Issue - meetings

At the time of writing this report the Department for Transport (DfT) have yet to confirm exact funding values for 2022/23 and beyond and therefore an assumption has been made that the grant award will remain at least at the level received in 2021/22.

This report sets out and seeks financial approval for investment of the 2022/23 Local Transport Plan (LTP) grant allocation (capital funding) from the Department for Transport (DfT).

It is expected that the 2022/23 LTP Capital grant allocation for the Council will be £7.9 million comprising £3.1 million of Integrated Transport Block (ITB) funding and £4.8 million of Highway Maintenance funding (including Pothole Funding).

RECOMMENDED that Council: -

(a)            approve the proposed 2022/23 Local Transport Plan Capital Programme funding as set out in Appendix A; and

(b)           approve the indicative 2023/24 and 2024/25 Highways Maintenance Programmes as set out in Appendix B;

Voting: Unanimous

Portfolio Holder: Sustainability and Transport

Reasons

Recommendation (a).

The approval would enable the continuation of existing Local Transport Plan capital programme schemes, delivery of schemes that are currently being planned, consulted upon and/or designed and the development of future years schemes.

Recommendation (b).

The approval would reduce the risk of loss of funding associated with the incentive fund element of the Structural Maintenance Block.

The Portfolio Holder for Sustainability and Transport presented a report, a copy of which had been circulated to each Member and a copy of which appears as Appendix 'A' to these Minutes in the Minute Book.

Cabinet was informed that the report set out and sought financial approval for investment of the 2022/23 Local Transport Plan (LTP) grant allocation (capital funding) from the Department for Transport (DfT).

Cabinet was advised that the 2022/23 LTP Capital grant allocation for the Council will be £7.9 million comprising £3.1 million of Integrated Transport Block (ITB) funding and £4.8 million of Highway Maintenance funding (including Pothole Funding). The Portfolio Holder informed Cabinet that the ITB block was to progress schemes which had been approved by Cabinet, Council and the DfT and in addition the additional government led strategic policy on active travel. The Highways Maintenance funding was allocated according to government guidance which included assurance that the highways were being well maintained. The Portfolio Holder explained that recommendation ‘C’ was not required as the Council had received notification of the final settlement from the DfT.

The Chairman of the Overview and Scrutiny Board advised that there was a long debate on this with a number of issues being raised but there were no formal recommendations.

Cllr A Hadley asked about funding of the Ferndown to Wallisdown corridor which was moving to the Transforming Cities Fund. The Portfolio Holder advised that nothing had change from the previous LTP Capital Programme and the corridors involved were integrated. The Councillor also asked about travel safety measures and funding for school zones as many schools were interested in this. The Portfolio Holder outline the funding for safer routes to schools and that the school streets were fairly low cost and it was hoped that these would be expanded through using the base budget.

RECOMMENDED that Council: -

(a)            approve the proposed 2022/23 Local Transport Plan Capital Programme funding as set out in Appendix A; and

(b)           approve the indicative 2023/24 and 2024/25 Highways Maintenance Programmes as set out in Appendix B;

Voting: Unanimous

Portfolio Holder: Sustainability and Transport

To consider the Local Transport Plan Capital Programme 2022/23 report scheduled for Cabinet consideration on 9 March 2022:

The O&S Board is asked to scrutinise and comment on the report and if required make recommendations or observations as appropriate.

Cabinet member invited to attend for this item: Councillor Mike Greene, Portfolio Holder for Sustainability and Transport.

The Cabinet report for this item is included with the agenda for consideration by the Overview and Scrutiny Board.

The Service Director, Transport and Engineering, presented a report, a copy of which had been circulated to each member of the Board and a copy of which appears as Appendix 'A' to these minutes in the Minute Book.

The Service Director and the Transport Improvement Manager addressed points raised by the Board. Many of these related to concerns around ward councillors and local residents accessing information regarding highway works/maintenance programmes, including:

·       The report listed structural maintenance works but did not include other works such as road markings/white linings. It was explained that there was a separate, funded programme in place for this type of maintenance within the Neighbourhood Services budget. Members were encouraged to report areas of concern in their wards.

·       When would a list of roads for highway maintenance for 2022/23 be available to inform councillors and residents of works in their area? It was explained that this information would be included on the website but did not form part of this strategic report. Works were identified and prioritised using criteria to assess the condition of the roads.

·       There was an initial list of roads for 2022/23 and the Board was advised of some of the planned resurfacing works. It was noted that as well as the LTP budget there were other sources of funding available through Government schemes. 

·       A Board member queried the process for selecting and agreeing the list of roads and asked about the consequences of losing Band 3 status. It was confirmed that to satisfy the incentive requirements for Band 3 the Council was required to publish a three-year rolling programme of highways maintenance. The three year figures were included in the report’s appendices and the Council was currently in a good position.

·       It would be helpful if the road listings included the ward, particularly as there were often roads with the same name in different areas of BCP.

·       Some Board members expressed concern at the state of road markings and white lines in some areas of BCP. These markings were particularly important for pedestrians and cyclists.

·       There were mixed views on the effectiveness of the reporting system. Some Board members expressed frustration at the lack of response received. A Board member questioned the efficiency of the process for ranking and undertaking white lining. It was explained that works were assessed and prioritised chiefly on safety grounds and within finite resources, with those of highest safety priority dealt with first, based on information from the Neighbourhood Services inspection team and the public reporting system.

·       A Board member asked if there was a list of roads scheduled for white lining and if this could be circulated. The Board was advised that this would have to be followed up with the Director of Environment.

Other issues raised included:

·       A Board member asked about the funding for bus facilities referred to in Appendix A. It was explained that this funding supported the continuation of works to provide infrastructure for safer journeys, including raised kerbs, shelters and real  ...  view the full minutes text for item 169