Agenda, decisions and minutes

There were no apologies for absence from the opposition spokespersons with all being present, but Cllr Lee Hunt had apologised that he was unable to attend in person to make a deputation on the Goldsmith Avenue item.

There were no declarations of members' interests.

Following full Council agreement of the capital budget for 2016/17 on 9 February 2016, this report seeks approval for the Local Transport Plan 3 (LTP3) Implementation Plan 2016/17.  Additionally it details how the approved budget for the LTP3 programme (£353k) and the Traffic Signals Optimisation Programme (£910k) will be apportioned.

(This item was deferred from the Traffic & Transportation decision meeting of 10 March 2016.)

Recommended that the Cabinet Member:

(1)  Approves the LTP3 Implementation Plan and Traffic Signals Optimisation Programme.

(2)  Delegates authority to the Director for Transport, Environment and Business Support in consultation with the Cabinet Member for Traffic and Transportation and the Section 151 Officer to agree any minor amendments to the Implementation Plan that may be required to take account of future funding changes and policy announcements.

The Cabinet Member:

(1)  Approved the LTP3 Implementation Plan and Traffic Signals Optimisation Programme.

(2)  Delegated authority to the Director for Transport, Environment and Business Support in consultation with the Cabinet Member for Traffic and Transportation and the Section 151 Officer to agree any minor amendments to the Implementation Plan that may be required to take account of future funding changes and policy announcements.

Pam Turton, the Assistant Director of Transport, Environment & Business Support, presented the report and the appendix which set out the detailed schemes.

A deputation was made by Mr Roger Inkpen, representing the Portsmouth Cycle Forum, to oppose the LTP in its present form.  He quoted from a PCC Flagship magazine article that traffic control systems were a priority to optimise traffic flows for cars at peak times and not for pedestrians and cyclists.  He was concerned that there was encouragement of more traffic with new signals being provided whereas he felt that the volume of traffic should be reduced for healthier lives.  The forum was therefore disappointed in the LPT and would instead ask for their own 'City to Share' document to be endorsed, which aimed to half the accidents on roads and get people out of their cars.

Councillor Ellcome wanted to have a balanced programme for all road users, and he acknowledged the aspirations within 'City to Share' and confirmed that he was due to attend the next meeting of the Portsmouth Cycle Forum and would be highlighting the various schemes and activities supported by the city council that indicate its strong support for cycling as a travel option.  He stressed that the signal programme was not intended to treat cyclists as second class citizens and this was reiterated by Pam Turton who explained that it had not been possible to maintain a significant number of the traffic signals to modern standards and now with better technology available, it is possible to give more appropriate time for all modes of transport. Councillor Ellcome added that the intention was to improve traffic flow to ease congestion and help reduce pollution in the city.

Councillor Stagg had mixed feelings, whilst appreciating the need to improve signals there was also the need for balance and she felt there was not enough encouragement for cycling routes.  She was also concerned by the number of new development sites in the city which would increase traffic.

Councillor Ellcome responded that a lot was being done to improve cycling (including the proposals for Goldsmith Avenue which was the next agenda item for this meeting), and several of the LTP schemes were for cycling improvements.  He regularly attended the Portsmouth Cycle Forum meetings so was aware of the forum's objectives and he also wished there to be balance in improving traffic flow.

DECISIONS The Cabinet Member:

(1)  Approved the LTP3 Implementation Plan and Traffic Signals Optimisation Programme.

(2)  Delegated authority to the Director for Transport, Environment and Business Support in consultation with the Cabinet Member for Traffic and Transportation and the Section 151 Officer to agree any minor amendments to the Implementation Plan that may be required to take account of future funding changes and policy announcements.

The report by the Director of Transport, Environment & Business Support seeks approval to undertake consultation via Traffic Regulation Order on the implementation of a designated cycle lane on Goldsmith Avenue.

(This item was deferred from the Traffic & Transportation decision meeting of 10 March 2016.)

RECOMMENDED that approval is given to undertake a consultation via a Traffic Regulation Order on the implementation of double yellow lines on the north side of Goldsmith Avenue, adjacent to the railway line opposite Francis Avenue to the pedestrian crossing west of Fratton Way.  This will include removing the loading bays and the current unrestricted parking to facilitate the introduction of a designated eastbound cycle lane.

Approval was given to undertake a consultation via a Traffic Regulation Order on the implementation of double yellow lines on the north side of Goldsmith Avenue, adjacent to the railway line opposite Francis Avenue to the pedestrian crossing west of Fratton Way.  This will include removing the loading bays and the current unrestricted parking to facilitate the introduction of a designated eastbound cycle lane.

Pam Turton, Assistant Director of Transport, Environment & Business Support, presented the report.  The Tesco development in Milton had included off-site improvements including a cycle lane along Goldsmith Avenue, and the report sought approval to go out to consultation via a Traffic Regulation Order (TRO) for double yellow lines.  There had been a change in the report since the published report (which had been deferred) for 10 March, as the description had changed from a 'mandatory' cycle lane to a 'designated' cycle lane.

A deputation was made by Roger Inkpen, of the Portsmouth Cycle Forum, to support the proposal.  He stated that this was welcome at Goldsmith Avenue which is a key East/West cycle route in the city.  He did however suggest that as motorists sometimes park in cycle lanes, thereby disrupting the flow of traffic, that some type of physical segregation was implemented.  He asked that this key route by signposted so that it was well used.

Councillor Ellcome referred to receiving two written deputations; he read out Councillor Hunt's representation which both supported a cycle way and linked the MB/MC residents parking zone being suspended to displacing commercial vehicles.   He had also taken on board the comments made by Mr Burns in supporting the proposal.

Councillor Potter would not support the idea (mentioned by the deputation) of segregation of the surfaces as he felt this would be dangerous for motorcyclists, and felt that a white line should be enough demarcation.  Councillor Stagg asked the officers regarding the extent of the cycle-path provision, which was not facilitated from Priory Crescent to Fratton Way.  Councillor Stagg also asked about the phasing of traffic lights at this junction for pedestrians and cyclists.  Councillor Chowdhury welcomed the proposal to improve facilities for cyclists and he hoped that this would reduce the level of traffic on a very busy road which had schools nearby.

Councillor Ellcome supported the proposal to go out to consultation via the TRO.  In response to Cllr Hunt's comments on MB/MC he reiterated his stance from previous meetings that parking zones in the Southsea and Eastney area would not be considered in a piecemeal way, and instead a policy for the whole area would be needed for any future residents' parking zones.

DECISION: Approval was given to undertake a consultation via a Traffic Regulation Order on the implementation of double yellow lines on the north side of Goldsmith Avenue, adjacent to the railway line opposite Francis Avenue to the pedestrian crossing west of Fratton Way.  This will include removing the loading bays and the current unrestricted parking to facilitate the introduction of a designated eastbound cycle lane.

A report will follow by the Director of Transport, Environment & Business to consider the responses to the public consultation on proposals under TRO 23/2016: Netley Road.  When objections are received to proposed Traffic Regulation Orders, it is a statutory requirement to consider them at a formal decision meeting. 

Public consultation on TRO 23/2016 is scheduled between 2 - 23 March 2016.  A report detailing the responses to the consultation will be published following the close of the consultation. 

That the proposed one-way northbound in Netley Road and 'no entry' from Osborne Road is not implemented. 

Alan Cufley the Director of Transport, Environment & Business Support, presented this report that had been circulated late due to the timing of the consultation process, which had only just finished the previous day. 

Councillor Ellcome reported receipt of three written deputations and he was also mindful of the results of the consultation which were summarised in paragraph 4.1 with 9 in favour of the proposals and 18 against.

A deputation was made by Mr Andre? Guedeney whose concerns included fire service and commercial vehicles access for the proposed new route and that delivery and collection vehicles could block access for residents.  There would also be problems when major events ran in the summer which would mean restrictions of access.

Councillor Stagg spoke on behalf of ward Councillor Hugh Mason who was also concerned that emergency access and refuse vehicle access needed to be maintained.

Councillor Ellcome recognised that the majority of respondents had not favoured the new route therefore he wished to support the recommendation that the proposed one-way northbound in Netley Road and 'no entry' from Osbourne Road should not be implemented.

DECISION: That the proposed one-way northbound in Netley Road and 'no entry' from Osborne Road is not implemented.