Consultation is under way on £6m plans to make Fleet more accessible.

Hampshire County Council has drawn up a package of improvements to improve access to the town, particularly for pedestrians and cyclists.

The county began working on the Fleet Town Access Plan (FTAP) in May 2007.

The 20-year plan aims to improve accessibility to a wide range of destinations and services, including doctors surgeries, schools, shops, churches, leisure centres and the countryside.

The full package of improvements is expected to cost between £5m and £6m, most of which will be funded by developers.

Hampshire County Council is now seeking the views of key stakeholders.

Among them is Hart District Council, whose overview and scrutiny committee was due to discuss the access plan on Tuesday night.

A joint report by Stephen Parker, cabinet member for the environment, and planning portfolio holder Richard Appleton said the council supports the county council’s commitment to improving accessibility to the town.

It said the FTAP should be welcomed as it puts forward proposals that will help all members of the community and encourage access into the town centre by means other than the car.

However, the report points out that while some councillors have been involved in early work on the plan, the involvement of the whole council has been very limited.

"Congested and dangerous"

It also questions whether sufficient account has been taken of developments such as Hitches Lane in Fleet and the former Queen Elizabeth Barracks (QEB) site in Church Crookham.

The report warns: “These major developments will generate large amounts of traffic, which needs to be planned for.”

Hart is also calling for a commitment to improve the Redfields Lane junction with the A287 in Church Crookham.

“The existing junction is congested and is perceived as dangerous,” warns the report.

“These problems will increase when QEB is built.”

The council also wants an undertaking that planned improvements to Kennel Lane are retained.

It said that at the very least there should be a direct link on to the Summit Avenue roundabout and the bends in the road should be straightened.

The committee report adds: “At present the main route from Fleet on to the M3 is shown as via Southwood. This is unacceptable for environmental reasons.

“With more development taking place in Fleet as a result of Hart’s development allo-cations in the South East Plan, it is essential that the Fleet Eastern bypass is completed.”

Hart also questions the proposed cycle route along the Basingstoke Canal to the east of Pondtail in Fleet.

It points out that this will only be a leisure route whereas the priority is for a proper commuter route to link with Farnborough. It would be bet-ter to have it running alongside Norris Hill Road.

Public ownership

The council is also concerned that most of the proposed cycle routes appear to be on existing roads, pointing out that lines on roads are never as effective as segregated cycle routes.

The report also points out that the cycle routes have focused on land in public ownership. It questions whether better routes could be provided by acquiring private land to allow for off-road cycling.

The council is critical of traffic management proposals contained in the FTAP.

The report adds: “While delivering short-term im-provements to the transport infrastructure of Fleet are welcome, these proposals are primarily about catching up with new development which has already taken place.

“Further development in Fleet will require additional infrastructure to be put in place to support additional traffic.”

Regarding proposed ped-estrian routes in the FTAP, the council wonders if there is scope for a zebra crossing where the Velmead Farm footpath joins Gally Hill Road in Church Crookham.

It adds: “Gally Hill Road is a busy route, likely to get busier and is well used by school children.”

The council asks if a roundabout could be needed along Elvetham Road in Fleet to cut traffic speed. It also calls for a crossing in Crookham Road between Netherhouse Moor and Coxheath Road.

It says there is no justification for waiting 20 years for any of the proposals.

“These are in the main low cost works which could be carried out within the first five years of the plan as part of Hampshire County Council’s routine maintenance schedule,” the report adds.