, as set out in 2.4 above, be adopted when considering application for traffic mirrors in the future, once DfT have devolved the decision making to Local Authorities. This will allow the Council, as the Highway Authority, to have a consistent approach that does not place an undue burden for the future, on our budgets.

3 5. Consultees and their opinions None 6. Next steps If the report is approved, Officers will, when the DfT devolve the responsibility, publish and use the recommended criteria when assessing future requests for traffic mirrors on the Highway. 7. Cabinet portfolio holder recommendation The Portfolio Holder, Cllr Steve Hall, supports the officer recommendation. 8. Contact officer and relevant papers Contact Officer: Joe Walker Tel: (01484) Assistant director responsible Assistant Director Streetscene and Housing

4 Applying for a Traffic Mirror

5 Requests for traffic mirrors on the Public Highway were previously approved by the Department for Transport (DfT), but this has now been delegated to local Councils. The Council shares the view of the DfT that traffic mirrors should only be used as a last resort, as they can have the following problems; 1.1 They are a poor substitute for a direct driver sightline. 1.2 The image in a convex mirror is small, and it is difficult to judge the speeds of approaching vehicles. 1.3 Driver attention can be diverted from looking at immediate surroundings. 1.4 They do not perform well in bright sunlight. 1.5 They can become misaligned. 1.6 They are often the target of vandalism or theft. 1.7 They become weathered and faded over time. 1.8 They are an expensive maintenance liability. Where might a mirror be considered? To judge requests fairly, Kirklees has adopted the same criteria as that used by the DfT. Therefore, before submitting a request, you should remember that the Council will only consider providing a mirror if the following criteria are met; 2.1 The site in question must have a history of injury accidents where poor visibility has played a part.

6 2.2 A poor junction sightline must not be due to an object which can be realistically removed, such as a parked vehicle or overhanging foliage. 2.3 A mirror cannot be used to serve a private access onto the Highway (although a mirror to serve this purpose may be erected by the applicant themselves on private land, subject to any Planning Regulations that may apply at that site). How to apply for a marking If you feel all the above criteria are met, please complete the enclosed application form and return it to: Highway Safety, FREEPOST HF 328, Streetscene and Housing, Flint Street, Fartown, Huddersfield HD1 6DQ. What happens next? A council officer will visit the site and assess the matter. If they believe a mirror cannot be justified, your application will be refused. If your application is approved, we will let you know and make appropriate arrangements.

7 Your details Title First name Last name Address Postcode Telephone Details of Application Location where mirror is being requested? What is causing the obstruction to sightlines? (Please also see 2.2 above) Is the mirror to serve a private access onto the Highway? Please also see 2.3 above)