Issue - meetings

Item to follow

The Committee received a report from the Project Manager.

 

The report outlined the outcomes of the Cambridge 20 MPH Project Phase 3 (South and West/Central) public consultation and requested that South Area Committee provide recommendations to the Executive Councillor for Planning Policy and Transport on how the project should be progressed.

 

The Project Manager said that ‘Table 2: Responses from Statutory Consultees’ in his report should in fact read ‘Table 2: Traffic Sped Monitoring’.

 

The Committee made the following comments in response to the report:

       i.          The 20 MPH limit should be implemented across the city to be practicable. Implementing piecemeal sent out the wrong messages.

     ii.          The speed limit could be reviewed in two years if implemented.

   iii.          The speed limit on new housing developments was 30 MPH until they were adopted by the Highways Agency. This placed them outside of the recommendations to the Executive Councillor. SAC Members agreed to prompt the Executive Councillor to accelerate the Traffic Regulation Order process to ensure developments were covered by the 20 MPH limit until adopted by the Highways Agency.

 

In response to Members’ questions the Project Manager said the following:

       i.          Other committees implemented the 20 MPH limit where there was a majority of residents in favour, even if not universal.

     ii.          Schools had been included in the consultation.

   iii.          A normal level of return had been received for responses ie as expected.

   iv.          The 20 MPH limit was proposed in residential and business areas, not in arterial routes.

 

Members of the public asked a number of questions, as set out below.

 

1.       Mr Woodburn made the following points about the proposed 20 MPH limit in Cherry Hinton Road:

      i.          Stated it was unclear in the Officer’s report which parts of Cherry Hinton Road would be 20 MPH and which sections would not.

    ii.          Suggested that all sections of Cherry Hinton Road should be 20 MPH.

 iii.          Cherry Hinton Road (pavement) was used by many pedestrians, who would benefit from slower moving traffic. IE accidents involving vehicles moving at 20 MPH were less severe than those moving at 30 MPH.

  iv.          Requested that Brooklands Avenue be included in the 20 MPH project.

 

2.       A member of public asked why the 20 MPH speed limit would be implemented without an evidence base to demonstrate the need. He took issue with the consultation process and stated it did not explore alternative priorities to spend funding on.

 

Councillor Moore said there was evidence that 20 MPH speed limits led to better safety. They took time to implement, but people would adhere over time.

 

3.       A member of public referred to the reported lack of impact of the 20 MPH limit in the north of the city.

 

The Project Manager said average traffic speed had been reduced by 1 MPH as expected. Structural features would need to be implemented in the highway to further reduce speed. The Project Manager acknowledged there was some comment in the media to reflect the perceived lack of impact.

 

Mr Woodburn added that the 1 MPH speed reduction made a small but significant impact as it reduced the number of collisions and deaths.

 

4.       A member of the public asked if there was any join up between the 20 MPH limit project and the Hills Road Cycleway. Would cyclists be prosecuted if they broke the 20 MPH speed limit?

 

The Project Manager said there was no legal power to take enforcement action against unlicensed non-motorised vehicles.

 

Councillor Blackhurst said that SAC would vote tonight on areas where they would recommend to the Executive Councillor to implement a 20 MPH limit. It was the Executive Councillor’s decision on where or not to implement the speed limit in March 2015.

 

The Committee noted there was some ambiguity in GIS mapping information as to where Teversham Drift became Hinton Drive.

 

Councillor Avery urged that early consideration be given to extending the 20 MPH limit to the new developments on the southern fringe. SAC agreed this revision nem com.

 

The Chair decided that the recommendations highlighted in the Officer’s report should be voted on and recorded separately:

 

Following discussion, Members:

       i.          Resolved (unanimously) to note the consultation outcomes.

     ii.          Recommended to the Executive Councillor for Planning Policy and Transport (Councillor Kevin Blencowe) and the Environment Scrutiny Committee (where a final decision on potential implementation of the project will be made):

·       To introduce a 20 MPH limit on the unclassified roads in the South Phase area (unanimously).

·       To introduce a 20 MPH limit on the following main roads within the South Phase area:

Ø Teversham Drift/Hinton Road ((by 7 votes to 0 with 2 abstentions).

Ø Southern section of Grantchester Road (unanimously).

Ø Both Church Lane and Maris Lane in Trumpington (unanimously).

Ø Cherry Hinton High Street (by 7 votes to 1 with 1 abstention).

Ø Section of Cherry Hinton Road between Queen Edith’s Way and Walpole Road (unanimously).

Ø Queen Edith’s Way (by 2 votes to 0 with 7 abstentions).

·       Not to introduce a 20 MPH limit on the following main roads within the South Phase area:

Ø Brooklands Avenue (by 6 votes to 1 with 2 abstentions).

Ø Fulbourn Road (by 1 vote to 0 with 8 abstentions).

   iii.          Officers give consideration to extending the 20 MPH coverage to include new developments on the southern fringe.