Agenda item

ES20170

It was noted that this report was being provided as it had been promised at the previous ECS PDS meeting that a follow up report would be provided to assess suitable options for the junction reconfiguration at Albemarle Road and Westgate Road. It had been agreed that one of the options that would be considered would be the installation of a new mini roundabout. Officers had considered the various options and had recommended that ‘Option 1’ be implemented, which was the installation of a ‘Priority Junction’. This would mean that priority would be given to Albemarle Road, while the traffic from Westgate Road would have to give way.

The Assistant Director for Traffic and Parking explained some of the reasons for the officers’ recommendation, saying that the installation of the mini-roundabout could cause problems—it was quite likely that traffic from Albemarle Road approaching the mini-roundabout would not slow down and give way as it should--because of the historical layout. Also, with the limited space available, it was difficult to give adequate visibility to traffic approaching the mini roundabout, especially out of Westgate Road Bridge; this could lead to an increase in accidents. It had also been noted by officers that many pedestrians had been using this point to go along Westgate Road or to proceed to Beckenham, (along Albemarle Road) and also this was on a cycle route. The Assistant Director explained that mini roundabouts were not good for cyclists or pedestrians. He expressed the view that the ‘priority give way’ junction would be better for cyclists and pedestrians at this location.

The Assistant Director said that officers had previously recommended the installation of a mini roundabout at the junction of Scott’s Lane and Bromley Road—but in this case there was more space to do so and also there was an ongoing accident and injury situation that needed to be resolved.

Attending the meeting were Ward Councillors Stephen Wells and Michael Tickner who supported ‘Option 2’, which was for the installation of a mini-roundabout. 

Councillor Tickner explained that Albemarle Rd was a long straight road which drivers often used to avoid the A222. The road had been made one way when cycle lanes had been implemented and now it had been proposed to remove the cycle lanes and for two way traffic to be reintroduced. He stated that local residents were concerned about the speed of traffic along Albemarle Rd. He expressed the view that if the road was reinstated as it was, then traffic would continue to speed along the whole length of the road. In his view, the installation of a mini roundabout would be a good opportunity to slow down the speed and pace of traffic along the road.

Councillor Tickner said that local residents had seen much money spent on the installation of cycle lanes and now they would see additional money being spent on the removal of the cycle lanes. He felt it would be good for local residents to see something concrete that was an improvement to the junction. He felt that just to put things back as they were, would make the Council seem foolish. He felt that the installation of the mini-roundabout was a good opportunity to implement a change at the junction for the better.

Councillor Tickner noted that the money required for the improvement would come from TfL. He noted that the cost for the mini roundabout would be 20% more, but felt that this cost would be justified as it would provide a positive and visible improvement at the junction.  Councillor Tickner therefore moved that the recommendation of the report be amended and that ‘Option 2’ be recommended instead of ‘Option 1’. Option 2 was for the implementation of the mini-roundabout.

Councillor Wells agreed that an improvement to the junction was required and felt that in terms of ‘arms’ on roundabouts, the one in question on the night was more 3.5 arms than 4. The costings were about 20% of the overall project cost—this was a worthwhile exercise and should be progressed, he seconded Councillor Tickner’s proposal that the officers’ recommendation be overturned and a mini roundabout be installed. This would be a safe and progressive approach in his view.

A Member asked what the public wanted. Had the public asked for a roundabout at this junction?  The Assistant Director responded and said that it was not clear what the public wanted. Councillor Wells said that previously, residents had indicated that they wanted to see an improvement to the junction and in particular, an improvement in safety at the junction. Later, conversations seemed to indicate that they were positive about mini roundabouts in general and were positive about a mini roundabout being installed at this location.

The Chairman asked Councillor Wells for greater clarification as to what the public actually wanted—did they want a safer junction or slower speeds---Cllr Wells responded that they would like to see both.

A Member commented that this was a difficult matter as he appreciated the local knowledge of the ward councillors, but at the same time respected the expertise of the officers in the Traffic Team. He said that in his ward the mini roundabouts that tended to cause problems were the 4 way mini roundabouts. Because of this he was concerned that the introduction of the 4 way mini roundabout may have a detrimental impact on safety. He asked if sufficient TFL funding was available to cover the extra 20% funding. The answer to this was affirmative. He also enquired as to the effectiveness of a nearby traffic enforcement camera.

The Assistant Director assured that the mini roundabout could probably be achieved within budget and that this would also include funding for an additional pedestrian refuge which would be required. He said that officers were not saying that a mini roundabout could not be put in, rather it was the case that a mini roundabout would normally be suggested when there was an issue to resolve in terms of casualties which was not currently the case. If a mini roundabout was implemented, then probably the Council would seek to install two pedestrian refuges on two arms of the roundabout to assist pedestrians.  A discussion took place as to whether or not a raised dome would be used, but there was no decision taken regarding this at the meeting. There was a possibility that an anti-skid surface could be used but this would need costing. 

A Member asked if the speed camera on Albemarle Road was operational. The Assistant Director responded that the information that he had received from TfL was that the camera was faulty. It was not known when TfL was going to undertake the repair to the camera. Cllr Wells stated that this camera had been waiting repair for three years.

RESOLVED that:

1) Option 2 be implemented which was the installation of the mini-roundabout at the junction, with an additional pedestrian refuge introduced on the south side of the Albemarle Road junction. 

2) The pedestrian refuge on Westgate Road would be re-instated and the footway would be extended on Westgate Road (North).