Archived decisions

Decision Maker:

Executive Member - Environment

Date of Decision:

11 November 2008

Decision Title:

Agency Review

Decision Reference:

398

Report From:

Director of Environment

Contact names:

Alan Giles and Peter Bayless

Tel:

01962 857810

Email:

[email protected]

1) Summary

The following decisions were made:

1.1. That new agency agreements with District Councils be pursued for Highways Development Control and Traffic Management, subject to a sufficient quantum of take-up.

1.2. That the new agreements strengthen performance provisions and reduce the termination period and that authority be given to the Director of Environment to settle the details of the terms and authorise the entering into of new Highways Development Control and Traffic Management Agency Agreements.

2) Reasons for the decision

2.1. To provide for the continuation of the Highways Development Control and Traffic Management services, in partnership with District Councils where appropriate, with increased county-wide consistency and to improve the quality and efficiency of the services delivered.

3) Other options considered and rejected:

3.1. Do nothing

a) Notice to terminate the current Highways Development Control and Traffic Management agencies was given in March 2007: Hence taking no further action at this stage would mean the Agency Agreements would cease on 31 March 2009 and the functions would automatically return to the County Council.

b) With regard to the Highways Development Control Agencies, it is considered that there would potentially be cost savings from a single County function. However, the synergies between planning authority and highway staff may be diminished. In addition Government is due to publish regulations on the Community Infrastructure and it is considered premature to change the arrangements before the position on future transport infrastructure funding is clear.

c) Many District Councils significantly enhance the Traffic Management resource funded by the County Council. If Agency Agreements were terminated and the staff employed transfer to the County Council under TUPE there could, in some districts, be a cost pressure, or direct delivery by the County Council would not maintain the same level of enhanced service which is currently delivered in many districts.

d) A number of districts use common staff to deliver both the Development Control and Traffic Management services, or cross subsidise the Traffic Management service from Development Control allocations. Hence the implications of withdrawing the agencies are unpredictable at this stage but may result in a net increase in cost to the County Council if the same level of service is maintained. For both agencies there would be considerable staffing implications to the County Council. Relationships with district councils may be affected by revising devolved services. However as part of the wider shared services agenda, it will be important to keep this under review.

e) It was therefore not considered to be in the best interests of Hampshire County Council to take back the agencies at this time.

4) Conflicts of Interest:

4.1. Conflicts of interest declared by the decision-maker:

None

4.2. Conflicts of interest declared by other Executive Members consulted:

None

5) Dispensation granted by the Standards Committee:

None

6) Any reasons for the matter being dealt with if urgent :

None

Approved by:

--------------------------------------------------

Date:

11 November 2008

Executive Member for Environment

Councillor M J Kendal