Part 1 (Open to the Public)
Item No 7
______________________________________________________________
REPORT OF THE STRATEGIC DIRECTOR OF HOUSING AND PLANNING
______________________________________________________________
TO THE LEAD MEMBER FOR PLANNING
ON 5th MARCH 2007
______________________________________________________________
TITLE: CARLTON ROAD, WALKDEN - TRAFFIC CALMING MEASURES.
______________________________________________________________
RECOMMENDATIONS: The Lead Member notes the content of this report, grants approval for
the implementation of the scheme and that an order for £14,000 be placed with Urban Vision
(Highway Services) for its construction. Also that the City Solicitor be instructed to advertise the
traffic calming measures on Carlton Road.
______________________________________________________________
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: Little Hulton and Walkden Community Committee have requested
measures to improve safety at the junction of Carlton Road/Mellor Drive. To provide safe
opportunities for motorists exiting Mellor Drive it is proposed to introduce traffic calming
measures on Carlton Road that would reduce speed on the approaches to the junction.
______________________________________________________________
BACKGROUND DOCUMENTS: Report to Traffic Management Unit (29/11/06)
Working files in Road Casualty Reduction Group
______________________________________________________________
ASSESSMENT OF RISK:
Low
______________________________________________________________
SOURCE OF FUNDING:
Estimated to be £18,737 funded from the Little Hulton and
Walkden Community Committee devolved allocation of the Block 3 Transport Capital
Programme.
______________________________________________
LEGAL IMPLICATIONS:
Pauline Lewis – following e-mail communication there
are no legal implications to report
______________________________________________________________
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS;
Nigel Dickens – following e-mail communication there
are no additional financial implications to report
COMMUNICATION IMPLICATIONS:
N/A
VALUE FOR MONEY IMPLICATIONS: N/A
CLIENT IMPLICATIONS:
CLIENT OFFICER:
Darren Findley
PROPERTY:
N/A
______________________________________________________________
HUMAN RESOURCES:
N/A
CONTACT OFFICER: Sean Fernando - 779 4860
______________________________________________________________
WARD(S) TO WHICH REPORT RELATE(S):
Walkden South
______________________________________________________________
KEY COUNCIL POLICIES: ENHANCING LIFE IN SALFORD
Reducing the number of people killed or seriously injured on
Salford’s roads.
______________________________________________________________
DETAILS:
1.
BACKGROUND
1.1 An approach has been made by Little Hulton & Walkden Area Committee requesting
measures to address problems at the junction of Carlton Road/Mellor Drive. However,
there have been no reported personal injury collisions at the junction.
1.2 Carlton Road is approximately 400 metres long, which runs off Newearth Road. Mellor
Drive is a cul-de-sac, which runs off Carlton Road in a northerly direction. The visibility
for motorists exiting Mellor Drive is inadequate and the current lay out of the junction
does not allow any alteration works to improve sightlines.
2.
PROPOSAL
2.1 In order to provide safe opportunities for vehicles exiting Mellor Drive it is proposed to
introduce traffic calming measures on Carlton Road that would reduce speed on the
approaches to the junction. The proposed measures involve the installation of 3
standard flat top road humps on Carlton Road, spacing approximately 70 metres, with
associated signing and marking. The enclosed plan illustrates the scheme layout.
3.
CONSULTATION
3.1 Consultation have been carried out with local residents in the area and the results are as
follows: 




The number of consultation documents distributed
The total number of return slips received
The number of slips in favour
The number of slips not in favour
The number of slip undecided
= 140
=
64 (46%)
=
45 (70%)
= 18 (28%)
=
1
3.2 The residents who were not in favour of the scheme gave the following reasons and
brief comments have been made against each one:-











Talk to the owner of no.3 Carlton Road about trimming off the hedges. The owner
of the property no.3 has been contacted regarding this issue, however, it appears
that triming the hedges itself is inadequate to provide safe opportunities for
motorists exiting Mellor Drive.
Waste of tax payers money, should spend on better things like schools and care
homes – It has been received as a road safety priority directly from the area
Community Committee. Reduced speeds on residential streets will improve
safety, particularly for vulnerable road users.
Traffic calming measures do nothing to stop joy riders and bikers – traffic calming
measures by themselves do not prevent access by stolen vehicles, and such
measures are not generally used to address this problem. Police enforcement
and community safety strategy, etc. require to tackle this social problem.
Traversing over the humps will damage their vehicles – not if driven over at lower
speeds.
Road humps are obstructions to general traffic – this is not true if they are
constructed according to the Road Humps Regulations.
Traffic Calming is ineffective – they are proven to slow down the speed of
general traffic.
More than enough traffic calming features already in Walkden area – this
proposal is to address a specific safety problem at the junction as the current lay
out of the junction does not allow any alteration works to improve sightlines.
Traffic calming measures are dangerous – not if constructed properly and
traversed over them at appropriate speeds.
Road humps will not slow down the traffic, better to introduce a road narrowing
with priority give way – Considering the road layout it would be difficult to locate a
narrowing. Also it is unlikely it would help to reduce the speed of vehicles
approaching the junction as it requires an equal flow of traffic in either direction
making vehicles approaching the feature stop and give way. The most effective
way of reducing the speed of traffic is to introduce features involving vertical
deflection such as road humps.
There is no speeding problem on Carlton Road – Other residents have
expressed concern over the speed of vehicles.
Not a busy road, perhaps a mirror on a lamppost at the junction would suffice.
Mirrors may be erected at concealed bends on private land by the land owners,
however, local highway authority would not normally erect such features on
public highway as they do not conform the requirements specified in the Traffic
Signs Regulations and General Directions (TSR&GD) 2002.
3.3 As noted above the majority (70%) of those residents that responded are in favour of the
scheme and the comments against should be assessed against the likely benefits such
as reduced vehicle speeds, which should create a safer environment for local residents.
The results of the consultation exercise have been forwarded to members of the
Committee and they are in agreement to proceed with the scheme.
3.4 The proposals have been before the Traffic Management Unit attended by the
emergency services and no objections were received.
4.0
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
4.1 A target for the proposed works has been received from Urban Vision (Highways
Services) for £14,000.
4.2 The overall cost of the scheme is summarised as follows
Works
£ 14,000
ED Fees
£ 4,037
CIU Fees
£
700
Total
£ 18,737
4.3 The cost of the works will be met from the Little Hulton and Walkden Community
Committee devolved allocation of the Block 3 Transport Capital Programme 2006/07.
5.0
RECOMMENDATION
5.1.The recommendation is that the contents of this report be noted, approval be given to
the scheme and the City Solicitor be instructed to advertise the traffic calming measures
on Carlton Road.
5.2 That approval is given to place an order with Urban Vision (Highway Services) for the
construction of the Community Concern scheme for the sum of £14,000.
TENDER APPROVAL - PROFORMA
For use in seeking the approval of the Lead Member for Customer and Support Services to
proceed with a capital proposal
REPORT TO LEAD MEMBER FOR CUSTOMER AND SUPPORT SERVICES
Title of Scheme : Carlton Rd/Mellor Drive Traffic Calming Scheme
Recommendations (please append report to your service Lead Member)
Scheme Details (please append report to your service Lead Member)
Tender Details (please append report to your service Lead Member)
Estimated - Start Date : March 2007
Estimated - End Date : April 2007
FINANCIAL DETAILS
Recommended Tenderer : Urban Vision
Breakdown of Scheme Cost :
Tender Cost (quotation) : £14,000
04/05
£000‘s
05/06
£000‘s
Contract
Fees
Other (Specify) GMUTC
06/07
£000‘s
14
5
Later
£000‘s
Total
£000‘s
14
5
19
Total Cost
19
Phasing of Expenditure (£000‘s)
Apr
This
Year
Next
Year
Foll
owing
Year
May
June
July
Aug
Sept
Oct
Nov
Dec
Jan
Feb
Mar
10
9
Note : The monthly cash flow above should be consistent with the contract start and end dates
shown above and should allow for normal time lapses which will occur between work being
done, claimed for, certified and paid, as well as retentions. Please consult your Capital
Accountant if you need assistance with this or any other part of this proforma.
Is Scheme In The Current Approved Capital Programme ? Yes / No YES
Funding Identified :
05/06
£000‘s
06/07
£000‘s
07/08
£000‘s
Later
£000‘s
Total
£000‘s
Supported Borrowing
Unsupported Borrowing (see note 1)
Grant (Specify) DfT Grant Specific
Capital Receipts
Other (Specify)
Total
19
19
REVENUE IMPLICATIONS
Are there any revenue implications of this proposal ?
No
If Yes, please complete the table below
Are there any other financial implications
Details
Estimated Cost
Staffing (please specify) :
Other Running Costs (please specify) :
Capital Financing Costs (see Note 1 below - only to be
completed where the use of unsupported borrowing is
planned)
Total Estimated Cost
To be met from :
Budget
Code
Part
Year
£
Full
Year
£
Total Funding/Income
Net Revenue Cost/(Saving)
Note 1 : If unsupported borrowing is to be used, capital financing costs can be provided by
your Accountant and you should show in the table how revenue savings can be made to
fund these costs. Please consult your Accountant if you need assistance with completing this
or any other part of this form.
Decision of Lead Member Customer and Support Services
Approved/Not Approved