Medium Term Financial Plan 2016 – 2019 (P.72/2015): fourteenth amendment.

STATES OF JERSEY

r

MEDIUM TERM FINANCIAL PLAN 2016 – 2019 (P.72/2015): FOURTEENTH AMENDMENT

Lodged au Greffe on 22nd September 2015 by Deputy J.M. Maçon of St. Saviour

STATES GREFFE

2015   Price code: B  P.72 Amd.(14)

MEDIUM TERM FINANCIAL PLAN 2016 – 2019 (P.72/2015): FOURTEENTH AMENDMENT

____________

PAGE 2, PARAGRAPH (b) –

After the words "Summary Table D" in sub-paragraph (ii) insert the words –

"except that the allocation to Contingency for 2016 shall be reduced by £300,000 to offset the increase in the amount that may be appropriated in the  Budget  for  capital  heads  of  expenditure  for  2016  to  fund  road improvements in St. Saviour .";

and after the words "future hospital provision" in sub-paragraph (iii) insert the words –

"except that the total amount that may be appropriated in the Budget for capital heads of expenditure for 2016 shall be increased by £300,000 to fund road improvements in St. Saviour ".

DEPUTY J.M. MAÇON OF ST. SAVIOUR

REPORT

This amendment is designed to ensure that adequate capital sums are available to allocate in the Budget 2016 to support saver traffic and pedestrians facilities in the Parish  of   St. Saviour .   St. Saviour  is  a  gateway  Parish,  which  sees  many  people travelling through for the school run (having the most schools in the Parish) and daily commute. Sadly, at these pressured times due respect is not always shown to the residents, many feeling that they take their lives in their hands when trying to simply cross a road. This funding will be used to improve Bagot and Longueville Road, a highly  populated  area. The  Transport  and Technical  Services  Department  already accepts that these are not safe roads and improvements need to be made. However, they need the funding in order to do so. Many promises have been made for decades and yet nothing delivered. We have already have a death in the recent past on these roads, and something needs to be done to slow the traffic, creating more gaps in allowing residents to cross and proper crossing facilities. All of these would be one-off capital spend.

I believe that the unallocated amounts in the £37.2 million Contingency Fund can cope with these minor reductions.

The Economic Development Department makes many dubious grants ("Canbedone", business developments grants to business people that designed the scheme itself, etc. come to mind) coming to several £100,000s, so they can take this reduction, for one- off spends.

I  would  welcome  the  Council  of  Ministers  taking  a  can  do'  approach  when considering  my  amendments,  and  looking  carefully  if  they  feel  I  have  identified incorrect funding sources.

• A death and many serious injuries have already occurred in the recent past on Bagot and Longueville road
• Jersey has an unacceptably high level of pedestrian injury rate – more and safer facilities are needed
• The Sustainable transport policy supports
• Safer routes to Schools policy Supports
• Health policy Supports
• Strategic Plan Supports – Better and safer Urban living
• Residents have been calling out foe these improvements for years.

Financial and manpower implications

The following information has been provided by the Transport and Technical Services Department in relation to the cost of the improvements I am seeking –

• Trial traffic signal installation at Longueville Road/Rue des Prés, permanent traffic signal installation – £120k
• Install traffic signals, including a pedestrian crossing at the junction of Plat Douet Road – £110k

• Cost of a Pelican Crossing at Longueville Road – £35,000
• Bagatelle Road – £35,000.

This amendment is revenue-neutral for overall 2016 spending, as the increased capital amount will be offset by a reduction in the allocation to Contingency. There are no manpower implications arising.

APPENDIX

WRITTEN QUESTION TO THE MINISTER FOR TRANSPORT AND TECHNICAL SERVICES BY DEPUTY J.M. MAON OF ST. SAVIOUR ANSWER TO BE TABLED ON TUESDAY 10th MARCH 2015

Question

Further to the previous Minister's response to question 8424 on 14th July 2014, can the Minister explain when the work for traffic and crossing improvements at the Longueville Road/Rue des Prés junction will commence, as it would appear that the promised consultation that was due to take place in the last quarter of 2014 has not occurred, and if not, why not?

Answer

As explained in the previous Minister's response of 14th July 2014, the original assessment related to calls for a pedestrian crossing in Longueville Road by Miladi Farm (copy of answer to 8424 attached).

We are sure you will appreciate there is a large call on my small team of Traffic Engineers' time. They are progressing a number of priority schemes in St. Saviour and other parishes.

Unfortunately limited resources have meant that the Department has been unable to take the scheme beyond concept design. This now needs to be discussed and agreed with the Connétable and the District Deputies to ensure Parish support.

Once a preferred solution has been agreed with the Connétable and Deputies, we will then  instruct  the  Officers  to  prepare  the  detailed  materials  required  for  a  public consultation. We anticipate a consultation being carried out later in 2015, with capital funding  provisionally  allocated  in  2016,  subject  to  a  successful  consultation  and continued funding.

WRITTEN QUESTION TO THE MINISTER FOR TRANSPORT AND TECHNICAL SERVICES BY DEPUTY J.M. MAÇON OF ST. SAVIOUR ANSWER TO BE TABLED ON MONDAY 14th JULY 2014

Question

Could the Minister explain what action, if any, has been taken to establish a pedestrian crossing at Miladi Farm, to include reference to –

1. the timeline of expected completion;
2. any drawings that are currently underway and any consultation with residents or the Parish which has or will be undertaken?

Answer

My Department has assessed the request for a crossing on Longueville Road by Miladi Farm and concluded that because of the very low number of pedestrians crossing at that location and low accident history, a formal crossing, such as a Zebra or Pelican,

would not be an appropriate or safe solution. The Department therefore designed a road realignment which would have enabled a pedestrian refuge island to be installed, however this required a small area of land acquisition from a private land owner and attempts to acquire that land failed.

Although the number of recorded accidents on Longueville Road by Miladi Farm is low, there have been several road injuries in recent years elsewhere along that route, including  a  motorcyclist  fatality.  The  accidents  are  mostly  centred  around  the junctions with La Rue des Prés, Les Varines and Plat Douet Road. This suggests therefore that a more comprehensive approach should be taken and the Department is designing a speed reduction scheme which will encompass the length of Longueville Road stretching from Rue du Prés junction to Plat Douet Road junction. This should reduce the likelihood of accidents along the route and also assist pedestrians who wish to cross at various locations along the entire length of that road. A provisional sum of £100,000 has been allocated to this project from TTS capital funding in 2015. The Department will discuss the proposals with the Connétable and a public consultation will be carried out later this year.

WRITTEN QUESTION TO THE MINISTER FOR TRANSPORT AND TECHNICAL SERVICES BY DEPUTY J.M. MAÇON OF ST. SAVIOUR ANSWER TO BE TABLED ON TUESDAY 3rd MAY 2011

Question

Would the Minister explain what specific legislative barriers exist, if any, which have prevented the establishment of a pelican crossing on Longueville Road next to Miladi Farm Parade?

Answer

There are no specific legislative barriers to providing a pelican type crossing on Longueville Road next to Miladi Parade. Under Article 69 of the Road Traffic (Jersey) Law 1956, the Minister for Transport and Technical Services may, after consultation with the Connétable of the Parish in which the road is situated, establish on any road such crossings for pedestrians as the Minister considers necessary.

However, I am advised by my officers that this location is not a suitable location in which to establish a pelican or zebra type crossing. Neither of these two types of crossings are a guarantee of pedestrian safety. Studies into pedestrian injury accidents that have occurred at such crossings both on the island and in the UK, indicate that a location such as Longueville Road, outside Miladi Parade, has a very high likelihood of pedestrian injury accidents occurring. The reasons for this are:

• The close proximity of a number of vehicular accesses, including that to Miladi Parade itself, resulting in a high likelihood of red light running from drivers exiting these accesses and failing to take account of the crossing and crossing pedestrians.
• The low level of future usage of a crossing at this location, especially for the majority of the day and evening outside peak traffic and pedestrian hours, again leading to red light running with consequent danger to pedestrians.

The  Department  has  therefore  advised  me  that  the  best  option  for  providing  a pedestrian  facility  at  this  location  is  a  pedestrian  refuge  Island.  Regrettably, negotiations with a nearby Landlord to acquire the necessary 400 mm. wide strip of land to widen the road sufficiently to provide an Island, have not been successful.

WRITTEN QUESTION TO THE MINISTER FOR TRANSPORT AND TECHNICAL SERVICES BY DEPUTY J.M. MAÇON OF ST. SAVIOUR ANSWER TO BE TABLED ON TUESDAY 2nd JUNE 2009

Question

"What action, if any, has the Minister taken to address the need for a pedestrian crossing along Longueville Road at Miladi Parade?"

Answer

Previous Committees and Ministers with responsibility for pedestrian and road safety have supported the construction of an island refuge at Miladi Parade, Longueville Road. I, too, support this proposal. However, as my predecessor reported to the States last year (11th March 2008 and 2nd December 2008), the necessary purchase of land required to widen the road at this point was not successful so the scheme could not be progressed. Should the situation change and land become available, and Transport and Technical Services has sufficient funds, I will ensure a facility is provided.

WRITTEN QUESTION TO THE MINISTER FOR TRANSPORT AND TECHNICAL SERVICES BY DEPUTY C.J. SCOTT WARREN OF ST. SAVIOUR ANSWER TO BE TABLED ON TUESDAY 11th MARCH 2008

Question

"At a meeting on 2nd December 2002 the former Public Services Committee approved a scheme for a Longueville Road crossing, with £20,000 being allocated for this project from the £100,000 funding made available from the Car Park Trading Account for  sustainable  transport  initiatives,  to  accelerate  the  Committee's  programme  of pedestrian improvements.

Would the Minister provide members with full information regarding the following:-

1. Why, in view of the subsequent work carried out which included financial negotiations with a third party in order to secure some additional land for road widening prior to the construction of the proposed island refuge at Miladi Parade, Longueville Road, and having gained approval for funds from Treasury and Resources and submitted a planning application in 2006, the negotiations were not concluded and the construction work on the island refuge did not proceed?
2. Whether the formerly identified funds from the Car Park Trading Account are currently available for this project, and, if not, can the Minister give members the reason why and the current whereabouts of these funds?

3. Whether the Minister still supports the implementation of an island refuge at this location?"

Answer

1. The construction of a central refuge in this location did not proceed because the required land could not be purchased. The Minister for Treasury and Resources is responsible for the department whose responsibility this was and should respond to this question.
2. The 2005 States Accounts identifies that £75,000 of the £100,000 budget had been expended leaving sufficient to progress this project. These funds were able to be spent on non-car parking initiatives under the previous Public Finance Law which allowed the Finance and Economics Committee to agree specific projects.

Furthermore,  the  States  approved  a  Report  and  Proposition  in  2004 (P.147/2004) which allowed surplus funds from the Car Park Trading Fund to be utilised for the funding of transport initiatives. In particular, the States wanted to ensure that, if car parking charges were raised above the level required to run, maintain and provide for parking facilities, that this income could be used on, for instance, the bus service, highway maintenance or other transport initiatives.

However,  the  new  Public  Finances  (Jersey)  Law  2005  and  relevant Regulations issued thereunder currently prevent the Minister for Transport and Technical Services, or any other Minister, from allocating funds from Jersey Car Parks Trading Fund for anything other than car parking provision. For this reason, the £20,000 originally allocated is now not available for this project. Having recognised this fact, TTS allocated the sum in its revenue budget in 2007 so the project could proceed if the land transaction was finalised. As this did not happen, these funds were spent on other projects and there is now no funding for any minor traffic works.

3. The Minister continues to support the implementation of an island refuge at this location. However, should the land now become available, there is no revenue funding available in the 2008 budget.