Agenda item

Report ES16048

Members considered alternative funding arrangements for highways maintenance.

Planned highways maintenance reduced reactive maintenance, improved value for money and customer satisfaction, reduced unplanned network disruption, and contributed to a reduced level of damage claims. As carriageways deteriorate through weathering and traffic, the requirement for protective or structural maintenance could be predicted with some accuracy.

Sustained annual investment had helped to keep the principal (A) road network in good condition. The non-principal (B/C) network had also been a revenue funding priority in recent years having a condition indicator of 3%. However, the unclassified road network had a road condition indicator of 17%.

Footways were in a better structural condition with the main causes of deterioration - root damage from street trees and over-running vehicles - both being effectively managed through reactive and minor works.

Although funding through revenue budgets had allowed non-principal and unclassified roads to be maintained in a stable condition, it had been insufficient for improvement so that expenditure on reactive works could reduce. Roads with the highest priority had been put forward for planned works programmes in accordance with expected budget provision.

Recent benchmarking with neighbouring boroughs showed that prices within the Council’s current Major Works contract for planned highway maintenance projects are at least 28% lower than similar recently awarded contracts. The Council’s contract has recently been extended to June 2018 and contract prices were anticipated to increase when the contract is re-tendered.  

To fund improvement works during the next two years and allow conditions to significantly improve in the short term using existing contract prices, £11.8m of upfront funding was proposed for release from capital receipts. The funding would allow revenue expenditure to reduce by £2.5m per annum for five years from 2017/18, at a total of £12.5m (£11.9m from planned works and £0.6m from reactive maintenance). This would be partly offset by a total reduction in treasury management income of some £167k over the five year period. After five years, the benefits of upfront funding would be reviewed and a decision taken on whether future funding is delivered from capital receipts (subject to future availability) or from revenue budgets.

The latest treatment survey suggested that future investment was best focussed on carriageway maintenance to obtain long-term benefits, with footway maintenance continuing to rely on reactive and minor works funding.

A proposed Working Group of the Committee would agree service levels and treatment options. Future work programmes funded by the investment would then be considered by the Portfolio Holder following the Committee’s scrutiny.

In discussion, it was confirmed that treatment priorities would normally depend on the extent of a road’s use. Cllr Samaris Huntington-Thresher (Chelsfield and Pratts Bottom) referred to a high number of unclassified roads in her ward, suggesting they might benefit from surface dressing. However, some surface dressings were not durable and could only be considered short term solutions; consideration of various treatment options could be considered by the Working Group. Given the current contract costs (and a reduced level of reactive maintenance in future), savings would accrue by undertaking the works from next year. The Portfolio Holder felt the recommendations made financial sense given a limited return on investment elsewhere. A further Highways report would be presented to the Committee’s next meeting on 8^th November 2016.  

Roads can be resurfaced quickly and officers would look to co-ordinate improvement works with emergency services to minimise disruption for road users. Member input would be valued on whether it was now considered necessary to treat a number of cul-de-sacs in the borough. Closes had previously been treated with surface dressing using funds from the reactive maintenance budget and it was necessary for Members to consider where a change was needed to the types of roads considered for treatment. If part road treatment was considered, a Member suggested treating the whole road for longer term savings should the remaining part need treatment in a further three to four years.  

Members supported the recommendations to the Executive.

RESOLVED that Executive be recommended to:

(1)  approve capital funding of £11.8m for investment in planned highway maintenance, to be funded from capital receipts, and to add the scheme to the Capital Programme, subject to approval by Full Council; and

(2)  subject to the above approval, the revenue budget for highways works would reduce by £2.5m per annum for the period 2017/18 to 2021/22, partly offset by an estimated reduction in treasury management income of £167k over the five year period.