Agenda item

Cabinet received a report which requested it to consider the conclusions and recommendations made by the task and finish review group with regards to the implementation of 20mph signed speed limits.

At its meeting on 17 April 2013, Council had called upon the Sustainable Growth and Environment Capital Scrutiny Committee to investigate the benefits of extending 20mph signed speed limits throughout all residential areas in the Peterborough District and to present proposals to the Cabinet for consideration.

A cross party task and finish group was convened, its remit being to investigate the impact of 20mph speed limits in residential areas and to report its findings to the Sustainable Growth and Environment Capital Scrutiny Committee, which it did on 20 January 2014.

After gathering all evidence, the group had considered, discussed and debated the relevant merits of what had been learnt, applying the evidence and learning to the city of Peterborough, and as a result, four recommendations had been reached, these being:

Recommendation 1

Due to current available levels of evidence of the impact of 20mph ‘signed only’ schemes across the country the group recommends that the council await the publication of further evaluation of schemes introduced in other similar size authorities prior to a recommendation on the roll-out of an authority-wide scheme. Officers to be charged with a further report in 12 months.

Recommendation 2

Whilst being cognisant of the caveat in Recommendation 1 the group is satisfied that the council should progress with implementing 20mph ‘signed only’ limits in all its constituent villages, subject to consultation. 

The implementation of reduced speed limits within villages should be used as a pilot. Implementation will be evaluated by officers to include speed, casualty reduction and a public perception survey as to improved quality of life (including levels of active travel).

Recommendation 3

Undertake a public consultation to gain views of such a scheme in Peterborough, as information presented made it clear such limits need to be self-enforcing and something the public buy into.

Recommendation 4

To agree that budget is made available to undertake the pilot in the villages.  Budget will need to cover implementation of the limits as well as speed monitoring and public consultations. 

Councillor North introduced the report and advised of the difference between a 20mph zone and a 20mph speed limit, this being that zones utilised calming measures to reduce the adverse impact of motor vehicles in built up areas and 20mph limits reduced the limit, but without utilising physical measures.

Further key points highlighted by Councillor North included the lack of data which was available to clearly demonstrate the impact of 20mph signed only speed limits on speed and casualty reduction; the inconclusiveness of long term casualty reduction due to 20mph speed limits; the preferred recommendation being recommendation 1; support for Parish Council’s if any wished to introduce and pay for the scheme in their own areas; and the costs to revert back to 30mph should 20mph speed limits be unsuccessful.

In summary it was advised that there was not enough evidence available at the current time to support a city wide transition to 20mph speed limits.

         Members of the task and finish group were given the opportunity to address Cabinet and the following key points were made by Councillor Peach:

·         All issues had been thoroughly addressed by the group and a number of individuals from the Police, medical profession, cycling world etc. had looked into the proposals;

·         There were a number of councils opting for 20mph speed limits and the group had recommended a pilot within the rural areas;

·         The 20mph zones implemented within Park Ward had proven to be very popular with residents and had cut much of the through traffic on a number of roads;

·         It was queried whether a pilot would cost as much as was stated; and

·         Consideration could be given in the future to a city wide scheme, the cost of which would equate to the positioning of signs coming into and out of the authority.

         The following key points were made by Councillor Shearman:

·         In 2013, the Government had issued the first circular from the Department of Transport requesting that Local Authorities consider rolling out, over time, 20mph speed limits in residential areas;

·         The benefits of such a roll-out were well recognised, with reduction in deaths and serious injury, and there was also evidence to suggest that these implementations had led to an increase in walking and cycling;

·         The implementation would also lead to a reduction in the traffic chaos outside schools, particularly around primary and infant schools;

·         There were over 14m people living in areas which had taken on this approach to road safety;

·         A Public Health England report was now available entitled ‘Reducing the Unintentional Injuries on the Roads Among Children and Young People Under 25 Years of Age’. A recommendation contained within this report related to the introduction of 20mph speed limits within residential areas;

·         Evidence showed that the majority of accidents involving children coming to and from school did not happen directly outside of the schools. Therefore, small zone implementation did not appear the best way forward; and

·         It was recommended that a pilot be undertaken in the village areas and if successful, to be implemented across the whole of the city.

Following comments from the working group members, Councillor Seaton advised that he was a supporter of 20mph zones in general, however the key benefit of these appeared to be across busy residential areas, such as areas near to primary schools etc. A blanket approach to implementing 20mph speed limits would also be more beneficial and would represent better value. With regards to the implementation of a pilot within all villages, there appeared to be a lack of evidence supporting this, however Councillor Seaton concurred with Councillor North’s proposal for support to be offered to any Parish Council which may wish to proceed with a 20mph implementation, to be funded by the Parish Council themselves.

Initially, further evidence was required to support any recommendations and a public consultation needed to take place, which could feasibly be undertaken alongside the budget consultation. There were also concerns highlighted around costs, in particular the implementation of electronic signs and the costs that would be incurred to revert any 20mph signs back to 30mph signs if a pilot was unsuccessful. In summary, Councillor North’s suggested approach was supported as a way forward.

The Assistant Director for Communities addressed the cost query and advised that additional expenditure would be incurred for re-establishing 30mph signs, and this cost would be equal to the initial cost to install 20mph signs in the first instance.

It was further advised that there were two important pieces of work which had been commissioned by Government following the cessation of the working group, these both being led by the Department of Transport. The first piece of work was around allowing local authorities more control over the use of signage in 20mph zones and other locations, this would ultimately lead to a reduction in implementation costs. The consultation results on this piece of work were due back within 12 months.

The second piece of work was a major research project examining implemented 20mph schemes across the country. The results of this piece of work would not be known until 2017, but outcomes of initial research should be available in early 2015.

Following comments, Councillor North summarised by stating that the implementation of a scheme at the current time would be demanding on budgets that were already stretched and with regards to the implementation of a blanket 20mph speed limit, he would have reservations about this. A 20mph limit would not be so relevant in some parts of the city and would not be for the best benefit of residents if it was not shown by other authorities that implementation had caused a substantial reduction in accidents and injuries on the roads.

Following debate, the Chairman proposed that Cabinet be minded to accept Recommendation 1, to await the publication of further evidence,  and Recommendation 3, to undertaken consultation as part of the overall budget consultation. Furthermore that support be offered to local parishes if they wished to utilise their own budget to do so.

The Chairman further advised that he supported the idea of 20mph speed limits across the city, however further evidence was required prior to spending money on rolling any scheme out across the city.

Councillor Seaton thanked the working group for its report and its presentation and further thanked the group for the hard work undertaken in bringing the recommendations to Cabinet. This was endorsed by the Chairman.

Cabinet considered the report and RESOLVED:

1.    To await authorities to publicise impacts of 20mph speed limits as per  Recommendation 1 arising from the working group;

2.    To undertake a public consultation, alongside the Budget consultation, to gain views of residents on 20mph speed limits, as per Recommendation 3 arising from the Working Group; and

3.  To agree to support any Parish Council wishing to implement 20mph speed limits, utilising its own budget to do so.

          REASONS FOR THE DECISION

The recommendations were based on the findings of the Councillor cross party task and finish group.

          ALTERNATIVE OPTIONS CONSIDERED

To await detailed evaluation reports from similar sized authorities who had recently implemented 20mph signed only limits on their effectiveness.