Archived decisions

Contact: Peter Bayless, ext 6882 email: [email protected]

1. Summary

1.1 The Highways Agency has requested that possible improvement schemes be identified that can be delivered in 2006/07 on routes which would be used in the event of an incident on the Motorway and Trunk Road network. A list of potential schemes was put forward and the Agency has indicated that it is prepared to fund the schemes set out in paragraph 3.2. The proposed schemes would assist traffic on these routes and would be of benefit under normal conditions as well as when traffic is diverted from the Motorway and Trunk Road network.

2. Background

2.1 On 5 October 2006 the Environment and Transportation Policy Review Committee considered a briefing paper on Motorway Diversion Routes. Traffic difficulties often arise when a section of motorway is closed for an incident. As well as long delays for those on the motorway, traffic is also diverted onto the county's road network, sometimes in a planned way but often in an ad-hoc way. The Government has set targets for the Highways Agency to reduce delays on the motorway network and one way the Highways Agency is dealing with this is by establishing `diversion routes' for when the motorway becomes blocked by a traffic incident.

2.2 The Highways Agency is currently reviewing what `diversion routes' might be established to alleviate incidents on the motorway network, and in some parts of the county where these routes are not straightforward further discussion is needed to agree the detail. Part of this process will be consideration by the Policy Review Committee working group which also meets on 12 December 2006. However, in advance of formal agreement being reached on these proposals, the Highways Agency has indicated that it has a budget to implement works in 2006/07 to help the operation of diverted traffic on those routes already being used and which it is clear will form part of the agreed network. If this timescale is to be met the work must be put in hand immediately.

3. Proposed Improvements

3.1 The Highways Agency is keen to proceed with some improvements that can be implemented in 2006/07 and a small number of schemes has been identified, either on routes which are always used if there is an incident on the motorways, or more general Intelligent Transport schemes which would be of benefit when traffic is diverted onto the county road network. These schemes can all be delivered by 31 March 2007 to meet the required timescale.

3.2 The schemes proposed are as follows and location plans are attached:

(i) A30 Ringway South Basingstoke Signing Improvements - estimated cost £50,000. A number of locations have been identified where existing direction signing is in need of amendment or replacement in order to provide clear, continuous and up-to-date directional information. The opportunity will be taken to reduce sign clutter and provide clear links to the parallel M3 motorway.

(ii) A27 Titchfield to Sarisbury Signing Improvements - estimated cost £25,000. Similar to the previous proposals, this scheme would provide updated and amended direction signing with clear links to the parallel M27 Motorway.

(iii) North Walls Winchester Variable Message Sign (VMS) - estimated cost £47,000. The main purpose of the VMS is to inform motorists of incidents on the Motorway and Trunk Road (M&TR) network near Winchester and indicate at which junction they should join the network. Traffic passing this point in North Walls wishing to join the M&TR network will interact with traffic on at least three of the proposed diversion routes and there is an opportunity to minimise disruption by informing local traffic. For instance, if the southbound M3 were closed between junctions 10 and 11, traffic leaving Winchester would be unable to join the M3 Southbound at junctions 9 or 10. The VMS at North Walls would be used to inform motorists and direct them round the one-way system to join the M3 at junction 11 (Compton), thus reducing the volume of traffic at Winnall and Bar End and its interaction with the diverted traffic on Spitfire Link. The format of the sign would need to be specially designed because of the lack of space on the footways in North Walls and to minimise the environmental impact.

(iv) ITS improvements at a total estimated cost of £24,500, consisting of:

(a) central software to enable strategic control of signalised junctions on the existing Remote Monitoring system. Software cost estimate £4,000;

(b) work on junctions to link with the central software - estimated cost £7,500. This is the cost of additional hardware;

(c) work on Urban Traffic Control junctions - estimated cost £8,000. Some existing junctions could be made to operate more efficiently by upgrading some components; and

(d) fees to implement the above - estimate £5,000.

3.3 Subsequent route strategy implementation costs are not included but this work on the signalised junctions represents the first phase in what could be a rolling programme of improvements, funding permitting. The proposals have been based on what is achievable before 31 March 2007.

3.4 Schemes will be subject to approval of individual Project Appraisals where required.

4. Impact Assessments

4.1 It is considered that the actions proposed in this report should not have any detrimental impact on equalities or race discrimination. Improved traffic flow and information should be of benefit to all sections of the community.

Recommendation

That approval be given to include the following improvement schemes in the 2006/07 Capital Programme, to be fully funded by the Highways Agency at a total estimated cost of £146,500:

(i) A30 Ringway South Basingstoke Signing Improvements - estimated cost £50,000;

(ii) A27 Titchfield to Sarisbury Signing Improvements - estimated cost £25,000;

(iii) North Walls Winchester Variable Message Sign - estimated cost £47,000; and

(iv) Intelligent Transport Systems improvements at a total estimated cost of £24,500, including fees, consisting of:

(a) central software to enable strategic control of signalised junctions on the existing Remote Monitoring system;

(b) additional hardware at junction sites to link with the central software; and

(c) upgrade at Urban Traffic Control junctions to achieve more efficient operation.

1142Rpt/PDB