Archived decisions
Hampshire County Council Buildings, Land and Procurement Panel 19 October 2004 Executive Member - Policy and Resources 11 November 2004 South Hampshire Rapid Transit: A3 Portsmouth-Waterlooville-Horndean Public Transport Priority Corridor Progress Report and Section 3 Waterlooville Town Centre Project Appraisal Report of the Director of Environment |
Item 6 Item |
Contact: Geoff Topps, ext 7959 email: [email protected]
1. Summary
1.1 The following decisions are sought:
(i) That the Buildings, Land and Procurement Panel recommends approval of the attached Project Appraisal (Appendix 1) in respect of Section 3 Waterlooville Town Centre, at an estimated cost of £7,250,000.
(ii) That the Executive Member for Policy and Resources approves the attached Project Appraisal (Appendix 1) in respect of Section 3 Waterlooville Town Centre.
(iii) That the progress report for the A3 project be noted.
2. Reason
2.1 The scheme supports Aim 1 (Maximising life opportunities), Aim 2 (Stewardship of the environment) and Aim 4 (Building strong and safe communities) of the Corporate Strategy by creating the standard and quality of public transport facilities along this major transport corridor that will stimulate greater use and attract new users who would otherwise use their cars.
2.2 The Department for Transport has approved major scheme funding of £25.1 million for this project and its implementation must now be managed to complement the terms of the funding provision. Approval of Section 3 will allow the project to proceed in order to achieve the planned overall project completion in 2007.
2.3 On 14 September 2004 the Executive Member for Environment recommended approval of the attached Project Appraisal (Appendix 1) in respect of Section 3 Waterlooville Town Centre.
3. Other Options Considered and Rejected
3.1 Various options for a north-south link between Portsmouth and Horndean were studied as part of the transportation studies undertaken for the South Hampshire Rapid Transit network. Neither an off-road solution nor an on-road tram-based system was very feasible or appropriate and an on-road bus priority system using the existing A3 corridor was recommended as the most suitable solution.
4. Conflicts of Interest Declared by the Decision Maker or Other Executive Member 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 T K Thornber