Highways and Transport Cabinet Panel

MEMORANDUM 23 July 2010

To:All Members of the Highways and
Transport Cabinet Panel
Executive Members for (1) HighwaysTransport and (2) Environment, Planning& Waste
Director of Environment & Commercial Services / From:Legal and Member Services
Ask for:Adrian Service
Ext:25564
My Ref:AS
Your Ref:
______

HIGHWAYS AND TRANSPORT CABINET PANEL

6 JULY 2010

MINUTES

ATTENDANCE

D Andrews,N Bell, C N Brazier (substituting for M Cowan), G F Button, R F Cheswright,

G R Churchard, W E Eynon, P V Goggins (substituting forS B A F H Giles – Medhurst),

T C Heritage (Vice – Chairman),M D R Muir, S O’Brien, D A A Peek (substituting for J Fraser)

S J Pile (Chairman), W A Storey (substituting forA D Williams).

Officers

R Smith-Lead Officer - Assistant Director of Environment (Transport Management)

M Armstrong-Strategy Development Officer, Sustainable School Travel

S Bailes-Special Projects Officer, Environment & Commercial Services Dept.

R Cuthbert-Head of Rights of Way,Environment & Commercial Services Dept.

V Gilbert-Head of Hertfordshire Highways

K Hamilton-Transport Planning & Policy Officer, Environment & Commercial Services Dept.

D Higgins-Assistant District Manager (St Stephen & The Colneys), HertsHighways

D Humby-Head of Transportation Planning & Policy, Environment & Commercial Services Dept

T MasonPrincipalEngineer (Policy), Environment & Commercial Services Dept.

A Service-Democratic Services Officer

I Wheeler-Senior Communications Officer, Environment & Commercial Services Dept.

K Williams-Assistant District Manager (St Albans Area Team), Hertfordshire Highways

MEMBERSHIP

The Panel noted that C N Brazier, P V Goggins, D A A Peek and W A Storey had beenrespectively appointed to replace M Cowan, S B A F H Giles- Medhurst, J Fraser and

A D Williams as Members of the Panel for this meeting only.

APOLOGIES

Apologies for absence weresubmitted on behalf of M Cowan, J Fraser,

S B A F H Giles – Medhurst, A F Hunterand A D Williams.

1.MINUTES OF PANEL MEETINGS HELD ON 16 MARCH AND 8 JUNE 2010

That the Minutes of the Panel meetings held on 16 March and 8 June 2010 be approved as correct records.

1. PETITIONS

There were no petitions received from the public to be presented to the Panel

at this meeting.

3.LOCAL TRANSPORT PLAN [LTP3] – DRAFT POLICIES

The Panel considered the draft transport policies that were proposed to be included in the Council’s Local Transport Plan 3 as contained in the submitted agenda report.

The Panel made the following observations of what the new policies needed to have regard to : -

a)Intelligent transport signals systems [para5.3 – page 2]

To take account of the optimum time taken for elderly / more vulnerable persons to cross roads without being an excessive length of time.

The local CountyCouncillor for OxheyPark referred to a peak hours problem at pedestrian crossing at the junction of Deacons Hill / Eastbury Road, Oxhey which could be eased if a pedestrian crossing phase was skipped.

The local CountyCouncillor for Bushey North commented on the considerable number of traffic lights introduced as part of the Watford Green Route in particular the unnecessary delay the traffic lights caused at night when traffic flows were low. Regarding the possibility of not operating traffic lights during

evenings there were doubts as to whether this would be legally possible.

The Panel Chairman advised that the work being undertaken with intelligent traffic systems would involve looking at traffic lights on the current network and whether more effective traffic movement could be achieved by re phasing / changing junction control systems / lights.

b)Cycling strategy [para 5.4 – page 3]

Some cycling schemes have taken a long time to sort out i.e London Road,

St Albans.

Reference was made to a potential danger to pedestrians on a pavement in Cow Arch, OxheyPark due to cyclists not dismounting when crossing the pavement which formed part of this local cycle route.

c)Airports [policy 3.2 – page 8]

It was felt that policy stated in the second sentence of 3.2 B should be bolder though it was acknowledged the Council had no powers in this regard.

In the event of any proposed developments at Stansted or LutonAirports, the Council would work in conjunction with neighbouring authorities to request that funding of adequate supporting surface access infrastructure and services were in place prior to airport / development or improvements occurring.

d)Passenger Transport [para 3.15 - page 13]

The provision of funds may limit improvements to passenger transport.

e)Powered two wheelers [para 3.16 – page 14]

In response to a suggestion that in addition to the Council having a cycling champion there should also be a motor cycle champion it was agreed that

W E Eynon speak to CountyOfficers regarding taking on this role.

f)School travel [para 3.22 – page 17]

To encourage safe cycling travel to school consideration should be given to permitting young children to cycle on pavements.

g)Sustainable Distribution and Freight [para 3.25 – page 18]

There was a continuing need to encourage heavy goods vehicles [hgvs’]to use the primary route network and minimise hgvs’ from using lower category roads and greater signage of primary routes would assist.

The local CountyCouncillor for Letchworth East and Baldock referred to a problem in Baldock where hgvs coming off the A1 driving down North Road which could be overcome by road signs advising hgv drivers what roads to follow and / or by turning bans being introduced which prescribed which roads to be followed.

In response to a query, the Panel Chairman understood that the freight / road haulage / industry were undertaking a trial in the west country looking at the possibility of improving Sat Nav systems to more precisely identify primary and advisory hgv routes and this avoid / reduce hgvs’ using local roads

The Panel Chairman advised that a draft LTP3 would be brought to the next Panel meeting on 7 September 2010 for consideration and endorsement prior to being put out to public consultation in autumn 2010.

It was agreed that subject to the amendment of the wording of the notes regarding policy 3.2 A to reflect c) above , the suggested draft policies as set out in 3.1 to 3.30 of the submitted report together with the explanatory notes be incorporated within the draft LTP 3 to be put out for public consultation in autumn 2010.

4.HERTFORDSHIRE’S SUSTAINABLE MODES OF TRAVELSTRATEGY (SMoTS) FOR SCHOOLS AND COLLEGES

Trevor Mason advised that in accordance with the Education and Inspections Act 2006, Hertfordshire‘s Sustainable Modes of Travel Strategy for Schools and Colleges had been updated and was presented to the Panel for comment and endorsement prior to being published by 31 August 2010.

In response to a question, Trevor Mason stated that a district by district breakdown of children travelling to school by sustainable modes of travel was available* [copy attached as an Appendix to these Minutes]. The Panel Vice Chairman stated she had obtained a breakdown [by E mail] and would circulate the St Albans District copy to the local CountyCouncillor for Sandridge.

In response to a suggestion that consideration should be given to permitting young children to cycle on pavements to encourage greater cycling travel to school, the Panel Chairman referred to the current legalities concerning cycling on pavements and young children felt that the issue could be looked into and subject to the findings statutory changes could be lobbied for. Trevor Mason responded to the reference to the case of two young children in London cycling unaccompanied to school which had resulted in the DulwichSchool reporting the family to local social services concerning lack of care.

In response to a comment on the text stated in the second sentence of

paragraph 2.2 of the report concerning 6thformers, the Panel Chairman advised that the text was endeavouring to state that the strategy covered young children including 6th formers. The issue of 6th formers driving to school and causing on street parking problem at some schools was an aspect the strategy aimed to cover by school travel plans encourage car sharing etc.

The Panel Chairman commented with regard to the likely cutback in public spending,

funds may not so readily be available for school travel initiatives in the future and a paper would be brought to the Panel when HM Government’s intentions are known.

The Panel agreed that the Sustainable Modes of Travel Strategy for Schools and Colleges for 2010 / 2011 (full text as deposited in the Members Room [Room 103] at County Hall, Hertford)be endorsed.

5.HIGHWAYS RE – PROCUREMENT 2012

Vince Gilbert advised of the progress made in evaluating the options appraisal for the procurement of contracts for Hertfordshire’s highway service. Contracts would beawarded to start from 1 October 2012.

The Panel Chairman drew attention to the Members Advisory Group (MAG) consisting of 5 members of the Panel that had to date provided the officers with guidance on the development work.

Vince Gilbert explained how the preferred contract model would meet the following

six critical success factors which had been derived under the guidance of the Members Advisory Group : -

• The new arrangements must be capable of achieving 20% revenue savings by 2013/14 (relative to 09/10) and meet future financial targets in a sustainable way focused on value for money. Ongoing competition for Capital works will be used to drive down costs.

• The new arrangements will have fewer HCC employees at less cost (properly taking into account payments to service providers).

• The new arrangements will include effective performance management, incentivisation and risk management to drive service quality in key areas, specifically including public satisfaction.

• The new arrangements must be flexible and allow for changes in scope, scale, strategic goals (e.g. Herts Local) and operational priorities for the duration of the contract and beyond.

• The service will strive to meet and manage customer expectations reliably and in a controlled manner

• The new arrangements will include effective/compatible systems and processes that support the business and a seamless customer interaction.

He advised that of the six broad contract options considered, the framework with enhanced competition model appeared to be the best option as suppliers are given financial incentives to meet the Council’s above six critical success factors objectives;it introduces continuous competition on both price and quality and likely to deliver considerable savings over more traditional arrangements.

The framework with enhanced competition model would comprise of the following separate contracts:

• A core term contract of approximate value £30-35M pa carried out by a single contractor. It covers
• Emergency response
• First line response (Cat 1)
• Cat 2 and small works including discretionary works
• Cyclical maintenance (grass, trees, gullies and minor drainage, etc.)
• Winter maintenance

It is not economical or practical to split this contract geographically or functionally, because of the loss of critical mass necessary to deliver an efficient service including winter/emergency.

• A support contract £7 -10M pa covering specialist professional skills which it would not be appropriate to transfer to the core contractor, principally
• Auditing and commercial management of works contractors
• Preliminary design work
• Development Control
• Some surveys and data management, and the studies and strategies that depend on them
• Traffic and network management
• A small number of specialist contracts for professional services, such as transport planning £0.5M pa and Intelligent Transport Systems £2.2M pa.

• Works framework contracts for small schemes £21M pa, for large schemes £7M pa and for structures £2.5M pa.

All figures are based on 2010 /11 budget levels.

Vince Gilbert stated he intended to keep Members informed of further developments through seeking guidance from the Member Reference Group, issuing Information bulletins to Panel Members and bringing reports to Panel meetings.

In response to questions he stated that approximately 20 companies were expected to express an interest in the core contract and it was proposed to select a shortlist of 4 to 6 companies of those submitting tenders. The core contract was proposed to run for 7 years with an option to extend for a further 3 years and if the core contract was working well there would be scope to migrate other highway work into the core contract.

In response to a query, the Panel Chairman and Vince Gilbert stated that as regards constructing vehicle crossovers to residents premises, a scrutiny exercise had been undertaken in 2006 plus a 12 month trial scheme in East Hertfordshire starting in 2007 with local builders as well as Hertfordshire Highways constructing vehicle crossovers. The outcome of the trial was that the majority of crossover works performed by local builders was done at a higher cost than if done by Herts Highways, this to some degree was due to compliance checks having to be done.

It was agreed that details of the scrutiny and this trial be circulated to Panel Members.

He stated that as part of this re procurement exercise the Hertfordshire District / Borough Councils had been offered the opportunity to engage with the possibility of them using the eventual contract arrangements to perform some or all of their works.

The Panel Chairman hoped that some if not all of the Hertfordshire / District Councils

agreed to take part and be featured in the Official Journal of the European Union (OEUJ) Notice giving details of highway contract works being offered out for tender.

The Panel Chairman commented that regard would be taken of the shortcomings in 2002 when the highway contracting works last changed especially in the event of significant changes in 2012.

In response to a question, Vince Gilbert stated that dependant on the financial climate

and market situation in 2012 double digit savings could result from the revised highway arrangements.

In response to a question, Rob Smith stated that as requested at the Member Advisory Group, officers would look into the pros and cons of the Council engaging its own Quantity Surveyors, to cost up future highway works including benefits, such as probity, confidenceandcost effectiveness.

The Panel agreed that

a)an “enhanced framework model” for the contracts delivering the highways service from 1 October 2012, incorporating a single term contract and framework contracts, with a performance regime that rewards high performance with additional opportunities for work be endorsed.

b)the OJEU notice be constructed to permit the potential changes in scope indicatedand the modification of the contracts at a suitable break point (probably four years), to allow for either the introduction of a Managing Agent Contract (as outlined in paragraph 5.3 of the submitted report) or for the continuation or termination of the initial arrangements, at the Council’s discretion.

6.DRAFT GATING ORDER POLICY

Richard Cuthbert and Damian Higginsoutlined a draft policy for adoption to deal with applications for the making of Gating Orders to close highways permanently or during specified hours as a measure to deal with crime or anti social behaviour. Richard Cuthbert stated that highway authorities in dealing with such applications would have to have regard to their responsibility to assert and protect the rights of the public to use highways within their area which in some instances could be conflicting.

He advised that a number of requests had already been received for the making of Gating Orders on roads and rights of way including one to close a footpath to deal with crime on school premises atHockerillEuropeanCollege, Dunmow Road, Bishop’s Stortford.

The process proposed to be used would involve the Community Safety Partnership (CSP)after being satisfied that all other possible solutions have been taken account of, taking forward applications for Gating Orders. If the area CSP agree the promotion of a Gating Order, the application to make the Order would be forwarded eitherto the County Council’s Rights of Way Team or Herts Highways , depending on highway status / location for further investigation, decision and if appropriate for advertising and public consultation.

He drew thePanel’s attentionto the correct version of the draft policy AG4 stated on page 10 which through the drafting process had changed from that shown on page 29 to now read :-

A Gating Order may not be progressed unless all the interested parties with properties adjacent to the route affected by the proposal have agreed in writing to the proposals, as specified within the Gating Order Policy Document, or they have not objected to such a proposal.

He stated that in the event of Gating Orders being made in most cases but not necessarily all, gates would be operated by means of a coded keypad lock with a personal identification number (PIN) all legitimate parties being issued with the PIN.

In response to a question, Richard Cuthbert advised that no neighbouring highway authority had established Gating Order policies and nationally he was only aware of York and Southend having such policies.

The Panel agreed that any gated private footways or roads which were put forward would not be adopted as highway maintainable at public expense.

The local CountyCouncillor for The Colneys, St Albans drew attention to a current anti social problem featuring a highway which could benefit from the making of a Gating Order and in the event of the Gating Order being made and should the problem be resolved it would then be possible to re open the highway concerned.

He felt that there could be community benefits from making such Orders, the costs did not have to be substantial and there was scope for any such costs to be shared.

Richard Cuthbert stated that the intention was to update the draft policy taking into account the comments of the Panel and present for endorsement at the next Panel meeting on 7 September 2010, then recommending to Cabinet on 20 September 2010 and finally submit to the County Council meeting on 12 October 2010

The Panel agreed the adoption of the draft policy for the processing of Gating Orders as set out in the submitted report, in principle.

7.DATES OF FUTURE PANEL MEETINGS

The Panel noted the dates ofits following future meetings: -

a)Tuesday 7 September 2010 at 10.00 am.

b)Tuesday 9November 2010 at 10.00 am.

INFORMATION NOTES

The following Information Notes had been sent to Panel Members since the last ordinary Panel meeting on 16 March 2010 : -

10 / 02 – Non Illuminated Bollards

10 / 03 – EDF Energy - Update

10 / 04 – Traffic Management Act & Regional Permit Scheme

Kathryn Pettitt

Chief Legal Officer

Appendix

Item 4 - Hertfordshire’s Sustainable Modes of Travel Strategy for School and Colleges