2
AGENDA ITEM NO. 5
REPORT TO: Executive Board
REPORT NO: CEnO/20/10
DATE: 29 June 2010
LEAD MEMBER: Councillor David A Bithell
(Environment and Transport)
LEAD OFFICER: Chief Environment Officer
CONTACT OFFICER: Jonathan Plant (Tel: 297145)
SUBJECT: Highway Asset Management Plan
WARD: All
1. PURPOSE OF THE REPORT
· To present a summary of the Highway Asset Management Plan for the County Borough.
· To seek approval of a Policy Statement on Highway Asset Management.
2. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
2.1 The highway network is provided for the benefit of the public who use the network to go about their daily lives. The network is the highest value infrastructure asset owned by the Council. The carriageway and footways alone are valued in excess of £1 billion.
2.2 As a highway authority, the Council has a statutory duty to maintain the highway. We do so in the face of increasing pressures, namely:
· Limited budgets
· Limited staff resources
· Mature highway networks with a backlog of maintenance requirements
· Increased accountability to the public.
· Increasing public expectations
2.3 The Highway Asset Management Plan (HAMP) sets out how the Council responds to its statutory duty, in the face of pressures. It sets out how asset management principles will be applied to the management of assets that make up the highway network in Wrexham.
These principles are:-
· A systematic approach that takes a long term view.
· The whole life/life cycle of an asset is considered.
· Maximising benefits by balancing competing demands.
· Allocation of resources based on assessed needs.
· Explicit consideration of public expectations.
This report is a summary of the HAMP. A copy of the full HAMP is deposited in the Members Library.
The Highway Asset Management Policy is contained in Appendix 1 of this report.
3. RECOMMENDATIONS
3.1 That the Executive Board approve the Highway Asset Management Policy (contained in Appendix 1).
3.2 That the Executive Board note the Highway Asset Management Plan.
3.3 That the Executive Board receive a progress report in 12 months on the implementation of the Highway Asset Management Plan.
REASONS FOR RECOMMENDATIONS
The Highway Asset Management Plan supports the statutory duty to maintain the highway network and the regional and local policies relating to managing the highway asset. Implementing the Highway Asset Management Plan will provide a strategic approach to ensuring that limited resources are directed to areas of need, balancing competing demands and risks, in a way that recognises the needs of our customers.
John Bradbury
Chief Environment Officer
4. BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Background
4.1 In February 2008, the Council’s Executive Board resolved that “the adoption of the draft Highways Asset Management Plan and the associated Life Cycle Plans for further development be approved and that a further report be submitted for the Board’s consideration in due course.”
4.2 Since then, work has been done to further develop the Wrexham Highway Asset Management Plan (HAMP) in accordance with national guidance. The HAMP has been developed by a working group of officers from both the Environment Department and Transportation & Asset Management Department.
4.3 The Council, as highway authority, has a statutory duty to maintain the highway network despite increasing pressures that include:-
· Limited budgets
· Limited staff resources
· Mature highway networks with a backlog of maintenance requirements
· Increased accountability to our customers
· Increasing public expectations
4.4 The HAMP provides a more structured approach to responding to these challenges. The purpose of the HAMP is to set out how asset management principles will be applied to the management of assets that make up the highway network in Wrexham.
These principles are:-
· A systematic approach that takes a long term view.
· The whole life/life cycle of an asset is considered.
· Maximising benefits by balancing competing demands.
· Allocation of resources based on assessed needs.
· Explicit consideration of customer expectations.
4.5 The HAMP is identified in the Wrexham Local Transport Strategy as a key component in the delivery of our Local Transport Outcomes. The following outcome is of particular relevance:
“Well managed and maintained local highway network maximising the safe and efficient use of road space and ensuring reliability of journey times”.
.
Scope of the HAMP
4.6 The HAMP deals with the highway network for which Wrexham County Borough Council are the highway authority. It does not cover the 31km of Trunk Road in the County Borough for which the Welsh Assembly Government is the highway authority. The Council works closely with the North Wales Trunk Road Agency who intends to prepare a HAMP for the trunk roads.
4.7 All asset groups forming the highway network will be covered in the HAMP. At present, we have focussed our attention on the following asset groups:-
· Carriageways
· Footways
· Structures
· Street lights
· Passenger transport assets (bus stops, shelters etc).
Future up dates of the HAMP will incorporate the following asset groups:-
· Drainage
· Signs and markings
· Traffic signals
· Green assets (trees and verges)
· Safety fences
Framework for Highway Asset Management
4.8 Asset management of physical assets is not a new concept. The principles have been used for some years in the property and utility sectors. However, although many of the principles and concepts of asset management have been applied to highway networks for decades, it is only in recent years that the benefits of a more holistic approach to management of highway assets has been realised. There is a growing body of good practice and guidance to support highway asset managers in the development of HAMPs. Development of the Wrexham HAMP has followed the Framework for Highway Asset Management published by the County Surveyors Society and summarised in Figure 1.
Asset management is defined in the Framework as:-
6. Reporting & MonitoringImprovement Actions / Goals, Objectives & Policies / Inventory
1. Starting Point
Condition Assessment / Demand Aspirations
2. Levels of Service
Performance Gaps / Lifecycle Planning
Performance Measurement / 3. Option Identification
Optimisation & Budget Consideration / Risk Assessment
4. Decision Making
Forward Work Programme / Physical Works & Services
5. Service Delivery
Fig 1: County Surveyors Society
Generic Asset Management System
Summary of the Highways Asset Management Plan
Policy Statement
4.9 The asset management policy plays a leading part in driving the asset management system. It sets out the organisation’s commitment to asset management and the principles, approach and expectations by which it will be implemented.
4.10 A Highway Asset Management Policy has been drafted and is included at Appendix 1 of this report. The Policy is presented to Executive Board for approval.
Inventory
4.11 A review of inventory (the asset register) has been carried out. An up to date inventory is the foundation on which asset management processes are built. The Council has good data management systems in place for capturing and recording the asset inventory. There are however gaps in inventory relating to highway drainage and street lighting cables.
In summary, the network comprises the following:-
Asset Group / QuantityRoads / Class A 107 km
Class B 149 km
Class C 387 km
Unclassified 544 km
Footways / 995 km
Structures / Bridges 132 No
Culverts 284 No
Retaining Walls 9.4 km
Drainage / Gullies approx 35,000 No
Street Lights / Columns 12112 No
Lanterns 12361 No
Traffic Signals / Junctions 18 Installations
Crossings 33 Installations
Condition Assessment
4.12 A review of condition assessment processes has been completed. This review captures the techniques and frequencies by which the asset condition is inspected or surveyed so that we can assess its overall condition and maintenance needs.
Key facts relating to network condition include:-
· Progress was being made in reducing the backlog of carriageway maintenance. The Council’s investment in carriageway maintenance had seen an overall improvement in the condition of carriageways across all classes of road. However, the severe weather of 2009/10 has had a significant damaging impact. Surveys carried out in February 2010 across the whole of the network provided the following assessment of carriageway condition.
Condition / Survey Rating / Percentage of networkVery good condition / 1 / 15.2%
2 / 29.2%
3 / 27.0%
4 / 20.2%
Very poor condition / 5 / 8.5%
· The percentage of Principal Roads where skid resistance needs further investigation was 28% in 2009.
· 1% of footways were deemed to be in very poor condition in 2009. Again, good progress has been made by the Council in improving the condition of footways as a result of additional resources for footway maintenance being prioritised by the Council.
· 30% of the street lighting stock (some 4000 columns) is older than the anticipated life expectancy of 30 years.
· 11 bridges and 6 highway retaining walls are considered to be in Poor condition.
Asset Valuation & Backlog
4.13 Guidance on asset valuation was published by The Chartered Institute of Public Finance & Accountancy (CIPFA) in March 2010. The aim of the guidance is to provide a consistent approach to calculation of asset values and depreciation to assist asset management. From 2011/12 these calculations will be subject to audit review and will be reported in Whole of Government Accounts.
The Officer Working Group will be implementing this guidance in accordance with the HM Treasury timetable which requires a formal, fully audited dry run in 2011-12.
Initial calculations using the CIPFA approach value the Gross Replacement Cost of Wrexham’s carriageway and footway assets at £1,048 million.
Levels of Service
4.14 Levels of Service are statements of the key requirements or expectations of customers when they use the highway asset or when it directly affects them in some other way. They are expressions of desired outcomes for customers and are concerned with how the asset performs in supporting delivery of these outcomes rather than performance in a technical sense.
4.15 In preparing Levels of Service statements, the relationship between customer expectation and National/Local legislation, guidance and policy has been recognised. The three main themes in the Code of Practice for Highway Maintenance Management (Well Maintained Highways) have been used as the starting point for the development of Levels of Service. The themes are:-
· Safety
o Complying with statutory obligations
o Meeting user needs for safety
· Serviceability
o Ensuring availability
o Achieving integrity
o Maintaining reliability
o Enhancing condition
· Sustainability
o Minimising cost over time
o Maximising value to the community
o Maximising environmental contribution
4.16 Primary and secondary levels of service statements have been drafted. Primary levels of service are at a network level. Secondary levels of service are at an asset group level (e.g. carriageway, footway, bridges etc.).
The proposed primary level of service statements are as follows:-
1 / We will ensure that our customers feel safe and are confident about personal safety when they use the highway asset. / SAFETY2 / We will endeavour to ensure that the condition of our highway network assets improve over time.
SERVICEABILITY
3 / We will ensure that our customers have a reasonable level of confidence that their journeys on the highways asset will be predictable and timely.
SUSTAINABILITY
4 / We will ensure that decisions taken on maintaining the highway network assets minimise costs over time.
5 / We will progressively reduce the environmental impact of the highway asset to the benefit of all our customers.
PRIMARY LEVEL OF SERVICE STATEMENTS
4.17 The primary level of service statements reflect work carried out by the Transport Research Laboratory and Ipsos MORI which established the priorities and concerns of a cross section of road and footway users.
4.18 The proposed secondary levels of service statements are included in the HAMP report. The secondary level of service statements have been used to define engineering standards, which define how the level of service is delivered in a technical sense. A range of engineering standards have been defined and the “steady state” standard identified, i.e. the level at which the service is delivered with current budgets. These standards have been used to prepare a gap analysis.
Risk Assessment
4.19 Risk registers have been prepared for each of the asset groups covered to date and are documented in the HAMP.
Gap Analysis
4.20 The Gap Analysis provides an examination of the levels of service and associated engineering standards which require an investment in financial and/or staff resources. The purpose of the gap analysis is to determine where gaps in service delivery exist, and the effect on resources and risk of responding to these gaps.
The approach to conducting the gap analysis was as follows:-
· The working group challenged asset managers on the drafting of the engineering standards, where it was felt that the standard did not set the performance level. Where changes were requested, consensus was reached on amended wording.
· Asset managers reported the current level of investment against each standard.
· Consensus was reached amongst the group as to whether the steady state standard delivered or exceeded the level of service. (The steady state standard defines the current asset condition or service level that is maintained with current funding levels).
· Where the service level was not delivered, or in the opinion of the group was exceeded, the impact of changing the standard on resources and risk was noted.
The Gap Analysis was limited to asset groups addressed in the current HAMP which include:
· Carriageways
· Footways
· Street Lights
· Highway Structures
· Public Transport Infrastructure Assets
4.21 The outcome of the gap analysis is presented in Appendix 2.
Gap Analysis Key Findings
Carriageways
4.22 The rate at which carriageway condition has deteriorated had slowed in recent years. However, the severe winter weather of 2009/2010 has caused extensive further deterioration of the carriageway network. Following a recent condition survey, it is estimated that the value of carriageway deterioration since summer 2009 is in the order of £12m. This was reported to the Executive Board at the meeting on 13 April 2010 (Ref CEnO/10/10). The Executive Board approved the use of prudential borrowing, repayable over a period of 25 years, to fund additional £1.6m investment in the carriageway infrastructure over the two year period 2010/11 and 2011/12. This provides total funding of £4.319m for 2 years in 2010-11 and 2011-12.