To
select appropriate items from the Cabinet agenda for pre-decision scrutiny
(reports enclosed for Scrutiny Members)
Minutes:
The
Committee scrutinised the following Cabinet Board items:
Welsh
Government proposed 20mph default speed limit across Wales
Members
were advised of the current position regarding the Welsh Government proposed
20mph default speed limit for Wales.
A
discussion took place regarding the financial impacts of this scheme; it was
asked if Officers will be lobbying for increased funding for speed cushions and
physical restrictions that will slow motorists down, as it was recognised that
there was not enough resources within the Police to enforce this across the
whole of the County Borough.
Officers
explained that the intention from the blanket order was that hard engineering
measures weren’t planned as part of the wider default 20mph limit; and to move away
from the extensive number of speed cushions that would be required as part of
this scheme, due to the costs that Local Authorities would be facing across the
whole of Wales. It was added that there could be money available for entry
features into communities, forewarning people that they were entering a built
up area from a strategic route.
Members
were informed that Welsh Government were undertaking pilots across eight Local
Authorities; Neath Port Talbot was included in this pilot, with specific reference
to the Cilfrew community.
It
was confirmed that Officers had been raising the issue of funding with Welsh
Government, and the circulated report set out a number of areas which were in
discussion including undertaking a review of their maps.
The
Committee noted that there would be significant costs in terms of the quantum
of signage that may be required, and any changes to the legislative orders. An
example of a change in legislative order would include if the Council decided
that some of the main roads or strategic routes, where bus services running,
would be best kept at 30mph; the Council would have to advertise to request
that the road becomes 30mph, as in the proposals from Welsh Government, all
roads will be defaulted to 20mph.
The
circulated report stated that the financial impacts were currently unknown, and
it was confirmed this was due to this being such an extensive piece of work;
Officers were lobbying Welsh Government, and were being assured that funding
will be available. It was mentioned that there would be significant work in
terms of supporting the roads that were felt should be maintained at 30mph.
Officers
explained that there was a meeting scheduled with the Deputy Minister, Leaders
of Councils across Wales and relevant Cabinet Members; at this meeting, all
concerns will be raised, particularly the financial implications of this
scheme.
It
was noted that an All Member Seminar had been arranged for Monday 27 September
2021 to brief Members on the Welsh Government proposed 20mph default speed
limit across Wales. Officers were also going to be providing Members with a
draft to the Welsh Government consultation that had been prepared from an
Authority perspective; Members were asked to review this document before the
Seminar. It was added that a lot of the questions contained within the
consultation, were unable to be answered as an Authority as they were directed
to individuals; Officers would be asking Members to respond to these particular
questions based on the streets within their Wards.
Following
the All Member Seminar, it was stated that Officers would take on board all of
the feedback and incorporate it into the consultation; it would then be
proposed that the Cabinet Member for Streetscene, the Director of Environment
and Regeneration and the Head of Engineering and Transport be granted authority
to submit the consultation to Welsh Government.
Following
scrutiny, the Committee noted the report.
Footway/cycleway
link to Eglwys Nunnydd and St Davids Park, Margam
Officers
provided a report on the proposal for capital investment in the provision of a
footway/cycleway on Water Street to link Eglwys Nunnydd and St Davids Park to
the A48 Margam.
Members
queried how many times had there been a bid made for this scheme, and why the
Council was still bidding on it despite being unsuccessful to secure Welsh
Government external grant funding.
The
report highlighted that a number of bids for Safe Routes in Communities had
been made for this project; in the past, grants had been approved for works on
the highways in the area, however these works weren’t specific to the footpath.
It was determined that this area required a Safe Route in Communities for the
residents for a number of reasons.
It
was explained that the Council had a long history of progressing Safe Routes in
Communities across the County Borough, and after trying on several occasions to
secure the funding from Welsh Government, the Council was not able to on this
occasion; therefore, the Council were being asked to contribute to the funding
of the scheme due to the elements of concerns with road safety in the areas.
The
concerns with the safety of this particular site were explained to Members. It
was noted that the Local Development Plan (LDP) included dormitory settlements
across the County Borough, some of which weren’t served by footpaths; the link
to Eglwys Nunnydd and St Davids Park, Margam was one of those areas. Officers
highlighted that the estates in discussion did not have any safe access way out
on foot.
Furthermore,
Members were informed that there had been some changes in terms of Heavy Goods
Vehicle (HGV) traffic movements, which was detailed within the circulated
report. It was stated that several years ago, the Leadership in Bridgend County
Borough Council, approached Neath Port Talbot County Borough Council (NPTCBC),
following issues with HGVs driving through the small villages in Pyle. It was
noted that a major project was undertaken to alter the highway to allow HGV
access to the industrial estate which was accessed via Water Street in Margam;
this resulted in a higher volume of HGV traffic utilising this route to access
the industrial estate.
Following
a query regarding the lack of school children that would use the proposed
footpath, it was explained that at the time of the first bid to Welsh
Government, the Safe Route to School Programme was a factor contributing to the
succession of funding for these types of projects; due to the low number of
children that would have used this route to walk to school, Welsh Government
did not approve the funding. However, since then the Safer Routes in
Communities Programme had been established which considers all users and
residents within various areas. It was mentioned that although the children in
the area had transport to school, there was no route out of this area for
residents on foot and that was a concern.
A
discussion took place in regards to the cost of the scheme, to which it was
predicated that it would cost around £550k. Officers provided information regarding
the various products and materials that would be required, and highlighted that
certain products were currently very volatile. Members were informed that
Officers were hopeful to deliver this project within its budget; the figures
had been based on a schedule of rates for the Council’s Streetcare Services,
which had been reviewed by an external consultant. It was stated that until
work is contracted there is always the potential to be variances; however, this
was the case for every project that the Council considers.
It
was asked if there were plans to put in a footway/cycle way from the estate in
discussion, towards the area of Pyle, which was located in Bridgend; this route
would be in the opposite direction of the route detailed in the circulated report.
It was noted that the Council was currently reviewing the Active Travel Routes,
and a consultation was currently being undertaken on this matter; if a
footway/cycleway was to be established towards the area of Pyle, then joint
proposals would need to be considered with colleagues in Bridgend Country
Borough Council due to the link between communities. Members were informed that
there were plans to join up communities across the County in that respect,
however this rested with the Active Travel future plans.
Reference
was made to paragraph six of the letter that was received from the residents of
Eglwys Nunydd and St Davids, which was detailed in the circulated report;
Officers were asked to elaborate on this.
The
Committee was informed that there was a group of Officers within the Local
Authority who were part of the Capital Programme Steering Group; this Group
considers issues relating to capital projects and associated funding including
unforeseen incidents across the County Borough such as flooding or landslides.
It was stated that this Group had been in operation for some time and prior to
the recent review which proposed changes to the procedures around how schemes
were authorised the scheme in discussion was approved. As a consequence Officers had been asked to
present this report to the Streetscene and Engineering Cabinet Board to share
the information and to ensure that Members were sighted on the proposal for
consideration. It was explained that the residents were informed of the scheme
as it had been thought, incorrectly, the project had been incorporated into the
works programme via its Capital Programme Steering Group approval.
It
had been noted in the meeting that the project had been raised for
consideration in the annual Members’ Surgery meetings regarding the Highways
and Engineering works programme. Given
the scale of the project Members queried the breakdown of programme spend
throughout the Wards. Officers stated
that whilst spend was limited there was potential for schemes to start as small
feasibility projects under the programme however a project of this scale could
not be funded out of the programme; this was the reason why it went to the
Capital Programme Steering Group for consideration of investment from the
Capital Programme. It was mentioned that this had happened in many areas in the
past. Officers could provide information
as required and noted spend as discussed in the surgeries formed part of a
wider asset management approach under the Highway Asset Management Plan
including essential safety work such as surfacing needs, barrier repairs and
other safety hazards that may come to light from asset surveys.
It
was noted that over the past few years, the Head of Streetcare, had sent all
Members a briefing note in advance of the Member Surgeries which set out the
available budget and the process. Officers noted that if the available budget
was averaged across all wards the amount would only be around £40k, however
actual spend varied according to need, for example, there could be bridges that
needing repairing or drainage assets that needed addressing in specific wards
in a given year. Officers confirmed again that a scheme of this scale and
nature would not come under the Highways and Engineering Programme but as noted
some feasibility work might be undertaken.
Following a study, the outcome would inform future decision taking; over
the years, various Members had requested a range of studies into potential
schemes in their Wards.
The
Local Member for the Margam Ward addressed the Committee, and expressed the
need for the footway/cycleway link to Eglwys Nunnydd and St Davids Park.
It
was raised that there was an error contained within the circulated report; on
pages 211 and 212, it mentioned ‘a
reduction in the National speed limit along the A48 route from 50mph to 40mph’.
However, it was confirmed that it should state ‘a reduction in the National speed limit along the A48 route from 60mph
to 40mph’.
Following
scrutiny, the Committee were supportive of the recommendation to go to Cabinet
Board.
Traffic
Regulation Order/s: Glais to Pontrdawe
The
Committee received a report regarding a 40 mph Speed Limit Traffic Regulation
Order at the A4067 Glais to Pontardawe.
Officers
explained that the vast majority of this network falls within the adjoining
Council, the City and County of Swansea; for some time they had been concerned
with the number of road accidents that had taken place on the highway network
in the area. It was stated that there was evidence of motorists speeding on the
road; colleagues in the City and County of Swansea had expressed that the only
way in which the speed of traffic on that part of the network could be
controlled, would be to reduce the speed limit. Members were informed that
Neath Port Talbot Council had a small section of the network that would need to
be changed in order to allow for the whole A4067 to have the average speed
cameras; the average speed cameras seemed to work effectively, as there was
evidence of a lot more compliance with cameras of this nature.
The
Committee discussed the placement of the average speed cameras. It was
confirmed that they will be placed on both sides of the network, in Neath Port
Talbot and the City and County of Swansea in order to capture the average speed
across the length of the road.
In
regards to the advertisement of the order, it was confirmed that it will need
to be advertised in the press, such as local newspapers, and on the Neath Port
Talbot Council website. Members were also informed that signage will need to be
placed in specific areas to inform motorists of the average speed cameras.
Members were informed that the grant that was submitted by the City and County
of Swansea and the money had to be spent by March 31 2022; therefore, the
preparatory work was in hand and the order just needed to go through the legal
process. It was mentioned that colleagues in the City and County of Swansea
were completing a parallel exercise on their part of the network, and were
aligned with the Neath Port Talbot Council’s work on the order.
Following
scrutiny, the Committee were supportive of the recommendation to go to Cabinet
Board.