Agenda item

To receive a report detailing contacts for highway services that will be considered by the Executive.

A Mr Redgewell had requested to speak on this item but unfortunately, when called to speak, he was unable to do so virtually. Having provides no details of his statement or question he was requested to send them in and a written response would be given.

The Committee considered a report setting out the details for five highways related contracts.

Members praised the work of their Emergency Duty Teams and in response to questions it was explained that:

§  If there were any changes to contact details, once the contracts had been awarded, members would be informed and the appropriate contact numbers advertised.

§  Whilst the contract for maintenance would be outsourced as there was no guaranteed workload. They would be looking at their ability to deliver the services in-house e.g. grass cutting where appropriate in terms of service delivery and financial efficiency.

§  A written response would be given regarding how long, under the contracts, a pot-hole repair would be guaranteed for.

§  They would be starting a project to look at decarbonising maintenance of the highways. There was the potential to reduce carbon emissions, with an estimated 60% of carbon in highways maintenance being moving people, equipment and materials around, by considering:

·         Concentrating works in certain areas of the county.

·         Having mobile recycling plants

This was a three year project and at the end of it they would report their findings back to the Committee.

§  Regarding vehicles, they referred to ‘alternative fuels’ as it was up to the contractors to say how they were going to meet the targeted reduction of 50% in carbon emissions e.g. electric or hydrogen vehicles. But they would not be accepting the use of hydrotreated vegetable oil as a fuel, because this was usually transported around using diesel trucks.

§  With five separate contracts there would be less outsourced decision making with the Council programming work over the network.

§  With many hedges not under the ownership of the Council, overgrown signage was often the result of farmers not cutting them back. However, if they were reported to the Council, ideally online, they would arrange to get them cut.

§  Maximizing income was an ambition and they would be working with contractors and look at obtaining revenue from the highways in a number of ways e.g. advertising on roundabouts.

§  They were looking at improving the network management by:

·         Using a GIS system so that both officers and members could see the whole programme of works across the whole network listings dates and times etc.

·         Scheduling resurfacing work to tie in with developers work under S106 agreements.

§  There was the potential to reduce carbon emissions, with an estimated 60% of carbon in highways maintenance being moving people, equipment and materials around, by considering:

·         Concentrating works in certain areas of the county.

·         Having mobile recycling plants

·         The service levels within these contracts were similar to the previous ones and included incentives and penalties for the contractors.

·         Grass verges were cut (not all of the verge) twice a year. The first between April and June and the second between August and September.

·         Whilst not for general use, they still used glycophosphate weed killers, in a very limited and sparing way for noxious species such as Japanese knot weed.

The Committee then adjourned for a 5 minute break.