Report re Wortley Road Highway Proposals

DEVELOPMENT SERVICES

                                             

REPORT TO WEST AND NORTH PLANNING AND HIGHWAYS AREA BOARD

13 NOVEMBER 2007

 

HIGHWAY PROPOSALS FOR WORTLEY ROAD

 

1.0       PURPOSE OF REPORT

 

1.1       To inform the Board of the outcome of consultation on highway proposals for Wortley Road at High Green, including the advertisement of the proposed Traffic Regulation Order, and to make recommendations on the responses and the objections received.

 

1.2       To seek approval to proceed to construct the scheme as now amended. 

 

2.0        BACKGROUND

 

2.1        There are long-standing requests from local residents for action on traffic issues on Wortley Road. These requests go back many years and a local action group, the Wortley Road Action Group (WRAG), has developed to help progress these. A number of proposals have been developed to tackle these issues over the years. However, progressing these through to implementation has been delayed by a lack of funding.  One of the main local issues is the conflict between traffic, especially large vehicles (mainly buses) and pedestrians, particularly in front of the school (High Green Primary).

 

2.2        Proposals for Wortley Road have been advanced this year because the location has been identified as causing significant reliability problems for buses. As a result, it has been included in the Local Transport Plan Bus Hotspots Programme. This is a list of problem locations for buses across the city, agreed between the Passenger Transport Executive (PTE), the bus operators and the City Council, to be tackled in a variety of ways.

 

2.3        A large number of buses use Wortley Road, particularly between 0800 and 1830 on Mondays to Saturdays, including high-frequency bus services such as the 75, 76 and 88. The road is important to the operation of the public transport network in Sheffield. Services 75, 76 and 88 are included as core services within the statutory North Sheffield (Barnsley Road) Quality Bus Partnership Scheme and so service users in High Green will benefit from the improvements required by it.

 

2.4        These buses experience delay along Wortley Road because it is a narrow road with conflict occurring between moving traffic and parked vehicles (and particularly between larger moving vehicles, most of which are buses, and parked vehicles). Local people report that larger vehicles (mainly buses) regularly endanger pedestrians by mounting the pavement in order to progress along the road, as a result of parked vehicles at places where the road is relatively narrow. The bus companies are tackling this with their drivers but, due to the lack of areas for two large vehicles to pass safely, it continues to happen. The underlying principle of the scheme proposed is to provide enough clear road width for vehicles to pass, including a number of ‘passing places’ where two buses (or other larger vehicles) can      pass. Cross-sections demonstrating this are attached as an appendix.

 

2.5        The most recent proposal for Wortley Road to come to West and North Board came in January this year. As a result of the lack of progress on previous proposals for the whole road, officers had developed a more modest proposal just to tackle the delays and congestion caused by the fact that the into-city and out-of-city bus stops outside the school were opposite each other. However, local residents petitioned against this, as it did not tackle the issues that they were most concerned about. A report on this petition came to Board in January. Board decided not to approve the bus stop proposal, but that officers should develop and consult on new proposals to tackle all the issues on the road in a balanced way. It was agreed that the new bus hotspots funding block provided a way forward in terms of funding. This report, therefore, informs the Board of the outcome of this process.

 

2.6        The scheme location is shown in Appendix A. Appendix B shows the number of buses that use Wortley Road on different days of the week. Appendix C shows the consultation proposals, including the proposed Traffic Regulation Order restrictions (plans TM-BN422-PO1-TRO AD-West and TM-BN422-PO1-TRO AD East). Appendix D shows the revised proposals as recommended by this report.  Appendix E contains cross-sections demonstrating the design principles adopted in relation to providing clear road width. Appendix F tabulates all the issues and objections received, alongside the recommended Council response.

 

3.0        CONSULTATION

 

3.1   Local public consultation was carried out during July this year, with a closing date of Friday 20th July. The proposed TRO was advertised at the same time. As part of the consultation process, officers attended a special meeting of the North Area Panel, held in High Green on 5th July, to discuss these proposals with local residents. Officers have also met with the Headteacher at High Green Primary School.

 

3.2   Officers have also attended a second North Area Panel meeting, held in High Green on 19th September, to report back on the changes that have been made to the proposals in the light of the consultation, as included in this report.

 

3.3   23 responses were received to the July consultation, including one from a local councillor. 12 of these responses are objections to the proposed TRO, in all or in part. Sections 4 to 7 of this report discuss the main issues and objections received. Appendix F tabulates all the issues and objections received, alongside the recommended Council response.

 

3.4   One response has been received from the emergency services: from South Yorkshire Police. This just notes that it has no objections to the proposals. The PTE and the bus operators’ umbrella group, Bus Operators Serving South Yorkshire, have been involved in developing the proposals as part of the Bus Hotspots project team.

 

3.5   The main issues raised were objections to the proposed parking restrictions; concerns about safety outside the school; concerns about the number of buses using the road; and concerns about the location of the two bus stops outside the school.

 

4.0        PARKING RESTRICTIONS

 

4.1   Plans TM-BN422-PO1-TRO AD-West and TM-BN422-PO1-TRO AD East, attached as Appendices C and D, show the consultation proposals, including the proposed parking restrictions. These comprise of:

§         Bus stop clearways at 6 bus stops;

§         Double Yellow Lines around junctions and accesses;

§         Double Yellow Lines (DYLs) and Single Yellow Lines (SYLs) along considerable stretches of Wortley Road, based on road width criteria. The criteria adopted were to maintain at least 4.8m of clear road width along the length of the road to enable a bus and car to pass, with a minimum of 5.75m of clear road width at a number of locations (‘passing places’) to allow two buses to pass.

 

4.2   12 objections were received to all or part of the proposed TRO. Half of these objected to the extent of the restrictions, particularly at the eastern end of the road and particularly at evenings and weekends. Other objections relate to specific locations: outside the businesses at nos.9 to 13 (3 objections) and around the school (3 objections).  Other parking issues raised were the need for limited waiting, for residents’ parking and for off-street parking.

 

4.3   Most of these issues were also raised at the special North Area Panel meeting in July and officers undertook to look at removing DYLs where possible (replacing with SYLs or removing altogether) and to look at the times of operation of SYLs, giving greater priority to residents at times when there were less buses running.

 

4.4   As can be seen from Appendix B, there are far fewer buses on Wortley Road after 1830 and all day on Sundays, than during the rest of the week. Because of this, it is possible to relax the clear road width criteria at these times, from 4.8m clear road width during the daytime to 4.5m at other times. This enables some reduction in the extent of DYL parking restrictions.

 

4.5   In addition, some of the accesses and junctions serve a very small number of properties. Where this is the case, it is reasonable to relax the 10m of DYLs advertised to 5m.

 

4.6   Saturdays present a more complex picture. The number of buses during the daytime is slightly less than during the week, reducing from 16 to 14 buses per hour each way, but is still considerable. However, officers are persuaded that the balance between different road users can be adjusted for Saturdays. The recommendation, therefore, is that the TRO be made with SYLs approved for Monday to Saturday 0800 to 1830, but that it will be implemented only for Monday to Friday 0800 to 1830 for a trial period. The recommendation is that scheme monitoring be carried out after this has been in place for at least 6 months. If, following the monitoring process, it is felt by officers that an additional restriction on the Saturday is required; this will be the subject of a further report to Board.

 

4.7   In terms of ‘parking spaces’, the revised scheme allows for 51 unrestricted spaces and an additional 12 at evenings/weekends, making 63 in all. This compares to 46 unrestricted and 8 additional at evenings/weekends, making 54 in total, in the consultation proposals. It is difficult to compare this to the current situation as there are currently no parking restrictions on-street at bus stops or junctions and accesses, although parking should not occur here. There are also no restrictions currently along the north side of Wortley Road between the school and the Mortomley Lane junction, although residents do not park here because of the narrowness of the road. A 12-hour parking survey (0700 to 1900) showed that the highest demand for parking was 53 vehicles, between 1500 and 1600, slightly higher than the 51 spaces that would be available at that time in the revised scheme. This demand relates, of course, to school finishing time. The school now has an approved travel plan and is encouraging parents and carers to walk or ‘park and stride’ (that is to park a few minutes away in a less busy area and walk the remainder of the journey).

 

4.8   In relation to the objections to parking restrictions outside the businesses at nos.9 to 13 (3 objections), the business people here are concerned for the viability of their businesses. However, the road here is particularly narrow and it is not possible to recommend much change. Footway width in front of the three properties is less than 1.5m (also on the opposite side of the road). Carriageway width is at 5.72m on the approach to no.9, widening to 6.33m at no.13. A width of 6.6m is required to enable daytime parking (4.8m clear width and 1.8m width for the parked vehicle) and 6.3m to enable evening/weekend parking. It is, therefore, possible to amend the DYLs outside no.13 to SYLs and this is recommended.

 

4.9    In relation to the objections to parking restrictions opposite and around the school (3 objections), residents here are concerned for their own and their visitors’ ability, because of mobility issues, to access their houses. Some of the amendments made to the plan (e.g DYLs to SYLs outside nos.41 to 47 and SYLs to unrestricted parking outside nos.92 to 94) will help here. However, the overall impact of the scheme is to provide regulated parking and it cannot be disputed that there will be occasions when residents have to park in different and less convenient locations.

 

5.0        SAFETY OUTSIDE THE SCHOOL

 

5.1   The proposal to resolve difficulties for buses also provides an opportunity to address the historic desire for a barrier or bollards outside High Green Primary School. This was raised during the consultation, along with requests for a zebra crossing in the area, and issues about the flat-top plateau and vehicle speeds. The consultation proposals included two flat-top plateau, as entry features, and a red-surfaced informal crossing point at the location where the School Crossing Patrol works, as well as a 24-hour school keep clear marking and regulatory order.

 

5.2   As already stated, there have been long-standing requests from local residents for action on traffic issues, particularly in the area outside the school where there is a perceived need to stop buses from mounting the footway and to improve safety for school-children. The footway outside the school is narrow at about 1.7m. The main school entrance is set in a high stone wall so that children are not visible to traffic until they are on the footway and vice versa. At that footway width, it is not feasible to provide a barrier or bollards as this would narrow the footway to about 1.2m, which would cause difficulties for wheelchairs and people with prams. Because of the seriousness of this issue, feasibility work has been done to establish that the footway can be widened here sufficiently to enable a barrier/bollards to be included, as well as providing more footway space. This will increase the costs of the scheme but should be done, in the interests of providing a balanced, integrated way forward.

 

5.3   It is not possible to provide a zebra crossing outside the school, as there is not enough width to do this. The footway would require building out on both sides (it is currently even narrower, at 1.56m, on the other side from the school). There is also an issue about where it could actually be located in relation to the various accesses.

 

5.4   The flat-top plateaux are included in the proposals as entry features in relation to the school, emphasising the need to drive carefully in that particular location. Two respondents have argued that the parking restrictions will lead to increased speeds, but the plateau should prevent this occurring in the vicinity of the school entrance. The clear road widths provided through the scheme are to allow for traffic movement rather than traffic speed, as demonstrated in the cross-sections at Appendix E. It is thought that the wider clear road widths provided are of a sufficiently short length to discourage speeding. Speeds have already been monitored in this area and will be monitored again after scheme implementation to check this.

 

6.0        BUS NUMBERS

 

6.1   There are a large number of buses on Wortley Road (see Appendix B), reflecting its’ importance as the outer end of several core bus services. The numbers have increased significantly since bus deregulation in the 1980’s. This means that local people who use the buses have an excellent service. Some local residents, the local action group WRAG and the local ward Labour Party, would like to see these numbers reduced. This is not within the powers of either the City Council or the PTE, as they currently stand. Some respondents have asked that the City Council take the matter to the Traffic Commissioner to progress a Traffic Regulation Condition. However, this method of control has not been used in similar situations elsewhere in the UK, being primarily used in congested town and city centres including Sheffield. There are other similar roads in the city with similar numbers of buses.

 

6.2   Wider powers to control bus frequencies will come through legislation. This is being developed as part of the Local Transport Bill. Recognising the views of local residents, officers will seek no increase in bus levels on Wortley Road, through existing regular meetings with the bus operators.

 

7.0        BUS STOPS

 

7.1   Several respondents have raised concerns about the location of the two bus stops outside the school. The proposals included moving the out-of-city stop so that these two stops were no longer opposite each other. This is the same as the proposal that came to Board in January. The consultation process showed a marked local preference for moving the into-city stop instead of the out-of-city stop. This option has been investigated and is feasible in terms of the carriageway and footway widths involved and the impact on parking. A location for the into-city stop has been confirmed. It is this option, therefore, that is shown in Appendix D.  

 

8.0        FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

 

8.1   The scheme is funded from the approved Local Transport Plan Bus Hotspots Block.  The cost is estimated at around £50K.

 

10.0 EQUAL OPPORTUNITIES IMPLICATIONS

 

10.1 The scheme will provide bus stop clearways and raised kerbs at seven bus stops, adding to the accessibility of the bus network across the city. It will also improve safety around the school entrance.

 

11.0  ENVIRONMENTAL IMPLICATIONS

 

11.1 The scheme should reduce congestion and emissions and help improve the reliability of bus services. It will add to the benefits that the area will receive as a result of  the bus service numbers 75, 76 and 88 being core services within the statutory North Sheffield (Barnsley Road) Quality Bus Partnership Scheme.

 

12.0 PROPERTY IMPLICATIONS

 

12.1       There are no known property implications arising from this report.

 

13.0    RECOMMENDATIONS

 

It is recommended that:

 

·        The objections to the proposed TRO are upheld in part and a suitably amended TRO for the restrictions shown on the revised plans (included as Appendix D) is made in accordance with the provisions of the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984;

·        The proposed Restriction of Waiting Monday to Saturday 0800 to 1830 be implemented initially for Monday to Friday 0800 to1830, for a trial period of at least six months;

·        If officers subsequently consider that an additional restriction on the Saturday is required, a further report will be made to Board;

·        All objectors are advised in writing of this outcome;

·        The amended design of the scheme is approved and authority given for construction.

 

 

John Bann

Head of Transport & Highways                                                                                                                                                          26 October 2007