Agenda item

The Monitoring Officer submits a report which explains that a petition has been received which asks the council to review and resolve the traffic chaos / congestion. The committee is recommended to consider the petition and representation and make any recommendations to the Executive in accordance with the Petition Scheme.

The Monitoring Officer submitted a report explaining that a petition had been received asking the Council to review and resolve the traffic chaos / congestion caused by the various improvements made to the city centre and surrounding roads.

At the invitation of the Chair, the lead petitioner, Mr Radynski, addressed the Committee, noting that, unfortunately, the petition did not contain enough signatures for a Council debate to be held on this matter, as many signatories had used their home postcodes, which were outside the city, rather than work ones which were in the city, when signing the petition. 

Mr Radynski reminded the Committee that, under the Traffic Management Act 1984, the Council was responsible for ensuring the smooth flow of traffic.  However, if people did not take up alternative methods of travel, such as cycling, walking or using buses, congestion remained.  The resulting pollution had an impact on public health, which was contrary to the Council’s stated policies.

The Council had not acknowledged that congestion had increased, stating instead that it was unchanged.  Mr Radynski therefore questioned how things could improve if the Council refused to accept the situation.  People were still signing the petition, so the Council was asked to listen to their concerns and act accordingly.

On behalf of the Committee, the Chair thanked Mr Radynski for presenting the petition and his comments.

The Committee noted that this was a matter of considerable public interest, as could be seen, for example, from comments in local media.  However, Leicester was an ancient city, with a road pattern dominated by that laid out in the Roman and Medieval periods.  After the Second World War there had been considerable reconstruction of the city for the benefit of motorists, but this had been at a cost to historic elements of the city.

It was stressed that, as well as considering the issues raised through the petition, ways needed to be found for the city to continue to prosper.  For example, pedestrianisation of areas of the city centre initially had been very controversial, but the city centre continued to thrive.  However, a balance had to be maintained between the needs of motorists, cyclists, pedestrians, traders and the wider city, which it was recognised was not easy to achieve.

The Committee suggested that it would be helpful if the City Mayor could set out all of the plans for change over the next three to four years.  This would enable people to see how they worked together and they could then comment in the full knowledge of what was trying to be achieved.  It also could mean that situations were avoided where plans had to be changed as people were not aware of the context of individual proposals.  The City Mayor welcomed this suggestion.

Members noted that views had been expressed that some of the new facilities, such as bus lanes, were well used, but no figures had been produced to substantiate these.  In addition, some of the changes appeared to oppose each other.  For example, people were encouraged to use buses to come in to the city, but on entering the city there were signs saying that motorists could park in the city centre for £1.  This did not correspond to the stated aims of freeing up the city centre and improving air quality.  It was suggested that one way of showing that the Council was serious about achieving these aims would be to provide free parking for electric vehicles.

In reply, the City Mayor drew Members’ attention to the Council’s Air Quality Action Plan, which referred to free parking for electric vehicles.  In addition, the Council’s Cycling Strategy highlighted the health and other benefits of this style of travel.  In addition, the Council’s Parking Strategy encouraged motorists to park in other parts of the city than the centre, so not all vehicles were travelling and parking together.

Members observed that policies and proposals currently appeared to come forward in a piecemeal fashion, so checks had to be made for each one to see how it worked with the Council’s other policies and proposals.  For example, the cycle lane in Newarke Street was underused and there were no linking cycle routes to enable cyclists to reach it safely.  Changes already made to roads seriously restricted the flow of traffic, but people were not incentivised to make the changes needed to their modes of travel.

The City Mayor refuted these suggestions, noting that a lot of plans had been promoted that were consistent with each other, all of which were transparent

The Committee noted that people took time to adjust to change and could find it difficult to do so.  Many of the proposals being made were for long term change, but the Council was trying to reduce government projections for congestion by 2040.

Yash Sharma, Young Peoples Council, addressed the Committee at the invitation of the Chair, noting that many young people cycled to school.  However, there were very few cycle lanes near schools and cyclists were unable to cycle on pavements. 

The City Mayor agreed that safe routes for cycling to school were very important and, although there had been some good schemes promoting this in the past, there had not been enough of them.  The comments regarding cycling to school therefore needed to be considered for future schemes.

At the invitation of the Chair, Mr Radynski made the following closing remarks:-

·           He was a cyclist and a car driver, but cycling was now more dangerous, due to all of the recent changes and traffic policies did not seem to accommodate people being both;

·           Over the last five years, it had become more dangerous to cycle in the city, partly due to increased stress levels of drivers;

·           Safe routes were needed to schools, which in turn would reduce congestion at schools, as it would reduce the need to drive to schools;

·           The city’s arteries were choked, which was squeezing the life out of the city centre;

·           Department of Transport statistics showed that the number of cars entering and leaving Leicester had not changed much.  Interestingly, although this number had reduced during the recent recession, the number of cyclists had not increased.

Mr Radynski advised the Committee that he had some questions he would like to ask the Council, so the Chair invited him to leave them with officers and a written response would be provided.

On behalf of the Committee, the Chair thanked Mr Radynski for attending the meeting and for his input.

RESOLVED:

1)    That the City Mayor be asked to:-

a)     Investigate the issues raised through the petition and the discussion recorded above and to advise this Committee of the action it is proposed to take;

b)     Make information available on all planned changes to traffic routes in the city over the next few years, and the timescales involved, to enable Councillors and the public to see how they integrated with each other and with other plans for the development of the city; and

c)     Investigate the concerns raised above and take them in to consideration in future plans relating to traffic planning; and

2)    That the Monitoring Officer be asked to send a written reply to the questions passed to officers by Mr Radynski.