Agenda item

(Report by Head of Network Management)

(1)       Under the Traffic Management Act, Local Highway Authorities (LHAs) had been given the option to operate a permit scheme in accordance with Part 3 of the Act. Permit schemes were designed to give the local authority further control over all works on the highway. It was intended that LHAs would have powers to direct all roadworks with regard to where, when and how they might be carried out.

(2)       KCC had made a strategic and political decision to introduce and operate a permit scheme at the earliest possible opportunity. We had been working in partnership with the DfT on developing a KCC Permit Scheme and at the present time we were the first County to implement a scheme.

(3)       KHS believed that a permit scheme was the right option for KCC for the following reasons:-

·                    met requirements under TMA Network Management Duty

·                    assisted towards improving the use of road space by proactively managing roadworks

·                    satisfied the public desire for KHS to improve the control of roadworks

·                    improved the ability to minimise disruption from roadworks

·                    increased KCC's powers to direct and control activities on the highway

·                    improved co-ordination and planning of activities on the highway

·                    increased the scope for collaborative working arrangements and best practice.

(4)       The report provided an update on the progress of the proposed KCC Permit Scheme and the consultation process. A summary of the key issues within the scheme were detailed in the report.

(5)       KHS had decided to introduce a structured timeline for all works promoters to adhere to when applying for a permit to ensure that they had sufficient time to review all applications. The proposed timeline forced works promoters to apply to work on the highway up to three months in advanced of the start date.

(6)       The report set out the Permit Fees KHS proposed to charge.  KHS proposed to introduce reductions in permit fees to encourage best practice amongst works promoters. The fee reductions were:-

·                    30% discount for shared sites

·                    30% discount for guaranteed extending working hours (e.g. 24 hour working)

·                    5% discount for Considerate Contractor Scheme Members who met site safety standards

DfT had stipulated that any permit scheme must be designed to run as ‘cost neutral’. The income must be ring fenced to offset the ongoing operating costs for the scheme (e.g. staff, systems).

(7)       KHS had decided to introduce fines for certain offences as follows:-

·                    Working without a permit (£500)

·                    Contravening the permit condition (£120)

·                    No information board or permit displayed on site (£120)

·                    Overrun charges (up to £2500 per day)

(8)       KHS were proposing to increase the application period for a Temporary Traffic Regulation Order (road closure) from 6 weeks to 12 weeks. The extension would allow public transport operators the statutory 56 days to inform the Traffic Commissioner of a change of route.

(9)       KHS were proposing to introduce restrictions to activities in the highway following substantial roadworks such as resurfacing of up to 5 years. Certain activities would be exempt from the restrictions such as emergency works, service connections, etc.

(10)     From the KPIs proposed by the DfT, KHS had decided to introduce four that reflected our approach.  These were as follows:-

·                    KPI 1. The number of permit and permit variation applications received, granted and refused.

·                    KPI 2. The number of conditions applied by condition type.

·                    KPI 3. The number of approved extensions.

·                    KPI 4. The number of inspections carried out to monitor conditions.

Additional performance indicators were being developed within Network Management so that the impact of the permit scheme could be evaluated in qualitative and quantative terms.

(11)     Under Permit Scheme Regulation 13, DfT required that all prospective permit scheme authorities must consult externally for a period of 12 weeks. KHS commenced the external consultation on 12 February 2008 and decided to run the process until 25 April 2008. The consultation had consisted of a consultation seminar held on 10 March 2008 and a consultation questionnaire that consisted of 24 key questions related specifically to parts of the scheme where KHS had made decisions.

(12)     The consultees had been carefully chosen to ensure that we were consulting as wide an audience as possible. These included the Emergency Services, Utilities, Transport Operators, Councillors, etc.  All comments received through the consultation process had been published on the KHS website along with KHS responses.  So far, we had received positive support for the proposed scheme, the consultation process and for the general way in which KHS were dealing with the scheme.

(13)     KHS had decided to introduce a Permit Scheme at the earliest possible time. The earliest a Permit Scheme could be introduced was 1October 2008.  KHS planned to implement the permit scheme in three stages. Stage 1 would be introducing permits on KHS works, phase 2 would be permitting utility works on 0, 1, 2 roads and stage 3 would be introducing permits on all works on all roads. There would be a 3 month gap between each stage to ensure that we used the time to improve systems and processes.

(14)     In early May, KHS would be submitting a final KHS Permit Scheme to the DfT along with an application to operate such a scheme. The DfT would then be given up to 4 months to review the application and if successful KHS would be given an Order from the Secretary of State to run the Permit Scheme.

(15)     The Board gave their support to the Permit Scheme.