(Cabinet Member with Special Responsibility Councillor Hanson)
Cabinet received a report from the Head of Regeneration and Planning to propose changes required to better manage access to and traffic within the city centre pedestrian zone, to suggest how to progress these and to update more generally on associated progress with the Square Routes initiative.
The options, options analysis, including risk assessment and officer preferred option, were set out in the report as follows:
|
|
Option 1: Make no changes to the traffic management system. |
Option 2: Formally request the County Council to consider the traffic management proposals as per Appendix 3 and undertake to implement the associated changes to City Council management practice on an experimental basis. |
Option 3: Formally request the County Council to consider the traffic management proposals as per Appendix 3 and undertake to implement the associated changes to City Council management practice on a permanent basis. |
|
Advantages |
None. |
This option involving an Experimental Traffic Order utilises a regulatory mechanism that builds in requirements to monitor and review and if thought necessary then revise or revoke any changes. This flexibility is needed where changes to traffic management are brought in within a complex environment and not all consequential changes can perhaps be known.
Advantages otherwise are as set out in full in section 2 of the Report. |
This option would involve a revision of the TRO on a permanent basis without any experiment. In principle it might enable changes to be brought forward in one tranche |
|
Disadvantages |
No attempt is made to try to address the deteriorating conditions for pedestrians in the zone that are impairing peoples’ experiences as pedestrians, impacting on the trading environment and giving rise to increasing safety concerns. Further, it precludes the ability to take the opportunities arising out of the Square Routes initiative and improvements to make more of Market Square as a meeting place, for a better outdoor market and as an entertainment venue and with all the benefits that these might bring. |
The raft of changes put forward in this proposal is quite complicated but inevitably so. Several elements will have some early workload implications for council officers e.g in revising the permit system and informing the public of the changes. Once in effect however the changes should make for better management of the pedestrian zone and less requirement on various city and county council officers and police officers and PCSOs and to deal with traffic management and related problems pedestrian problems in a reactive manner. |
This option is not favoured by the county council’s highway officers. It would not be a best practice approach. It would be much less flexible in practice than an experimental order and is without the ability to monitor and consult in operation then review and revise and, potentially terminate any changes. Conversely an experimental order provides for this. This option would likely prove much more challenging and take very much longer, involving the highway authority evidencing the need for and considering changes that would be permanent in effect. This would make for significant delay.
|
|
Risks |
Continuing increasing use of the zone by traffic and consequential reduction in the quality, perceived safety of the pedestrian environment and in time making for conditions more likely to give rise to safety accidents. Indirect further affects on and deterioration in the city centre as a trading environment.
|
Any changes to the management of a public environment as complex as this in how it is used risks adverse consequential effects but the consultations undertaken to date with professional highways officers and others should have teased most of these out. Further, the purpose of an experimental order is to build in flexibility and monitoring and review. |
That changes via a permanent revision are not attainable within a short / medium term timescale. |
Option 2 involving making the changes as set out in section 2 of the report and summarised in Appendix 2 was the officer preferred option. Officers advised that current arrangements for traffic management within the pedestrian zone were no longer sustainable, not delivering well for economic, social and environmental benefits. Revised arrangements were considered crucial to achieving on corporate and other ambitions for the city centre and as articulated through the Square Routes initiative. Further, it was felt that supporting changes and wider benefits to the pedestrian zone together with the mitigations proposed should outweigh any adverse impacts.
Councillor Hanson proposed, seconded by Councillor Blamire:-
“(1) That the recommendations, as set out in the report, be approved.”
Councillors then voted:-
Resolved unanimously:
(1) That the City Council request of the County Council as highway authority that as soon as possible it make one experimental traffic regulation order for the whole traffic restricted area (pedestrian zone) as per Option 2, including for the following changes:
· core hours of 10.00am to 17.00pm.
removal of the exemption for postal deliveries and parcel packets within core hours
· introduction of a revised permit system, with withdrawal of permit A and further adjusted providing for: essential maintenance (suggest Permit E); the dismantling of market stalls within set times (suggest Permit M) and temporary access for events and specific other activities (suggest Permit T)
· removal of the parking spaces dedicated for use by disabled people in Market Square and to the rear of the Old Town Hall
· re-designating existing car parking spaces within city council off street car parks and including St Nicholas Arcades to provide new dedicated spaces for disabled people
· adjustment of the Charter Market Rules
· re-programming council refuse collection in the zone to outside of the new core hours
· support the making of such an order, subsequent consultations, monitoring and review.
· where appropriate provide additional on street parking bays dedicated for use by disabled people.
and report to the Planning and Highways Regulatory Committee as required concerning any necessary further approvals required.
Officers responsible for effecting the decision:
Head of Regeneration and Planning
Reasons for making the decision:
The decision is consistent with the Economic Growth priority action to ‘continue to deliver Lancaster Square Routes scheme and is consistent with the Core Strategy (2008) whichidentified Central Lancaster as a Regeneration Priority Area of local importance (Policy ER2). The City Council Parking Strategy (2008) ‘Improving Access’ – Section 14.13 notes the Council’s ambition to seek to meet the needs of all users and types of transport. Specifically it seeks to set aside 6% of the total off-street car parking space for ‘Blue Badge’ holders in car parks where demand is proven and improve public information. The decision both supports and seeks to improve on these ambitions by seeking at least 6% in on and off street car parks where it is thought that access to the centre can be improved. The Council has a duty under the Equality Act 2010 to make areas open to all and not exclude those with significant mobility impairments. As per the assessment of the Parking Strategy policies, it is suggested that the proposal and the wider changes mitigate the removal of the existing provision for disabled access to the zone.