Agenda item

Mr DeCruz, Acting Head of Transport, reminded the Committee that a Member Call In had been received from Councillors Strutton, Chahal, Morris and Smith, regarding an Officer Significant Decision relating to Burnham Train Station and Road Network Improvements.

Burnham station is located between Burnham Lane and Station Road and the area was subject to considerable congestion in the morning and afternoon peaks due to not only the number of schools in the area, but also the commuter traffic from South Bucks heading for the station, trading estate and M4. Traffic had steadily increased over the past decade and as a consequence has resulted in the peak time delays starting sooner and ending later leading, now, to congestion being present for large parts of the day.

Following the assessment of a wide range of options, the scheme involved the closure of Station Road, Burnham under an experimental traffic regulation order along with a range of other traffic measures as part of a scheme to improve Burnham Station ahead of the arrival of Crossrail services. 

The Committee were informed that the Council had submitted in November 2014, two bids as part of the Local Growth Fund 2 (LGF2) to the LEP for improvements to Burnham Station and Langley Station. These bids focussed on improving accessibility to the stations (including the road layout) and constructing new buildings on the station forecourt. It was noted that the successful bids had secured approximately £2m to deliver the improvements in and around Burnham Station.

Referring to the details contained within the Call In, specifically that “due diligence” had not taken place, it was explained that the following work was undertaken before the recommendation was signed off:

§  Modelling assessment on 12 different scenarios;

§  Widening the scheme limits as a result of the assessment to capture Huntercombe Lane North, Burnham Lane, and Dover Road;

§  Consultation with the statutory stakeholders i.e. emergency services and bus operators;

§  Alterations to the traffic signals to mitigate against congestion;

§  Air Quality impact reviewed;

§  Briefing ward and lead Members

Councillor Strutton, one of the signatories to the Call-in, addressed the meeting to explain his concerns about the proposed closure which included the lack of prior consultation; failure to take into account the impacts on home care visits and on other health and education provision; the difficulties caused by previous closures of the bridge due to adverse weather and repairs; flood risks; and the fact improvements to the Five Points junction would not take place until or unless a permanent scheme was introduced. 

Councillor Strutton informed the Committee that a petition containing over 5,000 signatures, opposing the proposed scheme, had been submitted to the Council; and that this would be debated at a meeting of full Council on 22 September.

In conclusion, Councillor Strutton reiterated that proceeding with the decision to close Station Road would have a significant detrimental impact on both local residents and businesses in the area.

With respect to social care provision, Members were informed that Officers were liaising with the social care teams and would assist where necessary in minimising the impact on those who are affected. It was anticipated that some re-routing will be needed as part of a closure or a northbound option therefore dialogue would continue throughout the experimental period.

A number of local residents, inlcuding the Chairman of Burnham Parish Council, were given the opportunity to address the Committee and raised the following points:

·  Option 4  - closure of Station Road – was not the Officers preferred Scheme.

·  Difficulty in accessing residential properties.

·  The proposed scheme would increase traffic congestion in the area and what measures, if any, would be taken to address the anticipated increase in traffic on other routes.

·  Lack of transparency by the Council as no consultation had taken place with residents or affected businesses.

·  How the effectiveness of the scheme would be monitored to assess the traffic impacts of the scheme?

·  What guarantees were in place to ensure that the scheme would be reversed if unsuccessful?

Councillors Munawar and Swindlehurst, Commissioners with portfolio responsibility for the scheme, responded to the comments raised. In relation to the recommendation to trial a one way system, it was highlighted that the benefits of the wider redevelopment of the station could not be achieved by adopting this option as it was not release the land required for development and closure would therefore have to be trialled at a later stage.  A one way scheme would also not enable to additional car parking spaces to be delivered which risked adding to parking pressures on residential streets when demand rose when Crossrail services were introduced.

It was noted that data would be collected before the experiment was introduced to establish a clear baseline and arrangements were in place to collect and monitor traffic data at appropriate locations in the locality to measure the impacts of the scheme. 

Regarding the anticipated increase in traffic on surrounding routes/vicinity of the area, the Committee was informed that the experiment would not begin until both the Leigh Road and Stoke Poges Lane bridges reopened; that traffic signals at the likely diversion routes would be altered and the direction of traffic flow under the Burnham Lane bridge be reversed to allow southbound access to the A4 with a mini-roundabout at the Burnham Lane / Buckingham Avenue junction to improve access. Further measures included adjustments to bus stops and parking restrictions to assist traffic flow and avoid additional parking pressure on residential streets. 

It was explained that the experimental order would also include a one way option so that if the full closure did not work after an appropriate period of the trial, the other options could be trialled. It was emphasised that the measures would be trialled as an experiment with sufficient flexibility to react depending on how the scheme worked in reality. 

Councillors Coad, Morris, Smith and Wright also addressed the Committee under Rule 30. Concern was expressed relating to the lack of consultation with residents and businesses and that the scheme would have a detrimental impact on the businesses in the vicinity. It was submitted that experimental orders were too often being used by the Council to circumvent proper consultations being carried out.   

A number of points were raised in the ensuing Committee discussion, including how the decision had been made to proceed with the closure of Station Road.  Mr DeCruz informed the Committee that a working group had been established, consisting of Network Rail, Crossrail, Rail for London, First Great Western and Segro to discuss the options and the outputs from the assessment and to also understand how the area including the station could be improved. The working group collectively agreed that if Station Road could be closed, then this would help realise wider benefits including regeneration of the sites surrounding the station.

A Member queried what measures would be taken should the proposed scheme result in a significant detrimental impact on residents and businesses in the area. It was explained that the scheme would be implemented as an experimental order, which allowed officers the flexibility to make changes and adapt as necessary.

Whilst it was acknowledged that there had been no prior consultation, the Committee were informed that the experimental process would be utilised as the consultation period, which would allow individuals to submit experiences and views on the real rather than perceived impacts.  Consultation leaflets and information on the council webpage would also be made available to allow comments on the scheme to be made.

Clarification was sought regarding the criteria that would be used to monitor the scheme and to whom the information collated would be available to. Officers stated that various methods would be adopted to monitor the scheme, including undertaking queue length surveys and volume of traffic in the area and surrounding roads in comparison to prior to the scheme having been implemented. Members were informed that analysis of data that had been collected would be an on-going process and that this could be made available to any Member upon request on a bi-monthly basis. 

Officers were asked to explain why they had made a decision to proceed with the closure of Station Road rather than opting for a one way system, as details contained within the significant officer decision highlighted that officers initial preference was for the one way system to be trialled. The Committee were informed that following discussions with SEGRO and other relevant stakeholders it was recognised that this was a potential opportunity for a regeneration of the area that would also include improvements to the train station. 

The options available to the Committee were outlined and having taken into account all the submissions made during discussion of this item, the Committee were of the view that the one way system be trialled and the effectiveness of the scheme be reported to the Committee after a three month period. 

Recommended to Cabinet:

1. “That Option 1 – implementation of a one way system – as outlined in the Significant Decision (attached at Appendix A to the report), be trialled as an Experimental Order for a period of 6 months.”

2. “That monitoring data regarding the effectiveness of the scheme and its impact on the road network, local residents and businesses be reported to the Overview & Scrutiny Committee after a three month period.”