Issue - meetings

Senior Engineer to respond to resident's questions regarding 20mph/Cherry Hinton Road in response to issues raised at South Area Committee 18 April 2016.

The Committee received a report from the Senior Engineer. He updated the agenda pack report by stating that phase 3 work had started and was expected to go into the autumn, but the work timetable was weather dependent.

The Senior Engineer said the following in response to Members’ questions:

       i.          Some but not all of Cherry Hinton Road would be 20 mph. The County Council, as Highway Authority for local roads, and Police said the area around Cherry Hinton Hall near the pelican crossing should remain 30 mph.

     ii.          20 mph was desirable across the city, but the County Council and Police would not support the introduction of limits where compliance levels were expected to be poor, and the Council was of the view that it was better to implement 20 mph in those areas where it was practicable (the majority) rather than not at all.

   iii.          South Area Committee did recommend various roads should have a 20 mph limit, but the County Council had to go through a statutory process to implement this, and not all recommendations were achieved. The Executive Councillor and Leader had been kept updated with progress.

South Area Committee asked for it to be minuted that not all recommendations were implemented and asked what actions could be put in place to get the whole of Cherry Hinton Road reconsidered for implementation of 20 mph.

The Senior Engineer advised that this could continue to be pursued directly with the County Council following completion of the current City Council project.

ACTION POINT: Senior Engineer to keep South Area Committee informed on 20 mph project progress.

   iv.          The City Council has a 20 mph webpage where people could feedback views in readiness for work on project phase 3. An average reduction of 1 – 2 mph was expected through the 20 mph project, any further reduction would require measures such as speed humps.

    v.          Feedback would be sought in future regarding the success in reducing speed through each of the project phases.

Mr Woodburn made the following comments in response to the report:

       i.          The speed camera near the Swiss Laundry in Cherry Hinton Road ought to be set to 20 mph to enforce the speed limit. Requested other cameras in the city also be set to 20 mph.

     ii.          Requested a citywide 20 mph limit be established, rather than having a mix of 20 and 30 mph areas.

The Senior Engineer said the following in response to questions from members of the public:

       i.          The fixed safety camera near the Swiss Laundry in Cherry Hinton Road was unique in being the only one on a road where the speed limit was being reduced to 20 mph. Fixed cameras in other areas were generally set to 30 mph, which was the minimal level practicable for this type of equipment.

     ii.          Fixed safety cameras could be moved to areas of highest need, instead of being left redundant in 20 mph areas.

   iii.          Safety cameras were old technology that was being replaced by other methods. The Safety Camera Partnership, administered between the County Council and Police, was reviewing the effectiveness of tools and what could be utilised in future.

   iv.          City residents had been consulted about reducing the speed limit on a number of specific roads from 30 to 20 mph. In some cases, residents had requested there be no reduction. Area Committees had been asked to make recommendations on individual roads based upon existing traffic speeds, likely levels of compliance, and consultation feedback.

    v.          Referred to the evidence base in earlier reports as to why areas were recommended for 20 mph or not. Factors such as existing traffic speeds and the road environment had been considered.