Contact: Clive Griffiths, ext 7962 email: [email protected]

1. Summary

1.1 This report outlines the process for allocating the highway structural maintenance budget using current condition measurement techniques, and summarises the indicators used for assessing the condition of the network.

2. Budget Allocation

2.1 The overall highways maintenance budget is funded from two sources - Central Government through the Local Transport Plan settlement and locally through the council tax system. The attached graph depicts the total monies allocated for highway maintenance during the last 10 years

2.2 The highways maintenance allocation provides funding in a number of different areas. In the first instance the budget has to ensure that there is adequate funding to meet policy requirements. These are predominantly statutory services such as regulatory activities, winter maintenance and reactionary repairs, but also includes other services such as street lighting, bridge maintenance, energy supplies and many other similar functions. These works are primarily revenue funded.

2.3 The remainder of the allocation is used to maintain and improve the network and mainly comprises planned works. Again there are many service areas requiring funding, including the street light column replacement programme, bridgeworks, traffic signal and information improvements, as well as structural maintenance programmes for carriageways and footways.

2.4 The details of some of these budgets and programmes are reported in Agenda items 7 and 9.

2.5 With regard to the structural maintenance programme for carriageways and footways, which includes special maintenance, resurfacing and surface dressing schemes, the County Council has used the Highway Assessment of Maintenance Priorities (HAMP) system, a visual assessment system to prioritise individual schemes for maintenance need. Details of this process have been previously reported to the Panel.

2.6 HAMP assessments are carried out on 500-1,000 sites per year, the condition is recorded as a number, or rating, and the sites can be placed in priority order. All visual assessments have limited accuracy but generally the higher the number the greater the need. The budget allocation for structural maintenance is then used to fund the highest priority schemes and the Local Highway Units can then produce the annual, planned maintenance programmes.

2.7 The `cut-off' level, the lowest rating value to which funding will support, is primarily dictated by the budget allocation, the numbers of schemes submitted which have achieved higher rating and the overall cost of these schemes. As such, cut-off levels do vary year on year and are not a true indication of the network condition.

3. Network Condition

3.1 Historically HAMP has been the only measure of condition for the network and, although it is only a small sample, it has been used to comment on the overall condition of the carriageways and footways. This is not ideal but for many years this has been the only tool available.

3.2 HAMP results have been used in two ways to report condition. The annual results can either be analysed and extrapolated to provide condition indicators for the whole network, or `cut-off' figures, the level down to which funding is achieved annually, can be compared with the previous year. Both these options can and do provide valuable information but they must be treated with caution.

3.3 The funding available for structural maintenance throughout the nineties was low and with little chance of funding structural schemes there was minimal benefit in generating maintenance schemes through HAMP. Therefore when HAMP information was used as a backlog or condition indicator a relatively low need was identified. Improved funding over the last two years has re-established the need to generate scheme submissions and this has resulted in more schemes to fund and a backlog in extremely poor condition; cut-off figures have therefore risen.

3.4 In recent years Best Value Performance Indicators (BVPIs) have been introduced and some of these measure the condition of the network. This means that for the first time this Authority is able to assess the condition of the entire network. A paper to the former Highway Management Advisory Panels last year provided detail. To obtain really good network condition and backlog information it is necessary to record condition and compare this with spend over a number of years. In May the next set of BVPIs will be reported, for which the surveys are presently in hand.

3.5 Detailed knowledge concerning the condition of the network is still in its infancy. Even more difficult to assess is whether the network is improving or deteriorating and whether present levels of funding are sufficient to improve the network. More extensive condition information is available for the Principal Road Network and there is evidence to suggest that the rate of deterioration here has been halted. There is very limited information available for the footway or minor road network where condition surveys to a national standard only commenced in 2002/03 and 2001/02 respectively. There is concern that the flooding which occurred two years ago and the clay shrinkage issues of last summer have had a detrimental effect on the infrastructure.

3.6 The Public Service Agreement (PSA) for highways states that a marginal improvement must be shown in the condition of the minor road network by the end of 2004 based on BVPI benchmark surveys carried out in 2001, since the flooding. It is hoped that the targeting of funds in appropriate areas means that this will be achieved. Further information will be available at the end of May when this year's condition surveys have been completed.

Recommendation

That this report be noted.

8641/CG