Issue - meetings

(Report of the Scrutiny Review Panel) – To agree the conclusions and recommendations of the Review

Councillor Winskill, the Chair of this Scrutiny Review stated that it was commissioned by the Overview & Scrutiny Committee as part of its work programme for 2005/06. The 33 London Boroughsare the highway and planning authorities for the majority of roads in London. It is each borough's responsibility to ensure that their roads are properly maintained and that development control decisions do not compromise the safety and efficiency of the transport network.  Over the past twenty-five years the pressures on our roads have increased with the sheer volume of traffic and the increased axle loads of our heaviest vehicles. The privatised Utilities seem continually to be excavating and filling in holes to leave an unsightly patchwork of fixes and make goods.

The Review Panel has put forward key conclusions and recommendations aimed at improving the performance of the service and the condition of the road network in the Borough These are outlined in the attached Scrutiny Review report. 

Councillor Winskill outlined the following Recommendations for the Committee’s approval:

Asset Management and Long Term Funding:

(i)                 The Highways Department should ensure that the Asset Management Plan is a maintainable document and used to secure appropriate investment in the highway infrastructure.

(ii)               The Council should explore alternative funding sources including prudential borrowing as a means of providing a source of funding for maintaining the road network in the Borough. 

Maintenance and Repairs:

(iii)       The Executive should ensure that priority is given in the Council’s future budget so that long term savings and better value for money will accrue in the Department’s move toward a robust system of preventative measures in the repair of the road network.

(iv)       The Highways Department should review the practice of continually patching surfaces that might be just below the normal criteria for complete resurfacing.

(v)        The Highways Department should consider how the life span of highways and pavements might be increased and the financial implications of any changes in practice and use of materials.

(i)                 Where housing projects undertaken by developers cause actual damage to pavements and roads the developers should pay for the repairs.  This should be vigorously enforced.

(ii)               Recreation Services should ensure it adopts best practice for tree management in Haringey.

Utilities and other Statutory Undertakers:

(viii)     The Council should lobby Transport for London to secure increased funding for Haringey to finance damage caused by buses using minor and residential roads.

(ix)       The Highways Department should explore strategies to involve Utility Companies with the aim of reaching agreement on how a co-ordinated and planned approach to repairs could be developed in order to keep disruption and cost to a minimum.

(x)                The Highways Department together with Thames Water and appropriate professional organisations should undertake an assessment of the main drains network in Haringey to establish its condition and the long term implications of the condition of the drains in the Borough.

(xi)              Any Utility Company undertaking works in the Borough should leaflet households and businesses affected with details of the work, how long they  ...  view the full minutes text for item 164