Thursday 31 October 2013

E&E | Devon County Council carries out major review of 20mph zones in Exeter








Thursday 31 October 2013

Devon County Council carries out major review of 20mph zones in Exeter


By Exeter Express and Echo  |  Posted: October 30, 2013




Devon County Council carries out major review of 20 mph zones in Exeter

Many, according to Paul Bull, city councillor for Cowick, were not compliant with Department for  Transport guidelines and were thus unenforceable.
Now, however, the county council has advertised a new traffic order for them and residents have until November 7 to comment on the scope of them.
A spokesman for the county council said: “Having carried out a city wide review of 20mph limits and zones we have advertised a new traffic order. This order is purely to make simple changes to ensure that the TRO is updated to reflect what is on site.
“Where a limit is proposed to be removed from the historical order, this is because a 20mph limit or zone has not been signed on site and speeds are already very low (generally below 20mph) due to the roads affected being short or cul de sac style, so there is no need for a 20mph limit to be signed on site.
“This is in line with the county council’s aim not to add signing clutter to the network, especially where there isn’t a key justification.
“We are inviting comments on this proposed order which must be submitted by November 7.”
The spokesman added that in Devon a 20mph speed limit or zone can be considered in cases where all or most of the following apply:

  • It is used by high numbers of pedestrians and cyclists
  • Where there is a speed-related casualty record
  • Where average speeds are already low or traffic calming will be introduced
  • Where signing and traffic calming will not damage the environment and
  • a school travel plan supports the proposal.

Paul Bull, city councillor for Cowick, has been campaigning for a 20mph limit in all residential streets and said: “Some two years ago, the Government changed the regulations so that as long as the zone had one physical traffic calming measure the others could be replaced by a 20mph repeater roundel or a 20mph carrriageway roundel. Even despite this relaxation, many, if not all zones within Exeter, were not meeting the regulations, so were not compliant with the legislation and able to be enforced.
“Pressure by myself and others have forced the county council to carry out an audit to see which zones were legal.
“I’ve heard from the county council that the contractors have finished the Broadway zone, but when I followed up around there I found several stretches where there was more than 100m between physical calming measures and/or zones. So they are still not compliant or enforceable.
“Also as a consequence of the audit they found that several road where not signed properly.
“In Cowick this covered Franklyn Drive and Orchard Gardens.
“For various reasons, the county council has decided to approach each of these streets in a different manner – put in the proper signs along Franklyn Drive because there are some speed humps in place; officers think that drivers could never go above 20mph in Orchard Gardens and so have decided not to put up signs, and let it revert back to 30mph ‘by virtue of street lighting’.
“This upsets me. For more than two years I have been saying that all residential roads – other than the major routes of Cowick Lane, Buddle Lane and Dunsford Road – are 20mph. This is what I had been told was the case, now due to errors in the past this will not be the case in the future."


Monday 28 October 2013

Some more thoughts on 20 mph zones in Exeter

Once again, I've been contacted by people about the recent official advert in a recent Express and Echo  relating to the new Traffic Regulation Order, Devon County Council (Various Roads, Exeter) (20 mph Zones and Limits) Order

Some have asked Devon County Council about the difference between 20 mph zones and limits - here's DCC's response:


20mph limits are:
“introduced on roads where speeds are already low and generally traffic calming features are not needed”.
And 20mph zones are: 
“usually introduced in Urban Areas over several streets and normally be supported by traffic calming in order to make vehicles speeds self-enforcing to 20mph. In a 20mph zone there is also no need to sign or light traffic calming features, which would otherwise have a negative impact on the residential street scene”.

In Devon a 20mph Speed Limit or Zone can be considered in cases where all or most of the following apply:-
• - used by high numbers of pedestrians and cyclists
• - where there is a speed-related casualty record.
• - where average speeds are already low or traffic calming will be introduced.
• - where signing and traffic calming will not damage the environment.
• - a School Travel Plan supports the proposal.

Interested in what they said constituted a 20mph zone!
Especially "In a 20mph zone there is also no need to sign or light traffic calming features, which would otherwise have a negative impact on the residential street scene” as it is only by increasing physical traffic calming measures and/or street signage is the ONLY way DCC can make 20 mph zones compliant and able to be enforced

When they were first introduced (in Cowick in 2000)20 mph zones needed 
(1) a gateway sign at each and every entrance to the zone
(2) physical traffic calming measures (humps, chicanes, bends greater than 70 degrees, etc) no more than 50m from any point within the zone - in practice that means no more than 100m between any physical traffic calming measure

This is of course very expensive so some 2 years ago, the Govt changed the regulations so that as long as the zone had ONE physical traffic calming measure, the others could be replaced by a 20mph repeater roundel or a 20mph carrriageway roundel.

Even despite this relaxation, many if not all zones within Exeter, were not meeting the regulations, so were not compliant with the legislation and able to be enforced.

Pressure by myself and others have forced DCC to carry out an audit to see which zones care legal.

On this audit, DCC have said:
 “Having carried out a city wide review of 20mph  limits and zones we have advertised a  new traffic order. This order is purely to make simple changes to ensure that the TRO is updated to reflect what is on site. 

Where a limit is proposed to be removed from the historical order, this is because a 20mph limit or zone has not been signed on site and speeds are already very low (generally below 20mph) due to the roads affected being short/cul de sac style, so there is no need for a 20mph limit to be signed on site. 

This is in line with the County Council’s aim not to add signing clutter to the network, especially where there isn’t a key justification. We are inviting comments on this proposed order which must be submitted by 7 November.”

I've heard from DCC that the contractors have finished the Broadway zone, but when I followed up around there I found several stretches where there was more than 100m between physical calming measures and/or zones. So they are STILL not compliant or enforceble

So as  a consequence of the audit they found that several road where not signed properly since the zones were introduced (in Cowick's case, since 2000)

In Cowick this covered Franklyn Drive and Orchard Gardens

For various reasons, DCC have decided to approach each of these streets in a different manner - put in the proper signs along Franklyn Drive because there are some speed humps in place; officers think that drivers could never go above 20mph in Orchard Gardens and so have decided not to put up signs, and let it revert back to 30mph "by virtue of street lighting"

This upsets me - for over 2 years I have been saying that ALL residential roads - other than the major routes of Cowick Lane, Buddle Lane and Dunsford Road - are 20 mph. This is what I had been told WAS the case - now due to errors in the past this will not be the case in the future.

I'm sure there are similar cases all around Exeter. 

I've also seen some correspondence from DCC which suggests that 20 mph can be enforce even if all the roads within a 20mph are not compliant - I am not convinced of that argument and would not like to see it pursued in a court of law.



Monday 21 October 2013

Minutes on the Notice of Motion on the Energy Bill Revolution

In presenting the Notice of Motion, Councillor Bull stated that the country was facing an energy bill crisis, with millions of people nationwide struggling to heat their homes. It was estimated that 5,957 families in Exeter were currently in fuel poverty meaning that these households need to spend more than 10% of their income on keeping their homes warm. It was projected that by 2016 one in three households would be in fuel poverty. The two main reasons for this crisis were the high price of gas, oil and coal and that the UK’s homes were some of the most energy inefficient in Europe. This meant they cost much more than they should to heat and power and cold homes were damaging the health of vulnerable members of society and costing the NHS nearly one billion pounds each year.

Councillor Bull stated the answer was for the Government to use the money it received from carbon taxes to help make homes super-energy efficient. The Government must provide more funding from carbon taxes to help combat climate change. The current Green Deal had failed and, at its current take up rate could take 160 years for all of the UK's housing to benefit. Over the next 15 years the Government would raise an average of £4 billion every year in carbon taxes. If the Government recycled this carbon revenue back to households, it could provide billions of pounds to help insulate the UK’s homes.

There would be enough carbon tax revenue to treat 600,000 fuel poor households every year and help them potentially reduce their energy bills by an average £310 a year. Recycling carbon revenue to make homes super-energy efficient could bring 9 out of 10 homes out of fuel poverty and quadruple savings in carbon emissions compared to the Government’s new energy efficiency schemes and create up to 200,000 jobs which would help economic recovery. The Energy Revolution Bill was a public alliance, made up of over 150 major organisations supported by the Liberal Democrats and the Labour Party and the Big Six Energy companies.

Councillor Pearson, in seconding the motion, referred to the fact that one in five households were in fuel poverty and that hardworking people were forced to choose between warm homes or hot food. The Council had already invested in energy saving measures for their tenants by installing Solar Panels and this Energy Revolution Bill would help aid investment in new technologies to bring hard working people out of fuel poverty.

Some Councillors felt that the proposals in the Energy Revolution Bill were unworkable and that the Government was taking steps to help the hardworking people out of fuel poverty by ensuring that there was competition in the energy market and that ensuring that Energy Companies put customers on their lowest tariff.

In supporting the motion, other Councillors felt that the £4 billion raised by carbon taxes could be better spent to address fuel poverty in Exeter and beyond. Whilst recognising the measures that the Council had undertaken by installing Solar Panels on its council houses and civic buildings and its commitment to District Heating Systems, there was a need for pressure to be put on the Government to address fuel poverty and increase energy efficiency measures.

Councillor Bull, in response, stated that over150 organisations and 201 MPs from all parties were supporting this Energy Revolution Bill but Exeter's MPs were absent from the list. The Bill was about using the carbon taxes currently collected by the Government and redirect them to tackle fuel poverty. He asked Members to support this motion.
In accordance with Standing Order 27 (1), a named vote on the Motion was called for, as follows:
Voting for:
Councillors Bialyk, Branston, Brock, Bull, Clark, Crew, Denham, The Deputy Lord Mayor, Councillor Edwards, Fullam, Laws, The Right Worshipful the Mayor, Councillor Macdonald, Martin, Mitchell, Morris, Newby, Owen, Payne, Pearson, Robson, Ruffle, Sheldon, Spackman, Sutton, Tippins, Wardle and Winterbottom
(28 Members)
Voting against:
Councillors Baldwin, Donovan and Mrs Henson
(3 Members)
Abstain:
Councillors Crow, Leadbetter, Mottram, Prowse and Shiel
(5 Members)
The Notice of Motion was carried.

Wednesday 16 October 2013

Full Council | How everyone voted on the Energy Bill Revolution

A recorded vote on my Notice of Motion was called for by Cllr Greg Sheldon under Standing Order 27:


VOTING AT COUNCIL
(1) The mode of voting at meetings of the Council shall be by show of hands: providing
that on the requisition of any member of the Council made before the vote is taken
and supported by five other members, the voting on any question shall be by roll call
and shall be recorded so as to show how each member present and voting gave
his/her vote. The name of any member present and not voting shall also be
recorded. In the event of an equality of votes the Lord Mayor shall have a second or
casting vote.

Here's how everyone voted:

1
Cllr Margaret
Baldwin
Topsham
CON
AGAINST
2
Cllr Phil
Bialyk
Exwick
LAB
FOR
3
Cllr Simon
Bowkett
Pinhoe
LAB
Apologies
4
Cllr Richard
Branston
Newtown
LAB
FOR
5
Cllr Stella
Brock
St Davids
LIB DEM
FOR
6
Cllr Paul
Bull
Cowick
LAB
FOR
7
Cllr Marcel
Choules
Priory
LAB
Apologies
8
Cllr Margaret
Clark
Alphington
LAB
FOR
9
Cllr  Rob
Crew
Alphington
LAB
FOR
10
Cllr Tyna
Crow
Heavitree
CON
Abstain
11
Cllr Catherine
Dawson
Minchinglake
LAB
Apologies
12
Cllr Rosie
Denham
Whipton Barton
LAB
FOR
13
Cllr Jake
Donovan
Pennsylvania
CON
AGAINST
14
Cllr Pete
Edwards
Whipton Barton
LAB
FOR
15
Cllr Adrian
Fullam
St Thomas
LIB DEM
FOR
16
Cllr Rob
Hannaford
St Thomas
LAB
FOR
17
Cllr Yolanda
Henson
Polsloe
CON
AGAINST
18
Cllr David
Henson
St Loyes
CON
Apologies
19
Cllr Sarah
Laws
St Davids
LAB
FOR
20
Cllr Andrew
Leadbetter
Topsham
CON
Abstain
21
Cllr Rachel
Lyons
Polsloe
LAB
FOR
22
Cllr Moira
Macdonald
Pinhoe
LAB
FOR
23
Cllr Ian
Martin
Mincinglake
LAB
FOR
24
Cllr Keith
Mitchell
St James
LIB DEM
FOR
25
Cllr Heather
Morris
Cowick
LAB
FOR
26
Cllr Lee
Mottram
Duryard
CON
Abstain
27
Cllr Rob
Newby
Topsham
CON
Abstain
28
Cllr Keith
Owen
St James
LAB
FOR
29
Cllr Tim
Payne
Pennsylvania
LIB DEM
FOR
30
Cllr Ollie
Pearson
Exwick
LAB
FOR
31
Cllr Percy
Prowse
Duryard
CON
Abstain
32
Cllr Lesley
Roson
Priory
LAB
FOR
33
Cllr Rod
Ruffle
Alphington
LIB DEM
FOR
34
Cllr Greg
Sheldon
Heavitree
LAB
FOR
35
Cllr Norman
Shiel
St Leonards
CON
Abstain
36
Cllr Roger
Spackman
Newtown
LAB
FOR
37
Cllr Rachel
Sutton
Exwick
LAB
FOR
38
Cllr Gill
Tippins
Priory
LAB
FOR
39
Cllr Tony
Wardle
Whipton Barton
LAB
FOR
40
Cllr John
Winterbottom
St Leonards
CON
Abstain

So the voting was:
28 FOR
3   AGAINST
5  Abstentions
4  Apologies for absence