Return to Agenda

ITEM EX26

EXECUTIVE – 22 JANUARY 2002

BATH ROAD AND BEARGARDEN ROAD, BANBURY:
TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT MEASURES

Report by Director of Environmental Services

Introduction

1. This report details the response to the latest consultation on traffic management measures in the Bath Road/Beargarden Road corridor which was approved at the Highways & Road Safety Sub-Committee on 23 August 2001. It reports on the informal consultation in which three options were provided to residents, allowing them to take an active part on the form that traffic management measures should take.

Background

2. As a result of accident remedial measures exhibitions for North Bar/Horsefair/South Bar, Bath Road and Beargarden Road were identified as needing traffic management. Fears were raised at the North Bar exhibitions and subsequent consultation that with the introduction of the measures on North Bar increased rat-running and displacement of traffic flow along the Bath Road/Beargarden Road corridor would result.
3. Following the initial North Bar consultation we also undertook a consultation in the Bath Road/ Beargarden Road corridor on an initial traffic calming scheme. The response to that consultation proved very positive with 63% of the returning questionnaires being in favour of some form of traffic calming. The original consultation plan showed humps and cushions. While not all responses were in favour of this particular form of traffic calming, they did support the principle. As a result of this response the Highways & Road Safety Sub-Committee on 23 August 2001 agreed to consult residents further on a series of options to gauge their support for a particular design.

Consultation

4. Three options were offered to the residents:-

• Option A (drg.no. BPN652/B3011), using primarily 15mm platforms, mainly at junctions, with buildouts to either end of Bath Road.
• Option B (drg.no. BPN652/B3012), a mixture of buildouts, give way priority single traffic working, and low 15mm platforms.
• Option C (drg.no. BPN652/B3010), using 70mm humps, tables, and speed cushions.

5. Of the 265 frontagers of Bath Road and Beargarden Road consulted, 54 replies were received, of which nineteen preferred Option A, three Option B, and twenty seven Option C. Five others responded did not offer a preference. Additional comments were also made which have been listed in Annex 1. These points will be considered when we undertake detailed design.

Options

6. Cherwell District Council and local residents have represented that it is essential for traffic management measures to be introduced in Bath Road and Beargarden Road prior to the commencement of the major works on North Bar/ South Bar, due to start after Easter 2002.
7. The result of the low response to this consultation is the difference of 8 between Options A and C. This is not enough in my view to support construction of road humps (Option C) as a chosen measure for traffic calming. Option A (low 15mm platforms) might not be as effective in achieving the aims of reducing speeds and volume of traffic along this busy corridor as Option C, but it would allow for swift introduction prior to the major works at substantially lower cost.
8. Should monitoring prove this to be ineffective the implementation of the full road hump scheme could proceed, subject to further consultation, with minimal abortive cost.

Financial and Staff Implications

9. The scheme will be funded from SCA and developer contributions. The low platform Option A would cost approximately £10,000 for both Bath Road and Beargarden Road. The additional cost of implementing the full road hump scheme (Option B) would be approximately £40,000.
10. The County Council’s engineering consultant, Babtie, is undertaking the design work. Project management is being carried out by Environmental Services officers and can be encompassed within current staffing levels.

RECOMMENDATIONS

11. The Executive is RECOMMENDED to:

1. authorise the immediate implementation of Option A, as shown on drawing No BPN652/B3011, subject to monitoring of the effectiveness of the measures in terms of vehicle speeds and the level of traffic using Bath Road and Beargarden Road as a through route;
2. in the event of monitoring showing that Option A has failed to reduce vehicle speeds and through traffic, authorise formal consultation on the introduction of possible further measures in the form of Option C as shown on drawing No BPN652/B3010.

January 2002

Return to TOP