Scrutiny Committee - PDF document

1 Meeting: Overview and Scrutiny Committee Cabinet Date: 4 February 2013 6 February 2013 Subject : Traffic Restrictions in pedestrianised areas / Gloucester City Centre Gate Streets Report Of : Cabinet Member for Regeneration and Cu lture Cabinet Member for Environment Wards Affected: A ll Key Decision: Yes Budget/Policy Framework: No Contact Officer: Stephen Mc Donnell Email: s tephen.mcdonnell@gloucester.gov.uk Tel: 396209 A ppendices: None FOR GENERAL RELEASE 1.0 Purpose of Report 1.1 To inform members of the propos ed change to four existing T raffic Regulation O rders on Gloucester City C entre G ate Streets which are being introduced by the Highway Authority and Local Traffic Authority Gloucestershire County Council and to co nsider further options for controlling vehicular access to the pedestrianised area during peak hours. 2.0 R ecommendations 2.1 Overview and Scrutiny Committee is asked to consider the information contained in the report and make any recommendations to t he Cabinet. 2. 2 Cabinet is asked to RESOLVE that: (1) the proposed chan ges to the existing four Traffic Regulation O rders on Gloucester’s Gate S treets , which will restrict access to all vehicles apart from emergency services and certain specific exemptions b etween 10.00 am and 4.00pm seven days a week , be supported . ( These proposals are s ubject to the outcome of a formal public consultation to be undertaken by Gloucestershire Highways in early 2013. ) (2) A match funding contribution of £50,000 (approx) towards t he cost of four rising bollards and additional street furniture to support the enforcement of the T raffic Regulation Orders referred to in 2.1 above be approved . 2 3 .0 B ackground and Key Issues 3.1 The pedestrianised areas were first created in 1990 whe n most of Eastgate and Westgate Street s were pedestrianised and controlled by the creation of two Traffic Regulation Orders . Later , most of Southgate and Northgate Streets were also pedestrianised and controlled by the creation of two more Traffic regulat ion Orders . 3 .2 The pedestrianisation scheme for the Gate Streets is a great success story and despite strong opposition from car users and the Chamber of Trade pri or to its creation , i t seems most people now accept it has improved the urban core markedly . 3.3 The current Traffic Regulation Orders were modified in 2004 in order to permit cycle access outside the peak s hopping hours 10.00am. - 5.00pm and allow vans and l orries access in non - peak times outside 10.00 a.m. to 5.00 pm . T here are however a large number of exemptions to the restrictions. 3.4 For some time a range of public and private sector city centre stakeholders have raised concerns about the current arrangements regarding vehicles entering the pe destrianised parts of the four G ate S treets ( Eastgate , Westgate, Northgate and Southgate Streets). This is a particular issue at busy times. 3.5 Safety is a key issue in the pedestrianised area of the Gate Streets as it is clearly not sensible to have vehicles moving around in such areas especially during busy times , f or example, heavy goods vehicles trying to navigate through crowds at the cross when the farmers market is set up. 3.6 Creating the right trading environment in the pedestrianised area of the Gate Streets is important so it is not good for the shoppers experience to have to dodge vehicles and other successful shopping centres tend to have very clear controls to keep vehicles and shoppers apart. 3.7 Following discussions at the City Centre Streetcare Group meeting which began in Decembe r 2011 it was agreed to address the current situation in the pedestrianised areas of the Gate Streets and set out to improve the situation. D iscussions with officers and elected members have been guided by Gloucestershire Highways . Gloucestershire Highwa ys is part of Gloucestershire County Council, the Highway Authority and Local Traffic Authority for Gloucestershire, responsible for maintaini ng and managing the public highway and rights of way in the county as well as implementing Orders to regulate the use of the highway. 3.8 The main objective of amending the four Traffic R egulation Orders is to create a much more clearly defined and enforceable pedestrian zone, so that a safer and more at tractive shopping environment is maintained. 3.9 Public feedbac k from a n informal consultation with stakeholders is that the signing of the existing restrictions is over complicated and confusing. Unfortunately this has led to some abuse of the restriction s and problems with enforcement. 3 3.10 The current zones are compromised by the need to accommodate vehicular access to facilities that have no viable alternative route as well as accommodating exemptions for a wide and varied range of vehicles. Some of these exemptions apply at various times of the day and days of the week. This adds to the confusion among drivers. 3. 11 In order to address this, it is proposed that a ‘’core pedestrian zone’’ will be created where vehicular access would be restricted to ‘ an absolute minimum ’ between the hours of 10.00am - 4.00pm every day. The core zone will be: Southgate Street - from the Cross to its junction with Longsmith Street Northgate Street - from the C ross to its junction with T he Oxbode Westgate Street - from the C ross to its junction with Berk e ley Street Eastgate Stre et - from the C ross to its junction with Brunswick R oad. 3.12 The proposal is to augment the T raffic Regulation O rders with physical measures or barriers to vehicular access in the form of four rising bollards at the entry points along with some additiona l street furniture. 3.13 Further changes to restrictions are proposed on the sections of road at the Lower part of Westgate Street (between Upper Quay Street and College Street) and the outer part of Northgate Street ( between the Oxbode and Worcester Stre et) will follow. As these sections of road provide access to St . Johns C hurch, the Cathedral and on street disabled parking spaces the restrictions here will not be full. 3. 14 It has to be acknowledged that the impact of these changes will affect servicin g practices for some bus i nesses and services but research on other towns and cities has shown that similar changes have been successful elsewhere. 3.15 A n informal consultation with stakeholders has been undertaken by Gloucestershire County Council throug h Gloucestershire Highways in partnership with Gloucester City Council in September ) . 4 .0 Alternative Options Considered 4 .1 One option would be to leave things as they are but following the Gloucestershire H ighways consultation and the discussions with stakeholders traders and the public along with detailed work by the S treetcar e group , it has been decided to modify the Traffic O rders and reduce the flow of non permitted vehicles that are currently causing concerns for both public safety and commercial a ctivity. 5 .0 Reasons for Recommendations 5 .1 Following the informal consultation which has received support from the C ivic T rust and no objections to the proposals , it is proposed that the Highways Authority undertake a formal public consultation commenc ing early 2013 as part of the process to change the Traffic Regulation Orders . 4 6 .0 Future Work and Conclusions 6.1 Following increasing concerns about the abuse of traffic restrictions on the pedestrianised areas of Gloucester’s Gate S treets , discuss ion s from key stakeholders at the City Centre S treetcare meeting s have helped to develop prop osals to simplify the existing T raffic Regulation O rders which apply to the pedestrian zone in Gloucester City C entre. Subject to the outcome of a further statuto ry public consultation the City C ouncil can further support the introduction of traffic restrictions by helping to fund physical barriers to improve the effectiveness of the protected central zone to which access will be restricted every day between 10.00a m and 4.00pm.There are also proposed exemptions for emergency vehicles, and permits will be issued to restricted exemptions. 6.2 When the changes as set out above have been implemented it has also been proposed that a wider review of the street furniture in the Gate Streets should be undertaken. This would follow the ethos of ’’ Living S treets ‘’ and allow better pedestrian flows. Some of the existing signage and decorative iron posts could then be removed creating a more open aspect. “ Simply walking down a street shouldn’t be an obstacle course. Unnecessary clutter makes life difficult for vulnerable pedestrians such as older people, disabled people and parents with pushchairs, as well as making streets unattractive and taking up space that should be avail able for pedestrians. Where things like guardrail, bollards and badly placed signs aren’t necessary, we should get rid of them. If they are needed, they can be moved or combined to free up more of the street for people ” . ( Extract from Living Streets Web si te ). 7 .0 Financial Implications 7 .1 There is an estimated cost of £50,000 expenditure which is to match fund Gloucestershire County Councils funding . Future maintenance and operation al costs would be borne by the H ighway Authority, Gloucestershire County C ouncil. (Financial Services have been consulted in the preparation this report.) 8 .0 Legal Implications 8 .1 Gloucestershire County Council are both the Highway Authority and Local Traffic Authority in Gloucestershire and are the body responsible for the processes involved in making Traffic Regulation Orders. 8.2 As part of the process involved in amending Traffic Regulation Orders, the Gloucestershire County Council will need to put the proposals out to statutory public consultation. (Legal Service s have been consulted in the preparation this report.) 5 9 .0 Risk & Opportunity Management Implications 9 .1 T here are no major risks in the proposals as set out in the report as it seeks to improve the safety of the four main gate streets for pedes trians by restricting access to vehicles during the busy parts of the day.The access to emergency vehicles will override the system causing the bollards to drop.The need for a full statutory consultation prior to implementation will also provide additional opportunities for potential risks to be highlighted. 10 .0 People Impact Assessment (PIA): 1 0 .1 As the proposals set out in the report will be subject to a full statutory public consultation any further concerns should be identified .in general terms the proposals should benefit all users of the Gate Streets by improving public safety. 10.2 The PIA Screening Stage was completed and did not identify any potential or actual negative impact ; there a full PIA was not required. 1 1 .0 Other Corporate Impli cations Community Safety 1 1 .1 The main concern would be the safety of the pedestrians and that setting out the market stalls clear signage is needed as we have received complaints about the signage at the start of the pedestrianised areas. Sustainabil ity 1 1 .2 Improving the pedestrianised Zone and reducing vehicle access will help encourage walking cycling and public transport use. Staffing & Trade Union 1 1 .3 There are no trade unions or staffing implications as such. Background Documents : None