Title of Report: Traffic Regulation Orders • 7.5 Tonnes Weight Restrictions Amendment Various Roads, , Emmbrook, Evendons, Hurst, Norreys, South • Station Road, A321 High Street & Waterman’s Way, -Prohibition of Waiting Proposal

Equalities Impact Assessment The purpose of this assessment is to improve the work of the Council by making sure that it does not discriminate against any individual or group and that, where possible, it promotes equality. The Council has a legal duty to comply with equalities legislation and this template enables you to consider the impact (positive or negative) a project may have upon various equality target groups.

Positive Negative Neutral Detail of Impact Impact Impact impact and how it can be mitigated Gender Men P Women P

Ethnicity Asian or Asian British P Black or Black British P Gypsies/travelers P Irish P Mixed Race P Other minority ethnic P group White P

Disability Physical P Sensory P Learning Difficulties P Mental Health P

Sexuality Bisexual P Lesbian P Gay P Transgender P

Age 16-25 P 25-49 P 50+ P

Belief Faith Groups P Those of no faith P

Overall Conclusion: Impact on Equality Quantified

No impact on Equality.

Sustainability Appraisal Sustainability is one of the Council’s cross-cutting themes and the Council has made a corporate commitment to address the social, economic and environmental effects of activities across all service areas. The purpose of this appraisal is to record any positive or negative impacts this project is likely to have on each of the Council’s sustainability themes.

Theme Positive Negative Neutral Detail of (Potential impacts of the project) Impact Impact Impact impact and how it can be mitigated Use of energy, water, minerals and P materials Waste generation/sustainable waste P management Pollution to air, land and water P

Factors that contribute to climate P change Protection of and access to not rely P on the car A strong diverse and sustainable P local economy Meets local needs P

Opportunities for education and P information Provision of appropriate and P sustainable housing Personal safety and reduced fear of P crime Good health P

Access to cultural and leisure P facilities Social inclusion P

Overall Conclusion: Impact on Sustainability Quantified

Mainly a neutral impact but with respect to the waiting proposal it will meet the needs of the local residents.

NOTICE OF INDIVIDUAL EXECUTIVE MEMBER DECISION

ITEM NO. IMD

TITLE Traffic Regulation Orders • 7.5 Tonnes Weight Restrictions Amendment Various Roads, Arborfield, Emmbrook, Evendons, Hurst, Norreys, Shinfield South

• Station Road, A321 High Street & Waterman’s Way, Wargrave - Prohibition of Waiting Proposal

DECISION TO BE MADE BY Cllr Keith Baker

DATE OF DECISION

REPORT TO BE PUBLISHED ON

INDIVIDUAL EXECUTIVE MEMBER DECISION REFERENCE IMD:

TITLE Traffic Regulation Orders • 7.5 Tonnes Weight Restrictions Amendment Various Roads, Arborfield, Emmbrook, Evendons, Hurst, Norreys, Shinfield South

• Station Road, A321 High Street & Waterman’s Way, Wargrave - Prohibition of Waiting Proposal

FOR CONSIDERATION BY Executive Member for Highways and Transport

DATE

WARDS Arborfield, Emmbrook, Evendons, Hurst, Norreys, Shinfield South, , Wargrave and .

REPORT PREPARED BY Chris Redfern – Traffic Management

SUMMARY To inform the Executive Member for Highways and Transport of Progress on the Traffic Regulation Orders (TROs), and to inform on a review which has been undertaken to update the weight restrictions that are no longer permitted on eleven minor (Class C or unclassified) roads in the Borough area

REASONS FOR DECISION To enable the progression of the schemes.

ALTERNATIVE OPTIONS, IF ANY Do nothing. Other options for the Station Road, A321 High Street & Waterman’s Way, Wargrave - Prohibition of Waiting Proposal are set out under the Supporting Information section of this report.

RECOMMENDATIONS 1) It is recommended that the Executive Member for Highways and Transport approve: a) the amendment of the weight restriction to 7.5 tonnes on the following roads: • Eastheath Avenue, Evendons • Holt Lane, Emmbrook • Oaklands Drive, Evendons • Bell Foundry Lane, Norreys • Coppid Beech Hill (Service Road), Norreys • Church Lane, Arborfield • Commons Road, Emmbrook • Lowther Road, Emmbrook • Old Pound Lane, Hurst • Road south of Old Pound Lane connecting B3030 and A321 Broadwater Lane, Hurst • Kybes Lane, Shinfield South, b) the advertisement and formal consultation of the proposal, c) consideration of any objections which may be received, d) if no objections are received to authorise the introduction of the necessary Traffic Regulation Order.

2) It is recommended that the Executive Member for Highways and Transport approve: a) the installation of prohibition of waiting restrictions at the junctions of Station Road, with High Street (A321) and Watermans Way, Wargrave, as shown on drawing number 5049/398/A, b) that the objectors be informed accordingly. c) that no public inquires be held.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

Revenue *

How much will it Cost Is there sufficient budget (or grant / Save (*)? (1) funding) available? – if not quantify the Supplementary Estimate OR if savings, also quantify. (2) Current Financial Year £6,100 Yes - 7.5 Tonnes weight restrictions (Year 1) amendment could be funded from the 2008/2009 revenue allocation for Highway Improvements schemes.

£1,800 Yes - Station Road, A321 High Street & Waterman’s Way, Wargrave is previously funded from the 2008/2009 revenue allocation for Highway Improvements schemes. Next Financial Year £0 Yes. No future financial implications. (Year 2) Following Financial £0 Yes. No future financial implications. Year (Year 3)

Capital *

How much will it Cost Is there sufficient budget (or grant / Save(*)? (1) funding) available? – if not quantify the Supplementary Estimate OR if savings, also quantify. (2) Current Financial Year £0 Yes. No financial implications. (Year 1) Next Financial Year £0 Yes. No future financial implications. (Year 2) Following Financial £0 Yes. No future financial implications. Year (Year 3) Years 4 – 10 £0 Yes. No future financial implications. (10 year capital vision)

Other relevant financial information relevant to the Recommendation/Decision The schemes do not have any other financial implications.

SUMMARY OF CONSULTATION RESPONSES

Corporate Head of Finance – Graham Ebers: No response Monitoring Officer – Susanne Nelson-Wehrmyer: No response Leader of the Council – Frank Browne: No response Town and Councils: • Wokingham Town Council: Are in agreement • Aborfield Parish Council: No response • Hurst Parish Council: Are in agreement • Shinfield Parish Council: Are in agreement • Wargrave Parish Council: No response Local Ward Members Evendons • Dianne King: In agreement • Mr D Morgan: No response • Chris Bowring: No response Emmbrook • Ullakarin Clark: No response • Debbie Lewis: No response • Philip Mirfin: In agreement Arborfield • Gary Cowan: No response Hurst • Annette Drake: No response Norreys • Alistair Auty: No response • Iain Browne: In agreement • David Lee: No response Shinfield South • Malcolm Bryant: No response • Barrie Patman: No response • Mr A Pollock: No response Remenham, Wargrave and Ruscombe • Frank Browne: No response • John Kersley: No response

Impact on Equality No impact on Equality.

Impact on Sustainability Mainly a neutral impact but with respect to the waiting proposal it will meet the needs of the local residents.

List of Background Papers Copies of advertisements, consultation letters and letters of objection.

Held by Rob McDonnell – Senior Traffic Service Environment Management Engineer Telephone No 0118 974 6331 Email [email protected] Date 20th March 2008 Version No. 1 Date 9th March 2008 Version No. 2 Date 1st May 2008 Version No. 3

NB All reports seek to identify environmental, community safety, customer care and equal opportunities implications. Consultation with residents and organisations which has or is about to take place, will also be reported.

SUPPORTING INFORMATION An explanation of each of the proposed TROs is on the following pages. Drawing 5049/398/A is included for information. In addition Appendix A sets out the objections received.

7.5 Tonnes Weight Restrictions Amendment - Various Roads, Arborfield, Emmbrook, Evendons, Hurst, Norreys, Shinfield South

1 A review has been undertaken to update the weight restrictions that are no longer permitted on eleven minor (Class C or unclassified) roads in the Wokingham Borough area which have either 2 tonnes, 3 tons or 3 tonnes weight restrictions. It has recently come to the attention of Officers that the Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions 2002 now only permit weight restriction signs of 7.5 or 18 tonnes on public highways. Indeed, Regulation 3(2)(c) of the Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions 1994 stated that signs with maximum weights other than the aforementioned restrictions (with the exception of Weak Bridge maximum gross weight limit signs) will cease to have effect after 1st January 2005.

2 It is proposed for a Traffic Regulation Order be drafted referring to the respective Orders currently in place for roads with weight limits of 2 tonnes, 3 tons or 3 tonnes. These restrictions would then change to a limit of 7.5 tonnes to ensure consistency and compliance of all roads with weight restrictions in Wokingham Borough with the current legal requirement. The roads affected are listed below:

Eastheath Avenue, Evendons Holt Lane, Emmbrook Oaklands Drive, Evendons Bell Foundry Lane, Norreys Coppid Beech Hill (Service Road), Norreys Church Lane, Arborfield Commons Road, Emmbrook Lowther Road, Emmbrook Old Pound Lane, Hurst Road south of Old Pound Lane connecting B3030 and A321 Broadwater Lane, Hurst Kybes Lane, Shinfield South

Financial implications 3 These works are estimated to cost:

Advert Cost £1,100 Engineering Cost £5,000 Total £6,100.00

The cost could be funded from the 2007 – 2008 revenue allocation for Highway Improvement schemes.

Recommendation 4 It is recommended that the Executive Member for Highways and Transport approve a) the amendment of the weight restriction to 7.5 tonnes on the following roads: • Eastheath Avenue, Evendons • Holt Lane, Emmbrook • Oaklands Drive, Evendons • Bell Foundry Lane, Norreys • Coppid Beech Hill (Service Road), Norreys • Church Lane, Arborfield • Commons Road, Emmbrook • Lowther Road, Emmbrook • Old Pound Lane, Hurst • Road south of Old Pound Lane connecting B3030 and A321 Broadwater Lane, Hurst • Kybes Lane, Shinfield South b) the advertisement and formal consultation of the proposal, c) consideration of any objections which may be received d) if no objections are received to authorise the introduction of the necessary Traffic Regulation Order.

Station Road, A321 High Street & Waterman’s Way, Wargrave Prohibition of Waiting Proposal

5 A proposal for prohibition of waiting restrictions in Station Road, A321 High Street and Waterman’s Way, Wargrave was originally drafted in 2006 because of reports of station users parking their vehicles in Station Road rather than Wargrave Station Car Park. It had been concluded that this parking on the road was causing road safety concerns and so proposals for waiting restrictions had been designed to resolve those concerns.

6 However, local residents objected to the original proposal on the grounds that the major concern is not cars but large articulated vehicles trying to negotiate the junction with A321 High Street which are obstructed in this manoeuvre by parked cars or vans along the narrow section of Station Road. When this occurs it makes it impossible for residents and emergency vehicles to gain access. A similar turning problem for large vehicles exists at the junction of Station Road and Waterman’s Way. The objectors also expressed their concern about the reduction in available parking, especially when there is an event at the Church or Boat Club, and the subsequent relocation of this parking to areas that are unsuitable for the number of displaced vehicles.

7 Based on the number of substantive comments received the proposed restrictions were amended to protect the junctions of A321 High Street/Station Road and Station Road/Waterman’s Way, whilst leaving the remaining sections of Station Road un-restricted for parking. The new proposal has been designed to allow adequate sightlines for vehicles negotiating the junctions and also to remove parking within the narrow sections of road. This should allow easier and safer access, particularly for Heavy Goods Vehicles. The new proposal is shown on drawing number 5049/398/A.

8 The new proposal was advertised on 5th Dec 2007 and the objection period expired on 3rd January 2008. During this time two objections and nine supportive comments were received and are detailed in Appendix A. One objection was due to the fact that the junctions do not have an accident or congestion history, and the particular resident did not object to vehicles parking in Station Road. The other objection was due to concern that parking at the western end of Station Road would shift to locations opposite other properties which could create obstructions. However, it has long been established that parking is causing problems particularly for manoeuvres of large vehicles at the two junctions. Also the restrictions proposed at the western end of Station Road would move the available legal parking further from the station entrance and so should at least encourage train users to use the (currently free) station car park when space is available.

9 Five of the residents fully supporting the scheme expressed their additional wish for the restriction to be extended at the eastern end of Station Road by a few yards beyond Mill Green and Romans Walk. This is because parking congestion around these exits is, they report, occasionally causing near-misses. A single other comment received was a request to extend the Station Road restriction from Waterman’s Way eastwards across the boat club foot/cycle path exit.

10 have expressed their support for the new scheme.

11 It is considered that the proposed waiting restrictions are located on lengths of road that will help to solve the current road safety and traffic turning problems whilst removing minimal available parking space. There may also be some safety benefit in satisfying requests made by several residents to further extend the double yellow lines at the eastern end of Station Road across Mill Green. However, if it is decided to proceed with this it will be necessary to re-advertise the amended proposal with further time and cost implications.

Financial implications 12 These works are estimated to cost:

Advert Cost £1,200 Engineering Cost £ 600 Total £1,800.00

The cost is previously funded from the 2007/2008 revenue allocation for Highway Improvements schemes.

Recommendation

13 That the Executive Member for Highways and Transport approve:

a) the installation of prohibition of waiting restrictions at the junctions of Station Road, with High Street (A321) and Watermans Way, Wargrave, as shown on drawing number 5049/398/A, b) that the objectors be informed accordingly. APPENDIX A

Prohibition and Restriction of Waiting Proposal for Station Road, A321 High Street and Waterman’s Way, Wargrave

Letter from Comment/Objection Officer Comment

A Station Road OBJECTS to the scheme as it could create greater safety Comments noted but resident. risk for residents on the north side of Station Road as cars unsure that many will regularly park opposite their properties (west of motorists will be Waterman’s Way). He requests DYLs on south side from displaced. station for ~50m only.

A Station Road OBJECTS as considers plan is inappropriate as junctions Comments noted. An resident. do not have an accident or congestion history, and he has injury accident occurred no objection to users of the church, boat club or station at Station Road junction parking outside his property. with High Street in 2005.

A Station Road OBJECTS to lines around Waterman’s Way as undesirable Comments noted, resident. but SUPPORTS restrictions at High Street end of Station though Waterman’s Way Road, though on south side should be extended to Field lines are desirable to House to ensure turnings into Mill Green are safer by ‘protect’ this junction. clearing parked vehicles.

A Station Road SUPPORTS but the DYLs at the High Street end do not go Comments noted. resident. far enough - should be extended on south side as far as Field House to ensure turnings into Mill Green, entry to church and the concealed entry to Romans Walk are safer by clearing parked vehicles.

A Waterman’s SUPPORTS but as above. Comments noted. Way resident.

A Waterman’s SUPPORTS but as above. Comments noted. Way resident.

A Waterman’s SUPPORTS but as above. Comments noted. Way resident.

A Waterman’s SUPPORTS but at western end of Station Road should Comments noted. Way resident. NOT extend to the station as this section used for parking by residents of Loddon Drive when their access under the rail bridge is flooded.

A Waterman’s SUPPORTS but would like DYLs extended from Comments noted. Way resident. Waterman’s Way on northern side of Station Road to the boat club foot/cycle path on Station Road.

A Waterman’s SUPPORTS fully. Way resident.

A Waterman’s SUPPORTS fully. Way resident.