BOROUGH OF POOLE

TRANSPORTATION ADVISORY GROUP –THURSDAY 23 APRIL 2009

REPORT OF HEAD OF TRANSPORTATION SERVICES

on A POLICY FOR THE PROVISION OF DROPPED CROSSINGS

1.Purpose and Policy Context

1.1To consider a policy for the provision of uncontrolled pedestrian dropped crossings. Dropped crossings facilitate the crossing of the highway for people with disabilities, particularly wheelchair and mobility scooter users, as well as people with prams and pushchairs.

2Decisions Required

It is recommended that the Portfolio Holder be requested to approve :

2.1The policy set out in Appendix A.

3Background

3.1Although new schemes and developments have dropped crossings incorporated as standard, the majority of the roads and footways in the Borough were built many years ago when there was little or no consideration for the needs of people with mobility difficulties. There are therefore many obstacles to easy movement which can affect access to essential services and facilities and thus independent living.

3.2People with mobility problems are likely to be older people and people with disabilities, however, improved walking facilities for those with young children in prams and pushchairs can also aid social inclusion, especially for those families with no or limited access to a private car. The absence of a convenient dropped crossing point can also mean circuitous routes have to be taken and may result in people crossing at unsafe locations.

3.3Poole is a popular retirement town with an ageing population above the national average. The proportion of 85+ year olds is approximately 5% higher than the average in England and Wales. People of this age group are usually less mobile and it is likely to result in an increase in the demand for dropped crossings. The Council has limited resources for the construction of dropped crossing points and it is therefore necessary to prioritise requests. A draft policy for the provision of dropped crossings is set out in Appendix A.

3.4A complete list of all locations where consideration for dropped crossings has been undertaken is currently being developed. It is envisaged that this will be available shortly on the intranet for members to view.

  1. Financial Implications
  1. The typical cost of a pair of dropped crossings is £1,200 though this can be more depending on the local circumstances. A capital budget of £20,000 per annum is available which means approximately 16 pairs of crossings can be installed in any year. S.106 Developer Contributions may also be available in specific locations to support this activity.

5Legal Implications

5.1Part III of the Disability Discrimination Act 1995 (DDA) gives disabled people a “Right of Access” to goods, services and facilities. Service providers are required to make reasonable adjustments to the physical features of their premises to overcome physical barriers to access. As the highway authority, the Council has a legal duty to make appropriate changes to the highway so that disabled people can gain access to services and facilities.

6RISK MANAGEMENT

6.1Failure to deliver capital schemes is a High Level Risk identified within the Units’ Business Plan. Failure to provide dropped crossing points could be challenged under the Disability Discrimination Act and result in social isolation, the need for additional community support and an increase in personal injury accidents.

7Equalities Implications

7.1The provision of dropped crossings increases the accessibility of the highway network to people with mobility difficulties including older people and people with disabilities. Dropped crossings have no impact on people of different faiths, ethnicity, gender or lesbian, gay or bisexual people.

Julian McLaughlin

Head of Transportation Services

Appendix A – A Policy for Dropped Crossings

Name and Telephone Number of Officer Contact

John McVey (01202 262221)

Background Papers - none

6 April 2009
TAG230409T3C

APPENDIX A

A Policy for the Provision of Dropped Crossings in the Borough of Poole

Introduction

Dropped crossings are highway facilities that can enable all pedestrians (and cyclists in some situations) to cross more safely from one side of the road to another. Unlike controlled crossings such as Puffins, Pelicans and Zebras, they do not have traffic signals that motorists are required to respond to and pedestrians do not have priority over vehicles.

Dropped crossings support pedestrians, users of wheelchairs and mobility scooters, visually impaired people, pram/pushchair users and, cyclists (where cycling facilities exist).

The highway environment has evolved over many years and it is only relatively recently that greater consideration has been given to the additional needs of mobility impaired people. The ageing population of Poole together with the increasing popularity of mobility scooters has recently drawn particular attention to the need to provide specific road crossing points where level access to the highway may be achieved from the footway.

Design specification

  • Ideally the dropped kerb should be flush with carriageway.
  • Tactile paving of a contrasting colour (not red as this is used at controlled crossings) to be incorporated consisting of concrete or plastic slabs with raised ‘blisters’ provide a warning to visually impaired people who would otherwise find it difficult to differentiate between where the footway ends and the carriageway begins.
  • Minimum width 1.2m.
  • Maximum gradient of the dropped kerb approach to be 1/12 with the flared sides having a maximum gradient of 1/11.
  • If the width of the footway is sufficient there should be a level area (900mm minimum width) along the rear of the dropped crossing to allow the passage of other footway users (including wheelchair and mobility scooter users) who are not crossing the road.
  • Crossing points to be directly in line with each other and the length of dropped kerb and tactile paving to be equal on both sides.

Prioritisation

There is a high demand for dropped crossing facilities. Limited capital budgets have made it necessary to prioritise the provision of new dropped crossing points. Each request is considered and priority is given to those sites with the highest level of pedestrian flow and where most people would benefit from the provision of these facilities. Crossings are usually considered in pairs.

The following criteria are scored and highest priority given to the sites with the most number of points in total. The highest number of points is allocated to column A with reducing numbers of points across the table from right to left.

CRITERIA / ASSESSMENT LEVELS
A / B / C / D / E
Pedestrian usage expected / HIGH / MEDIUM / LOW
Proximity to shops / <100m / 100-500m / >500m
Proximity to medical facilities (<500m) / HOSPITAL / CLINIC / SURGERY
Expected use by prams/buggies or disabled/ wheelchair users / Yes/ No?
Proximity to schools (<200m) / FIRST / MIDDLE / SENIOR
Proximity to bus stop (<100m) / Yes/ No?
Proximity to Old People's Home (<100m) / Yes/ No?
Who requested? / DISABLED ASSOCIATION / PEDESTRIAN ASSOCIATION / COUNCILLOR/ MP / RESIDENT / OFFICER
How busy is road to be crossed? / VERY / MEDIUM
Would a crossing here complete a missing link? / Yes/ No?

John McVey

06 April 2009

1