Agenda and minutes

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors R A Wright and E W Strengiel

It was noted that the Chief Executive, having received notice under Regulation 13 of the Local Government (Committee and Political Groups) Regulations 1990, had appointed Councillor R R Ashton to replace Councillor E W Strengiel for this meeting only.

Councillor S P Roe declared a pecuniary interest in items five and six as he owned land adjacent to the proposed North Hykeham Relief Road.

It was raised that indications of support for the inclusion of the A17 within the major roads section of the Local Transport Plan 5 were not reflected in minute 50.

Councillor Mrs S Rawlins’ name would be removed from the attendance list.

RESOLVED

That the minutes of the meeting held on 24 January 2022 be confirmed and signed by the Chairman as a correct record.

The Committee were advised that Richard Fenwick was recently appointed to the role of Head of Highways Asset and Local Management Services.

Councillor S Roe left the room.

(To receive a report from Sam Edwards, Head of Highways Infrastructure, which invites the Committee to consider and comment on a report that seek approval to enter into a two-stage design and build contract for the purpose of delivering the North Hykeham Relief Road (NHRR), prior to a decision being taken by the Executive on 5 April 2022)

Consideration was given to a report from the Head of Highways Infrastructure which invited the Committee to consider and comment on a report that sought approval to enter into a two-stage design and build contract for the purpose of delivering the North Hykeham Relief Road (NHRR), prior to a decision being taken by the Executive on 5 April 2022. The Committee were advised that following approval to seek funding for NHRR, the Council submitted an Outline Business Case (OBC) that was successful in securing a £110m allocation from the Department for Transport (DfT). It was identified that the design and build (D&B) form of contract would provide the greatest cost certainty, therefore a SCAPE framework appointment with Balfour Beatty was recommended. While a robust range of likely costs were identified, ranging from £179.3m to £212.4m, it should be appreciated that not significant factors that wouldn’t normally be accounted for were not included. As a result of inflation and constraints in the construction industry, the cost estimates were from 16.1% to 37.5% higher than the cost identified in the OBC. It was stressed that various clauses were included in the contract to enable termination with no further costs or liabilities if the project’s progression was untenable.

The Committee considered the report, and during the discussion the following comments were noted:-

• Members expressed concerns that, in a period of high inflation rates, it was not clear how costings would be affected. Officers provided assurance that, although their concerns were valid, inflation, price rises, and other cost pressures had been factored into the costs presented.  The cost element included for the accelerated construction inflation experienced over the last 18 months and also accommodated normal levels of construction inflation throughout the life of the project.  There was also a range of variance included in the forecast cost range to account for future normal levels of construction inflation running either slightly higher or lower than expected.  It was stressed that a further substantial spike in interest rates like had been seen in the last 18 months had not been factored into the price as it was too variable to estimate. Officers maintained that if the scheme forecast costs that would be regularly reported back to Members and if the Council felt the scheme has become too untenable then there were provisions within the contract to terminate at no further cost or damages and cease development of the project. The DfT were not going to increase their financial offer above what was already agreed; therefore, any cost overrun would have to be factored in through other forms of funding and funding bids that could be explored. Further assurance was provided that the benefit to cost ratio followed the Green Book basis of the business case; when DfT received the final business case which was programmed for 2025 a summary of costs (as these would have changed over the course of time as the scheme progressed) would be provided.
• Members expressed their satisfaction over the positive  ...  view the full minutes text for item 57.

(To consider a report from Liz Burnley, County Manager for Development, which invites the Committee to consider and comment on a report which seeks approval to adopt and implement an Advanced Payment Code exemptions policy where a development site meets specified criteria, prior to a decision being taken by the Executive Councillor for Highways Transport and IT between 14 March - 18 March 2022)

Consideration was given to a report from the County Manager for Development which invited the Committee to consider and comment on a report that sought approval to adopt and implement an Advanced Payment Code exemptions policy where a development site meets specified criteria, prior to a decision being taken by the Executive Councillor for Highways Transport and IT between 14 March - 18 March 2022. The Committee were advised that the Council had been operating an Advanced Payment Code (APC) process for 15 years. While some proposals were being made to legislation from Central Government, the current legislation remained dated and open to interpretation. As a result, the Council had applied exemptions for a number of years, and it now sought to formally ratify the policy of applying APC exemption of proposed developments comprising 10 or less dwellings in total. This would bring the Council’s policy in line with the Flood and Water Management Act 2010.

The Committee considered the report, and during the discussion the following comments were noted:-

·       Members were pleased to receive this report that was documenting what was practically applied until now and that the Policy was now being put in place. Officers clarified that the Policy was previously being applied to five or less dwellings which was now being changed to less than 10 dwellings

RESOLVED

1.       That the Highways and Transport Scrutiny Committee - recorded its support to the Recommendations to the Executive, made in the Adoption and Implementation of the Advanced Payment Code Exemptions Policy report.

2.       That the Highways and Transport Scrutiny Committee agreed that the comments listed above be forwarded on to the Executive in relation to this item.

(To receive a report from Steve Batchelor, LRSP Senior Manager, which seeks to provide the Committee with an update on fatal, killed and serious injury (KSI) casualty figures for Lincolnshire)

Consideration was given to a report from Lincolnshire Road Safety Partnership (LRSP) Senior Manager which sought to provide the Committee with an update on fatal, killed and serious injury (KSI) casualty figures for Lincolnshire. The Committee were advised that The Covid-19 Pandemic had a sustained and dramatic impact on road use throughout 2020 and 2021 which made direct comparisons between years particularly difficult. However, there was a substantial reduction in KSI casualties with 446 and 452 casualties in 2020 and 2021 respectively. 2020 saw reductions in most KSI casualties when categorised by user group with the highest reductions in child 0-16, -35.1 per cent, and pedestrians, -31.9 per cent. Whilst the overall reduction in KSI casualties was maintained in 2021, increases had been seen in a number of user groups, particularly child 0-16, 87.5 per cent, and pedestrians, 19.1 per cent. Members were offered an outline of the key data for fatal casualties in 2021. Over 1000 sites and links were assessed annually resulting in over 50 sites requiring more detailed investigation and improvement work. There were currently seven average speed, 39 static and approximately 80 mobile camera sites in the County. Static camera sites were currently subject to digital upgrade programme. Operation Snap enables the submission of dashcam video evidence from members of the public in relation to suspected driving offences. Up to the end of November, 774 submissions were received in 2021 resulting in 236 suspected offences being processed and an additional 287 warning letters being issued. The Committee were advised of a number of Education, Training and Publicity (ETP) activities that were being offered, including delivery of 30,000 National Driver Offender Retraining Scheme (NDORS) courses as an alternative to prosecution during the Covid-19 restrictions.

The Committee considered the report, and during the discussion the following comments were noted:-

·       Members were surprised to find that most incidents occurred during periods of fine weather mid-day.

·       Referencing the incident they were personally aware of on the A1, Members asked if they could be provided with a more detailed breakdown. The LRSP Senior Manager explained that, while all incidents were detailed within the report, he’d be happy to provide something more specific to the Committee depending on their level of interest. Members were advised that the Executive Councillor for Highways, Transport and IT led a presentation in Grantham highlighting the issues in the County’s stretch of the A1.

·       Relaying their own experiences, a Member provided a less than satisfactory example of reporting dangerous drivers to the Police. Moreover, Members asked if the evidence recorded by community speed watch groups could progress to prosecution or fines. The LRSP Senior Manager was disappointed to hear the Member’s account, he reminded them of the Operation Snap programme which invited members of the public to submit dashcam footage, and a witness statement where necessary, to the LRSP which could ultimately lead to a warning letter being forwarded to the responsible driver. The LRSP Senior Manager agreed that it was hugely important to ensure that community  ...  view the full minutes text for item 59.

(To receive a report from Richard Fenwick, County Highways Manager, which sets out the reactive, cyclic and planned aspects of highways drainage maintenance including low-level flooding response)

Consideration was given to a report from the County Highways Manager which set out the reactive, cyclic, and planned aspects of highways drainage maintenance including low-level flooding response. The Committee were advised that 135,000 drainage assets had been cleansed in the routine programme, 12,500 had defects and required follow up work, 3,500 had damaged ironwork and required follow up work, the remaining assets were planned to be cleansed over the coming months. There were 12,000 assets requiring specialist traffic management. The Council was adapting it’s automatic reporting so that a “works are complete” message didn’t go out after the works were finally completed as the message could be misleading. The funding for 2021/22 was increased from £300,000 to £600,000 to complete a variety of works including replacing sections of damaged highway pipes, installing additional gullies and manholes where ponding occurs, increasing the size and capacity of the drainage system over small lengths and repairing bank or ditch slips. Since April 2020 Ajet crews had attended and dealt with 365 sites, with a further 144 designed and scheduled for the rest of the year. Works had been programmed to the value of £1.4m on various minor drainage schemes across the County from the £2.2m invest to save bid approved in 2020/21. The remaining budget was planned to be spent in early 2022 on larger and more complex schemes. So far in 2022 only 284 drainage reports were received and 33 flooding reports for the whole county, which was very low for this time of year.

The Committee considered the report, and during the discussion the following comments were noted:-

·       In relation to the 12,000 assets requiring specialist traffic management, Members asked if gullies along bypasses, particularly the A17, were included within that. Moreover, Members suggested that officers may want to consider additional gully cleanses in the annual cycle. The County Highways Manager explained that most A roads required specialist traffic management because the cyclic works, often done under stop and go boards, weren’t appropriate for roads with such heavy traffic. Some ditch clearance works for highways works were scheduled to start imminently. In addition, communication was underway with district councils to ensure effective sweeping to avoid gullies getting clogged. Cleanses currently took place at least once a year, but a focus of future endeavours was to undertake a targeted cleanse of gullies.

RESOLVED

That the Highways and Transport Scrutiny Committee note the Highways - Gully Cleansing, Drainage Repair Schemes, and Surface Water Flooding Report.

(To receive a report from Kiara Chatziioannou, Scrutiny Officer, which enables the Committee to comment on the content of its work programme for the coming year to ensure that scrutiny activity is focused where it can be of greatest benefit)

The Committee received a report from the Scrutiny Officer which enabled the Committee to comment on the content of its work programme for the coming year to ensure that scrutiny activity was focussed where it could be of greatest benefit.

Members were advised that, due time frame restrictions, the pre decision Bikeabilty report, originally scheduled for the 25 April meeting, would now be considered at the 24 March meeting of the Overview and Scrutiny Management Board.

Members of the Committee raised the issue of advertising on roundabouts as a potential source of future investigation. The Scrutiny Officer acknowledged Members’ request.