A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z

Council and councillors

Agenda item

HIGHWAYS CAPITAL MAINTENANCE FUNDING

(KEY DECISION)

 

Report No. 56/2019

 

(Report to follow)

Minutes:

Report No.56/2019 was received from the Strategic Director for Places.

 

Mrs Stephenson, Portfolio Holder for Culture & Leisure, Highways & Transportation introduced the report the purpose of which was to consider the allocation of the highway maintenance capital funding for 2019/20 and to consider the allocation of the additional £845k highway maintenance capital funding allocation for 2018/19 as awarded in the Chancellor’s November 2018 budget statement.

 

During discussion the following points were noted:

 

·         It was important that Rutland maintained its Band 3 submission (the highest grade available) for the management of its roads as reverting to a Band 2 submission would result in a significant loss of funding as shown in Appendix B of the report.

·         If roads were left alone there was a risk that future repairs would cost more and would cause more disruption to road users.

·         Slurry sealing was used to extend the cost of the footway without having to resort to full reconstruction

·         Residents had complained about the slurry sealing of footpaths and Councillor Walters noted that whilst on pages 30 and 31 of the report criteria had been set for various types of road repair, there was no indication as to whether the types of repair for footpaths were appropriate or not.

·         Officers had received relatively few complaints about slurry sealing since the project had been carried out but would respond in full to any complainants to address their concerns

·         Some of the Background papers attached to the report would be revised and updated in the early part of the 2019/20 municipal year in order to meet the requirements of a Band 3 grading.

·         Members felt that Rutland’s roads ranking in the East Midlands was not an accurate reflection of the situation as there seemed to be a noticeable deterioration in the state of roads once you left the County.  This could be partly explained by the fact that the independent surveys carried out for Councils was done for the primary road network rather than the smaller minor roads and that was possibly where Members were noticing the difference.

·         The programme of works would be worked through in a systematic way with the roads which were in the worst state of repair being done first. The aim was to have the budgets allocated and the majority of work done by Christmas so that it was not affected by bad weather.

·         Any unspent funding from the Revenue budget would be declared as an underspend but Members would have the option of using as savings as they saw fit.

·         Officers were waiting on the 2018/19 bridge surveys in order to compile a more detailed programme of works.

·         The more expensive option of ‘Steady State Prevent’ was recommended over ‘Steady State Prevent Opt’ as it used available funds to carry out preventative work offering savings in the long term. The ‘Steady State Prevent Opt’ looked to reduce the budget and would mean a reduction in the standard and wear over time. Spending the budget wisely now would result in a better quality network in ten years’ time.

 

DECISION:

 

Cabinet APPROVED the use of the Highway maintenance Grant Allocation for a programme of maintenance works to be delivered in 2019/20 as attached at Appendix A of the report.

 

Reason for the decision:

 

It was recommended that the capital highway maintenance programmes in Appendix A be approved to help deliver the Council’s strategic aims of ‘sustainable growth’ and to fulfil the Council’s statutory duties with regard to highway maintenance and road safety as efficiently as possible.

 

 

Supporting documents: