Archived decisions

Contact: David Devenish, ext 6099 email: [email protected]

1. Summary

1.1 The following decision is sought:

That the Executive Member for Policy and Resources approves:

(i) the Project Appraisal to carry out the following improvements at the A340 Aldermaston Road and A340/A339 Ringway Interchange at an estimated cost of £4.5 million:

(a) installing traffic signals on all six approach arms of the roundabout junction with additional carriageway widening;

(b) widening the A340 Aldermaston Road to dual carriageway from Priestley Road to the roundabout junction with two lanes in both directions;

(c) providing pedestrian footways on Popley Way northwards from Abbey Road, on Oakridge Road from Osborne Close to the roundabout and southwards along Aldermaston Road South to Hubbard Road;

(d) undertaking essential major maintenance works to the existing roundabout carriageway and road drainage network; and

(e) reconsidering the provision of a bus lane southbound only from Priestley Road to the roundabout junction, utilising one of the two proposed lanes, at a time in the future; and

(ii) procurement of a joint contract for the improvements at the A340 Aldermaston Road and A340/A339 Ringway Interchange in conjunction with the Merton Rise (Contract 3) Infrastructure Works.

2. Reason

2.1 This scheme will provide a safer and more secure environment for road users through traffic signal control and carriageway maintenance measures at a major interchange and by providing footway facilities to local destinations.

2.2 The proposal will support the economic vitality of Basingstoke and the surrounding area by managing traffic flow and congestion through traffic signal control, carriageway widening and maintenance measures at a major interchange on the strategic road network. The duration and level of disruption caused by construction works will also be reduced through the combined procurement of development, improvement and maintenance measures.

2.3 The works will deliver improvements in journey time reliability and hospital access through traffic signal control and carriageway widening measures.

2.4 The Executive Member for Environment recommends this proposal.

2.5 The Buildings, Land and Procurement Panel considered this report on 20 March 2007 and recommended the proposal.

3. Other Options Considered and Rejected

3.1 The feasibility of doing nothing was considered and rejected on the grounds that growth in general traffic and also traffic generated by planned housing would continue to worsen to the level whereby queues on the A339 slip roads would affect the main carriageway traffic. The implementation of minor safety improvements in recent years highlights that accidents are still occurring at a significant rate, warranting more substantial measures to help achieve national safety targets.

3.2 Partial traffic signal control of the roundabout was considered and rejected as anticipated queue lengths on the A339 slip roads were unacceptable. These investigations highlighted the need for the provision of additional queuing length on the A339 eastbound slip road and widening of the A340 northbound carriageway to two lanes to provide adequate capacity.

3.3 `Multiple-Occupancy' and `Non-Car' priority measures utilising one of the two proposed A340 southbound lanes were considered and rejected as an alternative to bus priority due to enforcement and traffic safety issues.

3.4 Inclusion of a bus priority measure on the A340 at the opening of the scheme was considered and rejected on the grounds that in the short term the delays to all traffic are unacceptable. County Council policy supports the inclusion of a bus lane; however at the present time this element of the project has not received local support. Once the approved scheme has been implemented and become operational it is proposed that the position be reviewed post 2010.

3.5 Shared pedestrian and cycle routes connecting Popley Way to Oakridge Road and Aldermaston Road South via the roundabout junction were considered. Pedestrian survey data and well-worn paths on the roundabout grass verges indicated an underlying demand from pedestrians to cross the roundabout despite the hazardous conditions. Signalisation of the roundabout would provide the opportunity to formalise a safe route using controlled crossings. Combined facilities for cyclists were included to offer wider modal choice at minimal additional expense. This option was rejected by the local Members following consultation.

3.6 The construction works programme coincides with the Merton Rise infrastructure works that include modifications to the A340/Priestley Road junction. A construction start date to follow immediately after completion of the junction works under a separate contract was considered and rejected. This arrangement would cause an extended period of disruption and it was considered unacceptable to miss an opportunity to minimise disruption and take advantage of economies of scale provided through a joint contract.

4. Conflicts of Interest Declared by the Decision Maker or Other Executive Member Consulted - None.

5. Dispensation granted by the Standards Committee - None.

6. Reason(s) for the Matter being dealt with if Urgent - None.

Approved by: ................................. Date: ..............................

Councillor T K Thornber CBE

Executive Member for Policy and Resources

1179Decn/DD