implementation and delivery report
play

Implementation and Delivery Report Dorking Town Forum May 2018 X - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Dorking Transport Package - Phase 1 Implementation and Delivery Report Dorking Town Forum May 2018 X X X X X X Excerpt from: Mole Valley Local Committee papers September 2015 X Not delivered Note: This document is arranged to


  1. Dorking Transport Package - Phase 1 Implementation and Delivery Report Dorking Town Forum May 2018

  2. X X X X X X Excerpt from: Mole Valley Local Committee papers September 2015 X – Not delivered

  3. Note: This document is arranged to mirror the order and format of illustrations in the report. As a consequence there will be a fair amount of repetition between some sections.

  4. 3) Investigation Process

  5. 06/2016 12/2016 12/2017 12/2014 06/2017 06/2014 06/2015 12/2015 C2C writes to SCC SCC (Mendes, July 2016 Original GWR Fishwick, Howard), Revised GWR Funding Expiry FGW (Pierpoint), C2C Completion Date 31 December 2015 Revised GWR 31 December 2016 (Sharrock, Castle) Completion Date 31 December 2017 PB (Higgs) Principal Schedule C2C, Surrey, GWR SCC (Smith, Ph I Safety Audit Simpson) Parsons Brinkerhoff Not done Safety/Accessibility Issues identified Surrey Police GWR SCC (Cannon) March 2014 January 2016 Agreement NR Station Inspection NR Station Inspection 14 October 2016 January 2018 2hr (Matyiova) 18hr (Petrou) NR Station Inspection September 2014 AMEY (?) NR Station Inspection more safety issues 3hr (Keyran) emerge Core: Fishwick, Guy, Hannam, Ligertwood, GWR state DfT funding Source Woodall, (Curry), Project Team Meetings (Sharpington) No mention of GWR civils work GWR install GWR Civils stops, w/o need to advise C2C commences lighting hoods Station.Approach Steps, Shelters, CCTV of amendments A24/S.Approach A24 widening out, confirm 1m Station Approach A24 Path, Road S. Approach 1m confirm widening Path Width issue Table Issues + Kier, NR, Footpath/Cycling Southern (Best) Station South Street Approach Safety Shelter Contract, Move to deliver DML RTPI issues RTPI? Expired! A, E, no B only one RTPI Waiting End of Shelter Contract + MVDC, GWR, Bus Shelter /RTPI Clear Channel, RTPI diverted to Bus Stop A On-station RTPI Trapeze improvements cancelled FGW and Southern Train/Bus Atkins produce Scope Expanded Wayfinding Strategy + WS Atkins, Wayfinding MVDC (Straw, Scope Expanding, SCC/MVDC Signage Issues emerge Shaw), (GWR?) Totems only, pressure commission Atkins and continue on funding External Contact DTF, MVAG, MVCF Primary Players: MVCF not contacted until 4 February, DTCF and MVAF not FGW, NR, MVLC (Hall, at all. Decision 9 Feb Curran, Watson), Local Partnerships (Hogger, Sachs) Third Party Involvement/Influence/Funding MVDC, Southern, Kier Working Draft – April 2018 Secondary Players: Surrey Police (Cannon), WSCC (Little)

  6. 5a) On-Highway Delivery

  7. Footpath Widening – A24 London Road

  8. Post in original position Original Path Width and Obstructions

  9. Post moved, Usable width remains same as pre-project New Path Width and Obstructions

  10. Sensor extends into carriageway Hard edges create additional hazard 2.5m total available Only 1.5m usable (including LTN 1/12 safety margins) Additional Obstructions Post-Safety Audit reduce usable width further

  11. Footpath Widening - Station Approach

  12. Before

  13. After

  14. Bus Stops and RTPI

  15. Bus Stop A, post-project Bus Stop B, post-project Bus Stop E, post-project no improvements or RTPI at Bus Stops A, B or E - RTPI only available to rail passengers at Deepdene - and Dorking Mainline Dorking-bound bus passengers have further to walk - and in the wrong direction RTPI at exit from Deepdene Station

  16. RTPI at Dorking Mainline Station

  17. Wayfinding and Information Signage

  18. Magistrate Courts Poor Cycle Route Wrong Direction Poor Route to don’t exist to Leatherhead to Bus Stop E Denbies Redundant Tourist Bus Passengers directed away No Signage at Far Information Box from nearest Bus Stop (E) Side

  19. Bus Stop E not marked Bus Stop identification letters not marked

  20. Room to inset Totem without obstructing pedestrians

  21. Layby a more visibly convenient and obvious location Totem located without considering obstruction to pedestrians

  22. Statutory Signage and Road Markings

  23. Sign Partially Obscured This Sign Obscured Sign too small to be visible West side foot/cycle path facing north

  24. Markings indicate segregated path, Markings indicate segregated footpath one-way each side of white line - cycling permitted to the right Signs misleading - cycle allowed on /road footpath beyond this point West side foot/cycle path facing north

  25. Pre-existing and New Signage suggest two way cycling on footpath is both legal and safe

  26. On-Highway Safety Issues

  27. Before

  28. After

  29. On-Highway Safety Issues – Junction Lincoln Road and Station Approach

  30. On-Highway Safety issues – Continuation of Cycle Route towards Leatherhead

  31. Pre-existing and New Signage suggest two way cycling on footpath is both legal and safe

  32. Ca. 85cm Ca. 1.4m

  33. At Bus Stop B New Sign suggesting cycling on footpath is legal Note position of Cycle Lane obstructions Ca. 1.4m

  34. Cyclepath designed for southbound cycle traffic only At night counterflow cyclists on both sides blinded by oncoming traffic East side A24 Cyclepath

  35. On-Highway Safety Issues – Junction with A24

  36. access narrowed +/-2m island extended +/-2m position of this island unchanged position of road markings unchanged trajectory now required original trajectory Lincoln Road Road markings and road geometry changes make life access confusing difficult for all vehicles

  37. Lincoln Road access can be blocked by vehicles waiting island extended +/-2m to exit into A24 road markings make Lincoln Road Lincoln Road access confusing road geometry changes make life difficult for all vehicles

  38. On-Highway Safety Issues - Construction

  39. Hazard left unmarked until reported by a member of the public * Several vehicle impacts * Raised table completed without ensuring dropped kerbs and road surface actually met

  40. On-Highway Safety Issues – Post- Construction

  41. Sensor extends into carriageway Hard edges create additional hazard 2.5m total available Only 1.5m usable (including LTN 1/12 safety margins) Additional Obstructions Post-Safety Audit reduce usable width further

  42. 2.8m to centre Reference Viewing Height 48 Degrees 1.7m 2.6m 1m

  43. Deepdene Station - Condition

  44. Deepdene Station RTPI installation

  45. Bus/Rail RTPI installed previously Ticket Machine and Arrivals/Departures Screen Timetables invisible from ticket machine Note Position of Trunking relative to pedestrian desire line

  46. 2.8m to centre Reference Viewing Height 48 Degrees 1.7m 2.6m 1m

  47. Safety issues – Post Stage III Safety Audit

  48. Sensor extends into carriageway Hard edges create additional hazard 2.5m total available Only 1.5m usable (including LTN 1/12 safety margins) Additional Obstructions Post-Safety Audit reduce usable width further

  49. 2.8m to centre Reference Viewing Height 48 Degrees 1.7m 2.6m 1m Deepdene Station RTPI Installation

  50. Ticket Vending Machines - Installation

  51. Ticket Vending Machines - User Interface Compatability

  52. Dorking Main Ticket Vending Machine User Interface

  53. Deepdene Station Ticket Vending Machine User Interface

  54. Project Finances

Download Presentation
Download Policy: The content available on the website is offered to you 'AS IS' for your personal information and use only. It cannot be commercialized, licensed, or distributed on other websites without prior consent from the author. To download a presentation, simply click this link. If you encounter any difficulties during the download process, it's possible that the publisher has removed the file from their server.

Recommend


More recommend