Meeting documents

To consider a report by the Service Director Highways and Emergency Planning.

The Committee considered a report by the Service Director Highways and Emergency Planning on a proposed zebra crossing on Dorchester Road, Upton.

The Project Engineer (Democratic) provided a presentation and detailed introduction to the proposal, including photographs of all aspects of its location.  The crossing had been requested by the Town Council and Local County Councillor because of concerns for the safety of pedestrians and particularly of children going to the Infant and Junior Schools.  The site did meet the County Council's policy for a zebra crossing and was supported by all primary consultees.  During the design stage the Methodist Chapel had raised an objection due to them being unable to park a hearse on zig zag lines for funerals.  The zig zag lines were subsequently changed to double yellow lines to facilitate this.  No further objection had been received from them.  The proposal had been advertised and there had been three objections from residents living in the immediate vicinity relating to them not being able to park outside their houses and light pollution.  Photographs illustrated the off-road parking available for residents, the short walking distance to available on road parking and that light pollution could be addressed retrospectively by the fitting of hoods if necessary.  In summary the crossing would provide a safe crossing point, particularly for children walking to and from school, there was negligible impact on residents' amenity, and the crossing should be implemented as advertised.

A statement from Mr Baker, owner of a property adjacent to the proposed location of the zebra crossing, setting out his concerns was read out.  This is attached in Annexure 1 to these minutes.

A statement from the Local Member for Lychett Minster and Upton, Councillor Bill Pipe, in support of the proposal was read out.  This is attached in Annexure 1 to these minutes.

In response to members' questions it was explained that the zebra crossing was off centre from the passageway in order to reduce the risk of children running out onto the crossing; the parking of a hearse on the double yellow lines met statutory guidance and would be infrequent and mostly not at school start and end times; drivers approaching the crossing would be at low speed and taking due care; because the crossing was uncontrolled drivers needed to be alerted to its position; it was not national practice for crossing lights to be intermittent or only when someone was waiting to cross; the hearse could be unloaded and loaded on double yellow lines but would be expected to move to a safe distance after unloading and before returning later; double yellow lines would not restrict access; a "no loading or unloading" restriction could be considered at a later date if it were to become a problem; the disabled would be able to park on the double yellow lines and there was ample on street parking nearby on Dorchester Road; normally in lower speed areas a zebra crossing was preferred to a controlled crossing; and the fitting of hoods to reduce light pollution could be considered at a later date if appropriate.

Members then discussed the proposal in detail.  Whilst recognising that a zebra crossing would increase safety in some respects, there was still concern for pedestrian safety during times when a hearse was parked on the double yellow lines. Members also remained concerned about light pollution when other types of crossing would reduce this and they suggested that the hoods should be there from the outset.  They asked whether cost had played any part in proposing a zebra crossing and whether all avenues had been explored.  In view of the concerns, it was proposed and seconded that a decision be deferred.

The Project Team Manager addressed members' concerns: a zebra crossing was considered far more appropriate in an urban situation as this gave pedestrians the immediate right to cross the road without waiting for a signal controlled crossing; the hearse was currently parking on the road for funerals; the hearse would be parked to the west of the zebra crossing on the downstream side and not affect driver visibility of people crossing the road; hoods could be fitted from the outset but this was not standard practice; and there had been no recorded accidents in the area over the last five years.  Any change to the proposed design would mean a re-negotiation with the Methodist Chapel.

The Chairman‘s view was that under normal circumstances a zebra crossing was perfectly adequate: unless a funeral coincided with school opening or closing times there was no cause for concern about child safety; the hearse currently parked outside the Methodist Chapel for funerals; lights to be fitted could only be seen clearly on the crossing's approach and assurance was given that hoods could be fitted if necessary at a later date to ameliorate light pollution; and the proposal would enhance the safety of children.  Whilst understanding the concerns raised, he could see no reason for the proposal to be refused and he did not support deferral.

Having discussed the proposal various opinions were expressed both in favour and against.  On putting the deferral to the vote members

Resolved

1.  That a decision to recommend the Cabinet to approve the provision of a zebra crossing as advertised be deferred.

2.  That officers provide a further report taking into consideration the parking situation with regard to the use of zig zag lines, car parking for the hearse, and amelioration measures for light pollution and the possible inclusion of a pelican or zebra crossing.