MIDDLESBROUGH COUNCIL

EXECUTIVE REPORT

Report Title: Traffic Signal Service Review

Executive Member for Transport : Charles Rooney

Director of Environment : Mike Robinson

2 March 2010

PURPOSE OF THE REPORT

  1. To seek Executive approval for the restructuring of the traffic signals group and to authorise joint working to develop a partnering mechanism with Newcastle City Council for future joint delivery of a traffic signal service.
SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS
  1. It is recommended that the staffing changes outlined in the report be approved to enable the traffic signal maintenance functions to be undertaken ‘in house’ following the termination of the current external contract.
  1. It is recommended that approval for initial joint authority working be granted to enable shared use of resources with Newcastle City Council’s traffic signal service, whilst a formal regional model for shared service delivery is developed.

IF THIS IS A KEY DECISION WHICH KEY DECISION TEST APPLIES?

It is over the financial threshold (£75,000) / 
It has a significant impact on 2 or more wards / x
Non Key / x

DECISION IMPLEMENTATION DEADLINE

  1. For the purposes of the scrutiny call in procedure this report is

Non-urgent / 
Urgent report / x

BACKGROUND AND EXTERNAL CONSULTATION

  1. When Cleveland County was abolished in 1996 the traffic signal maintenance unit was transferred on block to Middlesbrough Council and is jointly funded by Middlesbrough, Stockton, Hartlepool and Redcar and Cleveland. In the past 13 years there has been a significant increase in the number and complexity of new traffic signal and pedestrian crossing provision within the Tees Valley. In 1996 there were 194 units in the area and this has risen to 368 units, currently a rise of 89%. During this time the staffing structure and external contract arrangements have remained the same, however the use of the external maintenance contractor has risen steadily over the years to assist with the growing workload. In 1996 the service had the resources to monitor signal performance and undertake regular reviews to ensure optimum performance. Today the service is predominantly focussed on keeping the traffic signals operational and regular reviews no longer take place.
  1. With the retirement of the principal engineer a couple of years ago, a temporary agreement has been reached with Newcastle City Council (who are responsible for the same functions across Tyne and Wear) for a secondment into this post, whilst the service is reviewed. During the past two years a relationship has been established between Middlesbrough and Newcastle signals teams, with individual assistance being provided on specific needs basis and examples of good practice shared. This report proposes changes to the way the traffic signals unit operates and seeks closer working relationship with Newcastle City Council as a first step towards joint service provision covering the North East as a whole.
  1. Two other developments have influenced the review,
  • the Tees Valley Bus Network Improvement scheme and
  • the Tees Valley Urban Traffic Management and Control System development.

A critical element of the Tees Valley Bus Network Improvement scheme is the installation of traffic signal control equipment at both new and existing junctions to enable bus priority to be given on the core routes. In the project infrastructure register there are 52 individual schemes, with traffic signal elements across the Tees Valley. These are to be designed and installed within the three year programme at an estimated works value of £1,598,000. The Tees Valley Bus Network Improvement scheme received Programme entry status and is awaiting Full Approval form the DfT.

  1. The Tees Valley Urban Traffic Management and Control project is also part funded from the Bus Improvement scheme. The traffic management and public information system uses data collection from a variety of sources including traffic signals, real time bus information system, parking guidance systems, roadworks information and traffic flow data and interprets this to assist the improved management of congestion and provides information to people to inform their travel decisions. The Tees Valley approach to this builds upon the existing Urban Traffic Control centre, based in Middlesbrough and to use the Tees Valley Connect web portal. As congestion increases more proactive management of traffic will be possible through the development of these new tools.
Consultations
  1. The Tees Valley Chief Engineers Group have been consulted on the proposed approach and support the changes to working practices. Darlington currently have contractual arrangements for traffic signal maintenance and support with Newcastle City Council, thus as part of the revised arrangements, there is an opportunity to bring all the Tees Valley authorities under the same umbrella.
  1. The North East Improvement and Efficiency Partnership have worked with both Middlesbrough and Newcastle service managers to develop a framework in which to work to move towards a shared service arrangement for the both Tees Valley and Tyne & Wear initially, with a view to achieving a comprehensive North East service over time.

EQUALITY IMPACT ASSESSMENT

  1. An initial EIA has been carried out. The traffic signal review will not have an impact on any equality issues for users as the service impacts on all road users and pedestrians. Due to the nature of the work, the new posts created through the review will require a certain level of physical attributes to be able to undertake tasks on site and thus could have a differential impact due to disability. Recruitment will follow corporate guidelines.

OPTION APPRAISAL/RISK ASSESSMENT

Existing Situation

  1. The traffic signals team forms part of the Transport and Policy Section, within Transport and Design Services. The team is lead by a principal engineer, who supervises three traffic signal engineers and a traffic signal technician. The existing staffing structure is set out in Appendix 1. The estimated cost of providing this service for 2009/2010 is £574,829, funded from contributions from the four authorities in proportion to the number of units in each area (Middlesbrough’s contribution is £206,960).
  1. A significant element of this cost (approximately £106,000 / annum), is currently contracted out to a private sector supplier, this element has grown over the years as it has been used to meet the increase in demand, with no staff levels increases. There are two parts to the maintenance aspects of traffic signals, a first line maintenance (this is where a fault is initially checked out and any simple repairs carried out) and a second line maintenance (when the fault is such that it cannot be fixed on the initial visit). The contracted arrangement provided for is for second line maintenance only but the contractor has been used to supplement the 1st line in house staff due to demand. During the drafting of this report a termination notice has been received from the Contractor, which means the current contract will cease June 2010. Legal Services have advised that TUPE rules apply but it is not yet known how many, if any individuals will transfer.
  1. In addition to the maintenance activities, the traffic signals unit also design and install new traffic signal facilities; normally the value of this work is around £400,000 per year in total. As mentioned earlier in the report if the bus network improvement scheme receives final approval then there will be an additional £1.6M worth of works over the next three years.
  1. Following the termination of the external contract it is proposed to use the resources currently paid to the contractor to bring the service ‘in house’ either with technical staff transferred through the TUPE regulations or through direct recruitment if no staff transfer. Secondly in line with national and local policies it is proposed to build on the working relationship formed with Newcastle traffic signals service to share resources to cover peaks in workload and improve service delivery through sharing best practice and benefiting from reduced cost via joint procurement of equipment. Over time it is proposed to more fully integrate systems and practices with a view to offering a comprehensive joint service covering all the North East authorities.
  1. The advice from the Procurement service is that any expenditure over the OJEU threshold (currently £3,927,260 for works) with bodies external to the Council would normally have to tendered. Any expenditure below the OJEU threshold with bodies external to the Council is still subject to standing orders which allows either tenders to be sought or exemptions to be requested to allow other approaches to service delivery to be undertaken. Procurement services have advised that as a guide the value of the works over a four years period should be taken as the value of ‘works’ with relation to OJEU limits. The estimated costs for works during 2010/2011 to 2013/2014 are £3.2 million with the major bus scheme and £1.6M without. It is considered therefore that the value of the works is below the OJEU threshold, and thus subject to the Council’s own procurement rules. The fees elements of these projects have been estimated and the overall average is less than 10% of the value of the works.

Proposed Changes

18.For the value of the maintenance work currently being paid to the external contractor, there is funding to provide for the inclusion of two new traffic signal technicians (up to Technician link grade 3) to provide assistance with the first line maintenance needs. The existing engineers have the skills to deliver the second line maintenance tasks. A Service Manager (Grade J) is proposed to be added to the team to concentrate on providing proactive network management through the Urban Transport Management and Control centre, helping to deliver the network management duties under the Traffic Management Act 2004. This post will enable signal performance reviews to be re-established to get the most out of the current transport network. In terms of taking the work back ‘in house’ following the termination of the existing contract this is a permissible course of action under procurement rules.

19.However there would still not be sufficient capacity to cover for all the design and installation work expected over the coming three years. Thus as a second element of this approach it is proposed to develop a working relationship with Newcastle City Council to increase the pool of resources across the north east to provide an improved, cost effective service. Newcastle already provide a ‘market tested’ service and have in recent years won competitive tenders to provide a service to Durham (including Darlington) and Northumberland.

20.Through sharing resources it is considered that the expected workload can be managed within the existing local contributions from each of the Tees Valley authorities with additional design and installation costs being covered from proposed capital scheme programme. As well as providing the quality of services, cost savings will be made initially through reduced equipment costs through Newcastle’s current supplier contract, through operating a shared fault reporting centre based in Middlesbrough and by serving Darlington’s maintenance needs from a more local base. As the partnership develops further cost saving potential will be explored. (e.g. joint procurement of equipment, joint UTMC control centres providing additional resilience).

21.Work has been undertaken with the North East Efficiency and Improvement Partnership to develop a service delivery vehicle to take the informal partnership arrangements to a more structured approach, with the medium term aim of a joint service for the North East.

FINANCIAL, LEGAL AND WARD IMPLICATIONS

22.Financial - Over the past two financial years the value of work carried out under the current contractual arrangements has been on average £107,000. The cost of providing additional staff resources to undertake the work in house is £78,402, in addition there will be a need to increase the vehicle provision costing a further £9,000 per annum producing an initial annual saving of £19,000 (shared saving across the four local authorities).

  1. The current service is funded through contributions relating to the number of traffic control unit present in each borough as shown on the table below:

Item / Middlesbrough
(115.6 units) / Stockton
(129.75 units) / Redcar and Cleveland (68.45 units) / Hartlepool
(53.75 units) / Total
(367.55 units)
Salary / 72,773 / 81,635 / 43,178 / 33,853 / 231,439
Contracted maintenance / 33,653 / 37,772 / 19,927 / 15,648 / 107,000
In house maintenance / 29,195 / 32,775 / 17,386 / 13,607 / 92,963
Urban Traffic control / MOVA / 71,339 / 40,412 / 9,862 / 21,814 / 143,427
Total / 206,960 / 192,594 / 90,353 / 84,922 / 574,829
Initial saving / 5,976 / 6,707 / 3,538 / 2,779 / 19,000

The impact of the proposal would be to redirect the contracted maintenance value into the salaries line to a value of £78,402 and into the in house maintenance line to a value of £9,000 (for an additional vehicle) providing a saving of £19,000 distributed according to the number of units in each authority area

24.The current proposals under the review of overtime and allowances will have a significant effect on individuals within the service who operate a standby and call out rota system (1 week in 3). However this traffic signal review will include changes in working practices that may result in a further reduction in operating costs (e.g. currently three Grade J posts undertake call out duties, under the proposed restructure the technician link grades or TUPE’d equivalents will share in the call out rota and thus reduce overall operating costs).

25.Working with NEIEP it is planned to develop a structured partnering arrangement, which has the potential to delivery, not only an improved service but also future cost savings through joint procurement of materials (subject to procurement rules) and sharing of best practice.

26.Ward Implications - The service covers the whole of Middlesbrough as well as serving the other Tees Valley authorities

27.Legal Implications – Both procurement and legal officers have provided advice in the development of this proposal.

28.NEIEP have provided information showing that the model proposed has been used elsewhere to facilitate the provision of a shared service across authority boundaries.

RECOMMENDATIONS

29.It is recommended that the staffing changes outlined in the report be approved to enable the traffic signal maintenance functions to be undertaken ‘in house’ following the termination of the current external contract.

30.It is recommended that approval for initial joint authority working be granted to enable shared use of resources with Newcastle City Council’s traffic signal service, whilst a formal regional model for shared service delivery is developed

REASONS

31.To provide a comprehensive, cost effective service through the sharing of expertise, systems and resources to cater for increased workloads resulting from the increase in equipment on street.

BACKGROUND PAPERS

The following background papers were used in the preparation of this report:

  • Guidance for collaborative options evaluation and appraisal of service delivery models (4ps)

AUTHOR: Derek Gittins

TEL NO: 728636

______

Address: PO Box65, Vancouver House, Middlesbrough TS1 1QP

Website: