Agenda item

Purpose of the report:  Performance Management

This report provides an update on the development of proposals to improve pedestrian safety on Bridge Street, Guildford. This follows a road traffic collision on 20 February 2016 that led to the deaths of two pedestrians. This issue was the subject of a petition to the council on 17 May 2016 and was considered previously by the Economic Prosperity, Environment and Highways Board on 9 June 2016.

Witnesses:

Duncan Knox, Road Safety Team Manager

Keith Taylor, Guildford Local Committee Chairman

George Bowen, Petitioner that attended the 9 June 2016 meeting

Declarations of interest:

None.

Key point raised during the discussion:

1. Mr Bowen, the original Petitioner was invited to speak first and began discussions by giving the Board a brief summary for his reasons for attendance today. The Board were reminded that the petition was a result of a road traffic collision that took place on 20 February 2016, subsequently demanding Guildford Borough Council and Surrey County Council to take immediate action on Bridge Street, Guildford.

2. Members were advised that Bridge Street consisted of a 3 lane system which was difficult to navigate for both road users and pedestrians. The purpose of the petition was to prevent an accident where 2 people lost their lives on 20 February 2016 from occurring again.

3. Mr Bowen expressed the view that the lack of funding from the M3 Local Enterprise Partnership should not prevent the saving of lives and supplementary action should be made to ensure funding was in place to improve road safety for pedestrians on Bridge Street.

4. It was noted that Bridge Street was subject to many road traffic collisions and on average 3 collisions were reported every year.

5. Mr Bowen welcomed improvements to Bridge Street and expressed the view that the outcome the petitioners sought after was to ensure pedestrians safety.

6. The Road Safety Team Manager introduced the report by informing the Board that the report was drawn together from an analysis based over 5 years, however the service was aware of the number of casualties through out the years.

7. It was noted that that the collision that took place on 20 February 2017 was an unusual occurrence where the vehicle mounted the footway.  The Board were advised that Officers were waiting on the Coroners report for more details to the cause.

8. Based on the analysis, the Officer reported that the primary focus was at the eastern end of Bridge Street at the junction with Onslow Street, where 31 road casualties were recorded by the Police in just over 5 years.

9. The Officer informed the Board that Surrey County Council were working with Guildford Borough Council towards a long term solution in improving safety on Bridge Street. The raised tables mentioned in the report would help to direct people to cross the road in the right place rather than in an unsafe place. 

10. The Cabinet Member for Highways, Flooding and Transport assured the Board that there would be no issue with funding for any improvements to Bridge Street as it would be provided from central budgets and would not be expected to be allocated from Local Committee budgets.

11. The Guildford Local Committee Chairman acknowledged the problem with Bridge Street and stated that the Local Committee had been actively looking for funding to improve safety and was pleased with the assurances from the Cabinet Member to support the issue financially. The Member stated that he was happy with the recommendations stated in the officer report and was disappointed that LEP funding had not been as generous as it could have been.

12. A Member shared the view that the area in question was heavily congested and suggested extra warning signs for pedestrians at the crossing. The Road Safety Team Manager responded that this suggestion had been considered as other Local Authorities had introduced this however as the pavement was quite narrow it imposed physical restrictions.

13. Officers were asked whether there was a case to impose a 20mph speed restriction in the area and installing a camera to prosecute drivers who use the bus lane. Members were advised that a speed limit restriction would do little to improve safety for pedestrians as it does not change the behaviour of drivers and pedestrians. It was further added that any speed restrictions would need to take account of the impact of the town centre as a whole. Members further noted that enforcement of bus lanes in Surrey was the responsibility of Surrey Police and not the Local Authority.

14. The Cabinet Member for Highways, Flooding and Transport stated strongly that there was a requirement for partnership working with Guildford Borough Council in order to achieve long term pedestrian safety raised at the meeting. Members were advised that Guildford Borough Council needed to decide on a Masterplan for the town centre which would allow for longer term road safety measures to be implemented. It was added that the Guildford Vision Group put forward a 25 year vision for Guildford town centre which also included the pedestrianisation of Bridge Street. 

15. The Guildford Local Committee Chairman informed the Board that the Local Plan for Guildford would be consulted on in June 2017 and the likely adoption of this plan would come into effect in 2018.

16. The Guildford Local Committee Chairman identified the current decision on the new bus stop as an example of the many decisions the Borough is yet to resolve in an effort to explain how much the Borough needs to coordinate through.

17. Mr Bowen stated that excellent points were raised and expressed the view that the most significant point would be acknowledging the issue and working towards an end goal to resolve it. Mr Bowen proposed the Board agree that an action plan is put in place for the pedestrianisation of Bridge Street.

18. The Chairman advised Mr Bowen to attend Guildford’s Local Committee meeting when the report is presented for consideration, whereby he can follow the process and raise further concerns if necessary. It was stated that the Scrutiny Board did not have any decision making power and had therefore delegated the decisions around the final proposals to Guildford Local Committee.  

Recommendations:

The Economic Prosperity, Environment and Highways Board agreed to support officers with continuing to undertake work to refine the design proposals before presenting options to Guildford Local Committee for approval.

Actions:

None.