Local Highway Panels Terms of Reference and Members' Guide

These informal crossing points (dropped kerbs) can be provided where the presence of a formal crossing point, i.e. Zebra, Puffin or Toucan crossing is not currently available or justifiable under the required criteria.

Things to consider

Informal crossing points with dropped kerbs will be installed accompanied by tactile paving to aid visually impaired pedestrians to locate the crossing point. Considerations that will determine a site’s suitability for a dropped kerb crossing point include but are not limited to:

• Ensuring that there are suitable locations on each footway directly opposite each to provide a perpendicular crossing point
• Whether there may be a need to provide additional drainage directly upstream of the crossing to ensure no ponding of surface water occurs at the crossing itself
• The location of statutory undertakers equipment, as the costs associated with diverting this equipment can be significant, so an alternative location may be required to keep the costs of the design and installation proportional

The dropped kerbs in this guide pertain to pedestrians only. Vehicle crossings for private access into properties are not permitted through the LHP and would need to be applied for (and funded by) the resident/property owner directly. Details of the application process can be found on the Essex Highways website. 

There are two categories of vehicle activated signs:

• Permanent VAS are signs that are permanently mounted on a pole installed within the highway
• Temporary VAS are signs that may be moved around several locations either to be attached to poles or inserted into sockets already installed within the highway, which include speed indicator devices.

Things to consider

VAS signs are not enforceable as they are designed to increase driver awareness of the signed speed limit or to highlight a hazard.

Any VAS that are required in order to highlight a hazard are generally used as part of road safety measures where advanced warning of a hazard needs to be reinforced to reduce the potential for further incidents at that location. These signs will be assessed and installed by the Road Safety Team and are not permissible for LHP. This is to ensure drivers do not become over accustomed to seeing these types of signs, desensitising their effectiveness.

All requests for permanent speed VAS at site specific locations or for temporary speed VAS can be made through the LHP. The criteria to be met for these signs are that the average vehicle speed is 10mph above the posted speed limit. Those locations that do not meet this criterion will not be processed by the LHP.

District or Parish councils are able to procure their own VAS providing the asset is retained under license by them for any ongoing maintenance. This can be done via the Essex Highways VAS webpage - https://www.essexhighways.org/applications/apply-to-install-a-vas-or-sid-illuminated-sign.

Prior to LHP recommending VAS schemes, consideration to the ongoing maintenance cost for LHP installed units will need to be given as this will impact the limited ECC revenue budget.

Similarly to traffic signs, considerations that will determine a site’s suitability for VAS signage include but are not limited to:

• Is there sufficient physical space within the adopted highway?
• Will there be sufficient visibility of the sign for drivers?
• Will the sign hinder pedestrian or other user groups?
• Are there any statutory undertakers apparatus underneath the highway which might require relocation and therefore make the cost of installation unaffordable?

Under LHP, road markings will only be provided on the network when a clear need has been identified, to ensure the markings are appropriate for the location and meet the TSRGD.

Things to consider

All requests for road markings will need to consider:

• Compliance with the TSRGD and any local Policy or Guidance that has been adopted by the Council.
• Costs of ongoing maintenance of carriageway markings. The lifespan of road markings depends on the amount of traffic, the location of the lines and the condition of the road surface.

Disabled parking bays are not funded via LHP. All applications before disabled parking bays must be submitted via the the council's website to ensure they are assessed correctly.

Where the request for road markings has been made due to degradation, the request for repainting these should be raised to the maintenance teams via the reporting tool.

The Essex Parking Partnerships should be consulted on the installation of parking restrictions.

The restrictions associated with School Keep Clear markings are limited to the relevant school opening and closing times. A TRO is required to ensure that the road markings are legally enforceable.

 It is not intended that Keep Clear markings are used outside all schools, only where it is necessary for pupils to cross the road.

The Essex Parking Partnerships should be consulted on the installation of parking restrictions.

Things to consider

At each location, the following shall be considered:

• Each location shall be considered on its own merits, but good visibility is required in both directions of pedestrians by drivers (which is the purpose of the markings).
• The minimum length of the road marking is 25.56m and this can be increased up to 3m per zig-zag, to a maximum of 43.56m. The overall length may be increased by increments of 6m through the addition of a complete set of zig-zag modules on each side.
• The marking will need to be accompanied by an upright sign and will require a TRO to ensure it is enforceable. These restrictions will be limited to the relevant school opening and closing times for the peak times 08:00-09:30 and 14:30-16:00, although exceptions can be made to this if a strong case is put forward including the use at the school of a preschool playgroup.
• No vehicles are permitted to stop, including vehicles displaying a Bue Badge, during these times and dates, even for picking up or setting down passengers. This also applies to loading and unloading of vehicles and also school contract vehicle services.
• School keep clear markings shall not be used to address parking issues around schools, this should be addressed through the use of single or double yellow lines.

The type and design of bollards must comply with conservation and other local requirements.

Things to consider

Bollards often restrict the width of a footway and restrict certain pedestrian user groups from legally accessing pedestrian routes, as well as creating an additional maintenance burden for ECC, so their use needs to be limited.

Where bollards are being considered as a deterrent to stop powered two wheeled vehicles from using a section of footway or an alleyway, bollards are not the suitable solution. Instead, this type of activity should be reported to the Police as this is illegal and is therefore an enforcement issue rather than a highway issue.

Where bollards are being proposed to stop vehicles parking on footways and verges then double yellow lines shall be considered as this can then be enforced. Where it would be expected for double yellow lines to become contentious locally, then consideration shall be given to using a higher kerb face to stop vehicles mounting the verge, although a higher kerb face for footways is not always achievable given the costs associated with the resurfacing or reconstruction of the footway itself to accommodate them.

Planters or planting can be used as an alternative to bollards where they can be accommodated, however, to ensure they are properly maintained then it is recommended that the local Parish, District, local businesses or local resident groups take ownership of the asset post-installation and maintain them under license.

The installation of bollards should be a final option where no other alternatives can be made to work due to the existing environment and will need to consider any local conservation areas, so the correct type of bollard is installed.

Vision Zero Considerations: Many road users each year die because they hit objects after they have left the carriageway. Examples of features which have led to a death include trees, telegraph poles, sign poles, ditches, ponds, wooden fences, embankments etc.

• We must therefore ensure that any features are essential and are protected or passively safe to ensure they do not create risk.
• We must ensure that we do not introduce features that cannot or will not be maintained and that we do not introduce features that will be obscured by vegetation.

Motorcyclists are the highest risk group, comprising about 2% of traffic but 25% of DSIs and they require more protection. Many are young riders in urban areas who could be protected by lower speeds, better road/place design and less street clutter, others are more susceptible to poor surfaces including debris, inspection covers, unlit obstructions such as central refuges and unprotected signposts.

• Each person involved in each scheme, from the scheme promoter to the designer to the constructor needs to ask themselves what impact the scheme will have on the risk to all users but especially riders.

The Parish or District Council will need to take on the future maintenance of these features under licence depending on what features it includes, e.g. planting or planters.

Things to consider

Other traffic calming works may be combined with a gateway, these could include pinch points, buildouts, islands, and rumble devices, together with changes of carriageway colour and/or texture and the use of appropriate signing. Where changes in the surface of the carriageway are used it will be most effective if they start at the gateway location, rather than in advance of it. This helps to give greater prominence to the gateway itself.

Most speed reduction achieved by a gateway treatment can be extremely local and may be eroded over time. To achieve the most beneficial effect, other traffic calming features will have to be located close to the gateway and extend over the length of road over which the speeds need to be contained.

Gateway features cannot be used to prevent access, so therefore both the horizontal and vertical elements of the gateway must be constructed so that it can be negotiated by any vehicle entitled to use the road.

To achieve the maximum speed reduction possible the gateway must be conspicuous and within any aesthetic constraints imposed by the location, and colours should contrast with the surroundings. Should a coloured surfacing be considered, or rumble strips or markings from an on- carriageway perspective, then the area should normally be at least 5m in length, so it is clearly visible from a distance. Longer lengths up to 10m can improve conspicuity but beyond this may detract from the effect of the gateway. Edge line markings, such as ‘Dragon Teeth’ can make the gateway appear narrower than it is whilst still allowing larger vehicles to overrun these areas if necessary.

A gateway needs to be sighted so that drivers do not encounter them suddenly as this can be hazardous and may not bring about the desired reduction in speeds. The gateway will need to be visible over at least the stopping distance for the 85th percentile of the approach speeds. Basing the distance on the current speed limit will often not be sufficient and speed survey measures will be needed to identify the 85th percentile. Site inspections will confirm whether the stopping site distance is sufficient.

Physical measures, such as buildouts, chicanes and pinch-points can also be used as a narrowing effect and enhance the effect of the gateway and to reduce overall carriageway widths. Islands will need to be appropriately signed and sufficient lane widths retained to suit all vehicles likely to use the gateway. Where farm equipment or specialist commercial or military vehicles have to negotiate a gateway, it can be helpful to use ghost island markings or overrun areas.

A gateway feature comprised of vertical features alone is unlikely to influence vehicle speeds. Where a reduction in speeds is being sought it is recommended that gateways are used in conjunction with horizontal elements. When choosing the location of the gateway there is a need to ensure there is sufficient width to accommodate the vertical elements and that sufficient set back from the edge of the carriageway is available to ensure vehicles cannot come into contact with them. The location of these elements in a footway or cycleway path should be avoided unless there is sufficient space remaining to allow the safe and convenient passage of pedestrians and cyclists and provide sufficient headroom.

Vision Zero Considerations: Many road users each year die because they hit objects after they have left the carriageway. Examples of features which have led to a death include trees, telegraph poles, sign poles, ditches, ponds, wooden fences, embankments etc.

• We must therefore ensure that any features are essential and are protected or passively safe to ensure they do not create risk.
• We must ensure that we do not introduce features that cannot or will not be maintained and that we do not introduce features that will be obscured by vegetation.

Motorcyclists are the highest risk group, comprising about 2% of traffic but 25% of DSIs and they require more protection. Many are young riders in urban areas who could be protected by lower speeds, better road/place design and less street clutter, others are more susceptible to poor surfaces including debris, inspection covers, unlit obstructions such as central refuges and unprotected signposts.

• Each person involved in each scheme, from the scheme promoter to the designer to the constructor needs to ask themselves what impact the scheme will have on the risk to all users but especially riders.

Introduction of parking restrictions can be extremely contentious and displacement needs to be considered. Essex Parking Partnerships should be consulted on proposals or options prior to progressing a scheme.

Things to consider

ECC will only directly implement parking schemes that meet one or more of the following criteria:

• They have been identified as necessary to tackle congestion.
• They reduce road traffic casualties in line with ECC criteria.
• Are funded through developer contributions that have been identified as a requirement for the planning approval of a local development.

The LHP can only become involved in funding parking restrictions which are required as part of an LHP scheme.

Parking on grass verges can create significant problems and any remedial action to prevent parking on the verges needs careful consideration, as any action may result in additional unwanted parking in surrounding areas.

The enforcement of parking restrictions depends on several things. The availability of civil enforcement officers, the type of restriction and the local circumstances. There are only a limited number of traffic enforcement officers, and they cannot be everywhere at once. If there is a particular issue that requires enforcement, then the relevant Parking Partnership should be contacted directly. Limited waiting restrictions require two separate visits. The first identifies the vehicle parked at the time of the visit, with the second visit then made after the posted time period allowed for parking. A common enforcement issue in some locations is that as soon as the officer leaves the area the vehicles will return. Schools, cash points and takeaway locations are the most difficult to enforce.

The two main types of enforceable waiting restrictions are prohibitive waiting and permissive waiting restrictions. Prohibitive restrictions are indicated by yellow road markings and the times of control will be indicated by accompanying signs, unless they are double yellow.

Permissive restrictions are indicated by white parking bays and the times of the control are also indicated by the accompanying signs. The signs will indicate who can use the parking bay and any limits on its use, such as length of stay. Some bays may also be identified on the carriageway by white letters such as ‘disabled’, ‘doctors’, ‘loading’, or ‘permit holders only’.

All parking restrictions require a TRO and must be consulted on. This is a legal requirement, and all road users are entitled to comment on proposals and object or support them. The detail of the proposed restriction detailed in the TRO must be accompanied by a Statement of Reason which must show that it addresses one or more of the following factors.

• Safety
• Congestion
• Environment

Where objections are received, they need to be formally considered. This could involve modifying a proposal or in some cases abandoning it completely. The outcome of any public consultation can never be accurately predicted and can be a lengthy process.

To be confirmed

Things to consider

To be confirmed

Vision Zero Considerations: People wishing to place shelters to protect bus passengers must consider the movements these people will make to get on and off the bus. If shelters are placed on the shared surfaces and have opaque sides then cyclists passing the shelter may collide with people stepping out of the shelter. Where shelters are on footways it is still possible that e-scooters and both cycles and e-bikes may be using this surface illegally. We are aware this happens and are unlikely to be able to prevent it so we need to ensure that we design with this issue in mind.

• The Safe System requires us to design for what we know humans will do. We need to make the safe course of action the easiest course of action.

There are numerous issues to consider in order to identify an appropriate location for it to remain functional.

Things to consider

The proposed location of a bin will be checked for suitability to ensure it is safe to access for stocking and use and must be positioned where visibility for drivers is not reduced from the minimum standard criteria.

Salt bins will not be provided in the following circumstances:

• In private areas or commercial premises.
• Within 200m of another salt bin.
• Where they would obstruct the passage of pedestrians.
• Where the location would reduce visibility for traffic or pedestrians.
• Where traffic management would be required when installing or stocking.
• Where the location is on a treated part of the network.

Careful consideration is required so that salt bins remain functional as far as possible. These include:

• Stealing of salt – some bins are emptied soon after stocking or for resale.
• Private use – the salt is for use on the public highway only, however reports are made of the salt being use for private use i.e. driveways or on private land.
• Vandalism/Damage – an on-going maintenance concern.
• Contamination – Some bins are used as rubbish bins. Any contaminated waste requires emptying and disposal prior to filling.
• Non-use – some bins are not used and require the salt to be chipped out prior to re-stocking as it has solidified over the year.

Should an existing ECC owned bin prove problematic because of any of the above, Essex Highways reserves the right to remove it.

If the proposed bin location meets all of the criteria below, then the LHP can fund the installation and thereafter Essex Highways will stock and maintain it:

• The location is on a non-treated part of the network i.e. it does not receive precautionary salting. If a salt bin is on a corner of a treated and non-treated road it will be marked as non-treated.
• The road is on a steep incline with a gradient greater than 5% for a minimum length of 50m or there are sharp bends with less than 500m radius and a speed limit greater than 30mph.
• Not within 200m of another salt bin.

Things to consider

Enhancements to Zebra Crossings will be limited to:

• the replacement of old beacons with new Halo beacons
• replacement of outdated tactile paving arrangements to ensure they are compliant
• the introduction of new high friction surfacing on approach to the crossing

Repainting of existing road markings and replacement of existing high friction surfacing at a crossing are considered maintenance activities so requests for these must use the appropriate reporting tool.

Pedestrian refuge islands can be installed on carriageways where:

• there is an existing dropped crossing
• the width is greater than 7.2m, and
• where a high number of pedestrians are having difficulty crossing the road

Refuge islands provide the opportunity for pedestrians to cross the carriageway in two phases where gaps in the two-way traffic are limited due to the volume of traffic. Pedestrian refuges must be designed to appropriate standards to accommodate the types of user groups expected to be encountered, for example, where cyclists need to be accommodated the refuge island will need to have an increased width.

Things to consider

Pedestrian guardrail will be used for new sites in order to offer some protection to pedestrians to prevent them straying into the road or crossing at inappropriate locations where it is considered absolutely necessary and where there is a documented history of pedestrian collisions.

Guardrail may also be considered where it is required to offer some protection to pedestrians where the swept path of large vehicles takes them close to the footway or potentially overhanging it. However, this should only be a last resort after the consideration of footway realignment or the use of other features such as trief kerb or overrun areas have been investigated.

For larger schemes at locations with existing pedestrian guardrail, there should be a presumption that the pedestrian guardrail will be removed and only those sections that are identified as providing pedestrian protection will be replaced or kept.

In all instances pedestrian guardrail should be considered for as short a length as possible, and it is a last resort.

Pedestrian guardrail should not be used in residential areas, except at school pedestrian exits, or at junctions or crossing points with a history of pedestrian collisions if it is not possible to implement an alternative design for the junction or crossing. It may be considered at alleyway exits for the width of the exit where it is demonstrated that pedestrians are at risk from stepping out of the alleyway into the carriageway, however, this must consider the needs of all user groups and cannot limit access for disability groups or pushchairs.

In urban areas pedestrian guard railing may be considered where the risk of walking into the carriageway is very high and would result in a higher severity pedestrian casualty, or at junctions or crossing points with a history of pedestrian collisions if it is not possible to implement an alternative design for the junction or crossing.

Pedestrian guardrail shall not be used in rural areas unless there is a demonstrated issue to address such as a rural school.

Vision Zero Considerations: There is much support for removal of pedestrian guardrail as it creates risk for walkers and vehicle occupants/riders if vehicles hit it and this damage increases the burden on the maintenance budget. Pedestrian guardrail should not be required where there is good design and safe speeds.

• The safe system views pedestrian guardrail as failure of the design process but it is recognised that in certain situations in Essex it may be required as a measure of last resort.

Essex County Council has a speed management policy that takes into account the effect that appropriate traffic speeds have on environmental and social objectives, as well as their effect on road safety at a national and local level. Both documents place a high importance on consistent and coherent speed management to encourage driver compliance and to seek to reinforce the driver’s assessment of the safe speed to travel.

All schemes put forward should be consistent with national and local policy in order to be promoted for implementation

Things to consider

Speed surveys will be required to establish the actual speeds at the location where a speed limit reduction is being considered. Any LHP scheme request for speed management and/or new speed limits will need to go through the LHP validation process. This is where the request would be investigated and feasible engineering solutions, where possible, to the issues raised would be put forward.

Essex Police are consulted on changes in speed limits. As the enforcing authority of road speed limits their support is an important factor in ensuring any changes are successful in their stated aims.

Any changes to speed limits require a Traffic Regulation Order (TRO). Once this is in place and is correctly signed then the speed limit is legally enforceable. Any enforcement activity would be considered against Police resources at that time. If the legal process is not followed and/or the signing is not correct then the limit cannot be enforced.