Junction Upgrade Brugh Road

I'm looking for information relating to the recent junction upgrade Brugh Road with Roman bank the traffic lights outside the ship public house. 4-way traffic lights and new pedestrian crossing on Roman bank



1) I'm looking to understand the process that deciding these works were required



2) The expected outcome in terms of traffic flow?



3) The expected outcome in terms of pedestrian flow and safety



4) How and when the works will be measured in terms of success or failure.



5) The tender scope of works



6) The scope of works completed



7) A list of tendering contractors?



8) Winning contractors?



9) Winning tender bid value?



10) Final value once the works completed?



11) Variations to the scope of works applied after the project was awarded?



12) Cost of Variations?



13) Who was paid for these Variations?



14) Tender programme?



15) Final programme ?



16) Reason for any delays?

1). The equipment at this junction had reached the end of its operational life and so were replaced under the Traffic Signal Capital Refurbishment programme. At the same time, we took the opportunity to make some changes to the junction to make it safer for all users to negotiate.

2) We expected a drop in efficiency due to the changes we had made. Removing the very narrow islands and simplifying the junction layout does have an impact to the junction, and the analysis we carried out predicted this. However, the benefits for the safe operation and future maintenance of the site were felt to outweigh the reduction in capacity.

3) During the site investigation process it became clear that the existing layout posed issues for pedestrians and mobility scooter users and they had difficulty in navigating the junction. The small and narrow islands could not accommodate the amount of mobility scooters or people with pushchairs accessing them, leaving these users in a precarious position overhanging into the carriageway with traffic passing very close to them or having to avoid them.  Also, our term maintenance contractor who look after all the signal junctions and crossings in the county had reported safety issues maintaining equipment on the junction due to the large caravan trailer movements which regularly pass through it.  Over the years several poles and signal heads have been damaged, requiring replacement or repair.

4) There is no success/failure metric here. The works were carried out to improve access for non-motorised users and should be seen as a safety improvement for the more vulnerable members of society that negotiate this junction. The safety of our maintenance contractors when working here is also of paramount importance.

5) This was not a tendered scheme, but delivered through the Highways Term Maintenance Contractor, which is currently Balfour Beatty & our Traffic Signals Term Maintenance Contractor Colas

6) Removal of existing traffic signal equipment, simplification of the layout to include removal of traffic islands, provision of new “straight across” crossing facilities, widening of footway areas on Burgh Road & Castleton Boulevard; new ducting, pole sockets and inspection chambers for traffic signals; all new traffic signal equipment to include the latest above ground detection technology

7) Not applicable

8) Not applicable – Balfour Beatty (Civils) & Colas (Traffic Signals) carried out the works

9) Not applicable

10) £434,438 – this includes all civil engineering elements, traffic signals, traffic management, design & supervision fees

11) Compensation events were agreed where we had issues installing equipment due to the location/depth of existing utilities (gas, water, electricity etc); inclement weather and winter road maintenance (gritting); additional traffic signal equipment such as the right turn arrow signal from Burgh Road on to Roman Bank

12) £31.5k

13) Balfour Beatty & Colas

14) 13 weeks

15) 13 weeks

16) Inclement weather and winter road maintenance activities