Agenda item

( Report by Head of Transport and Development)

(Mr L Christie and Cllr W Dyke, Chairman of Gravesham JTB, were present for this item)

(1)       Gravesham Borough Council sought to introduce a gate on the highway at the entrance to Manor Road.  Manor Road was on the periphery of the pedestrian zone in Gravesend town centre.  The plan in Appendix 1 of the report showed the road in relation to the town centre.  The Joint Transportation Board resolved at its meeting on 26 March that ‘the County Highways Board be requested to consider the installation of an unmanned gate at the entrance to Manor Road in order to ensure highway safety’.

(2)       A major extension of the town centre pedestrian zone was introduced in 1990, the restrictions in the town centre (including Manor Road) included restrictions on the times of day when vehicles could enter roads and the class of vehicle permitted to enter the roads, and permission to enter for access or loading/unloading purposes.  The conditions had remained unchanged during this period with the exception of a small variation in the time during which access was permitted.

(3)       The restrictions in Manor Road were however complex.  All vehicles were prohibited between 10.30 am and 4.30 pm except for access to small private off-street car parks and access for loading by goods vehicles.  The exceptions were necessary to ensure the viability of small businesses in the road.

(4)       The complex nature of the restrictions had resulted in the restrictions being ignored by some drivers as Manor Road offered an opportunity to travel from west to east across the town centre without using the one-way system.  This was however useful to a limited amount of traffic visiting the town centre as there were west to east routes just outside the immediate town centre area.

(5)       Surveys of traffic activity were undertaken when Gravesham Borough Council promoted the introduction of the gate, these were included in full in Appendix 2 of the report.  In summary, the survey revealed 834 vehicles using the route between 7 am and 7 pm of which 98 appeared to be legitimate.  During the busiest hour (17.30 to 18.30) 196 vehicles used the route.

(6)       In addition the crash data was reviewed as Gravesham Borough Council had also cited road safety as a reason to provide a gate.  The 10 year crash record for Manor Road showed 3 crashes recorded.  The three crashes occurred overnight between 11 pm and 1 am, one of which involved a driver who tested positive for alcohol.  They occurred in 1998, 2001 and 2006.

(7)       Consultation with Kent Police indicated that whilst they acknowledged there was a degree of abuse of the current restrictions, this had been ongoing for many years and enforcement was unlikely to create a significant long term reduction in use.  The Police also acknowledged the sign was complex and therefore difficult for drivers to understand, but it must reflect the conditions that applied.  If the sign was to be simplified the restrictions (in the Traffic Regulation Order) must be revised.  As had already been indicated, the restrictions reflected the needs of the town centre businesses.

(8)       The Police did not support the provision of an unmanned gate as suggested by Gravesham Borough Council.  Their concern was that the gate would not be properly managed and that it could be opened when it was meant to be closed and vice versa.  Pedestrians could therefore be more vulnerable thinking traffic was not allowed to enter, but in fact had access because the gate had not been closed.

(9)       The provision of a gate across a highway was not generally allowed.  Any form of ‘obstruction’ be it a gate or rising bollards had to be risk assessed to ensure it would operate correctly and did not introduce danger to road users or liability to the Highway Authority.  The proposal by Gravesham Borough Council i.e. an unmanned gate which might be closed by legitimate users or parking attendants or town wardens was not a robust or safe system.  It exposed the Highway Authority to unnecessary risk of claims.

(10)     The unauthorised use of the road (and any road) was a matter for Police enforcement – as with speeding or ignoring no entry signs or prohibited turns.  In all these cases there were drivers willing to break the law.  Sometimes it was possible to introduce physical measures to aid enforcement, sometimes enforcement was the only option. The proposed introduction of an unmanned gate in Manor Road was not acceptable to the Police or Kent Highway Services as it introduced unacceptable risks of liability to Kent Highway Services.  The 10 year crash record did not provide evidence to support the Borough Council’s contention that the road was not safe.

(11)     Although drivers did ignore the restrictions, the Board agreed that there were no overriding safety reasons for a gate to be introduced for safety reasons.