Agenda and minutes

Scrutiny Review - Repairs to Highways & Footpaths
Monday, 31st October, 2005 3.00 pm

Venue: Civic Centre, High Road, Wood Green, N22 8LE. View directions

Items
No. Item

1.

APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE (if any)

Minutes:

None received

2.

URGENT BUSINESS

The Chair will consider the admission of any late items of urgent business. Where the item is already included on the agenda, it will be dealt with under that item but new items of urgent business will be dealt with at item 5.

 

Minutes:

None notified

3.

DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST, IF ANY, IN RESPECT OF ITEMS ON THIS AGENDA

A member with a personal interest in a matter who attends a meeting of the authority at which the matter is considered must disclose to that meeting the existence and nature of that interest at the commencement of that consideration, or when the interest becomes apparent.

 

A member with a personal interest in a matter also has a prejudicial interest in that matter if the interest is one which a member of the public with knowledge of the relevant facts would reasonably regard as so significant that it is likely to prejudice the member's judgment of the public interest.

 

Minutes:

None notified

4.

MINUTES - To confirm and sign the minutes of the meeting held on 20 October 2005

Minutes:

The minutes of the meeting held on 20 October 2005 were agreed and signed

5.

INTERVIEW SESSION WITH JOHN CROWLEY (MAINSTONE) CONTRACTORS & RICHARD CARTER (GABRIEL, CONTRACTORS)

To interview contractors with responsibilities for planned and reactive repairs to the Highways and Footpaths in Haringey.

 

 

Minutes:

*This was an informal meeting of the review panel.

 

Next Day Fix Project Closure

It was noted that the next day fix pilot began in April 2005 and scheduled to run for 6 months in the east of the Borough under a fixed based contract with Gabriels. The purpose of the pilot was to improve the performance of reactive repairs to the street scene through the review, redesign and improvement of the Street scene reactive maintenance process. The following benefits of the pilot were identified:

 

(a)       To improve public perceptions on the condition of roads and footways in the borough.

(b)       To achieve a faster response time to repair highways defects.

(c)        To improve the quality of fault reporting data

(d)       To reduce the likelihood of insurance claims resulting from accidents and injuries on the      highway.

 

Inspect and fix – this related to inspection carried out by the contractors before the due inspection date. Repairs were carried out in accordance with the Council’s inspection manual.  This was central to the process change since it removed the 24 hour, 7-day and 28-day time limits and ensured a faster response time.

 

Next day fix – contractors responded to defects reported by Members of the council and the public. These were inspected when reported and a works order generated for work to be carried out the next day.  The purpose of this was to ensure a faster response to reported defects.

 

In addition regular monthly monitoring meetings were held between the contractors and the service.

 

Due to concerns about the quality of repair works undertaken by the contractors, officers reported that 100% pre-fix inspections were carried out by the Council’s inspectors during the final two months of the pilot. This assessed and monitored the standard and numbers of repairs. Where this was deemed unsatisfactory the contractors were requested to bring the quality of the work up to standard.  At the start of the contract the percentage was 20% pre-fix inspection.  A system of penalties could be incorporated into any new contract in the future.

 

Currently there are four inspectors in the borough.  It was noted that some authorities such as LB Camden used in-house inspectors to undertake pre inspection work but external consultants were commissioned to undertake performance inspection.

 

Insurance Liability

Under the pilot scheme once defects were reported insurance liability became the responsibility of the contractor – it is unclear at the present time how this would impact on insurance premiums.

 

Tendering – The Chair wanted to know how prospective contractors were made of the tendering process since only Gabriels have been carrying out the work over a number of years. There was a need to ensure that as many companies were involved in the tendering process as others firms were doing similar works.  Officers stated that the service was looking for quality as well as value for money; details of inspection regime and investment would be provided to perspective contractors.

 

Highways Asset Management Plan

Officers stated that all local authorities  ...  view the full minutes text for item 5.