Agenda item

Our highways infrastructure (including roads and pavements) is the asset most used by the public and the most visible. In common with other Highway Authorities, Brent has an increasing maintenance requirement which cannot be met through a standstill budget. Currently estimated in Brent at £100m, more defects are appearing year on year. Against this, public expectations are rising with more customer reports of highways defects every year asking for these to be repaired.  An increase in the level of investment to maintain the highway network is required to respond to public concerns, make it safer and fit-for-purpose, and to improve public satisfaction.

(i)         Cabinet approved the investment of £2m in 2016/17 of Brent capital funding as summarised in Section 6.

(ii)        Cabinet approved that the major footway upgrade programme element of £1.3m be carried out with pavement slabs being replaced with tarmac (instead of a like-for-like replacement as has been the practice up until now, see section 3.2.1).

(iii)       Cabinet approved the proposed additional highways investment programme for 2016-17 as detailed in Appendix B.

(iv)       Cabinet approved that, the major footway upgrade programme of £1.510m approved in the Highways Capital Scheme Programme 2016-17, approved at the 14th March 2016 Cabinet, is carried out with the pavement slabs being replaced with tarmac as a default. Category 1 &2 footways and conservation areas will be considered on a case by case basis, but will normally be replaced like for like. (Appendix E)(see section 3.2.12)

(iv)       Cabinet agreed that the “Footway upgrades – short sections” pavement allocation of £ 0.150m approved in the Highways Capital Scheme Programme 2016-17, approved at the 14th March 2016 Cabinet, is carried out with:

a) in conservation areas or Category 1 & 2 footways, considered on a road by road basis but generally slabs (See section 3.2.12);

b) where the length to be replaced is junction to junction, the pavement slabs being replaced with tarmac – even though it may only be only side of the street only;

c) otherwise, for sections shorter than junction to junction, pavement surface to be replaced like for like.

Councillor Southwood, Cabinet Member for Environment, introduced the report stating that Brent’s highways infrastructure (including roads and pavements) was the asset most used by the public and the most visible.

In common with other Highway Authorities, Brent had an increasing maintenance requirement which cannot be met through a standstill budget. Currently estimated in Brent at £100m, more defects were appearing year on year.

She stated that public expectations were rising with more customer reports of highways defects every year asking for these to be repaired.

An increase in the level of investment to maintain the highway network was required to respond to public concerns, make it safer and fit-for-purpose, and to improve public satisfaction.

She reminded Cabinet that The Highways Capital Scheme Programme 2016-17, approved at the 14 March 2016 Cabinet, set out proposals to allocate £3.55m of Brent capital to maintain the highway network.

Councillor Southwood stated that it was also possible to improve the management of highway infrastructure and offer a better customer service experience to residents and businesses.

She stated that the council had made a start in implementing an asset management approach through establishing a Highway Asset Management Plan. 

Councillor Southwood stated that being more efficient in how and where the investment was spent, required confidence in information and the ability to analyse it, including budget vs condition level modelling scenarios.

She stated that the Council was investigating a “Brent Asset Management Tool”, a computer tool which would allow funding allocations to be better targeted for the best effect, including indicative treatment types from the condition data that would optimize the life of roads and pavements.

Councillor Southwood reminded members that improvement in asset management processes could also help secure future grant allocations, should TfL follow the DfT in changing the basis for funding allocation, as anticipated. Over a five year period the DFT would increase the proportion of Incentive funding that was based on “performance” (as measured by the level of asset management maturity reached); whilst the proportion that was based on ‘need’ would lessen. TfL was considering reforming the allocation of maintenance funding for Principal Roads in London to be along the same lines as the DfT model.

With the permission of the Chair, Councillor Kelcher, Chair of the Resources and Public Realm Scrutiny Committee, spoke welcoming the report. He asked Councillor Southwood to look at the content of the generic automated response sent to members of the public when they report a fault.

RESOLVED:

(i)         that approval be given to the investment of £2m in 2016/17 of Brent capital funding as summarised in Section 6 of the report from the Strategic Director, Regeneration and Growth;

(ii)        that approval be given to the major footway upgrade programme element of £1.3m to be carried out with pavement slabs being replaced with tarmac (instead of a like-for-like replacement as has been the practice up until now, see section 3.2.1 of the Strategic Director’s report);

(iii)       that approved be given to the proposed additional highways investment programme for 2016-17 as detailed in Appendix B of the Strategic Director’s report;

(iv)       that the major footway upgrade programme of £1.510m approved in the Highways Capital Scheme Programme 2016-17, approved at the 14 March 2016 Cabinet, be carried out with the pavement slabs being replaced with tarmac as a default. Category 1 & 2 footways and conservation areas would be considered on a case by case basis, but would normally be replaced like for like. (Appendix E) (see section 3.2.12 of the report);

(v)        that the “Footway upgrades – short sections” pavement allocation of £0.150m approved in the Highways Capital Scheme Programme 2016-17, approved at the 14 March 2016 Cabinet, be carried out with:

a)    in conservation areas or Category 1 & 2 footways, considered on a road by road basis but generally slabs (See section 3.2.12);

b)    where the length to be replaced is junction to junction, the pavement slabs being replaced with tarmac – even though it may only be only side of the street only;

c)    otherwise, for sections shorter than junction to junction, pavement surface to be replaced like for like.