Skip to content

Agenda item

Report of the Head of Highways, Infrastructure Development and Waste (HIW/18/35) on the key traffic management operational issues requiring development and implementation across the County, attached.

 

An Impact Assessment is also attached.

 

Minutes:

(Councillors Atkinson, Connett, Dewhirst, Greenslade, Hannaford and Shaw attended in accordance with Standing Order 25(2) and spoke to this item).

 

The Cabinet considered the Report of the Chief Officer for Highways, Infrastructure Development and Waste (HIW/18/35) which provided an overview of key traffic management operational issues requiring development and implementation across the County in the coming years to ensure the safe and expeditious movement of traffic on the highway network, which had been circulated prior to the meeting in accordance with regulation 7(4) of the Local Authorities (Executive Arrangements) (Meetings and Access to Information) (England) Regulations 2012.

 

The Report highlighted that the Devon Network Management Plan had been adopted by the County Council in November 2008, the purpose of which was to provide the strategic direction of the Council in discharging its Statutory Duty of the Traffic Management Act.  The ethos of the Plan remained in ensuring the expeditious movement of traffic on the network, however, it was considered some key areas required revisiting to determine how the highway network was managed in the future.

 

The Report outlined four key proposals and well as other ongoing work streams which may require a change of policy position in the future, for example a refreshed Network Management Plan should a Roadworks Permit scheme be pursued, electric vehicle charging points, the impact of autonomous vehicles, national legislation on “pavement” parking and emerging technology.

 

The first proposal related to the Management of Roadworks. The Council currently worked to a noticing system where the Council was notified of planned works. An alternative approach was a highway permit scheme, whereby instead of giving notice of works, ‘approval to work’ was sought by works promoters from the highway authority to work on the highway and a ‘permit to work’ was issued, or not.  Permits had an associated fee, set within maximums prescribed by the Department for Transport (DfT) and various conditions could be attached. DfT estimated that Authorities introducing such schemes tended to see a reduction in disruption of between 5-10% due to a greater control of works by the Highway Authority.  The Report gave further background information on Roadworks Permit schemes at Appendix I.

 

The second proposal was in relation to persistent evaders of civil parking enforcement. The Council had been delivering Civil Parking Enforcement service in-house for four years and had evidence of a number of UK vehicles and foreign registered vehicles repeatedly found contravening parking restrictions and owners not engaging with the appeals process or paying their penalty charges and associated costs.  The potential value of the outstanding debt being in the order of £400,000.

 

The proposal was to extend the Council’s enforcement activity to be able to remove or seize any vehicle, where the owner / keeper was identified as a persistent evader, where appropriate and in accordance with The Traffic Management Act 2004, The Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984 and the Secretary of State’s Statutory Guidance to Local Authorities on the Civil Enforcement of Parking Contraventions to tackle this antisocial behaviour.  Fees associated were set nationally which Devon would adopt and follow. A procurement exercise would need to be undertaken to identify an approved contractor. The Report gave fuller details of the Policy at Appendix II.

 

The third proposal related to Speed Management and there was sound evidence based policy and procedure in place to review and, where applicable, act on speeding concerns, following and building on National Guidance from the DfT. 

 

Whist it was anticipated that DfT would be issuing revised guidance on 20mph restrictions shortly, it provided an opportunity to reflect on the Council’s wider approach which was approximately 12 years old. 

 

Last, there was a growing interest in whether the authority should introduce bus lane and box junction moving traffic violation enforcement using camera technology. Whilst the Council had powers to enforce moving traffic violations in bus lanes through the Public Transport Act, there was no power to enforce box junction violations (that being a matter for the Police). Officers would engage with the Police to request greater attention be given to box junctions to help better manage traffic flow, in addition to pressing for powers to be devolved to local authorities to enforce such offences.

 

Parking in bus lanes could be dealt with through Civil Parking Enforcement powers where there was an associated Traffic Regulation Order in place to prohibit parking.  If the Council wished to use its powers to introduce moving traffic enforcement, as opposed to parking, in bus lanes there should be a network management need to do so. 

 

The Report concluded that none of the proposals were designed to generate income/profit but more designed to affect behavioural change.

 

The Chief Officer’s Report also incorporated an Impact Assessment relating to the proposal on Persistent Evaders of Civil Parking Enforcement Policy, which had been circulated previously for the attention of Members at this meeting in order that as part of its determination of the next steps in the process the Cabinet might have full regard to the responsibilities placed upon it to exercise its Public Sector Equality Duty, under s149 of the Equality Act 2010.

 

The Assessment highlighted that any contractor undertaking this service must be aware of and act in accord with the Equality Act 2010 Public Sector Equality Duty and for example not remove vehicles displaying a valid disabled person parking badge or with diplomatic plates or was known to be used by a vulnerable adult or was a tool of a person’s trade etc. Also, no vehicle would be removed without the approval of either the Chief Officer Highways Infrastructure Development & Waste or the County’s designated Traffic Manager.

 

There were no unmanageable impacts that had been identified in terms of environmental or economic impacts.

 

The Cabinet heard that regular contract meetings would be held to monitor progress and discuss complaints or issues arising from the service being provided.  It was anticipated that initially a 12 month trial would be procured, at which point it would be reviewed, with options to adjust how it was delivered, or whether the service should cease.

 

The matter having been debated and the options and/or alternatives and other relevant factors (e.g. financial, sustainability, carbon impact, risk management, equality and legal considerations and Public Health impact) set out in the Head of Service’s Report and/or referred to above having been considered:

 

It was MOVED by Councillor Hughes, SECONDED by Councillor Hart, and

 

RESOLVED

 

(a) that subject to a positive business case, a Roadworks Permit Scheme be consulted upon;

 

(b) that the policy dealing with ‘persistent evaders’ of parking enforcement be approved;

 

(c) that the County Council’s speed management policy be reviewed; and

 

(d) that the position on the enforcement of bus lanes and box junction infringements be noted.

 

[NB: The Impact Assessment referred to above may be viewed alongside Minutes of this meeting and may also be available at:  http://new.devon.gov.uk/impact/].

Supporting documents:


Top