QRUrl

LEICESTERSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL HIGHWAY FORUM FOR MELTON

TUESDAY, 12 JULY 2016 AT 4.30 PM

TO BE HELD AT COUNCIL CHAMBER 2 - PARKSIDE, MELTON BOROUGH COUNCIL OFFICES

AGENDA

Item Pages

1. Chairman's welcome

2. Apologies for absence

3. Any other items which the Chairman has decided to take as urgent elsewhere on the agenda

4. Declarations of interest in respect of items on the Agenda

5. Minutes of the previous meeting (Pages 3 - 8)

6. Chairman's update

(a) Network Rail update (Pages 9 - 10)

(b) T5 Street Lighting Transformation Project 2016/17 (Pages 11 - 12)

7. Presentation of Petitions under Standing Order 36

8. Progress with the development of a Melton Mowbray (Pages 13 - 24) Transport Strategy (Cabinet report)

9. Part-Night Street Lighting Review (Pages 25 - 38)

10. A-Roads to Zebras - A Comprehensive Maintenance (Pages 39 - 44) Review

11. 2016/17 maintenance and improvements programmes - (Pages 45 - 76) information item

Officer to Contact: Sue Dann, Democratic Support ◦ Department of Environment and Transport ◦ Leicestershire County Council ◦ County Hall Glenfield ◦ Leicestershire ◦ LE3 8RJ ◦ Tel: 0116 305 7122 ◦ Email: [email protected]

www.twitter.com/leicsdemocracy www.facebook.com/leicsdemocracy www.leics.gov.uk/local_democracy

12. Programme of traffic management work - current position - (Pages 77 - 82) information item

13. On-going action statement - nothing to report

14. Items for consideration for future discussion

Will Members please submit these in writing to the officers prior to the meeting

15. Any other items the Chairman has decided is urgent

16. Date of the next meeting - Tuesday 11th October 2016 at 4.30pm - Council Chamber, Melton Borough Council offices

17. Chairman's closing remarks

3 Agenda Item 5 MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE LEICESTERSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL HIGHWAYS FORUM FOR MELTON HELD AT THE MELTON BOROUGH COUNCIL OFFICES ON WEDNESDAY 15 JULY 2015 AT 4.30PM

PRESENT

County Councillors Borough Councillors Cllr P Posnett (Chairman) Cllr P M Chandler Cllr J T Orson Cllr A Pearson Cllr J Wyatt Cllr S Lumley

The following also attended the meeting:

County officers present: P Crossland, B Holt, P Bradshaw

Borough officer present: C Marshall

112. CHAIRMAN’S WELCOME

The Chairman welcomed Members and officers to the meeting. She explained that Dave Bradbury had retired from the County Council in May, and that his role would in future be undertaken by either Peter Bradshaw or Sue Dann from County Hall. To assist Peter she asked each Member and officer present to introduce themselves.

113. APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE

Apologies for absence were received from Cllr B Rhodes CC and Cllr E Holmes BC.

114. URGENT ITEMS

Traffic Calming – Thorpe Arnold

Cllr P Posnett CC informed the Forum that she had been contacted by a local resident, Ms Minu Khuti, regarding speeding motorists, the narrowness of the footway and the lack of a bus stop on the A607. Ms Khuti, who lives on the bend opposite Lag Lane on the A607 as you travel out of Melton, requested that the matters be brought to the attention of the Forum.

Mr Crossland informed the Forum that Ms Khuti has been in contact with officers about these matters for a number of years. He explained that the speed limit at the location is currently 40 mph, and that it is signed appropriately and does not have a bad accident record. Therefore, it does not meet the County Council’s requirements for traffic calming measures. It is accepted however that the footway is narrow as there is a steeply graded earth bank next to it which needs to be dug back. Due to current financial constraints the provision of an additional bus stop along the route cannot be supported.

Mr Crossland proposed that he arrange for one of his officers to meet with Ms Khuti on site to explain the situation and answer any further questions that she may have. Cllr Posnett informed Mr Crossland that she would inform Ms Khuti accordingly.

RECOMMENDATION

The Director of Environment and Transport arranges for an officer to meet Ms Khuti on site to discuss her concerns regarding traffic speeds and other related matters.

4

115. DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST

There were no declarations of interest.

116. MINUTES OF THE PREVIOUS MEETING

The minutes of the previous meeting held on Tuesday 24th February 2015 were confirmed and signed as a true record of the meeting.

In response to a question from Cllr J Wyatt BC regarding the minute for Item ‘101. c) -Pelican Crossings,’ Mr Crossland explained the difference between a Pelican and a Puffin crossing.

Cllr P W Chandler BC thanked Mr Crossland for organizing the meeting with Highways England (formerly the Highways Agency), to discuss concerns about signage and other issues on the A52. However, she was disappointed that Highways England was not going to do anything about the vegetation at the side of the carriageway, particularly as he understood that there had recently been a ‘near miss’ accident near to the Bottesford junction. She expressed her concern that the foliage would not be cut back, even though she felt that they were affecting people’s safety – particularly people who have to cross the road to get to the bus stop. She acknowledged that the proposed Sustrans bridge may improve the situation for some residents, but expressed her concern that it would not help residents who have to cross the road to get the bus to Botttesford. She informed the Forum that Bottesford Parish Council is also concerned about speeding motorists and had contacted the Road Safety Partnership to request that speed cameras be installed on the A52.

Mr Crossland explained that as the A52 is the responsibility of Highways England, there was very little that the County Council could do. He accepted Highways England’s view that the road is not a very busy road. Nevertheless, as he travels along the A52 on his way to / from work, he will stop on the road to assess the situation.

117. CHAIRMAN’S UPDATE – POLICE RESPONSE ON HGV ENFORCEMENT DUTIES

Cllr Posnett reminded Members that at the last meeting Cllr J T Orson CC had asked whether the police would be prepared to put more resources into HGV weight restriction enforcement, if the County Council could find funding for a new Service Level Agreement.

Mr Crossland reported that the police had informed the County Council that it would not wish to pursue a Service Level Agreement at this juncture. He explained that the main issue for the Police is its lack of resources. He suggested that if Members wished to pursue the matter further they should contact their MP to request that the matter be de-criminalized and the power of enforcement transferred back to local authorities – either at County or District level.

Cllr Orson informed the meeting that he would raise the matter with Mr A Duncan MP.

RECOMMENDATION

That the update of the Director of Environment and Transport be noted.

118. PRESENTATION OF PETITIONS UNDER STANDING ORDER 36

There were no current outstanding petitions. 5

119. MEDIUM TERM FINANCIAL STRATEGY (MTFS) – IMPLICATIONS FOR HIGHWAYS AND TRANSPORTATION SERVICES

The Forum considered a report by the Director of Environment and Transport on the County Council’s Medium Term Financial Strategy and the implications for Highways and Transportation Services. The report was introduced by Mr Crossland with a copy filed with the minutes.

Mr Crossland updated Members on the situation following the adoption of the MTFS in February 2015. This mirrored the report that he had submitted to the Forum last year. He stressed that the Department’s strategy for the next four years will be to ensure that it continues to make the best use of the existing road network and maintenance will be prioritised over improvements. The report outlines how savings will be made. Where appropriate, the Department will also work closely with other parties to generate additional income for the benefit of the public services.

Mr Crossland explained that the community concerns that have been brought to the Forum in the past will no longer be able to be agreed unless it can be demonstrated clearly that they will have a wider economic development or housing benefit.

Mr Crossland informed the Forum that he will be taking a report to the County Council’s Cabinet in October on the lessons learnt from the grass cutting operations this season.

Cllr Wyatt raised his concerns about the standard of grass cutting on Edendale Road, near to the B&Q store. He reported that the grass had only received its second cut the week before the meeting, and that it had not been cut to a very high standard. Mr Crossland apologized for this and informed Members that he would arrange for the matter to be investigated. Nevertheless, he asked Members not to blame the operatives as they had carried out the work as instructed and that quality issues were due to the system and reduced frequency which were not the operatives fault. He assured Members that the lessons learnt from this year’s grass cutting cycle will be fed into the Cabinet report, and that any improvements identified are implemented next year. In the meantime he will ensure that details of the next scheduled cuts are sent to all Members of the Forum.

Cllr Orson commented that he did not consider that it is fair that the County Council has a statutory duty to offer advice free of charge to the District Councils on planning enquiries. He therefore asked if there was any way in which the Government could be lobbied to introduce a fairer system. Mr Crossland agreed to look into the matter. However, he explained that the Government seemed reluctant to increase planning fees for developers.

Cllr A Pearson CC raised his concerns about parents parking outside St Francis Primary School, as they are aware that highway officers cannot do anything to stop them. However, he believed that this was a safeguarding issue for the County Council. He was particularly concerned as he was aware that a child had nearly been knocked over recently due to the parked vehicles.

Mr Crossland pointed out that the problem of parents parking outside schools is a national issue – which has been made worse by the increase in parental choice, as parents are no longer restricted to sending their children to the local school which is probably within walking distance of their home. Studies have shown however, that the safest part of a child’s journey to school is when they are outside the school. Although ‘zig zag’ lines can be made enforceable, in reality this is very difficult to carry out. He warned Members that by stopping parking outside schools it would lead to increased speeding and potentially make the situation far worse.

6

Cllr S Lumley BC asked how often roads are checked for potholes and damaged or fallen road signs, as he often notices signs that had fallen over when drives round the County.

Mr Crossland explained that this is determined by the category of road. The County Council, as the Highway Authority, has a statutory duty to carry out safety inspections in accordance with national standards. Whilst carrying out these inspections the Highway Inspectors will check the signs, but will give priority to more safety critical issues. He requested that details of fallen signs be reported to the County Council’s Customer Services Centre.

Cllr Lumley also asked whether the County Council had any schemes in place to take action against people parking on the pavement. Mr Crossland explained that unless there are double yellow lines at the location it is not an offence to park on the pavement. However, driving on the pavement is an offence. Unless the vehicle is causing an obstruction, the police will not normally take action against the vehicle owner as the police have to actually observe someone trying to get past a vehicle that is causing an obstruction.

RECOMMENDATIONS

i) That the report of the Director of Environment and Transport be noted; and ii) that a copy of next scheduled grass cutting cuts are sent to all Members of the Forum; and iii) that the Director of Environment and Transport Councils considers whether there is an appropriate way in which Members can lobby the Government for the introduction of a fairer system for dealing with pre-application enquiries received by the County Council, and reports back to the next meeting of the Forum

120. GRASS CUTTING UPDATE

The Forum considered a report by the Director of Environment and Transport updating Members on grass cutting. The report was introduced by Mr Holt with a copy filed with the minutes.

As Members agreed that grass cutting had been covered adequately during the discussion on the County Council’s Medium Term Financial Strategy, the report was not treated as a separate item.

RECOMMENDATION

That the report of the Director of Environment and Transport be noted.

121. POTHOLES

The Forum considered a report by the Director of Environment and Transport on potholes. The report was introduced by Mr Holt with a copy filed with the minutes.

Mr Holt took Members through the report which explains how a pothole forms and outlines the preventative measures that can be taken. He particularly referred Members to the graph on page 5 of the report as it shows the extent to which each category of road is in need of significant maintenance. He explained that since 2010 / 11 there had been a steady improvement in the condition of the County’s network.

Cllr Wyatt queried the variation in the number of precautionary treatments carried out in each of the years stated in paragraph 8. of the report. Mr Crossland explained that the variation was due to different treatments being used for different 7

weather conditions. Also, there had been a reduction in the number of precautionary treatments carried out each year as the network is now more resilient due to the County Council’s maintenance programme.

Cllr Wyatt enquired whether the County Council would be using ’flexible tarmac’ in the future. Mr Crossland explained that officers monitor market developments very closely. However, he stressed that it is essential that the claims that are often made by the Asphalt Industry are treated with caution, are challenged where appropriate, and that the whole-life cost of a product is considered adequately.

RECOMMENDATION

That the report of the Director of Environment and Transport be noted.

122. 2015 / 16 MAINTENANCE AND IMPROVEMENTS PROGRAMMES – INFORMATION ITEM

Cllr Wyatt asked for details of the duration of the deck waterproofing works on Edendale Road. Mr Crossland agreed to arrange for the information to be e-mailed to him.

RECOMMENDATION

i) That the report of the Director of Environment and Transport be noted; and ii) that officers e-mail details of the duration of deck waterproofing works on Edendale Road to Cllr Wyatt.

123. PROGRAMME OF TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT WORK – CURRENT POSITION

Members noted the report.

124. ON-GOING ACTION STATEMENT

There were no outstanding on-going actions.

125. ITEMS FOR CONSIDERATION FOR FURTHER DISCUSSION

The Chairman asked Members to submit any items for consideration for future agendas in writing within 10 days of the date of the meeting. Such items should be sent to Sue Dann by e-mail: [email protected]

126. ANY OTHER ITEMS THE CHAIRMAN DECIDED WERE URGENT

There were no urgent items.

127. DATE OF NEXT MEETING

The Chairman confirmed that the date and time of the next meeting will be Tuesday 20th October 2015 at 4.30 p.m.

128. CHAIRMAN’S CLOSING REMARKS

The Chairman thanked Members and officers for their attendance.

15th JULY 2015 Chairman

4.30 – 5.25pm Date This page is intentionally left blank 9 Agenda Item 6a

LEICESTERSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL HIGHWAYS FORUM FOR MELTON

12TH JULY 2016

CHAIRMAN’S UPDATE

REPORT OF THE DIRECTOR OF ENVIRONMENT AND TRANSPORT

Network Rail

Purpose

1. To provide an update on recent developments regarding the proposed enhancement works programme for the Midland Mainline through Leicestershire.

Background

2. In June 2015, the Secretary of State for Transport announced that plans to electrify the Midland Main Line would be ‘paused’ whilst the Network Rail programme of enhancements was reviewed.

3. In July 2015 Sir Peter Hendy was appointed chair of Network Rail, with his first task to review plans for the five years between 2014-2019 (known as Control Period 5, or CP5).

4. On 29 September 2015, Sir Peter Hendy reported his initial findings to the Secretary of State for Transport, and on 30 September 2015, the Secretary of State for Transport confirmed that both the TransPennine and Midland Mainline electrification schemes could be un-paused with immediate effect and progressed with some urgency1.

5. Subsequently, Sir Peter Hendy’s detailed findings and recommendations were published in a report (abbreviated to, and known as, the Hendy Review2.) in November 2015. As well as the Midland Mainline Electrification, the report confirms that other improvements will be undertaken that will enable faster longer distance journeys between Leicester, Nottingham, Derby, Sheffield and London. An additional long distance train per hour running between London and Kettering, along with additional track between Bedford and Kettering will allow additional express services to and from stations north of Kettering. In addition, more seats on trains will help to address capacity and meet growing demand.

1 Rail electrification of TransPennine and Midland Mainline routes correspondence: www.gov.uk/government/publications/rail-electrification-of-transpennine-and-midland-mainline-routes

2 Report from Sir Peter Hendy to the Secretary of State for Transport on the replanning of Network Rail's Investment Programme: www.networkrail.co.uk/Hendy-review/

10

Current situation

6. Where previously the Midland Mainline Electrification programme was to be completed by 2019, the programme is now expected to extend to 2024. Network Rail has yet to release a detailed programme of works through Leicestershire, but current liaison with Network Rail suggests that they are focused on developing their programme.

What does this mean for Melton

7. Though the Midland Mainline itself does not pass through the Borough of Melton, works on highway bridges over the Midland Mainline may affect transport routes to and from the Borough. The impact of this will become clearer once Network Rail make their programme available.

Next Steps

8. Leicestershire County Council officers will work closely with Network Rail, to ensure that these roadworks and road closures required as part of the Midland Mainline Electrification do not clash with other works on the highway network - or each other – and help to plan appropriate diversion routes to minimise disruption. Furthermore, Leicestershire County Council, in its capacity as Local Highway Authority, will check proposed designs to ensure the highway network is restored as close to its original layout as feasible, and to seek enhancements where appropriate and possible.

Officer to Contact Bernard Evans, Infrastructure Planning, Environment and Transport.

Tel: 0116 305 0001 Email: [email protected]

11 Agenda Item 6b

LEICESTERSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL HIGHWAYS FORUM FOR MELTON

12TH JULY 2016

CHAIRMAN’S UPDATE

REPORT OF THE DIRECTOR OF ENVIRONMENT AND TRANSPORT

T5 Street Lighting Transformation Project 2016/17

1. Leicestershire Highways is upgrading the County Councils street lighting stock to LEDs, in order to make substantial savings in energy, carbon and maintenance costs. Leicestershire County Council will be carrying out over 68,000 street light replacements across the county and are programmed to complete all installations within the next 3 years. Initially we are concentrating on the low level street lights (5 & 6m columns) which are mainly in residential areas with the high level installations (6m & above) due to commence from October this year.

2. The first low level installations were successfully carried out in Shepshed, as programmed in March this year, before a full roll-out of four installation teams started work in Loughborough, Hugglescote and Whitwick throughout April and into May. The project is progressing well and is on programme both in time and budget.

3. Details of the full construction programme for the project are being prepared in a suitable format to share with Members and residents and we anticipate this information will be available by the end of June.

4. The table below provides the implementation programme to the end of the current financial year.

2016 May Whitwick, Loughborough, Coalville June Coalville cont., Oadby & Wigston July Ravenstone, Packington, Coleorton, Ellistown, Swannington, Ibstock, Anstey, Rothley August Thurmaston, Syston, Wanlip, Birstall, Queniborough, Rearsby, East Goscote, Cossington, Seagrave September Sileby, Mountsorrel, Barrow on Soar, Quorn, Ratby, Groby October Groby, Glenfield, Markfield, Charley, Newtown Linford, Thurcaston & Cropston, Woodhouse, Loughborough November Loughborough, Newbold Verdon, Stanton under Bardon, Bagworth & Thornton, Desford, Kirby Muxloe, LFE, Chilcote, Appleby Magna, Heather, Swepstone, Snarestone, Normanton, Breedon on the Hill, Worthington, Osgathorpe, Belton & 12

Staunton Harold December Thurlaston, Peckleton, Ashby de la Zouch, Hinckley 2017 January Hinckley cont., Oakthorpe & Donisthorpe, Barlestone, Osbastone, Cadeby February Market Bosworth, Measham, Ashby Woulds, Burbage, Earl Shilton March Barwell, Witherley, Sheepy, Stoke Golding, Higham on the Hill, Sapcote, Stoney Stanton, Aston Flamville, Elmesthorpe, Croft, Broughton Astley

5. For note, when the lights are first installed they will burn all night at 100% brightness until they pick up their dimming programme, usually within a couple days. The lights then dim to 70% brightness and any part-night lights will switch off at midnight until 05:30 (GMT) as they currently do.

Officer to Contact Matthew Reedman, Tel: 0116 305 0001 Highway Service Delivery Email: [email protected]

13 Agenda Item 48

CABINET – 9 MAY 2016

PROGRESS WITH THE DEVELOPMENT OF A MELTON MOWBRAY TRANSPORT STRATEGY

REPORT OF THE DIRECTOR OF ENVIRONMENT AND TRANSPORT

PART A Purpose of the Report

1. In September 2015 the Cabinet considered a report setting out proposals for the development and eventual delivery of a Melton Mowbray Transport Strategy, including plans for an outer relief road for the town. The purpose of this report is to advise the Cabinet of further transport study work that has since been undertaken and seek agreement to the way forward, including prioritising the development of a preferred route for the eastern part of an Outer Relief Road (ORR) and establishing a Transport Strategy Fund for the MMTS.

Recommendation

2. It is recommended that:

(a) The development of the Melton Mowbray Transport Strategy (MMTS) is continued as outlined in the report, including the prioritisation of a preferred route and business case for the development of the eastern section of an Outer Relief Road (ORR);

(b) An MMTS Transport Strategy Fund be established for the purpose of supporting the MMTS including funding already allocated and developer contributions arising from planning permissions granted by MBC;

(c) The Director of Environment and Transport be authorised to undertake the necessary consultations and negotiations as required to enable the definition of a preferred route for the ORR, which will be subject to further consideration by the Cabinet once the necessary study work has been completed;

(d) All appropriate opportunities to secure funding should be explored such as submitting a bid via the Leicester and Leicestershire Enterprise Partnership to the Department for Transport for the Large Local Major Scheme Fund;

(e) Where the MMTS identifies minor works that could provide immediate benefit for the town these will be supported by the Transport Strategy Fund provided that this would not be detrimental to achieving funding for an ORR;

(f) Further reports are made to the Cabinet on the MMTS including the development of the eastern ORR business case.

14

Reason for Recommendations

3. The reason for this work is to enable the ongoing delivery of growth in Melton Mowbray, supported by an effective transport strategy, in line with the requirements and timetable of the new Melton Local Plan which includes provision for the delivery of the north and south sections of the ORR, funded by developers.

4. Developing a Melton Mowbray Transport Strategy will best ensure the necessary coordination of potential future transport investments in the town. It will also provide a robust basis to secure funding from public and private sources.

5. An MMTS Transport Strategy Fund would allow the money secured from public sources to be added to developer contributions to ensure best use of both, as guided by the Melton Mowbray Transport Strategy.

Timetable for Decisions (including Scrutiny)

6. Melton Borough Council (MBC) will consider a report at its next full council meeting in June 2016.

7. Continued work to develop a Strategy as soon as possible will assist MBC in its consideration of planning applications for developments in the town and in the preparation of its new Local Plan, minimising the risk of ‘unplanned’ development.

8. Subject to the Council’s approval, preliminary discussions with funders will commence immediately and an initial Large Local Major Schemes fund bid will be submitted in July 2016.

9. Having published the Preferred Options for the Local Plan for consultation in January 2016, MBC is currently working to a timetable which now includes the final “Publication Plan” being published for consultation in November 2016, with the aim of having the plan adopted by the end of 2017. The MMTS and supporting evidence will inform this process.

Policy Framework and Previous Decisions

10. Supporting the economy of Market Towns and rural Leicestershire is a priority of the Leicester and Leicestershire Enterprise Partnership’s (LLEP) Strategic Economic Plan, which was approved by the Cabinet on 5th March 2014.

11. The Enabling Growth Action Plan, approved by the Cabinet on 16th March 2015, identifies supporting the development of employment land in Market Towns as a priority activity for the County Council. It includes a specific action to work with MBC to plan for the future growth of Melton Mowbray.

12. The third Leicestershire Local Transport Plan (LTP3), approved by the County Council in March 2011, contains six strategic transport goals. Goal 1 is to have a transport system that supports a prosperous economy and provides successfully for population growth.

13. The Environment and Transport Interim Commissioning Strategy, approved by the Cabinet on 19th April 2016, contains an action to take forward work to identify and

15

cost a preferred scheme to address Melton Mowbray’s transport problems.

Resource Implications

14. The development of a MMTS was initially estimated to cost in the region of £1.5m. The Cabinet agreed on 11th September 2015 that up to £0.5m would be funded by the County Council; subject to match funding being available. MBC has allocated £0.4m. The LLEP has been approached to support this project and a bid is included within its current pipeline of projects for Local Growth Fund 3. By pooling the funds already allocated together with the developer contributions an MMTS Transport Strategy Fund can be designated.

15. Melton Borough Council approved a planning application for up to 520 houses off Leicester Road on the 21st April 2016 and this development includes a contribution of up to £4.5m towards strategic transport infrastructure, the availability of which is dependent on the progress of the development. The MMTS will ensure the best use of this funding.

16. This means that the MMTS, including development of the eastern ORR business case, can begin immediately using the available funds.

17. In the 2016 budget, the Chancellor announced a Large Local Major Schemes Fund. Funding bids to this must to be submitted through the LLEP. Schemes must be valued in excess of £52m. Initial bids need to be submitted by July 2016. This fund could be a source of both detailed design and construction funding for the ORR.

18. The development and full completion of an ORR would be subject to the availability of necessary funding and would likely take the lifetime of Melton’s new Local Plan to deliver (i.e. to 2036) although every effort will be made to bring this forward if possible.

19. The Director of Corporate Resources and the Director of Law and Governance have been consulted on the content of this report.

Circulation under the Local Issues Alert Procedure

A copy of this report has been sent to the following members - Mr. J. T. Orson JP CC, Mr. J. B. Rhodes CC, Mrs. P. Posnett CC, and Mr. A. E. Pearson CC

Officer to Contact

Phil Crossland - Director Environment and Transport Tel: (0116) 305 7000 Email: [email protected]

16

PART B

Background

20. Melton Borough Council’s draft Local Plan suggests a potential level of growth that will significantly increase development levels in the town beyond that which has been delivered in recent years.

21. Despite previous investments in highway improvements, there continue to be some significant traffic problems in the town which are already acting as a constraint on the town’s growth.

22. A number of separate, but inter-linked, studies have been undertaken by transport consultants Jacobs, on behalf of the County Council, using the Leicester and Leicestershire Integrated Transport Model (LLITM). The latest report, completed in April 2016, considered in principle the routing for options to the East and West of the town, and the findings of this are summarised below.

23. In summary, the studies confirm the extent to which the town is affected by existing traffic volumes and at peak times a number of main routes into the town are shown to have delays in excess of 3 minutes per mile, an indicator of severe congestion.

24. The studies also highlight that the main problems appear to be centred on a relatively small number of junctions in and around the town centre (shown in the plan attached as Appendix A to this report). These junctions are at crucial points on the network where the main routes into the town converge and where there are limited alternative routes for traffic.

25. It is considered that a Transport Strategy is therefore needed to support the strategic growth of the town and to fulfil the dual aim of facilitating the introduction of an ORR, but also helping the town to temper some of those interim negative impacts through the introduction of more modest transportation measures.

26. As indicated in the previous report to the Cabinet (15th September 2015) the ‘do nothing’ option is not considered tenable. The town makes an important contribution to the economy of Leicester and Leicestershire and it is an important service centre for those who live in its rural hinterland.

27. The Cabinet agreed that the County Council would work with MBC to develop a Transport Strategy, which would focus initially on identifying a preferred corridor for an ORR. It agreed also that new developments in the vicinity could be supported in the interest of obtaining developer contributions, accepting that these might cause a temporary deterioration in traffic conditions until such time as the scheme was completed.

28. Developer contributions will be provided through section 106 planning agreements linked to planning permissions granted by Melton BC. Accordingly Melton BC will need to be satisfied that the Highway requirements recommended (including financial contributions towards the funding of the ORR) comply with Regulations governing what contributions can be required and the number of them that can be pooled and used for the ORR.

17

Progress

29. As shown at Appendix B, ORR links to the north and south of the town will be an integral part of any proposed development as set out in the Melton Borough Council’s Local Plan and as such these ORR sections have a high likelihood of proceeding without depending on either council or bid funds. Further development of these will be subject to discussions and negotiations between developers and the Local Planning Authority (MBC) with support from the County Council as the Highway Authority as part of the MMTS.

30. Since September 2015, further work has been done by County and Borough Council officers supported by Jacobs consultants which considered broad routing options and a link to the east and the west of the town. Jacobs were engaged to provide expert input to the appraisal process and a full report was prepared in April 2016, the results of which are summarised in paragraphs 30 - 37 below. The draft report is available at www.leicestershire.gov.uk/roads-and-travel/road- maintenance/transport-studies Whilst its content maybe subject to ongoing presentational refinement, it is not anticipated that key findings will alter as a result. Any variance from this will be reported to the Cabinet.

The Options

31. Jacobs prepared a comparison of ORR options to the east and west of the town, which involved an assessment of relative strengths and weaknesses of each option through transport modelling and a government approved Early Assessment and Sifting Tool. (E.A.S.T)

32. It was concluded that both options to the east and west had similar benefits. The western option directly serves employment sites but must cross a river and a railway line. The eastern section, albeit with a lower contribution to economic development, by virtue of being shorter, provides greater transport benefits at lower costs.

33. A summary of the modelling outputs is given below. These represent indicative amounts used for testing options and are not as yet definitive estimates.

West East Construction Cost £107. m £83.m Cost to Traffic Benefits Ratio 0.6 – 1.0 1.1 – 1.9 Annual Economic Benefit * £109m £102m *Economic benefit defined as Gross Value Added. Normally considered over 10 years

34. Transport models can only estimate based on statistics and algorithms. Local knowledge and discussions with local businesses regarding their expansion requirements, suggests that existing businesses in the west of Melton would still gain significant economic benefit from the east option.

35. More detailed research with businesses will be needed to establish exact employer requirements. Early indications are that the east option enables changes in access patterns to the central area that could help expansion and relocation plans and facilitate a balanced supply of employment sites including valuable ‘incubator’ units.

18

36. The eastern ORR has a higher cost benefit ratio. This is not the only factor influencing the chance of bid success but it is one of the first things that scheme funders look for. It is highly unlikely that a scheme with a cost benefit ratio below 1 will be successful in securing funding bids under current Department for Transport guidance. Given this, and considering the overall costs and benefits, it is sensible to make the eastern option the priority to take forward for seeking funding.

37. By focussing MMTS resources on a single corridor to the east, best use of resources can be made. A corridor study can identify the broad route, and this will enable the creation of an outline business case suitable for funding applications.

38. Whilst it is not proposed to pursue the western route at present it is possible that this might be reviewed in the future if, for example, the funding situation changes. The modelling work could then be used to support a business case.

39. The options for allocating resources to highway design will need to balance the requirements for:

i. A route sufficiently developed to engage with funding agencies

ii. Preliminary surveys to help a scheme become ‘shovel ready’

iii. Avoiding blight whilst providing reassurance on progress.

40. This will be kept under review in order to take maximum opportunity of every relevant potential funding opportunity as these might arise at short notice. This may require the Director of Environment and Transport to enter into discussions with interested parties and stakeholders.

41. Further study work and detailed modelling needs to be carried out to help support strategic growth across the County and Melton Mowbray is included in this work. The MMTS will continue to use the LLITM transport model and detailed junction analysis to identify future and current problem areas and alongside specialist input, to support town centre management and study how the demands of housing, jobs and growth can be accommodated.

42. For the avoidance of doubt, this report does not determine the line of the ORR or the eastern link. The definition of a preferred route will be subject to, amongst other things, further study work; public consultations and (as required) negotiations with property and land owners; and further consideration by the Cabinet.

Consultation

43. Levels of traffic congestion in the town and the potential traffic impacts of further development have been a long standing issue of concern to local residents.

44. There has previously been a residents’ Action Group that opposed development to the north of the town, including in respect of potential traffic impacts. These concerns were particularly expressed during the development of the proposed Melton Core Strategy, which was not progressed to adoption following a public inquiry in 2013.

45. As part of the development of the Melton Mowbray Transport Strategy, public consultation will be undertaken at the appropriate time, including on the Eastern

19

ORR. It will also be necessary for officers to engage with relevant local landowners.

Equality and Human Rights Implications

46. Proposals are aimed at tackling congestion both now and in the future and helping to provide more reliable journey times. In turn, this will facilitate strategic growth that should help to meet the social and economic needs of Melton Mowbray’s current and future residents. No detailed assessment has been done at this early stage but if an ORR scheme were to be taken forward an Equality and Human Rights Impact Assessment will be completed at an appropriate point.

Background Papers

Cabinet - 11 September 2015 Development of a Melton Mowbray Transport Strategy http://politics.leics.gov.uk/ieListDocuments.aspx?CId=135&MId=4230&Ver=4

Cabinet – 5 March 2014 Strategic Economic Plan http://politics.leics.gov.uk/ieListDocuments.aspx?CId=135&MId=3988&Ver=4

Cabinet – 16 March 2015 Enabling Growth Plan http://politics.leics.gov.uk/ieListDocuments.aspx?CId=135&MId=4360&Ver=4

Cabinet – 8 March 2011 Third Local Transport Plan (LPT3) (2011-2026) http://politics.leics.gov.uk/ieListDocuments.aspx?CId=135&MId=3122&Ver=4

Cabinet – 16 March 2015 Local Transport Plan Draft Implementation Plan 2015-16 http://politics.leics.gov.uk/ieListDocuments.aspx?CId=135&MId=4360&Ver=4

Appendices

Appendix A - Key town centre junctions in Melton Mowbray Appendix B - Diagrammatic representation of outer relief road links

20

This page is intentionally left blank 21

APPENDIX A: Key Town Centre Junctions

Transport studies in the town have identified critical junctions that have the most significant impact on congestion. The new Outer Relief Road will help ease this congestion.

© Crown copyright and database rights 2016 Ordnance Survey LA100019271. Use of this data is subject to terms and conditions.

22

This page is intentionally left blank 23

APPENDIX B: Diagrammatic Representation of Outer Relief Road Links Transport Studies assumed that the developments as proposed in the Melton Local Plan emerging options consultation would be suitable places to accommodate a north and south section of an Outer Relief Road. The location of these routes is indicative and not fixed but will be determined through negotiation with MBC and developers and through development of the Eastern route proposals.

© Crown copyright and database rights 2016 Ordnance Survey LA100019271. Use of this data is subject to terms and conditions.

24

The previous Cabinet report included the map below showing the links to the north and south. The consultants Jacobs were asked to look at options to provide links to the east and west, although no exact specification of routes has been given at this stage.

© Crown copyright and database rights 2016 Ordnance Survey LA100019271. Use of this data is subject to terms and conditions.

25 Agenda Item 9

LEICESTERSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL HIGHWAYS FORUM FOR MELTON

12TH JULY 2016

PART-NIGHT STREET LIGHTING REVIEW

REPORT OF THE DIRECTOR OF ENVIRONMENT AND TRANSPORT

Background

1. In 2009, when the Part-night Lighting project was conceived, a commitment was made to a review taking place a year after implementation of every scheme, to look into its effect on crime and road traffic collisions. This review would involve the emergency services, Leicestershire County Council’s Accident Investigation Unit and the relevant parish council.

2. Throughout the project, County officers have maintained a close working relationship with the police reacting to any concerns from police officers accordingly, regardless of these reviews.

3. An update was requested in the last round of Highway Forums on the results of these part-night lighting reviews.

Purpose

4. With the roll-out of part-night lighting having started in 2010 and being completed in autumn 2014, all of the part-night lighting reviews have now been conducted. It is the purpose of this report to summarise the responses Leicestershire County Council have received through these reviews.

Results

5. The Emergency Services have not raised any issues through the reviews. This in part is down to the close working relationship the County Council have had with the police in that any issues with the part-night lighting are quickly picked up and responded to rather than waiting for the reviews to take place.

6. With regard to crimes, when a complaint is received, officers look at the locations and times of the offences and how this relates to the part-night lighting. In the majority of cases, the offenders show no preference for the part-lit areas, with more crimes happening in the lit areas. In the rare instances where the part-night lighting may have been a contributing factor, lights have been returned to all night lighting and officers continue to monitor the site along with the police.

7. The Accident Investigation unit similarly has not raised any issues with the part-night lighting and across the county and there has been no evidence of a detrimental effect on road traffic collisions.

26

8. The Parish Council reviews have received a more mixed response with some councils reporting a rise in crime whilst others have no issues to raise. The evidence seems to point to much of the public’s concerns being based on the fear of crime rather than actual crime.

9. In addition to the annual reviews, the County Council’s Research & Insight Team were asked to produce a report looking in to the effects of part-night lighting on crime. The results of this are attached at Appendix A, a summary of which is below.

Table 1: Number and percentage of crimes before and after part-night lighting of an area shows that crime decrease in all areas but more in areas that were part-lit

Crimes before Crimes after Variance (2 years) (2 years) 3,233 3,073 160 No lighting change 51.3% 48.7% 2.6% 14,707 12,770 1937 Part-lit 53.5% 46.5% 7% 17,940 15,843 2097 All areas (total) 53.1% 46.9% 6.2%

Conclusion

10. The evidence collated to-date shows that part-night lighting has no detrimental effect on crime or road traffic collisions. In fact for 97% of the County’s population, crime decreased more in part-lit areas than it did in areas where there was no change to street lighting.

11. The only exception to this is found to be for “Constrained City Dwellers” who experienced an increase in crime through the introduction of part night lighting. Overall, this group accounts for 2.4% (15,898 people) of the Leicestershire population. As a result of these findings, further study work is proposed on the feasibility of converting some lights back to all night operation and using the dimming capability of the LEDs and the Central Management System, in the areas most affected.

Recommendation

12. It is recommended that Members note the content of this report.

Officer to Contact

Tony Bull Tel: (0116) 305 0001 Email: [email protected]

Background Information

None. 27 APPENDIX A

What is the effect of reduced street lighting on crime in Leicestershire?

Aim To determine whether the implementation of a part-night lighting scheme within Leicestershire has had an impact upon crime levels in the county.

Objectives  To assess whether the change in crime levels in areas where the part-night lighting scheme has been introduced were significantly different (statistically) to the change in crime levels in areas where street lights remained on. The following differences were examined: o Crime levels overall o Crime levels by days of the week, times of the year and types of communities effected o Types of crime committed

Background Leicestershire County Council is responsible for maintaining approximately 67,000 street lights throughout Leicestershire. In April 2010, the county council started a four year programme to reduce street lighting with the aim of reducing carbon emissions, reducing light pollution and saving money. As part of this programme Leicestershire County Council began implementing part-night lighting of streets in some residential areas. In these areas, street lights are turned off at midnight until 5am. Part-night lighting has been introduced in stages to villages and towns at parish level across Leicestershire. The first area to have part-night lighting was Smeeton Westerby in Harborough district on 1st July 2010. The final area to be part-night lit was Markfield which commenced in August 2014. In total, 157 areas have been part-night lit. These are listed in Appendix A along with the date of implementation for each area. The final six areas to be part-night lit (Groby, Birstall, Wanlip, Loughborough, Glenfield and Markfield) were not included in the analysis as there was less than six months crime data available for comparison.

Produced by the Research and Insight Team Page 1 of 11

28 APPENDIX A

Methodology

Crime Data Where possible, four years’ worth of crime data was used to assess the impact of the implementation of the part-night lighting scheme; two years prior to the implementation and two years after

Only data for certain types of crime have been included in the analysis. These are crimes where research suggests that levels of light could have an impact on crime rates. These are: burglary dwelling, burglary other than dwelling, criminal damage, robbery, theft of cycle, theft from motor vehicles and theft of motor vehicles, violence against the person, theft and some sexual crimes. Crimes which have been excluded from the analysis include, for example, fraud, hate crimes and theft from shops.

Whilst the precise time of certain crimes is known, many crimes occur at a time which is unknown, for example, burglaries that happen when homeowners are away. Therefore, the period over which the event could have taken place could span several days or weeks. To analyse crimes that occurred only between midnight and 5am would exclude many crimes that could have occurred during this time frame. Therefore, crimes were only excluded where it was certain that they happened outside of the hours of midnight to 5am. Crimes with an offence start date and offence end date that spanned more than 30 days were also removed from the data set.

The county was divided into a grid of 100 meter squares and each individual crime was mapped to this level. For each grid square, the parish name, output area code and the implementation date of part-night lighting was identified. Each crime was examined to assess whether it had happened in the relevant period before or after the implementation date of the part-night lighting scheme in that area. Crimes that occurred outside of the date ranges of interest were excluded from the analysis.

Street Lamp Data A record of each of the 67,598 streetlamps in Leicestershire was provided by Leicestershire County Council’s Environment and Transport Department. The exact location of each street lamp was

Produced by the Research and Insight Team Page 2 of 11

29 APPENDIX A

provided, as well as whether the lamp was in a part-night lighting scheme. The street lamp data was mapped and assigned to the same 100m grid map as the crime data.

Combining data sets The crime data and street lamp data were combined at the 100m grid level. Crimes which occurred in grids with no street lamps were excluded from the analysis leaving 33,783 crimes for analysis.

Each of the crime incidents in the dataset were then labelled to indicate whether they occurred in an area affected by part-night lighting or not.

Other information included about each crime:  Season (Summer: April – September) / (Winter: October – March)  Day of the week  Midnight-5am indicator (crimes where there was certainty that they occurred during this time frame)

In addition, further information was also joined to the data set, specifically:  Urban Rural Classification for England – a classification or areas based on rurality  2011 Census Output Area Classification (OAC) – a classification of areas based on similar characteristics using Census data (see Appendix B for further information)  English Indices of Multiple Deprivation – a measure of deprivation (deciles for Leicestershire where 1 = most deprived)

Analysis and results After consulting with Lex Comber, professor of Spatial Data Analytics at the University of Leeds, on appropriate methodology, the chi-square statistical test was used to look for significant differences between crime levels over time for areas that were part-lit and those that were not.

The analysis only considered changes in crime figures in areas that were part-lit verses those that were not. It does not attempt to identify nor explain other possible reasons for any changes in crime levels.

Produced by the Research and Insight Team Page 3 of 11

30 APPENDIX A

Findings

Headline results The headline results are shown Table 1. It shows that overall, crime levels decreased over time across all areas (i.e. in both areas that were part-lit and those areas where there was no change to street lighting). It shows that, across all areas, 53.1% of the crimes examined in this study occurred in the periods before implementation and 46.9% after – i.e. a reduction in the number of crimes over time (a difference of 6.2 percentage points).

In areas where the part-night lighting programme had been implemented, 53.5% of the crimes occurred in the periods before implementation and 46.5% after (a difference of 7 percentage points). However, in comparison, in areas where there was no change in the level of street lighting, 51.3% of the crimes occurred in the periods before implementation and 48.7% after (a difference of just 2.6 percentage points).

Table 1: Number and percentage of crimes before and after part-night lighting of an area shows that crime decrease in all areas but more in areas that were part-lit

Crimes before Crimes after Total 3,233 3,073 6,306 No change 51.3% 48.7% 100% 14,707 12,770 27,477 Part-lit 53.5% 46.5% 100% 17,940 15,843 33,783 All areas (total) 53.1% 46.9% 100%

Therefore, although crime levels in general reduced over time, crime decreased significantly1 more in areas where the part-night lighting programme had been implemented.

1 Chi-square at the 5% level

Produced by the Research and Insight Team Page 4 of 11

31 APPENDIX A

Detailed results Additional analysis was undertaken to consider the levels of crime by more detailed criteria. The results show the type of impact that part-lighting had for each of the criteria. There were five types of impact observed. These are described below and summarised in Table 2.  “Positive” - where there was a greater reduction in the level of crime in part-lit areas, as compared to areas that were not part-lit  “Very positive” - where there was a reduction in the level of crime in part-lit areas but an increase in areas that were not part lit  “Negative” - where there was a lower reduction in crime in part-lit areas, as compared to areas that were not part-lit  “Very negative” – where there was an increase in crime in part-lit areas, compared to a decrease in areas that were not part lit  “None” - no significant impact on crime levels

Table 2: Types of impact observed

Impact of part-lighting Area Change in crime

Positive Part-lit Crime decreased more

No change to lighting Crime decreased less

Very Positive Part-lit Crime decreased

No change to lighting Crime increased

Negative Part-lit Crime decreased less

No change to lighting Crime decreased more

Very Negative Part-lit Crime increased

No change to lighting Crime decreased

None Part-lit None

Produced by the Research and Insight Team Page 5 of 11

32 APPENDIX A

No change to lighting None

Note: The use of the labels ‘very positive’ and ‘very negative’ refer to the direction of change in crime levels and indicates where the change was against the trend in the comparator area. It does not necessarily relate to the scale or magnitude of the change.

The results are shown in Table 3 below.

Table 3: Detailed analysis – impact of part-lighting - results summary.

Filtered by All valid crimes Criteria Subcategory Midnight-5am (33,783) (2,931)

All crimes All cases Positive None Urban Rural Urban areas Positive None Rural areas None None Crime Types (main groups) Burglary in a dwelling None None Burglary other than a dwelling None None Robbery Very positive Very positive Vehicle Crime None None Theft None None Criminal damage Positive None Violence against the person Positive None Census Output Area Rural Residents None None Classification - supergroups Cosmopolitans None None Multicultural Metropolitans None None Urbanites Positive None Suburbanites None None Constrained City Dwellers Negative Very negative Hard-pressed Living Very positive Very positive Season Summer (April- September) None Very positive Winter (October - March) Positive None English Indices of Multiple 1 None None Deprivation (deciles for 2 None None Leicestershire where 1 = 3 None None most deprived) 4 Very positive None 5 Very positive Very positive 6 None None 7 None None 8 None None 9 None None 10 None None Days of the week Monday None None (for crimes with a period of Tuesday None None less than 24 hours) Wednesday None None Thursday None None

Produced by the Research and Insight Team Page 6 of 11

33 APPENDIX A

Friday None None Saturday None None Sunday None Very positive

For most criteria, there was either no impact or a positive, or very positive, impact on crime levels in areas that were part-lit compared to areas of no change.

Positive Impact Results showed that for some criteria, part-night lighting had a positive or very positive impact on crime levels. This pattern was found for the following criteria:

 Census Output Area Classification o Hard pressed living – Very positive o Hard pressed living (Midnight-5am) – Very positive o Urbanites - Positive  Indices of Multiple Deprivation o Decile 4 – Very positive o Decile 5 – Very positive o Decile 5 (Midnight-5am) – Very positive  Crime type o Violence against the person – Positive o Criminal damage – Positive o Robbery – Very positive o Robbery (midnight-5am) – Very positive  Urban and Rural Classification o Urban areas – Positive  Season o Winter – Positive o Summer (Midnight-5am) – Very positive  Day of the week

Produced by the Research and Insight Team Page 7 of 11

34 APPENDIX A

o Sunday (Midnight-5am) – Very positive

As defined by the Census Output Area Classification mentioned in Table 3, 634,591 people or 97.6% of the population in Leicestershire live in areas where there was either no impact or a positive or very positive impact on the levels of crime after the implementation of part-night lighting.

In addition, further breakdown the ‘Hard pressed living’ OAC supergroup showed that two groups ‘Industrious communities’ and ‘Hard pressed ageing workers’ saw a decrease in crime in part-lit areas, whereas the crime increased in areas of no change in lighting.

Furthermore, part-lighting in areas categorised as ‘Hard pressed living’ had a positive impact on levels of certain types of crime, namely, violence against the person crimes and criminal damage, which decreased in part-lit areas but increased in areas of no change in lighting.

 Census Output Area Classification o Hard pressed living . Industrious communities – Very positive . Hard pressed ageing workers – Very positive o Hard pressed living . Violence against the person – Very positive o Hard pressed living . Criminal damage – Very positive

Negative Impact In areas categorised as ‘Constrained City Dwellers’, overall the levels of crime went down post the implementation of part-night lighting. However, the difference was not as great as that experienced in areas where lights remained on. Furthermore, for crimes in these areas, where it is certain they happened between midnight and 5am on the same day, crimes went down in areas of no change in lighting but actually increased where part-lighting was introduced.

There are 69 areas in Leicestershire which are categorised as being part of the ‘Constrained City Dwellers’ OAC supergroup - accounting for a population of 15,898 people or 2.4% of the total Leicestershire population.

Produced by the Research and Insight Team Page 8 of 11

35 APPENDIX A

Further analysis of the data for areas categorised as ‘Constrained City Dwellers’ is provided in Table 4.

Table 4: Detailed analysis – impact of part-lighting – Constrained City Dwellers OAC Supergroup

Criteria Subcategory All valid crimes

All crimes All Cases Negative Rural Urban Urban areas None Rural areas None Crime Types (Main Groups) Burglary in a dwelling None Burglary other than a dwelling None Robbery None Vehicle Crime None Theft Very negative Violence against the person Very negative Census Output Area Classification - 7a - Challenged Diversity Negative groups 7b - Constrained Flat Dwellers None 7c - White Communities None 7d - Ageing City Dwellers None Seasonal Divide Summer (April- September) None Winter (October - March) None English Indices of Multiple 1 None deprivation (deciles for Leicestershire 2 None where 1 = most deprived) 3 None 4 None 5 None 6 None 7 None 8 None 9 None 10 None Days of the week Monday None (for crimes with a period of less than Tuesday None 24 hours) Wednesday None Thursday None Friday None Saturday None Sunday None

Produced by the Research and Insight Team Page 9 of 11

36 APPENDIX A

Table 4 shows that for areas classified as Constrained City Dwellers, the levels of certain types of crime increased post implementation of part-night lighting, whereas they decreased in areas where lights remained switched on. This pattern of increased crime levels in part-lit ‘Constrained City Dweller’ areas was found for theft crimes and violence against the person crimes.

It has also been possible to further break down the ‘Constrained City Dwellers’ supergroup into four groups. Investigation highlighted that it was only one of these sub groups, ‘Challenged Diversity’, where there was a lesser reduction in crime overall in part-lit areas compared to areas where lights remained on. There are 29 areas in Leicestershire classed as ‘Challenged diversity’ with a population of 7,154 (1.1% of the Leicestershire population).

Conclusions The aim of this project was to determine whether the implementation of the part-night lighting scheme within Leicestershire has had an impact upon crime levels in the county. The analysis looked at the impact of the implementation of the part-night lighting scheme on crime levels overall and also by crime type, seasonality, days of the week and type of community (using the Urban Rural Classification, the 2011 Census Output Area Classifications and the Indices of Multiple Deprivation).

In most cases, results showed that there was either no impact, or a positive or very positive impact, on crime levels in areas that were part-lit. The only exception was in areas categorised as ‘Constrained City Dwellers’. In these areas, overall, there was a greater reduction in crime where lights remained on, than in areas where they were part-lit. However, for some crime types (theft and violence against the person) and times of the day (midnight-5am), crimes actually increased in areas categorised as ‘Constrained City Dwellers’ after part-night lighting was introduced. There are 69 areas in Leicestershire categorised as ‘Constrained City Dwellers’, accounting for a population of 15,898 people or 2.4% of the total Leicestershire population.

Further analysis showed that only one of the sub groups of ‘Constrained City Dwellers’ (‘Challenged Diversity’) experienced a negative impact on crime levels overall from the implementation of part- lighting – accounting for an area of 7,154 people or 1.1% of the Leicestershire population. It is recommended that further work is undertaken to examine whether part-night lighting should be reviewed in areas where there has been a negative impact.

Produced by the Research and Insight Team Page 10 of 11

37 APPENDIX A

The findings of this study have been found to be similar to those in the recently published work by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Public Health Research Programme. They conducted a nationwide project in collaboration with all local authorities in England and Wales. The LANTERNS (Local Authority Collaborators’ National Evaluation of Reduced Night-time Streetlight) study, led by Dr Phil Edwards, found that reduced street lighting in England and Wales is not associated with crime. They also concluded that there was no association with road traffic collisions.

The study, led by researchers from the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, in partnership with UCL, suggested that local authorities can safely reduce street lighting at night, saving energy costs and reducing carbon emissions.

However, it should be noted that this national study did not go into the same level of geographical segmentation and analysis by crime type, as covered in the Leicestershire study, which, as has been demonstrated, found negative impacts for some small geographical areas.

Produced by the Research and Insight Team Page 11 of 11

This page is intentionally left blank 39 Agenda Item 10

LEICESTERSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL HIGHWAYS FORUM FOR MELTON

12TH JULY 2016

A-ROADS TO ZEBRAS – A COMPREHENSIVE MAINTENANCE REVIEW

REPORT OF THE DIRECTOR OF ENVIRONMENT AND TRANSPORT

Purpose of the Report

1. To advise Members of the Forum of the need to review the County Council’s Transport Asset Management Plan (TAMP), Highway Maintenance Strategy and Policy and Street Lighting Strategy and Policy documents, and to notify of the proposed public consultation that will support this review.

Background

2. The broad approach to maintaining the highway network and street-scene in Leicestershire is set out in the Transport Asset Management Plan document (TAMP), the Highway Maintenance Strategy and Policy document, and the Street Lighting Strategy and Policy document.

3. These documents are in need of review and update in order to take account of the substantial reductions in the budget available for maintenance and to ensure that they are consistent with a new national Code of Practice for highway maintenance due to be published this summer, currently available in draft form.

4. The revised TAMP will set out the process by which the Council will maintain its highways assets and will also help to inform and manage expectations about the likely levels of service, condition of highway and treatments to be applied across the network, providing a transparent process for deciding treatments and priorities.

5. This revision will allow the Council to:  define, quantify, validate and evaluate short and long-term maintenance strategies  calculate with more certainty the costs and benefits associated with maintenance strategies  ensure appropriate maintenance strategies, which ensure that as far as possible, the network meets the needs of users  ensure maintenance strategies are presented in a form that can be understood and communicated to all.

40

Budget

6. In 2009/10, the combined revenue and capital highway maintenance spend was £32.6 million, by 2020/21 it is currently forecast to be £16.5 million. When inflation is taken into account, this is a reduction of 78% and whilst much has been done to generate savings though efficiencies, it will not be possible to achieve this level of saving without reducing our service levels, concentrating on our statutory duties and making some difficult decisions about maintenance priorities.

7. Reductions in budgets will require a change to management of highway assets. For example, current levels of major resurfacing will not be achievable and it will be necessary to mitigate the network condition over longer periods through more extensive use of localised patching. This will require an alteration to the life cycle plans within the current TAMP and these changes and their impacts need to be supported by stronger evidence of the links between the condition of the network and selected treatments.

8. In addition, a significant portion of the capital maintenance grant is no longer allocated by the Department for Transport (DfT) on a simple formula basis but is distributed through two schemes known as the “Challenge Fund” and the “Incentive Fund”. Both these sources of funding incentivise and reward highway authorities that demonstrate a commitment to the on-going development of an asset management approach to service delivery.

9. The Council was successful in bidding for funding from the first round of the Challenge Fund, securing £5.1m over 3 years to support the street lighting LED replacement programme. Further Challenge Fund bids will be invited in 2017 and a successful bid will be expected to demonstrate the continued development of an asset management approach.

10. The Incentive Fund allocations will be made annually for five years from 2016/17, based upon a self-assessment and external audit. The assessment places highway authorities into one of three bands, depending on the authority’s ongoing commitment to asset management. The Council is currently assessed at the intermediate level 2 band in 2015/16 and with a commitment to developing our asset management strategy, it is realistic to expect the Authority to reach the highest level, band 3, by 2018/19.

11. Developing an asset management approach through a revision of the TAMP will support the progression to Band 3 and secure an additional £3.57m over the period via the Incentive Fund and will also increase the prospect of a second successful bid for Challenge Fund monies. This approach will ensure that the Council can maximise opportunities to deliver efficiencies and be flexible in adapting to future budget changes.

41

The New National Code of Practice for Highway Maintenance

12. The existing national code of practice for highway maintenance (“Well Maintained Highways”) will be replaced in summer 2016 by a new code; “Well Managed Highway Infrastructure”. The new code is currently available in draft format and, apart from some additional guidance, is not expected to change greatly.

13. The Council’s current Highway Maintenance Strategy and Policy documents are based on the existing national code of practice and will require review and update to ensure consistency with the new national code.

14. The new code departs fundamentally from the current code in its philosophy, placing a great deal of emphasis on developing local policies based firmly on an assessment of risk, rather than providing prescriptive standards. The Council therefore needs to develop a reliable local evidence base of network condition, linked to use, customer expectation, levels of funding, and the likelihood of detriment.

15. Most critically, the new national code will require a revised approach to defining defects and response times based on an assessment of risk. One of the key aims of the review will be to establish an intervention policy that focusses on delivering prompt response to those defects which pose the greatest risk whilst at the same time allowing a more considered and planned approach to the less critical defects.

16. For example, the Council currently applies a 3-day response time to all carriageway potholes over 40mm in depth, regardless of the risk they pose to users. This results in a high number of reactive repairs at sporadic locations, which is challenging to meet with current resources and results in high travel times for response vehicles and low outputs and productivity. It is not practical or financially viable to employ substantial plant for compaction or to keep materials in fresh condition for such small scale repairs. The Council operates specialised Road Mender vehicles which deliver small scale patch repairs, but this comes at a cost of between £80 and £120 per repair, compared with between £40 and £50 per m2 for conventional patch repairs. Furthermore, Road Mender repairs are likely, although not always, to be less durable than conventional patch repairs. Revised intervention and response times would focus swift interventions on defects that present the highest risk, whilst relaxing interventions for low risk defects, thus ensuring more cost effective and durable repairs.

Proposed Consultations

17. Initial engagement and consultation with stakeholders is an important part of the process for developing revised policies. This will also help to ensure that the Authority’s asset management strategy, highway maintenance and street lighting policies take account of customer expectations and deliver the most appropriate service levels consistent with the limitations of the budget and the need to build long-term resilience into the network.

42

18. The County Council’s Cabinet is therefore being asked to approve a full public consultation exercise which will run from early June 2016 to mid- September 2016.

19. The aim of the consultation will be to establish a detailed understanding of stakeholders’ perceptions of the current asset condition, priorities in terms of treatment (by type, across the network hierarchy, and acceptance of particular response times), repair quality and the impact of roadworks across the network hierarchy.

20. The consultation will cover maintenance of all elements of the highway asset, including carriageways, footways, cycleways, signs, Vehicle Activated Signs, traffic signals, traffic calming features (tables, cushions, coloured surfacing), line marking and road studs, drains, lighting, winter gritting, grass verges, shrub beds, trees, public rights of way (footpaths and bridleways) and field roads.

21. The consultation will seek views on the value and potential reduction, either by removal or downgrading, of certain highway assets such as bollards, fencing, low-use rural laybys, shrub beds, lighting, low-use rural footways, signs and field roads.

22. Opportunities for partnership working to achieve savings and maintain service levels will also be explored, for example by devolving minor local maintenance responsibilities to parish councils and community groups.

23. Linked to this and as an extension of the existing Snow Warden and Flood Warden Initiatives, the consultation will also seek views on the introduction of Parish Highway Wardens. This has the potential to provide an interface between the Council and local communities, undertaking minor maintenance duties (such as those outlined above), low level enforcement issues (such as notifying requirements for hedge-cutting), and condition reporting.

24. Responses to the consultation will provide a basis for developing the revised TAMP, policy revisions and maintenance strategies in a way that is appropriate to the needs of users and the realities of the Authority’s financial position.

25. Due to the complex range of issues to be considered by the consultation, the process will also include a series of workshops involving representative groups, as well as web-based engagement.

Timescale and Outcomes

26. It is intended to report back to the County Council’s Cabinet before the end of the calendar year, providing the outcomes from the consultation and making appropriate recommendations for the update of the TAMP and the strategy and policy documents with a view to implementing approved changes from April 2017.

43

Resource Implications

27. The review of the Council’s maintenance policies and strategy will support the efficiency savings required from the Medium Term Financial Strategy (MTFS) and the corporate transformation process whilst utilising existing staffing.

28. The proposed consultation exercise will incur costs of between £10,000 and £20,000. This would include reference groups and analysis of the consultation. It is proposed that this will be funded from within the existing highway maintenance budget.

Equal Opportunities Implications

29. The review of Strategy and Policy will take account of the needs of all highway users and the consultation exercise will make provision for representative users to participate in the focus groups.

Recommendation

30. It is recommended that Members note the contents of this report.

Officers to Contact

Phil Crossland - Director Environment and Transport Tel: (0116) 305 7000 Email: [email protected]

Ann Carruthers – Assistant Director Environment and Transport Tel: (0116) 305 7966 Email: [email protected]

Ian Vears – Head of Service, Policy & Strategy Environment and Transport Tel: (0116) 305 7215 Email: [email protected]

Background Papers

None.

This page is intentionally left blank 45 Agenda Item 11 FOR INFORMATION ONLY

LEICESTERSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL HIGHWAYS FORUM FOR MELTON

12TH JULY 2016

2016/17 MAINTENANCE AND IMPROVEMENTS PROGRAMMES

REPORT OF THE DIRECTOR OF ENVIRONMENT AND TRANSPORT

Purpose of Report

1. The purpose of this report is to provide an update on progress in delivering the 2016- 2017 programmes of maintenance and improvement works. Progress is summarised in the attached appendix which includes details of the following programmes:

Works Programmes

Capital Maintenance – Principal Roads

Capital Maintenance – B&C Roads

Capital Maintenance – Unclassified Roads

Surface Dressing

Footway Treatments

Flood Alleviation

Bridge Maintenance

Safety Barrier Repair and Renewals

Street Lighting Renewals

Traffic Signal Renewals

Improvement Works

Equal Opportunities Implications

2. The completion of the maintenance programme will improve the condition of the network for the convenience of all users, whilst causing an element of localised disruption during construction work.

Recommendation

3. It is recommended that Members note the contents of this report.

46 FOR INFORMATION ONLY

Officers to Contact

Members with queries on specific schemes are asked to contact the following officers:

 Capital Maintenance – Principal Matthew Reedman Tel: (0116) 305 0001 Roads Highway Service Delivery  Capital Maintenance – B&C Email: [email protected] Roads  Capital Maintenance – Unclassified Roads  Surface Dressing  Footway Treatments  Safety Barrier Repair and Renewals  Street Lighting Renewals

 Flood Alleviation Bernard Evans Tel: (0116) 305 0001 Infrastructure Email: [email protected]

 Bridge Maintenance Chris Waterfield Tel: (0116) 305 0001 Structures and Assets Email: [email protected]

 Traffic Signal Renewals Fiona Blockley Tel: (0116) 305 0001 Traffic and Signals Email: [email protected]

 Improvement Works Martin O’Connor Tel: (0116) 305 0001 Engineering Services Email: martin.o’[email protected]

Background Papers

None

47

Major Capital Maintenance Principal Roads

Cost Bands A >£200k, B <£200k >£50k, C <£50k

Parish/ Treatment/ Cost District Location/ scheme name Notes village Description Band Carriageway Narborough Road - Post Resurfacing Construction Blaby Narborough House Junction with B and Q2 Braunstone lane Strengthening Ashby Road - Ashby Rd Carriageway Construction Charnwood Loughborough from Green Close Lane to B Resurfacing Q2 Radmoor Road Leicester Road - Archers Carriageway Construction Harborough Great Glen B Roundabout Resurfacing Q2 Hinckley Hinckley Road - Bends at Carriageway Construction and Stapleton C Stapleton Resurfacing Q2 Bosworth Carriageway Leicester Street - From Melton Resurfacing Construction Melton Sherrard Street to Play B Mowbray and Q2 Close gates Strengthening Carriageway Stephenson Way - North West Resurfacing Construction Coalville Roundabout junction with B Leics and Q2 Thornborough Road Strengthening Melton Road - From Asfordby Carriageway Construction Melton Welby Road to Asfordby B Hill Resurfacing Q2 Valley Leicester Road - Various Oadby & sections between Carriageway Reserve Wigston B Wigston Rosemead Drive and Resurfacing Scheme Wakes Road Roundabout Leicester Road - From Carriageway Frisby on Reserve Melton Frisby Top to Rotherby Edge B the Wreake Scheme turn Strengthening Nether Nottingham Road - Carriageway Reserve Melton B Broughton Broughton Hill resurfacing Scheme

48

Major Capital Maintenance B&C Roads

Cost Bands A >£200k, B <£200k >£50k, C <£50k

Parish/ Treatment/ Cost District Location/ scheme name Notes village Description Band Leicester Road - One Way section from Coventry Carriageway Construction Blaby Sharnford C Road to joint past The Resurfacing Q2 Hollies Loughborough Road - Carriageway Burton on Construction Charnwood From Burton on the Wolds Edge B the Wolds Q3 to Prestwold Lane junction Strengthening Grace Dieu Lane - North West Carriageway Construction Belton Between Ashby Road and C Leics Resurfacing Q2 Church Lane Nanpantan Road - From Carriageway Construction Charnwood Loughborough Ingleberry Rd to Charley Edge B Q3 Rd Strengthening Kibworth Road - Between Carriageway Carlton Construction Harborough Mere Road and Grange Edge B Curlieu Q3 Road Strengthening Carriageway Stoney Hinckley Road - From Resurfacing Reserve Blaby B Stanton village centre to 30mph and Scheme Strengthening Leicester Road - From Market Alvington Way to Just Carriageway Reserve Harborough B Harborough beyond Fairfield Road Resurfacing Scheme Junction Carriageway Hinckley Ashby Road - From Resurfacing Reserve and Twycross B Twycross to Wood Lane and Scheme Bosworth Strengthening Hinckley Church Street - Lychgate Carriageway Reserve and Burbage C Lane to High Street Resurfacing Scheme Bosworth Carriageway Lawn Lane - From The Reserve Melton Old Dalby Edge B Saltway to Wood Hill Scheme Strengthening North West Burton Road - From High Carriageway Reserve Measham C Leics Street to A42 bridge Resurfacing Scheme

49

Major Capital Maintenance Unclassified Roads

Cost Bands A >£200k, B <£200k >£50k, C <£50k

Parish/ Treatment/ Cost District Location/ scheme name Notes village Description Band Meridian Way - Carriageway Construction Blaby Lubbesthorpe Roundabout and Slip B Resurfacing Q2 Road Drainage work Broad Street - Entire and Construction Charnwood Syston B Length Carriageway Q2 resurfacing Georges Yard - Entire Carriageway Construction Charnwood Loughborough C Length Resurfacing Q2 Irish Bridge/footbrid ge Goadby Road - Entire Construction Harborough Hallaton replacement B Length Q4 and patching of carriageway. Hinckley Nutts Lane - Adjacent to Carriageway Construction and Hinckley C Railway bridge. Phase 2. Resurfacing Q4 Bosworth Melton Jubilee Street - Entire Carriageway Construction Melton B Mowbray Length Resurfacing Q2 Melton King Street - Chapel Carriageway Construction Melton C Mowbray Street to St Marys Way Resurfacing Q2 Melton Carriageway Construction Melton Snow Hill - Entire Length C Mowbray Resurfacing Q2 Carriageway Earl Shilton Road - Entire Reserve Blaby Thurlaston Haunching – B Length Scheme Phase 1. Carriageway Reserve Charnwood Syston St Peters Court - All C Resurfacing Scheme Peatling Bamburgh Lane - Isolated Carriageway Reserve Harborough C Magna Repairs Strengthening Scheme Hinckley Carriageway Reserve and Earl Shilton Coronation Road - All C Resurfacing Scheme Bosworth Reconstruct Hinckley Crow Lane - Isolated concrete Reserve and Sheepy C Repairs carriageway – Scheme Bosworth Phase 1 North West Ashby de la Smithy Road - Traffic Carriageway Reserve C Leics Zouch Island Resurfacing Scheme Twyford Thorpe Satchville Bakers Carriageway Reserve Melton B and Thorpe Lane - All Resurfacing Scheme

50

Surface Dressing

Parish/ Treatment/ District Location/ scheme name Notes village Description Blaby Blaby Lutterworth Road Surface Dressing Blaby Blaby Lutterworth Road Surface Dressing Blaby Blaby Lutterworth Road Surface Dressing Blaby Braunstone Shakespeare Close Surface Dressing Blaby Cosby Bakery Close Surface Dressing Blaby Cosby Chapel Lane Surface Dressing Blaby Cosby Cotswold Avenue Surface Dressing Blaby Cosby Horseshoe Close Surface Dressing Blaby Cosby Malvern Crescent Surface Dressing Blaby Cosby Starmer Close Surface Dressing Blaby Cosby Steadman Avenue Surface Dressing Blaby Cosby Stevenson Gardens Surface Dressing Blaby Countesthorpe Central Street Surface Dressing Blaby Countesthorpe Cherry Tree Close Surface Dressing Blaby Countesthorpe The Vineries Surface Dressing Blaby Countesthorpe Waterloo Crescent Surface Dressing Blaby Croft Coventry Road Surface Dressing Blaby Croft Dovecote Road Surface Dressing From Huncote Road to Hill Blaby Croft Surface Dressing Street Blaby Croft Hill Street Surface Dressing Blaby Croft The Green Surface Dressing Blaby Elmesthorpe Stanton Road Surface Dressing Blaby Enderby Cherry Tree Grove Surface Dressing Surface Dressing Blaby Enderby Clarence Road

Blaby Enderby Lime Tree Road Surface Dressing Blaby Enderby Moores Lane Surface Dressing Blaby Enderby Packhorse Drive Surface Dressing Blaby Enderby Shortridge Lane Surface Dressing Blaby Enderby Sloane Close Surface Dressing Blaby Enderby St Johns Surface Dressing Blaby Glen Parva Court Road Surface Dressing Blaby Glen Parva Howard Road Surface Dressing Blaby Glen Parva Iris Avenue Surface Dressing Blaby Glen Parva Nowell Close Surface Dressing Blaby Glen Parva Orchard Avenue Surface Dressing Blaby Glen Parva The Ford Surface Dressing Blaby Glenfield Glen Park Avenue Surface Dressing Blaby Glenfield Glendale Avenue Surface Dressing Blaby Glenfield Stelle Way Surface Dressing Blaby Glenfield The Maltings Surface Dressing Blaby Huncote Chantry Close Surface Dressing Blaby Huncote Cheney End Surface Dressing

51

Parish/ Treatment/ District Location/ scheme name Notes village Description Blaby Huncote Mill View Surface Dressing Kirby Blaby Barns Close Surface Dressing Muxloe Kirby Blaby Harene Crescent Surface Dressing Muxloe Kirby Blaby Hawthorn Close Surface Dressing Muxloe Kirby Blaby Highland Avenue Surface Dressing Muxloe Kirby Blaby Pine Tree Grove Surface Dressing Muxloe Kirby Blaby Shepards Close Surface Dressing Muxloe Blaby Narborough Alyssum Way Surface Dressing Blaby Narborough Campion Close Surface Dressing Blaby Narborough Hardwicke Road Surface Dressing Blaby Narborough Hornbeam Close Surface Dressing Blaby Narborough Oaks Court Surface Dressing Blaby Narborough Thorpe Hill Surface Dressing Blaby Narborough Waudby Close Surface Dressing Blaby Narborough Whitebeam Close Surface Dressing Blaby Sapcote Castle Close Surface Dressing Blaby Sapcote Dovecote Close Surface Dressing Blaby Sapcote Neville Smith Close Surface Dressing Blaby Sapcote New Walk Surface Dressing Blaby Sharnford Coventry Road Surface Dressing Stoney Blaby George Marriott Close Surface Dressing Stanton Blaby Whetstone Ashville Way Surface Dressing Blaby Whetstone Bambury Lane Surface Dressing Blaby Whetstone Bridge Way Surface Dressing Blaby Whetstone College Road Surface Dressing Blaby Whetstone Grebe Way Surface Dressing Blaby Whetstone St Peters Drive Surface Dressing Blaby Whetstone Sunnyside Close Surface Dressing Blaby Whetstone The Crestway Surface Dressing Blaby Whetstone Trinity Road Surface Dressing Blaby Whetstone Woodyard Lane Surface Dressing Barkby Charnwood Hamilton Lane Surface Dressing Thorpe Barkby Charnwood King Stree Surface Dressing Thorpe Barrow Charnwood Crossley Close Surface Dressing upon Soar Charnwood Birstall Denegate Avenue Surface Dressing Charnwood Birstall Hermitage Road Surface Dressing Charnwood Birstall Queensgate Drive Surface Dressing Ryegate Crescent Charnwood Birstall Surface Dressing

52

Parish/ Treatment/ District Location/ scheme name Notes village Description Burton on Charnwood Melton Road Surface Dressing the Wolds Charnwood Cossington Platts Lane Surface Dressing Charnwood Cossington Syston Road Surface Dressing East Charnwood Badgers Corner Surface Dressing Goscote East Charnwood Countrymans Way Surface Dressing Goscote East Charnwood Fox Hollow Surface Dressing Goscote East Charnwood Huntsmans Dale Surface Dressing Goscote East Charnwood Keepers Croft Surface Dressing Goscote East Charnwood The Chase Surface Dressing Goscote Charnwood Loughborough Alan Moss Road Surface Dressing Charnwood Loughborough Alan Moss Road Surface Dressing Charnwood Loughborough Ashby Road Surface Dressing Works Charnwood Loughborough Browns Lane Surface Dressing Cancelled Charnwood Loughborough Chatsworth Road Surface Dressing Charnwood Loughborough Cotswold Close Surface Dressing Charnwood Loughborough Durham Road Surface Dressing Charnwood Loughborough Epinal Way Surface Dressing Works Charnwood Loughborough Frederick Street Surface Dressing Cancelled Charnwood Loughborough Howard Street Surface Dressing Charnwood Loughborough Maxwell Drive Surface Dressing Charnwood Loughborough Messenger Close Surface Dressing Charnwood Loughborough Moor Lane Surface Dressing Charnwood Loughborough Park Road Surface Dressing Charnwood Loughborough Pevensey Road Surface Dressing Charnwood Loughborough Pinfold Gate Surface Dressing Charnwood Loughborough Poplar Road Surface Dressing Charnwood Loughborough Pytchley Drive Surface Dressing Charnwood Loughborough Regent Street Surface Dressing Charnwood Loughborough Silverton Road Surface Dressing Charnwood Loughborough Southdown Road Surface Dressing Charnwood Loughborough Sparrow Hill Surface Dressing Charnwood Loughborough Thorpe Hill Surface Dressing Charnwood Loughborough Wharncliffe Road Surface Dressing Charnwood Mountsorrel Castle Road Surface Dressing Charnwood Mountsorrel Linden Grove Surface Dressing Charnwood Prestwold Barrow Road Surface Dressing Charnwood Prestwold Loughborough Road Surface Dressing Charnwood Queniborough Coppice Lane Surface Dressing Charnwood Queniborough Primrose Way Surface Dressing

53

Parish/ Treatment/ District Location/ scheme name Notes village Description Charnwood Queniborough Rearsby Road Surface Dressing Charnwood Queniborough Ridgemere Lane Surface Dressing Charnwood Queniborough Syston Road Surface Dressing Charnwood Quorndon Leicester Road Surface Dressing Charnwood Rearsby Brookside Surface Dressing Charnwood Rearsby Gaddesby Lane Surface Dressing Charnwood Rothley Anthony Street Surface Dressing Charnwood Rothley Cossington Lane Surface Dressing Charnwood Shepshed Ashby Road West Surface Dressing Charnwood Shepshed Ashby Road West Surface Dressing Charnwood Shepshed Brick Kiln Lane Surface Dressing Charnwood Shepshed Brookside Close Surface Dressing Charnwood Shepshed Charnwood Road Surface Dressing Charnwood Shepshed Cotton Croft Surface Dressing Charnwood Shepshed Fairway Road South Surface Dressing Charnwood Shepshed Moscow Lane Surface Dressing Charnwood Shepshed Spring Close Surface Dressing South Charnwood Syston Road Surface Dressing Croxton Charnwood Syston High Street Surface Dressing Charnwood Syston St Peters Street Surface Dressing Charnwood Syston The Half Croft Surface Dressing Charnwood Thurmaston Church Hill Road Surface Dressing Charnwood Thurmaston Hill Rise Surface Dressing Works Charnwood Woodhouse Brand Lane Surface Dressing Cancelled Works Charnwood Woodhouse Forest Road Surface Dressing Cancelled Hinckley Bagworth and and Heath Road Surface Dressing Bosworth Thornton Hinckley Bagworth and and Merrylees Road Surface Dressing Bosworth Thornton Hinckley Bagworth and and The Square Surface Dressing Bosworth Thornton Hinckley and Barlestone Brookside Surface Dressing Bosworth Hinckley and Barlestone Chapman Close Surface Dressing Bosworth Hinckley and Barlestone Ferrers Croft Surface Dressing Bosworth Hinckley and Barlestone Meadow Road Surface Dressing Bosworth

54

Parish/ Treatment/ District Location/ scheme name Notes village Description Hinckley and Barlestone Orchard Close Surface Dressing Bosworth Hinckley and Barlestone Rushey Close Surface Dressing Bosworth Hinckley and Barlestone Smithy Close Surface Dressing Bosworth Hinckley and Barlestone Spinney Drive Surface Dressing Bosworth Hinckley and Barwell Arthur Street Surface Dressing Bosworth Hinckley and Barwell Carrs Hill Surface Dressing Bosworth Hinckley and Barwell Hastings Drive Surface Dressing Bosworth Hinckley and Barwell Meadow Road Surface Dressing Bosworth Hinckley and Barwell Mount Avenue Surface Dressing Bosworth Hinckley and Barwell Shoesmith Close Surface Dressing Bosworth Hinckley and Barwell Stapleton Lane Surface Dressing Bosworth Hinckley and Barwell Stapleton Lane Surface Dressing Bosworth Hinckley and Barwell Wightman Road Surface Dressing Bosworth Hinckley and Burbage Ashburton Close Surface Dressing Bosworth Hinckley and Burbage Banky Meadow Surface Dressing Bosworth Hinckley and Burbage Boyslade Road Surface Dressing Bosworth Hinckley and Burbage Cambourne Road Surface Dressing Bosworth

55

Parish/ Treatment/ District Location/ scheme name Notes village Description Hinckley and Burbage Dorchester Road Surface Dressing Bosworth Hinckley and Burbage Elm Tree Drive Surface Dressing Bosworth Hinckley and Burbage Gleneagles Close Surface Dressing Bosworth Hinckley and Burbage Grange Drive Surface Dressing Bosworth Hinckley and Burbage Hillrise Surface Dressing Bosworth Hinckley and Burbage Ilminster Close Surface Dressing Bosworth Hinckley and Burbage Lyndhurst Close Surface Dressing Bosworth Hinckley and Burbage Rufford Close Surface Dressing Bosworth Hinckley and Burbage Salisbury Road Surface Dressing Bosworth Hinckley and Burbage Sapcote Road Surface Dressing Bosworth Hinckley and Burbage Seaton Close Surface Dressing Bosworth Hinckley and Burbage Sherborne Road Surface Dressing Bosworth Hinckley and Burbage The Meadows Surface Dressing Bosworth Hinckley and Burbage Victoria Road Surface Dressing Bosworth Hinckley and Burbage Winchester Drive Surface Dressing Bosworth Hinckley and Burbage Woodback Surface Dressing Bosworth Hinckley and Desford Hunts Close Surface Dressing Bosworth

56

Parish/ Treatment/ District Location/ scheme name Notes village Description Hinckley and Desford Leicester Lane Surface Dressing Bosworth Hinckley and Desford Lindridge Lane Surface Dressing Bosworth Hinckley and Desford Little Lane Surface Dressing Bosworth Hinckley and Desford Main Street Surface Dressing Bosworth Hinckley and Desford Manor Road Surface Dressing Bosworth Hinckley and Desford Newbold Road Surface Dressing Bosworth Hinckley and Earl Shilton Almeys Lane Surface Dressing Bosworth Hinckley and Earl Shilton Birch Close Surface Dressing Bosworth Hinckley and Earl Shilton Coronation Road Surface Dressing Bosworth Hinckley and Earl Shilton Hinckley Road Surface Dressing Bosworth Hinckley and Earl Shilton Laburnum Drive Surface Dressing Bosworth Hinckley and Earl Shilton Maughan Street Surface Dressing Bosworth Hinckley and Earl Shilton Stoneycroft Road Surface Dressing Bosworth Hinckley and Hinckley Bardsley Close Surface Dressing Bosworth Hinckley and Hinckley Beatty Close Surface Dressing Bosworth Hinckley and Hinckley Bedford Close Surface Dressing Bosworth Hinckley and Hinckley Benbow Close Surface Dressing Bosworth

57

Parish/ Treatment/ District Location/ scheme name Notes village Description Hinckley and Hinckley Blake Close Surface Dressing Bosworth Hinckley and Hinckley Blenheim Close Surface Dressing Bosworth Hinckley and Hinckley Bramcote Close Surface Dressing Bosworth Hinckley and Hinckley Buckingham Close Surface Dressing Bosworth Hinckley and Hinckley Bute Close Surface Dressing Bosworth Hinckley and Hinckley Castlemaine Drive Surface Dressing Bosworth Hinckley and Hinckley Cherwell Close Surface Dressing Bosworth Hinckley and Hinckley Clarence Road Surface Dressing Bosworth Hinckley and Hinckley Darwin Close Surface Dressing Bosworth Hinckley and Hinckley Drake Way Surface Dressing Bosworth Hinckley and Hinckley Edendale Drive Surface Dressing Bosworth Hinckley and Hinckley Edward Street Surface Dressing Bosworth Hinckley and Hinckley Farneway Surface Dressing Bosworth Hinckley and Hinckley Frobisher Close Surface Dressing Bosworth Hinckley and Hinckley Gladstone Close Surface Dressing Bosworth Hinckley and Hinckley Hardy Close Surface Dressing Bosworth Hinckley and Hinckley Harwood Drive Surface Dressing Bosworth

58

Parish/ Treatment/ District Location/ scheme name Notes village Description Hinckley and Hinckley Hawkins Close Surface Dressing Bosworth Hinckley and Hinckley Jarvis Close Surface Dressing Bosworth Hinckley and Hinckley Jellicoe Way Surface Dressing Bosworth Hinckley and Hinckley Kent Drive Surface Dressing Bosworth Hinckley and Hinckley Kingston Drive Surface Dressing Bosworth Hinckley and Hinckley Lundy Close Surface Dressing Bosworth Hinckley and Hinckley Nelson Drive Surface Dressing Bosworth Hinckley and Hinckley Norwood Close Surface Dressing Bosworth Hinckley and Hinckley Osbaston Close Surface Dressing Bosworth Hinckley and Hinckley Portland Drive Surface Dressing Bosworth Hinckley and Hinckley Raleigh Close Surface Dressing Bosworth Hinckley and Hinckley Ramsey Close Surface Dressing Bosworth Hinckley and Hinckley Rodney Close Surface Dressing Bosworth Hinckley and Hinckley Sandy Crescent Surface Dressing Bosworth Hinckley and Hinckley Sutton Close Surface Dressing Bosworth Hinckley and Hinckley Walney Close Surface Dressing Bosworth Hinckley and Hinckley Warwick Gardens Surface Dressing Bosworth

59

Parish/ Treatment/ District Location/ scheme name Notes village Description Hinckley and Hinckley Well Lane Surface Dressing Bosworth Hinckley and Hinckley Wendover Drive Surface Dressing Bosworth Hinckley and Hinckley Wentworth Close Surface Dressing Bosworth Hinckley and Hinckley Willowdale Surface Dressing Bosworth Hinckley and Hinckley Windrush Drive Surface Dressing Bosworth Hinckley and Hinckley Woburn Close Surface Dressing Bosworth Hinckley and Markfield Beech Close Surface Dressing Bosworth Hinckley and Markfield Linford Crescent Surface Dressing Bosworth Hinckley and Markfield Roecliffe Close Surface Dressing Bosworth Hinckley and Markfield Swithland Close Surface Dressing Bosworth Hinckley and Markfield The Chase Surface Dressing Bosworth Hinckley and Markfield Warren Close Surface Dressing Bosworth Hinckley and Markfield Whitcroft Close Surface Dressing Bosworth Hinckley and Markfield Woodhouse Close Surface Dressing Bosworth Hinckley and Nailstone Barton Lane Surface Dressing Bosworth Hinckley and Nailstone Ibstock Road Surface Dressing Bosworth Hinckley and Nailstone Odstone Lane Surface Dressing Bosworth

60

Parish/ Treatment/ District Location/ scheme name Notes village Description Hinckley Newbold and Newbold Road Surface Dressing Verdon Bosworth Hinckley and Osbaston Goatham Lane Surface Dressing Bosworth Hinckley and Osbaston Newbold Road Surface Dressing Bosworth Hinckley and Peckleton Ashby Road Surface Dressing Bosworth Hinckley and Peckleton Chruch Road Surface Dressing Bosworth Hinckley and Peckleton Dadlington Lane Surface Dressing Bosworth Hinckley and Peckleton Main Street Surface Dressing Bosworth Hinckley and Peckleton Shilton Road Surface Dressing Bosworth Hinckley and Ratby Brook Drive Surface Dressing Bosworth Hinckley and Ratby Park Road Surface Dressing Bosworth Hinckley and Shackerstone Allotment Lane Surface Dressing Bosworth Hinckley and Shackerstone Ibstock Road Surface Dressing Bosworth Hinckley and Shackerstone Insleys Lane Surface Dressing Bosworth Hinckley and Shackerstone Nailstone Road Surface Dressing Bosworth Hinckley and Sheepy Ash Croft Surface Dressing Bosworth Hinckley and Sheepy Oakfield Way Surface Dressing Bosworth Hinckley Sutton and Bosworth Road Surface Dressing Cheney Bosworth

61

Parish/ Treatment/ District Location/ scheme name Notes village Description Hinckley Sutton and Pump Street Surface Dressing Cheney Bosworth Hinckley and Witherley Bridge Lane Surface Dressing Bosworth Hinckley and Witherley Foxs Covert Surface Dressing Bosworth Hinckley and Witherley Hall Lane Surface Dressing Bosworth Hinckley and Witherley Riverside Surface Dressing Bosworth Harborough Billesdon Brook Lane Surface Dressing Harborough Billesdon Coplow Lane Surface Dressing Harborough Billesdon Coplow Lane Surface Dressing Harborough Billesdon Gaulby Road Surface Dressing Harborough Blaston Blaston Road Surface Dressing Harborough Blaston Hallaton Road Surface Dressing Harborough Blaston Main Street Surface Dressing Harborough Blaston Stockerston Road Surface Dressing Harborough Bringhurst Drayton Road Surface Dressing Harborough Bringhurst Great Easton Road Surface Dressing Broughton Harborough Ambergate Close Surface Dressing Astley Broughton Harborough Bradstone Close Surface Dressing Astley Broughton Harborough Broctone Close Surface Dressing Astley Broughton Harborough Chandler Way Surface Dressing Astley Broughton Harborough Cromford Way Surface Dressing Astley Broughton Harborough Hallbrook Road Surface Dressing Astley Broughton Harborough Holbeck Drive Surface Dressing Astley Broughton Harborough Manton Close Surface Dressing Astley Broughton Harborough Mayre Close Surface Dressing Astley Broughton Harborough Netherfield Close Surface Dressing Astley Broughton Harborough Spinner Close Surface Dressing Astley Broughton Harborough Trent Close Surface Dressing Astley Burton Harborough Scotland Lane Surface Dressing Overy

62

Parish/ Treatment/ District Location/ scheme name Notes village Description Harborough Drayton Great Eaton Road Surface Dressing Harborough Drayton Main Street Surface Dressing Great Harborough Barnsdale Surface Dressing Easton Great Harborough Cross Bank Surface Dressing Easton Harborough Great Glen Stretton Road Surface Dressing Houghton Harborough Streeton Lane Surface Dressing on the Hill Harborough Hungarton Baggrave Hall Road Surface Dressing Harborough Hungarton Ingarsby Lane Surface Dressing Husbands Harborough Leicester Road Surface Dressing Bosworth Husbands Harborough Sibbertoft Road Surface Dressing Bosworth Husbands Harborough Welford Road Surface Dressing Bosworth Husbands Harborough Welford Road Surface Dressing Bosworth Kibworth Harborough Elliot Close Surface Dressing Beauchamp Kibworth Works Harborough Fleckney Road Surface Dressing Beauchamp Cancelled Kibworth Harborough High Street Surface Dressing Beauchamp Kibworth Harborough School Road Surface Dressing Beauchamp Kibworth Harborough School Walk Surface Dressing Beauchamp Kibworth Harborough Smeeton Road Surface Dressing Beauchamp Harborough Knaptoft Welford Road Surface Dressing From Bunkers Hill to Long Harborough Laughton Surface Dressing Close Lane Works Harborough Laughton Laughton Road Surface Dressing Cancelled Harborough Laughton Mill Hill Surface Dressing Works Harborough Leire Dunton Road Surface Dressing Cancelled Harborough Leire Dunton Road Surface Dressing Works Harborough Leire Frolesworth Road Surface Dressing Cancelled Harborough Lowesby Leicester Road Surface Dressing Harborough Lowesby Melton Road Surface Dressing Harborough Lubenham Laughton Road Surface Dressing Works Harborough Lubenham Laughton Road Surface Dressing Cancelled Harborough Lubenham Laughton Road Surface Dressing Harborough Lubenham Marston Road Surface Dressing Harborough Lutterworth Allfrey Close Surface Dressing

63

Parish/ Treatment/ District Location/ scheme name Notes village Description Harborough Lutterworth Azalea Close Surface Dressing Harborough Lutterworth Beamont Close Surface Dressing Harborough Lutterworth Dempsey Close Surface Dressing Harborough Lutterworth Douglas Bader Drive Surface Dressing Harborough Lutterworth Forsythia Close Surface Dressing Harborough Lutterworth Honeysuckle Close Surface Dressing Harborough Lutterworth Jasmine Close Surface Dressing Harborough Lutterworth Johnnie Johnson Drive Surface Dressing Harborough Lutterworth Lacey Close Surface Dressing Harborough Lutterworth Lavender Close Surface Dressing Harborough Lutterworth Robinia Close Surface Dressing Market Harborough Alvington Way Surface Dressing Harborough Market Harborough Bates Close Surface Dressing Harborough Market Harborough Burnmill Road Surface Dressing Harborough Market Harborough Coales Gardens Surface Dressing Harborough Market Harborough Cromwell Crescent Surface Dressing Harborough Market Harborough Davies Close Surface Dressing Harborough Market Harborough Doddridge Road Surface Dressing Harborough Market Harborough Hammond Way Surface Dressing Harborough Market Harborough Kestian Close Surface Dressing Harborough Market Harborough Kingston Way Surface Dressing Harborough Market Harborough Monroe Close Surface Dressing Harborough Market Harborough Ridgeway West Surface Dressing Harborough Market Harborough Roman Way Surface Dressing Harborough Market Harborough Roundhill Close Surface Dressing Harborough Market Harborough Sherrard Road Surface Dressing Harborough Market Harborough Smyth Close Surface Dressing Harborough Market Harborough Stockwell Close Surface Dressing Harborough Market Harborough The Crescent Surface Dressing Harborough Market Harborough The Longlands Surface Dressing Harborough Market Harborough The Ridgeway Surface Dressing Harborough

64

Parish/ Treatment/ District Location/ scheme name Notes village Description Market Harborough The Woodlands Surface Dressing Harborough Market Harborough Timson Close Surface Dressing Harborough Market Harborough Turnpike Close Surface Dressing Harborough Market Harborough Tymecrosse Gardens Surface Dressing Harborough Harborough Medbourne Uppingham Road Surface Dressing Harborough Mowsley Welford Road Surface Dressing Harborough Saddington Shearsby Road Surface Dressing Harborough Scraptoft Cranbrook Road Surface Dressing Harborough Scraptoft Pulford Drive Surface Dressing Harborough Shearsby Welford Road Surface Dressing Smeeton Harborough Main Street Surface Dressing Westerby Harborough Stockerston Medbourne Road Surface Dressing Works Harborough Stockerston Uppingham Road Surface Dressing Cancelled From Mill Hill to Station Harborough Theddingworth Surface Dressing Road Harborough Theddingworth Station Road Surface Dressing Thurnby Harborough Fern Close Surface Dressing and Bushby Thurnby Harborough Pulford Drive Surface Dressing and Bushby Thurnby Harborough Sedgefield Drive Surface Dressing and Bushby Thurnby Harborough Somerby Road Surface Dressing and Bushby Thurnby Harborough Stirling Drive Surface Dressing and Bushby Thurnby Harborough Vale End Surface Dressing and Bushby Harborough Tilton Melton Road Surface Dressing Tugby and Harborough Crackbottle Road Surface Dressing Keythorpe Harborough Welham Bowden Lane Surface Dressing Melton Ab Kettleby Nottingham Road Surface Dressing Melton Asfordby Brook Lane Surface Dressing Melton Asfordby Burnaby Place Surface Dressing Melton Asfordby Charnwood Avenue Surface Dressing Melton Asfordby Jubille Avenue Surface Dressing Melton Asfordby Mill Lane Surface Dressing Melton Asfordby Pump Lane Surface Dressing Melton Asfordby Regency Road Surface Dressing Melton Asfordby Woodhouse Road Surface Dressing Melton Belvoir Knipton Lane Surface Dressing Broughton Melton Nottingham Road Surface Dressing and Old

65

Parish/ Treatment/ District Location/ scheme name Notes village Description Dalby Burton and Melton Aerodrome Road Surface Dressing Dalby Burton and Melton Burrough Road Surface Dressing Dalby Burton and Melton Crown Hill Surface Dressing Dalby

66

Footway Treatments (including full reconstruction and planned patching)

Cost Bands A >£200k, B <£200k >£50k, C <£50k

Parish/ Treatment/ Cost District Location/ scheme name Notes village Description Band Cross Street - From Footway Construction Blaby Enderby Brook Street to Townsend C Reconstruction Q3 Road Ashby Road - From Epinal Footway Construction Charnwood Loughborough Way towards Radmoor C Reconstruction Q2 Road Greenacres Drive - Phase Footway Construction Harborough Lutterworth B 2 from Bitteswell Road Reconstruction Q4 Main Street - From the Footway Construction Harborough Mowsley church to 30mph on C Reconstruction Q4 Saddington Road Hinckley Ashby Road - Linked to Footway Construction and Hinckley Hinckley Phase 3 C Reconstruction Q2 Bosworth Improvements Sherrard Street - Between Melton Footway Construction Melton Sage Cross Street and C Mowbray Reconstruction Q3 Rutland Street Park Road - From Melton Nottingham Street towards Footway Construction Melton C Mowbray Nottingham Road – Reconstruction Q3 replacing damaged flags Southway - Between Footway Reserve Blaby Blaby Winchester Road and B Reconstruction Scheme Lutterworth Road Hinckley Strathmore Road - Full Footway Reserve and Hinckley length, replacing damaged B Reconstruction Scheme Bosworth flags

67

Flood Alleviation Schemes

Cost Bands A >£200k, B <£200k >£50k, C <£50k

Parish/ Treatment/ Cost District Location/ scheme name Notes village Description Band Kirby Upgrade of C Blaby Main Street & Ratby Lane Muxloe highway drain Drainage C alterations to Charnwood Loughborough Leicester Road remove standing water Improvements C to drainage channels and Charnwood Rothley Loughborough Road removal of verge obstruction Phase 2 works C Charnwood Loughborough Epinal Way/Ashby Road to resolve standing water Replacement B Station Road between of Harborough Thurnby Forest Rise and Somerby blocked/collap Road sed highway drain Diversion of C Main Street north of St highway drain Harborough Leire Peters Close close to St Peters Close Northampton Investigation C Market Harborough Road/Welland Park Road and upgrade of Harborough junction highway drains Upgrade of C Hinckley Barlestone Road between footway and Newbold and Dragon Lane and Newbold carriageway Verdon Bosworth Road drainage (phase 4) Hinckley Additional C and Hinckley Ashby Road carriageway Bosworth gullies Upgrade of C Hinckley carriageway Newton and Desford Road drainage to Unthank Bosworth remove standing water Carry Forward C Hinckley Wigston from 2015/16 , and Church Lane Parva upgrade Bosworth highway drains

68

Parish/ Treatment/ Cost District Location/ scheme name Notes village Description Band Replacement C Melton Stonesby Alma Barn, Main Street culvert and road crossing Upgrade of culvert and C Upgrade of Melton Wymondham restrictive piping under highway drain Main Street. Upgrade of C existing Goadby highway Melton Main Street Marwood drainage and replacement culvert Upgrade of C North West Ashby Albert Village, Occupation drainage Leics Woulds Lane system New drain and C footway North West alterations to Coalville Ashby Road Leics resolve footway flooding Carry over B North West Appleby A444 Atherstone Road scheme from Leics Magna 2015/16

69

Bridge Maintenance Schemes

Cost Bands A >£200k, B <£200k >£50k, C <£50k

Parish/ Treatment/ Cost District Location/scheme name Notes village Description Band Sutton Hill Bridge (0495) Brickwork Blaby Croft C Coventry Road repairs Anticipated Waterproofing Blaby Kirby Muxloe Blood's Hill (0600) B start bridge deck 01/08/16 River training Charnwood Barkby Barkby Brook (8026) C wall repairs Parapet Charnwood Cossington Syston Road (0533) C repairs Parapet Charnwood Loughborough Belton Road (0299) C painting Parapet Charnwood Loughborough Browns Lane (1146) C painting Belton Road West Parapet Charnwood Loughborough C Extension (1188) painting Parapet Charnwood Loughborough Buckingham Drive (1222) C painting Parapet Charnwood Rothley Town Green (1152) C painting Charnwood Swithland Main Street (1294) Culvert repairs C Completed Peatling Brickwork Harborough Arnesby Lane (1034) C Magna repairs Waterproofing, Hinckley & A50 Markfield Road Groby joints & B Bosworth (0189) parapet repairs Hinckley & A50 Markfield Road Parapet Groby C Bosworth (0190) painting Hinckley & Parapet Ratby Station Road (0620) C Bosworth painting Concrete Melton Ashby Folville Gaddesby Lane (0483) C saddle Melton Parapet Melton Wilton Road (0281) C Mowbray painting Melton Concrete Melton Edendale Road (1289) C Mowbray repairs North West Brickwork Measham Birds Hill (0244) C Leics repairs North West Saltersford Bridge, Bridge Oakthorpe B Leics Burton Road (0514) replacement Oadby & Oadby & Countesthorpe Road Parapet C Wigston Wigston (0813) painting Oadby & Oadby & Parapet Severn Road (0984) C Wigston Wigston painting

70

Safety Barrier Repair and Renewal Schemes

Cost Bands A >£200k, B <£200k >£50k, C <£50k

Parish/ Treatment/ Cost District Location/ scheme name Notes village Description Band Hinckley Lychgate Lane - From Aston Safety Barrier and Brook Street to Townsend Flamville Renewal Bosworth Road Welby Lane - Either side Safety Barrier Melton Asfordby of Brook Crossing Renewal

71

Street Lighting Maintenance & Renewal

Treatment/ District Parish/ village Location/ scheme name Description No. of Columns

Blaby Blaby Blaby 18 Blaby Braunstone Braunstone 50 Blaby Kirby Muxloe Kirby Muxloe 70

Blaby Sapcote Sapcote 13

Blaby Sharnford Sharnford 26

Blaby Thurlaston Thurlaston 16 Charnwood Burton on the Wolds Burton on the Wolds 10 Charnwood Hathern Hathern 26 Charnwood Mountsorrel Mountsorrel 37 Charnwood Newtown Linford Newtown Linford 13

Charnwood Rearsby Rearsby 18

Charnwood Rothley Rothley 48 Charnwood Sileby Sileby 19 Charnwood South Croxton South Croxton 4

Charnwood Wymeswold Wymeswold 14

Harborough Broughton Astley Broughton Astley 89 Harborough Gilmorton Gilmorton 13 Harborough Great Easton Great Easton 17

Harborough Kibworth Beauchamp Kibworth Beauchamp 76

Harborough Kibworth Harcourt Kibworth Harcourt 10 Harborough Lutterworth Lutterworth 33 Harborough Scraptoft Scraptoft 17 Harborough Swinford Swinford 6 Harborough Ullesthorpe Ullesthorpe 22 Hinckley and Barlestone Barlestone 37 Bosworth Hinckley and Barwell Barwell 73 Bosworth

72

Treatment/ District Parish/ village Location/ scheme name Description Hinckley and Burbage Burbage 213 Bosworth Hinckley and Desford Desford 91 Bosworth Hinckley and Hinckley Hinckley 469 Bosworth Hinckley and Newbold Verdon Newbold Verdon 54 Bosworth Hinckley and Ratby Ratby 46 Bosworth Hinckley and Sheepy Magna Sheepy Magna 19 Bosworth Hinckley and Stoke Golding Stoke Golding 27 Bosworth Hinckley and Twycross Twycross 20 Bosworth Hinckley and Witherley and Fenny Witherley and Fenny Drayton 31 Bosworth Drayton Melton Asfordby Asfordby 20 Melton Bottesford Bottesford 27 Broughton and Old Melton Broughton and Old Dalby 33 Dalby Melton Melton Mowbray Melton Mowbray 107 North West Leics Ashby de la Zouch Ashby de la Zouch 62

North West Leics Castle Donington Castle Donington 46

North West Leics Coalville Coalville 127

NWL Appleby Magna Appleby Magna 16 Oadby and Oadby and Wigston Oadby and Wigston 217 Wigston

73

Traffic Signal Renewal

Cost Bands A >£200k, B <£200k >£50k, C <£50k

Parish/ Location/ scheme Treatment/ Cost District Notes village name Description Band Hinckley, Melton, Digital Various Birstall, Various Communications B Leicester Upgrade Forest East A47 Hinckley Leicester Blaby Road/Kings Drive Pelican Renewal C Forest East junction A47 Hinckley Leicester Blaby Road/Kathleen Rutland Pelican Renewal C Forest East Home Loughboroug Sparrow Hill/The Junction Control Charnwood C h Coneries junction Renewal

Charnwood Syston Melton Road/Brookside Pelican Renewal C Melton Road/Parkstone Charnwood Syston Pelican Renewal C Road Melton Norman Way/Snow Hill Junction Control Melton C Mowbray junction Renewal North West Castle A453/Coppice Corner Junction Control C Leics Donnington junction Renewal Oadby and Bull Head Street/Bell Wigston Pelican Renewal C Wigston Street Coventry Road / Junction Control Blaby Lutterworth C Reserve Bitteswell Road Renewal Woodgate, Charnwood Loughbrough Pelican Renewal C Reserve Loughborough Oadby & Leicester Rd / Frederick Wigston Pelican Renewal C Reserve Wigston Street

This page is intentionally left blank 75

IMPROVEMENT WORKS ANTICIPATED 2016/17 Last updated: 01.06.16 - V1.3 By: AS

Cost Anticipated District Scheme No. Scheme Location Details Status PE Band Construction Countesthorpe, Leicester Road junction with Blaby 4300.000 Proposed traffic signals Awaiting construction B Q2 RU Hospital Lane

Blaby GPFG001.004 Glenfield, Elm Tree Avenue Developer funded traffic calming Complete C Completion Q1 GN

Leicester North West Major Transport Major scheme - widening and installation Project - A50 County Hall roundabout, of traffic signals at all three junctions - to Blaby 0031.001/2 Under construction A Completion Q1/Q2 DC A50/A563 New Parks Way roundabout and improve capacity and provide A563 Aikman Ave junction pedestrian/cycle facilities.

Junction improvement at B4114/Leicester Blaby 0034.000 Lubbesthorpe Strategic Employment Site Design underway A Q2/Q3/Q4 TM Lane and new junction on Leicester Lane

Charnwood 4653.000 Rothley, Westfield Lane Developer funded Vehicle Activated Signs Consultation ongoing C Q3 CH

Seagrave, Swan Street/Butchers Lane - Phase Preliminary design Charnwood 4673.000 Developer Funded traffic calming C Q3 CH 2 underway Construction Charnwood 4475.000 Syston, A607 Thurmaston Road Clearway signing C Completion Q1 RW underway

Developer funded bus shelter Harborough 3979.002 Great Glen, Church Road Complete C Q1 RW improvements

Developer funded cycle and pedestrain Harborough 3999.001 Great Glen, Stretton Road facilities along Stretton Road, High Street Design underway B Q3/Q4 SC to existing shared facilities in Great Glen

Kibworth Harcourt, Main Sreet, Albert Street Harborough 4533.001 Developer funded traffic calming Design underway B Q3/Q4 SC and Langton Road

Developer funded footway improvements Kibworth Beauchamp, Thackery Lane to Harborough 4533.002 between Thackery Lane and Kibworth CE Design underway B Q3/Q4 SC Hillcrest Avenue Primary School

Measures to reduce speeds and improve Thurnby and Bushby, Court Road/Grange Harborough 4266.002 road safety, traffic flow and accessibility Design underway C Q2/Q3 GN Lane/Main Street Junction Trial for pedestrians - funded by Parish Council

Permanent Vehicle Activated Sign request Harborough 4661.000 Swinford, Rugby Road and Kilworth Road from Swinford Parish Council, 3rd party Design Underway C Q2/Q3 LM funded

Hinckley and 4058.009 Earl Shilton, Mill Lane Footway widening works outside school Awaiting construction C Q2/Q3 ST Bosworth

Hinckley and Transport improvements forming part of Construction 4227.000 Hinckley, Ashby Road A Q1/Q2/Q3 AS Bosworth Zone 3 of the Hinckley Area Project underway

Hinckley and Hinckley, Ashby Road to Earl Shilton, High Transport improvements forming part of Construction 4225.000 A Q1/Q2/Q3 AS Bosworth Street Zone 3 of the Hinckley Area Project underway

Hinckley and Opening up to two-way traffic and Construction 4237.000 Hinckley, Regent Street B Q1/Q2 PL Bosworth provision of additional parking underway Hinckley and Hinckley, Stoneygate Drive and Leicester Transport improvements forming part of 4228.000 Awaiting construction B Q2/Q3 AS Bosworth Road Zone 3 of the Hinckley Area Project Installation of traffic signals on M1 J22 Hinckley and Markfield, A511 Little Shaw Lane/M1 Construction MTP0034.000 roundabout and capacity improvement A Completion Q1/Q2 RR Bosworth J22/A50 underway works Hinckley and Bus Stop Improvements in Zone 3 of the Construction 4285.003 Various C Q1/Q2/Q3 AS Bosworth Hinckley Area Project underway 4479.000 and Developer funded pelican crossing and Melton Melton, Nottingham Road Design underway B Q2 17/18 CH 4212.000 walking improvements

North West Installation of traffic signals at junction MTP0035.000 Ashby, A42 J13 Design underway A Q3/Q4 SChow Leicestershire and capacity improvement works

North West Installation of new culvert and farm 4550.000 Ibstock, Valley Farm Under construction A Completion Q1 MD Leicestershire access track

Wigston, Aylestone Lane/Shackerdale Road Local Safety Scheme - junction Oadby & Wigston TM4300 Complete C Completion Q1 PW junction improvement

D:\moderngov\Data\AgendaItemDocs\3\9\4\AI00048493\$m215qi5c 76

Local Safety Scheme - provision of speed Oadby & Wigston TM4300 Wigston, Aylestone Lane Complete C Completion Q1 PW table at existing zebra crossing

Notes

Cost Band Key: C <£50K; B £50K - £200K; A > £200K

Anticipated Construction: Q1 = April - June Q2 = July - September Q3 = October - December Q4 = January - March Future = future year not yet confirmed

Officer to Contact: Martin O'Connor Tel. (0116) 305 0001 Email [email protected]

D:\moderngov\Data\AgendaItemDocs\3\9\4\AI00048493\$m215qi5c 77 Agenda Item 12 FOR INFORMATION ONLY

LEICESTERSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL HIGHWAYS FORUM FOR MELTON

12TH JULY 2016

PROGRAMME OF TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT WORK - CURRENT POSITION

REPORT OF THE DIRECTOR OF ENVIRONMENT AND TRANSPORT

Purpose of Report

1. To inform Members of the current status of the traffic management work programme.

Work Programmes

2. The programme and current status of traffic management work is summarised in the attached appendices:

Works Programme Appendix 2016/17 Schemes (all) A

Resource Implications

3. Traffic management schemes are funded from various sources:  The County Council’s traffic management revenue allocation – includes most schemes undertaken as a result of an enquiry;  Capital funding (County Council, Local Sustainable Transport Fund etc.) – planned area-wide work;  Developers – no resource implications;  Outside funding (individuals, parishes, districts etc) – those schemes that are unlikely to be rated high enough to justify County Council funding.

Equal Opportunities Implications

4. No direct implications have been identified.

Recommendation

5. Members are requested to note the content of this report.

Officer to Contact

Fiona Blockley Tel: 0116 305 0001 Email: [email protected]

Background Papers None

This page is intentionally left blank DESIGN & DELIVERY TRO'S / NOTICES / TM SCHEMES 2016/17 Last updated: 27/06/2016 By: RD

District Parish / Town Location Scheme / comments

Complete

Objections

Works ordered Works

Officerto contact

Scheme Scheme Approval

InitialConsultation

Formal consultation Formal

Approvalto advertise Anticipatedconstruction Summer SES Leicester Lane TRO and relocation of right Blaby Enderby Leicester Lane √ √ √ Yes RW 2016 turn ban and change speed limit.

Speed Limt and Safety measures on sections of Bradgate Hill, Groby Road, Markfield Autumn Blaby Blaby √ √ √ Yes the A50. Consultation in May/June. Report back SB 79 Road, Leicester Road 2016 on findings before committing to a scheme

Blaby Narborough Thornton Drive √ Q4 Proposed no waiting at any time SB

Developer funded. Extension of single yellow Blaby Blaby Enderby Road √ √ √ √ √ √ Q3 RD line.

Blaby Lubbesthorpe Lubbesthorpe Bridle Road √ √ √ √ √ Q2 Developer funded. Prohibition of through traffic RD

Blaby Lubbesthorpe Beggars Lane √ √ Q3 Developer funded. Proposed 40mph speed limit RD

Summer Charnwood Birstall A6, Loughborough Road Developer funded. Bus lane SC 2016 Summer Charnwood Rothley Swithland Lane √ n/a √ Yes Developer funded. Speed cushions CH 2016 Traffic safety scheme at junction with poor Charnwood Thurcaston & Cropston Reservoir Road Q3 SB accident history Remedial TRO and Signage work required as a Charnwood Loughborough Inner Relief Road √ DM result of a public enquiry

Charnwood Sileby Review HGV signage √ √ √ √ √ √ √ Q2 Signage scheme for HGV traffic SB

Charnwood Birstall Birstall Road √ √ √ √ √ √ Q1 Implement SID sign SB

Working with parish over parking restrictions Charnwood Newtown Linford Bradgate Park Q4 SB around Bradgate Park

Charnwood Woodhouse Beaumanor Hall √ Q2 Brown tourism signs SB

Charnwood Shepshed Iveshead Road √ Q3 Developer funded. Proposed Speed Limit RD

Developer funded. Proposed bus stop Charnwood Anstey Stadon Road / The Nook √ Q2 2017 RD relocation

Charnwood Rothley Mountsorrel Lane √ √ √ √ √ √ √ Q1 Developer funded. Proposed 30mph speed limit RD

Developer funded. Proposed waiting Charnwood Loughborough Wharncliffe Road √ √ √ √ √ Q1 RD restrictions.

Charnwood Loughborough Baxter Gate √ √ √ √ √ √ √ Q1 Developer funded. Proposed loading/taxi bay RD

Developer funded. Proposed amendment to Charnwood Loughborough Little Moor Lane / Empress Road √ √ Q3 RD existing waiting restrictions. Main Street, Albert Street and Langton Summer Harborough Kibworth Harcourt n/a Developer funded. Proposed traffic calming SC Road 2016

K:\Information and Democratic Support Team\JOBS\COMMSUPP\Highway Forums\Melton Forum\12072016\12. TRO\11A. Design & Delivery 2016-17.xls

District Parish / Town Location Scheme / comments

Complete

Objections

Works ordered Works

Officerto contact

Scheme Scheme Approval

InitialConsultation

Formal consultation Formal

Approvalto advertise Anticipatedconstruction Spring Spring Developer funded. - Proposed pelican crossing - Harborough Lutterworth Leicester Road √ √ Yes √ n/a n/a MA 2016 2016 developer to implement.

Harborough Lutterworth Town Centre √ √ √ √ Q2 Review of parking restrictions on car parks AH

Summer Developer funded. Proposed zebra crossing Harborough Broughton Astley Station Road / Dunton Road √ n/a √ Yes RW 2016 and bus stop improvements

Developer funded. Proposed extension to Harborough Harborough Kettering Road √ √ √ √ √ Q2 RD 40mph speed limit

Developer funded. Proposed waiting Harborough Lutterworth Station Road √ √ √ √ √ Q3 RD restrictions.

Harborough Broughton Astley Broughton Way / Buxton Crescent √ √ √ √ Q3 Developer funded. Proposed speed limit RD

Developer funded. Proposed waiting and weight Harborough Broughton Astley Broughton Way / Buxton Crescent Q3 RD restrictions.

Hinckley and Developer funded. Proposed traffic regulation Hinckley Willowbank √ √ √ Yes √ √ n/a n/a MA Bosworth order Hinckley and Review of HGV signage around Desford , Desford Peckelton Lane √ √ √ √ √ Q3 SB Bosworth working with Catapiller and Neovia Logistics Hinckley and Work identified by strategy team over current Groby Village Centre waiting restrictions √ √ √ √ Q4 MP Bosworth waiting restrctions within the village centre To develop with the Parish a scheme to Hinckley and introduce waiting restrictions, also looking at a Market Bosworth Village Centre √ √ √ √ Q3 SB Bosworth one way system and additional parking within

the village. 80 Hinckley and Replace existing bridge signs as a result of on- Market Bosworth Kettering Road & Bellfield Road √ SB Bosworth going bridge strikes being reported Hinckley and Ratby Main Street, Station Road & Chapel Lane √ Q4 Waiting restrictions within village SB Bosworth Hinckley and Barlestone Newbold Road √ √ √ √ √ Q3 Waiting restrictions within village SB Bosworth Hinckley and Developer funded. Proposed prohibition of Earl Shilton Breach Lane & Oaklands Way √ √ √ √ √ Q2 RD Bosworth horses Winter Melton Melton Nottingham Road √ n/a Developer funded. Pelican crossing CH 2016 North West Developer funded. Speed cushions. Developer Measham Atherstone Road √ n/a √ Yes √ √ n/a n/a CH Leicestershire to implement North West Autumn Coalville Highfield Street √ √ Developer funded. - Waiting restrictions CH Leicestershire 2016 North West Summer Thringstone Loughborough Road √ n/a Developer funded. Speed table CH Leicestershire 2016 North West Accident scheme , raised zebra crossing to be Oakthorpe Measham Road √ Q4 SB Leicestershire installed

K:\Information and Democratic Support Team\JOBS\COMMSUPP\Highway Forums\Melton Forum\12072016\12. TRO\11A. Design & Delivery 2016-17.xls

District Parish / Town Location Scheme / comments

Complete

Objections

Works ordered Works

Officerto contact

Scheme Scheme Approval

InitialConsultation

Formal consultation Formal

Approvalto advertise Anticipatedconstruction North West Breedon On The Hill / Work with Parish to lower speed limit on A453 A453 √ SB Leicestershire Isley Walton between Breedon and Isley Walton

North West Working with Parish over changes to the current Castle Donington Borough Street √ √ √ √ √ √ √ Q2 SB Leicestershire time restricted parking on Borough Street

North West Castle Donington A50 Roundabout √ √ √ √ √ Q2 Scheme approved , scheduled July 2016 SB Leicestershire 81 North West Kegworth Market Place √ Q4 Waiting restrictions within village shopping area SB Leicestershire North West Moira Ashby Road √ Q4 Provide crossing facility at roundabout SB Leicestershire North West Measham Atherstone Road √ √ √ √ √ √ Q2 Developer funded. Gateway treatment RD Leicestershire North West Developer funded. Proposed prohibition of Hugglescote Grange Road √ √ √ √ Q4 RD Leicestershire driving Developer funded. Proposed waiting North West Autumn Coalville Highfield Street √ √ √ √ Q2 restrictions. Awaiting information from developer RD Leicestershire 2016 in order to proceed. North West Summer Developer funded. Proposed waiting Ashby de la Zouch Smithy Road √ √ Q3 RD Leicestershire 2016 restrictions. North West Developer funded. Proposed extension to Lockington-Hemington Tamworth Road Q3 RD Leicestershire 30mph speed limit North West Developer funded. Proposed waiting Whitwick Parsonwood Hill √ Q2 RD Leicestershire restrictions.

Summer Borough Council promoted pedestrianisation Oadby & Wigston Wigston Bell Street √ √ √ Yes GN 2016 Order - Experimental

Oadby & Wigston Wigston Aylestone Lane √ √ √ √ √ √ √ Q1 Accident reduction scheme on Aylestone Lane SB

Waiting restrictions around school and nearby Oadby & Wigston Oadby New Street √ √ √ √ √ Q4 SB junctions Developer funded. Formalisation of waiting Oadby & Wigston Wigston Moat Street / Peacock Place √ √ √ √ Q2 RD restrictions.

K:\Information and Democratic Support Team\JOBS\COMMSUPP\Highway Forums\Melton Forum\12072016\12. TRO\11A. Design & Delivery 2016-17.xls This page is intentionally left blank