Agenda item

The Director of Planning, Development and Transportation submitted a report to the Commission to consider unresolved objections to The Leicester Traffic Regulation (Bus Lane and Bus Gates) (Groby Road) (Amendment) Order (No. 8) 2019. Members were asked to give views to the Director to be taken into account when reaching a decision on whether or not to implement the proposed Traffic Regulation Order (TRO) and install the bus lane.

John Dowson, Major Transport Projects Manager, presented the report and drew Members’ attention to the following:

·         There were a number of popular buses that frequently used Groby Road, in particular Arriva 26, 27 29 services and University Hospitals Leicester bus services.

·         Delays varied during peak periods for buses but could be up to eight or nine minutes. With the installation of a bus lane, it would allow buses to bypass queues, making them more reliable and consistent and provide assurance to passengers.

·         The proposal had been advertised and objections had been received. There was concern from a resident about access to their property. It was explained that it was permissible to drive short distances in the bus lane for access.

·         Objections had been received from Ward Councillors Bhatia, Cassidy and Waddington, who had raised concerns with the length of the bus lane, impact on residents, and the linkage and timing of the bus scheme with the Five-Ways junction scheme. Discussions had been held with the Councillors concerned.

·         The Council had submitted a strong business case for the bus lane, and the Government had agreed to fund the work through its National Productivity Investment Fund.

Councillor Bhatia was invited to elaborate on objections he had made on behalf of residents, and made the following points:

·         He was not in objection to the bus lane as such but believed there was a cumulative impact of several issues and he wanted all issues to be taken into account.

·         He believed the 24 hours, seven days a week operation of the lane could not be justified based on the frequency of the buses at off peak times and residents could benefit from use of the lane off-peak.

·         The Five-Ways junction works proposed the removal of the right-turn into Blackbird Road from Woodgate and could force traffic to continue straight to turn right onto Medina Road from Groby Road. This could cause queueing problems on Groby Road if drivers had to wait behind those turning right into Medina Road.

·         There was proposed to be a new school entrance on Garland Crescent. Account should be taken on effects on the filter lane to turn right into Garland Crescent and this would need extending and may have an impact if traffic were queueing back up Groby Road.

The officer noted the concern around the 24/7 hours for the bus lane. It was reported that EDT Scrutiny Commission in 2015 had examined bus lanes at a policy level and had felt it appropriate where possible for bus lanes to be 24/7 on the grounds it that gave greater clarity to drivers, in particular on radial routes in and out of the city, rather than having drivers querying whether or not it was in operation. It was reported that where there were other 24/7 lanes they operated better, and were always designed so there was no disbenefit for peak traffic. He added that the overall importance of bus lanes were to ensure that route that buses were reliable. He also said buses were also a big part of making the city carbon neutral.

It was further reported that Medina Road and the Five-Ways scheme were moving to a point where the scheme could be consulted upon again and there would be a programme for that and further opportunity to discuss those proposals. It was acknowledged that with all the schemes in that part of the city, including the new school, the Council had to plan for all of the traffic as best as it could.

The Chair asked that another meeting be arranged with Councillor Bhatia to clarify the points made, as some time needed to be given to consider how the points could be resolved or responded to. She added that feedback on the information from the follow-up meeting be shared with Members of the Commission. The Director of Planning, Development and Transportation confirmed a follow-up meeting would be arranged as it was important to get the scheme right and that there was a common understanding of the benefits, and what some of the issues might be that arise from the project.

A Member asked that if the 24/7 bus lanes were to provide greater clarity, why there were so many people being fined by using the lanes, and he asked to see evidence to support the statement. It was noted Saffron Lane bus lane was peak period only, and everyone could understand timings on a sign. He said that to have no timings at all might be confusing to drivers. He added that to really deter motorists from using the bus lane it should be made more obvious cameras were being used and being enforced with signage to make the scheme more honest. He added that Nottingham City Council ran the scheme and had to generate significant funding every year in order to make the scheme self-sufficient. He also noted traffic queueing had a resultant pollution and congestion caused by the bus lane in Aylestone.

The officer addressed the points, noting that the signing of bus lanes and camera enforcement conformed with national requirements for road signing and directions and were legal, and if a driver wanted to appeal a charge issued, they could do so. It was noted the lining and signing was part of an adjudication process in appeals and was external to the city council, and enabled that lining installed according to regulations, to be critiqued. He added that the enforcement of bus lanes by camera ensured lanes were not unduly driven in, and helped to keep lanes clear for buses to ensure they worked as intended.

The Director of Planning, Development and Transportation added that in terms of the effectiveness of enforcement, there was a correction of behaviour in drivers after an initial period, and could be evidenced and showed they had the impact expected, He picked up on the point about Nottingham City Council and targets. He said there were no targets from Nottingham, that Leicester City Council made the decisions on where the cameras were installed, how they operated and the enforcement decisions, and Nottingham processed back-office tasks only.

Councillor Clarke said he would be happy to discuss with officers signing used compared with other parts of the country, and to look at that in the round, and to make comparisons to respond to the Members points.

The Chair thanked the officers and Councillors for their comments in input.

AGREED:

That:

1.    The report be noted.

2.    A meeting be arranged with Councillor Bhatia to clarify points in objection made. Information from the meeting to be provided to the Chair.

3.    The Deputy City Mayor, Councillor Clarke, to provide comparable information on signage for bus lanes from other areas of the country to be provided to Members of the Commission.