Agenda item
Petition for Road Improvements in Tanfield Avenue
This report informs the Committee of a petition received in July 2014 from residents in Tanfield Avenue requesting improvements to the road.
Decision:
(i) Agreed that vibrations arising from the general construction and condition of the highway were considered unlikely to be the cause of structural damage and problems to adjacent properties and rejected the petition.
(ii) Noted the combined actions and planned measures described in the report to mitigate the issues of noise and vibration that from the typical traffic levels and road condition that are evident in Tanfield Avenue.
(iii) Noted that, a short section of approximately 50 metres in length and the full width of the road outside properties nos. 26 to 38 was identified via a condition assessment to contain defects that contribute to noise and vibration and that resurfacing of this section was programmed for completion in autumn 2014.
(iv) Noted that Tanfield Avenue was in a 7.5 tonnes weight restricted area, which had been identified for periodic traffic enforcement involving CCTV camera equipped vehicles and thus there was no requirement to install CCTV.
(v) Noted that Transport for London (TfL) were responsible for London’s safety camera programme. Their Surface Planning Team liaise with representatives from the boroughs on improvements to existing sites, identification of new sites and decommissioning sites, where it was agreed that cameras were no longer required.
(vi) Noted that TFL applied stringent prioritisation criteria to determine which sites would have speed cameras installed. There must have been a minimum of 4 killed or seriously injured (KSI) collisions in a three year period, and at least 2 of these must have been identified in accident reports as being a result of speeding. There have been no reported personal injury accidents in Tanfield Avenue for the 3 year period up until the end of April 2014, therefore a speed camera would not be justified.
(vii) Noted and agreed that a letter would be sent to TfL highlighting the need for bus drivers to be mindful of noise and appropriate speeds when travelling along Tanfield Avenue.
(viii) Agreed that officers should arrange on site meeting with TFL, bus operators and residents to reinforce need for bus driver speed to be moderated;
(ix) That officers develop a plan for the enforcement of the 7.5 tonne weight restriction in the area.
Minutes:
Members considered a report that informed of a petition received in July 2014 from Residents in Tanfield Avenue requesting improvements to the road.
Mr Nadeem Khan speaking on behalf of Tanfield Avenue Residents’ Association (TARA) stated that due to the volume, frequency and the weight of vehicles and buses using Tanfield Avenue, properties were suffering from vibrations resulting in damage to the structure of those properties and considerable distress to residents. He requested that the road be upgraded appropriately to the necessary depth to be able to cope with the current load and in order to prevent a recurrence, to introduce a 20mph speed limit with immediate effect. Mr Khan also requested financial recompense for all residents of Tanfield Avenue where damages to their properties were not covered by their household insurance policies. He undertook to provide photographic evidence in support of his request.
Mrs Harbuz also from TARA echoed the views expressed by Mr Khan adding that the speed humps in Tanfield Avenue were adding to the noise caused to residents and requested their removal.
Tony Antoniou (Head of Transportation) submitted that it was unlikely that structural damage could have been caused to properties in the way described by the representative of TARA. He referred to a report by the Department of Transport (DoT) which identified that properties within 5 metres may notice vibrations but there were no other risks posed to those properties. He continued that most of the properties in Tanfield Avenue were about 8 metres away from the road. The Head of Transportation informed members that the road was inspected for potholes which had all been repaired and that a section of Tanfield Avenue had been prioritised in a programme of works for resurfacing from the results of a condition survey. He added that the issue of road humps would form part of the consultation on introducing a 20mph speed limit and road safety measures in the area in 2014/15 and 2015/16.
Members were advised that speed restrictions and maximum weight limit of 7.5 tonnes already applied, however there was a need to engage with TfL to ensure that their drivers exercised care when using the road not to exceed the speed limit. In responding to claims that buses exceeded the 7.5 tonne weight limit, the Head of Transportation clarified that the weight limit applied where the vehicle had no legitimate business in the area. Bus drivers however were within the category of carrying out legitimate business in the area.
Councillor Hirani (ward member) welcomed the pothole repairs but added that there was a need for the weight restriction and the new 20mph speed limit to be vigorously enforced. He urged a separate line of communication with TfL about their buses and the behaviour of their drivers.
Members welcomed officers’ initiatives including the 7.5tonne weight and 20mph restrictions and the scheme for programmed repairs and urged officers to prioritise it. The Chair added that the issues raised including bus drivers’ behaviour could be taken to the next meeting of Public Transport Liaison Committee and that on-site meetings would be organised.
RESOLVED:-
(i) that vibrations arising from the general construction and condition of the highway were considered unlikely to be the cause of structural damage and problems to adjacent properties and rejected the petition;
(ii) that the combined actions and planned measures described in the report to mitigate the issues of noise and vibration from the typical traffic levels and road condition that are evident in Tanfield Avenue be noted;
(iii) that it be noted that a short section of approximately 50 metres in length and the full width of the road outside properties nos. 26 to 38 was identified via a condition assessment to contain defects that contribute to noise and vibration and that resurfacing of this section was programmed for completion in autumn 2014.
(iv) that it be noted that Tanfield Avenue was in a 7.5 tonnes weight restricted area, which had been identified for periodic traffic enforcement involving CCTV camera equipped vehicles and thus there was no requirement to install CCTV.
(v) that it be noted that Transport for London (TfL) were responsible for London’s safety camera programme. Their Surface Planning Team liaise with representatives from the boroughs on improvements to existing sites, identification of new sites and decommissioning sites, where it was agreed that cameras were no longer required.
(vi) that it be noted that TFL applied stringent prioritisation criteria to determine which sites would have speed cameras installed. There must have been a minimum of 4 killed or seriously injured (KSI) collisions in a three year period, and at least 2 of these must have been identified in accident reports as being a result of speeding. There have been no reported personal injury accidents in Tanfield Avenue for the 3 year period up until the end of April 2014, therefore a speed camera would not be justified.
(vii) that a letter would be sent to TfL highlighting the need for bus drivers to be mindful of noise and appropriate speeds when travelling along Tanfield Avenue.
(viii) that officers should arrange on site meeting with TFL, bus operators and residents to reinforce need for bus driver speed to be moderated;
(ix) that officers develop a plan for the enforcement of the 7.5 tonne weight restriction in the area.
Supporting documents: