If the proposed position of a crossing is obstructed by a road sign, lighting column, road hump or tree etc., the location should be altered to avoid the obstacle. If this is not feasible, a decision will have to be made by the relevant section within the Council, or other agency as appropriate, as to whether the item should be removed or relocated, although there may be limited scope to do so. Where relocation or removal is agreed, the costs of any such work will be the responsibility of the applicant.
The following conditions apply:
Crossings will not normally be allowed where their construction will require either the removal or cutting of the roots of a street tree. In all cases, permission to proceed will be required from the Council's arboriculture team. The general presumption will be to refuse an application if there is a conflict with a street tree. However, where permission is granted, the cost of the tree removal and the replacement(s), including initial maintenance, will be charged to the applicant.
Where a crossing needs a street light to be moved permission will be needed from our PFI lighting contractor. Where relocation is approved all associated costs shall be paid for by the applicant.
If you ask for a new crossing or an extension to a crossing which affects - or is affected by - a road hump or similar traffic calming feature, the application will not be approved until the traffic calming feature has been relocated or altered to reduce any danger or nuisance. The applicant must meet all costs. Where a traffic calming feature is to be relocated, approval is subject to the formal consultation and legal process which must be completed before the application can be decided.
Work may be needed to remove, divert or lower statutory undertakers' plant or apparatus, such as telephone boxes, telegraph poles or chamber covers. All reasonable costs involved in such works will be paid for by the applicant. The applicant will liaise and arrange the works directly with the statutory undertakers prior to the installation of the crossing.
We may refuse crossing requests where the loss of public on-street parking would affect a parking scheme or lead to a lack of on-street parking. In particular, crossings should not be allowed where they would lead to the loss of more than one space in a residents' parking scheme.
Where approved, a crossing that affects an on-street parking bay or other restriction may need changes to the traffic regulation order (TRO). The cost of altering the TRO and any traffic signs and road markings should be met by the applicant. To reduce the cost to the applicant, we will wait until a number of amendments are required to the order before starting the legal process. The legal process should be completed before construction of the new crossing begins.
Where an application for a crossing is proposed across an area of highway verge or grassed amenity area that is greater than 3 metres in width there will be a presumption that it will be refused because of the loss of green space and the adverse effect this can have on the appearance of the street. However, if within 50m there is/are established crossing(s) greater than 3 metres then there will be a presumption to approve. In these cases precedent has already been established and amenity value has been historically relaxed.
The applicant must provide suitable drainage to prevent surface water going onto the highway before the construction of the crossing under s163 of the Highways Act 1980.
Where applicants have removed more of the wall or fence running along the boundary than is required by the size of the crossing, it should be understood that an item of street furniture (i.e. lamp post, telegraph pole, traffic sign etc.) may be erected at any time in the footway outside the area of a crossing - even though this may obstruct an area where there is no wall or similar feature.