Agenda item

Bank Junction Safety Scheme

Deputy Edward Lord asked a question of the Chairman of the Planning and Transportation Committee concerning the operation of the Bank Junction safety scheme.

The Chairman prefaced his reply by reminding Honourable Members that the experimental scheme had been in place only four weeks and, as such, any data and assessments should be considered in that context. He advised that the scheme had been successful to date, with journey times on key routes slightly improved and journey times for buses through the Junction experiencing an average reduced journey time of ninety seconds. Officers continued to monitor closely all aspects of the scheme to identify further improvements, including a review of loading locations; to date only very minor adjustments to some signal timings inside the City had been required, with no changes necessary outside the City. The resilience of the network under the new scheme was also noted, with it having coped well despite a number of incidents such as a broken down bus on Cannon Street in peak hours and the closure of London Bridge southbound due to the appalling terrorist incident there.

With reference to the impact of school holidays, it was advised that such periods made little difference to the number and type of vehicles moving on City streets; analysis of traffic from both before and after the scheme’s introduction also demonstrated that vehicle numbers moving around the City remained consistent.

Members were also informed that compliance levels were such that 85% of “pre-restriction” traffic was no longer crossing the Junction, which represented a very good figure for a restriction of this nature enforced only by signage. Compliance was expected to increase further with the introduction of penalty charge notices in the coming period. Consultation on the scheme had now gone live on the “Bank on Safety” website and was also continuing with local businesses and others, to fully assess the impact of the scheme’s operation; feedback to date had been positive and Members were encouraged to participate. The Chairman also took the opportunity to thank officers for their hard work preparing for the scheme’s launch and Members for their support in introducing this bold scheme to improve public safety.

Responding to supplementary questions, the Chairman acknowledged that some congestion had been caused on occasion in Gresham Street and other surrounding roads as a result of displaced traffic from the scheme, which he had observed was at least partly as a consequence of lorries unloading on double yellow lines. Additional enforcement officers were being employed to tackle this illegal activity and address the problem and the Chairman confirmed that he would be happy to report back on the scheme’s operation, as well as the impact on nearby roads, in six months’ time. He suggested that Deputy Lord might wish to submit a formal question to the January meeting of the Court to facilitate this.

The Chairman also responded to questions concerning collaboration with taxi drivers, advising that the City Corporation continued to work with them and hoped to maintain constructive dialogue. He added that he was keen to ensure that the views and experiences of all relevant parties were captured to inform analysis of the scheme’s operation and ensure that the best solution for all parties, including taxi drivers, was achieved.

Withdrawn Questions

Both Mary Durcan and Deputy John Tomlinson, who had submitted questions concerning safety across the City Corporation’s housing estates, sought and obtained the leave of the Court to withdraw their questions. This was in view of the fact that their substantive queries had been addressed during the discussion at Item 7.