Agenda item

(1)                           Further to Minute 13 of 4 November 2010, the report informed Members on the profile of the provisional programme for 2011/12 and provided a description of the process used to produce the programme.  Kent County Council had in place an inspection and survey regime to establish the condition of the carriageway network.  The regime incorporated both manual and machine based surveys.  The condition data that was collected as part of the exercise was processed within a maintenance optimisation system to produce a prioritised list of roads for treatment. 

(2)       Sites identified using the process were collated to form what was known as the 1^st Draft Programme.  At this stage the extents of each site was determined which allowed for an indicative cost estimation which was necessary for the next stage. For 2011/12 a total of 1125 potential sites were contained within the 1^st Draft Programme.  Once verified there was a need to prioritise schemes contained in the draft programme within the anticipated financial framework for the year.  The process of prioritisation produced the 2^nd Draft Programme (Baseline Programme) and formed the basis for the necessary detailed design and procurement. The exercise was undertaken in readiness for when funding was announced and so as to commence the works at the start of the financial year in April.  When the detailed financial allocation was confirmed in February 2011 the Baseline Programme would be reviewed and adjusted to conform to the allocation.  The programme would then be confirmed as the Baseline Programme (Funded) and would be submitted for approval and then published.

(3)       The effective use of resources was always of prime consideration when determining the Planned Carriageway and Footway Maintenance Programme.    It was therefore important that the correct sites were matched to the most effective treatments.  Preventative maintenance techniques, such as surface dressing and micro asphalt, were a cost effective way of arresting the deterioration of the carriageway network. The level of preventative maintenance contained within the programme was significantly higher than previous years.  This was in response to the severe impact that the 2009/10 winter had on the highway network which required a significant increase in the level of expenditure on reactive patching.  The increase in preventative maintenance would mean that less funding would be available for the resurfacing element of the programme.  Resurfacing had therefore been proposed on roads that were critical either in terms of safety or were in such a condition that deferring them in the short term would leave them to change from a thin surfacing scheme to a more extensive and expensive strengthening or reconstruction scheme.

(4)       When the detailed financial framework for 2011/12 was confirmed during February 2011 the definitive programme for the next financial year would be drawn up for approval. Based on the Baseline Programme, the details provided in the table below identified the indicative profile for treatment types that would form the 2011/12 programme.

(5)               Following a request from Mr Harrison the table above would include ‘Repair and’ before ‘Resurfacing’.  Mr Manning referred to the surface treatment programme and asked about preparation work, such as repairing deformed carriageway beneath that, or substantial potholes before it was carried out.  Mr Haratbar confirmed that if there were sections of a carriageway requiring fundamental re-structure, it would be included.

(6)       RESOLVED that the provisional profile of the Planned Carriageway and Footway Maintenance Programme for 2011/12 be noted.