Agenda item

Report of the Director for Environment and Resident Services. To be introduced  by the Cabinet Member for Cabinet Member for Climate Action, Environment & Transport.

Consider all feedback, objections and monitoring data of the trial LTN (including trial HGV ban on Belmont Road / Downhills Way) and decide whether to make permanent the associated traffic orders.

Councillor Sarah Williams left the meeting room for the consideration of this item at 7.02pm

Councillor Mike Hakata, Cabinet Member for Climate Action, Environment, and Transport introduced the report which sought approval to make the LTN trial in Bruce Grove and West Green permanent.

In response to questions from Cllr Chandwani and Cllr Cawley- Harrison the following was noted.

• There was a team that had been working on designing, managing and running various road schemes.
• In relation to emergency works, from the beginning, there had been a procedure for diversion through LTN’s and School Streets in the event of planned emergency street works. The procedure was created at the start without being able to live test how those the interventions would work. A review could be held regarding the procedure as a way forward.
• In relation to the smooth running of public transport in LTN’s and boundary roads, it was important to have reliable sustainable transport. There had been high disruption at the beginning, but this had eased off.
• The Council’s estates had always been designed according to LTN principles. The Council needed to be mindful of this and its subsequential impacts. The Council had begun the work of exploring solutions which would redress some of the issues on Broadwater Farm.
• In relation to the process and protocols in place, the traffic team can undertake a review to make sure that LTNs were optimised and as effective as possible. One protocol in place was designed to ensure that there was flexibility to open and ease congestion where there were delays due to road works or other such issues. Sometimes when there were road accidents, the Council was not always notified of them early enough and it was difficult for the Council to be immediately responsive. When the Council was aware, being able to open or make a decision around opening to redirect traffic was always something the Council was able to consider.
• In relation to undertaking a review, the Council would make a commitment to do it within the next few months.
• The ongoing projects such as trying to improve bus journey times and reliability was in the feasibility stage. There was a similar scheme around West Green Road looking at improving bus journey reliability and also looking at how to manage traffic flow through CCTV cameras. The same was true for Belmont Road and West Green Road and other roads in the borough. including the Tottenham area. All these were underway to help manage congestion.
• On average, across all LTN areas, there had been a reduction in road danger of 34% - a reduction in collisions. This was a reduction of one third. However, Bruce Grove, West Green, the most deprived of all three LTNs with some of the lowest car ownership numbers had seen a reduction of 56%. This was a reduction of around 20 serious collisions over a year. What had been shown across LTN areas and throughout the wider nation itself, was there had been a minimum of 50% reduction for traffic collisions. Vulnerable road users were seeing the benefits of improved road safety.
• The LTNs were only part of the solution to creating a fairer and greener borough. Complementary measures were already in place such as adapted school streets, bike hangers, cycle lanes that were being designed. The Council was also looking at public realm improvements within the LTNs themselves. The interventions could be anything, from greening spaces to tree planting. The Council did not want any money to be raised from a school street, but as a borough any money raised from fines caused by contraventions of schemes was spent on increasing and improving road safety as well as improving travel for vulnerable residents. For example, the borough put £14 million a year into the Freedom Pass scheme. This was paid for through revenue collected by the contravention charges.
• Filters and speed reduction measures would be placed if appropriate. A speed reduction measure, such as a borough wide 20 mile an hour zone was on its way to being implemented. Cars would also be taken off pavements.

RESOLVED

1. To consider the measured impact of the trial LTN as set out in the Monitoring Reports, Appendix A1 and A2.

2. To consider the responses received to the non-statutory public consultations and the statutory consultation, including objections to the experimental traffic orders, as set out in the Consultation Reports, Appendix B1 to B4.

3. To approve the recommended responses to main themes of objection, as set out in Appendix C.

4. To consider and discharge the Council’s statutory duties under section 16 of the Traffic Management Act 2004 and section 122 of the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984.

5. To consider and discharge the Council’s statutory duties under the Equality Act 2010 including the discharge of the Public Sector Equality Duty and any impact on Human Rights and approve the updated Equality Impact Assessment, Appendix D.

6. To agree that the Council shall exercise its discretion to not cause a public inquiry to be called.

7. To approve making the trial LTN permanent.

8. To delegate authority to the Head of Highways and Parking for the making of traffic orders which give permanent effect to the experimental traffic scheme known as Bruce Grove West Green Experimental LTN.

9. To approve making the trial 7.5 tonne weight limit on Downhills Way and Belmont Road permanent.

10. To delegates authority to the Head of Highways and Parking for the making of the traffic order which will give permanent effect to the experimental traffic scheme known as Experimental HGV Ban – Bruce Grove West Green Experimental Order 2023 T35.

Reasons for decision

The reason for recommendation 3.1 is to provide Cabinet with empirical evidence of the impact of the LTN.

The reason for recommendations 3.2 and 3.3 is to ensure compliance with (a) the Regulations1 whereby the order making authority must consider all unwithdrawn objections before making an order and (b) consider all consultation responses, in line with the ‘Gunning’ or ‘Sedley’ requirements. In short, this means: consultation must be at a time when proposals are still at a formative stage; Sufficient reasons must be put forward for any proposal to permit “intelligent consideration” and response; Adequate time is given for consideration and response; and the product of consultation is conscientiously taken into account by the decision maker.

Recommendation 3.4 is made to ensure that the Council discharges its statutory duties as contained within the Traffic Management Act 2004 and the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984, as discussed in the report.

Recommendation 3.5 is made to ensure that the Council discharges its statutory duties in relation to equalities and human rights, as discussed in paragraphs 10.5 to 10.16.

The reasons for recommendation 3.6 are set out in section 9.

Having taken into account all responses to all consultations, objections, the monitoring data, the Council’s existing strategic plans, statutory duties, studies on LTNs, the urgent need to respond to the Climate Emergency and to improve public health through increased active travel, the reason for recommendations 3.7, 3.8, 3.9 and 3.10 is to enable the Council to make the trial LTN and the 7.5t weight limit permanent.

Alternative options considered.

At this stage of an experimental traffic order (ETO), the Council must take a decision whether to make the traffic orders permanent. No changes to the LTN scheme are permitted in moving the orders to permanent orders. Notwithstanding the above, the existing LTN design meets the principles of such a scheme by preventing through-traffic (except to exempt vehicles) and whilst alternative options do exist (for example to provide all resident motorists with more routes to their street or property) this could not be achieved without undermining the objectives of the LTN; therefore this option is not recommended.

 If the Council does not make the LTN permanent, the alternative is to revoke the traffic orders (or let them lapse) and, as a consequence, the Council must remove the traffic signs that give effect to those orders and, therefore, remove the LTN. This alternative is not recommended for the reasons given in paragraph 4.6.

If the Council does not make the HGV ban permanent, the alternative is to revoke the traffic orders (or let them lapse) and, as a consequence, the Council must remove the traffic signs that give effect to those orders and, therefore, remove the HGV ban. This alternative is not recommended as it would not help address the rise in HGVs along Downhills Way and Belmont Road seen after the above LTN was implemented and therefore helped mitigate against this. Should the LTN not be made permanent, then the recommendation remains to retain the HGV ban as it brings benefit to the residents of these streets.

It is noted that, should the LTN not be approved to be made permanent, then the traffic filter located at the junction of Sperling Road and Moorefield Road would revert from an at-any-time ‘no motor vehicle’ restriction to a standard School Street filter (SS02 operating Mon-Fri 8:15-9:15am and 3-4pm) in accordance with the decision taken by Cabinet in July 2023.