Agenda item

SimonBrown,RoadSafetyProgrammeManager,willgivean overviewof roadsafety awareness andlearning currentlybeing promotedby thecountycouncil.

The RoadSafetyProgrammeManager presented anoverview of the work of the County Council’s road safety partnership which highlighted the following areas:-

Ø  Hertfordshire County Council’s Transport Access and Road Safety

Ø  The Road Safety Partnership

Ø  Police and Crime Commissioner’s Road Safety Fund

Ø  Community Concerns

Ø  Successful Bids

Ø  Strategic Priorities for Hertfordshire

Ø  Road Safety Headlines

Responding to points raised by Councillors, Officers informed that they were unable to comment on any one particular cycleway.  However, it was surprising that a considerable amount of antisocial behaviour carried out by road users was by cyclists.  As 80% of cyclists had driving licences this was difficult to understand.

Councillors agreed that a national campaign which encouraged both cyclists and pedestrians would be very welcome.

Councillors noted the following:-

• ‘Hi-vis’ vests, funded by Ocado, were given to cyclists and pedestrians when stopped at night by the Police in unlit areas.  The Police also kept sets of LED lights in their cars, which were also given to cyclists who did not have a set of lights on their bicycle.  This was a far quicker and safer method of ensuring cyclists were made more visible.
• There would be at least a three percent increase in traffic over the next 10-15 years.  This amount may increase to as high as 20% by 2032 should housing development in the county meet the housing needs forecast.
• Statistics indicated that a high percentage of trips made in a car were for less than three miles.  Work would be required to reduce this figure, including initiatives being put in place.  People would need to feel safe.
• There were many initiatives in place to try to deal with parking near to schools, such as Park and Stride, whereby parents were encouraged to park a mile away from the school and for the family to walk.  This initiative had shown that children’s behaviour, concentration and attention in school has improved.  Initiatives tended to work very well when it was the children who encouraged their parents to get involved. 

The Chairman advised that all schools, including private schools, were required to have a school travel plan in place.  The purpose of the school travel plan, which schools were required to refresh every five years, was to encourage parents to walk to school and to reduce the number of journeys they made by car to drop off or pick up their children.  The school travel plan applied to both parents and staff.  County Officers were assigned to individual schools. The implementation of the school travel plan had been a tremendous success with over 50% of pupils walking to school.

Councillors acknowledged that one of the reasons for parking problems near to schools may be due to an increased number of working parents dropping their children off at school by car before rushing off to work.

In response to comments regarding the increase in road casualties, particularly of young male drivers, the RoadSafetyProgrammeManager explained that one reason which contributed to this was due to the development of the teenage brain.  Teenagers’ attitude to risk had not developed.

Councillors were of the view that learner drivers were not being taught to drive safely and that there was a correlation between the method used to teach people to drive and the number of accidents.

The RoadSafetyProgrammeManager advised that graduate driving licences were being introduced, whereby newly qualified drivers were not permitted to drive at night or to have more than one passenger in the car at any one time.  Discussions were being held on the possibility of trialling the introduction of a virtual reality programme, whereby learner drivers received hazard and perception training.

A Councillor expressed dissatisfaction regarding the length of time it had taken for remedial work on a particular junction to be assessed following accidents resulting in significant personal injury.  The junction referred to had been identified as the 56^th most dangerous junction in Hertfordshire.  The engineering works, when eventually undertaken, had been resurfacing and line markings, which in his view, had not been particularly challenging.

The RoadSafetyProgrammeManager advised that although he was not familiar with the particular junction in question, all junctions were graded on the basis of the data intelligence received and any other issues, then prioritised.  Work was then carried out in priority order and the budget available.  In addition, there was tremendous pressure on the financial resources available to Officers.

The presentation on the Road Safety Partnership was NOTED.