Archived decisions
Hampshire County Council Executive Member-Spatial Strategy 10 February 2004 Project Appraisal: Lynchford Road, Farnborough - Report of the Director of Environment |
Item 1 |
Contact: Peter Rayment, ext 6894 email: [email protected]
1. Summary
1.1 The following decision is sought:
That the attached Project Appraisal for the installation of a Toucan crossing on Lynchford Road, Farnborough, at an estimated cost of £65,000, be approved.
2. Reason
2.1 This decision supports Aim 2 of the Corporate Strategy (Stewardship of the environment) by providing a facility that will encourage cycling and walking. It will assist pedestrians and cyclists to cross the busy Lynchford Road and will provide a link in the developing cycle network in this part of Farnborough.
3. Other Options Considered and Rejected
3.1 Other types of crossing are not appropriate on the grounds that provision needs to be made for both pedestrians and cyclists.
4. Conflicts of Interest Declared by the Decision Maker or a Member or Officer Consulted - None.
5. Dispensation granted by the Standards Committee - Not applicable.
6. Reason(s) for the Matter being dealt with if Urgent - Not applicable.
Approved by: Date:
Councillor J K Glen
HAMPSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL EXECUTIVE MEMBER-SPATIAL STRATEGY |
PROJECT APPRAISAL |
_____________________________________________
10 FEBRUARY 2004
_____________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________
PROJECT: |
LYNCHFORD ROAD, FARNBOROUGH - TOUCAN CROSSING |
____________________________________________________________________
COMMENCEMENT DATE: |
MAY 2004 |
COMPLETION DATE: |
JUNE 2004 |
PLANNED YEAR OF START IN ACCORDANCE WITH CAPITAL PROGRAMME: 2004/05 |
____________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________
1. |
FINANCE (Client Department, Director of Property, Business and Regulatory Services [Estates Practice] and County Treasurer) |
____________________________________________________________________
Current |
Capital | ||||
Estimate |
Programme | ||||
(at Nov 03 |
(at Nov 03 | ||||
prices) |
prices) | ||||
Capital Expenditure |
£'000 |
£'000 | |||
Land to be purchased |
Nil |
||||
Construction |
46.5 |
46.5 | |||
Fees |
18.5 |
18.5 | |||
65.0 |
65.0 | ||||
Less developers/ |
|||||
other contributions |
|||||
65.0 |
65.0 | ||||
Financial provision for total scheme |
Total Cost | ||||
1. |
From Committees own resources |
||||
(a) Capital programme (as above) |
65.0 | ||||
(b) Other |
|||||
2. |
From other resources |
||||
(a) |
|||||
(b) |
|||||
(c) |
|||||
TOTAL |
65.0 | ||||
Value of land for this project in HCC ownership £ |
|||||
Variations from capital programme |
|||||
Revenue implications |
£'000 |
% variation | |||
to Committee's | |||||
budget | |||||
Net current expenditure |
1.9 |
0.002 | |||
Capital charges |
6.0 |
0.006 | |||
TOTAL net expenditure |
7.9 |
0.008 | |||
____________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________
2. |
STATEMENT OF NEED/JUSTIFICATION FOR PROJECT (Client Department) |
____________________________________________________________________
This scheme supports Aim 2 of the Corporate Strategy by providing facilities that will encourage cycling and walking rather than using the car. The A3011 Lynchford Road forms a direct link with the nearby A321 Blackwater Valley Route (see attached location plan). The traffic flows in this part of Lynchford Road are in excess of 2,000 vehicles during peak hour. This, combined with a 40 mph speed limit makes it difficult for pedestrians and cyclists to cross Lynchford Road on their way from the housing areas to the south and the shops and schools to the north. A survey of traffic, pedestrian and cycle flows gave a PV² value of 0.7, which reaches a level where a controlled crossing can be justified. In view of the particular circumstances, a signal-controlled Toucan crossing is the most appropriate for the location and was included in the list of Capital Programme schemes approved by the Executive Member for Environment on 24 June 2003. |
____________________________________________________________________
3. |
ROAD IMPROVEMENT PROPOSAL (Client Department) |
____________________________________________________________________
National/County Network and Policies | |
The proposal is consistent with the County Council's North East Hampshire Transport Strategy. It will provide improved facilities for pedestrians and cyclists and a safer route to school. | |
Details of Scheme and Design Standards | |
The crossing design complies with the Department for Transport and Hampshire County Council standards and has been safety audited at the appropriate stages in the design process. The provision of a crossing at the location is justified in accordance with normal criteria. | |
Environmental Impact | |
There is no significant environmental impact from this proposal. | |
Land Requirements | |
No land acquisition required. All works to be confined within existing public highway limits. |
Statutory Procedures | |
All necessary statutory requirements have been satisfied in the development of this proposal. | |
Public Consultation | |
Public notices have been posted on this site for 28 days giving details of the proposal. No comments have been received. | |
Local Member's View | |
The local Member, Councillor Mrs Devereux, supports the proposal. | |
Facilities for the Disabled | |
The proposed crossing incorporates tactile paving and audible warnings for the visually impaired, with flush kerbs at the crossing point for wheelchairs, prams and less mobile people. | |
Maintenance Implications | |
The revenue implications of this proposal will be taken into account in the setting of the annual base budget. | |
Crime and Disorder Act 1998 | |
The provisions of this Act have no impact on this proposal. | |
Sustainability | |
The Toucan crossing supports walking and cycling which are both sustainable forms of transport. |
____________________________________________________________________
4. |
ROAD IMPROVEMENT - ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED (Client Department) |
____________________________________________________________________
Alternative types of crossing are not appropriate on the grounds that both pedestrians and cyclists need to be catered for. |
____________________________________________________________________
Section 100 D - Local Government Act 1972 - background papers | |
The following documents disclose facts or matters on which this report, or an important part of it, is based and has been relied upon to a material extent in the preparation of this report. | |
NB the list excludes: | |
1. |
Published works. |
2. |
Documents which disclose exempt or confidential information as defined in the Act. |
TITLE |
LOCATION |
Project Files Pel/6146 |
Environment Department Intelligent Transport Systems Group Monument House |
8487/PJR