PUBLIC
TRANSPORT AND TECHNICAL SERVICES
Charing Cross Phase 2
specification of highway treatment
Purpose of the Report
The purpose of this report is for the Minister of Transport and Technical Services to consider a proposal to enhance the pedestrian environment of Charing Cross, and specifically to determine the form of traffic calming and pedestrian crossing in this area.
This proposal is supported by Policy TT8 of the 2002 Island Plan and contributes toward the policy objectives of the Sustainable Travel and Transport Plan and States Strategic Plan 2005-2010.
Background
The St Helier Street Life Programme ‘West of Town’ scheme has delivered traffic management, pedestrian and environmental improvements from New Street/ Union Street through to Broad Street. Additional improvements are now proposed at Conway Street and Charing Cross. These proposals have been approved for the purposes of consultation, by the former Environment and Public Services Committee.
The St Helier Urban Task Group has considered these proposals and has endorsed the form of highway surface treatment proposed at Charing Cross, comprising a table-top crossing which extends from an area outside Aurum Jewellers to Sand Street (shown on the attached plan 1: dwg no BSII/103/B)
It is relevant to note that both the Minister for Planning and Environment and the Chief Minister have subsequently expressed their individual support for treatment of this extent.
It is also relevant to note that funding for these works is to be sourced from the Urban Renewal Programme vote. This vote is administered by the Minster for Planning and Environment.
Discussion
In determining the form of surface treatment in this area of Charing Cross, it is apparent that the Minister for Transport and Technical wishes to consider aspects of speed and the potential options for traffic calming/ pedestrian crossing. These matters are addressed in turn.
Speed
Speed counters have been installed in this section of road and data will be presented orally to the Minister when this matter is considered.
Notwithstanding empirical evidence, it is relevant to note that observation of vehicular traffic passing through this junction provides evidence to suggest that vehicle speeds are higher for vehicles entering this area and exiting via Sand Street than they are when exiting via York Street, the latter being traffic-calmed by virtue of an existing raised table-top.
It is also relevant to note that the area is undoubtedly subject to very high levels of pedestrian movement with a strong desire line to/from Sand Street, on both sides of this street to/from King Street. As a consequence, the junction of Charing Cross and Sand Street/ King Street is subject to many pedestrians crossing the carriageway.
On the basis of the above, it is the professional view of the Manager: Transport Policy that, on the basis of the speed of vehicles in this area and the high level of pedestrian activity across the carriageway, that some form of traffic calming would be desirable and beneficial to enhance pedestrian safety.
Form of traffic calming/ pedestrian crossing
Two variations for traffic-calming in this locality are considered worthy of consideration and assessment. The first, involving a table-top crossing of limited extent with a zebra or Jersey-crossing, is shown on plan 2 dwg no BSII/106/A.
This can be considered to be the ‘traditional’ highway engineering solution to traffic-calming in this particular situation. It would serve to reduce vehicle speed upon entering the area from Broad Street and would provide pedestrians with a dedicated crossing facility in a specific location. It is likely that the location of the zebra/Jersey crossing at this location would slow vehicles significantly and permit pedestrians who wish to cross Sand Street/ Charing Cross further west of this facility with opportunities to do so by virtue of gaps being created in the flow of traffic when the formal crossing facility was in use.
It would also retain the effect of calming traffic entering York Street by virtue of the traffic calming which exists here already. The speed of vehicles exiting via Sand Street is likely to be greater, by virtue of there being no traffic calming in the road way once the table top is passed, but speeds should be lower than they are at present as a result of vehicles having to cross the table-top when entering the area.
The second option, involving a far greater extent of raised table-top crossing, combined with a zebra/Jersey crossing at the entrance to the area, would deliver a similar traffic calming effect as the first option in that vehicle speeds will be reduced as vehicles enter the area.
This option also has the potential, however, of maintaining vehicle speeds at a lower level throughout the raised table-top area. The perception of the driver may be altered by virtue of being at the same level as the pedestrian and on a different road surface than a ‘normal carriageway’ thus altering the behaviour of the driver to proceed through the entire area (both York Street and Sand Street) at lower speeds.
This approach has already been employed in Broad Street, where a pedestrian crossing and raised table-top is provided at the entrance to the area from whence the driver proceeds through an extensive raised table top area that is much more of a shared space with the pedestrian than is a conventional carriageway. In all instances, the road edge is defined and the road remains distinguishable form the carriageway.
There is no empirical evidence to determine that vehicle speeds are lower, but observation of driver behaviour and pedestrian behaviour would indicate thus far (about 7 months since completion) that this arrangement is working well. There have been no reported pedestrian injury accidents in Broad Street during this time.
This option also facilitates easier crossing of the carriageway over a greater distance of those people with a physical disability.
The other advantage of this treatment, which has less to do with highway safety and more to do with urban design, is that the raising of a greater area of carriageway serves to provide a much more cohesive urban space in this part of the town which serves to improve its character and appearance. This is considered to be beneficial for pedestrian users of the area and is considered to provide a much richer town centre environment which has both social and economic value to the Island. The recent comment of a trader in York Street, which has just benefitted from extensive pedestrian improvement, provides an example of the benefit to be potentially accrued from a retail perspective (attached at appendix 3).
Conclusion
On the basis of the above, it is considered that the provision of traffic calming and a pedestrian crossing facility in this locality would be of benefit in terms of highway safety by virtue of the observable speed of vehicles and the high level of pedestrian use in this locality.
It is considered that whilst both options of traffic calming would be equally successful in delivering benefits to pedestrian safety, it is considered that the option of raising the level of the carriageway over a greater extent has the potential to deliver an enhanced level of highway safety for the reasons outlined above.
It is also considered that there are wider townscape, economic and social benefits of this form of treatment.
Recommendation
On the basis of the above, it is recommended that the Minister for Transport and Technical Services endorses the proposal to carry out works in Charing Cross involving the provision of a table top which extends from the entrance to Charing Cross into Sand Street, together with a zebra/Jersey crossing at the beginning of the table-top, as shown on plan 1 (dwg no BSII/103/B), as a basis for consultation;
Reasons for the decision
- It is considered that the option of raising the level of the carriageway over a greater extent has the potential to deliver an enhanced level of highway safety for the reasons outlined above.
- It is also considered that there are wider townscape, economic and social benefits of this form of treatment.
Action Required
- Notify members of the UTG of the Minister’s decision
- Prepare and issue consultation material
Written by: | Kevin Pilley Assistant Director Planning and Building Services |
| |
Approved by: | Dave St George Manager: Transport Policy, Transport and Technical Services |
| |
Endorsed by: | John Richardson Chief Officer Transport and Technical Services Department |
Attachments:
Appendix 1: Extended table top area: Plan 1 (dwg no BSII/103/B)
Appendix 2: Reduced table top area: Plan 2 (dwg no BSII/106/A)
Appendix 3: email from Mr Roger Bisson (dated 01 February 2006)
1/01/13/20/1
3rd February 2006
gov.je