Special Meeting, Scrutiny Panel - Monday 11 November 2024 7.00 pm

November 11, 2024 View on council website  Watch video of meeting or read trancript
AI Generated

Summary

The Scrutiny Panel voted to uphold the decision made by the Assistant Director of Street Scene, Mr Tyler Linton, to proceed to statutory consultation on the Amherst Road and Pembury Circus transformation scheme. The decision was challenged by Councillors Garbert, Davis, Premru, Turbot, Delif and Route, on four procedural grounds, but after hearing evidence from both sides the Panel voted to uphold the original decision.

Pembury Circus Junction Design

The most significant point of contention was the design of the junction at Pembury Circus. The Calling Councillors objected to the Council's design because it continues to mix motor traffic with cyclists, and does not include separate cycle tracks. This aspect of the decision was called-in on the following grounds:

  1. Relevant matters have been ignored
  2. Consideration and evaluation of alternatives and reasons for decisions.

The Councillors argued that the Council's plan, which aims to improve pedestrian safety and experience and to enhance the town centre feel of the area, does not adequately take into account the safety of cyclists. In particular, the Councillors felt that the Council failed to properly consider an alternative design, known as a Circulating Cycle Stage, or CCS, that was prepared by a traffic engineer commissioned by the Hackney Cycling Campaign. The Councillors argued that:

The repeated shifting of objections and the absence of meaningful dialogue to explore or understand the design suggest an unwillingness to seriously engage with the CCS designs. It suggests an unwillingness to consider new information and new plans, and rather a determination to remain rigidly to the initial design regardless of significant alternative benefits.

The CCS was presented to the Council in July, but the Councillors felt that the officers did not adequately consider it.

The Council's scheme will remove a signalised pedestrian crossing on Amherst Road, which is a key route to Hackney Downs Station. The Calling Councillors argued that this would have a negative impact on pedestrians, who would attempt to continue to cross at this location despite the lack of a formal crossing. The CCS design includes a signalised crossing at this location.

A speaker from the National Federation of the Blind UK argued against the CCS design, due to the potential conflicts between pedestrians and cyclists that the segregated cycle tracks would create. He argued that visually impaired people would be unable to avoid cyclists travelling at speed along the cycle paths, and that the increased use of tactile paving in the CCS design would be disorienting for visually impaired people.

Blind people using white canes and their guide dogs wouldn't be able to detect the cycle lane unless it had at least 60 mm curve with high curves preferred, with rock curves to allow wheelchair access and and off the pavement. There is a grave danger that they and their guide dogs will likely walk into the bike lane.

In response, Mr Linton argued that the Council's design represents a better balance between the needs of different user groups, and that it will improve safety for cyclists compared with the existing situation. He argued that:

We have to weigh up different considerations and needs based on technical data, professional judgment, several different guidelines ... and most importantly informed by public engagement.

He stated that the Council's scheme will reallocate road space away from motor vehicles, resulting in a reduction of traffic of around 35%, and that the narrower carriageways will slow traffic down. The Council's scheme will also simplify pedestrian crossings, making them more accessible and intuitive.

Mr Linton argued that the Council's design better meets the overall aims of the project:

To arrive at this proposal, we've followed a robust and open process, not just in terms of technical assessments and quality assurance, but also crucially public engagement and listening.

The Council's project assurance framework was used to evaluate the different options, including the CCS design, and Mr Linton stated that he decided to proceed with the Council's design based on a balance of factors.

We need to consider guidance in the whole, and we need to consider different guidancees. Local transport note 120, which is Department for Transport's most current guidance on cycling, refers to other guidancees in itself. It also contains a chapter on planning for cycling, and it puts into context much of what's in that document as part of a wider process in the lifecycle of planning a cycling network. It's only right to look at that document, that guidance, in its whole form, as well as in the context of other other documents.

In response to questions from the Panel, Mr Linton stated that the Council's scheme has a better safety record than other similar schemes, and that it is not the case that a Circulating Cycle Stage design would necessarily result in fewer accidents. He stated that the Council's design would be simpler and more intuitive for pedestrians, and that it would include more trees and sustainable urban drainage.

Levelling Up Funding Bid

The scheme at Pembury Circus is being funded by a grant of £19 million from the Levelling Up Fund. This aspect of the decision was called in on the following grounds:

  1. A presumption in favour of openness
  2. Clarity of aims and desired outcomes

The Calling Councillors argued that the scheme, as designed, does not meet the commitments that the Council made in its Levelling Up Fund bid. The bid stated that the project would support walking, cycling, and bus priority. However, the Council has subsequently stated that the project was primarily a town centre scheme, and not a safe cycling scheme. The Calling Councillors argued that this change in emphasis is not consistent with the commitments made in the Levelling Up Fund bid, and that the public were misled about the nature of the scheme. They argued that the Council should request that Active Travel England conduct a rapid independent review of the two designs, and that the Council should agree to implement the scheme that Active Travel England marks as its preferred scheme based on national design guidance.

The Council responded that it had been open and transparent about the aims of the scheme from the beginning, and that the Levelling Up Fund bid explicitly referred to a town centre scheme. The Council also stated that the scheme will improve cycling safety, despite not including segregated cycle tracks, and that the scheme is designed to encourage active travel, in line with the aims of the Levelling Up Fund.

Statutory Consultation

The meeting concluded with a vote to uphold the Assistant Director's decision, which means that the Council will now proceed to the statutory consultation stage. The statutory consultation will give members of the public a further opportunity to comment on the Council's proposed design, and for any new evidence to be considered.

Attendees

Documents