Return to Agenda

Division(s): Henley North

ITEM TIC16

TRANSPORT IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE –
4 MARCH 2004

HENLEY – BELL STREET/NEW STREET PEDESTRIAN CROSSING

Report by Head of Transport

 

Introduction

  1. In November 2003 the Committee received a report detailing the results of an informal consultation to provide a crossing in the Bell Street/New Street area. The site of the crossing was originally proposed for New Street, but following review of the responses to the consultation it was proposed to re-locate the site to the north of the junction across Bell Street (Annex 1) (download as .doc file).

  2. Formal consultation was carried out on the new site and objections received. These were reported orally to the Transport Implementation Committee (TIC) on 27 November 2003 when it was decided to approve the implementation of the three crossings detailed in the report subject to the Director of Environment & Economy being authorised to resolve any concerns or objections resulting from the formal consultation in consultation with the Executive Members for Transport and Strategic Planning & Waste Management (as then) and in the case of New Street/Bell Street referring any objections to the Henley Traffic Advisory Committee and reporting back to the Transport Implementation Committee.

  3. On 14 January 2004 the scheme was presented to Henley TAC who agreed on a majority of 2-1, following the Chairman’s casting vote, not to proceed with the crossing at the site north of New Street and with a recommendation to move its location further north to upgrade an existing pedestrian island facility near Adams Court.

  4. Since that decision was taken the County Council has received a letter from a voting member of the TAC who had not attended the 14 January meeting. The letter supports the site for the crossing north of the Bell Street/New Street junction and opposes the TAC recommendation to move the site north. The full letter including a petition against the Adams Court location is available in the Members’ Resource Centre.

    5. Officer Comments

  5. The majority decision taken at the Henley TAC did not support implementing the crossing north of the junction but wished to move it further north. However, if all the voting members of the TAC had been present the outcome could have been different. There is clearly a need to seek a view from the Transport Implementation Committee on the current proposal.

  6. The site at Adams Court is not considered an appropriate location for the crossing. It is accepted that some pedestrian movements would be catered for but the desire line for the majority of movement to the town centre would best be served at or near the junction.

  7. In an effort to seek further local opinion the Henley ITS Steering Group (5 February 2004) were asked for their comments and these will be reported at the meeting.

  8. Any crossing in the Bell Street/New Street area will inevitably impact on the frontages and any consultation will generate some objections. Until a clear decision is taken at local level it seems very unlikely that a scheme will be implemented.

    9. Financial and Staff Implications

  9. The programme is being managed within existing staff resources.

  10. Finance for a crossing has been included in the Henley Integrated Transport Strategy budget for 2004/2005 but is subject to approval of the 2004/2005 Capital Programme.

    11. RECOMMENDATIONS

  11. The Committee is RECOMMENDED to:

          1. agree to put on hold the implementation of the pedestrian crossing on Bell Street, north of its junction with New Street (Annex 1) subject to consideration of the Henley ITS Steering Group comments reported at the meeting and the outcome of (b) below;

          2. instruct officers to ask Henley Traffic Advisory Committee to review their decision and seek support for the pedestrian crossing site north of the junction on Bell Street;

          3. subject to (a) and (b) agree to implement the crossing as described in the report subject to funds being available; and

          4. instruct officers not to pursue investigation of a Pelican Crossing site near Adam Court.

DAVID McKIBBIN
HEAD OF TRANSPORT

Background papers:

Contact Officer: Mike Collins Tel: Oxford 815877

26 February 2004

Return to TOP