Committee: Regulatory
Planning Committee
Date: 13 July 2022
Report by: Director of Communities, Economy and Transport
Title of Report: Traffic Regulation Orders – Mackinlay Way, Newhaven
Purpose of Report: To consider the objections received in response to the formal consultation on the draft Traffic Regulation Orders for Mackinlay Way, Newhaven.
Contact Officer: Mark Weston – 01273 482242
Local Member: Councillor MacCleary
RECOMMENDATION
The Planning Committee is recommended to:
1. Not uphold the objections to the draft Orders as summarised in paragraph 2.2 of this report
2. Recommend to the Director of Communities, Economy and Transport that the draft Traffic Regulation Orders be made as advertised.
1.1 Planning permission for the Newhaven Port Access Road, now known as Mackinlay Way, was first granted in 1996 and was subsequently renewed in 2002 and 2007, when construction started but was not completed. The first phase of the road up to the Pargut Roundabout was completed in 2015 and Traffic Regulation Orders (TROs) to introduce a 30mph speed limit and waiting restrictions (double yellow lines) were implemented in 2018. The second phase, which completes the route with a bridge over the Newhaven to Seaford railway line and Mill Creek, takes the road into port land to the south and provides a link to the East Quay area. This phase was completed in 2021, and opened earlier this year.
1.2 To provide consistency with the first phase of Mackinlay Way, it is proposed to implement a 30mph speed limit, and install waiting restrictions (Double Yellow Lines) throughout the second phase of Mackinlay Way.
1.3 An initial consultation was carried out between 9th July 2021 and 30th July 2021 with the local District and County Councillors, and statutory consultees including the emergency services.
1.4 On the 25 February 2022, the County Council gave notice under the relevant section of the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984, (as amended), that it was proposing to make Traffic Regulation Orders. Copies of the draft Traffic Regulation Orders are included in Appendix 1. Copies of the advertised Notice of proposals were placed on posts in Mackinlay Way. Copies of the proposals were also placed on deposit in County Hall reception and on a website for viewing by members of the public. In addition, the Public Notice was advertised in the local newspaper (Sussex Express, 25 February 2022). The formal period for representations ended on the 18 March 2022.
1.6 The proposals are as follows: -
· 30mph Speed Limit: from a point 240 metres south of the roundabout junction with the A259 The Drove / Drove Road southwards for its entire length.
· Waiting Restrictions: from a point 650 metres south of the roundabout junction with A259 The Drove / Drove Road (B&Q roundabout) southwards for its entire length.
1.7 The proposed speed limit will help to keep vehicle speeds consistent with the first section of Mackinlay Way and other roads in the area. The road has been designed to a 30mph standard and therefore a 30mph speed limit allows for compliance with visibility guidance, increases pedestrian and cyclist safety and minimises potential for collisions at the site entrances.
1.8 Installing waiting restrictions throughout will help to ensure unobstructed access to the Port and East Quay.
2.1 During the informal consultation stage one item of correspondence was received. Two further items of correspondence were received during the formal consultation period all objecting to the proposals.
2.2 The grounds for the objections were that:-
· The speed limit should be 20mph or 15mph as the road will become busier once development takes place, which will make it dangerous for people walking and cycling along the road.
· Speeds humps should be installed to slow traffic, especially ‘boy racers’.
· The no waiting at any time restrictions should not run for the entire length of the road as this will encourage higher speeds, especially ‘boy racers’. Areas for vehicles to park should be provided to slow traffic.
· Disabled parking bays have not been included. Some should be provided so disabled drivers can park and enjoy the view.
2.3 It is not considered that these objections provide sufficient grounds to warrant the modification or withdrawal of the proposals.
2.4 In general, 20mph speed limits are usually not considered in isolation although they may be considered as part of an area wide traffic calming scheme or as part of a school safety zone if this is deemed appropriate, which is not the case here. This would only be in cases where there is an identified road safety issue and it was considered to be a high priority for funding for improvements. Experience has shown that the types of drivers that would ignore a 30mph speed limit are unlikely to slow down for a lower 20mph speed limit without extensive traffic calming measures being introduced.
2.5 As this road provides a main link to the Port and East Quay it will carry a high level of Heavy Goods Vehicles. As a result, traffic calming measures such as road narrowing, or chicanes are not considered appropriate. Road Humps are also not feasible. Mackinlay Way is unlit mainly due to its proximity to the Ouse Estuary nature reserve and adjacent National Park designation. Road Humps need to be installed in lit roads to meet the regulations. They also cannot be placed on or within 25m of a structure. Due to the bridge crossing the railway line and Mill Creek a large section of the road could not have humps installed even if the road were lit. For these reasons it is not considered that a system of traffic calming could be installed here to allow a 20mph speed limit to be introduced.
2.6 Double Yellow Lines are proposed along the entirety of the second phase of Mackinlay Way, as they are on the first phase, to facilitate the passage of vehicles to and from the Port. Due to the width of the road any parking would interrupt the free movement of vehicles along it. If areas were provided without restrictions in place for parking, then it is considered this would do little to deter ‘boy racers’ and speeding drivers. Most on street parking would take place in the day when generally such driving is least likely to occur.
2.7 The proposed waiting restrictions would not prevent drivers with a disabled parking badges from parking for limited amounts of time as a loading ban is not proposed.
3. Conclusion and reasons for recommendation
3.1 These proposals seek to ensure unobstructed access to and from Newhaven Port via Mackinlay Way, as well as providing an appropriate speed limit consistent with the first section of Mackinlay Way and other roads in the area. It is considered that the concerns raised by the objectors should not be upheld and the proposals should proceed as per the advertised TROs.
3.2 In turn, it is recommended that the Planning Committee recommends to the Director of Communities, Economy, and Transport that the draft Orders be made as advertised.
None
Appendix 1: Draft TRO
Appendix 2: Copies of Correspondence