Agenda and minutes

There were no disclosable pecuniary interests.

The minutes of the meeting held on 2^nd December 2020 were agreed and signed as a true record. There were no matters arising.

Report of the Deputy Chief Executive (Place)

To consider the above petition, bearing 41 signatures, which has been submitted by Councillor McNicholas, a Lower Stoke Ward Councillor, who has been invited to the meeting for the consideration of this item along with  Councillor Brown, a Cheylesmore Ward Councillor and the petition organiser.

Note: Councillors Brown and McNicholas have requested a report

The Cabinet Member for City Services considered a report of the Deputy Chief Executive (Place) in response to a petition, bearing 41 signatures, received from Councillor R Brown, a Cheylesmore Ward Councillor, and supported by Councillor J McNicholas, a Lower Stoke Ward Councillor, that read ‘This petition calls on Coventry City Council to consider traffic speed calming measures along Macaulay Road. Residents share increasing concern that this road is being used as a rat-run and is subject to a rising trend in speed violation that, left unchecked, could likely result in serious injury or worse.’ Councillors Brown and McNicholas attended the meeting for consideration of the matter and to speak on behalf of the petitioners.

In accordance with the City Council's procedure for dealing with petitions, those relating to highway maintenance were heard by the Cabinet Member for City Services. 

The report indicated that a determination letter had been sent to the Petition Organiser and Petition Sponsor that advised of the importance of targeting road safety measures in the city. To ensure funding was utilised carefully, personal injury collisions reported to the Police were used. Locations where there had been six or more recorded personal injury collisions in the previous three years were considered for inclusion in the safety schemes programme. A review of the collision data for Macaulay Road showed that one personal injury collision had been recorded in the last three years, therefore, Macaulay Road did not meet the safety scheme criteria.

A speed survey had also been undertaken in November 2019 that recorded mean weekday speeds of 21.2mph eastbound and 20.6mph westbound. A summary of the speed survey and traffic count, which had been located where the greatest volume of traffic was expected, was detailed in Appendix C to the report.

Based on the collision data and speed survey results outlined above, no further action was proposed. However, petitioners were advised of the Community Speed Watch initiative, a speed monitoring and awareness scheme that was co-ordinated by the Police and run by a group of local volunteers who used speed detection devices to monitor traffic and identify speeding drivers on a specific road or small area. Petitioners were also provided with the relevant contact details, should they wish to get involved in the scheme.

Councillor McNicholas and Councillor Brown spoke in support of the petitioners. They referred to the strength of feeling amongst residents in the area regarding the need to reduce vehicle speeds. They further referred to recent incidents and near misses that were of real concern. Following submission of the petition early in 2019, there had been changes in the area, particularly with the installation of traffic measures on Ansty Road and Binley Road, that had impacted on Macaulay Road and other roads nearby and meant that the traffic data used to assess vehicle speeds out of date. They referred to several roads in the area being used as rat runs to avoid the measures that had been put in place on other local roads  ...  view the full minutes text for item 58.

Report of the Deputy Chief Executive (People)

Note: The objectors have been invited to attend the meeting for consideration of this item

The Cabinet Member for City Services considered a report of the Deputy Chief Executive (Place), concerning objections received to the Whittle Arch Experimental Traffic Regulation Order (TRO). The objectors were invited to attend the meeting and both attended and one spoke on the proposal.

The report indicated that in 2002, as part of the Phoenix Initiative Regeneration Project the junction of Trinity Street and Fairfax Street was closed off to all traffic, and pedestrianised. Following the closure, bus usage of the Pool Meadow Bus Station was significantly reduced making the bus station facility unsustainable in the long-term.

To address these concerns, in 2005, the City Council ‘opened up’ the Trinity Street/Fairfax Street junction (Whittle Arch) to buses and cycles to enable improved bus access to the bus station. Since 2005 there had been further changes which had resulted in the creation of the bus gate and additional vehicles being able to travel through the bus gate at certain times. 

In 2018 further changes were proposed. The bus gate had been operating for several years and during this time alterations had been made to the road layout as part of the ongoing public realm works. In addition, issues had been raised by Adjudicators from the Traffic Penalty Tribunal regarding the clarity of the signage when hearing appeals.

The proposed changes simplified the operation of the bus gate, allowing buses, cycles and taxis to travel through the bus gate at all times and also simplified the associated signage. To monitor the impact of these changes the TRO was implemented as an Experimental TRO and came into operation on 10th September 2018. The closing date for objections was 10th March 2019 and Two objections were received. 

In accordance with the City Council's procedure for dealing with objections to TROs, they were reported to the Cabinet Member for City Services for a decision on how to proceed.

The costs relating to making permanent or amending the ETRO was funded from the Highways Maintenance and Investment Capital Programme budget through the Local Transport Plan.

Issues raised in the objections included:

·  As a motorist, they considered the bus gate a licence to print money,

·  Taxis should not be allowed through the gate as they were just a form of privileged transport for those who could afford to pay and it undermined the concept of more pedestrian only areas.

·  The changes had ‘absolutely nothing to do with promoting the economy but were simply trying to give black cabs an unfair commercial advantage they neither needed nor deserved’.

·  Both objectors referred to Hales Street (west) and that changes should be made to assist cyclists, such as the re-instatement of the contra-flow cycle lane.

An objector spoke about supporting climate change and the consider environmentally friendly options and resolutions where possible. He requested that the Authority support more pedestrianisation and cycling options in the City where appropriate and outlined his concerns regarding the lack of a quality impact assessment for this proposal. He confirmed that he was a regular  ...  view the full minutes text for item 59.

Report of the Deputy Chief Executive (Place)

The Cabinet Member for City Services considered a report of the Deputy Chief Executive (Place) concerning objections received to the City of Coventry (London Road) (40mph Speed Limit Revocation) Traffic Regulation Order (TRO). The objectors were invited to attend the meeting for consideration of the matter and one objector and also Councillor Bailey, a Cheylesmore Ward Councillor, and Councillor Brown attended and spoke on the proposal.

The report indicated that speed limits were reviewed within Coventry on a regular basis. The primary reason for evaluating speeds limits and speed limit changes were predominantly related to making roads safer for all road users.

On 28th November 2019, a TRO was advertised proposing to reduce the speed limit on London Road from 40mph to 30mph (from Allard Way to the approach to the ring road) to improve road safety. The reduction in speed limit would also assist to improve the safety of the proposed toucan crossing to be located on London Road near the access to Charterhouse. In addition, the Allard Way and Humber Road approaches (and exit) to the roundabout junction with London Road would also be reduced from 40mph to 30mph.

Three objections and three letters of support for the proposed speed limit reduction were received. In accordance with the City Council's procedure for dealing with objections to TROs, they are reported to the Cabinet Member for City Services, for a decision as to how to proceed.

The cost of introducing the proposed TRO, if approved, would be funded from the Highways Maintenance and Investment Capital Programme budget through the Local Transport Plan.

Three letters received in support of the speed limit reduction included comments ‘completely agree on doing this with or without the pedestrian crossing facility’ and the speed limit reduction will ‘stop these idiots who continue to drive too fast with no consideration for anyone else’. Other comments received in support of the speed limit reduction include ‘many road users drive at excessive and dangerous speeds’ on London Road.

Three objections were received and highlighted numerous concerns including the speed limit reduction was ‘bad for the environment with emissions increasing due to the non-smooth traffic flow’ and the speed limit reduction could result in an ‘increase in accidents as people slow down so quickly at point of speed reduction’. Other comments objecting to the speed limit reduction included this contributing to an increase in ‘congestion and pollution’ on London Road. A further comment related to many and in places, the majority, of drivers ignoring low speed limits.

Two late comments had been received from Councillor Bailey, relating to various speed limit options that could be considered on specific parts of the London Road, concluding that the whole road would benefit from a reduced speed limit of 30mph.

Councillor Bailey indicated that he had been contacted by a number of residents about this issue. He referred to the positive effect reducing the speed limit would have, not only for safety, but also for the environment in that it would  ...  view the full minutes text for item 60.

Report of the Deputy Chief Executive (Place)

Petitions Determined by Letter and Petitions Deferred Pending Further Investigations

The Cabinet Member for City Services considered a report of the Deputy Chief Executive (Place) which provided a summary of the recent Petitions received that were to be determined by letter, or where decisions had been deferred pending further investigations and holding letters were being circulated. Details of the individual Petitions were set out in an Appendix attached to the report and included target dates for action. The report was submitted for monitoring and transparency purposes.

The report indicated that each Petition had been dealt with on an individual basis, with the Cabinet Member considering advice from officers on appropriate action to respond to the petitioners’ request. When it had been decided to respond to the Petition without formal consideration at a Cabinet Member meeting, both the relevant Councillor sponsoring the Petition (if any) and/or the petition organiser/spokesperson could still request that their Petition be the subject of a Cabinet Member report.

Members noted that where holding letters were being sent, this was because further investigation work was required. Once matters had been investigated either a follow up letter would be sent, or a report submitted to a future Cabinet Member meeting.

RESOLVED that the actions being taken by officers as detailed in the Appendix to the report, in response to the Petitions received, be endorsed.

There are no outstanding issues

There were no outstanding issues.

Any other items of public business which the Cabinet Member decides to take as matters of urgency because of the special circumstances involved

There were no other items of public business.