BOROUGH OF POOLE

BROADSTONE, MERLEY AND BEARWOOD AREA COMMITTEE

WEDNESDAY 31 OCTOBER 2007

REPORT OF HEAD OF TRANSPORTATION SERVICES

CORFE HILLS SCHOOL PEDESTRIAN FACILITY

1.Matter for Consideration

1.1Provision of a formal pedestrian crossing facility in Higher Blandford Road, outside Corfe Hills School.

2.Recommendation

2.1It is recommended that this Area Committee agree with the suggested improvements, as detailed in Paragraphs 4 of this Report.

3.Background

3.1The need for a pedestrian crossing facility outside Corfe Hills School features high on the Council’s priority assessment list for crossing facilities. During school terms there are larger numbers of schoolchildren crossing Higher Blandford Road, in the vicinity of the school. Quite apart from that, pedestrians cross the road whilst walking between footpaths FP4 and FP5.

3.2Of the two possible options for formal crossing facilities, i.e. a zebra crossing or a pelican, it is considered that a zebra crossing is more appropriate in this instance. Reasons for this are as follows,

3.2.1The cost of a zebra crossing has been estimated at £27,500, whereas a pelican would be in the region of £45,000. The main effect of this cost differential would be to move the priority of providing a pelican crossing further down the priority pedestrian crossing list, such that other sites in the Borough would have a greater priority.

3.2.2In addition, the long term maintenance cost of a pelican facility is much higher than a zebra. Over an estimated 15 year life of a pelican facility it is expected that maintenance costs of £4,400 more than for a zebra crossing could be expected.

3.2.3A pelican crossing in this location could be subject to vandalism to a greater degree.

3.2.4A pelican has more benefit in allowing more time for pedestrians to cross. This would be of assistance for the elderly and infirm. However, in this instance, the majority of pedestrians will be fit and able bodied.

  1. Proposals
  2. On the basis of the points listed at Paragraph 3.2 a zebra crossing facility is proposed, as detailed on Drawing No. JC0709/02 at Appendix A.
  3. In addition, it will be necessary to construct some new lengths of footpath where, currently, none exist at present.
  4. The crossing, and footpath works, are estimated to cost £27,500 for which there is sufficient provision in the Capital Programme.
  5. Consultation has taken place with the school and they are very supportive of the proposal for a formal pedestrian crossing at this location. However, the school Governors have stated that they would prefer to see a signalised crossing rather than a zebra crossing. It has been stated at Para. 3.2.1 that a signalised crossing would be far more expensive and, if considered, would alter the priority of this crossing such that other requests would be a higher priority.
  6. The school Governors had indicated that they may be willing to make a financial contribution to the scheme to enable provision of a signalised crossing. On that basis the school have been contacted to ask whether they would be willing to pay the difference in cost between the two facilities, i.e. £21,900. A response to this is awaited and, if received, will be reported verbally at the meeting.

Julian McLaughlin

Head of Transportation Services

Appendix A- Drawing No. JC0709/02

Name and Telephone Number of Officer Contact:

Graham Spicer (01202) 262072

BMB311007T3B

1