Highways Asset Management Plan Version 3. August 2009

Transcription

1 Highways Asset Management Plan Version 3 August 2009

2 London Borough of Hounslow Streetcare Services Highways Asset Management Plan Version 3: 2009

3 Foreword to HAMP Version 1 At Hounslow we are continuously striving to improve the levels of service provided to our community. We recognise the key role that our street environment plays in achieving the diverse goals set out in our Community Plan, and that the Highway is a public space shared by all those who live, work, shop and pass through our Borough. The road network is perhaps the most extensive and valuable asset we own and manage on the public s behalf, so it makes sense to plan the investment we make in it, and ensure the public get value for money in all we do. The directorate of Street Management & Public Protection (SM&PP) took the initiative to produce a Highways Asset Management Plan (HAMP) in February 2005, and this document is the result of that important work. We are proud that Hounslow was one of the first Councils in London to publish a full HAMP, and we intend to put it to good use in the years ahead. The HAMP will be a living document, designed to reflect the changing needs and priorities of the community, and we have already started work on improvements identified in this first release. It encompasses all parts of the street assets, and sets out a way of setting targets and measuring performance of all our services that contribute to improving and maintaining the whole street environment. The Plan recognises that it is the outcomes of what we do that matter. The HAMP is an important first step on the path towards more effective management of the highway network. It is forward-looking and sets the framework for much longer-term planning than has been the case in the past. A Steering Group has been established to ensure that the HAMP moves forward and is effectively put into practice. We take this opportunity to thank the members of the Steering Group, other members of SM&PP and our technical advisers, Chris Britton Consultancy Limited for the excellent work done in initiating and developing the HAMP. We commend it to everyone who has an interest in maintaining and enhancing the quality of our street environment, and as a working guide for those directly involved in this activity, both in our SM&PP Department and in partner organisations. Barbara Reid Lead Member for Environment and Planning Suresh Kamath Director of Street Management and Public Protection July 2006

4 Steering Group Members NAME DESIGNATION ROLE Krishnan Radhakrishnan Head of Service, Streetcare Sponsor Satbir Gill Highways Asset Manager Lead Officer and Chair of Steering Group Fazlul Huq Borough Principal Bridges & Structures Engineer Steering Group Member Sonny Pham Area Highway Engineer Steering Group Member Aivaras Jasiunas Area Highway Inspector Steering Group Member Gowry Thevakantha Area Highway Inspector Steering Group Member John Reynolds Environmental Projects Manager Steering Group Member Anna Humphries Development Officer (PROW & OM) Steering Group Member Michael Croke Infrastructure Engineer Steering Group Member Ian Goodger Rebecca Behrendt Borough Senior Public Lighting Engineer Community Environment Manager Steering Group Member Steering Group Member Lorraine Srivastav Contracts Officer Steering Group Member Tehmina Khan Community Environment Officer Steering Group Member Andy Williams Highway Manager DSO Steering Group Member Trevor Collett Network Operations and Streetworks Manager External Advisors Chris Britton Consultancy Limited Steering Group Member Chris Britton Technical Advisory Support Steering Group Member Andy Pickett Technical Advisory Support Steering Group Member

5 Page 4

6 Contents Progress Since HAMP Version Progress to Date Collection of an Asset Inventory and Asset Register and of Condition Data Asset Valuation Levels of Service Options Appraisal, Works Prioritisation and Value Management Executive Summary Introduction What is our Highways Asset Management Plan? Why do we need a HAMP? Benefits of Highways Asset Management What s new about Highways Asset Management Relationship with other Planning Documents Management of Hounslow s Highways Asset What Asset Groupings and Services does the HAMP Cover? Goals, Policies and Objectives How the HAMP Supports Policy Making Stakeholders with an interest in the HAMP Knowledge of the Asset Role of Data and Systems in Asset Management Asset data currently held Street Network Asset Data Asset Inventory and the Asset Register Asset Valuation Data Dissemination of Asset Information Systems to Manage the Asset Levels of Service What are Levels of Service? How will we derive and use Levels of Service? Network Performance Gap Link and Place NPG Scoring mechanisms Minimums, Targets and Performance Gaps Streetscene Index Performance Indicators Planning and Options Performance Gaps Options and Priorities Option Identification Value Management Priority Setting Approach to Works Programming and Unified Works Programme An Introduction to Lifecycle and Investment Planning General Approach to understanding the assets General Approach to Value Management as part of Lifecycle Planning General Approach to Routine Maintenance Investment implementation and review Page 5

7 6. Decision Making and Management Processes The Annual Highways Asset Management Process Involvement of Stakeholders in the Highways Asset Management Planning Finance and budget considerations Organisational Structure and Resources Risk Management What is Risk Management? Risk Management in Hounslow Risk Identification Risk Analysis Risk Reduction Ongoing Monitoring and Review Data Management and Information Systems Data management regime Highways Asset Management Systems Service Delivery Procurement of Works and Services and Mechanisms for Future Service Delivery Benchmarking the Services Implementation of the Highways Asset Management Plan Implementing Asset Management within LB Hounslow Improvement Actions Communication, Monitoring and Reporting Internal Management and Delivery of the HAMP Communication and Consultation with Stakeholders Consultation Questionnaire Performance Monitoring What is Performance Monitoring? Data Collection Performance Reporting References Appendices Appendix 1 Summary of Current Highways Asset Data and Systems Appendix 2 - Terminology and Glossary Appendix 3 - Organisation Chart LBH Streetcare Services Appendix 4 - Report on HM Magazine Highways Asset Management Customer Perception Questionnaire Introduction Approach and Design of Questionnaire Responses Analysis of Results Observations and Conclusions Annex I Appendix 5 Asset Inventory and Asset Register Area Items Count items Length items Breakdown by Ward Breakdown of Footway Types (including paved verges) Page 6

8 Appendix 6: Transcript from the Agenda of Executive Public Meeting 4 April Appendix 7. Lifecycle Management Plans Road Carriageways Lifecycle Management Plan Footways and Cycle Tracks Lifecycle Management Plan Street Environment Lifecycle Plan Lighting Lifecycle Management Plan Bridges and Structures Lifecycle Management Plan Drainage Lifecycle Management Plan Non-Illuminated Street Furniture Lifecycle Plan Appendix 8 Interim Asset Valuation Report Page 7

9 Document History Version No Status Author Date Changes from Previous Version 1.01 Draft CBC/LBH First release for internal review by Steering Group 1.02 Revised Draft CBC/LBH 16 th Dec 05 Second release for internal review by Steering Group following review and 1.03a Revised Draft 1.04 Revised Draft 1.05 Final Draft updating by CBC Incorporating comments from Steering Group. CBC/LBH February 2006 CBC/LBH February 2006 CBC/LBH April 2006 Final Version Incorporating latest Lifecycle Management Plans Header and Footers updated Draft CBC/LBH October 2008 Updated to reflect progress since first version Final CBC/LBH/AG October 2008 Final version incorporating Client comments Draft CBC June 2009 Updated to reflect progress since second version, and the development of the highways PFI project 3.02 Final Draft CBC August Final CBC August 2009 Updated to incorporate comments and updated statistics from the HAMP steering group Final Version. Page 8

10 Preamble How to read this document As with any such Plan, the HAMP should be read in its entirety to understand Hounslow s current position, what it intends to do to improve, and the action plan arising from the proposals. The HAMP is written with a wide range of stakeholders in mind. However, this document is also intended as a ready reference for managers and practitioners and as such, has been designed to assist the quick identification of key points and actions. It contains some formatting of box-outs designed to this end, as follows; Grey box-outs highlight a Key Point or Conclusion. Improvement Action #1 Orange box-outs alert readers to an Improvement Action arising in the text. These are collated together in section 8.2 of the document Timescale: Year 1( 2006/07) Green box-outs highlight examples and references to good Asset Management practice in the text Page 9

11 Progress Since HAMP Version 1 Version 1 of the London Borough of Hounslow s Highways Asset Management (HAMP) plan was approved by the Executive on 4th April 2006; the HAMP sets out a logical and systematic approach to sustaining and improving the streets in Hounslow, to the benefit of all those who use them by whatever means, and for whatever purpose. The streets, pavements and all their associated furniture and apparatus not only serve a functional purpose but also contribute to public safety, and the environment in which people live, work, shop and pursue leisure activities. Well-maintained highways make an important contribution to the liveability of public spaces, and in turn people s quality of life in general. It was also agreed that the HAMP be updated on an annual basis to reflect progress in implementing the Asset Management processes and practices to Hounslow s street network. This section provides that update, and in particular focuses upon the Improvement Actions identified in the 5- year improvement plan, as part of the HAMP version 1, specifically: The collection of an Asset Inventory and the completion of the asset register The integration and roll-out of Hounslow s asset management computer systems Progress with the evaluation of options for the funding of the street network. Asset Valuation The further development of levels of service Options appraisal and value management, including budgetary allocation and prioritisation The production of a Street Maintenance Plan Changes to Hounslow s highway inspection processes to adopt the risk-based approach proposed in Well-Maintained Highways, the national code of practice for highways maintenance management, and to make use of handheld computers to improve the effectiveness and auditability of inspections. The project organisation that was established to develop the HAMP version 1, has been retained to progress the implementation and further development and in addition task-specific working groups have been established to progress various improvement actions for versions 2 and 3 of the HAMP. The project structure is described in the figure below. Page 10

12 HAMP Sponsor Krishnan Radhakrishnan HAMP Project Manager Satbir Gill HAMP Advisors Chris Britton Consultancy HAMP Steering Group Hounslow s HAMP is a fundamental element of Hounslow s Highways Private Finance Initiative (PFI) pathfinder project, and of the Outline Business Case recently submitted for DfT approval. This project will allow us to make significant improvements to the levels of service identified in the HAMP, and to the quality of the borough street network. The HAMP remains integral to the ongoing development and implementation of the project. This updated Version 3 of the HAMP incorporates some of the innovative aspects developed for the specification of performance and serviceability for the PFI project. Progress to Date Collection of an Asset Inventory and Asset Register and of Condition Data The collection and maintenance of an appropriate, fit-for-purpose and up to date asset inventory is an important priority for the implementation of the Asset Management Plan, and a key action for the HAMP v1 was the collection of an asset inventory. Having awarded a contract for the collection of a full asset inventory, surveying started in October 2006 with site surveys completed in December The validation of the data and Page 11

13 integration onto the Confirm system and GIS was completed in Autumn The contracted work requires the collecting and recording of data on the location, type and, where required, condition of all the assets on the public highway; and to provide the data in a format that can be displayed on the Council s GIS system and managed and updated on the Street Management Confirm System. Data has also been collected on areas outside of that shown on the highway register that are owned by the Council but managed by other departments, e.g. housing estates managed by Hounslow Homes. This data may be used to identify and agree the boundaries between the public and private areas owned by the Council and may be used by Hounslow Homes for the management of their streets. As part of the work in support of the PFI project considerable effort was made in validating and enhancing existing inventory data and in collecting new data to ensure that the assessment of the extent and condition of our highway asset is as accurate as possible. This also included validation and enhancement of the street lighting and arboricultural inventories in addition to our collected asset inventory. In addition asset condition data continues to be updated, including surveys of carriageways and footways in excess of the frequencies required for national performance reporting, to ensure that our assessment of the cost of the PFI project is as accurate as possible. In addition, to support the PFI project and to provide accurate data to potential bidders for the project, the following additional items of asset data have been collected; A video survey of the whole network that will allow Council staff and potential bidders to validate inventory and network condition A survey of the construction of the entire carriageway network, from core samples A sample survey (in one ward) of footways using the new version Asset Valuation Appendix 8 of the HAMP is a report presenting the results of the first year interim highway asset valuation for the London Borough of Hounslow, carried out in accordance with current national guidelines. A project to develop a new Code of Guidance on Financial Information to Support Transport Asset Management, Financial Planning and Reporting is currently being developed nationally, in project being steered by the Roads Board/CSS and TAG Highways Asset Management Financial Information Group (HAMFIG). This guidance is expected to be available in Autumn 2009, following which a full, depreciated, benchmark valuation will be produced, to meet national government requirements. The headline figures from the interim valuation are as follows: Page 12

14 Assets Valuation Roads including Drainage 472,643,518 Segregated Footpaths 2,009,085 Structures 30,321,000 Lighting 20,738,600 Total 525,712,203 Value per km 1,211,318 That is, the value of Hounslow s road network (at 2007 prices), when depreciation (condition) is not taken into account, i.e. the cost of replacing the whole network with one of modern standard, is 526 million pounds, that is an average of 1.2 million pounds for each km of road network. Comparisons with results from other authorities indicate that the valuation is of the correct order of magnitude. Levels of Service Levels of Service provide the mechanism for achieving service quality from the Highways Asset. The Level of Service therefore reflects the way our service is delivered and how it is perceived by our customers. Levels of Service include the performance and condition of the asset itself, the quality of the service that the asset provides and the performance of Streetcare Services in delivering that service. The HAMP v1 established 8 Levels of Service for the management of Hounslow s highways asset; an additional 9 th Level of Service, Sustainability of the Asset has been established for the HAMP v2. For the HAMP v3, we have revised our approach to Levels of Service to make use of the measures of network serviceability and performance that have been developed for the PFI. So that we are able to use these to monitor the quality of service that we provide in relation to our network in prior to as well as following the commencement of the PFI project, planned for Options Appraisal, Works Prioritisation and Value Management Local Authorities have, through their Highways Asset Management Plans, a requirement to establish Levels of Service for the performance of their networks. Associated with this is a need to measure, monitor and manage improvements to levels of service, at network level, by predicting outcomes of decisions on the level and allocation of investment and on maintenance policy and standards. A process, based upon a 48%/52% split of the total planned maintenance budget between carriageways and footways respectively for determining Page 13

15 the highway maintenance area works programmes has been developed for the prioritisation of highways maintenance works. Page 14

16 1 Executive Summary Hounslow Streetcare Services (SCS) is responsible for managing perhaps the most visible, well-used and valuable physical asset owned by the Council on behalf of the local community. The streets are vital to all aspects of everyday life. SCS is committed to a programme of improving the management efficiency of that asset in terms of Customer Service, Safety, Serviceability and Sustainable Preservation of the infrastructure. All of these aspects are brought together, for the first time, in the Highways Asset Management Plan (HAMP) which sets out objectives and targets for delivery, procedures for efficient management of the asset lifecycle, and a programme of improvements, for all parts of the public space which we call the Highway Network. The HAMP sets out to balance the needs of customers, who expect a high-quality of current service, with the desire to preserve integrity and value of the street network for future generations. There are many current government drivers and recently published industry Codes of Practice aimed at improving the efficiency and effectiveness of the local Highway Authority s management of the road network. These are succinctly described in the recent document Maintaining a Vital Asset (2005) published by the Roads Liaison Group and endorsed by Ministers as well as the Mayor of London. The Hounslow HAMP is written to be consistent with all appropriate parts of the associated new Codes of Practice. The HAMP is a structured document that sets out: The scope, extent and condition of existing assets and associated processes, Improvements required and planned as a result of this review, A description of asset management objectives and policies linked to the Council s business objectives, A definition of outcome-based Levels of Service, Lifecycle maintenance strategies based on long term, sustainable use of physical resources and minimising whole life costs, Service delivery and associated Plans Identification of a means of establishing future funding requirements to maintain target levels of service, The approach to managing the risks of falling short of the target levels of service, The development of co-ordinated forward programmes for highway maintenance, operation and improvement, and A regime for measurement of performance and continuous improvement. Page 15

17 The HAMP is only the first step in adopting Asset Management principles for our street network; the full benefits will be realised in the coming years as we develop and implement the actions set out in our improvement programme. Progress will be reviewed annually, and the Plan, as a living document, updated accordingly. Page 16

18 2 Introduction This, the London Borough of Hounslow s first annual Highways Asset Management Plan (HAMP) sets out our vision for improvements in the management, operation and funding of Hounslow s streets for the next year and for the next five years. The intention is that at the end of the 5-year Improvement Plan, which is a key part of the HAMP, our streets will be: Providing a better level of service to residents and street users In better condition Of higher value Providing services that Customers want, based upon a true understanding of their needs and expectations Highways Asset Management is relatively new to local authorities in the UK, and the approach now being promoted was formally set out in the Framework for Asset Management 1 document published in The adoption of Highways Asset Management is also recommended in Well Maintained Highways, the national code of practice for highway maintenance, in Well Lit Highways, the street lighting code of practice and in Management of Highway Structures. Hounslow has decided to adopt these national recommendations, the starting point of which is the development of a Plan. The introduction of good asset management practice to the management of the highways network should result in improvements both in the delivery of services to customers and in the preservation of the Highways Asset for future generations. All latest national codes may be found at The production of Hounslow s first HAMP is only the start of the process; the introduction of the culture and processes involved in better asset management will take some time to develop and implement, and a key element of the HAMP is the five-year programme of asset management improvement actions. The road network for which Hounslow is responsible consists of 39km of Borough Principal Roads (PR), 14km of B Roads, 31km of C Roads and 348km of urban unclassified roads (UC), with over 775km of footways, over 16,000 street lights, 91 bridges, 30,000 gullies and over 10,000 trees. The motorways and all-purpose trunks roads that traverse the Authority are not part of this plan, and are the responsibility of Transport for London. Page 17

19 The highway is the most valuable publicly owned asset managed by the Council but historically has not received the attention or funding required to maintain it in the optimal state of repair and operation, or to effectively take account of the needs of all our customers. The HAMP, for the first time, considers all parts of the asset together, and sets out an approach that considers and prioritises between them, in delivering the highway management service, and balances the preservation and enhancement of the highway network with the best use of resources and the delivery of services to Hounslow s residents and to the users of the highway network. The HAMP considers all parts of the asset together, and sets out an approach that considers and prioritises between them and balances the preservation and enhancement of the highway network with the best use of resources and the delivery of services. 2.1 What is our Highways Asset Management Plan? The HAMP is intended for information and operational use, both for officers within Streetcare Services, and any others involved in delivering the highway service. It is also available for Council Members within Hounslow, and to our customers and stakeholders as well as other organisations as required. The HAMP sets out the way that we manage the Highways Asset currently, but more importantly it sets out the changes that we are planning to implement over the next 1-5 years in order to achieve the benefits that good asset management practices can bring about. The HAMP comprises a number of Key components: 1. The HAMP The main body of the HAMP is a statement of current practice and future plans and aspirations for the main elements of good asset management planning, including: Processes for determining annual programmes of work and for securing funding and allocating budgets Processes for updating the HAMP as part of Hounslow s annual cycle of business planning Processes for setting annual targets for quality of service for Hounslow s streets within the wider context of local and national Best Value Performance Reporting and the CPA (Continuous Performance Assessment) regime. Systems and data that support Asset Management planning Page 18

20 Mechanisms for Member, customer and stakeholder involvement in the Asset Management process 2. Service Levels The HAMP sets out Levels of Service that will form the basis for target setting, strategic planning and service monitoring and improvement. Associated with the service levels are more detailed performance measures and improvement targets for the next year, and for the longer term. 3. The 5-Year Improvement Programme This identifies the actions that have been identified as necessary to improve Asset Management for Hounslow s streets for the first five years of operation of the HAMP, and provides updates on items where progress has been made. Each action has a priority and timescale allocated to it. Additionally, the improvement actions are highlighted separately in the relevant section of the HAMP. 4. Lifecycle Management Plans The Lifecycle Management Plans set out for each component of the asset (Roads, Footways, Street Lighting, Structures, etc.) how Asset Management will be applied over the whole life of that asset from its creation to its removal. 5. Service Plans The Service Plans set out how good asset management principles will inform service delivery for those services that are not specific to a particular asset component, such as street cleansing, flyposting and graffiti removal. 6. Asset Register The Asset Register will set out what exists within Hounslow s highway network and the condition that it is in, and is an essential prerequisite for carrying out an Asset Valuation. The Asset Register is as yet incomplete, although the completion of our asset inventory has enabled us to make considerable progress and the Improvement Plan sets out the process for compiling a complete asset register. 2.2 Why do we need a HAMP? There are many catalysts for Asset Management, not least good practice and the achievement of value for money. Importantly, it encourages a performance-based approach to setting levels of service, which will cover all aspects of concern to customers such as minimising disruption on the network, improving the street scene, contributing to community environment and safety and many other issues. Page 19

21 The Department for Transport (DfT) is encouraging local authorities to prepare Transport Asset Management Plans (TAMPs) as part of the Local Transport Plan (LTP) process. Within London, as a devolved administration, TfL is encouraging London Boroughs to produce TAMPs. The HAMP is the first stage in the process to produce a TAMP, and will form a key part of the TAMP, which will cover wider issues of managing the transportation infrastructure. The TAMP will establish a clear relationship between its programme and the authority s targets and objectives set out in the LIP submission. Transport for London has also indicated that the LIP assessment, and hence funding provision, will be affected by the quality of the TAMP. It also considers the production of a HAMP as essential in providing the information necessary to ensure that the authority both spends to an appropriate level and can more effectively consider the need for local road maintenance spending against the requirements of other services. A further, more specific, need for the HAMP is to obtain and organise information to support Asset Valuation (AV) as part of Whole Government Accounts (WGA). 2.3 Benefits of Highways Asset Management A number of important benefits to Hounslow have been identified that will be realised by the move towards Asset Management. These include: More Informed Decision Making Better information, and a clearer understanding of the link between the performance of individual assets and the delivery of service, will enable decisions to be made in an informed way that will result in a better level of service. Reduced Whole Life Costs The move towards lifecycle management and long-term investment planning will enable a right place, right time approach to investment that will reduce costs over the life of the asset, and promote the long-term preservation of the asset. Customer Focussed Delivery The continued development of effective customer consultation and the development of Service Levels that support both the corporate objectives of Hounslow and customer priorities will encourage more customer focussed decision making, and will help to ensure Page 20

22 that services provided by the street network reflect resident and user needs and expectations. 2 Transparency & Ownership of Decision Making Asset management will introduce transparency and objectivity into decision making that traditionally has often been subjective. This will help Streetcare Services justify investment decisions and will also enable decision-makers to take informed ownership of decisions that they make. 2.4 What s new about Highways Asset Management Asset management builds on existing processes and tools to develop a continuous improvement framework by using Levels of Service to express customer needs and expectations, to monitor performance against them and then to identify the most cost effective ways of closing performance gaps. It will require us to make significant changes to the way we work over the next five years. Levels of Service describe the quality of services provided by the asset for the benefit of customers (Framework for Highways Asset Management i ) The asset management decision-making framework is guided by performance goals, an extended time horizon, economics and engineering principles, and considers a broad range of infrastructure asset types. Asset Management provides for the economic assessment of alternative improvements and investment strategy across the whole highway network to be treated as a single entity. This is fundamentally the trade-off between levels of service and costs, with the aim of providing best value for money in the use of public funds. The contribution of the local highway network extends far wider than just transport. It is seen as fundamental to the economic, social and environmental well-being of the community, and its management and maintenance must maximise the wider contribution. Therefore, there needs to be a shift to preserving and operating the investment in the local highway network for the full benefit of the community. At the same time the UK public has undergone a change in its view of effective governance, resulting in the increased expectation that all tiers of government will be more accountable and will be managed more like a commercial operation. The Asset Management Plan supports these changes. 2 The involvement of Hounslow s Residents Panel in the highways asset management process and the Highways Asset Management Customer Questionnaire carried out for the first time in July 2005, and reported in Appendix 7 are examples of initiatives that are intended to promote customerfocussed service delivery. Page 21

23 Continuous improvement in service delivery will be achieved through the Improvement Action Plan (see Section 8.2). This 5- year plan prioritises individual improvement actions over this period. The HAMP will be reviewed on an annual basis to determine the benefits and progress delivered as a result of the improvement actions identified for that period. The application of an asset management approach to our Highways Network implies that we change and develop the way we operate in a number of ways: Greater emphasis upon the quality of the service provided by the highways network in decision making and investment planning, rather than a purely technical focus based upon engineering considerations, as has historically been the case An improved understanding of the likely implications of decisions upon the future quality of service to the users of the street network (residents, pedestrians, drivers, cyclists etc.) and upon the long-term preservation of this valuable asset Continuing a move away from the management and operation of the various components of the street (roads, footways, lights, trees etc.) separately towards holistic, integrated management of the whole street, that considers the quality of service provided by the asset as a whole, and that gives greater emphasis to whole street enhancements in the public realm, and to tackling public realm issues generally A move towards a longer-term planning horizon for funding, investment and works A focus on the Council s wider policy objectives in determining strategic objectives for the street network An emphasis on the value of the highways network as an asset, and upon the Council s role as long-term custodians of that Asset Strategic planning of levels and priorities of investment and funding based upon an informed evaluation of different funding options, taking into account likely future implications for quality of service and preservation of the condition and the value of the asset, resulting in informed decision making on the part of those responsible for allocating funds both within the Council and externally Consideration of the costs and value of investments and associated works over the whole service life of that investment, in decision making and planning, rather than purely short-term costs and benefits Page 22

24 Determining budgets and funding requirements based upon measured need rather than historic precedence The new approach is summarised in the following table: Focus on Outcomes Management operation Needs based Informed decision making Explicitly considering customer needs and expectations Taking a whole life and life cycle approach Explicitly identifying and documenting needs Allocating resources based on assessed need The general highways asset management cycle is described in figure 2.4.1, below. Page 23

25 Measure Performance and Review Know your Asset Plan Maintenance and Improvement Set Desired and Minimum Levels of Service Set Budgets Identify Investment Need Set Targets and Manage Risk Figure General Asset Management Cycle It should be noted that our 25-year Highways PFI Project is the now the principle means by which these objectives will be delivered, by identifying contractual levels of service and by securing the necessary funding to ensure that sufficient funding will be made available to invest in restoring the condition of our highway network to achieve these objectives. 2.5 Relationship with other Planning Documents A number of other documents already exist that set out the Council s policy and practice that either directly or indirectly have implications for the HAMP. The HAMP does not replace these, but complements them by showing how corporate policy and Page 24

26 priorities are reflected in the management of Hounslow s streets. These documents include: The Local Implementation Plan (LIP) The Annual Borough Spending Plan The Community Plan The West London People document The Residents Panel Survey The Executive, Departmental and Streetcare Services business plans The Local Area Agreement The Hounslow Plan The latter in particular is used to derive the Service Levels that are a key part of the HAMP; this interaction with the Council s business planning process is described in Section below. The HAMP will enable delivery of best value in Highway Maintenance and hence demonstrate effective Asset Management as outlined in the LIP. The HAMP is consistent with the Core Values and Challenges set out in the Corporate Performance Plan. Asset management planning will shape both the Highways and Engineering, and Neighbourhood & Environment Service Plans, and ensure that the objectives of the Community Plan ( Fast Forward ) are met, so that highways service levels reflect the needs and priorities of customers in a way which engages with and reflects the needs of local communities, develops cohesive communities and leads to sustainable improvements. The levels of service and performance required to deliver the seven Themes in the Community Plan will be measured in order to support continuous improvement in maintaining the highway network. To ensure commitment to the public, Street Management & Public Protection (SMPP) has identified various Service Levels, set out in section 4 of the HAMP, as a means of promoting the Themes set out in the Community Plan: 1. A Growing Community 2. A Cleaner and Greener Community 3. A Safer and Stronger Community 4. A Healthy and Caring Community 5. A Creative Community 6. A Children and Young People s Community 7. An Economically Active and Skilled Community Page 25

27 The HAMP is consistent with the Core Values and Challenges set out in the Corporate Performance Plan and will enable delivery of best value in Highway Maintenance and hence demonstrate effective Asset Management as outlined in the LIP. Page 26

28 3 Management of Hounslow s Highways Asset 3.1 What Asset Groupings and Services does the HAMP Cover? Our Highways Asset Management Plan applies to the whole of the highway network, and covers the full range of asset components that exist within Hounslow s streets: Carriageway, footway and cycleway pavements, including speed calming facilities Road Lining and markings, including road studs Highway Trees and other vegetation Street Lighting including Illuminated Signs and Advertising Unlit Signs, including directional, informational signs, and street name plates Street Furniture, including environmental monitoring stations and public toilets CCTV Parking meters and payment machines Grassed and other landscaped areas associated with the highway Bridges and structures, including culverts, retaining walls and subways Highway Drainage, including gullies The HAMP also makes reference to those items within the street that are the responsibility of third parties, such as utility providers, rather than the Council, but which nonetheless have implications for the quality of service provided by our streets. In addition to these, the HAMP covers the activities and processes associated with services delivery related to the above assets: Street Lighting and electrical testing Planned Maintenance and improvement schemes Inspections and Assessments (condition surveys) Whole street improvement schemes Reactive small-scale maintenance, in response to public reports and arising from routine inspections Winter Maintenance Structural Testing and inspection Highway drainage maintenance and improvement works Maintenance of Highway Structures Street Cleansing, Fly-Posting and Graffiti Removal Page 27

29 Tree Maintenance Highway Grounds Maintenance Enforcement and removal of abandoned and untaxed vehicles Highway Law enforcement (excluding parking enforcement) Maintenance of illuminated and non-illuminated street furniture Monitoring of statutory undertakers Co-ordination of works on the highway Management of highways liability claims Refuse collection and recycling 3.2 Goals, Policies and Objectives The Framework for Highways Asset Management advises that asset management processes and plans must be guided by the existing overarching corporate objectives of the authority. It is essential to define the relationship that is desired between asset management priorities and other corporate goals and objectives Hounslow s HAMP therefore, as well as embodying national standards and good practice, includes processes to ensure that the management of the highways network is always contributing to delivery of the Council s policy objectives, as well as adopting national good practice for managing and preserving the asset. The Council's new administration has set out its priorities for the next four years in the Hounslow Plan. The Plan's focus falls into three main areas: Organisational Delivery, Quality of Life, and Looking to the Future. Within these policy themes, there are ten new priorities: 1. Ensuring value-for-money, high performance and quality services 2. Transparency, accountability and participation 3. Safeguarding and enhancing the environment 4. Tackling crime and disorder 5. Improving schools standards 6. Building a stronger and more united community 7. Supporting the vulnerable 8. The Community Strategy Objectives (taking forward the projects in the current Community Plan ) 9. A new Community Strategy for A vision for the physical development of the Borough The Borough Road Network has a role to play in the promotion and delivery of a number of these priorities; the HAMP and, in particular, the service levels within the HAMP has the Executive Priorities as its starting point. Page 28

30 Our asset management planning process will derive detailed processes and priorities from the top down in other words, will take existing Council and national high-level goals, policies and objectives and then derive from these desired Levels of Service applicable to the road network which will, in turn, inform the practices to be adopted for maintaining and operating each element of that asset. This top-down approach is represented in Figure 3.2.1, with a direct relationship between the Priorities that are set for the Council in the Executive Business Plan, helping set those for the Street Management and Public Protection Department, which in turn determine those for Streetcare Services and for the management of the highways asset. The Service Levels and priorities that have been determined for our Highways Asset Management Plan are therefore consistent with, and directly contributing to, the success of the Service priorities for Streetcare Services, the Directorate Priorities, and Hounslow s Ten Executive Priorities. Page 29

31 Figure Identification of Priorities The process for determining asset management priorities and objectives from those at corporate and national level is described in section 6.1; the HAMP will be reviewed and updated on an annual basis and the improvement plan and works programme updated on an annual basis How the HAMP Supports Policy Making If the HAMP is to be successful, it must not only reflect the Council s policies and priorities, but also support informed strategic decision-making about levels of funding, priorities for investment, and desired levels of service by providing information about the implications of those decisions on the future value, condition and service quality of the highways asset and the whole life cost of operating the asset and delivering services. A measure of the success of the HAMP is the extent to which it provides tools and information that support the political process. It is intended that the processes for determining service levels and for determining and prioritising potential asset investments will, as part of the implementation and development of the HAMP, involve Council Members in a number of respects: 1. Through the development of formal processes for determining service levels and associated performance measures and targets derived from corporate objectives. 2. By informing members, and eliciting their approval, in the development of the performance standards for Hounslow's highways PFI project, as set out in the output specification. Asset management planning requires a structured, cyclical approach to the process of determining and monitoring target levels of service, and for setting a long-term, prioritised programme of investment in the asset that takes account of both desired levels of service and the need to minimise whole life costs of the asset, and to maintain the value of the asset by maintaining an appropriate level of condition. Page 30

32 The current overall process for business planning within Streetcare services, in particular the fact that highways asset management objectives and priorities are explicitly derived from and link to those of the authority, provides a good basis for the further development of the HAMP and for the implementation of good asset management practices. The process will be further developed during the implementation of the HAMP in the following respects: 1. As well as corporate policies and objectives being reflected, other high level objectives and strategies need greater emphasis in determining those for the HAMP: Transport-related objectives, particularly those set out in the LIP and those determined by TfL and by government that are relevant to Hounslow s highway network National standards and good practice as set out in Well Maintained Highways and national standards for Asset Management, such as the CSS Framework, Asset Valuation Guidance etc. 2. A more explicit link to customer and stakeholder consultations and feedback mechanisms in determining standards and practice. 3. A more robust mechanism for feeding back and reviewing actual performance and condition of the asset components and associated services and for linking that feedback to policy making. Future initiatives for assessing condition and performance should reflect this need 4. A more explicit target setting mechanism related to business planning With our Highways PFI planned to start on the ground in 2012, the above objectives will need to be built into the contract documentation associated with this project. One of the key benefits of Asset Management is the introduction of objectivity and transparency into what has often traditionally been subjective decision making. By making the connection between asset components and service levels, it is possible to demonstrate the impact of decisions, and therefore better enable decision-makers to take informed ownership of their decisions, and to justify particular decisions on an objective basis Stakeholders with an interest in the HAMP As the service being provided by Streetcare Services responds to the entire community which uses or has an interest in the Highway network, it is vital that all these stakeholders are consulted and their aspirations are reflected in the HAMP. Stakeholders have Page 31

33 been identified and broad consideration given to their main interests in asset management planning; section 9.2 describes this process in more detail. Hounslow has established a Residents Panel of around 2000 people, selected to be representative of the local demographic profile. The Panel is regularly consulted on topics of local interest to help inform policy-making and streetrelated topics are included in its brief for the September 2005 survey. Specifically to support the development of the HAMP, reference was made to previous consultation exercises with the Residents Panel, and a special questionnaire was commissioned through the local HM Magazine in July This is described in more detail in section 9.2.1, and in Appendix 6. The Residents panel have also have also been communicated and consulted with as part of the development of the PFI project, as part of the PFI communications plan. 3.3 Knowledge of the Asset It is an obvious, but sometimes overlooked, fact that in order to develop an asset management strategy and associated business processes and systems, it is essential to have a thorough and up-todate knowledge of the assets involved. This includes, but is not limited to: The extent of the road network itself The extent and detail of every asset type and component present within that road network Information about the quality and condition of each asset component, and the quality of service that is provided Information about the historical life cycle of the assets, including age and dates of major maintenance interventions and improvements Information about historical costs Hounslow is typical of most local authorities in that during the development of its first HAMP it has recognised that the knowledge of its assets leaves room for improvement. In the Current State Assessment carried out as part of the highways asset management planning exercise, knowledge of the data held about each asset group was gathered. During the subsequent gap analysis, the need for improved information was identified. These improvements are identified in respect of key assets groups in the paragraphs below, and form part of the Improvement Plan in section 8.2. Information about the asset may be found in a number of different sources, including: Page 32

34 Formal written records and reports, including archives On maps, drawings and plans In computer records and databases In contract documents As head knowledge by members of staff Ad hoc notes and records held by members of staff Page 33

35 One of the overall objectives in respect of improving the knowledge of the highway assets is to bring together, extend and enhance existing information, in whatever form it is held, and make it accessible for asset management purposes Role of Data and Systems in Asset Management The European Best Practice Guide on Data Management (see gives guidance on good data management for roads data Data is essential to support decision making at every stage in the asset management cycle. It must be emphasised that there is a difference between data and information in this context; data becomes information only when it is put to constructive use and can assist decision making to add value to the business. Public organisations such as Hounslow are accountable for their decisions, and good data management provides the necessary audit path to demonstrate the basis of decision making leading to cost savings. Information systems support the following elements within successful asset management systems: The asset register, comprising an inventory of assets Systems to integrate data from different asset components for the whole asset Condition Assessment and reporting systems Systems for calculating and reporting asset value and depreciation Systems to allow Performance Monitoring against service levels and targets Predictive decision and option appraisal models Budgeting tools Operational systems Data is of little use, however, if it is not fit-for-purpose and up-todate. This is described in more detail in section 6.6. Effective management systems and processes will depend upon good data in all aspects of owning, operating, maintaining and enhancing the highway assets. Good data quality, managed through an effective data management regime, and turned into information useful for informed decisionmaking through effective systems, is an essential part of the successful implementation of Hounslow s HAMP. Page 34

36 When embarking on the asset management planning process, Hounslow Streetcare Services undertook a review and health check of its existing data and systems. This is an essential prerequisite to designing what systems and data are going to be required in future. This is not just to plug any gaps, but also to identify new and improved systems that will in turn provide efficiency savings to the organisation. As part of the preparation for the Highways PFI project, substantial investment has been made in improving the quality and coverage of our existing asset data sets and in collecting new data (for example, the video inventory survey and the survey of carriageway construction) Asset data currently held Streetcare Services currently holds a vast amount of data that describe the various components of the asset and how they are managed. These data are held primarily as: Paper records Computer records Maps and plans Data sets include: Asset Inventory o roads, bridges, segregated footways and highway lighting,etc. o carriageway construction o Video survey Asset Condition o Historical o Current o Projected Operational data o Scheme planning & works o Routine Maintenance o Winter Maintenance o Traffic and congestion Financial data o Budgets, expenditure, etc. Whilst some of these data already exist, Hounslow is typical of many authorities in that data are fragmented, incomplete and, in many cases, cannot be easily integrated. Appendix 1 summarises the current data sets and associated systems used in the management of the highway asset in Hounslow Page 35

37 Streetcare Services. What is apparent is that there is wide variation in the quality, scope and detail of asset data, particularly inventory data. For some asset components, such as street lighting, good quality asset inventory data should be referenced to a map background. Other asset components have little or no coverage. We have now completed a full asset inventory survey of the whole borough Street Network Asset Data Knowledge of the Highways assets starts with a knowledge of the road network, in its widest sense. For the purpose of this Plan, the network asset comprises every part of the Highway between its boundaries, and which is the responsibility of the Borough. This will include associated public rights of way, footways and cycle tracks. Improvement Action #1. Procurement and implementation of a fullasset inventory and Asset Register. Completed While, historically, Hounslow like most local authorities maintained its road network as a statutory register of streets, in recent years this has rapidly been replaced by computer-based databases of the road network and street locations. Since one of the objectives of our HAMP is the adoption of a more holistic approach to the management of our street network, it is essential that the various gazetteers and street registers that support the various systems, data and processes are used to support such an integrated approach. These various street network representations are listed and their current quality assessed in Appendix Street Network Referencing Effective highways asset management requires that data held in different systems used to manage the different parts of the asset can be brought together to give a view of the performance and condition of the street as a whole. Key to this is the role of the street referencing that is used to locate such data on the network; whilst the ideal is that a single referencing system is used for all systems. This is rare in practice, both for historical reasons, and because of the different technical requirements and characteristics of the different asset components. Much of the data for the management of the highways service are fragmented across a variety of systems within and outside Streetcare Services and, where the spatial location of the data is relevant, is referenced to either a grid reference or to a variety of highway network representations. For example, the highways condition assessment data are referenced to a number of meters Page 36

38 along a section of road, whereas street lights are referenced by a map co-ordinate. Other data items have a simple text description, such as outside number 12 High Street. This situation is not uncommon amongst highway authorities in the UK. A number of representations of the highways network, (both spatial and textual) are used (or are available but unused) within Streetcare Services. The Pavement Survey Network was created within the MapInfo system and a sub-set of it is used within the MARCH system (MARCH in LBH has no spatial components). A similar but separate network is also held within the department s GIS system. All local authorities are required to maintain for their network a Street Gazetteer which forms part of the National Street Gazetteer (NSG). This can be held at various levels of detail from Level 1, (an outline of the Streets in the Borough), to Level 3, (a full Street/ESU description with linear geographic data to provide location). Hounslow s Streetworks system in the Confirm system uses Level 1 copy of the National Street Gazetteer (NSG) that is undergoing revision, whilst the master Level 3 version of NSG is held on the Corporate GIS system and exported monthly in the correct and current format to the national NSG Hub. Responsibility for this, the Authority s master NSG is within the Planning directorate due to the need for it to maintain it in parallel with a land and property gazetteer. Within the Streetworks system, Associated Street Data (ASD) (reinstatement categories, sites of engineering difficulty, etc.) and also Section 58 new pavement details are to be added. These data are are available in the corporate master system and therefore are reported to the NSG concessionaire, but there are some concerns as to the correctness and completeness of these data. In addition the directorate has a copy of the Planning directorate s gazetteer (not NSG) that is occasionally updated from data supplied by the Planning department and also a gazetteer supplied by TfL which is not updated. Data supplied by third parties to LBH, such as pavement condition Roads2000 data from LB of Hammersmith and Fulham, are referenced to externally maintained representations of parts of the network. In the case of Roads2000, pavement condition data are maintained and analysed against principal roads only, using a network representation within the LBH&F Confirm system. Improvement Action #2. We will establish a Single, Definitive highway network representation, together with associated processes to maintain that network and ensure that all Highways Asset systems and data sets make use of that networks Timescale: Ongoing Work is currently being undertaken to rationalise these discrete network representations into a single correct and maintained Page 37

39 network within the department s GIS 3 system, which will become the single definitive version of the network. The intention is to bring together the best data from the existing systems (such as the spatial data from the Pavement Survey Data) into a single GIS based network for all classes of road. It is intended that the local road hierarchy 4 attribute for each length of road will be included and populated in this network. We will then establish processes for maintaining this single definitive network and for ensuring that the single network is used within highways asset management systems, ideally by giving those systems access to the live controlled version of the network, but as a minimum by regularly copying controlled snapshots of the network to those systems. Generating a single, coordinated road network model will be a key objective in the development of asset management planning systems in Streetcare Services Asset Inventory and the Asset Register The inventory of highway assets owned and maintained by Hounslow is a crucial element of information required to support the Asset Management Plan, and specifically to support valuation of the assets and to determine strategies for their management. Streetcare Services have identified that the quality and coverage of their Asset Register is an issue to be addressed in their Asset Management Plan. Well Maintained Highways iii recommends Authorities should prepare detailed inventory or register of all highway assets requiring maintenance (R8.3) We have recently undertaken a complete survey of all location, dimensions and physical characteristics of all of the assets within the Borough highway network, as detailed in the following table. Item Code Inventory Item Definition AD Advertising Advertising space / unit on the highway - see catalogue BD Bollards All non illuminated devices placed to keep vehicular traffic from entering areas of the carriageway reserved for pedestrians. BH Benches / Seats A bench / seat used by the public / pedestrians on the public highway. 4 Hierarchy classifications, which are different for road classification, are set by Councils for their road networks based upon national guidelines, based upon the importance of a road or footway, taking into account both the amount of vehicle or pedestrian traffic, but also the type of usage, so that for example footway used by larger numbers of disabled users would be treated as more important. These classifications are then used to determine standards for services and treatments, such as frequency of inspection or need for and type of treatment. Page 38

40 Item Code Inventory Item Definition BL Bus Lane A dedicated lane on the carriageway for buses BO Bridges - over A structure which spans the road being surveyed, including bridges belonging to Network Rail and the Underground. BSP Bus Stop A sign erected on the highway for pedestrians to access public transport. BSH Bus Shelter A construction to provide pedestrian shelter. BU Bridges - under A structure carrying the road being surveyed, including bridges belonging to Network Rail and the Underground. CA Cabinet A box containing electronic equipment. CI Central Island A raised obstruction in the carriageway to split the traffic in to two lanes or to provide a pedestrian refuge. CR Central Reserve A raised area separating the carriageway of a dual carriageway road. CS Cycle Stands A stand used to store / park bicycles or motorbikes on the public highway. See photographs included. CT Cycle track A dedicated lane on the highway for cycles. CW Carriageway The part of the highway that is designated for use by vehicular traffic. DK Dropped Kerb A drop in the kerb to allow pedestrian crossing. FG Fencing A barrier erected on the highway between two or more areas to mark a boundary ( normally at the rear of the footway ) FW Footway The part of the highway reserved specifically for pedestrian use. GB Gate / Barrier A lockable barrier or structure erected on the highway to prevent unauthorised vehicle access GV Grass Verge / Area A grassed area that s part of the highway, lies outside of the carriageway but not part of the footway GY Gully A drainage chamber at the side of the carriageway. KB Kerb A stepped block that borders the carriageway and limits the footway. Includes kerbs on central reserves and islands. LB Litter bins A container used for the collection of refuse on the public highway. MH Manhole / Inspection cover A covering in the highway for utility access for maintenance or inspection purposes MP Mast / Pole A mast or pole with CCTV camera attached or for radio transmitter purpose PB Parking Bays A designated area marked out on the highway providing for vehicles to be left for a period of time. PC Pedestrian Crossing A transverse strip across the carriageway to indicate where pedestrians cross. PD Pay and Display machine A meter provided for the printing of slips for purchase of parking time PG Pedestrian guardrail Railing along the side of the footway to prevent pedestrians entering the carriageway. Please see photographs included. Page 39

41 Item Code Inventory Item Definition PL Planter Free standing container on the public highway containing plants or flowers PM Parking meters A meter provided for purchase of parking time PT Public Toilets Toilet facilities on the highways for public convenience. RB Roundabout A raised or painted surface in the carriageway where traffic circulates. RC Recycling Centre A location for a bin, or series of bins providing for the collection of recyclable waste including, paper, glass and plastic. RH Road Hump A raised surface in the carriageway used to slow traffic flow RM Road Markings As prescribed in "The Traffic Signs Regulations and general Directions 2002" Schedule 6 RW Retaining wall A structure constructed to resist lateral pressure from the adjoining ground, or to maintain a mass of earth in position. SA Soak Away Off highway drainage, other than a gully used to drain water from the highway. SB Shrub / Flower Bed Raised constructed bed on the highway containing plants or flowers SF Safety Fence A continuous barrier alongside the carriageway to minimise the consequences of a vehicle leaving it. SG Signs All standard and non standard non-illuminated signage for the purpose of information, regulation, warning or guiding traffic excluding all temporary signs. SM Statues / Monument A monument or statue on the public highway that represents historical or artistic purpose. SN Street Nameplates The nameplate indicating the name of the street on which it is found. See photo's included. TB Telephone Box A public telephone booth or unit on the public highway. TR Trees A woody plant having a main trunk TS Traffic signals A system of different coloured lights for stopping streams of traffic or permitting them to move. VC Vehicle Crossover A drop in the kerb allowing vehicle access to a property / driveway. Inventory survey work has also been carried out by London Borough of Hammersmith & Fulham on behalf of Transport for London on the Borough Principal Road network which now includes the following infrastructure assets: Trees Gullies Lighting Columns Traffic Lights Bollards Page 40

42 Street Furniture Posts Signs These data are being continuously updated. Appendix 5, the Asset Register, gives details of the overall quantities of inventory items recorded as part of the inventory survey. In determining the specification for the asset inventory the following factors were considered: What should be recorded? (items, attributes, condition data, documents and photographs, locational information, etc.) The purposes and intended benefits of recording asset data items The standard of accuracy to which data should be recorded The priority for collection of the various data items and attributes The need to calculate an Asset Value for the whole network The requirements of UKPMS, the Bridge Condition Index and other national standard systems and reporting mechanisms Location referencing considerations It will also be necessary to ensure that the necessary information systems are in place and have been appropriately configured in order to ensure that the full value of the asset inventory can be realised. In order to ensure that maximum value is realised from the inventory survey, and to ensure the ongoing quality and currency of the inventory survey, it is essential that an effective data management regime is established at an early stage. Improvement Action #1. Procurement and implementation of a fullasset inventory and Asset Register. Completed Collection and maintenance of an appropriate, fit-for-purpose and up to date asset inventory is an important priority for the implementation of the Asset Management Plan. An important element of the development of the Asset Inventory and Asset Register is the implementation of a Data Management regime, in order to ensure that maximum value is realised from the inventory survey, and to ensure the ongoing quality and currency of the inventory survey, that will set out procedures for keeping the survey up-to-date and for ensuring that the latest data is made Improvement Action #3. Establishment of a Data Management Regime for the asset inventory In progress Page 41

43 consistently available to end users. The principles and practice set out in the data management regime for the asset inventory will be extended to all highways asset data held. The project to develop the Confirm system as Streetcare Services principal asset management system will also assist in the promotion of good data management practices Asset Valuation Data The CSS Guidance Document for Highway Infrastructure Asset Valuation (July 2005) iv recommends that local authorities should establish a valuation regime for their highway infrastructure as a minimum: a benchmark valuation should be performed every 5 years annual adjustments should be made to reflect changes to the stock and fluctuations in construction prices Prompted by government concerns about the inadequacy of information about transport infrastructure, the slow progress in implementing asset management, and the need for consistent information to support Whole of Government Accounts (WGA) HM Treasury and the Department for Transport commissioned CIPFA to undertake a review of accounting, management and financing mechanisms for local authority transport infrastructure assets. The report on this review, published in June 2008 concluded that there was the potential for significant value for money and service improvement benefits from the implementation of an asset management approach. It also concluded that an asset management approach would support sound financial management and decision making and effective long-term stewardship of the highway asset. It conservatively quantified these benefits as at least 5% per annum in the longer term. The report recommended a number of updates and developments to the CSS asset valuation guidance to facilitate an updated accounting treatment in the Statement of Recommended Practice (SORP). This updated reporting is scheduled to take place as a dry run in 2010/11 and in light of this dry run, a decision to be taken on whether to change accounts for 2011/12 or have a second dry run year. Following on from the CIPFA review a working group, HAMFIG (Highways Asset Management Financial Information Group) was set up to fully develop the guidance to replace the CSS guidance and to produce quick start information to ensure that asset valuation and financial reporting is carried out in a nationally- Page 42

44 consistent way for highway networks. This new guidance will cover; The detailed management of assets, including life cycle planning and whole life cost optimisation Financial management Long term financial planning and budgeting Resource allocation and policy development. Transparent, informative financial reporting that is IFRS compliant and supports WGA. Improvement Action #6. The intention is to issue guidance as a draft for formal consultation in and to finalise the guidance in February The Asset Value for a road network is a reflection of both what exists on the road network, and how much it would cost to replace, and the state that it is in (and by implication how good or bad a service it is providing). Expressing the extent and condition of the highways asset in financial terms is a useful means of expressing what, for most Councils is their most valuable asset, and to allow comparisons to be made with other assets, such as property, on a common basis. We will carry out a full, benchmark asset valuation in making use of the full asset inventory. Timescale: Year 3-5 (2010) Since the publication of the first version of the HAMP, Streetcare Services has undertaken an interim valuation of the Gross Replacement Cost highways asset. Appendix 8 details this valuation. The key drivers for Asset Valuation are: 1. To emphasise the need to preserve the highway infrastructure by placing a monetary value on highway infrastructure assets but not forgetting that the AV represents the monetary (capital) value of the assets and not the service provided by the assets, i.e. what the assets are worth to society. 2. To demonstrate asset stewardship by monitoring the AV over time; however, AV should not to be used in isolation but should be used in combination with other recognized Performance Measures such as Best National Indicators (NIs) and other Performance Indicators (PIs). 3. To support Whole of Government Accounts and promote greater accountability, transparency and improved stewardship of public finances. The inventory data to support asset valuation is described in the CSS Guidance, Section 5 Page 43

45 4. To support Highway Asset Management Asset Valuation provides one facet of the robust financial framework that Asset Management should operate within. The following timetable has been adopted for implementation of highway infrastructure AV: Financial Year : Interim Gross Replacement Cost Valuation (Completed) 2010: Full dry run valuation for 1011/12 Accounts Financial Year and beyond: Calculate in-year movements (e.g. depreciation, impairment etc). Improvement Action #5. We will undertake an interim, pilot asset valuation in April 2006, drawing upon the data collected in the pilot inventory survey. Completed Dissemination of Asset Information In order for the full value of asset data to be realised, it is important that effective mechanisms are in place to ensure that data are made available, in an appropriate form, to those within the organisation that can make use of the data. A number of initiatives are already underway that will assist in this respect. The corporate GIS system provides a mechanism to distribute map-based information in a readily understood and web-based mapping functionality as part of the intranet for internal users. This mechanism will be extended through the Council s web site, for customers and other data users. Currently, relatively little data related to Highways Asset Management has been distributed, but it is anticipated that this will be extended in future. The adoption of Confirm as the departmental standard for Asset Management will assist in integrating and distributing data and associated functionality within the department, and potentially to contactors and other partners. Improvement Action #8. Following the implementation of the Asset Inventory and Register, we will, as appropriate, make data available to stakeholders and customers though the Intranet and Council web set, using Mapping tools where appropriate. Timescale: Years 3-5 ( ) Systems to Manage the Asset Much of the data for the management of the highways service are currently dispersed across a variety of systems within and outside Streetcare Services and, where the spatial location of the data is relevant, are referenced to either a grid reference or to a variety of highway network representations. This situation is not uncommon amongst highway authorities in the UK. As part of the HAMP improvement programme, a number of initiatives are proposed, including the rationalisation of systems and supporting data and referencing, with the Confirm Asset Page 44

46 Management System adopted as the preferred system, in order to promote sharing and integration of data and functionality. 5 Systems in use in Streetcare Services have evolved as a series of investments in systems and data, each investment made either to satisfy the needs within a part of the organisation or for a part of the organisation to participate in a London wide initiative. For example, some highway maintenance data is held within the MARCH system, whilst Streetworks data is within Confirm. In addition street lighting data is also Confirm based, whilst bridges data is maintained in the LOBEG/Bridge station system. This fragmentation is also a result of historic organisational structures. The various systems currently used in the management of our highways are summarised in Appendix 1. Steps have already been taken to adopt Confirm as the principal integrated highways asset management system in Streetcare services, and whilst further development is required, early indications are that this system should meet most of the currently identified needs. We will continue to adopt Confirm as the principal integrated highways asset management system, which will include an asset inventory/register. This system can only be successful if sufficient resources and time are allocated to its development and operation. It is also noted that other systems, particularly the GIS and Street lighting systems are already delivering benefit, and have the potential to provide further value. Improvement Action #9. Implementation of the Confirm System as the principle integrated asset management system within Streetcare Services Timescale: Years 1-5 ( ) No system can be successful unless sufficient resources and time are allocated to its development, operation and upkeep. It is noted that some existing systems, particularly the GIS and street lighting systems are already delivering benefit, and have the potential to provide further value. However, improved resources will be an essential part of the successful implementation of Hounslow s asset management systems. 5 Although in some instances there will be a specific technical need to diverge from Confirm, for example which uses the London-wide Bridge condition reporting system. Improvement Action #10 Development and integration of Asset Data systems Timescale: Years 2-5 ( ) Page 45

47 We will continue to develop the systems, including the GIS and Intranet/Internet to ensure the maximum integration, use of and benefit from our asset data. Page 46

48 4 Levels of Service 4.1. What are Levels of Service? In implementing highway Asset Management, a key challenge is to balance the need to invest in order to preserve the integrity and value of the physical asset, with the need to provide high-quality service to the users of our highway network. Figure describes this challenge and indicates how measures of condition and performance contribute. Service Delivery Performance Asset Preservation Physical Condition Figure Balancing Asset Preservation and Service Delivery Perceived Condition Non- Condition Related Performance Levels of Service provide the mechanism for achieving service quality from the Highways Asset. The Level of Service therefore reflects the way our service is delivered and how it is perceived by our customers. Levels of Service include the performance and condition of the asset itself, the quality of the service that the asset provides and the performance of Streetcare Services in delivering that service. This Highways Asset Management Plan describes the mechanisms that we will put in place to monitor and improve the quality of the services provided by the highways asset, whilst at the same time The national framework for highway Asset Management defines Level of Service as a term used to describe the quality of services provided by the highway asset for the benefit of customers Page 47

49 ensuring that the long-term integrity and cost-effectiveness of the asset is provided for. For this, version 3 of our HAMP, we have fundamentally revised our approach to Service Levels, to incorporate the measures of serviceability that have been developed for our Highways PFI project. This will allow us to monitor progress in delivering improvements to the service provided by our highway network, both prior to the commencement of the PFI project, planned for 2012 and then throughout 25 years of the project s operation. The PFI contractor will be required to achieve the desired standard or level of service throughout the contract, as specified by the output specification, and to improve the condition of the assets to a required standard during the first five years of the project, and then to maintain that standard through the remainder of the project How will we derive and use Levels of Service? In this Asset Management Plan, our measures of quality of service and infrastructure condition are intended to reflect the wide range of assets and services that we provide and to reflect the contribution of Streetcare Services to the overall objectives of the London Borough of Hounslow as defined in our ten Executive Priorities: One Hounslow Promoting Community Development, Cohesion & Safety Children & Lifelong Learning Supporting Vulnerable People Enhancing Our Environment Sustainable Mixed Housing Positive Regeneration Improving Customer Care Better Performance Resources for Future Improvement As part of the PFI contract documentation, we are identifying required standards of service for all assets and services associated with the highway network. In order to monitor how well we are delivering our services in accordance with these priorities, we have defined a number of Performance Measures for each Level of Service and, where possible, have set targets against which we will measure our performance. Page 48

50 The processes for determining service levels, for setting targets for those service levels and for monitoring achievement of those targets is essentially a top down process, determined by the strategic objectives for the highway network as determined by the Council, by regional government 6 and by central Government as described in broad terms in figures and below. Strategic Objectives Service Levels Performance Measures & Targets Figure The Strategic Objectives Service Levels - Performance Measures Hierarchy For Hounslow s HAMP, the strategic objectives are derived from both the Council business planning process and from Transport Policy set down by the Government and Transport for London, as set out in the Councils Transport Local Implementation Plan (LIP). This is described in Figure 4.1.3, below which also shows that for the Service Levels that have been derived for the HAMP, there are many performance measures and targets which, in many cases, contribute to the monitoring of more than one service level. 6 Government Office for London (GOL), Association of London Government (ALG) and Transport for London (TfL) Page 49

51 TfL London Transport Policy Government Transport Policy and Legislation Council Executive Priorities Local Implementation Plan SMPP Business Plan Targets Borough Spending Plan Street Care Services Business Plan Targets Highways Asset Management Plan Service Levels Performance Measures and Targets Figure Strategic Policy Documentation and the HAMP Network Performance Gap The Network Performance Gap (NPG) has been developed to measure the difference between the target condition and the actual condition of roads and footways within throughout the PFI period. The NPG is a composite of the output from a selection of different condition surveys depending on the location and Page 50

52 significance within the network and Link & Place of the road section length. The indicators that contribute to the NPG, along with the relevant survey used to obtain the information required to calculate the indices are given in the table below. Condition Index PCI SRI MSCI SCI ST SCI WC SCI SF FCI Survey Deflectograph SCRIM SCANNER Detailed Visual Inspection (DVI) Footway Coarse Network Survey (CNS) The NPG uses a different selection of surveys and different condition targets depending on the significance and location of the Road Section Length (RSL) within the network. The relative importance of each RSL has been determined through the use of the Link & Place methodology (P Jones et al, 2007) resulting in each RSL having a ranking based upon its level of importance as a link, a street where users aim to pass through as quickly and conveniently as possible, and a place, which are destinations in their own right where people are encouraged to spend time. The method bases the importance of a link on the movement of people, rather than vehicles, and therefore streets can be important links in terms of walking, cycling, driving or using public transport. Link and Place The classification of the road section lengths for both link and place significance is represented in a Link & Place matrix. The Link status is closely related to the Carriageway Hierarchies as described in Well Maintained Highways (Roads Liaison Group, 2005) as there is good relation between the carriageway hierarchy and the Link status, although some sections may be increased in significance due to important bus or cycle routes. The Place status is based more on the catchment areas of major land uses on or alongside the street, or on the heritage or cultural significance of the buildings. Local knowledge has been used to define the Places that are significant to the whole of the Borough, or are of just local importance. The Link & Place matrix used within the London Borough of Hounslow, along with the definitions of each category, is given in the figure below. Page 51

53 Place Status level Regional Borough Area Neighbour - hood Local Link status level Strategic route Main distributor Secondary distributor Link Road Local Access Road 1A 2A 3A 4A 5A 1B 2B 3B 4B 5B 1C 2C 3C 4C 5C 1D 2D 3D 4D 5D 1E 2E 3E 4E 5E Link Status Place Status Category Description Funds/ Maintains 1 Strategic Route Principal roads between primary destinations. (TfL Network) TFL / TFL 2 Major urban network and inter-primary links. (Borough Main Distributor Principal Road Network) TFL / LBH 3 Secondary Classified roads (B & C) and other roads of more than local LBH / LBH Distributor importance including unclassified urban bus routes. 4 Link Road Roads linking between the Main and Secondary Distributor LBH / LBH Network. 5 Roads serving limited numbers of properties carrying only Local Access Road local access traffic. LBH / LBH Destinations of regional (London) or national significance A Regional (e.g. regional shopping centres, heritage sites, sporting LBH / LBH venues) Places that contribute and important and valued role to the B Borough whole borough, although they may not be widely known at a LBH / LBH London or national level. Streets/Places that serve a role (e.g. shopping or commercial C Area uses) at an area or town level but are not frequently accessed LBH / LBH by users from other wider areas. D Neighbourhood Local streets/places acting as destinations to local users such LBH / LBH as small local centres and streets with corner shops. E Local Most local access streets with no interest from wider area. Used for Place activities only by adjoining frontages. LBH / LBH Figure Link & Place Matrix with category definitions Page 52

54 NPG Scoring mechanisms Minimums, Targets and Performance Gaps Each indicator used within the NPG has been given a Target Score; There is also a Minimum Score assigned to each RSL, which is the minimum acceptable level for the RSL at any time. The Target and Minimum Scores vary depending on Link & Place category of the RSL, allowing for different condition requirements on different parts of the network. There is a likelihood that the significance of the carriageway in terms of its link status, is going to be different to that of the off carriageway features, such as the footways and off carriageway cycle ways. This is because there are likely to be different key travelling routes for people travelling by vehicular modes of transport, such as cars and buses, and those on foot. Also, the importance of a footway has a relation to the place importance, as footways in pedestrianised shopping centres may not be a key link but are of importance to the high volumes of people using the shopping centres, whilst key links may have no, or very little, interest as a place such as dual carriageways and other principal routes. The surveys used and the targets required for the carriageway surveys are based on the Link status of the RSL, as the carriageways main purposes is as a transport link. The footways will be based on the Place rating as the importance of the location as a Place is likely to be the most significant in terms of ranking the importance of a footway within an RSL relative to the overall network, such as key shopping areas and busy areas outside schools for example. The NPG is a measure of Performance Gap, which is calculated as the difference between the Target Score, and the actual scores calculated for each of the constituent condition indices. Therefore, the overall aim throughout the PFI is for each RSL to be to upgraded to, and maintain at or above, the Target Score, therefore reducing the NPG to zero. To avoid gold plating of the network, and reduce the impact of RSLs that have been upgraded to higher than the Target Score offsetting deficits in other RSLs, where the Condition Indices have a score greater than the Target Score, a Performance Gap of zero is assigned. The PFI project is intended to improve (i.e. reduce) the NPG to zero by the end of the 5 th year of the project (planned for 2017) and then to maintain that level of service throughout the rest of the contract. The current (2008/09) values for NPG for Ward, Council Area and for the whole borough are given in the figures below; Page 53

55 Current (2009) Network Performance Gaps for Areas and the Whole Network 6 Network Performance Gap West Heston & Cranford Central Hounslow Area Isleworth & Brentford Chiswick Borough Network Current (2009) Network Performance Gaps for Ward and the Whole Network 7 6 Network Performance Gap Bedfont Feltham West Feltham North Hanworth Park Hanworth Cranford Heston West Heston Central Heston East Hounslow West Hounslow Heath Ward Hounslow Central Hounslow South Isleworth Osterley and Spring Grove Syon Brentford Turnham Green Chiswick Riverside Chiswick Homefields Borough Network The NPG is clearly focussed on carriageway and footway pavements, which form the most significant proportion (73%) of the value of the highway assets in Hounslow. The PFI Output Specification will also addresses the maintenance backlog, lifecycle maintenance and general levels of service for other key assets, notably bridges and structures, drainage, trees and lighting. Streetscene Index In addition to the NPG, which measures the quality of the roads and footways, a new Service Level measure is also being developed for the PFI project, and will be reported in the HAMP, which measures the quality of the Street Scene. The Streetscene index will be calculated for each Ward and for the Network as a whole. The Streetscene index is to be based on the Local Environmental Quality Surveys (LEQ) carried out on 50m sample lengths of street throughout the borough, of which a summarised version of the results are reported for National Indicator 195, to assess visually Page 54

56 both the cleanliness of the streets within the borough, and the condition of the street furniture. During the surveys, each 50m length is scored on a scale from -8 to +8, with scores above 0 being satisfactory or good. A Target Index is reported for the LEQ surveys, which reports the percentage to which the Borough meets an average target standard of +4. In addition to our own performance measures and service levels, we are required to produce a number of statutory indicators, which are used by Central Government to monitor the performance of each Local Authority in England Performance Indicators There are a number of sets of Mandatory Performance Indicators that we already have to report including the new national performance framework indicators, Public Service Agreement (PSA) indicators, and Hounslow s own Corporate Indicators. In addition to the various Mandatory Indicators, Streetcare Services have developed a number of Local Indicators relevant to the specific priorities and services provided by Streetcare Services in Hounslow. Page 55

57 5 Planning and Options 5.1. Performance Gaps In implementing this HAMP it is recognised that, for the various asset components and services associated with the highway network, there are inevitable gaps between the current performance and the level of performance that is desired. There are two categories of performance gaps: 1. Where the condition of an asset or an asset component is below that desired to preserve the value and integrity of the asset, for example where the carriageway has deteriorated to such an extent that major works will be required to restore condition. 2. Where the level of service provided to the users of the highway network is below that desired, for example, where the appearance of the street scene is poor. Our service levels developed for the PFI, specifically the Network Performance Gap and the Streetscene Index, are explicitly measures of the difference between current and desired performance, with a value of zero for a street, ward or the borough as a whole indicating that desired performance is being achieved. In monitoring service levels and associated targets will make use of the customer and resident consultation mechanisms described in section 6.2. We will also ensure that the targets set for the Council as part the government Local Area Agreement (LAA) regime are consistent with those set for service levels and supporting performance measures Options and Priorities A key element of Streetcare Services adoption of asset management principles and practice for Hounslow s Street Network is a move towards longer-term, life-cycle investment planning; specifically the desire to move beyond annual, historicbased budget allocations to look at future investment need over a longer period. Our Highways PFI project is our chosen mechanism for achieving longer term value and performance. Page 56

58 This is likely to lead to better value for money and lower whole life costs by ensuring that investment is made at the right time. This approach also recognises that there are different options that must be considered, with different impacts at all stages of the asset investment process: Options for overall level of budget Options for splitting the overall budget between different services, asset components, geographical areas, etc. Options for where to invest within budget programmes Options for the type of works that should be carried out Note that the implementation of our Highways PFI project will, by its very nature, as a 25 year project, bring a longer-term view and planning horizon to the management of the maintenance of our highway network Option Identification The move towards asset management implies the introduction of a lifecycle approach to the management of individual assets, where the costs and benefits of an investment in an asset is considered over the whole life of that asset, which will be different depending upon the specification for that asset and of any maintenance or improvement works that take place. This may be founded on a sophisticated approach to modelling future investment need or a more empirical approach based on the age of particular asset components. In any case it is important to develop a long term view of investment need. Key to effective lifecycle management is the recognition that there will, in general, be a number of options available whenever an investment decision is made and a consideration of the lifecycle costs associated with each option should be made. This intention is linked to the improvement action for a more integrated approach to budgeting for Asset Management and to the introduction of long-term investment planning. It should result in benefits, including reduced whole life costs, based on right-time investment and better financial planning and management. Both as part of the life-cycle management plans produced for the principle asset components services, and for the processes that are set up for asset investments as a whole, the HAMP will ultimately provide for the consideration of a number of possible options as the solution to the need to intervene and invest to restore condition, level of service or value of the asset. Page 57

59 The tools that are currently used and those that will be implemented over the life of the improvement plan (both the specialist, asset component-specific systems and the whole asset tools) must be able to support such an option-based approach by considering different options, and evaluating the impact of investment options over different return periods in terms of condition, level of service and impact upon asset value and depreciation, as well as accounting for cost, benefit and risk. There is an intention to implement option appraisal processes in relation to investment decisions that take account of factors such as: Risk Condition Level of Service including minimum levels of service Whole lifecycle costs The proposed integrated work programme described in figure also reflects that, for the funding available for the highways asset as a whole, once defined minimum levels of service and condition are met Streetcare Services has considerable choice in where those funds may be spent to realise greatest benefit. There are of course organisational and political barriers to such flexibility and choice, and we will need to explore further the extent to which, and the speed with which, SCS are prepared to move towards such an approach. Moreover, the move to our PFI project will, through the output specification, impose a requirement on the service provider to integrate works, including a requirement to implement integrated Whole Street Environment (WSE) schemes Value Management Value Management is about getting the right project, whilst Value Engineering is done to get the project right. (Value Management in Construction, Harry Hammersley, 2002) Value Management is defined, in the Highway Maintenance Code of Practice (Well-maintained Highways, Roads Liaison Group, 2005) as: a process that may be used to prioritise the competing needs of highway schemes, identified through condition and economic prioritisation. It provides a structured, consistent and quality approach for assessing the benefits of undertaking maintenance and the associated risks of not undertaking maintenance. The outcome should be a prioritised programme of schemes that will be entered into the HAMP Page 58

60 It is worth noting that much of the work involved in the implementation of this approach is now part of the work to develop the PFI project, both in the identification of the long-term investment need to eliminate maintenance backlog and to restore levels of service, and in the work that the eventual contractor will carry out to develop a 5 year programme of schemes during the core investment period. For Hounslow s HAMP, the original intention was that we would design a 3 level ( Strategic, Programme and Project ) value management process, to be used to set strategic investment priorities and levels of budget, to identify investment priorities and to determine treatment specifications. In the light of the development of Hounslow's PFI project, it is no longer appropriate to pursue this approach. The concept of a highways PFI is based around an "output specification" that sets out the levels of service, and the structural condition that the contractor is required to provide over the life of the (25 year) contract. In their proposals, the bidders for this contract will set out their own assessment of how they can best manage and minimise costs of delivering that level of service, based upon their own assessment of good asset and value management practice. Whilst the council will need to satisfy themselves that the bidders proposals are viable and make good engineering sense, their primary concern is that the quality of the street network is acceptable through the life of the contract and that the network is handed back at the end of the 25 year period with an acceptable level of residual life. The detailed "value management" procedures that that will be in place are a matter for the service provider as long as they achieve the desired results, although the Council will take into account whether they adopt good asset management practices in assessing their bids for this contract Priority Setting The good progress that has already been made for a number of the asset components, particularly roads, footways and street lighting, in determining priority for budget allocation on the basis of an objective assessment of condition and performance will be further developed over the life of the improvement plan: Condition and performance assessment techniques and systems will be further developed; these are described for each asset component in the Life Cycle Management Plans Page 59

61 Information related to the measurement of service and performance will be collected to support investment prioritisation Information and systems that allow potential investment options to be evaluated on an economic and whole life cost basis, giving priority to preventative maintenance, which reduce the risk of more costly future intervention and preserve the value of the asset over the longer term. For roads and footways, the Scheme Engineer system, that has been implemented to support the PFI project provides this capability. Systems and information that support whole asset prioritisation as part of the integrated works programme Classified (A, B) Roads SCANNER Surveys Backlog" Plan Maintenance Included in BVPI Plan Investigation Good Condition Whole Borough Carriageway Works Priority List Road Condition Index Road Road Road : : Road Road : : Road Road n 0 48% of Total Budget Area Carriageway Works Programmes Road Priority Road Road Road 1 Priority Priority 1 Road Road Road Road 2 1 Priority Road Road Priority 1 Road Road Road Road Road Road etc 3 3 Road etc Road Road etc Road etc 3 3 etc Unclassified Roads and Footways Road n Detailed Visual Survey United Kingdom Pavement Management System Backlog Included in BVPI Not included in BVPI Whole Borough Footway Works Priority List Footway Condition Index Footway 1 45 Footway 2 36 Footway 3 28 : : Road Road Road n 0 52% of Total Budget Area Carriageway Works Programmes Footway Road Priority Footway Road Road Road 1 1 Priority Priority 1 Footway Road Road Road Road 2 Road 2 1 2Priority 1 Road 1 Priority 1 Footway Road Road Road 3 1 Road Road Road etc 3 Road etc Road Road etc Road etc 3 3 etc Figure Prioritisation of Footway and Carriageway Area Works Programmes The figure above illustrates the agreed process for determining works programmes for footways and for carriageway, on an area basis. In order to support such an approach, improved record keeping will be required to ensure that whole life costs are captured and used for improvements to the process in future. The detail of this is developed in the life cycle plans for each component as well as the whole asset processes, procedures and systems for the integrated investment programme. 5.3 Approach to Works Programming and Unified Works Programme Page 60

62 The introduction of highways Asset Management has implications for: The way that budgets are structured the balance between capital and revenue funding the timescales over which budgets are set the processes for determining level of budget and for securing funding and for determining priorities and allocations and the processes It is intended that in the next three to five years, a considerably more flexible approach to funding and budgeting in relation to the operation and improvement of the highways asset be developed. Since the PFI project will largely remove the need for such an approach, we will need to assess how far it is beneficial to move towards this objective in the next two to three years. The desired approach is described in Figure and embodies the following features: 1. Minimum levels of service and/or condition are defined for each asset component and each service delivered, derived both from the Council s objectives and from statutory requirements, and from risk assessments (The process of determining minimum and target service levels is described below). 2. Asset component and service-specific work programmes aimed at ensuring the maintenance of the minimum levels of service are compiled separately on an annual basis. 3. A unified Whole Asset Works 5 year prioritised works programme will be produced. Underpinning this programme is a model which allows improvements to the disparate asset components and associated services to be considered on a common basis, and for the benefits associated with improvements to be considered on a common basis. The exact nature of this model has yet to be developed, but it is likely that it will take into account factors such as: Risk Analysis, taking into account risks to service delivery and asset value as well as purely safety considerations Minimisation of Whole Life Costs Asset Value, including depreciation and condition considerations and Economic value of investments, so that lower-cost preventative treatments that mitigate against more costly future treatments are favoured. Page 61

63 The cost of potential investments Hard benefits, that can be expressed in financial or quantifiable terms, and Soft benefits that cannot be so expressed, but which are nonetheless important Political priorities and policies, and priorities determined by consultations with service users and stakeholders Location, including hierarchy designations Life cycle costs National Standards of Good Practice CAPITAL BUDGET Unified Programme (Whole Asset Options) Investment ramping up to improve overall value IMPROVE ASSET VALUE Annual Service Programme ( Do Minimum ) Level of expenditure varies according to changing conditions OUTCOME REVENUE BUDGET ASSET/SERVICE ASSET/SERVICE ASSET/SERVICE ACHIEVE MINIMUM LEVELS OF SERVICE YR 1 YR 2 YR 3 YR 4 YR 5 Figure The Unified Works Programme The unified works programming process will provide a single, prioritised 1 and 5 year investment programme with a means of evaluating investments in different asset components, in multicomponent schemes or in whole-asset schemes on a common basis, so that the most beneficial receive the highest priority. Since under the PFI project the service provider will be contractually required to both restore the condition and integrity of the asset over 5 years and to provide minimum levels of service, this is our preferred means of delivering such an approach. Not withstanding this, however, prior to the implementation of the PFI, we will make progress towards this objective in the shorter term, drawing upon the enhanced data and systems that are being made available through the development of the PFI and the associated reference project. A useful introduction to these concepts can be found in the book Road Version Maintenance 3 (2009) Management Concepts and Systems v Page 62

64 5.4 An Introduction to Lifecycle and Investment Planning The current maintenance practices in Streetcare Services could, to a large extent, be described as managing the lifecycle of each asset component. However, in common with most other Local Authorities, this has been done in the past in a way based on experience and largely without cross-reference between the different asset groups. The aspirations for future asset management in Hounslow, as described in the preceding sections of this Plan and in particular the concept of working towards target service levels, means that it is necessary to take a much more integrated and long-term view than previously. This, essentially, is what Lifecycle Planning is about. Lifecycle Planning recognises that there are key stages in the life cycle of each asset component and that there are options at each of these stages for the investment required. One objective is to ensure that each part of the asset achieves its full expected life, at minimum cost. The analysis of options using these criteria is what is generally known as Life Cycle Costing or Whole Life Costing, and many models for this exist in the Engineering industry including in the Highways sector but few are in use actively in Local Highway Authorities. Streetcare Services have set, as one of their aspirations, the introduction of Life Cycle Costing in Hounslow. Creation or Acquisition Disposal Routine Maintenance Upgrading Renewal or Replacement Figure The Generic Asset Life Cycle Page 63

65 The generic asset life cycle, that can be said to apply to all aspects of the Highway, is illustrated in Fig above. Generally, as identified in the CSS Framework (2004), these key stages involve the following interventions by the asset managers; Creation or Acquisition Routine Maintenance Renewal or Replacement Upgrading Disposal Build or purchase a new asset in response to one of three demands; New Development or Major Upgrading (see below) Capacity (new demands on the service) and Performance (to meet level of service targets) Carry out routine maintenance to maintain the asset in a serviceable condition. The definition of such performance standards is dealt with elsewhere in the HAMP but in the lifecycle management plan, the implications for each aspect of the asset and on the different road hierarchies will be explained. In many instances routine maintenance regimes are principally based on historical practices rather than identified needs. Asset management demands the explicit identification of need. Carry out work to return the asset to its as new capacity and condition. Renew or replace the whole asset, or elements of it, when routine maintenance alone cannot sustain the asset. Improve the asset, or part of it, above its original standard to meet future needs (a special case of Creation ) Decommission or demolish obsolete assets. In the case of Highways, roads themselves are rarely fully decommissioned; however individual asset components are constantly being decommissioned, and may or may not be replaced depending on current demand. As an illustration, three example asset components are given in the table below for carriageways, trees and street lights respectively. Lifecycle Stage Creation or Acquisition Example for Carriageways Provision of a new road as part of a new housing development. Example for Street Lights Provision of street lighting for a street where no lighting existed previously or as part of a newly- Example for Trees Provision of trees within a street. Page 64

66 Routine Maintenance Renewal or Replacement Upgrading Disposal Street cleansing. Replacement of the road surface. Improvement of the road surface to cater for heavier vehicles, for example if the road becomes part of a bus route. Removal of a redundant street as part a traffic scheme. (This happens rarely in practice) built or adopted street. Bulk changing of lanterns, cleaning or painting of columns. Replacement of columns in a street with those of a similar specification. Replacement of columns in a street with those of an improved specification. Removal of street lighting within a street. (This happens rarely, if ever, in practice) Annual, routine pruning Replacement of diseased or fallen trees. Replacement of a young tree with a mature specimen Felling and removal of trees within a length of street In this Asset Management Plan, Streetcare Services has set out its approach to each of these stages in the lifecycle of each of a series of key asset groups. Where existing practice already delivers a rational approach to the lifecycle maintenance requirements, there will be no need to change. However, it is recognised that in many areas of activity change will be inevitable. The changes needed are those identified through the gap analysis, and which form part of the Improvement Actions in section 8.2. In each of the following Lifecycle Management Plans, the specialist needs of that part of the asset, and the way that the level of service can be achieved, is set out. In each Plan it is recognised that there is almost never a single solution to achieving the desired objective. Therefore the evaluation of lifecycle costs will, in future, play a large part in deciding which option is the best in each set of circumstances to deliver minimum whole life cost solutions. In addition, the definition of desired service levels will be based on several criteria, based not solely on engineering but also social and environmental factors (see chapter 3), and will often cut across more than one asset group. In each Lifecycle Maintenance Plan, the methods that are used or will be used in future to monitor condition and levels of service are described. Page 65

67 The life-cycle plans describe the option appraisal and investment prioritisation process for each asset component, and cover the whole life-cycle: 1. Creation of the asset 2. Maintenance of the asset to maintain serviceability 3. Renewal of the asset to bring it back to as-new condition and to restore its value 4. Improvement of the asset to bring about improved performance 5. Disposal of the asset The plans also describe how service levels and condition are measured and monitored and how the interaction with the investment option appraisal process is managed, including any tools such as the Asset Investment Option Model that will support the process. As part of our 5 year asset management improvement programme we will be developing Option Appraisal processes for each of the main assets covered in life-cycle plans that will take into account the need to balance costs over the life-cycle of those assets and to deliver high-quality services General Approach to understanding the assets The knowledge of the asset inventory is an area of improvement within SCS identified in the Asset Management Plan, and the implications of this on each asset group are referred to in Lifecycle Management Plans. During the life of each asset component, key interventions in the form of maintenance or upgrading will be recorded. This is part of the data management regime that is proposed in section 6.6. Implementing this in practice, while straightforward, is known from past experience to create a number of institutional hurdles. However, it should be stressed that without this information being regularly and accurately recorded, the ability of the asset manager to fully adopt the Lifecycle Planning approach could be seriously hampered General Approach to Value Management as part of Lifecycle Planning In section 5.2 of this Plan the part of the overall asset management process concerned with option identification and evaluation is described, and the concept of Value Management (VM) is introduced. First developed by the Highways Agency in connection with large Motorway and Trunk Road schemes, VM is now being recommended as good practice for local authorities through Well iii Maintained Highways, the Code of Practice for Highway Improvement Action #14 We will develop and implement asset-specific option appraisal processes as part of the ongoing development of life-cycle plans. Well Maintained Highways (R12.3) states Value Management should be applied to highway maintenance schemes in order to balance priorities and improve value for money Page 66

68 Maintenance Management. Value Management is a step in the design process for maintenance schemes that identifies feasible options, identifies the benefits of each based on objective criteria, and facilitates the selection of the best value solution in each case. Generally, when designing scheme options it will be the policy of Streetcare Services to seek to: 1. Combine scheme options in different disciplines at the same location wherever possible This approach is likely to save traffic management costs, and minimise disruption to the travelling public and to reduce congestion and travel times, and to bring about environmental benefits. In the longer term, it should be possible to place an economic value on some of these parameters, thus enabling an objective total whole life cost to be calculated for each scheme option, whether singular or hybrid. Initially, SCS will give a preferential weighting to hybrid schemes in the value management and engineering process. 2. Extend scope of scheme options to include preventative maintenance where possible SCS will adopt the approach of examining the potential to extend the scope or scale of a scheme option at the design stage, as it may be more costs effective to carry out other preventative maintenance to other asset components at the same time. In addition, this would save traffic management costs, and minimise disruption to the travelling public in a similar way as a hybrid scheme. 3. Design for future ease of maintenance and minimisation of costs In order to minimise whole life-cycle costs, a true evaluation of routine and cyclic maintenance costs should be undertaken at the scheme option stage, something that is rarely done at present. A change is necessary in both the culture within the design teams and the specific local guidance notes (for example the Hounslow Street Scene Design Guide, the draft of which was submitted to TfL in February 2006 as part of the LIP) to ensure that designs and components are selected not just on initial cost, or purely aesthetic grounds, but on the basis of ease of access for repair or replacement in the event of damage, deterioration or end of service life. Improvement Action #15 We will develop and implement provisions to ensure the management of risk and liability as part of our value management processes. Page 67

69 4. Determine scheme options that reduce risk and potential liability As part of the value management process, we will assess risk, both in terms of the service levels and service delivery and to safety and potential liability of the Council. As part of this process we will introduce an audit trail of investment decisions. The first step in the process will be to consider the implications of the forthcoming document on claims reduction and highways liability, to be published by the Roads Board General Approach to Routine Maintenance Routine Maintenance regimes are currently largely based on historical practices. The opportunity will be taken to review these practices at regular intervals, to establish whether they still represent best value for money, and, importantly to adjust them such that they deliver the desired levels of service or outcomes stated in this Plan. The Highway Maintenance Plan addresses routine maintenance considerations. It is recognised that this may take some time, and is likely to be linked to procurement and contract specifications (see section 7.1) Investment implementation and review To support the HAMP and to allow the success of the HAMP to be appraised, a process of investment review will be developed, described in the asset component Lifecycle Management plans and in the HAMP with the following features: Improvement Action #16 We will design and implement a post-investment review process Benefits identification, management and review Capturing information post-implementation to inform future improvements to asset management processes, in particular reviewing actual costs, and review quality and specifications Information about the impact of investment on service levels and upon life-cycle and operating costs will also be captured. Page 68

70 Page 69

71 6. Decision Making and Management Processes 6.1. The Annual Highways Asset Management Process Figure describes the annual process to update the HAMP, encompassing: The setting of service level targets Determining works and investment programmes Customers and stakeholder consultation Council Member involvement Interaction with the Council s Business Planning Processes. The Council Management Team gives overall direction to SCS along with all other parts of the service, in the Hounslow Plan. In principle, the Street Management Departmental Plan is framed by the Executive Plan, and in turn the three Divisional Plans (Streetcare, Public Protection and Internal Services) contribute to the Departmental Plan. This represents a top-down approach to business planning. In practice, for this process to work smoothly, the release timings of the various Plans must be well coordinated. This is an issue that will be raised and dealt with through the existing management mechanisms. Business Plans are reviewed every 6 months, with business-critical performance indicators reviewed every quarter; it is proposed that the HAMP is updated on an annual basis. The Service Levels identified for Streetcare Services in the HAMP have been linked to the Executive Priorities, and thus provide an audit trail showing how the HAMP will address the Council s higher level objectives. Other Plans and Strategies are produced at regular intervals, which are complementary to the Business Plans, rather than superseding them. These include: Hounslow Community Plan The Hounslow Plan Borough Spending Plan (submitted to TfL annually) Street Tree Strategy (awaiting approval) Highways Enforcement Strategy (October 2004) Page 70

72 Highway Maintenance Policy (to be prepared in line with Well Maintained Highways) Local Implementation Plan (submitted to TfL in February 2006) Highways Management Strategy Removal of Client/Contractor Split (improvement plan under implementation) Benchmarking reviews of Client and internal service providers: o Highways (scheduled for May 2006) o Street Lighting (scheduled for May 2006) o Street Cleansing, Graffiti and Fly-posting (Completed January 2006, improvement plan now being implemented) Page 71

73 Annual HAMP Planning Process April <phase> May <phase> June July July <phase> August <phase> September <phase> October <phase> November <phase> December <phase> January <phase> February <phase> March Customers Residents Panel Residents Panel Residents Panel Residents Panel Members Scrutiny Panel and Area Committee Area Committee Council Executive Executive Business Plan LIP and (annual) Borough Spending Plan Budget Review Capital Revenue Budget Announced SMPP Department SMPP Business Plan Street Care Services Annual HAMP Review HAMP (Annual Revision) SCS Business Plan Develop Candidate Schemes and Options Value Management Annual HAMP Review Including Setting of Service Levels and Targets for Coming Year Finalise Works Programme Service Providors Condition Surveys and Performance Assessment Implementation of Works Programme Figure The Annual HAMP Planning Process Page 72

74 An essential difference between Asset Management and maintenance management is that, whereas the focus of maintenance management is on the infrastructure itself, the focus on Asset Management is on the service provided by the infrastructure. Asset management planning requires a structured, cyclical approach to the process of determining and monitoring target levels of service, and for setting a long-term, prioritised programme of investment in the asset, that take accounts of both desired levels of service and the need to minimise whole life costs of the asset and to maintain the value of the asset by maintaining an appropriate level of condition. Figure represents a structured view of the business planning cycle within the context of the HAMP. LBH, and Streetcare Services in particular, already has to a greater or lesser extent - many of the components of this business planning cycle in place Involvement of Stakeholders in the Highways Asset Management Planning At the highest level, Council policies and priorities inform and guide the service priorities for Streetcare Services. These were described in section 3.2. The road network is a shared resource and as such has a very large number of stakeholders interested in it they in turn shape these service priorities. A list of stakeholders was identified in the preparation of this Plan and is reproduced in table Stakeholders Users/Community (residents, businesses, cyclists, pedestrians, vehicle users, bus users) Transport providers (Network Rail, London Underground, British Waterways Board, Freight Hauliers) Councillors Officers/Staff Interest All outcomes Infrastructure, links Their own ward/locality, achieving political success, good stewardship of financial resources Good Practice, managing enquiries from the Public, Page 73

75 Investors/Developers Chief Executive/Finance Dept Residents Associations TfL, DfT, LoTAG, LoBEG, Road2000, ALG, GOL, ODPM Police & Emergency Services Highways Agency Schools & Disability Groups Environment Agency & DEFRA Professional Organisations Pressure Groups Neighbouring Boroughs Contractors & Utilities improving levels of service Good business environment, physical restrictions Better/clearer spending rationale To obtain more say in decisions on road improvements etc. Funding, Good Practice Public safety, access Interface access etc. Accessibility, safety, provision Assets maintained on their behalf Good Practice Various, anti-social activities Work scheduling at the boundaries, other local interface issues Works programmes, coordination, planning Table Stakeholders with an interest in the Highways Asset Management Plan As with any public service, there are many legal responsibilities and constraints placed upon Streetcare Services, particularly the requirements of the Highways Act 1980, New Roads and Street Works Act 1991, Traffic Management Act 2004 and the Clean Neighbourhoods and Environment Act The Business Plan sits at the heart of this, and must address how the sometimes conflicting priorities will be managed, within budget constraints, and what specific actions are planned for the year ahead. During the HAMP planning process, it was identified that there is scope for the Business Plan to be more effective in making an objective case for increases in funding to maintain or improve service outcomes. It is anticipated that the HAMP will provide the opportunity for improvements to this process by making explicit the links between levels of service, asset condition, asset value and decisions on levels of funding and budgetary allocation. Hence, as illustrated in Figure 6.2.1, the HAMP has the Business Plan at its centre, and is framed by external drivers, namely the demands and requirements of legal, corporate and stakeholder interests. Page 74

76 Stakeholder Interests Council Policies Legal Constraints Highways Asset Management Plan Service Priorities Monitor & Review Business Plan Identify Improvements and Risks Implement Works Set Targets Budgeting Figure Highways Asset Management Business Planning Cycle 6.3. Finance and budget considerations Financial planning in Hounslow Streetcare Services as in almost all areas of local government has historically been on an annual basis. The long-term planning approach implicit in the Asset Management Plan requires a review of the financial planning and budgeting cycle in order to explore options for: Longer term budget planning (3-5 years) Greater flexibility in moving monies between budget heads Creating a unified works budget and programme for crossasset investments Page 75

77 Is intended that there will be a move to a more flexible approach to financial planning over the life of the HAMP Improvement plan Organisational Structure and Resources A simplified view of the current organisation structure within Streetcare Services, and the context of Streetcare Services within the Council s Departmental structure, as part of Street Management and Public Protection, is shown in Appendix 3. The organisational structure within Streetcare Services is largely in line with the current service delivery mechanisms, although some activities do cut across the organisational boundaries such as inspections. Key staff involved in Highways and Street asset management have been identified, and there is good buy-in at senior and middle management level to the introduction of the HAMP. Several members of staff are engaged in academic courses related to Asset Management. In the process of developing the Plan, it was felt there was no major organisational barrier to its introduction. Staff training and development including staff appraisals (Performance Development Assessment, PDA) are linked to Business Plan targets. In the development of the Plan, members of staff were receptive to the concept of Asset Management and showed a willingness and intention to break down silos within the organisation. However, there will be a number of challenges to successful delivery of the Plan. Winning staff over to using new processes and models is one of these. Having the right resources, with requisite skills and experience, is also essential to successful delivery of the HAMP. Staff retention is therefore a risk to the project as it is imperative that existing knowledge and skills are made full use of, and ultimately handed on to newly appointed staff when the experienced practitioners retire. When considering the delivery of the HAMP, it was felt that the necessary experienced in-house resources were currently available to achieve this, provided that they are able to devote the necessary time to the tasks in the Improvement Plan. However, this situation will need to be continuously monitored. Page 76

78 6.5. Risk Management What is Risk Management? The process of risk management is widely applied in other asset sectors and has an important role to play in the management of highway assets as poorly managed assets are likely to create risks to the public and hence to the asset owner. It is important to recognise that risk management is more than just about safety and avoiding accidents but also includes business risks and the risk of failure to deliver an acceptable level of service to the customer. The Framework for Asset Management i (section 2.4.3) promotes the use of risk assessment, risk identification and risk analysis for UK road Effective risk management improves decision making at both a strategic and operational level, enabling organisations to allocate funding more effectively and providing greater transparency in the way decisions are made Within an Asset Management context, Risk Management ensures that: Causes of physical failures can be identified Levels of acceptable risk can be evaluated Critical risks are identified and managed Consequences of failure can be identified including loss of service Risks can be avoided or reduced Risks can rarely be eliminated altogether so risk management is about reducing the exposure of the organisation to risks Risk Management in Hounslow The way in which risk management contributes to the way we manage our highway assets in Hounslow is described in the individual Lifecycle Management Plans in Section 5.5. Risk to the achievement of service level targets will also be considered as part of the value management and investment evaluation processes supported by the Highways Asset Investment Option model. There are some common aspects to our risk management approach which is based on the three components of Risk Management; risk identification, risk analysis and risk reduction. Page 77

79 6.5.3 Risk Identification Risk identification is the formal recognition and documenting of events that have the potential to adversely affect our ability to deliver a quality service to our customers. There are different types of risk that all local authorities are faced with including: Safety Natural Events Physical Risks External Risks Internal & Corporate Risks Including the safety of both road users and the safety of those involved in delivering the service (e.g. road workers) and any resulting public liability claims. This predominately includes the weather and its effects and as such we have little or no real control over timing and impact. This includes risks where the physical failure of the asset could lead to failure. For example: The collapse of a structure Street-lighting failures Collapse of drains leading to flooding Includes risks associated with legislative and economic changes outside our direct control such as: Oil price rises affecting the cost of bituminous materials Dramatic increases in inflation increasing costs Changes to key pieces of legislation Changes in government policy Failure of external organisations to deliver services Includes the reliance on key personnel for service delivery, the potential loss of valuable information if systems fail, changes of policy within Hounslow resulting in changes in priority and funding etc Risk Analysis Risk analysis is a process by which we determine which events are the most critical to us and our ability to deliver the required level of service. Determining the level of risk involves: Determining the impact of the event occurring Considerations are likely to include: Loss of life, or injury Failure to meet statutory requirements Loss of revenue Repair costs Page 78

80 Determining the likelihood of the event occurring Third party losses Reduction in the service provided, e.g. reduction in the level of network availability if closures are required in order to undertake unplanned maintenance activities This will often be based on our experience but might also make use of other information if it exists such as: Numbers of claims Statistics for flood events Accident statistics Our intention is to develop a systematic process of risk analysis based on ranking the impact and likelihood of each risk event occurring based on a risk matrix approach as illustrated in the diagram below. This will provide us with a sound documented basis about the level of risk that we take on and therefore to identify the actions required to minimise existing risks to an acceptable level. The first step in the process will be to consider the implications of the forthcoming national guidance on claims reduction and highways liability, to be published by the Roads Board. Impact of Risk Occurring Low Medium High These are the most critical risks to manage Low Medium High Likelihood of Risk Occurring Figure Risk and Impact Other methods that we will consider include the development of a risk model that places a monetary value on the risks by pricing the consequence of failure. By doing this it then becomes possible to evaluate the cost benefit ratios of differing risk reduction actions. If developed this could be a useful tool to inform decision making and to set priorities for different investment options. Page 79

81 6.5.5 Risk Reduction The development of a more systematic approach to risk management will enable us to assess the cost of acceptance of a risk or to plan appropriate risk reduction actions. There are a number of actions that we can take to reduce risk including: Carrying out appropriate maintenance to reduce the likelihood of a physical failure occurring, for example by timely replacement of lighting columns Reducing the impact of a failure by producing appropriate contingency plans Insuring against the consequential loss A combination of the above Alternatively we can accept the risk and the consequential cost met should failure occur Ongoing Monitoring and Review Like all the processes that we are adopting as part of the management of our highway assets, the way we identify and manage risks will be subject to ongoing monitoring and review to identify opportunities for improvement. We anticipate that, by building on our existing experience of managing highway assets, the formal identification and analysis of risks and the documentation of appropriate actions to manage or mitigate those risks will become a routine task that runs through all aspects of our work and improves the way we do business Data Management and Information Systems Data management regime In the context of highway Asset Management, best practice in data management requires an organisation to: Recognise that data are an asset that are vital to the effective management of highway assets Have a clear understanding of what data are needed to manage its highway assets including required levels of quality and currency Clearly define responsibilities for collecting and maintaining those data Have clearly defined processes in place for the collection or creation; storage and retrieval; and archiving or deletion of data Examples of good Data Management practice may be found in Data Management for Road Administrations vi Page 80

82 Take a service-wide view to ensure that data are available to be shared and used by different parts of the organisation Minimise the collection and storage of redundant and duplicate data The main benefits to an organisation of effective data management are: Better data quality that enables more effective decision making Improved service delivery based on better and more timely information A better understanding of the data needs of the organisation makes it more responsive to change Cost savings through more efficient use of data and reduce the amount of duplicate or redundant data that are collected and stored Sharing of data and information will improve co-operative working and lead to more co-ordinated service provision Employees will be better equipped to take decisions A more detailed understanding of the data held by the organisation will enable faster and more cost effective system development A key part of the projects to specify and procure asset inventory and pavement condition surveys will be the design and implementation of good data management practices that are embedded within the procedures and processes. Moreover, as the Confirm asset management system develops as the primary systems supporting the HAMP, it will be necessary to design and implement a robust data management regime to ensure that an appropriate level of data quality currency and cost that meets the needs of users at an appropriate level of cost. Additionally, work to develop the Corporate GIS and an integrated asset management system will provide the opportunity to introduce good data management practices. Improvement Action #4. We will extend the good data management practices established for the asset inventory to all asset data Highways Asset Management Systems Steps have already been taken to adopt Confirm as the principal integrated highways asset management system in Streetcare Services, and whilst further development is required, early indications are that this system should meet most of the currently identified needs. The adoption of Confirm will provide the opportunity to address many of the requirements of the HAMP, particularly a more integrated approach to the management of the highways asset, but it may be necessary to develop further whole asset models and systems to support: Page 81

83 Whole asset investment appraisal and prioritisation and the unified works programme as described above Monitoring of performance in respect of service levels Systems to make data and functionality available across the whole asset GIS, Intranet Public-facing systems We have embarked on a project to implement Confirm as the primary asset management system for Streetcare Services. No system can be successful unless sufficient resources and time are allocated to its development, operation and upkeep. It is noted that some existing systems, particularly the GIS and street lighting systems are already delivering benefit, and have the potential to provide further value. However, resources will be an essential part of the successful implementation of Hounslow s asset management systems. Thames Water Key Accidents Surface Water - Paper Records ACCSTATS Paper Records Excel Spreadsheets Highways Law Enforcement Database Paper Records Paper Records LoBEG Bridgestation Sewers - Freestanding viewer & data Traffic Accident Traffic Regulation Data Orders Traffic Data Permits & Licensing Insurance Claims Safety Inspections Structures Drainage Streetlighting & Illuminated Signs Public Streetworks Inspections FLARE Customer Care enquires RESPOND Customer Care complaints Highway Network (GIS) Highway Network (Pavement Surveys) Highway Network (NSG level 3) CVI (non PR) Footways & Cycleways Streetworks Notices Highway Network (NSG level 1) Works Orders BVPIs TTS, SCRIM, Deflectograph (PR only) Aggresso Financial Information Corporate System POST Customer Care post Customer Care Corporate System trees CadCorp GIS Highway Network (Pavement Surveys) March UKPMS Customer Care NOT USED Confirm CVI (UC) LB H&F (ROAD2000) Symology Figure Current Highways Asset Systems Architecture Page 82

84 Key Accidents CadCorp GIS ACCSTATS Traffic Accident Data Highway Network (NSG level 3) Asset Inventory Paper Records Traffic Regulation Orders Confirm Asset Management System Excel Spreadsheets Highway Network Traffic Data Public Works Orders Asset Inventory Highways Law Enforcement Database Permits & Licensing FLARE Customer Care enquires RESPOND Customer Care complaints UKPMS Streetworks Notices Streetworks Inspections Insurance Claim Records Safety Inspection Records Defect Inspection Records Drainage Records Streetlighting & Illuminated Signs LoBEG Bridgestation Aggresso Financial Information Corporate System POST Customer Care post Customer Care Corporate System Principal Road Condition Surveys (ROAD2000) Symology Street Works Inspections Insurance Claim Inspections Safety Inspections Defect Inspections Figure Proposed Future Highways Asset Systems Architecture Page 83

85 7 Service Delivery 7.1. Procurement of Works and Services and Mechanisms for Future Service Delivery Although the implementation of Asset Management does not imply the use of any particular contractual or supply chain mechanism for the delivery of services, it is important that the current and future service delivery mechanisms do not present actual or potential barriers to the delivery of effective Asset Management. In order to implement Asset Management it will be necessary to review and possibly update such mechanisms to ensure that: They support holistic service delivery focusing on value for money They are sufficiently flexible to allow funds to be re-directed towards where there is greatest need or priority. Contracts should support allocation of funds based upon need, rather than merely encouraging spending budgets in full They allow for different options and specifications for maintenance and upgrading Any data supply and maintenance requirements are built into contracts (for example where works take place to upgrade the asset, information is fed back to allow the asset register to be updated) Suppliers commercial needs are aligned with what is best for the asset Within LBH some aspects of service delivery are already focussed holistically on the full asset, e.g. Street Enhancement Schemes. The delivery of maintenance and improvements on the Highway is currently achieved through a combination of in-house and externalised contracts (summarised in table below). With the exception of Street Trees and Horticulture, no major changes are currently underway. However, there is an ongoing review of the client/contractor relationship taking place with regards to the DLO, Environmental Direct Services (EDS). The strategic review will streamline the service delivery in accordance with a revised outcome based service level agreement, implemented in October Page 84

86 Service Area Street Cleansing, Fly-Posting and Graffiti Removal Tree Maintenance Drainage Bridges Street Lighting Capital Works Road Maintenance Footway Maintenance Winter Maintenance Contract Arrangements internal (EDS) being externalised contracted out (most activities) contracted out internal (EDS) external contracts (e.g. resurfacing & footway recon 2 yr + 1yr ext) internal (EDS) internal (EDS)/external mix internal (EDS) Table Current Service Delivery Mechanisms In order to deliver a more flexible, service-wide approach to the management of highway assets, it is likely to be necessary to consider introducing greater flexibility into the way in which services are delivered. This may require greater flexibility and skills transfer amongst Streetcare Services staff and possibly the consideration of innovative approaches to the procurement of services. Streetcare Services are in the process of reviewing contractual and procurement arrangements for delivering services related to the installation, improvement, maintenance and operation of the highways asset. As contracts are reviewed and re-tendered, the needs of highways Asset Management will be taken into account, in particular to ensure that contracts: are sufficiently flexible to support Asset Management provide for a range of appropriate treatment and improvement options support a whole asset are consistent with a longer term, unified works programme are consistent with allocation based upon need rather than encouraging spending of budgets We intend to adopt the new Engineering Contract, 3 rd edition as our standard form of contract. In the longer term, we have been successful in securing government approval for a highways Private Finance Initiatives (PFI) project, in order to ensure long-term investment in the Improvement #18 Action We will investigate possible longer term funding, procurement and service delivery mechanisms, such as Public-Private Partnerships (PPP) and Private Finance Initiatives (PFI). Completed Page 85

87 highway network. It is intended that this project will commence in Benchmarking the Services Benchmarking against similar organisations is encouraged as part of Best Value and is useful when identifying improvements. In order to demonstrate value for money from current contractual mechanisms for service delivery, and to identify areas for improvement, a number of recent benchmarking exercises have been undertaken with the following objectives: To undertake a benchmarking exercise, and establish the effectiveness and value for money being achieved by the Highways DLO under the new contract. To establish whether the service provided by the Highways DLO under the new contract has improved from that provided under the old contract. To undertake a benchmarking exercise to establish the effectiveness of the Highways Service Client organisation in undertaking both its highways duties and responsibilities, and in the management of the contract with the Highways DLO. To undertake a benchmarking exercise, and establish the effectiveness and value for money being achieved by the Street Lighting service. The Street Cleansing, Graffiti and Fly-posting benchmarking exercise was completed in January 2006, and an improvement plan is now being implemented. Improvement #19 Action We will carry out a benchmarking exercise on the delivery of Highway Maintenance services, by both Client and Contractor, in order to demonstrate value for money from current contractual mechanisms for service delivery, and to identify areas for improvement. Completed Page 86

88 8 Implementation of the Highways Asset Management Plan 8.1. Implementing Asset Management within LB Hounslow Our Version 1 HAMP for 2006/07 was only the first step to the full implementation of good asset management practices for our highways network; it is recognised that there will be both an annual process of asset management and a programme of development and implementation, based upon the improvement actions identified throughout this document. Improvement Action #20 We will submit the HAMP to Peer review by TfL as part of the annual HAMP Review Process The highways Asset Management business planning cycle described in figure 6.2.1, shows that the process should include regular review, both of individual investment schemes and of the operation of the HAMP as a whole, as part of a process of continuous improvement to consider whether: Desired levels of service are being achieved Anticipated costs are accurate The value of the asset is being maintained Option appraisal is being meaningfully applied Future projections are realistic Service level standards are appropriate As part of this review process this version of the HAMP is being submitted to Transport for London for peer review. Whilst post-implementation review is currently being undertaken in an ad-hoc way on some investment schemes, a much more extensive, formal process is required as part of the HAMP. Page 87

89 Figure Asset Management Continuous Improvement Cycle 8.2. Improvement Actions Hounslow s first HAMP, for 2006/07 was not a description of complete, well developed asset management processes; it was a commitment to the development of such processes. Central to this commitment is the improvement plan, which sets out a series of actions over the next five years for the full development and adoption of asset management for our highway network. Each year s annual review and revision of the HAMP includes an updated improvement programme, and will report upon progress towards the full development and implementation of the HAMP. The process that was undertaken to develop this improvement programme is outlined in figure below. Having carried out a review of current processes to identify our current state in respect of highways asset management, we then assessed our desired state, drawing upon good practice and national guidance, as well as on local priorities and policies in order to identify gaps in our asset management processes. We were then able to identify improvement actions to address those gaps, assign priorities to these actions, and to draw up our 5-year highways asset management improvement plan. Page 88

90 Current State Now Strategy Processes Culture & Organisation Finance & Budgeting Data & Systems Improvement Plan Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Desired State Next Three - Five Years Revised Goals/Outcomes Improved Processes Changed Culture & Organisation Long-term Financial Planning Integrated Data & Systems Plan annually revised/updated HAMP/TAMP Mgmnt of Assets in Year 1 Year 1 of Improvements Year 1 Bid/Budget Ongoing Lifecycle Maintenance Yr 2 Year 3 improvements etc. Improvements Long term budgeting Work Programme Yr 1 5 Year Rolling Programme Figure The HAMP Improvement Plan The improvement actions identified for our HAMP over the next 5 years are described and highlighted throughout this document and are set out in the tables below, and have been updated from the first version of the HAMP, both to reflect progress and changes in priority. No HAMP Section Ref and Improvement Action Procurement and implementation of a full-asset inventory and Asset Register Establish a Single, Definitive highway network referencing model, together with associated processes to maintain that network and ensure that all Highways Asset systems and data sets make use of that networks Establishment of a Data Management Regime for the Asset Inventory Timescale (Year 1 = Implementation plan, Years 2-5 = Improvement Plan) Year 1 (2006/07) Year 1-5 (2006/07 on) Year 1-5 (2006/07 on) Responsibility Environmental Projects Systems Administrator and GIS Team Asset Management Steering Group Notes Completed Partially Completed; being further refined to support the PFI Project Partially Complete We will extend the good data management practices established for the asset inventory to all asset data We will undertake an interim, pilot asset valuation in April 2006, drawing upon the data collected in the pilot inventory survey We will carry out a full, depreciated benchmark asset valuation in, making use of the full asset inventory. Year 5 (2010/11) Year 1 (2006/07) Year 4 (2009/10) Asset Management Steering Group Environmental Projects Asset Management Steering Group Completed Pending national guidance Page 89

91 No HAMP Section Ref Improvement Action We will implement mechanisms to allow ongoing changes in asset value to be calculated and reported on an annual basis Following the implementation of the Asset Inventory and Register, we will, as appropriate, make data available to stakeholders and customers though the Intranet and Council web set, using the Confirm system and Mapping tools where appropriate Implementation of the Confirm System as the principle integrated asset management system within Streetcare Services Development and integration of Asset Data systems We will review and update service levels and associated performance measures and targets as part of an annual HAMP review process Development and implementation of the 3-level Asset Investment Value Management process We will implement more flexible budgetary processes and a long term works programme for all asset investments We will develop and implement assetspecific option appraisal processes as part of the ongoing development of life-cycle plans We will develop and implement provisions to ensure the management of risk and liability as part of our value management processes, and will assess and implement national guidance on Highways Liability Claims We will design and implement a postinvestment review process We will review financial processes for highways asset investment with the aim of introducing a more flexible approach We will investigate possible longer term funding, procurement and service delivery mechanisms, such as Public-Private Partnerships (PPP) and Private Finance Initiatives (PFI) We will carry out a benchmarking exercise on the delivery of Highway Maintenance services, by both Client and Contractor, in order to demonstrate value for money from current contractual mechanisms for service delivery, and to identify areas for improvement We will submit the HAMP to Peer review by TfL as part of the annual HAMP Review Process Asset Management Training and Education Programme We will update Job Descriptions to reflect the requirements of Asset Management Timescale (Year 1 = Implementation plan, Years 2-5 = Improvement Plan) Year 5 (2010/11) Responsibility Asset Management Steering Group Notes Pending National Guidance Years 3-5 (2008/09-10/11) GIS Team In progress Years 1-5 ( ) Years 2-5 (2007/08-10/11) Years 2-5 (2007/08-10/11) Year 1-2 (2006/07-07/08) Year 3 (2008/09) Years 2-5 (2007/08-10/11) Years 2-5 (2007/08-10/11) Year 5 (2010/11) Year 2 (2007/08) Year 1 (2006/07) Year 1 (2006/07) Years 2-5 (2007/08-10/11) Year 1-3 (2006/07-9/10) Year 1 (2006/07) Highway Network and Maintenance Asset Management Steering Group Asset Management Steering Group Asset Management Steering Group Finance Asset Owners Asset Management Steering Group Asset Management Steering Group Finance Asset Management Steering Group Highway Network and Maintenance Asset Management Steering Group Asset Management Steering Group Asset Management Steering Group In progress In progress Replaced with PFI performance measures No longer required in the light of the PFI Project Unlikely to be required, the light of the PFI Project Unlikely to be required, the light of the PFI Project In Progress Unlikely to be required, the light of the PFI Project Completed. PFI Project now being developed. Completed Completed Completed Page 90

92 No HAMP Section Ref Improvement Action We will undertake a Closing the Perception Gap initiative, in order to ensure that customers have realistic expectations of level and quality of service that they can expect of the highways asset We will implement the Borough Tree Timescale (Year 1 = Implementation plan, Years 2-5 = Improvement Plan) Year 3-5 ( ) Year 1 (2006/07) Strategy We will produce Highways Design Guide manual. Year 1 (2006/07) We will develop and implement a performance reporting framework based upon our highways asset management service levels Carriageway s LMP Carriageway LCP We will implement tools that will allow the whole-life cost implications of highway maintenance and improvement options to be assessed. We will implement more robust models for the calculation of maintenance backlog, linked to the calculation of asset depreciation, as part of asset valuation. This model will include a predictive capability, to allow the future implications of possible budgetary scenarios to be assessed. Year 1 (2006/07) Year 2-4( 2006/07) Year 2-4( ) Table The HAMP Improvement Programme Responsibility Asset Management Steering Group Asset Management Steering Group Asset Management Steering Group Asset Management Steering Group Highway Network and Maintenance Highway Network and Maintenance Notes Being progressed as part of the Highways PFI Communications Strategy Completed Completed. To be updated to support PFI Project Replaced by the PFI Project performance reporting mechanism Unlikely to be required, the light of the PFI Project Being developed as part of the models to support the PFI Project Page 91

93 Page 92

94 9 Communication, Monitoring and Reporting 9.1. Internal Management and Delivery of the HAMP One of the key challenges of Asset Management is the introduction of a holistic approach to the delivery of services that removes organisational silos and promotes integration of processes, information and systems. This leads to a more efficient way of working by removing duplicate and redundant processes and by service-wide decision-making, but will also require changes to the working culture to engender greater co-operation and flexibility amongst staff. In order to ensure the successful adoption of highways asset management, we have been proactive in informing staff and involving them in the process. An asset management steering group has been established to produce the HAMP and to manage implementation, comprising those with responsibility for all the major highways assets under the direction of the Head of Streetcare Services, who has overall responsibility for asset management. Senior management have been involved at key points and have been fully supportive of the process, and are keen to see the potential benefits realised. Improvement Action #21 Asset Management Training programme Completed Improvement Action #22 Update Job Descriptions to reflect the requirements of Highways Asset Management A programme of training and education in good asset management practices has been set up. This includes releasing staff for training and education in asset and infrastructure management as part of their professional development, and seminars to inform a wider range of participants, including interested external parties, about asset management and about Hounslow s progress and intentions. It is intended that the HAMP, as it develops, will be a key reference document to all of those involved in management of service delivery on the highway network. It will be made available both as a printed document and through the Council intranet Communication and Consultation with Stakeholders Levels of Service that underpin the HAMP must be based upon a good understanding of Stakeholder and customer priorities and expectations, and essential to the success of the HAMP are effective mechanisms to communicate service standards and outcomes and to manage customer expectations. Page 93

95 The intention is that the HAMP will include a set of service levels for all services and asset components that have associated measures that address relevant outcomes. Ideally these measures should address both customer perception of the success in meeting those desired outcomes and objective measures of actual performance in these respects. The definition of service levels and the models used in assessment of the service levels and other factors to determine priorities for asset investment should be founded upon good-quality information as to views, expectation and priorities of stakeholders and customers. The levels of service that are to be expected by customers, and the reasoning for prioritising some asset components and levels of service over others should be clearly communicated to Members and customers; by making the link between level of investment, level of condition and level of service provided explicit the HAMP should, if it is effective make such communication simpler. Both of the above require the adoption of a new, explicit and repeatable method for determining outcome-based levels of service. Determining and monitoring customer aspirations is going to be a vital element of the implementation of Hounslow s HAMP. It is envisaged that the methods used for acquiring this information, described above, will be used again in the future, revised and augmented as the understanding of Asset Management develops. While there is a need for continuity in the questions being asked, to enable trends, changes in attitude and success in achieving objectives to be monitored, there will also be a need to develop new approaches to understanding customer aspirations. Improvement Action #23 We will undertake a Closing the Perception Gap initiative, in order to ensure that customers have realistic expectations of level and quality of service that they can expect of the highways asset. Timescale: Year Consultation Questionnaire To support the development of the HAMP, a specific questionnaire survey was commissioned by Streetcare Services, through the local HM Magazine, in July Page 94

96 Appendix 4 describes the results of the questionnaire in detail; the key features are: Quick method to get feedback for the HAMP Inserted a 1-page questionnaire in HM magazine Circulation 98,000 Response by post 348 (0.36%) Positives o Gave indication of relative priorities o Statistically benchmarked against population Negatives o Self-selecting sample o Limited scope of questions It is intended that the questionnaire will be carried out on an annual basis and the results used to inform the setting of priorities for service levels and investment as part of the annual review of the HAMP. The results of the 2005 Residents Panel survey will be used to complement the findings of the questionnaire, and the proposed annual asset management processes will include mechanisms for input from both sources in setting priorities and in reviewing and updating the HAMP. For the future, in order to support the PFI project, in addition to support Asset Management within SCS, a improved consultation Page 95

97 mechanisms are being developed, including the use of the residents panel. These will be included in the communications strategy for the PFI Project Performance Monitoring What is Performance Monitoring? As described in section 4, there are a number of requirements for monitoring the performance of Hounslow Streetcare Services including: LAA National Performance Framework Indicators Local Transport Plan Indicators Benchmarking and market analysis Data Collection A large amount of data is needed to support all of the Performance Measures and the national Framework for Asset Management recommends that, where possible: Data is gathered as an integral part of carrying out the work, rather than as a separate task Data is collected by the people who need it to make decisions As far as possible we have designed Performance Measures to make use of readily available data but, where this has not been possible, we will review our processes and systems to ensure that the provision of data to support Performance Monitoring becomes integral to our operations and that existing data is easily accessible Performance Reporting Once we have produced our performance measures, we must report our performance both within the Council and to our customers. As part of our implementation of Asset Management, we will confirm our performance reporting requirements. In accordance with the national Framework for Asset Management, we will aim to introduce a reporting framework that: Shows the alignment between the measures and the outcomes/strategic goals Reflects a balance between competing demands Presents only information that the audience requires Keeps the number of measures to a manageable level Page 96

98 As part of the development of this reporting framework, we will also consider the most appropriate frequency of reporting, given the recommendations for data collection set out above. Again, the national Framework for Asset Management identified the following options: Monthly, Quarterly and 6-Monthly performance statistics from established management systems Annual The availability of some data may limit its use to annual reviews Random Auditing this might take the form of customer satisfaction surveys, sample inspections etc. Other options may also exist. We will consult with our internal stakeholders to determine the most appropriate reporting frequency. Page 97

99 References Framework for Highway Asset Management, 2004 published by CSS and endorsed by the Department for Transport, London Technical Advisors Group (LoTAG), the UK Roads Board and other groups. GIS Geographic Information System, allows data to presented, interacted with and analyses using maps and co-ordinate referencing iii Well Maintained Highways, 2005, published by UK Roads Liaison Group iv Guidance Document for Highway Infrastructure Asset Valuation, July 2005 published by CSS/TAG Asset Management Working Group. v Road Maintenance Management Concepts and Systems, by Robinson, Danielson & Snaith, 1998, Macmillan, ISBN vi Data Management for Road Administrations, A Best Practice Guide, WERD SubGroup Road Data, 2003 Page 98

100 Appendices Page 99

101 Appendix 1 Summary of Current Highways Asset Data and Systems Data System Coverage Reliability Rating Highway Network (Pavement MARCH (copy in High 1 High High Surveys) MapInfo) Highway Network (NSG) (2 copies) Confirm (copy in High High High MapInfo) Highway Network (GIS) MapInfo High High High Footways and Cycleways MARCH High High High SCANNER (PR only) H&F Confirm High High High SCANNER (Non-PR classified) H&F Confirm High High High DVI (unclassified local roads) MARCH High High High Safety Inspections Paper records High Medium Medium SCRIM (PR only) H&F Confirm High High High Inventory (exc. Street lights and Trees) Construction (Surface Type only) GIS/Confirm High High High Being collected to support PFI Vehicular Traffic 1 Spreadsheets N/A 3 Pedestrian Traffic 1 Spreadsheets N/A 3 High High High Structures (Register) Bridgestation/ LOBEG High High High Structures (Condition Indices) Bridgestation/ LOBEG High High High Surface Water Drainage Paper records Low Sewers Thames Water High Medium Medium Customer Care (Enquiries) FLARE N/A 3 Customer Care (Complaints) RESPOND N/A 3 Customer Care (Post) POST N/A 3 Streetworks Notices Confirm High High High Streetworks Inspections Confirm High High High Streetlights and Illuminated Signs Confirm High High High Road Traffic Accident 1 ACCSTATS/ Key Accidents N/A 3 Trees MapInfo High High High High-level Summary of Current Asset Data 1- excludes unadopted and private streets. 2 - not currently part of Streetcare Services 3 not assessed as not a Streetcare Services system 4 except trail data loaded to Confirm Page 100

102 Appendix 2 - Terminology and Glossary Asset Management Term The Asset Asset Group Asset Components Delivery Groupings Gap Analysis Improvement Plan Improvement Programme Option Identification Definition The entire extent of the Highway, from boundary to boundary, and including all physical infrastructure that is owned and/or maintained by LBH Streetcare Services An ad-hoc grouping of asset components, linked for management and reporting purposes in the HAMP (note that this may not be the same as the Delivery Grouping) A discrete type of asset infrastructure that comprises the Asset (e.g. street lighting, drainage, carriageway and footway pavements, signs, markings etc. A logical grouping of services for the purpose of planning effective delivery of maintenance and operation to meet current objectives (note that these groupings may affect different asset components and may change from time to time depending on the policy objectives) The process of identifying differences ( gaps ) in performance or processes between the current and desired states. The plan of action identified to bring the Authority s levels of service, including condition of the assets, and processes, up to the Desired standard(s) The sequence and priority of tasks identified to deliver the Improvement Plan (generally focussed on a one year look ahead, but also with key longer-term milestones included within it. The process of identifying delivery options (including maintenance and operation, and rehabilitation and construction schemes) to achieve a given objective expressed in terms of addressing the gap between existing and desired level of service or condition Page 101

103 Appendix 3 - Organisation Chart LBH Streetcare Services Department Environment Divisions Public Realm Regulatory & Development Services Leisure Spatial (or Sustainable) Planning Corporate Property & Project Coordination Business Support Streetcare Traffic Management / Road Safety Parking Mangement and Enforcement Waste Management Highway Network Maintenance, Operations & Improvements Environmental & Special Projects Community Environment Highways PFI Project Highway Network Maintenance/ Improvements Highway Network Operations Highway Licensing & Risk Management Bridges & Structures Asset Systems & General Administration Improvements to Mobility through Accessibility and Movement. Project management Holistic Street Enhancement Scheme Delivery Street Lighting Water Courses & Drainage General Administration Clean, Greener, Safer Issues and Enforcement Litter & Street Cleansing Nuisance Vehicle Service Tree Management Service Grounds Maintenance Service General Administration Page 102

104 Appendix 4 - Report on HM Magazine Highways Asset Management Customer Perception Questionnaire Introduction This report summarises the results of a customer consultation exercise commissioned by Hounslow Streetcare Services in July 2005, and carried out by Chris Britton Consultancy Ltd in conjunction with ongoing work on Hounslow s Highways Asset Management Plan, HAMP. The objective of the exercise was to obtain some broad feedback on the priorities for the different sectors of the local community in respect of the service they receive from the local street network. This touches upon issues of design, maintenance and operation of these important assets, and the interests of different users, and different types of locality. The intention is to make use of the results in the asset management process, for example in the setting of desired service levels, and this will be reported on in the HAMP. Approach and Design of Questionnaire The mechanism for the questionnaire selected by Street Care Services was to use a one-page advertisement feature in the local HM Magazine. This is circulated to all homes and businesses in the Borough, so has a good market penetration in the customer base required. Other factors in selecting this method were (a) cost and (b) timescales. However, it is acknowledged that this approach has some drawbacks; in particular, the sample is self-selecting and so may show some bias, and the space available limited the extent of the questions. The criteria we adopted for the design of the questionnaire were; To obtain the maximum range of information from the minimum number of questions (the limitation of space meant that only 2/3 of the page was available, allowing only 4 questions to be fitted in, along with respondent information) To capture sufficient respondent information to enable correlations of results with key location and user interest categories To design questions to be as unambiguous and simple as possible to allow the maximum response rate and accuracy As an incentive to returning questionnaires, and to the completion of the respondent s address details, a small cash prize was offered (to be drawn from completed questionnaires received by the deadline of 6 th July 2005). Page 103

105 Responses A copy of the published questionnaire is shown in the Annex to this report. A total of 348 questionnaires were received in response to this survey, equivalent to 0.36% of HM s 98,000 circulation. Of the 348 responses, 58 were either partially or entirely misinterpreted, making the results of at least one, and more often 3 questions invalid. The invalid questionnaires mainly had the ranking questions (1, 2 and 4) misinterpreted, whilst only 4 people misinterpreted question 3. The 58 questionnaires with missing results represent 16.7% of the sample. The work section of question 4 was filled in rarely, as many respondents did not work in the borough so left the section out. 125 people did fill it in however, making the results still suitable for analysis. One other factor to consider in the results of question 4 is that many respondents duplicated their scores for all 3 sections, possibly reflecting personal views, but potentially being unrepresentative of opinion. The age range of the sample showed a slight bias toward the higher age brackets compared to the census population, but perhaps not as much as had been anticipated: Age 14 and Under 15 to to to and over 0.58% 21.87% 22.16% 20.12% 35.28% Figure 1: Age of Sample The important factor when analysing using age is that all sectors, except the 14 and under sector, are well represented with a large number of respondents, so that results will be significant, unlike if very Page 104

106 small numbers from certain age categories had arisen. When the age range was compared with the statistics published for Hounslow s population 7 some differences became clear. The first step in finding meaningful differences was to discount the 14 and under age category from the census data, as the number received in the sample of the age was so low as to be insignificant. This gave a comparison of the adult population in Hounslow, against the adult respondent samples. Table 1: Population comparison Age Hounslow population Sample age structure % 22.2% % 35.3% % 20.1% % 21.9% As the sample respondents consisted more of the 60+ age groupings as opposed to the bias actual population, the results are not representative of a realistic subset of the Hounslow population. This is expected in a questionnaire of this kind, as it is a self selecting sample, with those with the most time to respond replying, in effect the older and retired population are more likely to have the time to respond to the questionnaire, so make up the majority of the sample. This problem was dealt with later on when the results were weighted. There is also an element of natural bias to the sample, as those who are most likely to respond are those with extreme views. This includes people with bad experiences of street management, such as those who have had roadworks outside their house, or experienced a deteriorating street scene. Therefore, the sample may have a bias towards those who have particularly bad experiences, whilst the majority, who may not have a negative view, will not feel strongly enough to respond. This is shown in the notes occasionally written on the questionnaires relating to specific issues that people were concerned about. The sample consisted of 323 people with a permanent home in the borough, whilst only 89 worked in the borough. This gives more precedence to the live results rather than the work results in question % of the sample did not provide a postcode, but the significant majority did, and the postcodes entered could be analysed further as an extension to the study, providing detailed information on the geographical distribution of the sample census,ness geography hierarchy Page 105

107 The respondent information graph shown below indicates the travel tendencies of the sample, with more classifying themselves as regular pedestrians rather than regular car users. This may not be representative of the population of Hounslow, especially considering that 56.3% of the working population in Hounslow travel to work by car, 8 and could affect the results of the questionnaire. Whilst the results show a similar, 54.5%, amount of car users, the level of regular pedestrians, 67.4%, may be slightly higher than that of the total population. 13.8% were regular cyclists, with 51.6% saying that they were regular bus users, which again may show a higher bus than the population, representing the higher age level of the sample, who traditionally are more frequent bus users. 14.7% said that they had mobility difficulties, providing a significant enough percentage to draw conclusions from. Compared with given statistics for the Hounslow population, this is high, but there is a lack of harmonisation. In Hounslow Borough, 4% claim disability living allowance, which is provided for people under 65, who are disabled, and need help with personal care and/or getting around 8www.statistics.gov.uk 2001 census,ness geography hierarchy Page 106

108 However, this figure represents only those under 65, whilst half of the respondents who said they had mobility difficulties were over 70. It also only includes those who are receiving benefits because of their mobility difficulties; many may continue working or classify themselves as having difficulties without needing to claim benefits. Overall, it is hard to make a firm conclusion on whether or not the population with No. of Respondents Has Permanent home in Borough Works in Borough Regular Car User Regular Regular Pedestrian Cycle User Regular Bus User Has Mobility Difficulties mobility difficulties is representative, but it is large enough to be significant. Figure 2: Respondent Information Graph Analysis of Results The questionnaire surveyed the views on a number of different issues relating to street asset management, and in particular the priorities of the public in both spending and street or works qualities. To collate the Page 107

109 results, they were entered into the statistics software SPSS , with questions 1,2 and 4 entered as ranked scores, and question 3 as 1 or 0, representing a tick or blank box. The respondent information was entered as 1 or 0 similarly, and the age was entered on a scale from 1 to 5, 1 being 14 and under, 5 being 70+. Once the data was entered, it could then be analysed, but with 1 being representative of the highest score the graphs and statistics would use a low mean showing a higher level of importance. This is not ideal for analysis, so the data was transformed in other columns to invert it, thus giving a higher mean being representative of a higher level of importance. This did not in any way alter the results, merely made them easier to analyse. The first question asked What qualities should Hounslow s streets have? and was answered using a ranking from 1 to 8. This was then entered, and inverted to produce mean scores for each option, with a higher mean representing a higher level of importance to the respondent Mean level of importance Safe for pedestrians Safe for cyclists Quick, reliable car journeys Quick,reliable bus and taxi journeys Good signage and information Safe and easy parking Attractive Reliability for street journeys in environment all weather Figure 3: Graph showing relative importance of different qualities Page 108

110 As the figure 3 shows, the customers valued Safe for pedestrians to walk and cross streets as being the most important quality Hounslow s streets should have. The result for this category was exceptionally high, with it having a mean rating of 2. Quick reliable bus and taxi journeys was the next most important quality, with the other categories fairly similar in their means. The result for the quick and reliable car journeys was lower than expected, the sample showing a distinct tendency against cars, and in favour of other means of transport. When these results were plotted against the age of respondents, some other trends became clear. Mean level of importance Safe for pedestrians Safe for cyclists Quick, reliable car journeys Quick,reliable bus and taxi journeys Good signage and information Safe and easy parking Attractive street environment Reliability for journeys in all weather to to to and over Age Figure 4: Graph showing importance against age The mean for Quick reliable bus and taxi journeys increased evenly with age, as expected showing a higher importance for older people in bus and taxi s as methods of transport, and the safe for pedestrians mean also increases with age. Also as expected, cycling is more Page 109

111 important to younger people. One other interesting correlation is for Attractive street environment as the mean for that category decreases with age. Figure 5 shows how the importance of qualities changed for car users and non car users. The patterns shown were as predicted, with car journeys and easy parking more important to car users, and pedestrian and bus and taxi journeys less important. This correspondence with expected results adds credence to the data, making it more likely that questions have been filled in to actual beliefs and views. Mean level of importance Safe for pedestrians Safe for cyclists Quick, reliable car journeys Quick,reliable bus and taxi journeys Good signage and information Safe and easy parking Attractive street environment Reliability for journeys in all weather No Yes Regular Car User Figure 5: Graph showing importance of qualities to car users Page 110

112 Mean level of importance Safe for pedestrians Safe for cyclists Quick, reliable car journeys Quick,reliable bus and taxi journeys Good signage and information Safe and easy parking Attractive street environment Reliability for journeys in all weather No Figure 6: Graph showing importance of qualities to those with mobility difficulties Those with mobility difficulties gave similar means when analysed, reliability for journeys in all weather, and Bus and Taxi Journeys being slightly higher for those with mobility difficulties. Question 2 asked In your opinion what priorities should we be spending your money on? and was answered in the same way as question one, with answers ranked from 1 to 8.. This was then entered, and inverted to produce mean scores for each option, with a higher mean representing a higher level of importance to the respondent. The graph below shows the mean level of importance for the different categories, with Making the streets feel safer and Making the streets cleaner the 2 most important priorities for spending. Using high quality materials and making the streets greener are also important for spending, but the car related categories, Making car travel easier and Making parking easier are the least valued priorities, continuing the trend from question 1 in favour of non car travel. Yes Has Mobility Difficulties Page 111

113 Mean level of importance High quality materials Look of street scene Making the streets "greener" Making streets cleaner Figure 7: Graph showing priorities for spending Making car travel easier Making travel easier for non-car users Making the streets feel safer Making parking easier The priorities for spending (below) for pedestrians show the expected trend in that the mean scores for Making car travel easier and Making parking easier are much lower for pedestrians. The other values are very similar, however, with making the streets greener and cleaner being slightly higher. Page 112

114 Mean High quality materials Look of street scene Making the streets "greener" Making streets cleaner Making car travel easier Making travel easier for non-car users Making the streets feel safer Making parking easier No Regular Pedestrian Yes Figure 8: Graph showing priorities for spending for pedestrians The graph for priorities of cyclists shows a high priority for travel of non car users as expected, whilst also showing a decrease in car user priority. The means for high quality materials, look of the street scene and making the streets greener have all risen, reflective of cyclists placing more value in the street scene and materials than other users. Page 113

115 Mean level of importance High quality materials Look of street scene Making the streets "greener" Making streets cleaner Making car travel easier Making travel easier for non-car users Making the streets feel safer Making parking easier No Yes Regular Cycle User Figure 9: Graph showing priorities for spending for cyclists In question 3 respondents were asked the 3 most important factors when major works to roads and footways take place. This was recorded using 1 to represent one of the 3 ticks, and all others were 0. This gave a total sum for each option, reflecting how many people chose it as being important. The graph below shows the sum and percentage of total in a pie chart. Page 114

116 Money is well spent Works take place at the same time Works take place at night Works take place as quickly as possible Traffic is kept flowing Workforce is courteous and considerate Good information provided Figure 10: Graph-most important factors during works The pie chart shows that the most customers chose Money is well spent as an important factor, with Works take place as quickly as possible also important. Traffic being kept flowing is the next most important factor, with the workforce being courteous and considerate not being much of a factor to the customers. The main priorities during roadworks therefore are that they are necessary, take place quickly and with little impact as possible. Question 4 explored the differing priorities between the areas where respondents live, work and shop. This was achieved by asking a ranking based question, with different rankings for each area. The rankings went from 1 (highest) to 9 (lowest) and were then inverted for analysis. A higher mean represents an area were the customer believes money should be spent. Below are the 3 basic graphs depicting the mean for each category, for the live, work and shop questions: Page 115

117 Mean level of importance Cleaning the street (Live) Lighting the street (Live) Resurfacing the road (Live) Providing traffic free zones (Live) Improving drainage (Live) Improving road signs (Live) Upgrading street furniture (Live) Resurfacing footways (Live) Trees and grass maintenance (Live) Figure 11: Streets in which I live Page 116

118 8.00 Mean level of importance Cleaning the street (Work) Lighting the street (Work) Resurfacing the road (Work) Providing traffic free zones (Work) Improving drainage (Work) Improving road signs (Work) Upgrading street furniture (Work) Resurfacing footways (Work) Trees and grass maintenance (Work) Figure 12: Streets in which I work Cleaning and lighting the street are the top priorities irrespective of location, but there are some other significant differences between the different types of area. Traffic free zones are much more desirable, as expected in shopping areas, shown below. This fits again with the expected model, increasing the credence of the results. The same pattern is shown in the street furniture category, where again it takes more importance on the pedestrian focused shopping areas. Page 117

119 Mean level of importance Cleaning the Lighting the street (Shop) street (Shop) Resurfacing the road (Shop) Providing traffic free zones (Shop) Improving drainage (Shop) Improving road signs (Shop) Upgrading street furniture (Shop) Resurfacing footways (Shop) Trees and grass maintenance (Shop) Figure 13 Streets in which I shop Mean level of importance Live Work Shop Figure 14: Importance of traffic free zones by area Page 118

120 Mean level of importance Live Work Shop Figure 15: Importance of upgrading street furniture by area One important analysis to make is of the results of those who live in the borough when looking at the results from the live section of question 4. As the respondents mainly lived in the borough (323 of 348) excluding those who live outside the borough will not make a significant difference, but it is still important. The main change arises in that those who live in the borough place more importance for spending in Resurfacing footways and Trees and grass maintenance. Upgrading street furniture is much less important to those who live in the borough, as is resurfacing the road. These factors may be determined by individual and local experience, but are representative of an overall trend. One other factor to consider is that these results are more significant as the large number of people who live in the borough allows for results that are very representative of the resident s views. Page 119

121 Mean level of importance Cleaning the street (Live) Lighting the street (Live) Resurfacing the road (Live) Providing traffic free zones (Live) Improving drainage (Live) Improving road signs (Live) Upgrading street furniture (Live) Resurfacing footways (Live) Trees and grass maintenance (Live) No Yes Has Permanent home in Borough Figure 16: Graph showing spending importance by residence Figure 17 shows another important reference, of those people who work in the borough, and their answers to the work section of question 4. This comparison is perhaps more significant than with the permanent home in the borough graph, as there are a smaller number of people in the sample who work in the borough. This should give a better comparison, as the majority who do not work in the borough may influence the overall results. However, in view of the small number who actually completed the work section, the data may not be statistically significant; only 60 people make up the segment that work in the borough (and filled in question 4 work section). Page 120

122 Mean level of importance Cleaning the street (Work) Lighting the street (Work) Resurfacing the road (Work) Providing traffic free zones (Work) Improving drainage (Work) Improving road signs (Work) Upgrading street furniture (Work) Resurfacing footways (Work) Trees and grass maintenance (Work) No Works in Borough Yes Figure 17: Graph showing spending against whether respondent works in borough The graph shows an increased priority for resurfacing and improving drainage in those who work in the borough, meaning that alongside cleaning and lighting the street resurfacing of both roads and footways are a high priority for those who work in the borough. Once all the results had been collated, the need for weighting because of population difference arose. To create weighted means, the following formula was used: Σ {Mean (age group) * %total population} So for each mean, the different age groups means would be multiplied by the percentage of the total adult population of Hounslow. For example, for the age group, 50.9% of Hounslow s adult population fits into this category, so the mean would be multiplied by Page 121

123 e.g. (7.01 * 0.59)+(6.89*1.296). So, when all the age brackets are summated, a weighted mean is given. This was carried out for the means of every rankings based question (1, 2, 4). The results obtained gave mainly a slight variation from the original, with the weighted means giving more emphasis to the age group, which makes up over half of Hounslow s adult population, and less importance to the 60+ groups which make up a large part of the sample. Table 2: Question 1 with weightings Question 1 Mean Weighted Mean Safe for Pedestrians Safe Cycle Routes Quick, reliable car journeys Quick, reliable bus and taxi journeys Good signage and information Safe and easy parking Attractive street environment Reliability for journeys in all weather The main differences that have occurred during the weighting in question 1 are in the cycling, bus and taxi and street environment categories. The higher cycle and street environment weighted means indicate a higher importance of these to younger age groups, whilst being less important to the 60+. This is very clear in the cycling category, which previously had a lower mean, as older people naturally cycle less. The reliable bus and taxi journeys mean has fallen by.3 due to the increased use of buses by the elder age groups. Table 3: Question 2 with weightings Question 2 Mean Weighted Mean Using high quality materials Look of the street scene Make the streets greener Make the streets cleaner Making car travel easier Making travel easier for non car users Making the streets feel safer Making parking easier In question 2, there are much less distinct differences in the means after weighting, which suggests that priorities for spending are less affected by age than the street qualities. This could suggest greater Page 122

124 harmonisation in views on spending than the slightly more subjective street qualities. Table 4: Question 4 (live) with weightings Question 4-Live Mean Weighted Mean Cleaning the street Lighting the street Resurfacing the road Providing traffic free zones Improving drainage Improving signs and markings Upgrading street furniture Resurfacing footways Trees and grass maintenance In question 4, for the live area, there is a decrease in the means for both types of resurfacing, showing that older people place more importance on resurfacing than younger, whilst the increase in means of trees and grass maintenance, traffic free zones and street furniture all show more importance placed in the environment, and especially pedestrian environment in the area young people live. Table 5: Question 4 (work) with weightings Question 4-Work Mean Weighted Mean Cleaning the street Lighting the street Resurfacing the road Providing traffic free zones Improving drainage Improving signs and markings Upgrading street furniture Resurfacing footways Trees and grass maintenance The most significant change in the work area of question 4 when weighted arises in the upgrading of street furniture, changing by 0.43, indicating an increased importance for street furniture amongst the younger age groups, maybe as they are more appreciative of the long term look of the street scene, reflected in higher weighted means for trees and grass maintenance and resurfacing the road. Page 123

125 Table 6: Question 4 (shop) with weightings Question 4-Shop Mean Weighted Mean Cleaning the street Lighting the street Resurfacing the road Providing traffic free zones Improving drainage Improving signs and markings Upgrading street furniture Resurfacing footways Trees and grass maintenance There are much fewer large variations in the shop category of question 4, with there being a general small change in some categories such as an increase in the importance of trees and grass maintenance. The lack of large changes shows that there is more of a harmonisation of priorities in shopping areas, likely as the area is used by all age groups (unlike the work category), and without variation in the type of area (as in live category). One other area of analysis was to carry out a test of the correlation between different questions or categories, and test the significance of any relationships that might arise. This was carried out using a bivariate correlation test, using the Pearson correlation model. The test created a Pearson correlation coefficient, and a 2 tailed significance level. The coefficient indicates how strong the correlation between the variables is, giving a value between -1 (very strong negative correlation) and 1(very strong positive correlation). The significance level, or P value, is always below 1, and represents the likelihood of the relationship occurring by chance. For example, a P value of 0.1 would show a 10% chance of the relationship having arisen by chance. Therefore, a P value of 0.01 has been used to indicate a significant relationship, at the 1% level. The results created showed some significant relationships, below the 1% level, but with relatively low (under 0.5 or above -0.5) coefficients, indicating relationships that were not exceptionally strong, but, due to the low total numbers, were very significant. The first set of significant relationships, were with car users on question 1. There was a very significant (below 0.000) relationship between car users and the ranking of quick and reliable car journeys, as expected. In reverse, there was a very significant (below 0.000) relationship negatively between car users and Quick reliable bus and taxi journeys. This showed car the trend of car users ranking car related categories highly, and non car categories lower, was definitely significant. Page 124

126 A similar pattern was true of non car users on question 1, with regular cyclists, bus users and pedestrians all having significant negative relationships with Quick, reliable car journeys. Data from other questions also supported the expected findings, with there again being significant relationships between car users and car related categories, and vice versa. Observations and Conclusions Overall, the questionnaire received a large enough response to enable the drawing of some valuable conclusions. Correlations performed give additional confidence in the reliability of the entries, and allay some of the fears inherent in a self selecting sample. The results indicate a number of factors that the public clearly see as the most important in street management, and also locate important relationships between different types of customer and their priorities for asset management. The validity of the data was slightly affected by the self selecting sample, which resulted in the sample age range significantly different to the actual population of Hounslow; however, this was later overcome through applied weightings. The data was given credence by the results of some groups, and questions, fitting accepted patterns e.g. car users placed Making car travel easier as a higher priority than non car users. A number of important results arose from the data analysis, showing trends that carried through the whole study. The major, and first trend, is the precedence of non-car users, over car users. Figure 3 showed the importance of pedestrian, and bus and taxi qualities in a street, whilst making streets quick and reliable for cars and with ample parking came lower down in terms of priorities. This was reinforced later on by the data from question 2, showing car travel and parking as the lowest priorities for the customer. Making the streets safer and cleaner were top priorities, again reflecting a desire for a street geared toward pedestrian travel. Correlation analysis supported this, giving significant relationships between pedestrians ranking car use low, and car users ranking it high. The significant relationships show that customers responded as expected according to whether or not they were a regular car user. That is, the larger numbers of pedestrians determined the high means for pedestrian related categories, and low car related categories. This non-car trend could be unrepresentative, due to the self selecting nature of the sample, and a very high percentage of regular pedestrians. There were some other trends relating to the age of the respondents, such as the increase of importance of bus and taxi journeys with age, as expected, as well as an increase in the importance of keeping the streets safe. The results of those with mobility difficulties showed only a slight difference from the other results, reflecting either those who responded as having mobility difficulties either not answering to reflect Page 125

127 any specific needs in the street, or having no need for different priority in street management. The results for cyclists showed a significant relationship again for non car travel, as well as a significant desire to resurface footways. When viewed in conjunction with the high overall level of concern to make the streets feel safer (Figure 7) this might be interpreted as a need for improving non-motorised transport assets, for example cycle tracks. The results concerning question 3, and the most important factors during roadworks showed money being well spent as the top priority, with works taking place quickly and traffic being kept flowing being the other main concerns. This shows a desire from the customer for quick and cost effective works, but also a need to know that the money they effectively contribute is being spent in the right areas, on necessary works. These are important facets of good Asset Management, and so customers appear to be supporting the Council s approach by their responses to this question. Question 4 showed the differing priorities for different area usage, showing an overall importance of cleaning and lighting the street, again both pedestrian focused options. The upgrading of street furniture and the creation of traffic free zones were of more importance in shopping areas, as expected, adding further credence, and showing the importance of the non car elements in shopping areas. The general trend of results in the survey showed many as expected, with pedestrians ranking pedestrian categories highly, car users favouring resurfacing roadways and improving parking. The results from different subsets such as age groups and cyclists, showed results that matched significantly with the perceived idea of the different groups, giving much credence to the results in other sections. The priorities given for street management focus on non car areas, such as making the streets cleaner and safer. The priorities for roadworks showed a desire for cost effective, necessary works, but with the least disruption possible. The questionnaire results and responses also helped to indicate what questions are the most effective in this type of survey, and many areas of question design were highlighted as being important lessons to be learnt for future surveys. Firstly, the ranking questions, whilst appearing simple, gave effective results, but were often misinterpreted. 16.7% of respondents misinterpreted the ranking questions, whilst only 1.15% did not fill in the third question, which required ticks in boxes. The question type has to be effectively balanced between being user friendly and understandable, but while still giving good results. The relatively good survey response meant that, even with the large percentage of missing answers, the ranking questions still gave valuable and significant results, and the ranking style questions have a much Page 126

128 higher potential for analysis when compared with the simpler ticks in boxes questions. Some specific question options could have confused respondents, for example the question 1 reliability in all weathers option drawing a number of comments for being too vague. The definition of mobility difficulties is a hard issue to tackle, but a more harmonised description in future would allow for better analysis against given statistics for the borough. The same applies to age ranges, which could be harmonised, the national statistics profile of Hounslow 9 uses different age ranges to the survey. This was overcome in analysis by finding detailed raw data, but this could be avoided if the same age categories were used. The inclusion of a 14 and under age category also did not seem effective, with very few (2) responses in this age range received as expected. It could be argued that, while the definition of certain terms used in the questionnaire (such as safe, attractive etc.) could be ambiguous, these terms describe common perceptions of the street environment. It is these perceptions, as well as the more objective engineering aspects of the asset which will inform the development of service levels in the HAMP. 9 Page 127

129 Annex I Page 128

130 Appendix 5 Asset Inventory and Asset Register Area Items Asset Area (m2) Length (m) Anti Skid 70,569 17,458 Bus Lane 6,659 2,352 Carriageways 2,788, ,466 Central Island 10,999 5,129 Central Reserve 5,820 2,580 Cycle Track 28,598 22,815 Footways 1,390, ,827 Grass Verge 419, ,985 Layby 45,347 12,861 Hatched Lineas 50,169 31,738 Parking Bay 154,073 76,272 Count items Asset No Camera 97 Comms Cabinet 3,022 Crossover 25,553 Cycle Stand 278 Dropped Kerb 6,241 Gates 55 Gully 19,123 Litter Bins 900 Manhole 49,313 Parking Meter 259 Pay&Display Machine 244 Pedestrian Crossing 263 Planter 208 Postbox 243 Sign 11,872 Statues and Monuments 20 Street Name Plates 2,441 Telephone Boxes 136 Page 129

131 Length items Asset Length (m) Fences and Barriers 10,724 Kerbs 711,389 Kerb Markings 32,199 Longitudinal Lines 305,799 Pedestrian Rail 14,459 retaining wall (non structural) 5,769 Road Hatching 5,157 Safety Fence 1,361 Breakdown by Ward Ward Carriageways Footways Verges Kerbs Area (m2) Length (m) Area (m2) Length (m) Area (m2) Length (m) Length (m) Longitudinal Lines Length (m) Signs Number Bedfont 193,406 27,886 94,842 47,430 46,834 8,370 50,952 18, Brentford 86,773 11,684 48,136 23,246 9,182 2,213 23,640 11, Chiswick Homefields 120,165 16,037 54,156 26,416 5,441 1,890 28,521 13,666 1,051 Chiswick Riverside 144,434 18,528 70,230 33,156 24,775 14,038 33,932 11, Cranford 110,986 16,829 46,831 26,835 7,449 3,709 31,842 6, Feltham North 168,592 23,434 86,772 42,381 25,375 3,033 43,419 20, Feltham West 125,535 18,762 66,499 31,966 19,849 5,760 34,836 12, Hanworth 145,585 21,060 70,484 36,538 27,760 5,038 39,791 10, Hanworth Park 164,327 23,173 86,119 41,667 40,211 8,893 34,190 16, Heston Central 120,461 18,367 58,645 32,977 18,748 5,449 33,876 9, Heston East 133,944 18,552 61,757 31,936 37,158 10,337 34,755 9, Heston West 141,204 18,417 61,435 31,513 26,906 9,140 34,005 10, Hounslow Central 184,953 24,292 96,912 43,670 16,732 4,163 44,859 35,166 1,431 Hounslow Heath 130,899 18,729 77,437 33,509 16,852 4,881 36,184 15, Hounslow South 135,399 18,719 75,683 37,718 29,411 12,739 39,102 13, Hounslow West 105,379 14,156 54,350 27,264 3,747 1,050 27,240 12, Isleworth 137,862 19,514 76,972 34,047 19,562 4,511 36,612 21, Osterley and Spring Grove 207,472 27,218 94,790 48,652 25,981 7,731 49,065 25, Syon 141,355 18,756 66,930 33,528 8,995 1,822 33,647 22, Turnham Green 111,500 13,694 49,783 18,964 1, ,277 11,936 1,570 Page 130

132 Breakdown of Footway Types (including paved verges) AREA (m2) PERCENTAGE Ward Bituminous Flag Concrete Block TOTAL AREA Bituminous Flag Concrete Block Bedfont 65,371 26, ,590 96, % 27.1% 0.2% 4.8% Brentford 29,224 18, , % 37.3% 0.8% 1.9% Chiswick Homefields 8,212 45, , % 83.2% 1.5% 0.1% Chiswick Riverside 10,282 59, , % 84.5% 0.7% 0.1% Cranford 20,201 25, , % 54.6% 1.6% 0.7% Feltham North 78,439 10,921 1, , % 12.0% 1.3% 0.9% Feltham West 54,477 9, ,525 66, % 14.7% 1.0% 2.3% Hanworth 42,063 25,960 2, , % 36.4% 3.9% 0.9% Hanworth Park 56,855 27,352 2,661 5,793 92, % 29.5% 2.9% 6.3% Heston Central 19,264 35,025 2,185 2,535 59, % 59.4% 3.7% 4.3% Heston East 25,546 36,551 2, , % 56.7% 3.4% 0.2% Heston West 22,254 37, ,588 62, % 60.8% 1.0% 2.5% Hounslow Central 51,970 52,062 2,956 15, , % 42.5% 2.4% 12.6% Hounslow Heath 41,920 31, ,272 84, % 37.0% 1.1% 12.2% Hounslow South 16,442 59,313 2, , % 76.1% 2.7% 0.1% Hounslow West 20,035 31,072 1,042 2,450 54, % 56.9% 1.9% 4.5% Isleworth 28,761 43,711 1,959 2,931 77, % 56.5% 2.5% 3.8% Osterley and Spring Grove 44,021 49,206 2, , % 51.0% 2.7% 0.6% Syon 19,323 42,321 1,143 4,334 67, % 63.1% 1.7% 6.5% Turnham Green 5,603 42, ,142 50, % 85.6% 0.9% 2.3% TOTALS 660, ,338 28,044 56,180 1,453, % 48.8% 1.9% 3.9% Page 131

133 Appendix 6: Transcript from the Agenda of Executive Public Meeting 4 April 2006 HOUNSLOW HIGHWAYS ASSET MANAGEMENT PLAN VERSION 1 Report by: Councillor Ron Bartholomew Lead Member for Enhancing the Environment SUMMARY The Highways Asset Management Plan (HAMP) sets out objectives, targets for delivery and procedures for efficient management of the asset lifecycle, and a programme of improvements for all parts of the public space which we call the Highway or the Network. The HAMP seeks to balance the needs of customers, who expect a highquality of current service with the desire to preserve the integrity and value of the Street network for future generations. The HAMP is only the first step in adopting Asset Management principles for our street network. The full benefits will be realised in the coming years as we develop and implement the actions set out in our improvement programme. 1.0 RECOMMENDATION That the Executive: 1.1 Note the contents of the Report. 1.2 Approve the adoption of Hounslow s Highways Asset Management Plan (HAMP) Version 1 as an important first step on the path towards Infrastructure Asset Management for local borough roads and its associated structures with effect from April 2006, that will eventually meet the requirements of the Whole of Government Accounts (WGA). 1.3 Agrees to receive an annual progress report that updates the development of processes for implementing Asset Management and improvements made in routine maintenance to ensure the infrastructure asset is in a serviceable condition or is returned to its as new capacity and condition, or is improved above its original standard. Page 132

134 2.0 BACKGROUND 2.1 There are many current government drivers and recently published industry Codes of Practice aimed at improving the efficiency and effectiveness of the local Highway Authority s management of the road network. These are succinctly described in the recent document Maintaining a Vital Asset published by the Roads Liaison Group and endorsed by Ministers as well as the Mayor of London. The Hounslow HAMP is written to be consistent with all appropriate parts of the associated new Codes of Practice. It is now expected that each Authority put in place a structured HAMP that sets out: The scope, extent and condition of existing assets, A description of objectives and policies linked to business objectives, A definition of outcome-based levels of service, Lifecycle maintenance strategies based on long term, sustainable use of physical resources and minimising whole life costs, Identification of future funding requirements to maintain target levels of service, The approach to managing the risks of falling short of the target levels of service, The development of co-ordinated forward programmes for highway maintenance, operation and improvement, and A regime for measurement of performance and continuous improvement. 2.2 The HAMP becomes the starting point for making a case for the funding of this vital asset, against the background of strong competition for limited resources. It will support capital bids, for example in conjunction with the Local Implementation Plan (LIP), currently with the Mayor of London for approval. The Department for Transport has recently announced that the government is making available 600 million in PFI credits for Highways Maintenance and has invited Local Authorities to submit an Expression of Interest by September They have indicated that submissions should include a description of how the scheme is generally consistent with agreed Asset Management Plans. The HAMP will provide evidence that Hounslow is seeking to secure continuous improvement in the way that we exercise our functions, having regard to a combination of economy, efficiency and effectiveness; and simultaneously will provide the basis for local decision making on a wide range of services that impact on the day-to-day maintenance of the whole street environment. This must be set in the context of the 430km of local roads, 775km of footways and channel, 16,123 street lighting units, 4417 illuminated street furniture, 105 bridges and structures and 10,220 trees, as well as all the associated structures managed by Streetcare Services in Hounslow. 2.3 Hounslow Streetcare Services commenced a project in February 2005 to establish such a Plan, and to identify the actions needed to improve their procedures, systems and data. This Plan (the HAMP ) has been drawn up under the auspices of an internal steering group, with the assistance of an outside consultant, Chris Britton Consultancy Limited. Page 133

135 3.0 PROPOSALS 3.1 It is proposed that, as from April 2006, the Council adopts the HAMP which sets out a logical and systematic approach to sustaining and improving the streets in Hounslow, to the benefit of all those who use them by whatever means, and for whatever purpose. The streets, pavements and all their associated furniture and apparatus not only serve a functional purpose but also contribute to public safety, and the environment in which people live, work, shop and pursue leisure activities. Well-maintained highways make an important contribution to the liveability of public spaces, and in turn people s quality of life in general Hounslow s HAMP provides a description of current practices and future plans and aspirations for the main elements of good asset management planning, including: Processes for determining annual programmes of work and for securing funding and allocating budgets, A process for setting annual targets for quality of service for Hounslow s streets within the wider context of local and national Best Value Performance Reporting and the CPA (Continuous Performance Assessment) regime, Systems and Data that support asset management planning, Mechanisms for Member, customer and stakeholder involvement in the asset management process, and Processes for updating the HAMP as part of Hounslow s annual cycle of business planning The Asset Register, will set out what exists within Hounslow s highway network and the condition that it is in. It is an essential prerequisite for carrying out an Asset Valuation. The Asset Register is currently incomplete and the Improvement Plan sets out the process for compiling a complete asset register A description of Levels of Service (LoS) will form the basis for target setting, strategic planning and service monitoring and improvement. This includes how each service level contributes to the Council s Ten Executive Priorities. Associated with the service levels are more detailed performance measures and improvement targets for the next year, and for the longer term. Page 134

136 Levels of Service defined in the HAMP are: 1. Accessibility of Services 2. Availability & Accessibility of the Asset 3. Providing a Safe Street Environment 4. Quality of Street Scene 5. Serviceability of the Asset 6. Providing Information about Street Care Services 7. Quality of Service Delivery 8. Effectiveness of Internal Management Looking at the Levels of Service it will be apparent that a balance must be struck between investing in the soft estate that makes streets, smarter, cleaner and safer, at the same time as investing in the long term preservation of the asset, or the hidden value in its construction and fitness for purpose An initial 5-Year Improvement Programme identifies the actions necessary to improve asset management for Hounslow s streets in the short/medium term. Each action has a priority and timescale allocated to it. Additionally, the improvement actions are highlighted separately in the relevant section of the HAMP Preparation of an Asset Valuation for the Highway network; is part of the national requirement for Whole of Government Accounts (WGA). Local Authorities are expected to publish information on the value of their highway network, taking into account both what exists and the condition it is in. This first full benchmark valuation will be produced in 2006/07, providing an opening book value for 2007/08, and will allow for the calculation of in-year movements Lifecycle Management Plans, will set out for each type/group/component of the asset (Roads, Footways, Street Lighting, Structures etc) how asset management will be applied over the whole life of that asset from it s creation to its removal The Service Plans will set out how good asset management principles will inform service delivery for those services that are not specific to a particular asset component, such as street cleansing, graffiti and flyposting and the usage of powers and the meeting of requirements under the Clean Neighbourhood and Environmental Act 2005 (some of which are Best Value Indicators by reference to which the authority s performance in exercising functions can be measured). 3.2 Once adopted, it is intended that the HAMP will be implemented from April 2006 onwards. A programme of actions and improvements has been drawn up, and will form the first phase of delivering the benefits of this approach to the community. The Plan makes out a case for funding. For the improvements to be actually delivered, funds will have to be made available by the Council for the targeted improvement work on the ground. The Plan is, therefore, just a first step in a long-term programme. Continuous monitoring of performance will be Page 135

137 necessary and feedback will have to be obtained on the effectiveness of every measure that contributes to the newly-defined levels of service. This will be a continuous, iterative process, involving members of the public, Councillors, local interest groups as well as the technical experts employed by Streetcare Services. 4.0 LEGAL IMPLICATIONS 4.1 The Director of Legal Services comments that there are no implications arising from the recommendations in the report, at this stage. As the HAMP is implemented there are likely to be legal implications relating to the procurement of works, goods and services, PFI and meeting the requirements of relevant legislation. 5.0 FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS 5.1 The Director of Finance comments that he has been involved in the development of the HAMP and there are no direct financial implications arising from this report s recommendations. However as Asset Management develops, then funding needs to be identified for schemes. If so, these proposals will each be the subject of an appropriate report to the Executive. 6.0 EQUALITIES / DIVERSITY IMPLICATIONS 6.1 The introduction of the concept of Asset Management regime into the highway network and its associated structures in Hounslow will positively affect universally the population who live, work, visit and shop in the borough. The concept will economically benefit the borough and its stakeholders, and eliminate discrimination by enhancing social inclusion through the improvement of mobility, accessibility/availability and movement. 6.2 An Equalities Impact Assessment (EIA) is under preparation and it is considered that there are no adverse affects on equalities arising from this report. 7.0 NETWORK MANAGEMENT IMPLICATIONS 7.1 The Traffic Manager Comments that an assessment will be made on each individual project within the Improvement Programme with regard to maintaining traffic flow and minimising traffic congestion arising from the works, both on the borough s roads and on adjoining Traffic Authorities road networks. Page 136

138 7.2 Consultation will take place with adjoining Traffic Authorities and effective measures put in place to minimise any disruption to traffic flows on each project as and when appropriate. 8.0 CONCLUSIONS 8.1 The adoption of the Highways Asset Management Plan by Streetcare Services will be the first and most important step by the London Borough of Hounslow towards a more rational, justifiable, and transparent approach to identifying and prioritising the actions and associated need for funding to make best use of its vital road network asset. 8.2 The HAMP puts Hounslow in the forefront of best practice, particularly in the context of London, and positions SCS well for implementing improved processes and delivery in its investment in street infrastructure, operation and maintenance. It is, however, only a start. Having established the objectives and targets in the Plan, SCS will continue to manage the implementation of asset management over a number of years. This will involve commitment both in terms of investment and in a willingness to make changes, educating staff, involving stakeholders and working together to reap the benefits that good asset management can bring. The ultimate objective of the new approach is to provide continuous and visible improvements in the whole street environment in Hounslow, through an optimised approach to identifying needs, allocating funds and delivery of services on the ground. 8.3 The above aligns with the results of the Panel Survey in September 2005, where it was identified within the Community Environment that resources should be prioritised and redirected towards improving street lighting, reducing noise and air pollution followed by resurfacing of footways and roads. Background Papers: London Borough of Hounslow Streetcare Services: - Maintaining a Vital Asset. (see Highways Asset Management Plan Version 1 This report has been or is due to be considered by: C.M.T. 1st March 2006 Executive Briefing 21st March 2006 Executive Public 4th April 2006 This report is relevant to the following wards/areas: All. Page 137

139 Resolutions Hounslow Highways Asset Management Plan (HAMP) Version 1 Councillor Bartholomew presented a report outlining the objectives, targets for delivery, and procedures for efficient management of the asset lifecycle, and a programme of improvements for all parts of the public space which we call the Highway or the Network. The Plan seeks to balance the needs of customers, who expect a high quality of current service, with the desire to preserve the integrity and value of the Street network for future generations. Members were informed that the HAMP was only the first step in adopting Asset Management principles for the Borough s street network. Councillor Bartholomew explained that the full benefits would be realised in the coming years as the actions set out in the improvement programme were implemented. Resolved (i) (ii) (iii) That the contents of the Report be noted. That Hounslow s Highways Asset Management Plan (HAMP) Version 1 be adopted as an important first step on the path towards Infrastructure Asset Management for local borough roads and its associated structures with effect from April 2006, that will eventually meet the requirements of the Whole of Government Accounts (WGA). That the Executive agrees to receive an annual progress report that updates the development of processes for implementing Asset Management and improvements made in routine maintenance to ensure the infrastructure asset is in a serviceable condition or is returned to its as new capacity and condition, or is improved above its original standard. Page 138

140 Appendix 7. Lifecycle Management Plans Page 139

141 Road Carriageways Lifecycle Management Plan Our road carriageways (the paved road construction which carries traffic) comprise the most valuable single asset within our highways asset management plan. One of the key challenges for the introduction of Asset Management to the management of our road network is the introduction of a Life Cycle Planning approach to the management of investments in our carriageways. Our current approach to the management of investments in our roads asset has a number of strengths, in particular: Needs-based assessment of maintenance requirements based upon UKPMS surveys A long-term works programme, which has every road in the borough included, based upon UKPMS outputs and, in the coming year, the outputs of the Scheme Engineer software, being used for the PFI project A calculation of network backlog Appraisal of the future implications of various possible funding scenarios We acknowledge, however, that if we are to be successful in meeting the challenges of asset management planning for our Carriageways we will need to develop our processes, systems and data in a number of areas: The implementation of predictive models that allow the future implications of investment options upon future condition, quality of service and asset value and preservation, including the ability to assess and prioritise on whole-life cost principles The implementation of a more sophisticated methodology for the calculation of maintenance backlog, ideally using nationally agreed standard definitions of backlog The implementation of a value management process for determining the most appropriate scheme options, and for balancing the requirements of service quality and asset preservation and structural improvement Asset valuation The development of service levels related to the carriageways Improvement Action 27. We will implement tools that will allow the whole-life cost implications of highway maintenance and improvement options to be assessed. Much of the future development of asset management for carriageways is addressed through the improvement actions for all assets, described elsewhere in the HAMP. Specifically for Carriageways, however, an improvement action has been highlighted relating to the development of the ability to assess the costs and impacts of investments in Page 140

142 carriageway maintenance and improvement schemes over the life of those investments. The Scheme Engineer software that has been implemented to support the PFI project will provide these most capabilities for roads and footways, and it is intended that we will make use of these in the coming year. Scope of Life Cycle Plan This section deals with all parts of the Carriageway not included in other Life Cycle plans including: The whole depth of the carriageway pavement Lines and road markings Studs and zebra crossings etc. Ironwork Special Surfaces including Anti-skid and bus-lanes, cycle lanes etc. Kerbs and other features Introduction and Background Road Categories Table (below) sets out the Road Categories used within London; these are set by Transport for London, and are linked to responsibilities for maintenance and funding as follows: Category 1 roads are maintained by DfT Category 2 roads are maintained by TfL Category 3 roads are maintained by LBH, but funded by TfL Category 4, 5 and 6 roads are maintained and funded by LBH Page 141

143 Category Hierarchy Type of Road Detailed Description 1 Motorway Limited access Motorway regulations apply Routes for fastmoving long distance traffic. Fully grade separated with 2 Strategic Route 3 Main Distributor 4 Secondary Distributor Trunk Roads and some Principal A roads between primary destinations Major Urban Network and Inter-Primary links. Short to medium distance traffic. Classified Road (B and C class) and unclassified urban bus routes carrying local traffic with frontage access and frequent junctions. restrictions on use. Routes for fastmoving longdistance traffic with little frontage access or pedestrian traffic. Speed limits are usually in excess of 40mph and there are few junctions. Pedestrian crossings are either segregated or controlled and parked vehicles are generally prohibited. Routes between Strategic Routes and linking urban centres to the strategic network with limited frontage access. In urban areas speed limits are usually 40mph or less, parking is restricted at peak times and there are positive measures for pedestrian safety. In rural areas these roads link the larger villages and HGB generators to the Strategic and Main distributors Network. In buildup areas these roads have 30mph Page 142

144 Category Hierarchy Type of Road Detailed Description speed limits and very high levels of pedestrian activity with some crossing facilities including zebra crossings. On-street parking is generally unrestricted except for safety reasons. 5 Link Road Roads linking between Main and Secondary Distributor network with frontage access and frequent junctions. 6 Local Access road Lengths of road maintained by LBH Roads serving limited numbers of properties carrying only access traffic. Road Categories Length Road Type 38.7 km Principal A Roads 14.0 km B Roads 30.5 km C Roads km Unclassified Roads 2.9 km Back lanes km Total Length Residential or industrial interconnecting roads with 30mph speed limits, random pedestrian movements and controlled parking. Often residential loops or cul de sacs. Existing Funding mechanisms The Principal Road Programme is entirely funded by TfL. Following assessment a 5 year programme of carriageway resurfacing and associated footway re-construction is included in the BSP. Over the past 7 years Hounslow has made a strong case for a high level of funding and has consistently demonstrated its ability to fully spend its allocation plus any additional funding received due to under spend by Page 143

145 other London Boroughs. This has placed us just outside the top quartile of all London Boroughs. In order to make effective use of the available LBH planned maintenance funding allocation, roads and footways of more than local importance are targeted for implementation. Roads of more than local importance include: Classified non-principal roads Bus routes High density vehicle routes Accident hot spots High density pedestrian areas such as town centres Schools / Old peoples homes Hospitals / medical centres These roads form the Corporate Prioritised List and are listed by order of priority from Condition Factors. Draft area programmes are extracted from the Implementation Priorities and submitted to Area Committees for approval. Members of each Area Committee have the opportunity to either agree their area priorities or advise of their own perceptions of those roads which should be included in the Area Programme from the implementation priorities. This allows Area Committees for example, to propose substituting roads for others of approximately similar priority within their own area but not to impact on resources available to other areas. This will establish a prioritised list for each Area Committee and those schemes of the highest priority will be implemented as funds are made available throughout the year. As only those roads with a condition factor indicating they require reconstruction are included in the implementation priorities the effect of altering the order of priority by Area Committees will not adversely affect the relevant PI. Maintenance Backlog On an annual basis, maintenance backlog is assessed, based upon most recent survey data processed using UKPMS; the backlog is determined using a simple model based upon the road lengths included in the published road condition performance indicators for each part of the network. Backlog figures are then projected using simple straight-line predictive models, at various possible funding scenarios, to predict future backlog. The Figures below illustrate this approach; such projections are used as part of our annual budgetary process. It is acknowledged that these current models lack robustness, and that to support life-cycle planning for our carriageways, we will need to develop a more sophisticated approach in future, ideally drawing upon Improvement Action 28 We will implement more robust models for the calculation of maintenance backlog, linked to the calculation of asset depreciation, as part of asset valuation. This model will include a predictive capability, to allow the future implications of possible budgetary scenarios to be assessed. Page 144

146 nationally agreed definitions and models, and making more extensive use of the functionally provided by UKPMS. Maintenance Backlog to Roads Current Annual Funding Required Annual Funding Backlog Roads Maintenance Backlog 5 Year Programme to Remove Roads Maintenance Backlog k Current Annual Funding Total Funding to remove backlog Annual Funding Required Backlog 5-Year Programme to Remove Roads Maintenance Backlog Page 145

147 10Year Programme to Remove Road Maintenance k Current Annual Funding Total Funding to remove backlog Annual Funding Required Backlog Backlog 10-Year Programme to Remove Roads Maintenance Backlog 15Year Programme to Remove Roads Maintenance Backlog k Current Annual Funding Total Funding to remove backlog Annual Funding Required Backlog 15-Year Programme to Remove Roads Maintenance Backlog Page 146

148 25 Year programme to Remove Roads MaintenanceBacklog k Base Level Annual Funding Actual Annual Funding Funding to remove backlog Backlog 25-Year Programme to Remove Roads Maintenance Backlog Defect vs. Planned maintenance non-optimal (graphs annual budget projections) The figure below gives a different perspective on the current level of backlog; at current and recent historic levels of budget, the amount of planned maintenance that we were able to carry out is at such a low level that we are not able to arrest network deterioration, and to prevent planned maintenance backlog increasing over time. The implication of this is that in order to maintain minimum levels of service and safety, we are having to spend increasing amounts on unplanned, reactive maintenance, further restricting the budget available for planned preventative maintenance, and therefore further increasing maintenance backlog. It is recognised that this position is unsustainable, and it is intended that the introduction of an Asset Management approach to the management of our network will allow us both to better manage the limited funds that we have available, and to better make the case for increased, sustained funding of our network. Allied to this intention is the initiative to explore opportunities for new ways of funding investment and for delivering service on our network, described in section 7.1 and in improvement action 20. Page 147

149 Projected Budgets Reactive v Planned Maintenance million Planned Reactive Figure: Projected Budgets: Reactive vs. Planned Maintenance Approach to condition and need assessment The flowchart below gives an overview of our current approach to assessment of condition and need for our carriageways. Page 148

150 NETWORK PLAN OF SURVEY SITES PROVIDED TO SUB CONTRACTOR CONTRACTOR UNDERTAKES CVI / DVI SURVEY DATA DOWNLOADED DATA EDITED, VERIFIED AND VALIDATED CATEGORY 1 DEFECTS REPORTED TO CLIENT SUMMARY SPREADSHEET WITH RATING CALCULATIONS PROCESSING INTO HMDIF RE-DEFINE NETWORK QUERIES AND SUBMIT TO CLIENT DATA EXTRACTED AND VALIDATED PI s PRODUCED Principal roads (ROAD2000 surveys) plus local roads Network vs. scheme level use Use of contractors QA provisions Engineers check outputs from UKPMS National and Local PIs The graph below set out the values of road condition indicators over recent years. Note that over the life of these indicators their definition and the supporting data has changed a number of times, so that they are not directly comparable, over time. Page 149

151 40% 35% 30% 25% 20% 15% BV 187 Footways BV223/NI168 (Principal Roads) Bv224a/NI169 (Classified Roads) BV 224b (Unclassified Roads) 10% 5% 0% Hounslow 2005/06 BVPI Hounslow 2006/07 BVPI Hounslow 2007/08 BVPI Hounslow 2008/09 NI + LI Data and Systems that are used Section 3.3 of the HAMP describes the data and systems, used in the management of our service delivery and maintenance of our carriageways. The key systems for carriageways are: Confirm (Highway maintenance and inspections) March PMS and Scheme Engineer (Pavement Management) Confirm Works ordering Confirm Streetworks Current state of inventory and asset register Following the completion of the full asset inventory survey, we now have complete, up-to-date information on all of our roads and footways. In addition, we have completed a survey of the construction of all carriageways in the borough, using core samples. Documentation and standards The principal reference documents for the management of maintenance and service delivery of our carriageways are set out in our highways Procedures and Method Statements. We have also adopted the principles set out in Well Maintained Highways, and will be assessing the implications for the management of the highways network over the coming months. Consultation mechanisms Carriageway-specific consultation mechanisms include: Page 150

152 with the general public, timing and other information about works post-implementation questionnaires with elected Members on programme, timing of works, bustour of potential sites In addition, consultation on the programme of major works takes place with: Police Traffic Management Liaison Group Statutory Undertakers (3 months in advance) TfL (PRN) Page 151

153 Process Descriptions Condition assessment Carriageway Condition is monitored using industry-standard surveys, contracted out for cost effectiveness and quality control. The range of survey types utilised in any given year will vary, but will generally be selected from the following list: Type Application Coverage Standard Visual (CVI/DVI) General and structural All Road UKPMS condition Classes SCANNER General Condition and Performance Principal and Classified SCANNER Specification (Carried out as part of the SCRIM Ground Radar Penetrating Safety (skidding resistance) Construction, voids etc. Principal Principal Road 2000 project) HA DMRB (Carried out as part of the Road 2000 project) HA DMRB (Carried out as part of the Road 2000 project) The management of condition surveys follows the following process: Page 152

154 NETWORK PLAN OF SURVEY SITES PROVIDED TO SUB CONTRACTOR CONTRACTOR UNDERTAKES CVI / DVI SURVEY DATA DOWNLOADED DATA EDITED, VERIFIED AND VALIDATED CATEGORY 1 DEFECTS REPORTED TO CLIENT SUMMARY SPREADSHEET WITH RATING CALCULATIONS PROCESSING INTO HMDIF RE-DEFINE NETWORK QUERIES AND SUBMIT TO CLIENT DATA EXTRACTED AND VALIDATED PI s PRODUCED Page 153

155 Defect maintenance CONFIRM SYSTEM NOTIFICATION OF DEFECT BY LETTER / TO HIGHWAYS NOTIFICATION OF DEFECT BY TELEPHONE TO CALL CENTRE ELECTRONIC NOTIFICATION OF RSI TO APPROPRIATE INSPECTOR INSPECTION UNDERTAKEN ELECTRONIC NOTIFICATION OF DEFECT TO APPROPRIATE INSPECTOR RECORD DEFECT DETAILS ON ipaq CATEGORY 1 DEFECT CATEGORY 2 DEFECT DOES NOT EXCEED INTERVENTION LEVEL NOT HIGHWAYS RESPONSIBILITY DETAILS UPLOADED TO CONFIRM SYSTEM ORDER RAISED DSO DETAILS UPLOADED TO CONFIRM SYSTEM ORDER RAISED DSO INFORM RESPONSIBLE BODY REPAIR OR MAKE SAFE WITHIN 24 HOURS PERMANENT REPAIR WITHIN APPROPRIATE TIMESCALE RECORD DETAILS ON ASSET MANAGEMENT SYSTEM PERMANENT REPAIR WITHIN APPROPRIATE TIMESCALE Page 154

156 Carriageways Life Cycle Management Lifecycle Stage 1. Creation or Acquisition of Carriageways Hounslow s network is a well-developed, mature network, and as such there are few instances of new provision; those few new roads are mainly new adoptions, as part of housing and business developments, and the occasional new road as part of a traffic improvement initiative. Identification of Need: How is need identified? Adoption for new development Traffic improvement initiatives Area improvements Selection of Option(s): Applicable Standards: What are the options and how are options selected? There are relatively few options, considered in the decisions to provide new carriageways. Section38 adoptions are required to follow Hounslow defined standards, and in the new Highways Design Guide. The following standards to the provision of new carriageways: LBH Section 38 standards S106 agreements Standards for adoption from other Parties (check reference) Well Maintained Highways LBH Design Guide Manual (within LIP) CDM and H&S standards Designing for maintenance in the Highways Design Guide Routine and Reactive Maintenance for Carriageways to maintain Safety and Serviceability At current levels of funding and condition, we rely heavily on routine and reactive maintenance of carriageways to keep them in a safe and serviceable condition. The main activities are described in the process descriptions, above. Routine maintenance activities include: 1. Responsive maintenance Page 155

157 Repairs to defects in response to public and ad-hoc reports. 2. Safety inspection maintenance Repairs of defects identified as part of our rolling programme of routine safety inspections. 3. Maintenance of ironwork Carried out on an ad-hoc basis, largely as a result of reports by officers and by the public and third parties. As part of our proposed asset inventory survey, we are intending to collect condition information relating to ironwork, and as such will be able to, for the first time, put together a planned programme of road markings maintenance; the budgetary implications of this have yet to be assessed however, and will need to be considered as part of the wider asset investment planning initiatives described elsewhere in the HAMP. 4. Maintenance of Road Markings Largely undertaken on a reactive basis in response to public reports and reports from officers and parking wardens. As part of our proposed asset inventory survey, we are intending to collect condition information relating to our road markings, and as such will be able to, for the first time, put together a planned programme of road markings maintenance; the budgetary implications of this have yet to be assessed however, and will need to be considered as part of the wider asset investment planning initiatives described elsewhere in the HAMP. 5. Winter Maintenance The Winter Maintenance Service involves treating the highway to prevent ice from forming, known as precautionary salting and to melt ice and snow already formed, post-salting. It is not practicable to carry our precautionary salting on all roads in the Borough because of the difficulties in providing the required resources. The precautionary salting of roads is carried out on agreed pre-determined routes comprising: Principal Roads Other strategic main roads Major bus routes Where known local icing conditions occur Footways are only treated once snow has settled or during periods of prolonged freezing conditions on a priority basis at locations including: Town Centres Hospitals Old Peoples Homes Day Centres Schools (during term times only) Page 156

158 Footbridges Bus Stops In addition to these routine maintenance activities, we carry out condition assessment surveys on our local road network, with surveys being carried out on the principal road network by London Borough of Hammersmith and Fulham as part of the Road 2000 project. Condition Monitoring of condition and identification of need in Monitoring relation to routine and reactive maintenance is and Need primarily based upon our programme of routine safety Identification inspections, together with our processes for responding to and actioning reports of defects. In addition, as part of the condition information to be held within our proposed asset inventory survey, we are intending to move from a purely reactive approach to the maintenance of lining and of iron work to a proactive, need-based approach, with a greater emphasis on planned programmes of works, and consequent efficiency and cost savings from working in such ways. Our highways method statements and the process descriptions above set out the way that we assess defects to determine need for action, and the exact nature of that action. The factors that are taken into account as part of this process include: Standard Defect Intervention Levels Road Hierarchy Safety and risk assessments carried out by inspectors. Note that as part of proposals to remove the clientcontractor split for highway maintenance we are intending to delegate budgetary responsibility for repairs to potholes, and other small-scale works to Environmental Direct Services. Service Levels and Standards The following service standards apply to carriageways: Public standards set out on the Council s website (see figure below) Internal inspection procedures and manual An annual report to the executive committee setsout and agrees intervention levels for the coming Page 157

159 year. Option Appraisal Whilst we do carry out an assessment of the balance between the level of routine and planned maintenance for our highways network funding planning, as shown in the figure above, in practice, at the levels of funding that we currently operate under, there is little opportunity to consider different options for the level of routine and reactive maintenance. Such maintenance is primarily safety driven and therefore there is little opportunity to make reductions in the level of activity. The intention is that the improvements to processes and supporting models that will be introduced as part of our HAMP will enable us to make a case for increases in levels of funding in planned maintenance and a subsequent reduction in levels of routine and reactive maintenance, by demonstrating the improvements to whole life costs and longer-term financial benefits in taking such an approach. We have not considered different options for the intervention levels currently agreed, which are wellestablished and accepted both within the Council and by our insurers, but it may be necessary to review them and to consider different options in future if current levels of funding continue. We would also need to assess the possible impact of such options on our level of liability claims and our insurance premium. Applicable Standards, Codes of Practice and Procedures Well Maintained Highways Intervention Levels as agreed by executive committee Winter Maintenance Operational Plan, and the associated winter service policy statement. Page 158

160 London Borough of Hounslow Website Highways Defect Intervention Levels Lifecycle Stage 2. Renewal or Replacement of Carriageways and Associated Items Renewal or replacement activities, to return carriageways and/or associated items to as new capacity and condition (or to current standards, which may be better than the original standards, given advancements in technology), encompasses the following: Planned carriageway maintenance Resurfacing Surface Dressing Thin surfacing Strengthening Planned patching Reconstruction Replacement of lining Replacement of ironwork Page 159

161 Identification of Need: The identification of need for replacement or renewal of carriageways and associated items comes from a number of sources, including; Condition assessment surveys, the analysis of which are outlined in the process description above Local knowledge by area engineers and inspectors, and from other officers Public and member reports Reviews of the long-term programme Opportunities presented to carry out works in conjunction with works to other asset components, e.g. footway works. Selection of Option(s): Every street in the borough forms part of our long-term works programme with a priority for renewal or replacement allocated based upon UKPMS processing of the most recent survey data. Those streets with the highest priority form one input to the annual works programme, and those with the next-higher level of prioritisation are programmed for the next 3-5 years. This process will be retained and expanded as part or the development of our value management processes and associated works programming processes described elsewhere in the HAMP and our improvement plan. The identification of options for carriageway renewals or replacement schemes includes options for the following: The division of overall levels of budget between the different treatment types (resurfacing, surface treatment, strengthening, etc..) The locations for which treatments will take place Extent of treatment at those locations The type of treatment to carried out The detailed design and specification of that treatment If and how the carriageway works will be combined with works to other asset components The balance between preventative maintenance schemes, which may not be in the worst condition but which are of better value, and Page 160

162 Applicable Standards: treatments to carriageways in worst condition. We recognise that we have to make significant improvements to this process over the coming years to establish effective asset management processes based upon life-cycle planning principles, in particular in developing a value management process that takes into account the life-cycle cost implications of various possible scheme options and in developing models and systems to support such an approach. These processes will also need to consider different options for the balance between funding of routine and planned maintenance, and consider risks in determining treatments and priorities. The value management process will also institute a more rigorous assessment of expected and actual treatment lives associated with treatment options. Our consideration of options for renewals and replacement is currently based upon: Budget levels Member input and priorities UKPMS outputs and priorities Engineering judgement Public reports Performance Indicators UKPMS Contract specifications The Design Manual for Roads and Bridges (DMRB) Well Maintained Highways LBH Design Guide Manual (within LIP) CDM and H&S standards Lifecycle Stage 3. Upgrading of Carriageways and Associated Items The upgrading of carriageway to result in improvements in the service provided above that provided for in its original design encompasses the following: Enhancement schemes Provision of anti-skid, special surfaces, etc. Widening, realignment, etc. Provision of bus lanes, cycle lanes, etc. Lining improvements Page 161

163 Safety schemes Traffic improvement schemes Safe routes to schools Improvements to strength of roads to cope with Airport HGV traffic Identification of Need: The need for upgrading of carriageways is identified from a number of sources, including; Safety and accident records Bus priority routes initiatives Safe routes to school initiatives Traffic calming initiatives New developments and Section 106 upgrading Street Scene audits and street enhancements Heritage improvements in conservation areas Local knowledge Review of planned maintenance needs Members and resident groups Area initiatives inc Single Regeneration Bids Selection of Option(s): Applicable Standards: The selection of options would largely take place as part of the more general initiatives listed above, but options to upgrade rather than to renew at the same standard would be considered in certain circumstances, to provide environmental improvements or as part of area-based initiatives. The options that are considered in such circumstances would include: The use of materials that are of a higher specification or expected life, including highamenity materials in areas of particular need. For example. provision of anti-skid surfaces or coloured surfaces to identify bus lanes would be included here Designing to increase the capacity of a particular carriageway The following standards to the provision of new carriageways: LBH Section 38 standards S106 agreements Standards for adoption from other Parties (check reference) Page 162

164 Well Maintained Highways LBH Design Guide Manual (within LIP) CDM and H&S standards Designing for maintenance in the Highways Design Guide Lifecycle Stage 4. Decommissioning and Disposal of Carriageways and Associated Items We rarely, if ever, have occasion to remove carriageways from the network of adopted highways. Decommissioning of carriageways would generally only take place in conjunction with disposal of the whole street which would only happen in exceptional circumstances. Small lengths of carriageway might be removed from the network as part of major developments, new developments and traffic improvement schemes, but change of use does not, as such, constitute decommissioning. Non-Asset Options Non-asset options are those that allow the performance or capacity of the carriageway to be adjusted by other means, including: Managing Demand Influencing Perception Amend Standards & Targets The nature of the carriageway network is such that there are relatively few non-asset options available to us, but those that we would consider include: Traffic management to discourage use of a particular part of the network width restrictions, 20mph limits etc. Management of expectations from customers, including the mechanisms for communicating with and consulting stakeholders and customers. Page 163

165 Footways and Cycle Tracks Lifecycle Management Plan This section covers specific details on the make-up of the footway and cycle track network and outlines the levels of service and standards that users can expect to be applied to the whole life management of the network. As with the road network, the Council aims to maintain all footways and cycle tracks, which are the responsibility of the highway authority, to a safe and consistent standard dependant on their level of usage. Scope The footway and cycle track asset group comprises the surface and structure of the Footways and Cycletracks within the Borough, both those associated with carriageways and those remote from carriageways. Introduction and Background Footway Hierarchy Footway and Cycle Track Hierarchy is a key part of the inventory data and is used to reflect both pedestrian and cyclist needs, priorities and usage of the network by using a structured classification system which is detailed in the Well Maintained Highways. Footway Hierarchy will not necessarily be determined by the road classification, but the functionality of the footway and scale of use. In urban areas the contribution the contribution of the footway to the public space and street scene is particularly important. Category Category Name Description 1 (a) Prestige Walking Zones Very busy areas of towns and cities with high public space and streetscene contribution. 1 Primary walking Routes Busy urban shopping and business areas and main pedestrian routes. 2 Secondary Walking Routes Medium usage routes through local areas feeding into primary routes, local shopping centres etc. 3 Link Footways Linking local access footways through urban areas and busy rural roads. 4 Local Access Footways Footways associated with low usage, short estate Page 164

166 Footway Hierarchies roads the main routes and cul-de-sacs. In assigning footways to a particular Hierarchy, the following factors are taken into account: Pedestrian volume Current usage and proposed usage Accident and other risk assessment Age and type of footway (e.g. old flagged footways may require more frequent inspection than newly laid); and Character and traffic use of adjoining carriageway The national standard hierarchies for cycle routes, recommended in Well Maintained Highways have been adopted by the Council for its Cycle Route Hierarchy. Category A B C Description Cycle lane forming part of the carriageway, commonly 1.5 metre strip adjacent to the nearside kerb. Cycle gaps at road closure point (no entries allowing cycle access) Cycle track a highway route for cyclists not contiguous with the public footway or carriageway. Shared cycle/pedestrian paths, either segregated by a white line or other physical segregation, or un-segregated. Cycle trails, leisure routes through open spaces. These are not necessarily the responsibility of the highway authority, but may be maintained by an authority under other powers or duties. Survey and Inspection Regimes Inspection of Footways The inspection of footways, as part of the highway network, is fundamental to the planning of maintenance works. It is part of a highway authority s statutory duty to demonstrate that the needs of the highway user are being addressed in a reasonable manner. The inspection regimes for footways may be different from those used on the carriageway of the roads on which they are situated, because their importance to users is different. A central shopping street, with pedestrian priority, would be an obvious example. Page 165

167 The inspections must always include adopted footways away from carriageways. An inspector on foot should undertake all footway inspections. This is normally held to be necessary in litigation. There are two types of inspection safety and detailed inspections (sometimes called routine inspections). The purpose of the latter is to gather specific information to help evaluate design and plan routine maintenance work. There are several systems of inspection. In practical terms, not all defects can usefully be recorded in a single inspection. The following three inspection types are therefore proposed; the first two are already well established in current practice: 1 Safety inspections - principally to identify individual defects in need of urgent or immediate attention. This inspection is normally carried out at very short intervals. 2 Detailed inspections - to record items necessitating maintenance works within a short- to medium-term programme. 3 Provision inspections - to monitor progress on achieving longerterm improvements in serviceability, which are achieved through traffic management, new works or higher-profile enforcement of relevant legislation. This type of inspection, relating largely to the facilities provision dealt with above, falls outside the maintenance brief and will not be addressed in further detail at this stage. Safety Inspections. Safety inspections are designed to identify all defects likely to create danger or serious inconvenience to users of the network or the wider community. Such defects include those that require urgent attention (within 24 hours) as well as those where the locations and sizes are such that longer periods of response would be acceptable. Safety inspection frequencies based upon categories within the network hierarchy are set out below. Page 166

168 Description Category Frequency Prestige Area 1(a) 1 Month Primary walking 1 1 Month route Secondary walking 2 3 months route Link Footway 3 6 months Local Access 4 1 year Footway Safety Inspection Frequencies Defect Intervention Levels All public reports of highways defects are inspected by the following day. Safety defects identified both from public reports and during routine safety inspections are assessed against intervention levels published on the Council s website. To ensure that budgets are contained within their allocation, it is necessary to objectively assess the severity, nature and location of defects to determine if repairs are necessary. Defects will only be repaired if they are regarded as hazardous or serious, and in order that consistent standards are adopted throughout the Borough, clearly defined categories known as intervention levels are set, which are set out below. Very heavily used (town centres) Heavily used (shopping areas, schools, hospitals etc.) Frequently used (principal roads) Other (residential roads) 15 mm trip / rocker 20 mm trip / rocker 25 mm trip / rocker 25 mm trip / rocker Footway Defect Intervention Levels If the defect exceeds intervention level an order will be raised. For urgent orders this may be on a 1 day or 1 week priority while less urgent defects will be issued as four week orders. Condition of Footways and Cycletracks In England Footway Condition was identified by BVPI 187 up to 2007/08. We are continuing to collect this as a local indicator. This records the percentage of Categories 1,1A and 2 footways (i.e. the most Page 167

169 important footways) each year where maintenance should be considered. The indicator is based on the collection and analysis of the national standard Detailed Visual Inspection measurements carried out on 50% of Category 1, 1A and 2 footways each year so that complete network coverage will take place every 2 years. There is no national standard survey or Best Value Performance Indicator for Cycletracks or for the lesser used (Category 3 and 4) footways within the network. Surveys of these features take place at the same time as the carriageway surveys. There is presently no statutory indicator specifically identifying the condition of cycle routes but guidance on investigatory levels for cycle routes is provided in TRL 535 and the footway and Cycle Route Construction and Maintenance Guide AG26. As well as assessing the performance of the network through the various condition surveys the Council also monitors other streams of readily available information, such as number of defects or potholes made safe, customer enquiries and complaints, information collected during highway safety inspections. Footways and Cycletracks Life Cycle Management Lifecycle Stage 1. Creation or Acquisition of Footways and Cycletracks Hounslow s network is a well-developed, mature network, and as such there are few instances of new provision. Asset creation is usually as a result of major works that either creates the asset where one previously did not exist or when improvements are made to the asset, which surpass it original capacity. Acquisitions, particularly with regard to footways, by the authority are mostly as a result of adopting new highways from developers. Creation of new highway assets by the authority is generally managed through the Local Implementation Plan (LIP). Routine and Reactive Maintenance for Footways and Cycletracks to maintain Safety and Serviceability Page 168

170 At current levels of funding and condition, we rely heavily on routine and reactive maintenance of carriageways to keep them in a safe and serviceable condition. Routine Maintenance is the day-to-day aspect of maintaining the footway and cycle track network in a safe and serviceable condition in accordance with the Council s published intervention levels. Routine maintenance activities include: Responsive maintenance Repairs to defects in response to public and ad-hoc reports. Safety inspection maintenance Repairs of defects identified as part of our rolling programme of routine safety inspections. Winter Maintenance Footways are only treated once snow has settled or during periods of prolonged freezing conditions on a priority basis at locations including: Town Centres Hospitals Old Peoples Homes Day Centres Schools (during term times only) Footbridges Bus Stops In addition to these routine maintenance activities, we carry out condition assessment surveys on our local road network, with surveys being carried out on the principal road network by London Borough of Hammersmith and Fulham as part of the Road 2000 project. General day-to-day maintenance on the footways and cycle tracks that is necessary to maintain them in a safe condition for users is identified and programmed in a timely manner in accordance with the policy on Highway Safety and Defect Inspections. The options and typical treatments available for both day-to-day maintenance and planned maintenance works, are determined in accordance with the following: Maintenance Option Do Nothing Do Minimum Medium Life Long Life Typical Treatment Footway or cycle track is safe and no works are required Make safe with minor repairs Extensive patching works Micro Asphalt surfacing Relay flags and paving Resurface Page 169

171 Improvement Replace flags and paving Reconstruction Change dimensions (realignment), type of construction, etc. Changes dependant on use and demand. Footway Maintenance & Treatment Options Planned maintenance works typically fall in to the Medium, Long Life and Improvement options identified above. These elements of planned maintenance are identified and used to create a proposed programme of works. The identification of need for replacement or renewal of footways and cycletracks and associated items comes from a number of sources, including; Condition assessment surveys, the analysis of which are outlined in the process description above Local knowledge by area engineers and inspectors, and from other officers Public and member reports Reviews of long-term programme Opportunities presented to carry out works in conjunction with works to other asset components e.g. carriageway works Every street in the borough forms part of our long-term works programme with a priority for renewal or replacement allocated on the basis of UKPMS processing of the most recent survey data. Those streets with the highest priority form one input to the annual works programme, and those with the next-highest level of prioritisation are programmed for the next 3-5 years. This process will be retained and expanded as part or the development of our value management processes and associated works programming processes described elsewhere in the HAMP and our improvement plan. Lifecycle Stage 2. Renewal or Replacement of Footways and Cycletracks Renewal or replacement activities, to return footways and cycletracks to as new capacity and condition (or to current standards, which may be better than the original standards, given advancements in technology), encompasses the following: Extensive patching works Micro Asphalt surfacing Relay flags and paving Resurface Replace flags and paving Page 170

172 Reconstruction The identification of options for renewals or replacement schemes considers the following: The division of overall levels of budget between the different treatment types (resurfacing, surface treatment, strengthening etc.) The locations for which treatments will take place Extent of treatment at those locations The type of treatment to carried out The detailed design and specification of that treatment If and how the carriageway works will be combined with works to other asset components The balance between preventative maintenance schemes, which may not be in the worst condition, but which are of better value, and treatments to carriageways in worst condition. We recognise that we have to make significant improvements to this process over the coming years to establish effective asset management processes based upon life-cycle planning principles, in particular in developing a value management process that takes into account the life-cycle cost implications of various possible scheme options and in developing models and systems to support such an approach. These processes will also need to consider different options for the balance between funding of routine and planned maintenance, and consider risks in determining treatments and priorities. The value management process will also institute a more rigorous assessment of expected and actual treatment lives associated with treatment options. Our consideration of options for renewals and replacement is currently based upon: Budget levels Member input and priorities UKPMS outputs and priorities Engineering judgement Public reports Performance Indicators Lifecycle Stage 3. Upgrading of Footways and Cycletracks The upgrading of footways and cycletracks, to result in improvements in the service above that provided for in its original design encompasses the following: Enhancement schemes Page 171

173 Provision of special surfaces, etc. Widening, realignment, etc. Safety schemes Traffic improvement schemes Safe routes to schools The need for upgrading of footways and cycletracks is identified from a number of sources, including: Safety and accident records Bus priority routes initiatives Safe routes to school initiatives Traffic calming initiatives New developments and Section 106 upgrading Street Scene audits and street enhancements Heritage improvements in conservation areas Local knowledge Review of planned maintenance needs Members and resident groups Area initiatives inc Single Regeneration Bids Page 172

174 Lifecycle Stage 4. Decommissioning and Disposal of Footways and Cycletracks We rarely, if ever, have occasion to remove footways and cycletracks from the network of adopted highways. Decommissioning would generally only take place in conjunction with disposal of the whole street which would only happen in exceptional circumstances. Small lengths of might be removed from the network as part of major developments, new developments and traffic improvement schemes, but change of use does not, as such, constitute decommissioning. Due to the legal status of the highway network it is not possible to dispose of any footway or cycle track without due legal process. As with roads the process involves the issuing of a stopping-up order under either Section 247 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 or Section 116 of Highways Act 1980, when a highway is designated as no longer being maintainable at the public expense. This is a process that requires consultation with those affected and often takes several years. However there is also provision under the Countryside & Rights of Way Act 2000 to allow for the closure or diversion of footways, cycle tracks and public rights of way (PROW) for crime prevention reasons. Under these provisions, the highway authority must make a submission to the Secretary of State requesting that the area surrounding the footway be designated as a High Crime Area. The inclusion of a path within a designated area then enables the highway authority to make a public path closure order. It will only be possible to close a route on the grounds of crime prevention if it lies within a designated area. These powers are only applicable to a small number of paths, which are generally remote from the highway or road network. Prior to embarking on such a closure it must be proved that there is a clear link between the existence of the path and persistently high levels of crime. It also has to be considered that the closure of a footpath may inconvenience many legitimate users and as such the Government has stressed that these powers should only be used as a last resort. Non-Asset Options Non-asset options are those that allow the performance or capacity of the carriageway to be adjusted by other means, including: Managing Demand Influencing Perception Amend Standards & Targets Page 173

175 The nature of the carriageway network is such that there are relatively few non-asset options available to us, but those that we would consider include Management of expectations from customers, including the mechanisms for communicating with and consulting stakeholders and customers. Page 174

176 Street Environment Lifecycle Plan Scope This section of the Asset Management Plan deals with Street Trees Grass verges and other grassed and shrub areas. Hanging baskets and flower beds Introduction and Background The street trees, verges and shrub areas play an essential role in ensuring that our streets are attractive and pleasant places for the people of the borough to use. Not only do they improve the quality of the borough s streets but they are also fundamental living resources, needed to counteract environmental problems such as air pollution. A key challenge is ensuring that these resources are managed to balance the need to invest, particularly in the tree stock, in order to preserve the integrity and value of physical assets against the need to provide a high quality service to our customers. Ensuring that our town centres are vibrant and enjoyable spaces means that a high quality environment using attractive plants will ensure that the perception of the borough will increase. These valuable assets are a living part of the street scene and therefore have to be cared for and managed appropriately. The borough is encouraging the Cleaner Safer Greener agenda and by managing our grounds maintenance and street trees correctly we can enhance the street scene and subsequently the environmental quality of the borough. Trees in particular also play a vital role in urban wild life and therefore feed into sustainability and biodiversity issues. The street trees and highway ground maintenance area has recently been put out to tender. The process reviewed the old specification, which historically has been under-funded for many years and this resulted in the borough having poor quality shrub areas and a back log of tree maintenance of 8 years. The re-tendering process meant the specification could be written to deal with the historical funding issues and poor shrub maintenance the borough has received over the last 8 years. Page 175

177 The tendering process also revealed that the service was not funded adequately to get the quality service the borough needs. We have received additional one off funding to assist the service in and In this was used to reduce all of the shrub areas in height, remove all litter and rubbish from the sites and regenerate the vegetation. It also allowed us to provide works to a considerable number of trees using the new regime developed as part of the retendering process. Inventory Street Trees There are some 10,094 street trees within the borough. Of these 2,666 are lime trees and plane trees which are worked upon every three years. There are also 2,374 trees that are a variety of Prunus (flowering / fruit trees), and a considerable amount of Ash (340) and Maples (1,047). The rest of the street tree stock is made up of a variety of other species. Tree sizes are as follows: Very large Large Medium Small 1,066 1,820 3,719 3,489 Highway Grounds Maintenance Assets Shrub beds Flower beds Grass Hedges Rose beds 46,663sqm 47sqm 483,432sqm 5841sqm 470sqm Approach to condition and need assessment The adopted approach for tree management in the borough is based around a three year cycle. This commences with a full survey of all street trees and follows with prioritised pruning operations. Page 176

178 Urgent High risk Decayed, dead, dying, diseased Seriously overgrown Non Urgent Medium Risk Future Encroachment likely Pruning to reduce future risk Good Pruning Practice Low risk Year 1 April 2005 March 2006 Years 2-3 April 2006 March 2008 No work required - resurvey in three years Table Tree Management Cyclical Timetable The lime and plane trees have particular issues and therefore are subject to a different regime of being crown reduced every three years. This break down to a third of the stock of limes and planes is worked upon every year. Trees are also worked upon if there is an immediate health and safety issue or a specific reason and this will be through instruction from the Community Environment Team. The shrub areas were identified as being in poor condition and have received regeneration works in This has entailed cutting shrubs back to approximately 800mm in height. The tree stock in Hounslow is in predominantly fair to good health, with some 9,073 trees falling into the categories of Fair, Good and Excellent and only 562 which are classified as poor; the figure below illustrates this point. Page 177

179 Overview of current approach Verges Grass verges are cut 15 times per year and obstacles strimmed 15 times per year. Each time the verges are cut the litter is removed first. 47,205 linear metres are winter edged each year. Shrubs Shrubs are pruned twice a year to a height of no greater than 1m. This work takes place in May to September a light prune of current season growth to maintain sight lines; then a winter prune in October to March which is a hard prune to reduce height. Other Routine works This includes weed spraying, removing litter, maintenance of hedges and rose beds and also any flowers and summer bedding. Town centres The town centres have a higher specification, the area included is a 500m radius around the town centres. This includes 20 grass cuts and strim to all obstacles. Shrubs will be pruned twice per year and weed spraying occurs 7 times per year. Tree Survey The street trees will be surveyed every three years; this is good arboricultural practice and also assists with mitigation for insurance claims. Lime and Plane trees These trees receive crown reduction every three years. Page 178

180 Other street trees. The survey generates work based on the criteria as above 590 trees have basal growth removed every year. Stump removal is usually carried out a couple of days after the tree s removal. Data and Systems The assets were mapped in 2003/04. The changes are made by CIP who keep the systems up to date. CIP use Confirm. An aspiration is that the Community Environment Team have read-only immediate access to this system. Contractual mechanisms Grounds Maintenance and street trees went out to tender in the spring of 2005 and the contracts were awarded to CIP in August The contract is for 5 years with a 2 year extension. Documentation and standards The draft tree strategy is written and forms the basis for current practice but has not yet been formally adopted as policy. The specification is clear and useable; it also states various standards that the Contractor must be accredited with or working towards, e.g. ISO 9001 and be approved by the Arboricultural Association. Arboricultural work is carried out to the British Standards that are appropriate for the works. Consultation mechanisms When a tree has to be removed we advise the residents that are immediately affected and also the Ward Councillors. However, if it is an emergency and we cannot inform residents prior to the removal, we advise the Ward Councillors in retrospect. When the work towards the draft Tree Strategy was initiated a survey was placed in the HM magazine to establish the views of residents on street trees. Page 179

181 Page 180

182 Area Chiswick Nos. Isleworth & Brentford Nos. Hounslow Central Nos. Heston & Cranford Nos. West Nos. Total Nos. Trees Population Properties Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Do you like trees in an urban environment? Do you live in a road with trees in it? If yes would you like the trees to remain Should the larger trees be lowered more frequently? Should the Council be guided by resident s views? Should the Council act as guardian for the future? Are you interested in being a Tree Warden Table - Summary Of Survey Results Both CIP and the Community Environment Team are working towards getting ISO 9001 accreditation and this will include regular Customer Satisfaction surveys. National and Local PIs There are currently no performance indicators for this area. However the Contractor and Community Environment team are working towards putting sensible informative Performance Indicators in place. Process Descriptions Highway Grounds Maintenance and Street Trees The Community Environment Officers monitor the routine works. If issues are raised these are discussed with the Team Leaders from CIP and resolved. If the matter cannot be resolved at this level it is discussed at the monthly Contract meetings. Trees are dealt with as shown in the process diagram below Page 181

183 Hierarchy As mentioned the town centres have a slightly higher specification. The areas involved are Hounslow Town Centre, Chiswick High Road, Brentford High Street, Hounslow West and Feltham High Street. The lime trees and plane trees are worked upon every three years a third of the stock per year. This is a rolling programme of maintenance. Page 182

184 Lifecycle Stage 1. Creation or Acquisition of Street Trees and Amenity Areas All new street trees and amenity area assets created on the highway are funded through Capital investment where need has been identified. These assets may be created from adoption of new roads from housing and business developments. local environmental improvement schemes, sponsorship S106, Area Committee capital. highway improvement schemes. The street trees, verges and shrub areas play a essential role in ensuring that our streets are attractive and pleasant places for the people of the borough to use. Not only do they improve the quality of the borough s streets but they are also fundamental living resources, needed to counteract environmental problems such as air pollution. A key challenge is ensuring that these resources are managed to balance the need to invest, particularly in the tree stock, in order to preserve the integrity and value of physical assets against the need to provide a high quality service to our customers. Ensuring that our town centres are vibrant and enjoyable spaces means that a high quality environment using attractive plants should be achieved so that the perception of the borough will increase. This can be achieved by identification of need through the following processes. Adoption for new development Area improvements Street Scene Improvement ( Greening the Borough ) Resident request Member requests Enhancement programme (evaluation of planned highway maintenance, and traffic schemes for extra over improvements) Selection of Option (s) The criteria for selection are based upon the following: Housing or business development adoptions, where the developers would have been required to follow Hounslow defined standards Street Scene Design Guide (Draft) where, Health and Safety Page 183

185 Tree Strategy (currently in draft form), that prescribes the maintenance regime that LBH is working towards, together with recommending suitability of species for the streets. Consultation with members of the public Long-term maintainability Application of Standards Environmental Protection Act 1990 EPA 1990 Code of Practice for Litter and refuse Clean Neighbourhoods and Environment Act Cleaner Safer Greener Routine and Reactive Maintenance Routine maintenance to trees will be through two streams - either maintenance to limes and planes or work generated through the survey as described above. There is a drive-by survey every six months to identify any dead, dying or dangerous / diseased trees and this is also being recorded on Confirm. This is intended to pick up any problem. However, emergencies do occur and there is an immediate call-out to deal with the problem if required. Storms can also cause considerable problems and any trees that are damaged will take priority over planned works. Basal growth and low branches are also removed once a year. The basal growth schedule colour codes importance of area so these get done as a priority, e.g. sight lines near a hospital entrance. Shrub areas are subject to regeneration; in all of the shrub areas have been reduced to 800mm as a method to regenerate the shrubs. The borough has a considerable amount of old shrub beds and the contract specification requires 2% of the shrub area to be replanted each year. Condition Monitoring and Need Identification The Street Tree Strategy explains the approach that we aspire to take towards our street tree stock. We have incorporated many of the issues raised in the Strategy into the specification and decisions are now made based on the species of tree, e.g. lime and plane trees. These species are crown reduced which is a viable way of managing a large spreading tree Page 184

186 in today s urban environment. Only certain species can tolerate the large loss of leaf area, usually resulting in vigorous re-growth which will require re-pruning in 2-3 years. Currently we have a 3 year programme in place - an aspiration based on resources available would be to have a 2 year programme for limes and planes. The survey will then prioritise other works. Health and Safety concerns are always inspected by the Contractor and appropriate action carried out. As part of the inventory gathering exercise grass verges will be classified as being poor, fair or good condition. The Tree Warden scheme is a tool to train residents to identify issues and report them to the contractor. Lifecycle Stage 2. Renewal or Replacement Planned maintenance Replacement, e.g. grass for mulch, shrubs for grass etc.) Surface Dressing Re-seeding/returfing Felled trees replacement in near location Identification of Need Environmental improvements (greening of the borough) Condition assessment Local knowledge Public and member reports Review of long-term programme Opportunity to carry out works in conjunction with e.g. footway works Selection of Option(s): Decisions based on: Budget levels Member input judgement Public reports Service levels Value management Inc. Risk assessment Tree Survey Page 185

187 Options: Different species or material Fitness for purpose Location (e.g. buried services) Site conditions Extent of treatment Applicable Standards BS3998:1989 Recommendations for Tree Work Arboricultural Association Approved Contractor AAIS Arboriculture Research Note 48 Definition of the best pruning position Refer to Highway and Arboricultural Maintenance Services Contract for specific Health and Safety requirements Lifecycle Stage 3 - Upgrading Enhancement schemes Provision of more trees in same location (greening the street) Seasonal planting Focus on maintainability Identification of Need: Environmental improvements (greening of the borough) Condition assessment Local knowledge Public and member reports Review of long-term programme Opportunity to carry out works in conjunction with e.g. footway works Selection of Option(s) Need for maintainability Consultation Area Committees Applicable Standards BS3998:1989 Recommendations for Tree Work Arboricultural Association Approved Contractor Page 186

188 AAIS Arboriculture Research Note 48 Definition of the best pruning position Refer to Highway and Arboricultural Maintenance Services Contract for specific Health and Safety requirements Lifecycle Stage 4 Removal, Decommissioning or disposal. Healthy trees are not removed unless there is a specific reason that means there is no other option but to remove the tree. This is always signed off by the Director of Street Management and Public Protection. If the tree is removed because of development, the developer has to contribute trees to compensate the borough for the removal. Reasons for removing a healthy tree are safety of pedestrians, safety of vehicles, thinning out for improvements to street scene, insurance issues, to allow for disabled access (a crossover). It is unlikely that a street will have all trees removed in one go. However, if the trees are diseased it would be necessary. If a tree is dead, dying or dangerous the tree will be removed as quickly as is required. If urgent the tree will be removed immediately and the Community Environment team informed in retrospect. If the tree is found to be dying but safe for the immediate future it will stay in situ for a planned removal. How is the need for disposal identified? The tri annual survey of street trees The DDD twice yearly inspection Residents requests Tree Warden Ad hoc consideration, for example if an area was heavily parked we many consider reducing the size of the grass verge and hard paving the edges to reduce damage to verges. It is unlikely that we would remove the grass verge. Consultation/information process. Residents and Ward Councillors are advised. Each tree removal is approved by the Director of SMPP except in urgent and emergency cases. Unfortunately we are not able to replace where a tree has been removed due to issues surrounding the quality of the soil or disease. We are also unable to replant at a rate that is suitable for a growing healthy tree stock that will be beneficial to the borough now and in future generations. This shortfall needs to be addressed through Page 187

189 additional resources. Additional resources do come from area Committees however the sponsorship of trees needs to be driven forward. Lifecycle Stage 4. Removal, Decommissioning or disposal Rarely if ever Health, dead or dying Safety/risk To facilitate pedestrian or vehicle movement Thinning out for improvement purposes To allow disabled access (crossovers) No whole street removal of trees Removal of verges for footway parking Non-Asset Options: Communication and consultation to manage demand Area committees Tree strategy looking at dedicated resources Monitoring of statutory undertakers Identification of Need: Management of expectations feedback from residents panel Leaflets Articles in HM magazine Page 188

190 Lighting Lifecycle Management Plan Introduction to Street Lighting Street lighting is a part Highways Services Group of the Street Management and Public Protection Department, and is located within the Infrastructure Team. Street lighting is responsible for the maintenance, repair and management of all lamp columns and illuminated signs erected on the adopted public highway that is maintained as part of the SMPP department. It also has the responsibility for the maintenance of all non-illuminated signs and street nameplates. Electricity Suppliers Scottish and Southern are the DNO for Hounslow; they provide all new electricity supplies for lighting columns and feeder pillars from the Utilities Low Voltage cable network that exists throughout the Borough. The DNO will maintain these cables free of charge. 99% of the illuminated signs are supplied by Hounslow s private cable network. The Authority is responsible for the maintenance and repair of these cables. Physical Attributes This asset grouping consists of street lights, illuminated street furniture, subway lights, feeder pillars and belisha beacons including private cables networks which supply these units where they are not directly connected to the regional electricity supply. Lighting columns - are of various types and height between 4.5 metres and 12 metres, the columns are supplied from different manufacturers but are predominantly mild steel manufactured by CORUS meeting specification type G2a. The main light source is High Pressure sodium (SON) that will eventually replace the Low Pressure Sodium (SOX) lamps, 99% of street lights are switched on and off by the use of an electronic photoelectric cell set at 70 lux switch on in the evening and 35 lux switch off in the morning Illuminated signs include all signs that require illumination the signs are either mounted upon a dedicated freestanding post or attached to a Page 189

191 lamp column, all illuminated signs are externally lit and predominantly use a PL compact florescent light source, the majority of illuminated signs are switched on and off by the use of an electronic photoelectric cell set at 70 lux switch on in the evening and 35 lux switch off in the morning Non-illuminated signs includes the reactive and maintenance of all non-illuminated signs including street nameplates, the inventory of non-illuminated signs is currently out of date, it is anticipated that a full inventory of all signs will be completed within the next 12 months Inventory A complete inventory of the street lighting assets was completed in 2003, the inventory is GIS based and is located on the CONFIRM data base, positions of the street lighting units are displayed on the highways register. The inventory was subject to comprehensive validation and quality checking to prepare for the PFI contract. The figure and tables below show: 1. Screen shot of Confirm GIS database overlaid on Highways register 2. Asset by area committee 3. Asset by road hierarchy 4. light source and column type by area committee Page 190

192 Screen shot of Confirm GIS database overlaid on Highways register Columns Centre Island Street Lights School Crossing Flashers Illuminate d Signs Belisha Beacons Feeder Pillars Safety Bollards Area Chiswick Heston & Cranford Isleworth & Brentford Central Hounslow West No code allocated TOTAL Totals Street Lighting Assets by Area Road Class Columns Centre Island Street Lights School Crossing Flashers Illuminated Signs Belisha Beacons Feeder Pillars Safety Bollards Totals BPRN Km Classified B Roads 14Km Classified C Roads 30.5Km Unclassified Local Roads K Back Lanes 4.6Km TOTAL Page 191

193 Street Lighting Assets by Area Steel Column Concret e Column Other Location Area Chiswick Heston & Cranford Isleworth & Brentford Central Hounslow West No code allocated TOTAL Total Street Lighting Types by Area SOX SON Other Total Maintenance Contracts 1. Street Lighting Maintenance contract - Maintaining Lighting and Signing 2. Street Lighting New Works Term Contract The street lighting in Hounslow is currently maintained by Environmental Direct Services Streetlighting. The contract is managed as a service level agreement; this allows maximum flexibility in response to ever changing demands and political agendas. The contract is intended to be benchmarked against other street lighting maintenance term contractors to guarantee that best value is provided by EDS throughout the term of the agreement. The contract is performance based with Environmental Direct Services Streetlighting being paid in proportion to the service they provide as set out in the table below. Standard Performance Level (%) Performance Factor to be applied percentage of lamp columns to the Contractors monthly working payment for Maintain in Lighting and Signing Page 192

194 A feedback form is used to gain opinions of the service provided by the street lighting section. 20 members of the public who have made contact with the Council specifically to report a defective streetlight are sent a feedback form requesting their opinion of the service provided by the Council when initially identifying their original request and subsequently when they repair the defect. The results show that, on average, 85% of users are very satisfied with the service provided The contract includes the maintenance and reactive maintenance of all illuminated street furniture and non illuminated signs erected on adopted public highway (excluding car park ticket machines and signing) as listed below Street lighting. Illuminated signs and signposts. Non-Illuminated signs and signposts. Illuminated bollards. Floodlighting for Zebra Crossings Pedestrian Refuge Centre Island Columns and luminaries. Zebra Pedestrian Crossing Flashing Beacon posts and luminaries. School Patrol warning luminaries. Private, Employer owned underground supply cables. Feeder Pillars. The service level agreement titled Maintaining Lighting and Signing includes the services listed below. Routine Maintenance. Emergency Works Service. (Call-Outs) Planned Maintenance. Customer Service. Performance and Night-time Inspections (Night Scouting) Planned Electrical Testing & Inspecting. Provision of computer equipment, hardware, software, communications and maintenance New complete sign lighting luminaries. The Authorities Street Lighting New Works Term Contractor is used in the installation of new streetlights and illuminated signs and includes Planned painting works. Page 193

195 The supply and installation of: o New lighting schemes. o New traffic schemes. o New complete street lighting luminaries. o New complete luminaries. o New complete illuminated bollards. Underground private cabling/re-cabling works (excluding those repairs to private cables included within Maintain in Lighting and Signing) Park lighting and signs Housing Estate external lighting and signs. Private power supplies to car parking ticket machines. Full detailed specification of routine, non-routine and new works can be found in the Street Lighting Term New works and Maintenance Contract and Part 6 Maintaining Lighting in Signing Condition of Current Lighting Stock Hounslow currently has 16,428 lamp columns; over 23% of the total lighting column stock is aged greater than 30 years and a further 20% has an age between 21 and 30 years. Concerns have been raised about the integrity, safety and cost of maintenance of these old lighting columns. Since about 1990, there has been a general downward pressure on revenue budgets, resulting in a continual systematic reduction in the amount of resources available to carry out inspections, maintenance and renewal programmes at optimal level. A non-destructive sample test was carried out in 2003/2004 and 2004/2005 on 2000 randomly selected samples of tubular steel lighting columns predominantly 5 metres in height and over 30 years old. Those with potential to have known faults were given a top-totoe assessment above and below ground level to determine the risk of collapse in accordance; 96 columns were in such a condition that it was deemed prudent to remove them from service immediately. A further 791 lighting columns are in a state that requires replacement within two years, these were replaced from funding made available over the financial periods of 2006/07 and 2007/08. Page 194

196 In the financial period of 2008/09 capital funding was secured enabling Hounslow to replace another 571 tubular steel lighting columns predominantly 5 metres in height and over 30 years old. From the analysis of the results and extrapolation it is estimated that 2,456 columns of 5 metre high and over 30 years old should be replaced within two years allowing an uplift of 25% to enhance to ISO design standard BS 5489 / BS EN which will improve the level and quality of lighting in the Borough to European lighting standards. Of these 2,456 columns a total of 1,458 have now been replaced, this leaves 998 columns still requiring replacement. There are a further 1,285 lighting columns between 6 and 10 metres high that are over 30 years old and 3,261 lighting columns of various heights that are over 20 years old. In 2008 Hounslow carried out a non-destructive sample test on 804 of these columns situated on traffic routes, 16 columns were in such a condition that it was deemed prudent to remove them from service immediately, these columns were replaced with new with the remainder going into a 3 year retesting programme. The PFI contract will ensure that all of our street lighting columns are compliant with current standards for condition and design within 5 years. Page 195

197 Street Lighting Lifecycle Management Creation and Acquisition (Why do we provide Street Lighting) Street Lighting is not a statutory provision. Local Authorities are able to install street lighting on the public highway under the Highways Act 1966 Succeeding the Local Government Act 1966, The Highways Act 1980 reaffirmed our powers, as the highway authority, to install and operate street lighting on highways, footpaths, etc. maintained at public expense. Although there is no statutory duty on a highway authority to provide street lighting, we do have a duty of care to maintain our existing lighting stock in a safe condition, and to ensure the equipment is fit for the purpose. Additionally, a highway authority has a duty to ensure the safety of the highway. This could, arguably, include the provision of street lighting where there is a demonstrable night time accident problem. Most of the roads and footpaths in Hounslow already have street lighting; it is the policy of this Authority to provide street lighting on all newly adopted highways. If a new road is to be adopted by the Authority the following steps are considered during the design and installation of the street lighting and illuminated signing: Road Category, Pedestrian usage, Location, Environment and Surroundings with careful consideration of the street lighting design will be maintained over the next 30 years. From this a lighting design is developed with the aim of encompassing the lighting of all types of highways and public thoroughfares, assisting traffic safety and ease of passage for all users at night time. It also has a wider social role, helping to reduce crime and the fear of crime, and can contribute to commercial and social use at night of town centres and tourist locations. Road lighting should reveal all the features of the road and traffic that are important to the different types of road user, including pedestrians and police. Routine and Reactive Maintenance Page 196

198 The Maintaining Lighting and Signing Service level agreement includes the following annual cyclic routine and non-routine schedules including: Annual Cleaning and condition assessment of all street lighting columns and luminaries Annual Bulk Change of all street lighting lamps in a 2-4 yearly cycle depending upon lamp type Electrical testing of all illuminated street furniture in a 6 yearly cycle Routine night time inspections of all illuminated street furniture Annual cleaning and condition assessment of all illuminated signs and bollards Annual Bulk Change of all illuminated sign lamps on a 12- month cycle Structural testing of all street lighting and illuminated sign columns after years Visual condition assessment when carrying out any of above annually Update inventory as and when required Reactive Maintenance (scope of works) The reactive and pro-active day to day maintenance, repair and/or replacement of all missing, damaged, defective and faulty equipment and component parts, appertaining to all items of illuminated and non-illuminated street furniture on the public highway. Night Inspections The maintenance contractor completes a night time inspection of all illuminated furniture; the current frequency is 8 inspections per column per year; it is hoped to increase the frequency from September 2005 to 13 inspections per annum, cost permitting. Information All lamp columns in residential roads have an information label advising of how to report a faulty lamp column; these labels are currently out of date with the incorrect telephone number; it is hoped to renew these labels during 2005/06. Consideration of Options Hounslow s policy for street lighting maintenance is proactive and planned; it is considered that an efficient planned maintenance regime will keep the street lighting asset working at maximum Page 197

199 efficiency for the duration of its life; a well managed routine maintenance regime will also extend the life of an asset and save money in the long term. Hounslow currently repairs the majority of all street lighting faults within 3 days and illuminated sign faults within 3 days. Our Emergency Service call out is within 1 hour during office hours and 2 hours at all other times. These response times and efficient planned maintenance regimes enable the service lighting service to have 99.49% of the street lights working at any one time (figures taken from LPI /09) Page 198

200 Start Defect reported to call centre Defect report raised by EDS indentifing further works ouside of contract scope Street Light loss of supply Electric service provived by SEB EDS lighitng emergency call out make safe Flare raised to street lighting to attend fault Order raised to Southern Electric to restore supply under ofgem agreement Supply restored under terms condiiton of maintenance contract Job complete Defect requires urgent response Works will be completed by eds under new works contract ie rep lantern, Flare passed to Street lighitng to attend defect Rasie order to New works term contractor and SEC Asset identified on confirm data base and order raised to EDS Works completed by SEC TC Asset checked on site for attribute accuracy and location EDS attend defect with contracted response times Measurement sheets completed by TC Payment requested by SEC Defect completed Works inspected By engineer Aseet accuracy correct Job signed of by EDS Works and MS satifactory Works rectifeid by Client Asset text attributes updated by EDS and Client Finish works inspected by Client Invoices paid Inspection ok Finish Street Light Fault Reporting Process Page 199

201 Start Night time inspection of 12.5 % of street lights Refer to flow chart for fault reporting EDS list all faults found during patrol Refer to BVPI 215 A Refer to flow chart for fault reporting Engineer identifies all 3 rd party faults Loss of supply by DNO Calculate number of defects as percentage minimum of 98 % of street lights working for full payment Refer to LPI 72 Contractor Paid 1/ 12 of annual contract value for the month Street Lighting Performance Monitoring Process Condition Monitoring and Risk Assessment (how do we asses the condition of existing lamp columns) The age of the column and areas of possible problems primarily determine Hounslow s Condition monitoring and risk assessment, these are identified during the planned routine structural inspections. During the planned maintenance routines through out the year all columns are visually inspected for degradation and corrosion, from this information together with the age of the column a dedicated structural inspection of the column is undertaken. Page 200

202 The structural inspections measure the metal thickness of the column above and below ground level to determine the risk of structural collapse in accordance with guidance from BS5649 / EN40 and the Institution of Lighting Engineers TR22 (2002) lighting columns and sign posts planned inspection regimes. From the structural test a matrix is completed to identify the likelihood and severity of risk. It is generally considered that a column with over 50% loss of thickness is likely to indicate that replacement of the column is required in the near future, while a loss of 25% of thickness should be carefully and frequently monitored if not replaced LOR IOSH level of danger 5 Almost certain 4 Very likely 3 Likely 2 Possible 1 Unlikely 0 Zero to very low SOR IOSH level of danger 5 Fatality/Disabling 4 Major Injury/Illness 3 3 Day Injury/Illness 2 Minor Injury/Illness 1 Very Unlikely Injury/Illness 0 None Risk assessment Column degradation Risk Assessment Danger probable Danger possible Danger unlikely Root Section Measurement Loss of wall thickness Swaged Joint Measurement Loss of wall thickness Visual and Other Assessments (Example only; see TR22 for full visual criteria) >51% >31% Bracket hanging by wires Door reinforcing poor Column leaning >30 degrees 11 to 50% 11 to 30% Paint flaking Surface corrosion present Column leaning slightly 0 to 10% 0 to 10% No Significant deterioration IOSH Level of Risk Score 3, 4 or 5 1 or 2 0 Page 201

203 Risk Matrix Likelihood of Severity of Risk Danger Score Action required Immediate Asses results and action urgent Asses results monitor / retest high priority test annually 2 10 Accelerated structural test programme 2/3 years 1 5 Minor repair painting visual assessment 0 0 Continue routine maintenance retest 6 years Condition Monitoring (When does a lamp column require replacing) If it fails the Structural / Risk assessment If it fails (Destructive) structural testing Failure of Visual Condition Assessment Change in legislation (Non-destructive) Structural Testing It is the aim of the street lighting section that all lamp columns and lantern have positive residual life both in age and structural assessment, and that all roads and footpaths meet all current European lighting standards, Electrical Regulations, CDM and Health and safety Standards. Page 202

204 No Start Is the lamp column over 24 years old or failed Visual Inspection Identify risk from matrix table Wait for period of between 2 and 6 years prior to next test Yes Complete non destructive structural test Does column require replacing No yes Does column pass structural test No Raise order to SEC and Term contractor to replace Replace column yes yes In from local residents of proposed works Does road lighting meet Bs5489 Contractor disposes of redundant column and erect connects new column no Design new road lighting and specification Refer to options table for material lgihting design Flow chart assumes opption 3 Column is inspected by Engineer and signed for payment Site visit to access new column positions Consulate with residents Confirm asset inventory and attributes updated Produce draft drawing Complaints received yes Invoice to contractors paid Produce final drawing no Review and resolve complaints Finish Street Lighting Structural Test Process Page 203

205 Replacing Existing Street Lighting Street lighting replacement is mainly identified from the condition assessment and risk assessment; however a number of other influencing factors may be included: If the lighting levels do not meet the current European Standards If an has a greater occurrence of night time accidents Change of use or upgrade of road, i.e. from class C to A Request by residents associations Request by police Highway improvement schemes (e.g. widening) Road adopted from previous unknown source Highway improvement schemes (e.g. widening) Replacement of existing lighting scene Decision to light an unlit road Change of use / category Request from public / police Accident information Increase in Crime rate Other consideration that influence the design and type of street lighting are the impact on the day-time street scene, the requirements and procedures for recycling, the impact on energy and revenue budgets. The choice of materials and light sources also needs to be considered as this will impact on future maintenance strategies and durability of materials. Upgrading Existing Street Lighting Street lighting upgrading is identified in a similar method to replacing an existing streetlight, although it may be possible to reuse the existing lamp column, depending upon the structural test results. When existing columns may be used then it may be cost effective to increase the wattage of the existing luminaries or to replace the existing luminaries with a type that is more efficient. The current European lighting standards permit a lighting design to reduce the lighting levels if the lamp colour is greater than 60ra the colour rendering index. Page 204

206 Option Modern lighting standards Safe and sustainable infrastructure Maintains service standards Best value compliant Table Options for Upgrading Non Financial Evaluation Contribution to vision for public lighting Failure to deliver vision Timescale 1. DO Will fail to meet Continued deterioration of Service standards will Not compliant as unable No MINIMUM current lighting infrastructure deteriorate over time to produce continuous improvements standards and will decrease as failures increase improvement delivered SCORE PARTIAL Some infrastructure Service standards will Partially compliant Partially meets Depending upon REPLACEME meeting the British deteriorate to retained modernisation level of capital NT Standards stock objectives investment Significant investment to upgrade infrastructure but continued deterioration of high proportion of retained infrastructure lighting standards with higher capital costs. No benefit from latent value in existing infrastructure SCORE , FAST New infrastructure Significant investment Service standards High standards of service Fully meets Fast tracked TRACK. meeting all British producing a fully upgraded and optimised with but higher costs. Achieves modernisation 5 years REPLACE. lighting Standards modern infrastructure sustainable approach best value objectives towards maintaining standards SCORE , FULL All equipment Total replacement on a like for Service standards at High standards of service Fully meets Phased approach REPLACEME replaced to meet like basis over assessment least maintained with meeting community needs modernisation 8 years NT. British Standards periods. Will produce a safer the ability to introduce and benefits, utilises value objectives over assessment and sustainable infrastructure. new delivery methods in existing infrastructure period Not environmentally friendly, replacing stock to early very high cost / SCORE Total score max 50 Page 205

207 Options/Outcome Background - Approximately 75% of lighting complies with current standards of safety. Lighting levels from approximately 40% of the Council s stock do not meet EN31201 / BS 5489 the current standards for road lighting. Do Nothing - Corroding Steel and cast iron columns showing corrosion and lacking suitable door compartments, necessitating in certain circumstances feeder pillars adjacent to or complete removal of the street light. Older lanterns are energy inefficient and contribute to Sky Glow. Poorly sited bollards, leading to high knockdown rate and high emergency callout costs. Cable joining of non-compatible cable construction types, resulting in nonmaintainable systems and the continuity of directly opposing earthing systems. Increasing Maintenance costs and night time road traffic accidents and night time crime incidents. Option 1 - Do Minimum - Gradual decay of lighting stock will make the streets look poorer Continuation of sky glow ; rate of night time accidents continues at same level. Rate of crime continues at same level. Personal Safety Possibility of injury accidents due to installation failure or collapse. Gradual deteriorating lighting standards would discourage the night time use of streets by pedestrians, cyclists etc. Option 2 - Partial Replacement - Reduction in traffic pollution better lighting will encourage night time use of the streets by pedestrians and cyclists, and subsequently increased use of public transport Improvement in aesthetic appearance of lighting installation will improve street scene. Modern luminaries will decrease sky-glow, glare and light pollution. Improvement in aesthetic appearance of lighting installations across the whole borough, including established Conservation Areas. Reduction in night time burglary, theft, vandalism, violent crime etc. Reduction of risk of injury caused by falling columns or signs. Increased pedestrian and cycle usage over the use of private vehicles. Reduction in public transport journey time if less private vehicles used, however difficult to quantify. Increased pedestrian usage of streets and public transport will reduce congestion and there fore journey time should fall. Improved safety in the community would benefit night time economy and wider employment opportunities. Reduction in crime may also encourage investment and thus have a positive impact on job creation. Assists by encouraging and facilitating the after dark usage of public transport. Assists by encouraging and facilitating the use of public transport, walking and cycling as alternatives to the private car, and thus contributing to social inclusion. Benefits that improved and better-maintained lighting and traffic signs would bring are supported by London Page 206

208 borough of Hounslow development plan and in line with both national and local transport policies and objectives Option 4 Full Replacement - Reduction in traffic pollution better lighting will encourage night time use of the streets by pedestrians and cyclists, and subsequently increased use of public transport. Improvement in aesthetic appearance of lighting installation will improve street scene. Modern luminaries will decrease sky-glow, glare and light pollution. Improvement in aesthetic appearance of lighting installations across the whole borough, including established Conservation Areas. Improved lighting of streets and traffic signs will assist towards the reduction of night-time traffic accidents. Reduction in night time burglary, theft, vandalism, violent crime etc. Reduction of risk of injury caused by falling columns or signs. Reduction of risk of injury caused by falling columns or signs. Increased pedestrian usage of streets and public transport will reduce congestion and there fore journey time should fall Improved safety in the community would benefit night time economy and wider employment opportunities. Reduction in crime may also encourage investment and thus have a positive impact on job creation. Better lighting improves the safety of the streets for pedestrians and cyclists. Reduction and rationalisation of street furniture and more suitable positioning of columns will improve accessibility Assists by encouraging and facilitating the after dark usage of public transport. Assists by encouraging and facilitating the use of public transport, walking and cycling as alternatives to the private car, and thus contributing to social inclusion. Benefits that improved and better-maintained lighting and traffic signs would bring are supported by London borough of Hounslow development plan and in line with both national and local transport policies and objectives Conclusion Hounslow stock is in reasonably good condition and below the national average; it is considered that Hounslow should be prudent to use options 3 /4 partial or fast track replacement in the short term with an initial Capital allocation of 2.5M to replace all structurally defective and life expired columns. The entire funding of future replacements will then need to be considered in when the majority of stock will be coming up to 30 years of age The future The street lighting section commissioned Consultants Jacobs Babtie to identify a funding review to prepare the service for future needs This report proposes increasing the street lighting revenue budget to 1.15 Million per annum excluding energy costs. It also proposes an initial Capital injection of 2.5 million to achieve the Authority s Page 207

209 target of all columns to be less than 30 years old with sustainable revenue budgets and a high cost benefit ratio Disposal The asset management plan generally considers disposal only in conjunction with disposal of the whole street which would only happen in exceptional circumstances, disposal of individual assets is part of the existing term Maintenance and new works contracts In the rare case in change of responsibility / ownership it is considered that the existing infrastructure would be transferred The process for disposal is detailed as part of the CDM and Health and Safety regulations. Where possible lighting column posts will be recycled and reused. An example of this are keep left bollard shells where the damaged usable shell is recycled into a new useable shell. We currently identify the need for disposal at the design stage, and only use recyclable stock as required by national standards Documentation and standards referred to ILE TR22 Well-Lit Highways Roads Liaison Group ILE code of practice for safety in Electrical Operations Health and Safety Regulations CDM 1994 BS5489 /EN13201 European Lighting Design Standards BS7671 Code of Practice for Electrical Installations (IEE regulations) Street Lighting funding review 2005 / 2035 completed by Jacobs Babtie on behalf of LBH Maintain in Lighting and Signing EDS Maintenance service level agreement 1st August 05 Street Lighting New Works Term Contract Street Management Design Guide 2005 Page 208

210 Bridges and Structures Lifecycle Management Plan Introduction to Bridges and Structures Bridges are essential components of the UK transport infrastructure and their safety and serviceability is therefore vital in the smooth functioning of the transport systems/network. Society expects and perceives bridges to be safe and the fact that there have been no cases of catastrophic bridge failures in recent years is due largely to the skills and ability of professional bridge engineers and managers. Bridges and Structures is part of Street Care Services within the Street Management and Public Protection Department, and forms part of the Infrastructure Team. The Structures section is responsible for the inspection, maintenance, repair, replacement, assessment and management of all highway structures on adopted public highway that is maintained as part of the SMPP department. The new Code of Practice was launched by the UK Bridges Board in September The objectives of the Code are to encourage and assist highway authorities and other owners to implement Good Management Practice, harmonise practices, coordinate approaches and share their experiences and practices. The Code emphasises the need for a holistic approach to highway structures management that gives due consideration to the wider highway network and local environment in which the structures exist. This Code covers all aspects of highway structures management, except for the design of new structures or alterations/upgrades to existing structures. The Code identifies the Development of the Implementation Plan; which converts the gap analysis into a formal implementation plan. The plan should identify the activities and timeframes together with the resources required to achieve it. Inventory (Physical Attributes) The asset grouping comprises bridges (both vehicular and pedestrian), culverts, subways, and retaining walls. Bridges are of various types and spans and their construction is mainly brickwork/masonry, concrete or steel. There are also subways serving the areas. Within the borough there are a significant number of structures that carry the highway infrastructure which are owned by other statutory Page 209

211 bodies such as Department for Transport, Network Rail, Environment Agency, London Underground Limited and British Waterways Board. We carry out inspections to all LBH structures. Hounslow is also responsible for inspection and maintenance of footway/carriageway surfacing to bridges owned by other bodies such Network Rail, London Underground Limited. Details of the assets are recorded under individual structures inspections file, and are electronically held in Bridgestation. The Infrastructure Manager makes additions and changes to the asset inventory following significant maintenance work, completion of new schemes or discovery of an existing bridge or retaining wall. The extent of the inventory is indicated in the following table by area and type of construction. Location Brick Arch Reinforced Concrete Steel Pre-stressed Concrete Steel Jack Arch Masonry Arch Timber Various Cranford Feltham North Feltham Isleworth Chiswick 2 5 Kempton Kempton Park 1 Hounslow Hounslow West Bedfont Hanworth 2 Twickenham 1 1 Brentford Hatton 1 1 Osterley 5 Boston manor 2 1 Hayes 2 Heston 1 Whitton 1 Totals Table Structures by area and type of construction. Page 210

212 Owner Bridge Footbridge Culvert Subway Retaining Wall Other Totals London Borough of Hounslow Network Rail London Underground British Waterways Board Other Total Table Structures Assets by type and ownership Many bridges will have elements of brick column steel or concrete within their structure therefore the figures contained are based on the major component and should be used only for indicative purposes. Condition Assessment Condition Monitoring Measures The condition of a bridge element is recorded in terms of the severity of damage/defect and the spatial extent of the damage/defect. The conversion from BCS to BCI maps the values to a linear scale from 0 to 100. The BCI values can be interpreted broadly as the percentage service potential of a bridge. Thus, a BCI value of 100 implies that the bridge has retained 100% of its service potential; a value of 60 indicates that the bridge has lost 40% of its service potential; while a value of zero implies that the bridge is no longer serviceable. Element Condition Score (ECS) uses a severity scale 1 (best) to 5 (worst) and an extent scale of A (non significant) to E (>50% area affected). The severity and extent values for an element are combined to produce ECS. The scoring reflects the view that the extent of damage is less critical then severity of damage. Element Condition Factor (ECF) reflects the influence of the condition of an element has on the overall condition of the bridge. It is evaluated using the element importance classification and Element Condition Score (ECS). Element Condition Index (ECI) indicates the contribution of the Page 211

213 condition of an element makes to the overall health of the bridge. The ECI is determined by adjusting ECS to account for ECF as shown below: ECI = ECS ECF but always > or = 1 This shows that except for elements of very high importance, the damage is less critical for the overall bridge than it is for that element. Bridge Condition Score (BCS) represents the condition of the bridge as a whole and is evaluated as a function of ECI values of elements in a bridge weighted by importance 1 representing no significant damage to 5 implying failure or loss of serviceability. The severity of damage increases non-linearly and is used as a reliable tool for intervention. The Bridge Condition Index (BCI), on the other hand, has a simple linear scale with 100 representing a bridge in very good condition while 0 implies that a bridge is no more serviceable. The BCI is therefore useful for communication outside the operational community. The Bridge Stock Condition Index (BSCI) provides an overview of change in condition of a bridge stock and can be used as a high level strategic tool to compare stocks from different groups as well as different authorities to benchmark performance and bidding for funds. The table below shows the interpretation of the BCSI Av BCSI Crit values in terms of the general condition of the bridge stock. BSCI Range Very Good Good Fair BCSRange Bridge Stock Condition based BSCI Av Bridge stock is in a very good condition. Very few bridges may be in a moderate to severe condition Bridge stock is in a good condition. A few bridges may be in a severe condition Bridge stock is in a fair condition. Some bridges may be in a severe condition. Potential for rapid decrease in condition if sufficient maintenance funding is not provided. Moderate backlog of maintenance work. Bridge Stock Condition based on BSCI Crit Very few critical load bearing elements may be in a moderate to severe condition. Represents very low risk to public safety. A few critical load bearing elements may be in a severe condition. Represents a low risk to public safety. Wide variability of conditions for critical load bearing elements, some may be in a severe condition. Some bridges may represent a moderate risk to public safety unless mitigation measures are in place. Page 212

214 64 40 Poor 39 0 Very Poor Bridge stock is in a poor condition. A significant number of bridges may be in a severe condition. Maintenance work historically under funded and there is a significant backlog of maintenance work Bridge stock is in a very poor condition. Many bridges may be unserviceable or close to it. Maintenance work historically under funded and there is a huge backlog of work. A significant number of critical load bearing elements may be in a severe condition. Some bridges may represent a significant risk to public safety unless mitigation measures are in place. Many critical load bearing elements may be unserviceable or close to it and are in a dangerous condition. Some bridges may represent a high risk to public safety unless mitigation measures are in place. Interpretation of BSCI AV and BSCI crit values Page 213

215 Select Bridge Select Element Element Condition Score (ECS) Element Conditio n Data Element Type Element Importance Classification & Element Condition Factor (ECF) Element Condition Index (ECI) Next Element? Element Importance Factor (EIF) Bridge Condition Score (BCS) Bridge Condition Index (BCI) Next Bridge? Bridge Stock Condition Index (BSCI) Deck Areas Page 214

216 Flow Chart for the derivation of Bridge Condition Indicators. The defect code helps in the identification of Work Required, Priority and Cost. This also provides valuable information about defect types, their frequency of occurrence and cost of repairs. The defect is not used for the evaluation of Bridge Condition Indicators. The results of inspections are now recorded in accordance with the draft CSS (formerly County Surveyors Society) Bridge Condition Index procedures. This system has been in procedure since April Amendments to the procedure were published in May Prior to the adoption of the CSS procedures, modified BE11 forms, as defined by the Highways Agency, were used. As the Project Manager receives each new completed inspection form the BMS system is updated and the overall condition of the asset is recalculated. Current conditions - Inspections The conditions of all structures are monitored through general and principal inspections. Ad-hoc special inspections may be carried out following specific events such as vehicle impact or flooding. Inspections are carried out by in-house engineers/inspectors and are at times tendered out to the consultants. General inspections are carried out every two years and principal inspections every six years. Inspections are carried out in accordance with Departmental Standards BA 63/94 and BD 63/94. General inspections are remote visual inspections whereas principal inspections need to be carried out from within touching distance. Destructive and/or non-destructive testing may also be incorporated with the principal inspections. Current Conditions - strength assessments A nationally funded bridge assessment programme was introduced to check the capability of existing bridges to meet the higher 11.5t axle load and 40/44t gross vehicle weights permitted on UK roads from 1 January The assessment reports comprise special inspections specifically for assessments, material testing results where appropriate and a mathematical evaluation of the way that a bridge is assumed to carry traffic loads. The calculation process starts with a comparatively simplistic approach and continues, where justified, by using more sophisticated analytical techniques. To date the Council has carried out load carrying assessments to all the highway bridges excluding bridges owned by other bodies. Those that were assessed below 40t capacity were programmed for strengthening/replacement. Below is a list of structures that have been successfully strengthened/replaced over previous years. H/08 Baber Bridge Page 215

217 H/09 Baber Auxiliary Bridge H/10 Railshead Bridge H/18 Queens Bridge H/26 Brentford High Street Bridge H/27 White Bridge RW1 Church Street Retaining Wall RW2 Ealing Road Retaining Wall To date the Council has proposed to strengthen/replace the following structures depending on the funding available from TfL: H/02 Park Lane Bridge H/05 Talbot Road Bridge H/06 Church Street Bridge H/12 Richmond Avenue Bridge H/24 St Johns Road Bridge H/47 Augustus Close (The Ham) Bridge However, the Council submits an annual Borough Spending Plan outlining the financial requirement for the bridges. Service Standards for Bridge Management The Highways Act 1980 requires that roads are maintained to allow the passage of all Construction and use vehicles, i.e. those up to 40/44t. Therefore, the primary service standard is to maintain bridges to allow the passage of such vehicles, including smaller vehicles with 11.5t axles, unless a permanent weight restriction has been imposed at a particular bridge. The purpose of a computerised Bridge Management System (BMS) is to assist the bridge manager and others in the management of highway structures. A BMS appropriate to the size and characteristics of the highway structures stock an needs of the authority should be implemented to support the Good Management Practice in accordance to the Code of Practice. The BMS should be part of, or align with, the overall Asset Management System (ASM) used for the management of all highway assets. The basic principles of BMS are; the management of highway structures involving planning, decision-making, scheduling and managing various types of work. A BMS should support these processes through good data storage, management and analysis capabilities. Creation & Acquisition (Why do we provide Bridges) Bridges form an essential part of the highway network, and it is a Page 216

218 means of crossing an obstacle such as river, rail, etc. It is the statutory duty for the highway authority to provide and maintain highway structures in a serviceable condition. Construction of a new bridge may arise from various factors such as local economy and growth of housing, which will lead to building more bridges for the safe passage of traffic and public. Almost every area of Hounslow is served with various types of bridges with the exception of some areas. Two number footbridges are proposed for construction adjacent to two railway bridges that does not have footways either side. Routine & Reactive Maintenance Routine maintenance is the regular ongoing day-to-day work that is necessary to keep assets operating. Steady state maintenance can be split into Preventative and Essential maintenance. The former covers work to deal with defects, replace components and includes repointing, repainting, re-waterproofing, minor concrete repairs and cathodic protection. The latter heading covers rehabilitation work undertaken when part (or whole) of a structure is considered to be (or about to become) structurally inadequate, e.g. major concrete repairs, scour repairs, masonry repairs, replacing bearings, and steelwork repairs. Following general and principal inspections the routine maintenance works can be programmed and carried out. The routine works such as vegetation removal, and graffiti cleaning are done on an annual basis. The rehabilitation works are incorporated into the bridge strengthening works. The maintenance works are necessary in order to upkeep the serviceability of any structure and from the safety of the public and transport users. Where the routine maintenance works are not carried out on time the future costs and extent becomes greater. Reactive maintenance, on the other hand, covers the immediate safety of the structure. For example if a bridge parapet or beam is hit by a vehicle then immediate action is required to keep the structure or part of the structure safe (from collapse) and in serviceable condition. This may lead to a special inspection to the damaged element which can be planned for repair/replacement in the future. Performance Monitoring The CSS Bridges Group developed the following suggested Page 217

219 performance indicators: Bridges not meeting highway authority's required carrying capacity as a percentage of total stock Annual maintenance expenditure on bridges as a percentage of stock value Annual maintenance expenditure on retaining walls as a percentage of stock value Performance indicator related to Bridge Condition Through London Bridges Engineering Group (LoBEG) further development work is now taking place with the Highways Agency and Atkins to consolidate the existing work and to prepare four further indicators: Condition - the physical condition of structural elements compared with the as built/new condition (to be based on the CSS BCI procedure) Reliability - the reliability of the structure in supporting traffic loading Availability - the availability of the structure of its required purpose i.e. traffic Outstanding Maintenance - work identified from inspections and from other programmes but not planned for execution in the next financial year Asset Valuation The average cost of replacing a typical highway bridge deck in an urban area is in the region 400k - 600k. This indicates that a cost of 2.5k per square metre, excluding other major costs such as statutory diversions, traffic management, etc. At the present time individual project appraisal is carried out using the whole life costing approach set out in Highways Agency Standard BD36. Performance Gaps The adoption of the CSS Bridge Condition Indicator process is still in its early phrases. The early indicators are that the overall average condition of the bridge stock is good. However, the initial rating for critical elements of structures is of more concern. The large number of structures awaiting major revenue funded maintenance is also hidden by these general figures. It should also be noted that a preventative maintenance painting programme has not been undertaken for many years. Performance gap analyses is a comparison of the As-Is and To-Be Page 218

220 practices to identify the gaps. The gap analyses should include an assessment of costs and resources required to close the gaps, the benefits of closing the gap and the resources/training needed to sustain the To-Be position once in place. The overall key problem areas are as follows: Sub standard strength assessment bridges Sub standard parapets Road over rail mitigation measures Disability Discrimination Act improvements Shift from 'reactive' to 'preventative' maintenance Maintenance backlog It should be an objective to eliminate this backlog at a rate that minimises whole life costs. Risk Assessment and Management Under the LoBEG assessment programme the following are considered: Initial assessment Detailed assessment Risk assessment Feasibility studies Feasibility studies determine the optimal option to mitigate the risk to motorist/public, and look into the various options of repair/rehabilitation and/or strengthening schemes. The risk management of bridges that have failed strength assessments is covered by procedures set out in BA79. Current levels of funding are likely to result in traffic restrictions having to be imposed to ensure public safety. Replacing Existing Bridges The replacement of bridges and structures are determined from the failed load assessment along with the condition assessment and the risk assessment. Along with these there are other factors which influence the replacement projects are as follows: Increased traffic loading over the years Require widened lane due to increased traffic volumes Major weak elements within the structure Page 219

221 Age of the structure reaching its end of service life Strengthening Existing Bridges The upgrading and/or strengthening of bridges are identified through similar means to replacing a bridge, but the strengthening programme involves different set of assessment, rehabilitation design that opposed to the replacement scheme. The strengthening scheme also at times includes the do nothing option, however normally it is not considered as a viable case. The factors that influence the strengthening options are as follows: Replace like for like material Add new material/element Add external pre-stressing Upgrade/change the parapet type In 1998 the Government published a White Paper entitled 'Roads 2000: A new Deal for Roads'. The White Paper required local authorities to: arrest deterioration in condition on local roads by 2004 remove the maintenance backlog by 2010 The structures that require strengthening are identified from the stock that has been assessed as part of the nationally funded bridge assessment programme. Disposal Plan Disposal is any activity that removes a decommissioned asset, including sale, demolition or relocation. Disposal of structures assets will generally occur as part of disposal of a larger asset grouping like roads and footways. However, other drivers may result in development of a disposal programme as shown below Page 220

222 OPTION DO MINIMUM MODERN BRIDGE STANDARDS Will fail to meet current bridge standards and will decrease as failures increase SAFE AND SUSTAINABLE INFRASTRUCTURE Continued deterioration of infrastructure MAINTAINS SERVICE STANDARDS Service standards will deteriorate over time BEST VALUE COMPLIANT Not compliant as unable to produce continuous improvement CONTRIBUTION TO VISION FOR STRUCTURES Failure to deliver vision TIMESCALE TOTAL SCORE Max 50 No improvements delivered SCORE PARTIAL Depending upon level REPLACEMENT of capital investment Some infrastructure meeting the British Standards Significant investment to upgrade infrastructure but continued deterioration of high proportion of retained infrastructure Service standards will deteriorate to retained stock Partially compliant bridge standards with higher capital costs. No benefit from latent value in existing infrastructure Partially meets modernisation objectives SCORE STRENGTHENING New infrastructure meeting all British bridge Standards Fully meets modernisation objectives Fast tracked Significant investment producing a fully upgraded and modern infrastructure Service standards optimised with sustainable approach towards maintaining standards High standards of service but higher costs. Achieves best value SCORE FULL Phased approach REPLACEMENT. All equipment replaced to meet British Standards over assessment period Total replacement on a like for like basis over assessment periods. Will produce a safer and sustainable infrastructure. Not environmentally friendly, replacing stock to early Service standards at least maintained with the ability to introduce new delivery methods High standards of service meeting community needs and benefits, utilises value in existing infrastructure very high cost / Fully meets modernisation objectives SCORE Options for Upgrading - Non Financial Evaluation 5 years 8 years Page 221

223 Drainage Lifecycle Management Plan Introduction to Highways and Land Drainage Highways and Land Drainage are essential components of the UK transport infrastructure and their efficient function and serviceability is therefore vital in the smooth functioning of the transport systems/network during wet and adverse weather condition.. Drainage is part of Street Care Services of the Street Management and Public Protection Department, and forms part of the Infrastructure Team. Infrastructure section is responsible for the inspection, maintenance, repair, replacement, assessment and management of all highway drainage on adopted public highway that is maintained as part of the SMPP department. A very important feature of road construction is drainage. New roads include designed drainage systems intended to remove water efficiently from the surface of the highway to provide a safe passage for all vehicles and pedestrians. Older roads may have less sophisticated drainage, but all have features designed to take the water away from the road surface. It is necessary to clean and maintain these drainage provisions so that they can work properly. Problems can occur even when drainage provisions are clean and well maintained. Flooded and waterlogged roads result when the amount of water arriving on the road is greater than the capacity of the drainage facilities that take it away. Exceptional rainfall, a road being in a low lying area, changes in 'run off' from adjoining land and rivers overflowing are some situations that can lead to the road flooding or being waterlogged even when drains are in good working order. Material carried into the drains by floods can also lead to them becoming blocked. Drainage grills and gratings (e.g. on gullies) can become blocked very quickly when materials like mud are deposited on the road or when there is a heavy fall of leaves. If a flooded road is caused by a ruptured water main the water company will be responsible for repairing the damage. Water is directed to drains by the road profile. Puddles (ponding) Page 222

224 tend to occur if there is a depression in the road. This can be rectified where necessary by local patching of the road surface. Wherever possible it is encouraged to have sustainable drainage systems to for highway drainage. The features of this system are swales (form of a ditch sometimes with small embankments either sides of it), soakaways (concrete or brick chamber with without base and opening in the chamber walls and infiltration trenches and filter drains. All above features allow rainwater to infiltrate in to the ground thereby reducing the amount of water discharging in to the sewers and rivers thus avoiding flooding. The following notes give guidance on responsibilities for dealing with various types of flooding: Flooding from Public Sewers The water company, Thames Water, own and manage the network of public foul and surface water sewers. Therefore, Thames Water is the responsible authority to resolve problems with respect to overflowing public sewers. Flooding from Private Sewers or Drains Private sewers or drains are the responsibility of the owners. Flooding from the Public Highway Streetcare services are responsible for dealing with flooding from the public highway or reporting blocked road gullies or gratings. Flooding from a Burst Water Main Thames Water is responsible for their supply up to and including the water stopcock. Flooding from a Main River The main rivers are the responsibility of the Environment Agency. In addition, the Agency provides a "Floodline", which is a 24 hour advice and information service for floods and flood warnings. Flooding from Watercourses other than Main Rivers Watercourses, other than main rivers, are the responsibility of riparian owners. A riparian owner is a one who has a property or land is on, or very near, a watercourse. Riparian owners have a duty to keep the watercourse clear of any obstruction to flow and the Council can serve legal notices on riparian owners to deal with obstructions. Certain "strategic" watercourses, that are known to pose a high risk of property flooding if they become blocked, are Page 223

225 checked and maintained by the Council's contractor on a regular basis. Provision of Sandbags to Protect against Flooding The Council make sandbags available to residents of the borough during extreme situations, to enable them to protect their homes from flooding. However, residents who are aware that their homes are at a high risk of flooding, e.g. as a result of the close proximity of a watercourse, are recommended to obtain sandbags from a builders' merchant to enable early preparation, as at times of flooding the Council's contractor may not be able to reach all properties before flooding occurs. Inventory (Physical Attributes) The drainage asset grouping comprises Gullies and their associated connections to the public sewer system, culverts and soakaways. Within the borough there are about 25,000 gullies and 75km of associated pipe works connections to the public sewers within the borough s road network. As far as the Land drainage responsibilities are concerned, the Council is responsible of maintaining 16km of riverbanks and 10km of watercourses. Infrastructure team carry out inspections and maintenance work of riverbanks where London Borough of Hounslow are the riparian owner - a person who owns the land adjoining a watercourse. The extent of the inventory of open ditches and watercourses is indicated in the following table Watercourse/River Owner/ Responsible Party Land Drainage Authority Osterly Border Watercourse Riparian LB Hounslow Trumpers Wood Ditch Riparian LB Hounslow Wyke Green Golf Course Wyke Green Golf Course LB Hounslow Osterly Park National Trust National Trust Cranford Infants School Riparian LB Hounslow drain Heathrow Ind Trading Este Riparian LB Hounslow Bedfont Close/Caines Lane Riparian LB Hounslow Hounslow Heath Golf Course Riparian LB Hounslow Westmacott Jubilee Way W/C Riparian LB Hounslow Crematorium Drain Riparian LB Hounslow Catherine Parr Riparian LB Hounslow Portlane Brook Environment Agency Environment Agency Page 224

226 Watercourse/River Upper Feltham Brook Owner/ Responsible Party Environment Agency Land Drainage Authority Environment Agency Church Rd Drain Riparian LB Hounslow Moatside Lakes Riparian LB Hounslow The Parkway Riparian LB Hounslow Jersey Rd Riparian LB Hounslow Greenman Lane Riparian LB Hounslow Farm Land Faggs Rd Riparian LB Hounslow Ashford Rd Riparian LB Hounslow Castleway Riparian LB Hounslow Brabazon Rd Riparian LB Hounslow Harlequin Close Riparian LB Hounslow Duke of Northumberland Environment Environment Agency River Agency Longford River Royal Parks Royal Park River Crane Environment Agency Environment Agency River Brent Environment Agency Environment Agency SSSI Syon Park Environment Agency Environment Agency Number of Gullies and the frequency of cleaning of them In Area Committees Location Feltham, Bedfont and Hanworth (West Area) Number of Gullies 7354 Chiswick Area 5166 Isleworth and Brentford Area 3531 Hounslow central Area 6814 Cranford and Heston 4025 Maintenance Provision Clean every gully once a year and gullies in stains road are cleaned twice a year Clean every gully once a year and gullies in Chiswick high street are cleaned in twice a year Clean every gully once a year and the gullies in the London Road and Twickenham are cleaned twice a year Clean every gully once a year and gullies in town centre and High Street are cleaned twice a year. Clean every gully once a year and gullies in the Cranford high street twice a year. Condition Assessment Condition Assessment of gullies is made during gully cleaning Page 225

227 operation and the maintenance programme is made for various remedial works required for gullies following the assessment. However, reactive maintenance will be carried out as result of requests made by the members of public. Similarly, the condition assessment of river banks and watercourses are made in accordance with the assessment criteria of the Environment Agency. Current conditions - Inspections During a cleaning operation Drainage Technicians assess the condition of the gully grating and the frame with regard to its structural condition. Further assessment of the gully pot and its connection to the public sewer is carried out by water testing the system following cleaning operation. During the last two years the Drainage Crew has followed the procedure outline above. It was revealed that approximately 80% of the highway drainage system is in good serviceable condition. Although 80% of gullies and their connection to sewers and water courses are in serviceable condition most of them are over 50 years old and require continuous close monitoring of their condition in order to avoid sudden collapse causing flooding and risking road accidents. Any relaxation of the cleaning and inspection regime of the drainage system will result in more of its features falling into the defective category and requiring a major replacement programme. Therefore it is envisaged that the frequency of cleaning and inspection of the system will have to be increased. This will keep the highway and land drainage system fully operable thereby minimising the major funding requirement. Performance Indicators Currently there are no national indicators for drainage related activities. However, it is intended to form a benchmarking club to assess how best to formulate indicators with respect to the number of highway flooding incidents, cost of repair of highway drainage infrastructure and flooding events from watercourses and the cost of maintenance of water courses. Life Cycle Plan Page 226

228 In accordance with the Local Government Act 1966 and the Highways Act 1980 the Council as the Highways authority has a statutory requirement to provide an adequate drainage system for the purpose of draining and preventing surface water flooding of the highway Routine and Reactive Maintenance The annual cyclic routine cleaning and inspection of highways and land drainage system is carried out by the in-house drainage team whilst the structural maintenance involving replacement gullies and associates pipe work is normally carried out by an external contractor, selected through a competitive tendering procedure set out by the Council. The annual cyclic maintenance includes the following activities: Annual cleaning gully pots and associated pipe work connection to the public sewers and watercourses. Clean gully gratings and frame including apply necessary lubricant to facilitate maintenance. Clean Council owned drainage and inspection chambers. Clean chamber covers including application of lubricants Clean soakaways pits/chambers Inspection of highways and land drainage system Produce defects schedule general defects are cracked gully gratings and frame, defective fitting of grating into the frame and defective/collapsed pipe work Produce works orders for external contractors to carry out works identified in the schedule Payments to the contractors following completion of works Update the inventory of drainage asset Reactive Maintenance The reactive and pro-active daily maintenance involve repair and/or replacement of all missing, damaged and defective gullies and associated pipe works. Reactive maintenance will normally be carried out upon receipt of complaints from members of the public and officers (Highway Inspectors) of the Council when they found defective asset during their site visits. Enhancement of the system This will be carried in conjunction with implementation of major enhancement/refurbishment work of highway works or to reduce/illuminate of frequent flooding. Page 227

229 Start Defects reported by members of public Cleaning gullies and connections in line with annual programme Monitoring the performance Partially passed Water testing and inspection of gullies and connections Test Failed Report to Drainage Engineer Condition deterioration Test pass Request Drainage Crew to resolve No further action required Crew failed to resolve Update the Inventory Instruct the contractor to carry out work Further work Not satisfied with work Inspection of work Satisfied with work Satisfactory Inspection Pay to the contractor Figure - Drainage Fault Reporting Process Page 228

230 Non-Illuminated Street Furniture Lifecycle Plan Scope of Life Cycle Plan This section of the asset management plan relates to the items of street furniture that are placed on the highway to carry out a variety of functions for all users. Introduction It is recognised that these assets may not always be the responsibility of the Local Authority, or may be covered by statutory regulations and therefore the Council has limited control for the management of these. Within the Street Management & Public Protection Department the Environmental Projects Team carries out the Management of these assets. The management and maintenance of street furniture not only ensures that its function is maintained to its optimum but also that its decline in condition or proliferation of unnecessary items or duplication does not impact upon the quality of the street scene. Where the borough is the owner or has responsibility for the asset these may be provided as a statutory requirement of the authority in carrying out its responsibility in managing the highway. The main functions of street furniture on the public highway fall into the following categories: Safety Communication Information Traffic Environment The various types of non-illuminated street furniture considered in this section are shown in the following tables together with its functionality. Page 229

231 Council Asset Type Function Safety Communication Information Traffic Environment Seats and Benches * Bollards * * Traffic Signs * * * * Information Signs * * * Street Name Plates * * Parking Meters * Cycle Stands * * * CCTV Equipment * * * (cameras and poles) Pedestrian guard- * * * rails Knee-rail fencing * * Fencing on walls * * Walls * * Hand-rails * * Litter bins * Gates * * Table London Borough of Hounslow Street Furniture Assets and Functions 3 rd Party Asset Type Asset Function Safety Communication Information Traffic Environment Public Conveniences Advertising panels * Bus-stops and * * shelters Telephone kiosks * Cabinets * Speed Cameras * * Table 3 rd Party Street Furniture Assets and Functions Approach to condition and need assessment * The Borough through partnership contracts has an interest in some assets listed in the second table above, but has a clear responsibility for the maintenance of all assets in the first table above, and it is these assets that that are referred to in the following sections. There is no current planned maintenance regime in place for the management of the Council street furniture, and repairs or replacement have usually been carried out on a reactive / ad hoc basis. However recent capital funding initiatives for street scene improvements have allowed comprehensive assessments of various assets to be made and improvements carried out to either repair, replace, or reduce assets, e.g.: Local Area Enhancement schemes Sign condition survey in 2004 (Principal Roads ) Page 230

232 These funding initiatives are generally one-off and restrict management of assets to certain areas of the borough. With the adoption of the HAMP the Council is intending to carry out a full inventory of all assets in the Borough; this will include a general condition assessment allowing the development of a future planned maintenance programme for these assets, and identification of associated costs. Documentation and standards Standards covering the assets in this section are covered by various documents for manufacture, installation and maintenance where applicable. Examples of these are: British Standards The Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions 2002, New Road and Street Works Act Highways Act Planning legislation This department of the Council is currently in the process of producing a Street Scene Design Guide that aims to set out the key objectives in the choice and management of items of street furniture to be used in the Borough. Consultation mechanisms Where items of furniture are to be installed as a statutory function of the Council formal notification will be publicised in accordance with legislation and guidance. There is no specific consultation process for individual items of street furniture; in general terms consultation is carried out where new items of furniture are to be installed as part of minor & major projects, e.g. local road safety schemes, local environmental improvement schemes, highway improvement schemes. These consultations take place with local residents, elected members and representative groups. Post project surveys are being introduced as part of the Environmental Projects Team s move to achieve Chartermark for its service. Process Descriptions Page 231

233 Maintenance / Replacement With a very limited budget to carry out routine maintenance of these assets the main process for dealing with their management has been on a reactive basis rather than planned. Officers from the Environmental Projects Team receive all enquiries from members of the public, and through routine inspections carried out by officers within other areas of Street Care Services. Instructions for remedial works are issued where funding from current budgets is still available. Although there is no priority criteria set down for dealing with this regime Health & Safety issues will always be addressed as a priority. Where assets are identified as being 3 rd party notice of damage etc will be forwarded to the owners. Asset Creation / Acquisition All new assets erected on the highway are funded through Capital investment where need has been identified as part of a local road safety schemes, local environmental improvement schemes, or highway improvement schemes. The adoption of new roads from housing and business developments may include the acquisition of new assets; these will have been designed in accordance with the Councils standards and statutory requirement. Asset Upgrading / Enhancement Upgrades of existing assets erected on the highway are funded through Capital investment. Asset Disposal Hierarchy: The asset management plan generally considers disposal only in conjunction with disposal of the whole street. However disposal of individual assets may occur where assets are no longer required through changes in statutory requirements or may be removed to reduce street clutter. Page 232

234 There is no hierarchy in the maintenance of items of nonilluminated street furniture other than prioritising H & S issues. However with the hierarchy for highway inspection the number of defect reports will generally lead to a higher standard of maintenance / repair in high profile areas such as Town centres and on Principal Roads. Page 233

235 Appendix 8 Interim Asset Valuation Report Page 234

236 Highway Asset Valuation 1 st Year Interim Report & Comparison Highway Asset Valuation 1 st Year Interim Valuation Report and Comparison Job ref : 103/ Hounslow Asset Valuation Report v1.4 Page 1 of 31 Chris Britton Consultancy October 2007

237 Highway Asset Valuation 1 st Year Interim Report & Comparison Version History Name Signature Date 1.1 Gareth Ellis August 2007 Prepared By 1.2 Andy Pickett September Andy Pickett October Andy Pickett 12 October 2007 Checked & Reviewed by Steve Fitzmaurice October 2007 Approved By Chris Britton October 2007 Issue Status Final Purpose of Issue Incorporating additional client feedback Project Code 103/431 File Reference Hounslow Asset Valuation Report Chris Britton Consultancy #4 Howard Buildings Burpham Lane Guildford Surrey GU4 7NB [email protected] Phone: +44 (0) Fax: +44 (0) Hounslow Asset Valuation Report v1.4 Page 2 of 31 Chris Britton Consultancy October 2007

238 Highway Asset Valuation 1 st Year Interim Report & Comparison Contents Executive Summary... 4 Introduction... 5 Background... 5 Approach taken for the Interim Valuation... 6 Assumptions Made... 9 The Valuation Appendix 1. Detail of the Calculation Appendix 2. Cost Rates Appendix 3. Comparison with other Authorities Appendix 4 Comments on CIPFA Consultation Draft Report Hounslow Asset Valuation Report v1.4 Page 3 of 31 Chris Britton Consultancy October 2007

239 Highway Asset Valuation 1 st Year Interim Report & Comparison Executive Summary This report presents the results of the first year, interim highway asset valuation for the London Borough of Hounslow, carried out in accordance with current national guidelines. The valuation will form part of the Highways Asset Management (HAMP) Plan Version 2. A full, depreciated, benchmark valuation will be produced for publication in the HAMP version 3. The results need to be viewed in the light of current availability of asset information, i.e. inventory and condition, which is in the process of being significantly improved. Comparisons with results from other authorities indicate that the valuation is of the correct order of magnitude, with differences being generally explainable. The headline figures from the valuation are as follows: Assets Valuation Roads including Drainage 472,643,518 Segregated Footpaths 2,009,085 Structures 30,321,000 Lighting 20,738,600 Total 525,712,203 Value per km 1,211,318 That is the value of Hounslow s road network, when depreciation (condition) is not taken into account, i.e. the cost of replacing the whole network with one of modern standard, is 526 million pounds, that is an average of 1.2 million pounds for each km of road network. The Chartered Institute for Public Finance and Accounting (CIPFA) have, at the request of the Government, produced a report reviewing accounting, management and financial mechanisms associated with the valuation of transport infrastructure assets, including highways. This report recommends a change to the SORP (Local Authority Statement of Practice) to allow Asset Management Planning to be used by authorities in valuing their infrastructure assets and to include those valuations in the whole of government accounts. CIPFA is considering comments on the draft report; whilst the draft report is broadly compatible with the approach taken by Hounslow, it is likely that the end result of this process will be changes to the current guidance for local authorities on highways asset valuation, which may necessitate some detailed changes to future calculations Hounslow Asset Valuation Report v1.4 Page 4 of 31 Chris Britton Consultancy October 2007

240 Highway Asset Valuation 1 st Year Interim Report & Comparison Introduction This report has been prepared on behalf of the London Borough of Hounslow (Streetcare Services) by Chris Britton Consultancy, to report the Gross Replacement Cost (GRC) for Hounslow s highway network for the first year, interim valuation as set out in the guidance given by the County Surveyors Society (CSS). 1 The report also details the calculations, identifies assumptions, and benchmarks the valuation against those available for other authorities, and against alternative methods of calculation. The GRC has been calculated from the best information currently available; Hounslow is in the process of collecting a full asset inventory and condition data for highway assets; this will allow a more accurate assessment in future years, as will work going on regionally and nationally to introduce consistency in the derivation of cost rates and for standard approaches to valuation for particular assets, such as structures. Depreciated Replacement Cost will be calculated in the second year benchmark valuation as set out in the CSS guidance. Rates for the calculation have been taken from the current contract schedule of rates (SoR) and are current for the 2007/8 financial year. It is intended that this use of current rates from the SoR, where available, will result in a more locally representative, and accurate calculation and valuation. National or regional rates have not been used except for the calculation of replacement costs for bridges or where sufficient local data on costs is not available. For comparative purposes, a valuation using a model and rates derived on behalf of the South Eastern Counties Service Improvement Group (SECSIG) has also been calculated 2, and also a version of the calculation using assumptions on standard design widths. The Appendices included provide details of the quantity, value and calculations for each asset type for the GRC. Background The key drivers for highway infrastructure asset valuation are: 1. To emphasise the need to preserve the highway infrastructure by placing a monetary value on highway infrastructure assets, albeit that the valuation represents the monetary (capital) value of the assets and not the service provided by the assets, i.e. what the assets are worth to society. 2. To demonstrate asset stewardship by monitoring the asset value over time. It is worth noting however, that the asset value should not be used in isolation as a single measure of performance and serviceability, but should be used in combination with other recognised Performance Measures such as Best Value Performance Indicators (BVPIs) and other Performance Indicators (PIs). 1 Guidance Document for Highway Infrastructure Asset Valuation, County Surveyors Society/TAG Asset Management Working Group, July The Standard Spreadsheet for Computing Transport Asset Valuations: A Study for the South East Centre of Excellence. Michael Rolfe for SECSIG Asset Management Theme Group, April Hounslow Asset Valuation Report v1.4 Page 5 of 31 Chris Britton Consultancy October 2007

241 Highway Asset Valuation 1 st Year Interim Report & Comparison 3. To support Whole of Government Accounts and promote greater accountability, transparency and improved stewardship of public finances. 4. To support Highway Asset Management Asset Valuation provides one facet of the robust financial framework that Asset Management should operate within. In the general sense, Asset valuation is defined as the calculation of the current monetary value of an authority s assets. The current monetary value is expressed as the Depreciated Replacement Cost (DRC) of an authority s highway infrastructure assets, where: DRC = Gross Replacement Cost Accumulated Consumption Gross Replacement Cost The Gross Replacement Cost (GRC) for the highway infrastructure is determined from a bottom up calculation using a standardised procedure involving representative Unit Rates and using a GRC model which derives the cost of replacing an existing asset with a Modern Equivalent Asset. This cost is reported as the 1 st year interim valuation which is the subject of this Report. The GRC is based on modern equivalent construction and has been valued using current prices, from the current SoR through the current contractor. The valuation is based on replacement cost for the standard installation; the Council have not included an allowance for heritage asset items. Accumulated Consumption Assets are consumed during their service life due to ageing, usage, deterioration, damage, a fall in the Level of Service (assessed through appropriate performance Measures) and obsolescence, i.e. the wear and tear and deterioration of the highway infrastructure. Consumption = Depreciation + Impairment which will be calculated for the 2nd year benchmark valuation. Approach taken for the Interim Valuation London Borough of Hounslow has followed, as far as possible, the CSS guidance on the valuation of individual asset types and on their contribution to the overall GRC of the highway asset. The following asset items have been included: Roads (carriageway, footway) Segregated Footpaths and Cycleways Structures Lighting Drainage Kerbs Trees Signs (illuminated and non-illuminated) Lines Markings and studs Hounslow Asset Valuation Report v1.4 Page 6 of 31 Chris Britton Consultancy October 2007

242 Highway Asset Valuation 1 st Year Interim Report & Comparison Guardrails Roundabouts The following items have been excluded from this year s valuation: TfL network (TRLN) Land (no land exists besides for land covered by the roads; the replacement cost of this land is unknown) Traffic Systems (all traffic systems in the Borough are owned and operated by TfL) Street Furniture (apart from street furniture listed above; included in next years benchmark valuation) Unit rates were calculated for the different elements of the carriageway; this included the following asset items : reconstruction of the carriageway reconstruction of the footway attached to the carriageway replacement of road markings and lines replacement and installation of kerbs reconstruction and installation of standard gullies Table 1 sets out the rates used in the calculation for these elements; that all rates relate to Urban classes of roads, since Hounslow has virtually no rural network. Asset Item Reconstruction of the carriageway Reconstruction of the footway attached to the carriageway Replacement of road markings and lines (centre lines) Replacement of road markings and lines (edge lines) Replacement and installation of kerbs Reconstruction and installation of standard gullies Road Class (Urban) Principal Classified B Classified C ` Unclassified 120 per 110 per 110 per 100 per square m square m square m square m 55 per square 55 per square 55 per square 45 per square m m m m 0.54 per linear m per linear m 0.54 per linear m per linear m 0.54 per linear m per linear m 0.54 per linear m per linear m 50 per linear 50 per linear 50 per linear 35 per linear m m m m 1200 per unit 1200 per unit 1200 per unit 1200 per unit Table 1: Unit Rate for Elements of the Road The derivation of these rates is described in more detail in Appendix 2 and in the calculation spreadsheet that accompanies this report. The assumptions that were made as to the quantities and construction of the main asset types are set out below; the Council are in the process of collecting a full asset inventory and condition data, that will allow future valuations to be based on a more precise assessment of the extent of the asset Hounslow Asset Valuation Report v1.4 Page 7 of 31 Chris Britton Consultancy October 2007

243 Highway Asset Valuation 1 st Year Interim Report & Comparison The model used to produce the GRC was developed in Excel, as described in the Appendices. A bespoke programme was not used as it would not allow the same degree of flexibility required for the interim valuation. Excel allows the Council to fine tune the calculation and helps in providing a more transparent and accurate result. The Council will be able to quickly assess the effect of reviewing their assumptions and various asset quantities by making changes to the base information thus establishing items whose change would have a significant effect on the GRC. This helps identify items where closer attention to detail should be given. Figures from the model are given in the Appendices of this report and have also been provided electronically. Valuation of Roads For the purposes of the valuation, Hounslow s road network has been grouped into the following categories: PUS : Principal Urban Single NUS : Non-principal Urban Single UUS : Unclassified Urban Single Non-principal urban single roads have been further broken down into B and C class roads to provide a more accurate breakdown by making different assumptions as to their typical widths. The design widths used for the valuation of Hounslow s roads were agreed with the client, based upon local knowledge of the network are specific to the Borough and differ from the assumptions on standard widths given in the model developed by SECSIG for the modern equivalent, as follows: Road Class Hounslow Carriageway Width (metres) SECSIG Carriageway Width (metres) Principal Roads Classified B Roads Classified C Roads Unclassified Roads The valuation includes calculations made using both methods, for comparative purposes, and also includes calculations made with each method, using the assumptions on carriageway widths from the alternate model. The calculation is based upon urban single roads of bituminous construction; Hounslow has relatively few dual carriageways and no significant length of rural network. It has been assumed that any existing concrete road would be replaced with the standard flexible construction Hounslow Asset Valuation Report v1.4 Page 8 of 31 Chris Britton Consultancy October 2007

244 Highway Asset Valuation 1 st Year Interim Report & Comparison Assumptions Made Carriageway Construction of the carriageway has been broken down into Principal, Classified and Unclassified roads and reconstruction according to the standard breakdown as indicated in Appendix 2 where the costs are also included. Relaying of carriageway and footway surfaces does not include recesses for manholes or statutory boxes. Kerbs As an urban authority, it has been assumed that all carriageways in the Borough have kerbs; the length of kerbs was assumed to be the same as twice the length of the carriageway length plus an additional 10% for centre islands and reserves. This assumption was also made in the calculation of investment need for the Highways PFI Expression of Interest (EOI). For the calculation of rates, it is assumed that concrete kerbs are used on unclassified roads, and that both concrete and granite kerbs are used on other classes of roads. Footways A similar approach has been taken for footways; as the overwhelming majority of carriageways in the Borough will have footways the length of footway was assumed to be slightly less than twice the full carriageway length although the assumed widths will vary by road class. The length of footway has therefore been assumed to be 180% of the carriageway length. This assumption was also made in the calculation of investment need for the Highways PFI Expression of Interest (EOI). For the calculation of areas the assumed footway average footway width for principle roads is 3 metres while for all other roads it is 2 metres. Detailed information exists with regards to footway areas in the Appendices. The majority of footways within the Borough are either of modular or bituminous construction. For the purposes of this assessment, average rates to reflect a mix of modular and bituminous footways have been used. Relaying of carriageway and footway surfaces does not include recesses for manholes or statutory boxes. This has not been added to the calculation. For footways this is a considerable cost, but difficult to assess without accurate inventory data; the availability of the full asset inventory and condition data should allow a more accurate assessment to be made for the benchmark valuation Hounslow Asset Valuation Report v1.4 Page 9 of 31 Chris Britton Consultancy October 2007

245 Highway Asset Valuation 1 st Year Interim Report & Comparison Lines The length of carriageway lines was assessed with the following assumptions, since an accurate account of lines and markings does not exist. The length of centre lines is taken to be the full length of the carriageway, on principal and classified roads, and 20% of the carriageway length on unclassified roads. The length for edge lines have been broken down into single yellow and double yellow each making up 50% of the network on both sides of the road, for principal and classified roads, and 15% on unclassified roads. Parking lines are the same cost as single yellow lines It has therefore been assumed that for the length of edge marking of and of centre lines respectively is 200% and 100% on principal and classified roads, with 60% and 20% on unclassified roads. Other Markings and Studs As Hounslow does not yet have accurate inventory information for other (non-linear) road markings and studs the SECSIG model was used to calculate this rate and the total has been included in the final value for roads. Gullies The number of gullies in the Borough has been assessed, for the purposes of the highways PFI Expression of Interest (EOI), at 26,890. This figure is the basis of this years calculation, until a more accurate figure is available from the asset inventory survey. The cost of replacement has been detailed and calculated as per the SoR, based on a standard gully replacement assumed with a 1.8m gully connection and 2 courses of engineering brick work, 1 new grating and 2 metres of pipework. No other highways drainage has been included in this valuation due to lack of detailed information. Cycleway The replacement cost of cycleways that form part of the carriageway has been included as a notional cost in the carriageway rates and has therefore not been included as a separate entity in the valuation. The length of carriageways remote from the carriageway is unknown, but is a relatively short length and has therefore not been included in calculation Hounslow Asset Valuation Report v1.4 Page 10 of 31 Chris Britton Consultancy October 2007

246 Highway Asset Valuation 1 st Year Interim Report & Comparison Signs The inclusion of signs has been based on an average figure for replacement cost based on the total number of signs replaced in the last year; as the total number of signs is currently unknown an estimate was made to provide this figure. The actual total number will be supplied in the second year valuation after the inventory survey has been completed. The replacement cost is the single average rate for all signs, measured per sign. The quantity of signs used in the calculation is consistent with the figures quoted in the PFI submission at 8,435 nos. Illuminated signs have been included under lighting. Trees The replacement cost for trees takes into account that the bulk of the tree stock in the Borough is comprised of large trees, with a significant proportion being very being large trees. A weighted average was taken for the replacement of trees; as mature trees could not be replaced like-for-like replacement is assumed to be with semimature saplings. The weighted average was taken for the removal and stump treatment cost and this was added to the total replacement cost. The tree officer at CIP states that the figures provided are not a true indication as they based on an average calculation. The true value of the tree which should include atheistic appeal, pollution reduction and various other factors have not been taken into consideration; there would be benefit in discussions at regional and national level to agree a common approach to the valuation of very mature trees that could be replaced like-for-like. Roundabouts As Hounslow does not yet have accurate inventory information for roundabouts the SECSIG model was used to calculate this rate and the total has been included in the final value for roads, as an average value per km of roads, varying between one roundabout every 0.5km on principal roads, through to one every 0.01km on unclassified roads. Traffic Management The more onerous traffic management requirements for main roads met when carrying out highway maintenance work are not applicable to the valuation of large quantities as new construction, i.e. the modern equivalent. Therefore traffic management and out of hours working arrangement costs have not been included. Segregated Footpaths and Pedestrianised areas Rates for reconstruction of segregated footpaths including hard paved public rights of way have been separately included in the calculation Hounslow Asset Valuation Report v1.4 Page 11 of 31 Chris Britton Consultancy October 2007

247 Highway Asset Valuation 1 st Year Interim Report & Comparison Structures London Borough of Hounslow has 30 bridges, 19 footbridges, 4 subways, 5 retaining walls and 3 culverts. Due to the specialist nature of bridges and structures within the Borough and the fact that calculating the different unit rates is somewhat complicated as limited historical data exists regarding their construction, we are in the process of developing estimated unit rates for subways, retaining walls, embankments and culverts. At the time of writing LoBEG have yet to provide unit rate figures for the calculation of the GRC, but we have used the agreed unit rate figure supplied by SEABIG (South East Bridge Information Group) for the cost of replacement for bridges, 4,800 per m2 of deck area, but not for other structures. Traffic Signals / Systems London Borough of Hounslow do not own or maintain any of the traffic signals or traffic management systems within the Borough. These are owned and maintained by TfL and have therefore been excluded from the valuation and the calculation of the GRC. Lighting Unit Rates The Council have recently completed a survey of their lighting stock and this data has been used in the calculations as shown in Appendix 1 and includes illuminated street furniture. In the case of all lamp columns the cost includes the lantern, installation and connection of the supply. Rates for lighting works from the Council s current lighting contractor have been used to calculate the lighting GRC. The calculation was based on lamp columns, illuminated signs and bollards. The replacement for bollards is based on the installation of two at a time and the replacement of illuminated signs is based on the average cost of a sign and includes erection. The calculation includes lamp columns, illuminated signs, bollards, belisha beacons and central island columns all of which have been included in the Summary GRC. London Borough of Hounslow s unit rates as mentioned before have been calculated based on the rates as specified in SoR for the current service contract. The unit rates were calculated for the various asset items based on recent replacement costs for the standard modern equivalent replacement for that particular item. This is set out in more detail in the Appendices. The council is confident that that the rates calculated Hounslow Asset Valuation Report v1.4 Page 12 of 31 Chris Britton Consultancy October 2007

248 Highway Asset Valuation 1 st Year Interim Report & Comparison indicate a fair and accurate representation of the true replacement for modern equivalent. As large areas would be replaced, with full replacement with modern equivalents, the highest band with the lowest price from the schedule of rates has been used to reflect economies of scale. For the carriageway this is 1000 units and for footways this is 100 units. Inventory Data This valuation has been performed using the best available information on current assets. However until accurate asset inventory and condition data is available the full extent of the asset is unknown, and this initial valuation should be interpreted with caution. Currently a full asset inventory and condition data survey is being carried out that will allow a complete and accurate assessment of the extent, scope and condition of the Hounslow s highways assets. This will allow any updates to be added to the valuation to provide a more accurate GRC calculation and will help provide a good platform for use in the second year benchmark valuation, where the DRC will be calculated based on condition, depreciation and impairment. With the Council s good knowledge of contractor rates they have been easy to incorporate into the various spreadsheets, thus allowing fine tuning of the GRC. Similar methods will be used with regards to calculating the DRC for year 2 bench mark valuation 2 programmed for April Hounslow Asset Valuation Report v1.4 Page 13 of 31 Chris Britton Consultancy October 2007

249 Highway Asset Valuation 1 st Year Interim Report & Comparison The Valuation Table 2, below, summarises Hounslow s Interim Asset Valuation and shows, respectively, in columns 3 to 6; 1. Hounslow s Interim Asset Valuation, based upon rates and assumptions described in this report. 2. The Valuation calculated using the model provided by SECSIG, with the attendant assumptions about design standards and its unit rates. 3. An alternative version of Hounslow s Interim Asset Valuation, but replacing the Hounslow-specific assumptions on carriageway widths with those used in the SECSIG calculation. Note that, since these are all lesser widths than those in the Hounslow model, the overall valuation is significantly lower. Once information from the asset inventory and condition data becomes available, it will be possible to make an accurate assessment of carriageway widths and areas. 4. An alternative version of the SECSIG calculation, using Hounslow s assumptions as to carriageway widths. Detailed calculations have been provided in the Appendices and in spreadsheets supplied separately to this report. What is striking from the figures below is the predominance of carriageways and associated footways in the total valuation, and the sensitivity of the overall GRC to differences in unit rates and to assumptions as to widths and areas. Once accurate inventory data is available, it will be possible to derive a valuation with considerably more confidence. Group 1) Roads 2) Segregated Footpaths 3) Structures 4) Lighting Assets Carriageway, Footway, Kerb, Drainage and related items. Interim Asset Valuation SECSIG Calculation Interim Valuation using SECSIG Widths SECSIG Calculation using LBH Widths 472,643, ,000, ,775, ,900,000 Footpaths 2,009,085 1,200,000 2,009,085 1,200,000 Bridges 23,088,000 23,088,000 Retaining Walls 976, ,000 64,800,000 Culverts 590, ,000 Subways 900, ,000 Footbridges 4,767,000 4,767,000 Lamp Columns 16,972,600 16,972,600 20,300,000 Illuminated 64,800,000 20,300,000 Furniture 3,766,000 3,766,000 Total 525,712, ,300, ,843, ,300,000 Value per km 1,211, ,912 1,045,723 1,005,194 Table 2. Interim Asset Valuation Gross Replacement Cost (GRC) Hounslow Asset Valuation Report v1.4 Page 14 of 31 Chris Britton Consultancy October 2007

250 Highway Asset Valuation 1 st Year Interim Report & Comparison Appendix 1. Detail of the Calculation Three spreadsheets have been supplied separately from this report, which set out: 1. The Valuation (HounslowValuation1.4.xls) 2. The SECSIG approach to valuation, for Hounslow s network (Hounslow Valuation1.4_SECSIG calc.xls) 3. The Valuation using the assumptions on carriageway widths from the SECSIG model (HounslowValuation1.4_SECSIG Widths.xls) 4. The SECSIG approach to valuation, but using the width assumptions from the Hounslow valuation (Hounslow Valuation1.4_SECSIG calc_lbh Widths) The tables below provide detail extracted from 1. and 3. (above). Elements of the Composite Rates and Costs for Roads a1. Carriageways Asset Subgroup length(m) width(m) area(m2) rate( /m2) cost( ) Principal Urban ( A) 38, , ,118,000 Non Principal Urban (B) 14, , ,860,000 Non Principal Urban (C) 30, , ,491,500 Unclassified Urban 350, ,280, ,020,000 Totals 434, ,489, a2. Carriageways (Alternative based upon SECSIG carriageway widths) Asset Subgroup length(m) width(m) area(m2) rate( /m2) cost( ) Principal Urban ( A) 38, , ,830,000 Non Principal Urban (B) 14, , ,932,000 Non Principal Urban (C) 30, , ,459,000 Unclassified Urban 350, ,754, ,400,000 Totals 434,000 2,302, ,621, b. Footways associated with Carriageways Asset Subgroup % width area(m2) rate( /m2) cost( ) Principal Urban ( A) , ,493,900 Non Principal Urban (B) , ,772,000 Non Principal Urban (C) , ,039,000 Unclassified Urban , ,829,600 Totals 906,700 77,134, Hounslow Asset Valuation Report v1.4 Page 15 of 31 Chris Britton Consultancy October 2007

251 Highway Asset Valuation 1 st Year Interim Report & Comparison c. Lines Asset Subgroup Centre line rate( /m) % Edge Line rate( /m) % cost( ) Principal Urban ( A) ,143 Non Principal Urban (B) ,460 Non Principal Urban (C) ,645 Unclassified Urban ,960 Totals 337,208 d. Markings and Studs Asset Subgroup % rate( /m) Cost ( ) Principal Urban ( A) ,200 Non Principal Urban (B) ,000 Non Principal Urban (C) ,000 Unclassified Urban ,104,800 Totals 2,604,000 e. Kerbs Asset Subgroup % rate( /m) Cost ( ) Principal Urban ( A) ,063,500 Non Principal Urban (B) ,470,000 Non Principal Urban (C) ,202,500 Unclassified Urban ,783,800 Totals 34,519,800 f. Gullies Rate Asset Subgroup number ( per unit) Cost ( ) All ,200 32,268,000 g. Trees Rate Asset Subgroup number ( per unit) Cost ( ) All ,050 10,722,600 h. Signs Rate Asset Subgroup number ( per unit) Cost ( ) All ,513, Hounslow Asset Valuation Report v1.4 Page 16 of 31 Chris Britton Consultancy October 2007

252 Highway Asset Valuation 1 st Year Interim Report & Comparison i. Roundabouts Asset Subgroup rate( ) no/km Cost ( ) Principal Urban ( A) ,644,750 Non Principal Urban (B) ,500 Non Principal Urban (C) ,850 Unclassified Urban ,180 Totals 2,054,280 Total Costs for Roads Asset Subgroup Valuation ( ) Alternative Valuation using SECSIG Widths ( ) Principal Urban ( A) 107,129,723 97,841,723 Non Principal Urban (B) 18,271,960 13,343,960 Non Principal Urban (C) 34,025,495 28,992,995 Unclassified Urban 313,216, ,596,340 Totals 472,643, ,643,518 Remote Footpaths/Public Rights of Way length(m) width(m) area(m2) rate( /m2) cost( ) 20, , ,009,085 Structures number length(m) width(m) measure Unit unit cost ( /m2) GRC ( ) Bridges ,810 m ,088,000 Footbridges ,767 m ,767,000 Subways m ,000 Retaining Walls (Concrete) m ,000 Culverts m ,000 TOTALS 30,321, Hounslow Asset Valuation Report v1.4 Page 17 of 31 Chris Britton Consultancy October 2007

253 Highway Asset Valuation 1 st Year Interim Report & Comparison Lighting a. Lamp Columns Length (m) Number Cost ( ) Total ( ) < = 5m 5, ,888, m 6, ,218, m 1, ,287, m 2, ,570, m , ,972, b. Illuminated Signs and Bollards Item Number Cost ( ) Total ( ) Illuminated Bollards Illuminated Signs Belisha Beacons 3m Feeder Pillar ,766, Hounslow Asset Valuation Report v1.4 Page 18 of 31 Chris Britton Consultancy October 2007

254 Highway Asset Valuation 1 st Year Interim Report & Comparison Appendix 2. Cost Rates Item Unclassified Roads 400mm Full Depth Construction Classified B and C Roads Full Depth Construction 600mm Principal A Roads Full Depth Construction 890mm Footways (modular) Footways (bituminous) Average Footway Rates Description Break out & cart existing construction Excavate to formation level 200 type 1 construction 150 road base 70 base course 30 wearing course Break out & cart existing construction Excavate to formation level 250 type 1 construction 250 road base 60 base course 40 wearing course Break out & cart existing construction Excavate to formation level 250 capping course 250 type 1 construction 250 road base 100 base course 40 wearing course Break out & cart existing construction Excavate to formation level Provide and lay paving Break out & cart existing construction Excavate to formation level 150 mm type 1 50 mm base Wearing Course Hounslow Cost/m Principal Roads Classified Roads Unclassified Roads SECSIG Cost/m % footway enhancement factor %(B)/19.4%(C) footway enhancement factor % footway enhancement factor Included in footway enhancement factor Included in footway enhancement factor Included in footway enhancement factor Gullies reconstruction 1, Kerbs (Principal and Classified) Kerbs (Unclassified) Lines and Markings Signs Break out existing kerb, bed and backing and cart to tip Lay new bed and backing Provide and lay new granite kerbs Break out existing kerb, bed and backing and cart to tip Lay new bed and backing Provide and lay new concrete kerbs yellow 0.54 n/a white broken/centre 0.54 n/a double yellow 0.81 n/a markings and studs Take down and cart sign Take down and cart post Provide and erect post Provide and fix sign face n/a Hounslow Asset Valuation Report v1.4 Page 19 of 31 Chris Britton Consultancy October 2007

255 Highway Asset Valuation 1 st Year Interim Report & Comparison Item Constructed Roundabouts / Central Reserve Description Hounslow Cost/m2 SECSIG Cost/m2 Reconstruction, excavation and replant cost 85, , Trees Replanting 1, n/a Structures Bridges 4, , Footbridges 1, n/a Subways 1, n/a Retaining Walls (Concrete) n/a Culverts 1, n/a Hounslow Asset Valuation Report v1.4 Page 20 of 31 Chris Britton Consultancy October 2007

256 Highway Asset Valuation 1 st Year Interim Report & Comparison Appendix 3. Comparison with other Authorities Introduction A comparison has been made between Hounslow s Valuation and other figures that we have access to, including those supplied by the South East Authorities Group (including Dorset County Council, East Sussex County Council, Hampshire County Council, the Isle of Wight, Kent County Council, Surrey County Council, West Sussex County Council, and Portsmouth City Council), as well as some London Boroughs for whom valuations have been carried out by CBC including Harrow, Tower Hamlets and Kensington and Chelsea. Whilst we have made the references to data anonymous in this report, the client is asked to respect confidentiality and to only use this report for internal purposes. Overall The County Surveyors Society s guidance on valuation breaks down the highways assets into the following 4 Asset Groups which can be seen in the table below. The percentage break down by value (Gross Replacement Cost) of these 4 asset groups is shown in Table 1 below. Hounslow % Other Authorities % Roads Structures 6 7 Drainage 6 6 Lighting 4 4 Table 1 Percentage GRC by Asset Group Hounslow's Breakdown 6% 6% 4% 84% Roads Structures Drainage Lighting Figure 1 Percentage GRC by Asset Group This provides positive correlation that Hounslow s valuation is consistent with those for other Boroughs Hounslow Asset Valuation Report v1.4 Page 21 of 31 Chris Britton Consultancy October 2007

257 Highway Asset Valuation 1 st Year Interim Report & Comparison As some authorities have significantly different lengths and hence different total values, the total asset value or gross replacement cost for the entire asset group is the divided by the full network length to give a unit rate per kilometre, this then gives a fair representation of the asset value across the entire network. Hounslow s Gross Replacement Cost (GRC) of 525,712,203 divided by the full network length of 434kms gives an average figure of 1,211,318/km. This compared to other authorities (see table 2) was the lowest figure compared to other London Boroughs, but is of a sufficiently similar order of magnitude to indicate that it a fair representation. Authority Total (GRC) Total km /km LB1 546,424, ,809,382 LB2 770,001, ,683,513 LB3 411,277, ,584,883 Hounslow 525,712, ,211,318 Unitary 588,300, ,176,600 Unitary 758,000, ,500 County 4,621,143, ,339 County 3,338,000, ,416 County 2,361,800, ,450 County 1,698,800, ,793 County 4,697,000, ,166 County 1,444,823, ,117 County 1,967,200, ,900 Table 2 GRC in order of per km Total (GRC) GRC (millions) Total (GRC) LB1 LB2 LB3 Hounslow Figure 2. Total GRC for London Boroughs The four authorities in Table 2 marked LB are London Boroughs which have some of the highest rates per kilometre. This may be explained by the high density make up of the highways asset in London and the expensive composition of the rates indicating London Prices, and a preference to use high-quality materials and in some cases fragmented and poor procurement policy Hounslow Asset Valuation Report v1.4 Page 22 of 31 Chris Britton Consultancy October 2007

258 Highway Asset Valuation 1 st Year Interim Report & Comparison Roads The roads asset group forms the bulk of the value and is the main contributor to the total asset value or Gross Replacement Cost (GRC). The CSS guidelines for the calculation of the roads GRC include replacement costs for carriageway, cycleway, footways, street furniture and drainage. As seen in the table above Hounslow s roads replacement cost equates to 84% of the total GRC value compared to 83% for the rest of the valuations CBC have completed. Authority Value LB LB LB Hounslow Table 3 Roads GRC (London Boroughs) Roads 's millions LB1 LB2 LB3 Hounslow Figure 3. Total Roads GRC for London Boroughs The reason why Hounslow s comparable rates are higher could be due to a number of factors. The main reason is likely to be that the unit rates used to calculate the reconstruction of roads are higher for Hounslow than for the other authorities out side of London. This can be seen in Table 4 below: Hounslow Asset Valuation Report v1.4 Page 23 of 31 Chris Britton Consultancy October 2007

259 Highway Asset Valuation 1 st Year Interim Report & Comparison Authority main A roads main B roads C roads unclassified roads urban rural urban rural urban rural urban rural Hounslow LB LB LB A B C D E F G H Table 4: Carriageway Unit Rates ( /m2) It should be noted that when calculating the unit rate for carriageways the rate needs to include full reconstruction from the road base to the surface layer, and needs to take into account excavation and removal of the existing carriageway. For comparability of unit rates, all authorities should have used the same item coverage but this may not have been the case Hounslow Asset Valuation Report v1.4 Page 24 of 31 Chris Britton Consultancy October 2007

260 Highway Asset Valuation 1 st Year Interim Report & Comparison Structures Structures 's (millions) LB1 LB2 LB3 Hounslow Figure 4. Total Structures GRC for London Boroughs The value of structures forms a significant part of the GRC; in the comparison Hounslow s replacement cost for structures is 30,809,000 which is the lower than two of the London Boroughs and five other authorities that have supplied structures data. Of these the highest was around 750,000,000 (figures quoted are approximate figures). This figure relates to a county and would obviously depend on the number of bridges within that county. The unit rate of 4,800/m2 (supplied by SEABIG South East Bridge Information Group) of bridge deck area was used for the calculation of bridges, which makes up the bulk of the structures asset groups GRC. The overall comparison can be seen in Table 5 below. Authority Value Hounslow 30,321,000 LB1 40,030,000 LB2 46, 800,000 LB3 20,090,000 A 100,000,000 B 500,000,000 C 500,000,000 D 550,000,000 E 750,000,000 Table 5 Total Structures GRC (figures quoted are approximate) Hounslow Asset Valuation Report v1.4 Page 25 of 31 Chris Britton Consultancy October 2007

261 Highway Asset Valuation 1 st Year Interim Report & Comparison Drainage Drainage 's (millions) LB1 LB2 LB3 Hounslow Figure 5. Total Drainage GRC for London Boroughs The drainage asset group, makes up a lesser part of the total GRC in relation to the other asset groups and also measures low compared to three other authorities that have supplied drainage data. (see Table 6). Note that the data for drainage has been based upon sample data for compiled for the PFI Expression of Interest (EOI), and that a more accurate assessment of drainage will be possible once the asset inventory has been completed next year. Authority Value Hounslow 32,300,000 LB1 9,500,000 LB2 23,100,000 LB3 37,900,000 A 175,000,000 B 350,000,000 C 525,000,000 D E Not available Not available Table 6 Total Drainage GRC (figures quoted are approximate) Hounslow Asset Valuation Report v1.4 Page 26 of 31 Chris Britton Consultancy October 2007

262 Highway Asset Valuation 1 st Year Interim Report & Comparison Lighting Lighting 's (millions) LB1 LB2 LB3 Hounslow Figure 6. Total Lighting GRC for London Boroughs Lighting makes up a lesser part of the total GRC in relation to the other asset groups, and also measures as the second highest compared to three other London Boroughs that have supplied lighting data (see Table 7). Authority Value Hounslow 20,700,000 LB1 15,200,000 LB2 29,800,000 LB3 16,100,000 A 25,000,000 B 40,000,000 C 115,000,000 D 115,000,000 E 200,000,000 Conclusion Table 7 Total Drainage GRC (figures quoted are approximate) The figures provided by Hounslow for their valuation have been compared with other similar authorities, including London Boroughs with similar characteristics, and our findings suggest that Hounslow s valuation of their asset is consistent with results from other authorities Hounslow Asset Valuation Report v1.4 Page 27 of 31 Chris Britton Consultancy October 2007

263 Highway Asset Valuation 1 st Year Interim Report & Comparison Appendix 4 Comments on CIPFA Consultation Draft Report Local Authority Transport Infrastructure Assets - Review of Accounting, Management and Finance Mechanisms The following are the comments made in September 2007, jointly by Chris Britton Consultancy and the London Borough of Hounslow on the version of the above report issued for consultation. 1. Comments in response to consultation questions; (i) Yes, we agree that the AMP approach has significant advantages, including; Transparency and auditability of objectives and performance More objective assessment of condition and of need (as long as all authorities subscribe to the same basic methodologies), and the ability to make funding allocations at regional and national level on a better informed, more equitable basis Longer-term planning horizon Ability to treat assets that have traditionally been managed and funded separately on a common basis, and to therefore direct funds to where the benefit, in terms of the service provided and the need to preserve the asset, is the greatest. (ii) We would agree that a change to a SORP would be beneficial in promoting and AMPbased approach, but would also make the point that many of the reasons for this change detailed in section 5.15 would be desirable and should be pursued in any case, in particular greater professional finance liaison and input and initiatives to improve data quality and consistency. (iii) All these actions would be worthwhile. It should be noted under action (iv) that centralised training and support is underway or will shortly commence in Wales and Scotland, but nothing similar has been set up in England. Since English authorities are more diverse, this may not be feasible to implement, but grants that could be used for commercially-run courses and consultancy support might help to pump prime this? Other possible additional actions that might be considered are: More joined-up working between transport and finance staff within local authorities on valuations and asset management plans A mechanism for independent audits of the calculations within the valuation to ensure consistency of inputs and approach, and the production of standard audit guidance/process. National standard reporting formats including the elements of the calculation (inventory, cost rates, assumptions etc.) to provide an simple audit trail and to provide some evidence of consistency of approach Hounslow Asset Valuation Report v1.4 Page 28 of 31 Chris Britton Consultancy October 2007

264 Highway Asset Valuation 1 st Year Interim Report & Comparison A national highways asset valuation database, containing both headline figures and components of the calculation would be useful both for benchmarking and for reporting and trending at regional and national level. You may be aware that CBC is the support contractor for the national UK Pavement Management Systems (UKPMS) which is the standard system for assessing condition and need for maintenance on local authority roads. UKPMS provides a means by which highquality nationally consistent data on road condition could be used for nationally consistent calculations of condition and depreciation of roads and footways, and could provide nationally consistent software to carry out those calculations. A new combined support contract for UKPMS and SCANNER (the national standard road surface condition survey) will be let over the coming months and one of the first tasks for the support contractor will be to implement the recommendations of the UKPMS Strategic Review, carried out by Halcrow in ( %20UKPMS%20strategic%20review.pdf) A key theme of this review is the need to update UKPMS to support AMP, and we would anticipate that the introduction of consistent software for asset valuation and depreciation would form part of this. We would also strongly endorse the proposed additional support in sections 5.26 and 5.27, and would be happy to share our experiences in carrying out Hounslows valuation in this respect. We would strongly support the recommended approach in section 7.12 and 7.13, but would also suggest that there would be a valuable ongoing role for the national assumptions and data for benchmarking and quality audit purposes once authorities have their own data and models available. (iv) (7.6) The revision of the CSS/TAG guidance is necessary to make it more practical, and to reflect latest developments. Given the lead time, procurement of this project should be commenced straight away. We would suggest that strong dialogue/cross referencing between the asset types is built into all future AMP developments (to ensure consistency of approach) through the UKRLG s various groups such as Roads, Street Lighting, Structures, etc. The shared topics would include for example; data management, valuation, whole life cost modelling, and levels of service. (v) and (vi) Our experience, within Hounslow, and elsewhere, has been limited to highway networks and assets covered by SORP, so it is not possible for us to give an informed view on how other transport assets, such as airports, or other property assets should be treated. It is clearly desirable that the benefits that AMP can bring for highways networks be pursued elsewhere. 2. Other comments; We could not find any reference in the document to the definition of Capital and Revenue expenditures. We believe that the somewhat artificial current distinction between these heads can lead to distortion in the way Council s allocate their limited funds, and make certain asset-maintenance activities less attractive. The key point here is that many hitherto revenue activities such as maintenance of drainage do have a beneficial effect on extending the life of an asset and hence reduce depreciation. But if only capital activities are included in the AMP calculations and accounting process, this benefit may be overlooked? Asset Management is a long term, planned process, and encouragement needs to be given to Hounslow Asset Valuation Report v1.4 Page 29 of 31 Chris Britton Consultancy October 2007

265 Highway Asset Valuation 1 st Year Interim Report & Comparison Authorities to ring-fence these investment budgets. Revenue budgets for road maintenance have been notorious targets for short term funding cuts when times are hard, with no consideration given to the long-term impact this has on the life of the assets or risk/safety issues. Perhaps there is scope for a national minimum set of maintenance/levels of service standards that reflects best practice both in risk management and preservation of asset life terms? Longer term, there is probably a need for a debate as to whether the "value" of the service provided by an asset is also reflected in the valuation. (So that, for example, two roads that are physically identical in terms of their specification and condition, one of which serves a community of 10 people, the other a community of 10000, would have their "value" to the community reflected in the calculation) Hounslow Asset Valuation Report v1.4 Page 30 of 31 Chris Britton Consultancy October 2007

266 Highway Asset Valuation 1 st Year Interim Report & Comparison Acknowledgements This report and the valuation were carried by CBC with the assistance of London Borough of Hounslow. Further information on the general principles adopted in the initial asset valuation can be obtained from Krishnan Radhakrishnan (London Borough of Hounslow) [email protected] Further details with regards to the calculation and methodology can be obtained from Andy Pickett ([email protected]) The SECSIG valuation report and model was produced by Michael Rolfe Hounslow Asset Valuation Report v1.4 Page 31 of 31 Chris Britton Consultancy October 2007

267 Michael Jordan, Director Environment Department London Borough of Hounslow Civic Centre, Lampton Road Hounslow TW3 4DN. Communications August 2009