Contact: Richard Chinn, tel 023 8042 7000 email [email protected]

1. Summary

1.1 This report brings Members up to date on the progress regarding the changing arrangements with respect to:

(i) Development Control Services;

(ii) Traffic Management Services;

(iii) Grass and Shrub Maintenance Agreement; and

(iv) Design and Implementation Agreement.

2. Development Control Services

2.1 In April 2004, the revised arrangements for the delivery of development control services were implemented. As previously reported the changes involved Hampshire Highways undertaking the Section 38 engineering checking and Section 278 (under £100,000) functions.

2.2 Within Hampshire Highways West a team of four has been established to carry out the Section 38 and Section 278 design check and supervision functions. The team is fully staffed and operates from Totton.

3. Traffic Management Services

3.1 Draft Traffic Management agreements have been circulated to all district councils except East Hampshire, which indicated it did not wish to carry out this function. Agreements have been concluded with Winchester City, New Forest District and Test Valley Borough Councils.

3.2 Negotiations are continuing with other district councils. A particular concern has been the level of Professional Indemnity Insurance (PII) and following a risk assessment it has been agreed to reduce the level required in respect of this agreement from £5 million to £2 million. It is hoped that this will enable new agreements with the remaining districts to be concluded shortly.

4. Grass and Shrub Maintenance Agreement

4.1 The documentation for Agency Agreements relating to urban grass and shrub maintenance (and tree maintenance in some cases) has now been sent out to all district councils. The County Council has informed districts that PII is not necessary for this type of work and has also confirmed that it would take over responsibility for any long term contracts that were still in place in the event of early termination of the Agency arrangements.

4.2 Responses have been received from a number of districts and the others are being urged to complete the Agency Agreement documentation as soon as possible.

4.3 The payment formula included in the agreement will provide a much fairer allocation of funding for the works done by the districts on behalf of the County Council and enable both parties to more accurately predict future budget allocations.

5. Design and Implementation Agreement

5.1 The draft Agency Agreement was sent to all district councils for consultation and comment at the end of January 2004. Feedback from the districts has been disappointing but the following concerns have been expressed:

(i) recovering the costs of £5 million PII which is a requirement of the Agency Agreement; and

(ii) a mechanism for undertaking their own works on the highway which is not covered by the draft Agency Agreement.

These issues are currently being addressed and proposals will be presented shortly.

5.2 Eastleigh Borough Council has indicated that it is ready to conclude the Agreement, and Test Valley Borough Council indicated that the Agreement is acceptable in principle. No formal responses have been received from East Hampshire, Hart, Havant, Gosport or Winchester.

5.3 All districts were contacted again between 21 July 2004 and 5 August 2004 in an effort to establish whether the agreement is acceptable and requesting their comments. The County Council's Transport Implementation Team continued to consult with the district councils in an effort to complete these agreements by 30 September 2004 when all existing agreements originally expired. At his meeting on 14 September the Executive Member for Environment agreed a further three month extension from 1 October, but district councils were requested to notify the County Council by 1 December 2004 if they did not intend to complete a new agreement so that alternative arrangements could be made.

Recommendation

That this report be noted.

8970/RC