Top

Top

Agenda Item No

 

The Vale of Glamorgan Council

 

Cabinet Meeting: 13 January, 2014

Report of the Cabinet Member for the Environment and Visible Services

 

Swanbridge Road / Cog Road / Sully Road - Proposed 30mph Traffic Regulation Order - Objections Report

 

Purpose of the Report

1.         To advise Members of an objection received relating to the proposed introduction of a 30mph speed restriction order.

Recommendations

1.         That Members note the contents of the report.

2.         That for the reasons given, Members reject the objection and approval be given to     progress with the proposed Order as shown on the Schedule attached at Appendix 'A' and on plan no. T/13/104/DJH.

Reasons for the Recommendations

1.         For information.

2.         To enable the Order to be made.

Background

2.         On 15th February, 2012, a report was presented to Councillor. Cox, the then Cabinet Member for Visible Services, entitled ‘Swanbridge Road, Cog Road & Sully Road – proposed 30mph speed restriction order’.

This report sought his approval to give public notice to introduce a 30mph speed restriction along the sections of road shown on the attached plan, drawing no.T/13/104/DJH

The reason for the introduction of the 30mph limit through this area was that it has been identified that some of the lighting columns along the route are further apart than the maximum distance of 183 metres to automatically render the speed limit to be 30mph by virtue of street lighting.  Therefore a formal Traffic Regulation Order is required to make the road 30mph.

 

The proposal would also extend the existing 30mph restriction along Cog Road to its junction with Swanbridge Road, including the southernmost section of Sully Road.  This would greatly enhance the road safety situation at the triangular junction of these roads.

Relevant Issues and Options

3.         Councillor Cox approved the report and public notice and the formal consultation process was completed, which included support for the proposal from the Police.

4.         One objection was received from a former Councillor, Mr Anthony Ernest. A copy of his objection email is attached to this report in Appendix˜B’.  The reasons for his objections are highlighted below, alongside comments from the Traffic Management Section.

Objector's Views

(i) Objects to the creep of speed restrictions in the eastern side of the Vale;

(ii) States that of the six injury accidents and one fatal mentioned in the report (that occurred in the five year period 1st April, 2006 to 31st March, 2011), three of the casualties were in the same vehicle;

(iii) Says that there are very few properties along these roads and that we should not legislate for bad or incompetent drivers.

Traffic Officer Comments to the Objector's Issues:

 

(i) The speed limit is being proposed to improve road safety and has the full support of the Police;

(ii) The injury accidents recorded, including the fatal, actually relate to separate collisions;

(iii) The Council has an obligation under the Highways Act 1980 and the Road Traffic   Regulation Act 1984 to improve road safety where issues are clearly apparent and may be found negligent if it does not meet its obligations in this regard.

5.         A further letter was received during the consultation period from a Miss Gooch of Redlands Road, Penarth, stating that she supports the proposal, however she wishes the 30mph speed restriction to be extended along the length of Sully Road to where it meets the existing 30mph restriction south of St. Joseph’s Primary School,   approximately 2.2 kilometres away.

This was considered inappropriate and impracticable and does not have any support from the Police for enforcement.

6.         Details of the proposals are shown on the Schedule attached at Appendix ‘A’ and on plan reference number T/13/104/DJH.

Resource Implications (Financial and Employment)

7.         The cost of making the Traffic Regulation Order and implementing the scheme will be in the region of £1,650, which will be funded by the Council’s Traffic Management Revenue Budget 2013/14 and will utilise the Council’s own administrative resources.

Sustainability and Climate Change Implications

8.         There are no Sustainability and Climate change implications.

Legal Implications (to Include Human Rights Implications)

9.         The Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984 allows Highway Authorities to make and vary Traffic Regulation Orders to regulate the movement of vehicular traffic, restrict or prohibit certain classes of vehicle and to improve the amenities of an area.

10.      The Council as Highway Authority has a responsibility to improve the safety of the highway user and may be found to be negligent if it does not meet its statutory obligations under the Highways Act 1980 and the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984.

11.      There are no Human Rights Implications with regard to this report.

Crime and Disorder Implications

12.      There are no Crime and Disorder Implications.

Equal Opportunities Implications (to include Welsh Language issues)

13.      The proposals will benefit all sections of the community by improving the highway safety of the area.

14.      Public Notices advertising the proposed intention to create a new Order will be published bilingually and any signage associated with this project will adhere to the Council’s Welsh Language Scheme.

Corporate/Service Objectives

15.      To maintain and develop a safe and effective highway.

Policy Framework and Budget

16.      This is a matter for Executive Decision by Cabinet.

Consultation (including Ward Member Consultation)

17.      Current Ward Members have been consulted and are in favour of the proposal.

Councillor Bob Penrose would also like to see further restrictions in place, comments from his email reply dated 3rd October, 2013 are as follows:

'I personally consider that a 30 m.p.h. speed limit should exist on the total lengths of Sully Road, Cog Road and Swanbridge Road, from South Road Sully through to the junction with Redlands Road, Penarth, by virtue of the width of road, obscured bends and generally poor forward visibility for traffic travelling in either direction.  I would also recommend a 30 m.ph. speed limit for the length of Cross Common Road from its junction with Sully Road through to Dinas Powys, for the same reasons given previously for the other 3 roads.

I consider it essential this speed limit order is imposed as soon as possible on road safety grounds, where recently the risk factor has been increased by the rising volumes of traffic using this road to bypass traffic jams to Llandough via the Lavernock Road/ Redland Road route to the Merrie Harrier Junction.'

No further comments received from Cllr Kevin Mahoney.

18.      Stakeholder consultations will take place in accordance with the Road Traffic     Regulation Act 1984 when appropriate.

Relevant Scrutiny Committee

19.      Economy and Environment.

Background Papers

Traffic File IF 664

 

Contact Officer

David Hunt - Graduate Engineer (Traffic Management) - Tel No. 02920 673231

 

Officers Consulted

Operational Manager Legal Services

Accountant, Building and Visible Services

 

Responsible Officer:

Miles Punter Director of Visible Services and Housing

 

 

Share on facebook Like us on Facebook