Agenda item

Briefing Note of the Director of Transportation and Highways

The Scrutiny Board considered a Briefing Note which provided an overview of Highway Utility Companies in Coventry.

Cllr P Hetherton, Cabinet Member for City Services, introduced the item and indicated that there was an aspiration to do work with our partners to ensure the restoration was undertaken satisfactorily to improve access and aesthetics.

The Scrutiny Board received a presentation which provided an overview of Highway Utility Companies in Coventry. Key points raised included;

·  The legislation used to manage Highways Utility Companies was the ‘New Roads and Street Works Act 1991Code of Practice for the Co-ordination of Street Works and Works for Road Purposes and Related Matters’.

·  This code applied to prospectively maintainable highways.

·  Everyone working in the highway should take account of the needs of all road users, including those with disabilities – whether they are pedestrians, equestrians, cyclists or drivers – at all stages in the planning and execution of works in the street. This had implications for the timing, method and scheduling of works.

·  Works in the street would interfere with road users and nearby residential and business premises to some extent. The aim should be to avoid, where possible; serious traffic disruption; works on recently resurfaced or reconstructed streets; and planned works within a short time of earlier works.

·  Different types of traffic management which could be used included; Stop and Go Boards; Give and Take; Lane Closures; Footway Closures; Traffic Signals and Road Closures

·  Road closures required plans and diversion routes to be submitted to the Council.

·  Utilities had to display a permit board so that if a member of the public had any concerns and wishes to report the works they would know who the utility was and had a reference number.  This could also help residents check the works on line and find out how long the works would be on site.

·  If problems there were problems on sites being worked on are, which were in a poor state, then companies are issued with a one or two hour notice to remedy the issue.

·  Reinstatement works had a two year guarantee. Penalties could not be issued for aesthetic reasons. New surfaces were protected for three or five years unless there was an emergency repair required.

·  Surfaces had to be repaired like for like, unless the surface being worked on was already damaged in which case a compromise was reached with regards to reinstatement.

·  Sometimes temporary tarmac is installed whilst other scheduled work takes place. Consideration was being given to spraying the tarmac to say it was temporary to reduce the number of complaints received. 

The Scrutiny Board questioned officers and the Cabinet Member and received responses on the following issues including:-

·  There were ongoing discussions to prevent conflict between work to install fibre and the development of Very Light Rail (VLR)

·  An issue on Wyken Road was discussed and would be picked up outside of the meeting.

RESOLVED that the Communities and Neighbourhoods Scrutiny Board (4):-

1)  Note the impact of the current permit scheme

2)  Note the impact and the control of utility works on the highway

3)  Request that an  item be added to the Work Programme to consider the impact of Very Light Railway on highways and footpaths once a route has been agreed