Agenda item

(Report by Director, Kent Highway Services)

(1)       The report sought approval of revised fees and charges for 2007/08 in respect of a wide range of services provided by Kent Highway Services. The Local Government Act 2003 (Section 93) provided the power for charging for discretionary services but also stipulated that local authorities might only cover their reasonable costs in providing such services.

(2)       The main source of income was from developers who were required to pay S38 or S278 fees relating to supervision of new estate road construction and in some cases commuted sums for future maintenance of new highway infrastructure.  The New Roads and Street Works Act 1991 [RASWA] and subsequent regulations determined charges for sample inspections, defects, licences, etc but the Road Safety team also provided a range of services, including cycle and minibus driver training for which a charge was made either to individuals or other departments and organisations.

(3)       Fees had been set to reflect the actual cost of the service and in most cases, were rounded up to the nearest £5.00 but an attempt had also been made to standardise charges for similar services. Some charges which were statutory and for which there was no local discretion had not been included in the tables appended to the report.

(4)       As part of the Transformation process, Kent Highway Services was continuing to examine options for delivering some services on line, eg paying for skip permits. This would enable differential charges to be considered, distinguishing between electronic and paper transactions. A further report would be brought to the Highways Advisory Board if this was the case.

(5)       The proposed new fees and charges for 2007/08 were set out in the Appendices to the report.

Highway Definition, Licences and Other Admin Services

(6)       There had been problems with interpreting the correct charges for highway definition work; at present different charges applied depending on whether plans were supplied and by whom. The current minimum charge was £30 plus £22 for showing a boundary on the enquirer’s plan or £30 if KHS provided a plan with a boundary shown. Some district and parish councils had claimed they should be exempt. This was specialised work which often required research into legal documents held in archive files. Inevitably the amount of work on each case varied but it was impractical to calculate the exact cost per enquiry so there needed to be a standard fee. It was recommended that for 2007/08 all highway definition enquiries were charged at £35 plus a further £35 if KHS was asked to supply an A4 plan from the GIS system showing the boundary; the lower charge for showing a boundary on the enquirer’s plan would be dropped. It was also recommended that in future the charge should equally apply to district and parish councils.

(7)       Income from land searches was previously received by district councils, where this function was undertaken by the former highway units. Charging by the Highway Authority was agreed with district councils and introduced in April 2006. In practice most district land charges teams had elected to respond to the highway CON29 questions themselves using information supplied to them by KHS. The charges were due to be increased to reflect increased staff costs; it should be noted that the district councils made a 10% handling charge to the initiator of the search but KHS would seek payment of the amount shown.

(8)       Skip, scaffolding and hoarding licence fees [introduced in 2002/03] cover the administration costs in the issuing of licences for placing of skips, scaffolding and hoardings on the highway. The income generated was used to offset divisional costs in overseeing the safe positioning of the items on the highway including enforcement action where necessary. The current charge was £10 per 2 weeks but this charge had proved insufficient to cover the costs of checking proposed sites and administering the system. Most of the permits were only required for a few days and it was therefore recommended that the charge was increased to £15 per week. Making the permit valid for only one week would marginally increase admin costs but helped to ensure that the skips, scaffolding, etc were placed on the highway for no longer than absolutely necessary. The permit was recharged via the skip companies so the rise would only equate to a small increase in the overall hire charge. There were no changes proposed for vehicle crossings as these were determined by RASWA regulations. 

Developer Funded Highway Schemes

(9)       The main source of developer fees was the standard charge of 8% of the estimated works value for the supervision of new estate road construction under S38 of the Highways Act 1980. There were also charges for supervision and fixed consultancy fees for advice to developers re alterations to the existing highway under S278 of the Act.

(10)     In addition commuted sums were sought wherever there was an ongoing maintenance cost relating directly to the new infrastructure [e.g. for maintaining new traffic signals or inspecting structures]. The charges were all under review, in particular whether the 8% fee was sufficient to cover all the KHS costs relating to new estate road schemes; meanwhile 3% cost of living increases were recommended for S278 and commuted sums and some minor modifications were recommended to the period over which inspection and maintenance costs were assessed. The commuted sums for certain specified other items had been adjusted to reflect current maintenance costs over a 10 year period.

Road Safety

(11)     Cyclist training was offered to Year 6 children through their primary school.  Currently the Road Safety team provided cycle training for around 7,000 children per annum; approximately 43% of the total year group across the county.  In March 2005 Members chose to remove the charge made for cyclist training so that it was provided free of charge for one year from September 2005.  This resulted in a loss of the £70,000 income that had previously been used to offset the £150,000 annual cost of running the training scheme. However Members subsequently approved the re-introduction of the cyclist training fee at £10 per child and it was proposed to increase the charge to £15 from September 2007 with the aim of restoring a break even situation within two years.

(12)     The Road Safety team provided minibus driver courses and reassessment [every 3 years] for KCC drivers and a small increase to the fee was proposed in line with wage cost increases. It was recommended that the fees were increased to £110 and £30 respectively.

(13)     Theatre in Education was a valuable activity that delivered key road safety messages to students in an innovative and exciting way.  Annually the Road Safety team organised performances for year 12/13 students with a focus on driving issues including anti-drink drive and anti-drug drive.  The team subsidised this for participating schools which allowed greater coverage within the available budget.  It was recommended that the proportion of the subsidy should remain at the current level.

(14)     The Road Safety team provided monitoring and training functions for the School Crossing Patrol service managed by Children, Families and Education Directorate.  This was arranged through a Service Level Agreement (SLA).  The current level of SLA income covered existing costs and so the charge for this remained unchanged.

(15)     The National Driver Improvement Scheme (NDIS) and Speed Awareness course were administered by the Road Safety team as the service provider for Kent Police.  The schemes must be totally self-financing; no excess income could be generated for KCC. Small fee increases were recommended to ensure that the costs of running the schemes could continue to be met without the need for a subsidy.

(16)     In order to overcome potential Freedom of Information Act concerns Members agreed to drop the proposed hourly rate for photocopying but retain the unit rate and a minimum £10 charge.  Members also noted that the proposed increased charges for the National Driver Improvement Scheme and the Speed Awareness course would have to be endorsed by the relevant partner organisations as they were both ring fenced self-funding schemes.

(17)     Mr J I Muckle moved, Mr R J E Parker seconded as an amendment:-

            “That the charge for cycling proficiency training remain at £10.”

Lost 4 for, 7 against

 (18)    Subject to paragraph (16) above, the Board supported the proposal for recommendation to the Cabinet Member for Environment, Highways and Waste that the proposed Fees and Charges for 2007/08 as set out in Appendices 1 and 2 of the report be implemented.