Agenda item

An opportunity to ask any highways questions.

The Chairman then invited questions and comments from those present. It was noted that questions submitted in advance of the meeting would receive written responses in a document attached to the minutes.

The following questions were raised during the meeting with responses provided by the Panel:

1.    How schools who were interested in school streets should investigate their feasibility in the first instance.

Response – Schools that are interested in School Streets would need to update their Travel Plan to include the reasons for a School Street, explaining the benefits that will be derived, and demonstrating that some consultation with affected parties such as local residents and businesses to gauge support for the scheme has taken place.  Help is available from the Council's Road Safety Team and School Travel Plan officer.

2.    Local Highways and Footways Improvement Group (LHFIG) – a representative of Cycle Chippenham thanked Council officer Kirsty Rose for the support and advice given to the Chippenham and Villages LHFIG but understood her ability to complete all the requests approved by the LHFIG in a timely fashion was near impossible without the additional resourcing of officer time and increases in budgets. Residents asked if there was a criteria for prioritising and undertaking a risk assessment of LHFIG schemes. 

Response – The Cabinet member agreed to reflect further on the request and consider where improvements could be implemented further. It was acknowledged that on occasions processes needed to be update in order to increase output and this would also be considered further. Area Board members explained that Cycle Chippenham had undertaken some excellent work and referred to the ongoing consultation for the Local Cycling and Walking Infrastructure Plans (LCWIP) process in Chippenham. LHFIG Schemes were prioritised by the LHFIG membership using agreed criteria.

3.    Traffic Congestion – the residents of Rowden were concerned and frustrated about the number of housing developments in and around Chippenham both existing and future and the associated increase in traffic congestion impacting Chippenham. They also highlighted the knock on effect of changes to traffic lights phasing and particularly referred to Station Road, Chippenham and the need to improve road signage especially merging onto the M4.

Response – The Cabinet Member and Officers explained that traffic flows were a balancing act that had to be achieved for all road users, with investment being undertaken along the A350 as it is a strategic route. Officers acknowledged that the traffic lights in Station Road were controversial due to the phasing allowing pedestrian priority. They confirmed that the traffic lights were monitored, and they needed to be managed effectively, whilst moving traffic efficiently through Chippenham. It was noted that developers were required to mitigate the impacts of their developments. The M4 junction design initiated a Stage 3 safety audit for the roundabout and the junction from Chippenham to assess the current arrangements, with all associated costs being part of the scheme cost.  Officers explained that the chief safety concern related to the potential for the build up of traffic back onto the M4 and the junction design is intended to move traffic away from the M4 as quickly and safely as possible.   

4.    New developments in Patterdown, Chippenham – concern was raised by residents about the new developments in Patterdown.

Response – The Cabinet Member referred to the Local Transport Plan and how this document details the long-term transport strategy for the county.

5.    Community Transport – concern that demand for community transport was overwhelming the availability of volunteers.

Response – The Cabinet Member highlighted the responsibility of the NHS in this area. She would also consider the use of council funding for the promotion of volunteer opportunities.

6.    Reporting Highway Issues – A resident raised an issue about the reporting of a blocked drain in Monkton Hill which took 6 months to resolve.

Response – Officers apologised for the length of time to clear the drain. It was suggested that reporting of such issues via the My Wilts App may help receive a faster response. The meeting noted that the App was receiving a number of updates which would improve response times to issues reported.

7.    Safety on the A350 – A resident called for the A350 road layout near Lacock to be reviewed due to the number of road accidents over the years.

Response – The Cabinet Member commented on the category of accidents and how these are responded to by the Council and Police. She along with officers highlighted that the Council worked very closely with the Police and the Road Safety Partnership to make sure roads were safe in the vicinity of Chippenham and county-wide. They indicated that speeding was also a factor to consider. 

8.    Localised Flooding – A resident of the Chippenham Without Parish raised a query about flooding and the impact on local roads between Kington St Michael and Yatton Keynell.

Response – Cllr Nic Puntis – Portfolio Holder for Flooding advised the resident to report any flooding issues through the My Wilts App. Officers explained that deterioration of the road network formed part of the Forward Work Programme and that a local safety scheme was undertaken each year.

9.    Speeding – a resident commented on extensive speeding issues through Sutton Benger and asked for details about process to access speed calming devices or speed engineered solutions. He reported that a Speed Indicator Device (SID) was already in place.

Response – The Cabinet Member reminded the meeting that speeding was a Police enforcement issue and information collected from a SID could be downloaded to alert the Police enforcement team.

10.EV Chargers – A resident asked if there was a strategy to work with developers in relation to EV chargers.

Response – Officers noted that on occasion some EV vehicles had an increased risk of catching fire during the charging process and consequently in order to avoid such issues charging points in in some locations were only available for Council vehicles as these were known vehicles and minimise any public risk. It was noted that plans were in place to expand the public infrastructure for EV chargers in the county.

11.Sadlers Mead Car Park - Concerns were raised about the condition of the stairwells in Sadlers Mead Car Park and who held responsibility for cleaning these areas.

Response – Officers noted the concerns and later confirmed that Chippenham Town Council has the decision for the level of cleansing of Saddlers Car Park stair well.  The relevant sections of the Service Delegation Agreement have been sent to the Town Council for them to consider.  Wiltshire Council have arranged for the twice weekly cleansing of the car park following reports.  However, the Service Delegation stands unchanged and the decision over standards remains with the Town Council in the future.

12.A representative of Chippenham Rugby Club asked for an update on a live planning application being considered by the Local Planning Authority to allow direct access to the Club facility from the A350.

Response – Officers indicated that they were unable to comment on the planning application, as this was the responsibility of the Local Planning Authority.

13.Road/Lane Signage Marshfield Road – Residents from Marshfield Road raised issues about road and lane signage not being clear in Marshfield Road, Chippenham.

Response – Officers indicated that the issue would be investigated further.

14.Developer S106 Contributions – A resident commented on the level of developer contributions sought by the Council for large housing schemes.

Response – Officers provided assurance that developer financial contributions is a legal requirement for schemes above a certain size, and the request for contributions is fair and reasonable to provide mitigation for the impact on neighbouring residents.

15.Number of vehicles using Wiltshire roads – A resident asked how the Council is encouraging a reduction in the number of vehicles using the road infrastructure.

Response – The Cabinet Member referred to the work currently being undertaken on the next Local Transport Plan that will encourage the use of alternative forms of travel.