Proposed Closure of Bridge Hill, Oughtibridge
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Author/Lead Officer of Report: Matthew Lowe Tel: 0114 273 6170 Report of: Director of City Growth Report to: Cabinet Member for Transport and Development Date of Decision: Not before 1st February 2020 Subject: Consultation response to the proposed closure of Bridge Hill, Oughtibridge Is this a Key Decision? If Yes, reason Key Decision:- Yes No - Expenditure and/or savings over £500,000 - Affects 2 or more Wards Which Cabinet Member Portfolio does this relate to? Transport and Development Which Scrutiny and Policy Development Committee does this relate to? Economic and Environmental Wellbeing Has an Equality Impact Assessment (EIA) been undertaken? Yes No If YES, what EIA reference number has it been given? 744 Does the report contain confidential or exempt information? Yes No If YES, give details as to whether the exemption applies to the full report / part of the report and/or appendices and complete below:- Purpose of Report: To report details of the consultation response to the proposed closure of Bridge Hill, Oughtibridge and set out the Council’s response. Form 2 – Executive Report July 2016 Recommendations: 7.1 The scheme is implemented subject to further approval via the Council’s formal Capital Approval process. 7.2 Make the Traffic Regulation Orders as advertised in accordance with the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984. 7.3 Those who objected to the scheme are informed of the decision. 7.4 The Lead Petitioner is informed of the outcome of the investigation into the issue they raised. Background Papers: (Insert details of any background papers used in the compilation of the report.) 1. Sustrans Information Sheet FF39 Traffic restraint and retail vitality 2. University of Westminster, Business and Resident perception surveys on London Road, 2006 Lead Officer to complete:- 1 I have consulted the relevant departments in respect of any relevant implications Finance: Gaynor Saxton 21/01/2020 indicated on the Statutory and Council Policy Checklist, and comments have Legal: Bob Power/Richard Cannon 07/02/2020 been incorporated / additional forms completed / EIA completed, where required. Equalities: Annemarie Johnston 23/01/2020 Legal, financial/commercial and equalities implications must be included within the report and the name of the officer consulted must be included above. 2 EMT member who approved submission: Edward Highfield 3 Cabinet Member consulted: Councillor Bob Johnson 4 I confirm that all necessary approval has been obtained in respect of the implications indicated on the Statutory and Council Policy Checklist and that the report has been approved for submission to the Decision Maker by the EMT member indicated at 2. In addition, any additional forms have been completed and signed off as required at 1. Lead Officer Name: Job Title: Matthew Lowe Senior Engineer. Date: 07 February 2020 Page 2 of 104 1. PROPOSAL Background 1.1 The aim of the proposal is to reduce the number of injury collisions at the junction of Bridge Hill/Low Road/Station Road/Orchard Street in Oughtibridge. 1.2 South Yorkshire Police collision records show that in the 5 years to 31/12/2017 there were 10 injury collisions at this junction. Of these collisions 6 resulted in serious injury and 4 in slight injury. 1.3 Of these collisions 6 involved a person on a bicycle (4 serious, 2 slight), 2 involved people on motorcycles (both serious), 1 involved a pedestrian (slight) and 1 a collision between two cars (slight). 1.4 A collision analysis showed that all of the collisions involving people on bicycles and motorcycles occurred when they were travelling down Orchard Street, towards Sheffield, and were hit by a motor vehicle pulling out of Bridge Hill to go ahead into Station Lane. 1.5 Collision records covering the period 01/01/18 to 04/05/19, (the most up to date information following the original analysis), show that a further 4 injury collisions have occurred at the junction. Of these collisions 2 involved a person on a bicycle (1 serious, 1 slight) and 2 involved people on motorcycles (1 serious, 1 slight), 1.6 The latest annual analysis of collision hotspots places the junction of Bridge Hill/Low Road/Station Road/Orchard Street as the 3rd worst location for killed and seriously injury (KSI) collisions and the 4th worst location for collisions involving people on bicycles in the whole of Sheffield. 1.7 Clearly the collision history at the junction shows that there is an ongoing problem with injury collisions involving people on bicycles and motorcycles. 1.8 In order to address this collision problem it is proposed to close Bridge Hill at one end to remove the significant majority of the traffic which is causing the collisions. Restrictions are therefore being sought for avoiding danger to persons or other traffic using the road or for preventing the likelihood of any such danger arising. Proposal 1.9 The proposal would close Bridge Hill to motor vehicles at its junction with Langsett Road North/Langsett Road South/Church Street. This would turn Bridge Hill into a cul de sac with access from Low Road. Traffic that currently uses Bridge Hill would be diverted along Langsett Road North and right into Orchard Street to reach Bridge Hill, Low Road or Station Page 3 of 104 Lane. Some parking would be removed on Langsett Road North close to the junction with Orchard Street. Additional parking would be provided on Bridge Hill with the introduction of time limited parking spaces and a single yellow line which would allow evening and weekend parking. 2. HOW DOES THIS DECISION CONTRIBUTE? 2.1 The proposal would reduce the number of injury collisions involving people on bicycles and motorcycles at the 3rd worse location for KSI injury collisions in Sheffield. 2.2 There are also potential ancillary benefits resulting from the removal of the majority of motor vehicles from Bridge Hill. It would make it easier to hold outside events in the heart of the village, such as a street markets and for environmental improvements to the area around Bridge Hill. 3. HAS THERE BEEN ANY CONSULTATION? 3.1 E-mails were sent to Stocksbridge and Upper Don Ward Members, North Local Area Partnership and Bradfield Parish Council in February and March 2019 giving details of the proposal. E-mails were also sent to South Yorkshire Police, South Yorkshire Fire and Rescue, Yorkshire Ambulance Service and South Yorkshire Passenger Transport Executive in March 2019 asking for comments on the proposal. 3.2 Consultation letters, plan and a list of frequently asked questions were delivered to 1500 households and businesses in Oughtibridge on 7 March 2019 informing them of the proposal and a public information event was held in Oughtibridge on 14 March 2019. A copy of this letter and plan is included in Appendix A. 3.3 An article was placed in Look Local, a local paper for north Sheffield on 7 March 2019 informing people of the proposal and public information session. 3.4 Road signs were put up at the Langsett Road North/Bridge Hill junction from 7 March to 5 April 2019 informing drivers of the proposed change and giving them a telephone number to call for further information. Response to the March Consultation 3.5 A total of 144 responses were received in response to the consultation letter, road signs and public information session. Of these 92 were against the proposal, 22 were for the proposal and 30 expressed no opinion either way. Page 4 of 104 3.6 Many of the issues raised related to wider issues in Oughtibridge rather than the proposal. These included concerns about speeding on all roads within Oughtibridge, increased traffic as a result of proposed nearby large housing developments, rat running traffic through residential areas, compliance with banned turns and a general lack of parking in the Village centre. These issues have been forwarded as appropriate (Streets Ahead for maintenance issues, Parking Services for enforcement of waiting restrictions, Transport Planning for requests for new works etc.). 3.7 Of the businesses on Bridge Hill only the land lady of the Cock Inn and the owner of the flower shop on Bridge Hill made comments. They both objected to the proposed closure siting the impact it would have on their deliveries, the loss of passing trade and parking. 3.8 Several issues relating to the proposal were raised multiple times by respondents, these are discussed below. 3.9 Residents raised concern that servicing of the pharmacy, florist, hair dresser and public house would not be possible with the proposal in place. Concerns were expressed about the ability of cars to turn around at the closed end of Bridge Hill and how large vehicles could get to service and turn around to get out of Bridge Hill. 3.10 The March proposal included waiting restrictions at the closed end of Bridge Hill which would give enough space for a car or van to undertake a turn in the road in order to get back out of Bridge Hill. It also includes a turning area at the Orchard Street end of Bridge Hill which would allow a large vehicle which has turned in to Bridge Hill to turn around and leave Bridge Hill in a forward gear. 3.11 A large number of people said that the existing Zebra crossing on Low Road was in the wrong place, was dangerous and contributed towards collisions at the junction. People said the crossing should be moved to the north side of the Orchard Street/Forge Lane junction or further down Low Road away from the junction. 3.12 Although people have concerns about the location of this crossing and pedestrian safety there is no evidence to substantiate that it is causing an injury collision problem.