Agenda item

The purpose of this report is to update the Economy and Place Policy and Scrutiny Committee on the current position with respect to City of York Council’s approach to Highway maintenance and to describe the improvement path the service is on.

Members considered a report that updated them on the current position with respect to City of York Council’s approach to Highway maintenance and to describe the improvement path the service is on. The Director of Transport, Highways and Planning explained that there were two strands to highway maintenance which was proactive and reactive. He noted that there was a mix and match approach to how investment was made on highway maintenance. He advised that Department for Transport (DfT) guidance was followed rigidly as it affected what funding the council got. He then explained how the asset management plan was developed.

In addition to the attendance of the Director of Transport, Highways and Planning and Head of Highway Asset Management, the Executive Member for Transport was in attendance. A Member thanked the Executive Member for his attendance. In answer to Member questions, it was confirmed that:

·        The Director of Transport, Highways and Planning would check if the data in the report annexes was the most up to date.

·        When the highways policy position was developed, officers talked to other authorities and a peer review was undertaken. The challenge regarding highways maintenance was universal and it was a political choice regarding the amount of discretionary budget applied to it.

·        Highways maintenance was looked at in a programme sense in taking a holistic overview programme approach and making sure that there was sound procurement in place.

·        Regarding what the Executive Member said to residents, he explained at he would say that the council had an approach to try and get the balance of maintaining roads and reactive repairs on a risk basis. He noted that Wards had funding for highways repairs and there were repairs reports on this.

·        There had been massive cuts in support from central government over the last decade and the top priority had to be the most vulnerable and in respect of highways this was about making highways safe. The Chair pointed out the backlog in funding.

·        There needed to be a rolling programme for asset management, and the council wanted highways to be in grades 1 to 3. There was a need to spread investment across grades 3, 4 and 5 to prevent deterioration.

·        Some of the worse roads were the ones with the last amount of traffic and may be outside peoples houses. The challenge was there, but the council needed to apply principle and tried to introduce flexibility and balance with Ward budgets.

·        The city of York was well funded on drainage and drainage had been tweaked to ensure that it was functioning correctly. Drainage was prioritised and there was a lot of work going on to address drainage issued. Good progress had been made in improving drainage.

·        There were 45,000 gulley pots in York. The key pots had been identified and there had been maintenance of the 14,000 critical ones. This was a risk managed approach.

·        Pothole repair was never as good as a resurface.

·        Concerning value for money and checking repairs, there were mechanisms within frameworks for contractors. Members were asked to detail of unsatisfactory repairs to the Executive Member.

·        There was a timeframe for potholes being marked up for repair and being undertaken.

·        There were different priorities for the risk based approach. It was explained that different materials were used and the council was looking at giving inspectors more power to use capital budget. It was noted that material costs had become 20% more expensive in the previous year.

·        The Highway Infrastructure Asset Management Plan identified cyclists as a higher priority and there was a similar approach with footways. A Member noted the importance at looking at equality of access in the Highway Infrastructure Asset Management Plan.

·        It was explained that in the data included in the annexes to the report a high quartile meant that the council was doing well and low quartile equated to doing badly. It was noted that it was doing well in some areas but not in others.

·        It was confirmed that 8% of principal roads required structural maintenance and that 70% of maintenance expenditure was planned. It was explained that the budget would have over planning in it and there was a small amount of slippage. It was noted that this year there was a forecast underspend of 5% and it was forecast hat the majority of schemes would be delivered. The budget would roll over to the following year with schemes being delivered the following year.

·        The projector of the highways asset was that it would get progressively worse. The council was managing the decline of the road network and was trying to get most of the budget that it had.

·        There was a project engineer to each area, including drainage and footways.

·        The Chair noted the importance of being transparent and the Director for Environment, Transport and Planning noted that officers could review how information was presented. He noted the difficulty in communicating why grade 3 roads were being repaired ahead of grade 4 and 5 roads as it gave more value for money. He added that it would be good to have a budget for grade 4 roads and this was reinforced by the Executive Members who added that it would be useful to explain to residents the rationalisation for repairs.

Resolved: That it be recommended that officers look at communication regarding highways repairs.

Reason: In order to improve communication regarding highways repairs.