Agenda item

Report to follow

The Cabinet Member for Waste, Roads and Community Safety, the Assistant Director for Planning, Regeneration and Transport, the Interim Head of Transport Infrastructure and the Senior Engineer - Road Safety attended the meeting to present a report in response to a request made at the 16 December meeting of the Overview and Scrutiny Management Board. At that meeting it has been resolved that  the Cabinet Member for Waste, Roads and Community Safety gave consideration to the actions that could be taken to ensure that pedestrian crossings and other road infrastructure across the Borough fully took into account the needs of vulnerable road users (Minute No.278).

In introducing the report, the Cabinet Member for Waste, Roads and Community Safety advised that the report provided the further detail on how the needs of vulnerable road users were taken into consideration in the design of crossing infrastructure and also on the processes used for the determination of crossing “wait times” that had been noted as a concern by members.

The Interim Head of Transport Infrastructure advised that a key part of the design considerations for signalised crossings was the configuration of both pedestrian and road traffic “wait times” and that this issue was considered in great detail in order to ensure the optimum highway usage was attained to enable the effective and safe use of the crossing for pedestrians and other non-motorised road users whilst also maintaining effective traffic flow.  The report stated that Rotherham’s pedestrian crossing installations were configured using “wait time” parameters detailed in government guidance note “LTN 2/95 the Design of Pedestrian Crossings”.

The Interim Head of Transport Infrastructure advised that issues relating to vulnerable road users were taken into account throughout the design processes associated with new highway projects and that these were also evaluated during the road safety audit process, with particular attention taken at sites where it was known that there were vulnerable road users, such as outside schools or in areas of with large numbers of pedestrians and cyclists.

The report provided a detailed explanation of the processes surrounding pedestrian crossings and how pedestrian “wait times” were calculated. A list of infrastructure measures that could be used to support vulnerable road users when crossing the road was attached as an appendix to the officer’s report.

The Interim Head of Transport Infrastructure noted that even with the most careful planning of road crossings, roads were dangerous places and that all road users, including pedestrians needed to behave safely when using and crossing roads.

Members asked how ward members were engaged with regarding proposals for pedestrian crossings and other road infrastructure developments in their wards. The Interim Head of Transport Infrastructure advised that as the design of such infrastructure needed to follow national guidance that there was limited scope for member consultation on design, but assured members that ward members would always be consulted with to gain insight on local needs and concerns. The Interim Head of Transport Infrastructure noted that any aspect of a design that could be implemented in different ways would always be consulted on. Members noted that engagement with ward members was essential and asked that if an aspect of a road crossing, for example, could not be changed or had to be built in a certain way, officers should explain to ward members the reasons for this so that they in turn could share this information with residents.

Members asked for further information on the processes involved in the changing of speed limits on roads. The Senior Engineer - Road Safety detailed the processes involved but noted that the speed limit on a road needed to reasonable in relation to each individual road, for example a 30mph limit on a country road would not be reasonable and the speed limit would be unenforceable. The Senior Engineer advised that the adherence to any speed limit required road users to accept any speed limit as a reasonable one. The Senior Engineer stated that if members had any particular concerns about speed limits that may need looking due to increased traffic or new residential developments, then these could be looked at.

Members agreed that safety of all road users should be the main consideration when setting any speed limit and that that any speed limit on a road should always be enforced. The Senior Engineer assured members that speeding in any form was not condoned but advised that a view was always taken, in consultation with the police when setting a speed limit on a road regarding its individual circumstances to what a realistic and reasonable expectation of drivers would be for the speed of that road.

The Senior Engineer advised that if a speed limit was lowered on a road then additional road infrastructure would also need to be installed in order to make the new speed limit a realistic one for that road. The Senior Engineer noted that this requirement added extra costs for lowering speed limits on roads, and as such made some proposals to reduce speed limits unviable as reducing speed limits without the accompanying changes to road infrastructure being made could make the reduction in the speed limit ineffective.

Members noted examples of effective collaborative working with officers regarding road safety issues in their wards. The Cabinet Member noted the procedures for consultation with ward members that were in place and that the records of  delegated decisions taken by officers, along with the accompanying reports when changes to road infrastructure had been made were available on the Council website.

The Chair thanked the Cabinet Member for Waste, Roads and Community Safety, the Assistant Director for Planning, Regeneration and Transport, the Interim Head of Transport Infrastructure and the Senior Engineer - Road Safety for attending the meeting and answering member questions.

Resolved: -

1)    That the report be noted

2)    That ward members are always consulted during the planning stages of any new pedestrian crossing, changes to road infrastructure or road safety measures in their ward.

3)    That ward members should actively engage with officers when they are notified of changes to road infrastructure in their ward.

4)    That, if required, officers prepare briefing notes for ward members that explain the reasons why a particular change has been made regarding new pedestrian crossings or changes to road infrastructure or road safety measures in their ward.