Archived decisions

HAMPSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL

EXECUTIVE MEMBER - ENVIRONMENT: NORTH HAMPSHIRE AND SPATIAL STRATEGY

ITEM 2

PROJECT APPRAISAL

PROJECT:

A325 BUCKS HORN OAK - JUNCTION IMPROVEMENT

COMMENCEMENT DATE:

APRIL 2006

COMPLETION DATE:

JUNE 2006

PLANNED YEAR OF START IN ACCORDANCE WITH CAPITAL PROGRAMME: 2006/07

1.

FINANCE (Client Department, Director of Property, Business and Regulatory Services [Estates Practice] and County Treasurer)

Current

Capital

Estimate

Programme

(at 2005

(at 2005

prices)

prices)

Capital Expenditure

£'000

£'000

Land to be purchased

0

0

Construction

156

156

Fees

97

97

253

253

Less developers/

other contributions

Nil

Nil

253

253

Financial provision for total scheme

Total Cost

1.

From Committees own resources

(a) Capital programme 2006/07, subject to approval of its inclusion

253

(b) Other

253

2.

From other resources

(a)

(b)

(c)

TOTAL

253

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

0.001

Capital charges

22

0.018

TOTAL net expenditure

23

0.019

2.

STATEMENT OF NEED/JUSTIFICATION FOR PROJECT

(Client Department)

2.1

2.2

2.3

2.4

2.5

Due to an increasing level of accidents, a feasibility study was undertaken in 2003 to investigate the provision of alternative layouts at this crossroad junction. During the early 1990s there were four to six personal injury accidents (PIAs) per year recorded. In the three year period of the feasibility study there were eight PIAs between October 2000 and October 2003. All these accidents involved vehicles on the through road (A325) being in collision with vehicles turning into or out of the side roads (Dockenfield Street and Binsted Road). Major junction modifications, including a roundabout and traffic signals, were considered.

However, from October 2003 to May 2005 there has only been one PIA (PIA data from May 2005 to date is not yet available). A major junction improvement scheme would see a very poor rate of return in accident savings if implemented now.

For this reason a small-scale staggered junction is now proposed which will cost considerably less than the schemes originally considered. To further reduce costs, it is proposed to include this work within a major maintenance scheme that is programmed to start on site in January 2006 and will run for approximately six months. This will enable economies of scale to be achieved, particularly with respect to the traffic management that will be required. It will also minimise the disruption to local residents and businesses by completing both schemes at the same time. This proposal will continue to reinforce the A325 strategy of safety led improvements and it is expected that this will positively influence driver behaviour.

The fee cost shown in the finance section of this appraisal will appear high compared to the scheme construction costs. This is because preliminary design of the signal and roundabout options plus two public exhibitions are included.

The latest traffic count was undertaken on 22 September 2005. Approximately 15,000 vehicles a day passed through the junction in the period from 7.00 am to 7.00 pm. Of these 13,800 used the A325 and 1,200 used the side roads. On the day of the survey, 19 cyclists and two pedestrians used the junction.

Targets and Outcomes

2.6

2.7

The principal objectives of the scheme are to achieve county average PIAs for this type of junction and to manage traffic speed through the junction.

The prime method for determining the success of the scheme will be to monitor accident rates and undertake follow-up speed checks.

3.

ROAD IMPROVEMENT PROPOSAL (Client Department)

National/County Network and Policies

3.1

The scheme supports the County Council's road safety and casualty reduction policies and improves pedestrian facilities.

Details of Scheme and Design Standards

3.2

3.3

3.4

3.5

The proposed works will change the existing crossroads to a staggered junction layout. A pedestrian refuge will be included to assist crossing of the A325. Vehicle Activated Signs will be installed on the A325 approaches to the junction. These measures, together with the new signing, road markings and anti-skid which will be installed as part of the major maintenance scheme, will help to improve driver awareness of the junction as they approach it, thus reducing the risk of accidents.

The design includes one departure from standard. A staggered junction should have a minimum distance between the side road centre lines of 50 metres. This design has only 23 metres. To increase it further would require third party land that is habitat to European protected species. It would also increase the cost significantly due to the additional areas of carriageway construction required. However, the proposed design does provide a significant improvement over the current road layout. The rest of the design adheres to the design standards of the Department for Transport, together with those of the County Council. A Road Safety Audit has been undertaken and issues identified have been included in the design.

A pedestrian crossing refuge is to be provided. This will incorporate flush dropped kerbs, but the site location is rural and the use of tactile paving in isolation is not thought to be beneficial. This refuge, together with the footpath to the bus stop in the maintenance scheme, will improve accessibility between the residential properties, public house, bus stop and Alice Holt Visitor centre.

A location plan is attached and a detailed drawing (No. 17/A325/49/420) will be displayed at the meeting.

Environmental Impact

3.6

The speed of traffic on the A325 and the amount of queueing traffic on the side roads is expected to be reduced with the implementation of this scheme.

Land Requirements

3.7

No land acquisition required. All works to be confined within existing public highway limits.

Statutory Procedures

3.8

Temporary road closure and speed restriction traffic orders will be required during parts of the construction, for the safety of both the travelling public and the contractor's staff. The current speed limit on the A325 through the junction is 50 miles per hour (mph).

Public Consultation

3.9

3.10

3.11

Two public exhibitions have been held, one on 1-2 December 2004 and the other on 6-7 May 2005, to show the original roundabout and signal junction proposals. Since the scale of the works has now been considerably reduced it is not felt appropriate to hold further exhibitions.

The Police and Hampshire Highways Area Office have been consulted over the temporary diversion routes required during construction.

A letter and plan showing the proposed staggered junction was sent to stakeholders in December 2005. There have been a number of responses, the main issues raised include:

Binsted Parish Council - a reduction in the speed limit from 50 mph to 40 mph was requested. Response: a follow-up speed check will be undertaken once the junction improvement and major maintenance scheme are complete, justification for a lower speed limit can then be determined.

NB: Binsted Parish Council also stated in its letter that the staggered junction "is not what the Parish Council had hoped for".

Forestry Commission - the addition of a right turn lane on the A325 will increase the speed of through traffic. Response: speed activated signs, additional signs, traffic islands and narrower through lanes will control speed.

British Horse Society - the staggered junction does not help horses across the junction, whilst the signal option did. Response: if the injury accident rate were to increase in the future the signal junction would be reconsidered.

Dockenfield Parish Council - the Dockenfield approach is narrower than at present, which the Council feels will increase queues. Response: the existing Dockenfield Street approach allows two vehicles to exit at once - one to the left and one to the right. The access has been narrowed to allow only one vehicle out at a time as this is safer. With two vehicles at the give-way line, one can obscure the view of the other.

Local Member's View

3.12

The local Member, Councillor Kemp-Gee, supports the scheme.

Impact Assessments

3.13

This scheme is not considered to compromise equalities in terms of race, creed or gender. It will enhance safety and accessibility at the junction. Pedestrian access across the A325 will be improved by the installation of a traffic island.

Maintenance Implications

3.14

A small amount of additional carriageway construction (230 square metres) and high friction surfacing (250 square metres) will be required.

Crime and Disorder Act 1998

3.15

The provisions of this Act have no impact on this proposal.

Sustainability

3.16

3.17

The contractor may use a percentage of recycled aggregate in the carriageway construction materials in accordance with the Department for Transport's Specification for Highway Works.

All planings arising from the construction work will be taken to store for re-use within Hampshire.

4.

ROAD IMPROVEMENT - ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED

(Client Department)

4.1

4.2

4.3

4.4

Two roundabout options, a signal junction and a large-scale staggered junction were considered by the 2003 feasibility study. All these options would require third party land that is habitat to European protected species. On balance, the signal junction was felt to give the best balance of safety, cost, environmental impact and access for non-motorised users.

In the last two years the PIA rates have dropped and a major junction improvement scheme, like the signal option that was previously considered, would see a very poor rate of return in accident savings if implemented now. The cost of the signal junction would have been in the order of £1 million. With the current low level of PIAs, justification for a safety scheme of this size would be difficult.

However, there is a case for undertaking the low cost junction improvement currently proposed. This scheme will continue to reinforce the A325 strategy of safety led improvements and it is expected that this will positively influence driver behaviour.

The `do nothing' option has been rejected as there is historical evidence that drivers have difficulty negotiating this junction.

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

Scheme File

Environment Department

Room 313