Decision details

9.1

The Committee considered a report that detailed the consultation response to proposals to introduce 20mph speed limits in Burncross, report the receipt of objections to the Speed Limit Order and set out the Council’s response.

9.2

RESOLVED UNANIMOUSLY: That the Transport, Regeneration and Climate Policy Committee:-

1)    Approves that the Burncross 20mph Speed Limit Order be made, as advertised, in accordance with the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984 and that:

a.    the order be implemented on street subject to no road safety issues being identified through a Road Safety Audit (RSA) at the detailed design stage.

b.    objectors will be informed of the decision by the Council’s Traffic Regulations team

2)    Approves the introduction of a part time 20mph limit on Ecclesfield Road outside Ecclesfield Secondary School.

9.3

Reasons for Decision

9.3.1

The adoption of the Sheffield 20mph Speed Limit Strategy established the principle of introducing sign-only 20mph speed limits in all suitable residential areas.  Reducing the speed of traffic in residential areas should, in the long term, reduce the number and severity of collisions, reduce the fear of accidents, encourage sustainable modes of travel and contribute towards the creation of a more pleasant, cohesive environment.

9.3.2

Having considered the response from the public and other consultees it is recommended that the 20mph speed limit in Burncross be implemented as, on balance, the benefits of the scheme in terms of safety and sustainability are considered to outweigh the concerns raised.

9.3.3

It is also recommended that a part time, advisory 20mph speed limit be introduced on Ecclesfield Road for the same reasons.

9.4

Alternatives Considered and Rejected

9.4.1

In light of the objections received, consideration was given to recommending the retention of the existing speed limit in Burncross. However, such a recommendation would run contrary to the delivery of the Sheffield 20mph Speed Limit Strategy. This would also mean that pedestrian and cyclist safety would not be improved, and this would be detrimental to the Council’s Active Travel ambition and vision of Safer streets in our city.