Agenda and minutes

RESOLVED

That Councillor Strengiel be elected as Chairman for this meeting of the Highways and Transport Scrutiny Committee.

COUNCILLOR STRENGIEL IN THE CHAIR

An apology for absence was received from Councillor B Adams. It was reported that, under Regulation 13 of the Local Government Committee and Political Groups) Regulation 1990, Councillor A N Stokes was replacing Councillor B Adams for this meeting only.

Apologies for absence were also received from Councillor A M Hall.

No declarations of interest received.

That the minutes of the meeting held on 28 June 2021 be confirmed and signed by the Chairman as a correct record.

Councillor Davis, Executive Councillor for Highways, Transport and IT, confirmed that the Executive would be proposing to the next meeting of Council that an additional £10 million be added to the highways maintenance budget on top of the £12.5 million that had been topped up earlier in the year.

(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 Programme Manager, and the, County Highways Manager, on Gully Cleansing/Repair and Surface Water Flooding. The Council were responsible for 190,000 drainage assets, and for the 2020/21 financial year, only 2,500 hadn't been attended to. This was a significant improvement when compared to previous years. An overview of the types of defects identified during inspections and a summary of the schedules of the Council's eight tankers were given. In relation to budget for minor drainage improvements, funding had increased from £300,000 in 2020/21 to £600,000 in 2021/22. An overview on the process for job prioritisation when received from the Customer Service Centre or Fix My Street was also given. Over the last financial year, outstanding jobs were double what they were now. Emergency Repair crews attending flooding reports now had the benefit of using tablets and took photographs of flood sites.

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

·         Members relayed residents' comments that, on occasion, they had been advised by officers that surface water would drain away itself within a few days, and sought further clarity on the rationale behind this advice. Assurance was given that the same priority practice was applied throughout the county. The suggestion that water would drain away did not follow the Council's consistent approach. If similar comments were received, going forward, these would be fed back to the County Highways Manager.

• The report suggested that assistance may be scheduled shortly within the cycling programme. Members sought detail on exactly how long this would be. Assurance was provided that officers took a risk based approach when determining the priority of their assistance. If a puddle remained with no risk to the public, a time frame of one to two months would be expected.
• Members appreciated officers’ and partners’ working together effectively to respond to issues throughout the County. Members were particularly pleased to see traffic management gangs on the A16.
• Observing that 'no immediate action proposed' was a response to issues of very low priority and risk, one member asked if this response indicated that a particular job would be closed indefinitely. Acknowledging that this may perturb residents who raised the job, the Committee was provided with assurance that, more appropriate wording would be considered on the Fix My Street app.
• Water pooling was still a concern to residents when it affected only a small number of properties or a single property. Officers suggested working with Local Drainage Boards, however, Members felt this was limited to larger projects. The Committee were advised that often residents were not aware that they were responsible for a water course. The County Highways Manager sat on a riparian working group which sought to engage with residents further to keep watercourses open and added that unless there was a significant nuisance, the Environment Agency did not have the power to enforce action.

RESOLVED

That the report and comments be noted.

(To receive a report from Karen Cassar, Assistant Director Highways, which presents the Committee with the findings of a Councillor Call for Action referred by the Overview and Scrutiny Management Board meeting (28 January 2021) in relation to a request concerning West Street, Barkston.  Councillor R Wootten will be in attendance for this item)

Consideration was given to a report from the Assistant Director of Highways on a Councillor Call for Action, report recommending proposals that resolved obstruction of the highway on West Street, Barkston that was previously raised by Councillor R Wootten. The proposals included implementation of a H bar, increased signage and allocation of a passing place. Signage aimed to deter parking and would not be legally enforced.

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

• Members commended Councillor R Wootten on his proactive approach to resolving issues within his division; however, concerns were raised that this may have set a precedent for how similar division issues could be resolved. It was clarified that division issues were resolved without Scrutiny Committee intervention.
• Members raised a concern that structures had been erected on the verge, and queried if Lincolnshire County Council was liable for any damage as a result. The Committee was informed that the Council had written to the resident, advising them to remove any unauthorised structures. In addition, a claim for damages had been received from a third party.
• Members argued that the increased traffic on West Street was a result of the Covid-19 lockdown, and added that there was only anecdotal evidence to rely on in absence of monitoring being carried out and suggested that this could be done after some normality returned. Members raised concerns that the resources allocated to address this problem would be better spent addressing other more severe issues within the County.
• Members acknowledged that the proposal made in the report would be subject to limitations however, it was agreed that this would be used as a test site to verify the efficacy of the proposals.

RESOLVED That recommendation 1(b), adoption of Proposal 1 & Proposal 2, of the report be supported, that recommendations 2 and 3 be noted, and the comments outlined above be passed onto the Executive Councillor for Highways, Transport and IT.

(To receive a report from Kiara Chatziioannou, Scrutiny Officer, which requests the Committee to consider topics for potential scrutiny reviews)

Consideration was given to a report from the Scrutiny Officer, which invited the Committee to make suggestions for in-depth scrutiny reviews, for consideration and decision by the Overview and Scrutiny Management Board on 30 September 2021.

On 17 June 2021, the Overview and Scrutiny Management Board had agreed to request that each overview and scrutiny committee identify potential topics for in depth scrutiny reviews, which would be undertaken by the two Scrutiny Panels, taking into account the prioritisation toolkit. The Board would consider all the suggestions at its meeting on 30 September 2021, with a view to making a decision on which reviews would be approved. This Committee was requested to consider whether it would wish to make any suggestions to the Board.

While acknowledging that some divisions and parish councils had their own speed monitoring systems, Members agreed that traffic speed management was a common issue throughout the County therefore, a wide review would appropriate. This topic that had been considered in 2014, further guidance from central government was still expected in relation to this matter.

RESOLVED

That the Overview and Scrutiny Management Board be informed that the Committee had suggested a review of traffic speed management.

(To receive a report from Kiara Chatziioannou, Scrutiny Officer, which enables the Committee to consider and comment on the content of its work programme)

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.

The Committee noted that an additional item on - Enhanced Partnership Scheme and Bus Service Improvement Plan (BSIP) (Pre-decision Scrutiny) had been added to the work programme.

RESOLVED

          That the work programme as amended above be approved.

(To consider a report from Anita Ruffle (Head of Transport Services) which sets out updates relating to Transport Connect)

Consideration was given to an exempt update report from the Head of Transport Services on Transport Connect Ltd.

RESOLVED

That the report and comments be noted.