Agenda item

To consider a Traffic Regulation Order for the prevention of the use of the road by vehicular traffic of a kind which, or the use thereof by such traffic in a manner which, is unsuitable having regard to the existing character of the road or adjoining property.

With the aid of a visual presentation including plans and aerial photographs, the Case Officer identified the site and explained the proposal and relevant planning policies to members. Members were informed that the proposal was to secure that at all times, the bus route at the junction with Mampitts Lane, could only be used by buses, coaches, bicycles and pedestrians. Photographs of the location of the proposed Vehicle Restriction Facility were shown with the Case Officer detailing that the existing carriageway did not satisfy modern design standards. Images to demonstrate the location of the proposed footway to the north were also shown. The officer’s presentation highlighted the map of the alternative route which would be used by road users and is accessed by a signal-controlled junction which had previously been designed to accommodate the expected amount of traffic.

Primary and secondary consultation had been carried out and no objections had been received from Local Members, Emergency Services, Waste Services, Bus Operators, Utility Companies or Road and Freight Haulage Associations. However, upon secondary consultation, it was evident that there were 78 against the Traffic Regulation Order whilst 43 members of the public remained either in support or neutral. Objections had been received in relation to the impacts on Allen Road, the northern link/spine road, an overall increase in speeding vehicles, climate change and journey times and the request for a 20mph speed restriction. Photographs of Allen Road were shown to illustrate the signalised traffic junction onto the A30 and to visually demonstrate the alternative route and the Northern link which would've provided access to Wincombe Lane.

Members were also provided with details of the number of collisions which had been caused due to highway user error and not due to the design of the road. The Case Officer’s recommendation was to support the Traffic Regulation Order for the following reasons:

• For preventing the use of the road by vehicular traffic of a kind which is unsuitable having regard to the character of the road.
• To prevent the use of the road by through traffic for the purposes of road safety.

Public Participation

Mr Peter Yeo spoke in his own capacity as a resident who lived on Mampitts Lane, who like many others, objected to the bus gate. He referred to the narrow roads near the Town Council allotments and cemetery. Over the last 8 years, the access had worked well with the Town Council conducting surveys to demonstrate suitability and no speeding problems. Mr Yeo felt that if approved, the proposal would stop residents accessing the estate by the most logical route and there was no real justification for cutting off and segregating the east of Shaftesbury. The local resident also highlighted an accident which had occurred the week prior to the meeting, highlighting that if the access point couldn't have been used, there would have been even more severe traffic jams in all directions. Looking at figures, 75% of residents do not want the bus gate. Mr Yeo did not feel as though the proposal was logical and urged the committee to refuse and allow for it to go to public enquiry.

Ms Varsani spoke in objection to the proposal. She lived at Mampitts lane and if the bus gate were to be approved, then her garage and parking space would have become difficult to access and make her parking situation unusable. The local resident felt that the road closure would cause significant issues whilst also segregating the town of Shaftesbury. Reducing access to a single road would have led to frustration and resentment. Ms Varsani did not believe that the proposal was the best solution and urged officers to look for alternative traffic calming measures. She did not have details of an accident survey, however, knew that there was not a huge number of incidents. Ms Varsani felt that a single access point for hundreds of residents was not justifiable and urged the committee to refuse.

Ms Taylor spoke in objection to the proposal. As a local resident her knowledge and experience of Shaftesbury dated back several years. She noted that she had been approached by many people asking for her to give her view on the subject that was being debated. Ms Taylor referred to residents' deeds which stated that they should always be given a right of way to all roads on the estate. She queried if legal advisors had researched this. Resident concerns also referred to the building of the Mampitts Community Hub which will require a signific amount of work traffic. It was also speculated that if approved, residents of Mampitts Lane and Mead Close would potentially leave their cars the other side of the bus gate to save journey times. This would cause considerable congestion and parking issues. It was also pointed out that the original plan for the bus gate was made before the Chilmark Glade part of the estate was built, and therefore the original calculations were invalid. Resident assumption has always been that there would be a Northern Access Road.

Ms Taylor also referred to an incident in Christies Lane on 7 November 2024 which the fire brigade attended. For at least an hour, traffic was diverted through the Maltings and over the bus gate. On this occasion Allen Road became completely choked up and there was grid lock on the estate. Residents did not feel as though any thought had been given to the impact on this road. There was currently no pavement in Greenacre Way for most of its length and was populated by many parked cars day and night. It was narrower than Allen Road. Many school children used this road on their route to local schools. If approved, the road would have become a major hazard zone, and the Royal Chase roundabout would be frequently congested. The bus gate was socially divisive and would impose a physical barrier separating the Maltings from all parts of the town. To summarise, Ms Taylor felt that pollution and congestion were real concerns as well as fair access. She urged the committee to re-evaluate the bus gate proposal taking account the many issues raised. In Ms Taylor’s view it was unethical to dismiss them when they impact the wellbeing of residents.

The Local Ward member made a neutral representation. Highlighting that it was his duty as local ward member to put forward the comments made by residents. The current road enables swift access into the estate; however, the northern link was missing. When the plans were first put forward, the access road was never designed to be the route out of the development and people brought houses with this understanding. Minor accidents have occurred but residents living on Pound Lane were promised that access wouldn’t be where it currently was. A traffic restriction should have been put in place from the beginning, but it was crucial for members to consider the impact from both sides.

Members questions and comments

• Cllr Bawden queried whether there could have been any modifications made which would have satisfied objectors.
• Questions regarding how the traffic restriction order would have assisted the bus route.
• Cllr Monks referred to access for the emergency services and queried whether any work had been carried out to assess the change for their access to and from the development.
• What had been done since 2007 to consult with local residents to ease the change of access
• Clarification regarding the width of the road and frequency of public buses.
• Feasibility of increasing the width of the road to allow for 2-way traffic
• Members were disappointed that it had taken such a long time to come forward for consideration and there was no feasible modification. Therefore, it was suggested by Cllr Northam to move forward with the officer recommendation.
• Members felt that it was imperative to ensure pedestrian safety.

Having had the opportunity to discuss the merits of the application and an understanding of all this entailed; having considered the officer’s report and presentation; the written representatives; and what they had heard at the meeting, a motion to APPROVE the officer’s recommendation to GRANT the Traffic Regulation Order as recommended, was proposed by Cllr David Northam, and seconded by Cllr Belinda Bawden. 

Decision: To grant the Traffic Regulation Order without modification.