Meeting documents

1 THE ISSUE

1.1 The improvement of traffic flow in the vicinity of Sydney Gardens has been an issue for the Council for some time. The A36 and A4 meet in this location which brings together two of the busiest roads in Bath. Funding for the scheme was approved as part of the 2002/2003 Transport Capital Programme and consultation has recently begun on the preferred scheme. Members are asked in this report to consider the potential for starting this scheme considering initial responses from the consultation and also the impending works of the Highways Agency on the A36 south of Bath at Limpley Stoke.

2 RECOMMENDATION

2.1 It is recommended that members agree;

Printed on recycled paper

3 FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

3.1 The Transport Capital Programme contains an allocation of £350,000 for the Sydney Gardens Improvement during 2002/03. The re-allocation of funds will maintain the transport spending at the level suggested by Government following the submission of the Council's Local Transport Plan.

4 THE REPORT

4.1 Traffic congestion and disruption prevails in the area around Sydney Gardens for much of the day and is most noticeable during the morning and evening peak periods. The network of roads acts as a key location in distributing traffic, which is both travelling around and approaching Bath. It has long been recognised that improvements to the traffic flow are required.

4.2 A number of options were presented to the public through a consultation exercise during 2000/01 which culminated in there being no specific consensus amongst respondents as to what the best solution was. Officers created a hybrid option, which was considered to be the best compromise solution. The Council's Planning Transportation and Environment Committee approved this course of action for a second stage of consultation on 29^th March 2001. This consultation took place during May and June 2002 and officers are currently analysing the responses.

4.3 The principal aim of the scheme is to manage the traffic through an extension of the UTMC project, which has already been established at many other locations in Bath. This effectively manages the flow of traffic through a series of traffic signal controlled junctions which are linked to provide an optimum solution to traffic throughput. This also allows for the movement of pedestrians, cyclists and can provide priority for public transport vehicles. This scheme also aims to improve the safety of pedestrians through provision of controlled crossings points at a number of locations as can be seen on the attached consultation pamphlet. National Cycle Route 3 also runs through this area and the scheme seeks to provide a defined and safe cycle route through what is clearly a difficult area to traverse by cycle at present.

4.4 The introduction of traffic management equipment into an historic setting such as Sydney Gardens has always been seen as a difficult issue to resolve and members will need to consider this when making a decision on the final scheme.

4.5 The intention was to carry out consultation during spring 2002 and conclude the scheme design during late summer following a members' decision on the final scheme layout. Construction was then to follow early in the New Year and span two financial years. The total cost of works is likely to be in the region of £800,000.

4.6 However, the Highways Agency is now planning on closing the A36 at Limpley Stoke during September 2002 in order to carry out essential maintenance works. Due to the disruption caused by this closure it would seem prudent to either link the Council's work to the same timescale or defer the project for a period. In light of the extremely tight timescale it is not possible to accelerate the project to coincide with the Highways Agency works and the consultation exercise would be devalued. Therefore it is recommended that the project should be deferred until the next financial year after a thorough consultation exercise has taken place. It is intended that this will include a workshop following on from the initial response of stakeholders.

4.7 In order to maximise the investment in Transport Infrastructure and meet the requirements of the LTP members need to re-allocate the funds from this project to other priorities. A proposed list of projects is contained in Appendix 1 to this report. It is important that priorities are based on the LTP and the need to meet the Council's policy objectives. Appendix 1 shows how these are met.

4.8 The consultation exercise and detailed design of the Sydney Gardens improvement should continue to enable a decision to be taken on the final scheme. Funds are required to enable this work to be completed during this financial year. This is estimated to cost approximately £90,000 including the work carried out to date.

4.9 The Decriminalised Parking Enforcement project is progressing towards implementation but requires additional funds in order to meet the implementation date of January 2003. The current budget is £250,000 of revenue funding and the current requirement is an additional £200,000.. This is due to the phasing of the project and increased costs of IT systems and property. It was anticipated that the project would have started earlier this financial year and therefore would have been generating income to offset costs. Since the initial costings for the project there have been a number of changes that have affected the cost and income profiles. A revised financial business case is currently being drawn up and will be presented to the Executive Member on 10th July 2002. However the delay in implementation means that income generation is unlikely to materialise until late in the financial year, the revised business case will reflect a significant increase in income from that set out in the original business case, assessed at approximately £600,000 per annum.

The original set up costs were projected to be an add on to current processes. It has become clear through the development of the project that the software system currently employed is not suitable and a new system is required. This adds £120,000 to the required costs but saves three administrative posts on an ongoing basis. Tenders have been received and assessed for both quality and price. The additional funds are required to purchase the system and keep to the programme of implementation.

The hardware used in the operation is developing extremely quickly as with all IT equipment. Costs have increased due to the capability of the hardware increasing and also the number of parking attendants having increased. An additional £50,000 is projected, but will make significant contribution to the Council's E-Government targets.

Accommodation estimates in the original business case have been found to be extremely low and the current scarcity of supply and high demand has kept prices high in Bath. The increase in costs associated with property issues is £30,000 plus the cost of improvements to the Guildhall to accommodate the Parking Shop in the One Stop Shop. At present the costs associated with the Guildhall have not been identified in detail and are excluded from this assessment.

4.10 Capital expenditure on this project includes the cost of the IT system to manage the administration process and the handheld computers used to issue tickets and record offences. A tendering process has been completed for this equipment and the system and this can be contained within the additional funds proposed in this report.

4.11 The maintenance of the highway network is critical to meet the aims of the LTP. The quality of non-principle roads in the area is below national averages and improvements have been identified within the Best Value review. A large-scale programme of works is being progressed this financial year including a £750,000 surface-dressing programme. Additional funds of £50,000 are proposed to enable resurfacing of a number of locations within Bath. Areas such as Upper Borough Walls, Gay Street and Bennet Street require work urgently. It is proposed that an allocation be made and that the Head of Transportation, Access and Waste Management be given delegated authority to agree the programme in consultation with the Executive Member for Transportation and Planning Policy.

4.12 The Council has received a number of representations regarding the quality, extent, clarity and effectiveness of the signage in and approaches to Bath and how it integrates with a World Heritage Site environment. It is proposed that an independent audit is commissioned to look at the issue and recommend a prioritised and costed action plan for consideration as part of next financial years work programme.

Document1

This version was printed 03-Jul-02 10:09 a9/p9

APPENDIX 1

REALLOCATION OF FUNDS FROM THE SYDNEY GARDENS

IMPROVEMENT