Agenda item

(Report by Permit Scheme Project Manager)

(1)        The report sought to update Members on progress in implementing the Permit Scheme.  The second consultation with external stakeholders concluded on 19 September 2008. In total there were nearly 300 responses from 8 sources. The comments had been reviewed and assessed and the Permit Scheme and application were being developed in consideration to these.

(2)        To date, the Department for Transport (DfT) had only received one Permit Scheme application. The application was from the London Authorities under a common scheme named the “London Permit Scheme”.

       (3)        In discussions with the DfT it had become apparent that they required clear substantiation of any proposed permit scheme, including cost benefit analysis, how objectives would be realised, and detailed operational information. Kent had taken many of the comments from the DfT into consideration and the Permit Scheme application was being developed accordingly.

       (4)        The project was still on track to submit a Permit Scheme application to the Secretary of State (SoS) in early November. The DfT required up to 4 months to review the application, so it was estimated that, if KCC was successful, the legal order to operate the scheme would be received in February 2009. At that point Kent would issue a communication to all works promoters stating the intent to introduce operational permitting from April 2009.

       (5)        Whilst waiting for approval by the SoS, KCC would be progressing with developing the resources for operational permitting, including recruiting and training staff, developing systems and engaging with external stakeholders.  Initially Kent would be operating permitting within the KHS Alliance for its own work. As there was no associated permit fee to the operation, Kent were not constrained by the SoS Permit Scheme approval to introduce the new way of working. Based on the current project schedule, permitting of KHS’ own work should commence in February 2009.

       (6)        The period between own works permitting (Phase 1) and full Kent operational permitting (Phase 2) would provide an opportunity to review and embed permitting working practices; organisational capability and systems. This would ensure KHS was operationally stable to commence permitting with external works promoters and any initial operational issues were highlighted and resolved. In addition Kent would conduct a readiness review with external works promoters to ensure a successful transition into operational permitting was achieved.

(7)        An operational permit scheme provided KHS with an increased level of control in relation to disruption within the network, but also represented the introduction of constraints to the works promoters whose primary concern was to maintain their supply of services. KHS currently had a positive relationship with works promoters and the National Joint Utility Group (NJUG). The works promoters acknowledged that KHS intended to apply and run a permit scheme and were in support of the open approach.

       (8)        A communications strategy to maintain and build on the positive relationship with the works promoters was underway. As part of the implementation KHS would be developing working practices with the work promoters and sharing experiences and knowledge from the Phase 1 own works permitting. In addition, the Chair of NJUG was a member of the Project Board.

(9)        The business case and associated application for the Permit Scheme contained very clear strategic objectives to be realised from the implementation of operational permitting:-

- To ensure safety – for those, living or working in the street, including those engaged in activities controlled by the Scheme;

- To minimise inconvenience and disruption caused by activities to people using the streets;

-  To protect the structure of the street and integrity of apparatus in it.

KHS had produced a detailed benefits matrix, including methods of measurement, to provide analysis and data to justify and validate the implementation and continued operation of a Permit Scheme. The high level method and measurements for realising the objectives were set out in Appendix 1 of the report.

      (10)      The report had been produced to provide information in relation to the progress of the Permit Scheme application and associated implementation.

(11)      The Board noted the report and recommended that work should proceed as soon as possible.