January 29th Traffic Survey

Traffic Problems in Orlingbury Parish Council Report January 29th 2008

(n.b some tables are not correctly formatted)
1.0 Summary
Villagers have significant concerns about traffic, roads and footpaths in Orlingbury.
Consultations, petitions, police monitoring, a traffic survey and an audit of roads and footpaths reveal unprecedented increases in speed, volume and incidence of heavy vehicles which threaten the safety and wellbeing of villagers.
This report highlights the need to improve the regulation and calming of traffic in Orlingbury. It also shows the need to improve roads, signage and pathways. It signifies the urgent need to consult further with the community, to work with local council authorities, developers and the highways authority and to provide costed and funded programmes for rapid improvement.

2.0 Headlines
§ A well supported petition illustrates that most villagers are very concerned about traffic in Orlingbury:to be (currently being completed)
“We, the undersigned raise this petition in order to highlight the need to:
a) Enforce current restrictions on heavy vehicles of more than 7.5 tonnes, travelling through Orlingbury
b) Reduce the volume and speed of traffic through the village.”
§ Police speed monitoring shows high density of speeding traffic passing through Orlingbury.
§ Most drivers exceed village speed limits, particularly on the Northampton Road.
§ Observers confirm that incoming and outgoing traffic, on all routes, is travelling at high speed
§ A traffic survey shows continuous and very dense movement at peak travelling times.
§ Roads most affected by high traffic volume during these times are the Pytchley and Harrowden Roads.
§ The build up of traffic begins well before dawn.
§ An audit shows that signs fail to prevent speeding, and road verges are ill-maintained and often offer no refuge from speeding traffic.

3.0 Background
A major priority in the Orlingbury Parish Council plan[1] is to improve safety and well-being near roads, footpaths and recreation space by a) regulating traffic flow and b) improving roads and footpaths. This would have an immediate effect on the quality of life of villagers as a place for safe living, leisure and recreation. This priority stems from growing concerns from villagers including:

· Increase in traffic. High volume, high speed and larger size of vehicles passing through Orlingbury. In recent years this flow pattern has become significantly greater.
· Nuisance and noise pollution. This occurs particularly during the early hours, and is worsened by new patterns of travel through the village to shift work in neighbouring workplaces.
· Poor regulation of heavy commercial vehicles travelling through the village. There is restricted access to vehicles over 7.5 tonnes on all roads, but this restriction is not enforced.
· Outdated and ill-maintained road and footpath infrastructure. There has been no improvement to village roads, footpaths or recreation space to accommodate a recent increase in new housing and additional traffic flow.
· Variable, safe pedestrian access within the village, and poor care for pedestrian safety beyond the village.
Pavements within the village are good in parts but non-existent in key areas of the village e.g. at essential crossing points. Roads out of the village, particularly the Harrowden Road, offer no footpaths and no verges for refuge from traffic.
· Poor warning signs and restricted pedestrian and driver visibility. Speed restriction signs are placed too close to the village, or are obstructed by bends or shrubbery, allowing insufficient warning time to drivers. High hedgerows, and ill-maintained boundary hedges and shrubbery, restrict pedestrian and driver vision.
· Absence of sensible traffic calming. All surrounding villages have road calming measures in place. These range from village “gateways” and chicanes to courteous reminders to reduce speed and radar triggered reminder boards. There are no such procedures in Orlingbury.
· No safe recreation spaces. The village is compact with no designated Parish recreation area. The one small, public recreation space, the village green, is unfenced and located at the centre of heavy traffic flow.

The volume of traffic is particularly great during the hours of commuting to and from work and school. Orlingbury’s position between three congested trunk roads, the A14, A43 and the A508, and an absence of traffic calming procedures in Orlingbury, in contrast to all surrounding villages, favour it as a “rat run” for traffic. Motorists appear to try to save time and distance, and to avoid trunk road traffic congestion, by using minor roads. Traffic has recently increased further due to the establishment of a number of logistics/ commodity distribution centres on the nearby industrial estate at Burton Latimer. Works traffic, which extends from the early hours of the morning, includes heavy delivery vehicles.

4.0 Policy of Highways Authority and the County Council
In a recent response from Northamptonshire County Council, in reply to a letter from Peter Bone MP expressing concerns about traffic on the Northampton Road in Orlingbury, the chief executive writes:

One of our villagers commented:
“Does someone have to die/be injured before aid can be given for traffic calming?”

5.0 Expressions of concern

5.1 Police Monitoring
A police monitoring of traffic speed on the Isham and Northampton Roads, in the week of the 5th of November, revealed the following:
Date of Police Survey
5/11/2007 to 12/11/2007 (7days)
No. of Vehicles
7520
9020
Volume of Vehicles per day
1074 (45 vehicles per hour)
1288 (54 vehicles per hour)
Road
Northampton Rd.
Isham Rd.
Location of Survey
At Telegraph Post 27
At horses warning sign
Speed Limit warning
30
30
No./% exceeding limit
6611 88%
4624 51%
No./5 exceeding 35 m.p.h
5122 68%
2158 24%
Speed below which 85% travelled
46 mph
38 mph
Maximum Speed
81 mph
56 mph

The volume of traffic averages 45 vehicles per hour on the Northampton Road and 54 per hour on the Isham Road. These figures use a 24 hour average, so they do not demonstrate peaks in traffic flow. Clearly, the bulk of traffic passing through Isham and Northampton Roads exceeds the speed limit.

5.2 Reported incidents
Fortunately there are, so far, no recently reported accidents resulting in injury or death to villagers. The following anecdotal examples, collected in the last month, illustrate the range of concerns:
1. A car, driven by an early morning shift worker, overshot the Isham/Harrowden Road junction at the village green, resulting in the car mounting a steep bank and demolishing a boundary wall to a cottage.
2. A Pedestrian on the Harrowden Road narrowly missed serious injury when an incoming vehicle, passing wide to avoid her, was met head on by an oncoming car travelling in the middle of the road, at speed, out of the village.
3. Villagers watched as a commercial van travelling at speed seriously injured the dog they were walking.
4. A parked car, on the Isham road, received a glancing scrape from an incoming car travelling at speed.
5. An incoming car swerved off the Northampton Road ploughing through a landscaped area.

5.3 Village Petition
In August a small petition was organized to raise protest at the large volume of traffic coming through the village at high speed. 80 signatures were collected. The petition was extended in January 2008 to include all villagers. The petition stated:
“We, the undersigned raise this petition in order to highlight the need to:
c) Enforce current restrictions on heavy vehicles of more than 7.5 tons travelling through Orlingbury.
d) Reduce the volume and speed of traffic through the village.”
It resulted in the collection of XXXX signatures i.e. xxxx% of all villagers. Petition to be completed GOOD RESPONSE!

5.4 Audit of Footpaths and Roads
A brief survey of footpaths and roads reveals the following:
1. Footpaths and Pavements
a. Pavements are, in places, in need of replacement.
b. Recent building in the village has, in places, destroyed surfaces in places
c. Whilst the village is generally well served with pavements, there is a notable absence of pavement particularly at key road crossing points e.g. at the Isham and Harrowden Roads junction, and at the Northampton Road to Allotment area crossings
d. There is no paved provision on the village green to enable safe crossing.
2. Boundaries and verges
a. Driver vision, and safe pedestrian access to entering the Harrowden Road from the Isham Road, is obstructed by dense shrubbery.
b. Walled boundaries on the eastern edge of the Harrowden Road are thickly covered in ivy which hides road signs, and restricts driver and pedestrian sight lines, at bends.
c. All road edges on the Harrowden Road have dense and high hedges which are overgrown and intrude on to the verges . They prevent safe walking and walker refuge from traffic.
d. Sight lines for drivers and pedestrians are significantly restricted, especially on the numerous blind bends..
3. Road signs and village boundaries.
a. There is no logic to the positioning of village signs and speed signs. Currently, village signs are placed at a reasonable distance from the first building. Speed signs are often too close to the village to give adequate warning. Speed signs in surrounding villages are generally more closely synchronized with village signs e.g. Little Harrowden.
b. On the Pytchley Road a steep approach to the village, with a blind summit before the village edge, gives little advanced warning of the village to motorists. The speed restriction sign here is placed within the village boundary after the first house, and shortly after the blind summit.
c. On the Harrowden Road the speed restriction signs are placed after a blind bend, and one is covered with ivy.

5.5 Village Traffic Survey
In response to village concerns, a traffic survey was conducted in the period 23rd to 25th January. The survey, voluntarily undertaken by over 30 villagers, recorded the volume and type of vehicles using the roads.
On the Wednesday, Thursday and Friday, at six selected times between 7.00 a.m. and 6.00 p.m. surveyors recorded numbers and types of vehicles travelling in to Orlingbury. Surveyors were stationed in sheltered vantage points, either in houses or safely parked cars, near each of the four major roads. In response to concerns about heavy traffic during the hours of darkness, some villagers also agreed to do a “post-midnight” shift to measure through-traffic in this very early morning period.[2]
5.6 Analysis
5.6.1 Chart 1 Traffic entering the village
The following chart shows the total volume of traffic entering the village during six selected hours between 7.00 a.m. and 6.00 p.m. This only records six hours of movement, and it does not include significant volume generated from within the village or traffic flow out of Orlingbury. The vast majority of vehicles are cars but observations also show a small number of heavy vehicles over the restricted limit of 7.5 tonnes as well as a significant number of commercial vehicles.


5.6.2 Chart 2 Average numbers of vehicles travelling into Orlingbury between 07.00 and 09.00
All traffic coming in to the village, as well as traffic starting in Orlingbury is likely to travel past the village green. This means that pedestrians waiting or crossing at this area, notably school children waiting for school buses, are confronted with a constant stream of traffic.



Cycle/
Motorcycle

Car
Light Van or truck(com’l)
Over 7.5 tons (com’l)
Mini-bus/bus
Farm vehicle

Totals

Road


7 to 8
H’den
0

57.3

29.6

1.6

1.6

0

62.6
N’ton
0

26

3.6

0.3

0

0

30
Py’ley
1

149

25

1

3

0

179
Isham
1

43.6

10

0.3

0

0

55














326.6
8 to 9
H’den
1.3

78

21.3

3

2

0

139
N’ton
0

62

13

0

0

0

75
Py’ley
2.3

255.6

24.3

1

1

0

284.3
Isham
0

63.3

5.6

1.3

1.3

0.3

76.3














574.6
Total Number of vehicles entering the village between 07.00 and 09.00 a.m.
901.2

Between 07.00 and 09.00, an average of 901 vehicles enter the village and are likely to use the intersections at the village green

5.6.3 Chart 3 Traffic Volumes at Peak Times between 7.00 and 9.00 a.m. and 4.00 and 6.00 p.m.
The next chart shows the average flow of traffic at peak times. Whilst flow in the morning is concentrated between 7.00 and 8.00, observations show peak times spread beyond 4.00 to 6.00 in the late afternoon. The most significant and dense incoming movements in the morning are on the Pytchley Road. In the evening, the greatest concentration is incoming on the Harrowden Road. This passage of vehicles is believed to be to and from the place of work (and possibly schools). These figures give a clear idea of congestion on the incoming sides of roads but do not indicate equal volumes of traffic leaving the village on the opposite side.






5.6.3 Chart 4 Volume throughout the day
The next chart shows the ebb and flow of traffic at selected times throughout the day. There are a not insignificant number of large commercial vehicles as well as trucks exceeding the restricted 7.5 tonnes level.
5.6.4 Chart 5 Total incoming volume within selected time periods






5.6.5 Traffic Count: Early hours
Three villagers also counted the type and volume of traffic from 5.00 a.m. to 6.00 a.m. This was undertaken to determine the nuisance value of transport which is frequently reported by villagers as being fast moving and often very noisy. Drivers are observed ,during the hours of darkness, to pay even less attention to the Highway Code. Such traffic movements often keep villagers awake on the Isham and Northampton Roads. Movements are attributed to shift workers travelling to and from the Burton Latimer industrial estate.
Chart 6. Early Morning Sample
5-6 a.m.
Cycle/
Motorcycle

Car
Light Van or truck(com’l)
Over 7.5 tons
(com’l)
Mini-bus/bus
Farm vehicle
Total
Flow
Northampton Road
0

26.3

3.3

0

0

0

29.6
Isham Road
0

18

6.5

4

0

0

24.5

6.0 Survey Overview
The method of surveying had the advantage that observers were, generally in the warmth of their houses. In the hours of darkness it was generally possible to make a distinction between types of vehicles, though it was sometimes difficult to spot restricted vehicles.
Limitations of personnel prevented surveying around the clock, counting traffic on both sides of the road or village generated traffic. Notwithstanding, the survey gives a very clear picture of patterns i.e. peaks and periods of relative calm, and clearly reveals a picture of significant congestion and danger.
The busiest roads are the Pytchley and Harrowden Roads, but all roads receive high traffic volume which is generally travelling at speed.
During the three days observers note:
o The illegal, and disturbingly frequent, use of mobile phones
o Driving in the middle of the road ;(one driver was travelling on the wrong side of the road).
o Nose to tail travelling at speed.
o Travel above the speed limit through the entire village
o The use of full headlights coming out of the village during darkness

7.0 Recommendations
This report endorses Priority 2 of the Parish Council Plan Roads and Pathways i.e.

a. Safety
Given the increase in housing in the village and the increase in the volume, speed and size of traffic, the PC work in cooperation with current and future housing developers, the county council and the police to:
i. Audit the extent of concerns through survey and consultation. Feb. 2008
ii. Ensure that current traffic calming funding for the Harrowden Road is used[3]. Sept.2008
iii. Plan and create an agreed traffic calming/pedestrianisation and regulation system throughout the village. Sept.2009
iv. Create a safe network of footpaths and crossing points. Sept.2009
b. Maintenance, Lighting and Cleanliness of all pavements and pathways
i. Ensure that all unsafe surfaces are scheduled for repair and all dog fouling and littering of footpaths is minimised. Apr.2008
ii. Ensure that all boundary shrubbery and road verges are maintained and trimmed so that there is no obstruction to pedestrians and drivers. Apr. 2008

The following additional recommendations are made:
The results of this report should be shared with villagers to inform a preliminary meeting to discuss Priority 2 and future options. Proposals for improvements should be used at the meeting as an additional kick-start for consultation. Local Authority representatives and developers should be invited to this meeting.
A working group, comprising key parish councillors responsible for Priority 1 together with interested villagers, a county councillor and the community police officer (say 6-8 people), in close consultation with villagers, should be charged with “making things happen”
A more detailed audit should be quickly conducted to verify exact areas of concern in terms of signs, road and verges and footpath maintenance.
A range of proposals for road improvements, and options for traffic regulation and calming, should be costed in co-operation with the highways authority and the range of options presented to villagers.
The fairly strict timelines for improvement, set out in the Parish Plan, should be adhered to in order to give focus to rapid and effective resolution.
Copies of this report should be sent to key authorities.

Acknowledgements

Many thanks to the following people who gave up their valuable time to act as surveyors on the 21 sessions during the 3 days of survey

Day of Survey
Day 1
Day 2
Day 3
Early morning




Mid-day






Early evening
Wil. McKeown
Rob and Anne Widdup
John & Charlotte Cook
Rose and Mike Newmam
Brenda and Patrick White
Gerry Rowlatt
Trish Robinson
Margaret Johnson
Jan and Rod Derry
Chris and David Staff
Pat Waller
Lloyd Beech
Adrienne Greenbank
Don and Molly Pettitt
Wil. McKeown
Rob and Anne Widdup
Alan & Angela West
Peter Allen
Rose and Mike Newmam
Tim Norton
Judith & Peter Marshall
Gerry Rowlatt
Jan and Rod Derry
Chris and David Staff
Andy Gosling
Eloise Brown
Adrienne Greenbank
Don and Molly Pettitt
Pat Collings
Peter Robinson
Kath Gosling
Brian Lewis
Brenda and Patrick White
Rose and Mike Newmam
Pat Waller
Jan and Rod Derry
Chris and David Staff
Claire Robinson
Simon Watson
Adrienne Greenbank
Claire Robinson
Simon Watson


© Peter Allen Jan. 29th 2008










[1] Priority 2 ( Parish Council Plan) Roads and Pathways
a. Safety Given the increase in housing in the village and the increase in the volume, speed and size of traffic, the PC work in cooperation with current and future housing developers, the county council and the police to
i. Audit the extent of concerns through survey and consultation. Feb. 2008
ii. Ensure that current traffic calming funding for the Harrowden Road is used. Sept.2008
iii. Create a traffic calming/pedestrianisation and regulation system throughout the village. Sept.2009
iv. Create a safe network of footpaths and crossing point. Sept.2009
b. Maintenance, Lighting and Cleanliness of all pavements and pathways
i. Ensure that all unsafe surfaces are scheduled for repair and all dogs’ mess and littering of footpaths is minimised. Apr.2008
ii. Ensure that all boundary shrubbery and road verges are maintained and trimmed so that there is no obstruction to pedestrians and drivers. Apr. 2008

[2] Volunteer surveyors surveyed for each of the nine, two hour sessions during the 3 day period. To keep things as simple as possible, Traffic was recorded coming into the village. Recording was done on prepared sheet using tally marks.
N.B Tally marks are written as groups of five lines. The first four lines are vertical, and every fifth line runs diagonally across the previous four vertical lines. The resulting mark is known as a five-bar gate, from its similarity to the same.
[3] Funding made available for traffic calming as a condition for the development of Norlington Close.