Issue - meetings

Forward Plan Ref: 2019/067

Contact: Hugh Potter, Team Leader – Area Operations Hub Tel: 07766 998704

Report by Director for Community Delivery (CMDE6).

The report presents responses received to a statutory consultation on a proposal to introduce a signalled crossing on the A40 west of its junction with the B4020 Burford Road, traffic calming measures and the extension of the 30mph speed limit on the B4020 Shilton Road at Burford.put forward as a result of the development of land to the west of the B4020 Shilton Road at Burford and, if approved, funded by that development.

The Cabinet Member for the Environment is RECOMMENDED to approve the following proposals:

    i.          Provision of a signalled pedestrian crossing on the A40 approximately 150m west of its junction with the B4020 Shilton Road.

  ii.          Traffic calming measures on the B4020 Shilton Road comprising six sets of speed cushions.

 iii.          The extension south eastwards of the 30mph speed limit on the B4020 Shilton Road by 170 metres.

Approved on the understanding that a continuous footway would be provided by the developer along the west side of the Shilton Road notwithstanding concerns previously expressed regarding existing localised pinch points along the route.

The Cabinet Member for Environment considered (CMDE6) a report presenting responses received to a statutory consultation to introduce a signalled crossing on the A40 west of its junction with the B4020 Burford Road, traffic calming measures and the extension of the 30mph speed limit on the B4020 Shilton Road at Burford put forward as a result of development of land to the west of the B4020 Shilton Road at Burford noting that, if approved, the scheme would be funded by that development.

Anna Lampard a resident living opposite the development spoke on behalf of other residents and in support of the principle but raised concerns regarding how it would be achieved.  There had been a reluctance on the part of developers to discuss with residents some key unresolved technical issues including provision of a pedestrian footpath on the west side, which if not provided would necessitate crossing the road twice and a ghost lane serving the development.  Quoting an 82% objection to humps she asked that the matter be deferred for further discussion and analysis to find a more innovative solution.

Officers confirmed there had been 3 elements to the consultation process – the crossing; traffic calming and the 30mph extension. With regard to the crossing the developer was required to do that. Traffic calming – while accepting that what was being proposed was an old technique the design of the humps should, however, address some of the objectors’ concerns as they were flatter thereby reducing noise. They would be bus friendly and allow cars to negotiate at 30 mph but would address and reduce instances of severe speeding and not impede movement of larger delivery vehicles.  The police would not consider speed cameras and had been supportive of these proposals but only in conjunction with the traffic calming proposals.

John Exley confirmed that footpath provision had originally been designed in the way it had to avoid pinch points which would have made the path narrow in certain areas. However, a path would now be provided along the whole length of the western side despite those points. That change had not yet been communicated to residents.

The Cabinet Member welcomed that change and, although that provision was not specifically in front of her at this meeting, any decision she made would be on the understanding that a footway would be provided by the developer along the whole of the west side.

Mr Exley confirmed that a “Ghost Lane” would be essential to provide a safe right turn into the development and had been part of the original planning stage. He also confirmed that driveways were now shown on schematic drawings.

Acknowledging the representations made by Anna Lampard the Cabinet Member recognised the need to address local problems as highlighted but in this particular case she felt that the traffic calming scheme as proposed presented the best option as opposed to say chicanes which were often susceptible to damage and therefore repair costs. She supported moves for a 30mph speed limit  ...  view the full minutes text for item 41