Agenda and minutes

Apologies for absence were received from Councillor N M Murray.

The Chief Executive reported that having received notice under Regulation 13 of the Local Government (Committees and Political Groups) Regulations 1990, he had appointed Councillor G J Ellis as a replacement member on the Committee in place of Councillor N M Murray for this meeting only.

There were no declarations of interest at this point in the meeting.

RESOLVED

            That the minutes of the meeting held on 1 June 2015 be signed by the Chairman as a correct record.

No announcements were made by the Executive Councillor for Highways, Transport and IT or the Chief Operating Officer.

(To receive a report which provides information to the Highways and Transport Scrutiny Committee about the surface treatments used to maintain the highways network and their contribution to delivering the strategy outlined in the Transport Asset Management Plan)

The Committee received a report which provided information regarding the surface treatments used to maintain the highways network and their contribution to delivering the strategy outlined in the Transport Asset Management Plan.

Prior to consideration of the report, the Chairman advised that Mr Brian Dinsdale, who presented a petition to the meeting of the County Council in December 2014 about issues relating to surface dressing around Burgh le Marsh had been invited to address the Committee.  Councillor C Pain, as the local member for Burgh le Marsh had also been invited to address the Committee.

Mr Dinsdale addressed the Committee and reported that a number of local residents in Burgh Le Marsh were dissatisfied with the amount of noise following the application of the surface treatment to the Burgh Le Marsh bypass in 2014.   Reference was also made to two noise surveys which had been carried out, the results of which were not supported by residents who claimed they were inaccurate.

Members were guided through the report and were informed that surface treatments were used extensively on the Lincolnshire highways network to protect carriageways from the ingress of water and to improve the texture and skidding resistance of the running surface.  This was a more sustainable and cost effective approach than allowing roads to deteriorate to a poor condition which required more costly intervention.  It was noted that in Lincolnshire there were 3 main types of treatment used which were:

·         Single layer surface dressing;

·         "Racked in " surface dressing;

·         Slurry sealing;

Which form of treatment was used was generally determined by the levels of traffic which used the road.  It was noted that these products and processes would not improve the 'ride quality' of the surface, but, by preventing the ingress of water they would extend the structural life of pavements and highways by reducing deterioration.

Councillor Pain, local member for Burgh Le Marsh also addressed the Committee supporting the views of the residents in relation to the noise produced by the bypass, and that the use of a 14/6mm surface treatment was unsuitable for the Burgh le Marsh bypass.

Members of the Committee were provided with the opportunity to ask questions to the officers present in relation to the information contained within the report and some of the points raised during discussion included the following;

·         It was noted that if 14/6mm surface dressing was applied, a 10/6mm treatment could be applied at a later date, in total extending the life of the road up to 18 years;

·         It was acknowledged that these treatments were used to provide longevity to the roads;

·         It was considered important that the County Council had a policy for surface treatments and that it made the best use of available resources;

·         It was not possible to carry out a noise survey before every section of surface treatment work took place;

·         It was confirmed that different surface treatments did have different noise values, but it was difficult to get a standard for noise;

·         Members were advised  ...  view the full minutes text for item 17.

(To receive a report which outlines details of a request for waiver permits to be granted to Volunteer Emergency Service Personnel to allow for parking of vehicles in restricted parking areas)

Consideration was given to a report which outlined details of a request for waiver permits to be granted to Volunteer Emergency Service Personnel to allow for parking of vehicles in restricted parking areas.

Members were reminded that a motion was submitted to the County Council on 15 May 2015 by Councillor Mrs Reynolds, which proposed that Waiver Permits should be granted to Volunteer Lifeboat Crew members.  It was resolved that the matter be referred to this Committee and the Portfolio Holder for consideration.

Councillor Mrs Reynolds was in attendance at the meeting to address the Committee and explain why it was important that these permits were granted.  She thanked Councillor Davies, Executive Councillor for Highways, Transport and IT for visiting Mablethorpe.

Members of the Committee were provided with the opportunity to ask questions to the officers present in relation to the information contained within the report and some of the points raised during discussion included the following:

·         It was suggested whether the criteria for requests for waivers was correct, and if it needed to be re-examined;

·         There were not always enough designated spaces available outside the lifeboat station, would it be possible to increase this number?

·         Members were advised that the Council used to issue permits to the lifeboat station which provided an exemption in designated areas.  It was noted that there was no reason that this practice could not be re-started;

·         There was a need to be clear about what the issue was, as there was confusion regarding whether the issue was regarding volunteers requesting permits so they could park closer to their homes, or whether it was about volunteers not being able to park once they reached the lifeboat station;

·         It was noted that the issuing of a waiver permit was not necessarily the answer to these parking issues, as it would not guarantee a parking space where it was required;

·         The Portfolio Holder informed members that he had visited the site, and there were two issues, the main issue was that there was limited parking available near the lifeboat station, and he was exploring with officers the possibility of removing the yellow lines.  The second issue was in terms of Civil Parking Enforcement, as officers had no discretion, if cars were parked in areas with parking restrictions, they had to issue a ticket;

·         It was suggested whether a task and finish group should be set up to look at all aspects of granting waivers;

·         There was a need for this issue to be taken up with the relevant officer;

·         It was commented that if the yellow lines were removed, it would become a parking 'free for all';

·         It was noted that the RNLI was a blue light service emergency service, and once they were called every second counted, and anything that could be done to speed up their response time should be supported;

·         There was support for issuing the volunteers with parking waivers;

·         It was queried whether this would encourage others to request similar permits, for  ...  view the full minutes text for item 18.

(To receive a report which sets out the progress towards the delivery of a roundabout at the A17/A151 Peppermint Junction.  The report provides some  history to the project and sets out the next stages towards delivery.  It also identifies the ambition to deliver scheme to create a dual carriageway link on the A17)

The Committee received a report which set out the progress towards the delivery of a roundabout at the A17/A151 Peppermint Junction in Holbeach.  The report provided some history to the project and set out the next stages towards delivery.  It also identified the ambition to deliver a wider scheme to create a dual-carriageway link on the A17.

Members were advised that the opportunity to fund a roundabout had come forward through the Greater Lincolnshire Local Enterprise Partnership (GLLEP), and in November 2014, a bid for funding from Growth Fund 2 was submitted which was for part funding towards the roundabout and linked this firmly with the growth that the improvements could release.  It was expected that delivery of the roundabout would improve road safety and traffic problems; provide access to up to 20 hectares of commercial land, in the form of a Food Enterprise Zone (FEZ); provide access to land for up to 1,000 dwellings between the A151 and Holbeach; and potentially release planning consent for a residential development to the south of Holbeach.

It was noted that the GLLEP funding would amount to £2.415m towards a current estimate of £4m, with a further £1m anticipated to come from local developers through Section 106 agreements, with the remaining £0.6m funded by the Council.  However, the GLLEP funding may only become available in 2020/21.  Therefore, delivery of the junction based on the current programme would require an element of forward-funding from the Council, with pay-back from the GLLEP in a future year.

It was noted that at the time of writing of the report, it was proposed to the hold the public consultation alongside the consultation for the housing development.  However, the housing development consultation has since been postponed therefore it was now proposed that the consultation would start in September 2015 in order to avoid the school holiday period.

Members were provided with the opportunity to ask questions to the officers present in relation to the information contained within the report and some of the points raised during discussion included the following;

·         This was a most welcome scheme;

·         Members were pleased to see this item on the agenda;

·         It was commented that if a builder was likely to get outline planning permission for 900 houses, it was sensible that they should make a contribution to the scheme;

·         Concerns were raised regarding traffic issues which may be caused by having a small amount of dual carriageway road between the two roundabouts.  It was acknowledged that there was a risk that when the junctions were running at capacity there may be a problem for a short part of the day, but the overall benefits of the scheme would outweigh this;

·         It was commented that proposals to increase capacity on the highways network should always be supported;

·         There was a need to ensure that developers made the necessary contributions to these schemes and that that money was spent locally;

·         A public inquiry was not expected for a scheme such as this.  ...  view the full minutes text for item 19.

(To receive a report which briefs members on actions being taken in enhancing our users' experience with regard to the highway and transport services)

Consideration was given to a report which briefed the Committee on actions being taken to enhance the experience of customers with regard to the highways and transport service.

Members were advised that at the time of the Senior Management review in summer 2014, it was recognised that there a need to improve highways and transport services user experience.  Recognising this need, the position of Network Manager South was allocated the County-wide responsibility for this.  Since then, various reviews have highlighted the importance of Customer Engagement if Lincolnshire was to continue being a 'high performing' authority.  This also had the potential of increasing reward funding received from the Department of Transport and positioned the authority to bid for other one-off funding opportunities.

It was noted that as part of the Future Delivery of Support Services Programme (FDSSP), a contract had been awarded to Serco which commenced on 1 April 2015.  One element of this contract was customer Services Centre (CSC) provision.  As part of the transition arrangements a number of highways and CSC staff had been working with Serco to develop a web based system called LAGAN which would transform the 'customer journey'.  This system was launched on 18 June 2015.  The system would enable members of the public to log in and report faults and then track how it progressed.  A report would be brought to the Committee in December to update on the progress since the system was launched. 

Zoe Butler, Head of Customer Services, provided the Committee with a demonstration of the LAGAN system.  It was noted that the system was still in its first phase, once the GIS system had been upgraded more information on each local place would be available.  Officers were looking into how the information on roadworks.org could be included with this system, and were hoping to establish a more proactive approach.  There were approximately 100,000 contacts per year in the highways customer services team.

It was commented that the biggest frustration for members of the public was often not knowing what was happening once they had reported a fault.  The aim of this system was to alleviate this issue by allowing people to be able to log in and see what progress had been made.  They would also be able to track the progress of other faults which had been reported.  Members commented that this was a wonderful system and welcomed the report and would look forward to receiving the update in December.

RESOLVED

1.    That the steps being taken to enhance the user experience be noted;

2.    That a further report be brought back to the December 2015 meeting of the Committee.

(To receive a report which presents an update on progress with the Lincolnshire Highways Alliance, an Alliance between the County Council, Imtech, Mouchel and Kier.  The Alliance delivers the majority of highways services through the Traffic Signals Term Contract, the Professional Services Contract and the Highway Works Term Contract)

The Committee received a report which presented an update on progress with the Lincolnshire Highways Alliance, an Alliance between the County Council, Imtech, Mouchel and Kier.  The Alliance delivered the majority of highways services through the Traffic Signals Term Contract, the Professional Services Contract and the Highway Works Term Contract.  The Lincolnshire Highways Alliance was now in the sixth year of a potential contractual duration of 10 years.  It was noted that changes to some of the indicators had been made in order to reflect changes in resources.

It was reported that overall performance for the Highways Works Term Contract, the Professional Services Contract and the Traffic Signals Term Contract remained in the upper quartile and had all outperformed Year 4 performance scores.  Client performance had slipped from 73 to 68 mainly due to issues concerning the commitment of Compensation Events and the issuing of a large amount of variations at year end.  The overall Alliance score remained at 42.

Members were also advised that the works for the Canwick Road Improvement Scheme had been completed with the upgrade of the Tidal Flow system and the signal junctions at Canwick Road with Washingborough Road and South Park Avenue.  The Alliance continued to introduce innovative signals technology into Lincolnshire with the first RLCS crossing installation at Manthorpe Road in Grantham.  It was also noted that over 30,898 potholes had been repaired and 72,516.5m2 of carriageway patching at 182 sites had been carried out.  A substantial surface dressing programme was well underway of around 3.3million square meters of carriageway or just over 400 miles of road to be treated.  A programme of carriageway recycling which incorporated the use of 5,500 tonnes of tar bound planings had been completed.  This had resulted in £750,000 of savings in disposal costs.

A number of major schemes were progressing towards the construction phase.  Canwick Hill had been completed and Lincoln East-West Link was under construction.  A tender to start the construction of a section of the Grantham Southern Relief Road was due to be released, and the Lincoln eastern Bypass was ready to go out to tender subject to a further Public Inquiry in August 2015.  It was also reported that Boston's St Botolph's Footbridge had won in the medium project category of the Institution of Civil Engineers (ICE) East Midlands Merit Awards.

The Committee was provided with the opportunity to ask questions to the officers present in relation to the information contained within the report and some of the points raised during discussion included the following:

·         It was queried whether any problems to compensation events were envisaged as a result of the introduction of Agresso;

·         In relation to surface dressing it was considered important that residents were given enough notice that these works would be taken place.  It was suggested that two weeks was common, but it should be a minimum standard of 1 week;

·         There had been an issue with some surface dressing treatments sticking to tyres.  However, a councillor commented that he had  ...  view the full minutes text for item 21.

The Committee received updates in relation to the following major schemes:

Lincoln Eastern Bypass – the Public Inquiry would be taking place on 11 August 2015.  It was reported that the planning permission would run out on 10 June 2016.  Officers were working with Network Rail to deliver the railway bridges.

Lincoln East West Link – there had been an archaeological discovery on site, but the finds were not as extensive as first thought, and officers were trying to put things in place to ensure this did not delay delivery of the road part of the scheme.  It was noted that the scheme was slightly behind programme but other activities were in progress to get it back on track.

Lincoln footbridges – Network Rail had given an indication that they were not going to deliver the Brayford Wharf Bridge, but talks were ongoing.

Grantham Southern Relief Road – Phase 1 of the King 31 element of the scheme was out to tender.  Final discussions with the landowner were still taking place.  There were also ongoing changes to planning permission, some of which were around the changing of materials for the carriageway.

RESOLVED

            That the update be noted.

In accordance with Section 100(A)(4) of the Local Government Act 1972, the following agenda item has not been circulated to the press and public on the grounds that it is considered to contain exempt information as defined in Paragraph 3 of Schedule 12A of the Local Government Act 1972, as amended.  The press and public may be excluded from the meeting for the consideration of this item of business.

RESOLVED

          That under Section 100(A)(4) of the Local Government Act 1972, the             public and press be excluded from the meeting for the following item of     business on the grounds that it involves the likely disclosure of exempt           information as defined in paragraph 3 of Part 1 of Schedule 12 of the         Act.

(To receive a report which invites the Committee to consider the overall Grantham Southern Relief Road project and the King 31 Phase 1 contract award which is due to be considered by the Executive Councillor on 24 July 2015)

The Committee received a report which provided information in relation to the overall Grantham Southern Relief Road project and the King31 Phase 1 Contract Award which was due to be considered by the Executive Councillors for Highways, Transport and IT and Finance and Property on 23 July 2015.

Officers responded to a number of questions from members in relation to the scheme, and there was support from the Committee for this scheme.

RESOLVED

1.    That the Committee support the recommendations to the Executive Councillors as set out in the report;

2.    That the Committee pass on their support of the scheme to the Executive Councillors.

(To receive a report which enables the Committee to consider and comment on the content of its work programme for the coming year)

Consideration was given to a report which enabled the Committee to consider and comment on the content of its work programme for the coming year.

Members were advised that the following additional items would be listed on the work programme:

·         Enhancing our users' experience – Update in December 2015

·         Update on Burgh le Marsh (to be considered in the autumn)

·         Sponsorship of roundabouts – to be considered at the meeting in September or October.

RESOLVED

            That the work programme, and the additional items listed above be noted.