Issue - meetings

To consider an objection and comments received to the traffic calming proposed under Highways Act 1980 – Section 90 A-F – Scar Lane, Golcar

Contact:

Will Kellett, Senior Engineer

RESOLVED: That The objections to the traffic calming proposed under Highways Act 1980 – Section 90 A-F – Scar Lane, Golcar be overruled and that the scheme be implemented as advertised.

RESOLVED: That The objections to the traffic calming proposed under HighThe Committee considered one objection and comments received in relation to the traffic calming proposed under Highways Act 1980 – Section 90 A-F – Scar Lane, Golcar.

Lucy Carter, Principal Engineer presented the report and the Committee were advised that;

• Scar Lane had a documented history of personal injury collisions (PICs) over a five-year period from 2019 to 2024. Ten of the collisions recorded along its length, resulted in twelve casualties, six of whom sustained serious injuries as a result of speeding traffic and rear end shunts.
• This suggested that vertical traffic calming measures in the form of speed cushions and tapered free-draining humps would be appropriate mitigation, in line with current guidance.
• The proposals then underwent local public consultation in August 2025, during which 192 letters were distributed to adjacent affected properties and businesses
• The scheme was formally advertised from 9th September 2025 to 30th September 2025 in line with the Road Hump Regulations 1999 and one objection was received.
• The objection was from a resident who was not included in the public consultation due to their address not been in the vicinity of the proposed scheme.
• The objector suggested that accelerating after passing over “speed humps” will seriously increase levels of exhaust pollution.
• In response, officers acknowledged concerns around air pollution but highlighted that the benefits of reduced speeds, and therefore fewer collisions and injuries were weighed against any possible minor negative impact on air quality. Given the collision and injury history along Scar Lane, the introduction of traffic calming along this length to increase the safety of all road users, could be justified.

In the discussion to follow, the Committee highlighted that 12 casualties, of which 6 suffered serious injury, during the past 5 years was high, and that contributory factors suggested issues with inappropriate speeding along Scar Lane.  On balance, the Committee felt that the benefits of the scheme in reducing the number and severity of collisions and injuries outweighed concerns raised in the objection. The Committee also noted it may be helpful to monitor the success of traffic calming should this be agreed going forwards. 

Having considered all the information presented to it verbally and in writing the committee agreed that:

RESOLVED: The objections to the traffic calming proposed under Highways Act 1980 – Section 90 A-F – Scar Lane, Golcar be overruled and that the scheme be implemented as advertised.

ways Act 1980 – Section 90 A-F – Scar Lane, Golcar be overruled and that the scheme be implemented as advertised.