ITEM NO.
REPORT OF THE STRATEGIC DIRECTOR FOR HOUSING AND PLANNING
TO THE LEAD MEMBER FOR PLANNING
ON 4TH JULY 2005
TITLE :
PROPOSED SPEED MANAGEMENT MEASURES – LANGLEY ROAD/LANGLEY
ROAD SOUTH, IRWELL RIVERSIDE
RECOMMENDATIONS : THAT LEAD MEMBER NOTES THE CONTENT OF THIS REPORT
AND GIVES APPROVAL TO THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE
SPEED MANAGEMENT SCHEME.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY :
AN APPROACH HAS BEEN MADE BY RESIDENTS LIVING
ON LANGLEY ROAD REQUESTING TRAFFIC
CALMING/SPEED MANAGEMENT MEASURES.
THE PURPOSE OF THIS REPORT IS TO INFORM THE
LEAD MEMBER OF THIS REQUEST AND TO GET
APPROVAL FOR A PROPOSAL TO IMPLEMENT SPEED
MANAGEMENT MEASURES ON LANGLEY ROAD AND
LANGLEY ROAD SOUTH.
BACKGROUND DOCUMENTS : WORK FILE HELD IN ACCIDENT INVESTIGATION UNIT
(Available for public inspection)
ASSESSMENT OF RISK: N/A
SOURCE OF FUNDING: AN ESTIMATED COST OF £50,000 TO BE FUNDED FROM BLOCK
3 TRANSPORT CAPITAL PROGRAMME – LOCAL SAFETY
SCHEMES ALLOCATION.
COMMENTS OF THE STRATEGIC DIRECTOR OF CUSTOMER AND SUPPORT SERVICES
(or his representative):
1. LEGAL IMPLICATIONS
Provided by : N/A
2. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
Provided by : N/A
PROPERTY (if applicable):
N/A
HUMAN RESOURCES (if applicable):
CONTACT OFFICER :
N/A
ANDY DEVINE
WARD(S) TO WHICH REPORT RELATE(S):
KEY COUNCIL POLICIES:
DETAILS (Continued Overleaf)
xtn - 2696
IRWELL RIVERSIDE, PENDLEBURY
ENHANCING LIFE IN SALFORD
Reducing the number of people killed or seriously injured on
Salford’s roads.
1.0.
Report
1.1.
Lead Member will be aware that a road traffic accident occurred on Langley Road, in
January 2005 where a vehicle collided with a pedestrian, resulting in 14 year old
Amber Lok being fatally injured. There has subsequently, been an approach made by
local residents requesting traffic calming measures for the area. The normal
procedure is to undertake an assessment of the site in order to determine if
measures are appropriate and then to decide on what measures will be most
effective once implemented and this process includes an assessment of the risks
associated with the site in question. Further investigations include visits to site and
also a number of associated surveys that are undertaken recording the volume, type
and speed of vehicles in order to gain an appreciation of the situation as it exists at
that time.
1.2.
The traffic surveys revealed that the 85%ile speed (the speed at which 85% of the
traffic is travelling and the yardstick by which we measure the speed of a road) of
traffic on Langley Road was actually 33.8 mph with speeds of 38 mph on Langley
Road South and it also identified that a small proportion of the traffic was travelling at
speeds inappropriate for the nature of Langley Road. As a result of this information a
scheme has been drawn up that is intended to encourage motorists to regulate their
speed to the 30mph speed limit that is currently in place.
1.3.
The recent accident record for Langley Road reveals 3 accidents having been
recorded all resulting in slight injury and Langley Road South having 4 accidents, 1
fatality involving a single two wheeled powered vehicle losing control and colliding
with street furniture and the remainder involving slight injuries. As the entire length of
Langley Road and Langley Road South is over 2km the accident record did not result
in either of these roads being flagged up as sites requiring immediate attention in any
of our ‘hot spot’ lists.
1.4.
The road itself is semi-rural in character at the northern end, with the land use along
the remainder of the road being in the main light industrial with a cluster of residential
properties at the southern end of Langley Road. This means therefore that the class
of vehicle using the road does include Heavy Goods Vehicles (HGV) accessing the
industrial units and they make up approximately 3% of the total volume of vehicles
travelling along Langley Road and 5% of those on Langley Road South.
1.5.
The fact that HGV’s use the route limits the type of traffic management features that
are available to use and it was considered that the most appropriate treatment should
attempt to visually narrow the road by using appropriate road markings, warn
motorists on the approach to the various bends and then highlight the fact that the
road changes to residential use by implementing ‘gateways’ that reinforce this
message. The gateways consist of ‘dragon’s teeth’ road markings, rumble strips and
markings that give the impression that the road is actually narrower than it is.
1.6.
The existing road signs along Langley Road and Langley Road South are to be tied
in so that they are consistent with the new scheme and they will include 2 new speed
activated signs one on Langley Road and the other on Langley Road South that lock
on and track the speed of any vehicle that is travelling excessively over the speed
limit and then the reading on the sign flashes the speed back to alert drivers, these
have been used successfully in other areas to reduce the speed of vehicles.
1.7.
It is anticipated that these measures along with a new mobile speed camera site on
Langley Road/ Langley Road South, operated by Greater Manchester’s Casualty
Reduction Partnership will work in slowing down the speed of vehicles to more
appropriate levels. The scheme will be monitored after it has been implemented to
ensure that it is working to reduce speeds effectively. Before January 2005 this site
did not quite meet the criteria for a mobile camera (it needs 2 KSI’s per km over 3
years and speeds greater than 35mph to be considered) but we have argued the
case with DfT and it is anticipated that it will receive approval in the next operational
case (decision on this was deferred due to the election but should be rubber stamped
after 5th May).
1.8.
Consultation to date has included a meeting with Ian Latham (representing the
residents of Langley Road) and also members of the area Community Committee
where these proposals were outlined and everyone was in agreement. A request for
guard rail was raised at this meeting, however guard rail is normally used outside
school or park entrances and if it was erected on Langley Road it might create a
tunnel effect actually encouraging drivers to increase their speed. It was agreed to
allow the scheme to be implemented and then monitor it with a view to putting guard
rail in adjacent to the telephone box as a possible phase 2.
1.9.
A constant dialogue with Ian Latham had been maintained until recently and there
have been additional requests for both conventional traffic calming and also a formal
pelican crossing.
1.10. The character of the road has been described in 1.4 and this combined with the
requirement for use by HGV’s means that traffic calming in its conventional sense is
not appropriate. Vertical features would have to take account of the use by HGV’s
and bus services, thus restricting the type of measure to speed cushions. However,
in order to maintain low speeds the features would need to be spaced 60 metres
apart and as the road is 2km long it would require a great number of cushions, also
cushions do not necessarily reduce the speed of larger vehicles as their wider axles
can straddle the features. Horizontal features such as chicanes would also be
inappropriate as they need to be designed to allow the passage of HGV’s and buses
and therefore the gap required to allow their passage would be wide enough so that
the speed reducing effect to general traffic would be minimal, furthermore, chicanes
need a balanced flow of traffic in either direction otherwise the dominant flow often
takes priority through the feature resulting in hardly any speed reduction.
1.11. As regards the request for a crossing, a site visit has revealed that the number of
features that could be considered pedestrian generators are restricted to a telephone
box and letter box and I would anticipate that if subject to a pedestrian/vehicle survey
the number of crossing movements made would not reach the desired frequency
required to satisfy the need for such a crossing.
1.12. A more wide ranging consultation has just been completed with every resident and
business along Langley Road and Langley Road South receiving a letter outlining the
proposals, a plan and a reply slip on which to register their support or otherwise for
the scheme. A total of 120 letters were delivered and at the close of consultation on
27th May 2005 there had been 38 returns, with 35 or 92% in favour of the scheme
and 3 or 8% against the scheme as they consider it not wide ranging enough.
1.13. A further meeting took place on 27th June 2005 between senior representatives from
the City Council/ Urban Vision and representatives of the residents. The outcome
was that residents were happy for the proposals in this report to be implemented
without delay, however that further investigation be undertaken in to the
implementation of speed plateau on Langley Road, a static safety camera site,
possible severance of the route to through traffic and also to write to the relevant
bodies requesting the relocation of the post box and telephone box from the side
opposite the houses to a location on the property side.
1.14. A further assessment of the site will take place to determine if it is feasible to include
the additional features requested by residents at the meeting on 27th June 2005 and
if so they will receive consideration for implementation as phase 2 of the scheme.
2.0
Recommendation
2.1
The recommendation of this report is that Lead Member gives approval to the
implementation of the speed management scheme as outlined above, with a period
of after monitoring to take place to determine its effectiveness.
Malcolm Sykes
Strategic Director of Housing & Planning