Agenda item - BRIGHTON AND HOVE 20MPH LIMIT PHASE 2 - OBJECTIONS TO SPEED LIMIT ORDERS

navigation and tools

Find it

Agenda item

BRIGHTON AND HOVE 20MPH LIMIT PHASE 2 - OBJECTIONS TO SPEED LIMIT ORDERS

Report of the Executive Director of Environment, Development & Housing (copy attached).

Decision:

1. That, having taken account of all duly made representations and objections, the Environment Transport & Sustainability Committee approves as advertised the following orders

· Brighton & Hove (Phase 2, Area 1) (20mph Speed Limit) Order 20** (TRO-3a-2014)

· Brighton & Hove (Phase 2, Area 2) (20mph Speed Limit) Order 20** (TRO-3b-2014)

· Brighton & Hove (Phase 2, Area 3) (20mph Speed Limit) Order 20** (TRO-3c-2014)

With the following amendment:

That Copse Hill be removed from the Order for the reason set out in paragraphs 4.78 - 4.79

· Brighton & Hove (Phase 2, Area 4) (20mph Speed Limit) Order 20** (TRO-3d-2014)

· Brighton & Hove (Phase 2, Area 5) (20mph Speed Limit) Order 20** (TRO-3e-2014)

· Brighton & Hove (Phase 2, Area 6) (20mph Speed Limit) Order 20** (TRO-3f-2014)

· Brighton & Hove (Phase 2, Area 7) (20mph Speed Limit) Order 20**(TRO-3g-2014)

· Brighton & Hove (Phase 2, Area 8) (20mph Speed Limit) Order 20** (TRO-3h-2014)

· Brighton & Hove (Phase 2, Area 9) (20mph Speed Limit) Order 20** (TRO-3i-2014)

· Brighton & Hove (Coldean Lane) (30mph Speed Limit) Order 201* (TRO-3j-2014)

2. That the Committee authorises officers to proceed with advertising a formal Speed limit Order (SLO) to reduce to 20mph the speed limit on Dartmouth Crescent for the reasons outlined in paragraphs 4.41 – 4.44

3. That the Committee authorises officers to proceed with advertising two formal Speed limit Order’s (SLO’s) to reduce to 20mph the speed limit on Surrenden Road. One to cover the section of road running north to south and the second to cover the section of road running east to west for the reasons outlined in paragraphs 4.41-4.44

4. That the Committee authorises officers to proceed with advertising a formal Speed limit Order (SLO) to reduce to 20mph the speed limit on Preston Drove for the reasons outlined in paragraphs 4.41 – 4.44

5. That the Committee authorises officers to proceed with advertising a formal Speed limit Order (SLO) to reduce to 20mph the speed limit on Stanford Avenue for the reasons outlined in paragraphs 4.41-4.44

6. That the Committee note the forward programme for the 20mph programme as outlined in paragraph 6.5

7. That the Committee instructs officers to continue a comprehensive monitoring and evaluation programme to accompany and follow the implementation of the 20mph speed limits and to bring a report to Committee should such monitoring indicate that the introduction of the reduced speed limit has had a significant negative impact in line with objections raised

Minutes:

86.1. The Committee considered a report of the Executive Director of Environment, Development & Housing that addressed the comments and objections relating to the draft Speed Limit Orders (SLO) for the proposed introduction of a 20mph speed limit on the phase 2 area of Brighton & Hove.

86.2. Councillor Hawtree noted that consultation on phase 3 of the programme was scheduled to begin on 14 March and asked if Medina Terrace would be included in this phase as he had submitted a petition on the matter recently.

86.3. The Principal Transport Planner confirmed that Medina Terrace would be included in the consultation for phase 3.

86.4. Councillor Cox asked if Friends of the Earth had withdrawn their objection to the reduction of the speed limit on Surrenden Road.

86.5. The Principal Transport Planner replied that no specific withdrawal of this objection had been communicated.

86.6. Councillor Robins asked why monitoring of casualty figures was conducted between 8 April and 7 December as referenced at 4.50 of the report.

86.7. The Principal Transport Planner clarified that this was the only period feasible subsequent to the agreement of phase 1 of the scheme and allowed for consistency in a like for like comparison of data.

86.8. Councillor Theobald asked if the proposed SLO for Surrenden Road would apply to its entirety and if so, if two SLO’s could instead be advertised. Councillor Theobald explained that separating the Orders would allow residents to contribute to their specific area and there were no bus routes linking Ditchling Road to Braybon Avenue.

86.9. The Principal Transport Planner confirmed that the proposed SLO applied to all of Surrenden Road, two separate Orders could be advertised with Committee agreement.

86.10. Councillor Davey stated that he was pleased to see a positive response to the advertised SLO’s and he hoped that the Committee could support the proposals that had the backing of stakeholders such as Brighton & Hove Bus Company, Sussex Police and residents. Councillor Davey added that 20mph limits would make the cities streets safer and would go some way to addressing Brighton & Hove’s road safety record which was a matter of some concern.

86.11. Councillor Mitchell stated her support for the proposals adding that she was re-assured that the SLO’s for Surrenden Road could be separated. Councillor Mitchell expressed her thanks to the parents of Surrenden Road who had invited her to the area to view some of their concerns about road safety and to council officers who had explained some of the physical measures planned for the area. Councillor Mitchell stated that she strongly believed the introduction of 20mph required physical measures as a means of enforcement and hoped these would be forthcoming.

86.12. Councillor Hawtree stated his support for the proposals that he believed were in the best interests of residents of the city.

86.13. On behalf of the Conservative Group, Councillor Theobald formally moved a motion to amend recommendation 2.3 as shown in bold italics below:

2.3 The Committee authorises officers to proceed with advertisingtwo formal Speed Limit Order’s (SLO’s) to reduce to 20mph the speed limit on Surrenden Road.One to cover the section of road running north to south and the second to cover the section of road running east to west for the reasons outlined in paragraphs 4.41-4.44

86.14. Councillor Janio formally seconded the motion.

86.15. The Chair put the motion to the vote which was passed.

86.16. Councillor Hamilton stated that there appeared to be two small sections of road in South Portslade that were not identified in the SLO. Councillor Hamilton added that whilst he did not believe speeding would be an issue on these roads, he was concerned that their exclusion may potential cause problems regarding mandate.

86.17. The Principal Transport Planner clarified that she would check the legal status of the roads concerned and if it was found they been excluded in error, it was likely a report would have to be brought back to Committee for their inclusion.

86.18. Councillor Janio stated that he was pleased 20mph limits were being introduced although he believed arterial routes should remain at 30mph. Councillor Janio added that he did not believe enough data had been gathered from phase 1 of the scheme to justify commencement of phase 2 of the scheme and he was concerned the programme had been rushed.

86.19. The Principal Transport Planner stated that officers were continuing to monitor phase 1 and phase 2 of the scheme and she envisaged a report on the introduction of 20mph in phase 2 would be brought to Committee in the future.

86.20. Councillor Cox expressed his support for the proposals as a long advocate of 20mph limits on residential roads. Councillor Cox congratulated those who had campaigned for the inclusion of Preston Drove, Surrenden Road and Stanford Avenue as he had supported its original exclusion with some reluctance.

86.21. RESOLVED-

2.1 That, having taken account of all duly made representations and objections, the Environment Transport & Sustainability Committee approves as advertised the following orders