Author: John Pryor, Assistant Director Public Realm Services Group Tel: (01908)

Transcription

1 Wards Affected: All Wards. MILTON KEYNES PERMIT SCHEME ITEM 13 CABINET 23 JULY 2014 Author: John Pryor, Assistant Director Public Realm Services Group Tel: (01908) Executive Summary: The Traffic Management Act 2004 part 3 introduced road works Permit Schemes as a mechanism to control and coordinate activities in the public highway, in order to better manage, and to improve Authorities abilities to minimise congestion, disruption and free flow of traffic on the highway network. In September 2013 the Council started to develop a Permit Scheme. The scheme is a full scheme, (Option 4) which applies to all works on all roads and requires a fee to be paid by Statutory Undertakers, when the Authority can approve or challenge the times, durations and conditions of the works proposed. (Subject to operational matters in detailed in the Scheme document). The Utilities companies have been consulted on the proposed scheme and met with Highways officers to fully review the proposal. The scheme has been named the Milton Keynes Permit Scheme (MKPS) and a number of necessary documents have been prepared and consulted on in anticipation of an application to Secretary of State for Transport. In order to begin operation of the MKPS an application now needs to be submitted to the Department for Transport (DfT) to ask the Secretary of State to make an Order giving effect to the scheme. Summary findings of the Milton Keynes Permit Scheme Cost Benefit Analysis. (CBA) [Values based on 25 Year Operation of the Scheme (2010 prices)] show: Value of benefits to economy and society 218,862,716 Set-up and operating costs (matched by Fees) 11,042,215 Financial benefit to the local economy 207,820,501 Benefit to Cost Ratio 19:82 (The Cost Benefit Analysis has been produced from four sources of information: Government guidance; A completed Permit Fees Matrix in a format provided by the DfT; Local data provided by Milton Keynes Council; and DfT Traffic Flow Data Standard Cost Benefit Analysis assumptions and sensitivity factors have been used in line with recommendations in Annex C of the DfT s publication Traffic Management Act 2004 Decision-making and Development (2nd edition). The Local data provided by the Council contained both the number of permits by type and specific information on Scheme operation and costs (see Annex).

2 1. Recommendation(s) 1.1 That the implementation of a Full Milton-Keynes Permit Scheme be approved. 1.2 That the submission of Milton Keynes Permit Scheme application to the Department for Transport be approved. 1.3 That officers be authorised to continue with operational activities in preparation for implementing the Milton-Keynes Permit Scheme including necessary IT upgrades, an accommodation review and staff recruitment and training. 2. Background 2.1 Currently, statutory undertakers, primarily Utility companies, known as Promoters, have rights to dig up and place their apparatus in the street subject to compliance with the notification requirements in the New Roads and Street Works Act The cost of the disruption caused by these essential Utility works to the UK economy is estimated to be 4.3bn per year at 2002 values in a 2007 Halcrow report for the DfT. 2.3 Another recent report shows the cost of idling to car-commuting households in the UK was 4.1bn in 2011 and further estimates from the CBI have put the total cost of road congestion to UK businesses at nearer 7-8bn per year. 2.4 Part 3 of the Traffic Management Act 2004 and associated Traffic Management Permit Schemes (England) Regulations 2007 give Councils the power to establish a new Permit Authority and operate a Permit Scheme requiring statutory undertakers (and Highway and Transport Authorities) to apply for a Permit before carrying out these works. 2.5 The fundamental change resulting from the introduction of a Permit Scheme is the need for all works promoters, including the Council itself, to apply for a Permit before working and for Utilities to pay a fee. 2.6 This new revenue will provide additional resources to enable the Council to more effectively manage these works and impose working conditions to better control what happens, when and how it is undertaken. 2.7 Permit schemes cannot come into operation until the Secretary of State has made an Order giving effect to the scheme. The requirements, contents and way in which the Permit Schemes must operate are specified in the Permit Regulations and supplemented by statutory and operational guidance issued by the DfT. 2.8 The development of a Milton Keynes Permit Scheme has required that a number of work themes and components be developed: A Scheme Document detailing how the scheme will operate and comply with legislation. A formal consultation detailing the proposals and seeking responses from relevant stakeholders.

3 (d) (e) An up to date Local Street Gazetteer and Associated Street Data designating certain streets (or parts of streets) as "Traffic-Sensitive" if they meet specific criteria under Section 64 of New Roads and Streetworks Act 1991 A formal Traffic-Sensitive designation consultation detailing the new designation of streets and responding to any objections. Cost Benefit Analysis detailing the Benefit to Cost Ratio resulting from the introduction of the scheme Annex 3. Options These works elements have all been completed. 3.1 Option 1: Do Nothing. Maintain Existing Notice System (Minimum statutory controls) The current process provides the greatest flexibility for statutory undertakers and minimises their costs.the flexibility is due to the large window within which works promoters can plan to carry out their works (over order and allocate resources in advance then cancel notices when no longer required). The disadvantages of this approach are that there is limited: coordination powers for works within the highway; resources to manage duties funded from revenue accounts; and information, which is subject to change without consent, available to other road users (bus companies etc). Works often disrupt bus services and bus companies and result in increased costs, to run extra/replacement services as a result. 3.2 Option 2: Permits and Notices Chargeable Permit required on 0, 1, 2 Category Roads and Traffic Sensitive Streets / Notices only for 3, 4 Category Roads and non-traffic Sensitive Streets. This approach would provide a greater control on the strategic road network and includes all Route Hierarchy routes (all Principle Roads and routes designated by the Council as either a Main Distributor, Local Access or HGV Access route) and all bus route. It would most likely reduce the number of street works on the strategic road network, which will reduce disruption and burden to business and other road users. The disadvantages of this approach are that: There would only be partial cost recovery, with all costs associated with dealing with Permits issued to statutory undertakers being recovered through fees. The Notice regime would still be non-chargeable; Permitted works would demand more detailed advance information enabling better assessment of the impact of the proposed works; and

4 There would be two systems in operation, with works on the majority of the road network, including nearly all urban roads still only coordinated by agreement with limited statutory powers available to the Council to improve coordination / communications etc. 3.3 Option 3: Permits (Chargeable and Deemed) Chargeable Permits required on 0, 1, 2 and Traffic Sensitive Streets / Nonchargeable Deemed Permit on 3, 4 and non-traffic Sensitive Streets. This would result in only one system being in operation, with full permit powers (controls to force coordination, time / duration of works etc) being available to the Council. This would potentially reduce the number of street works on the road network, which will reduce disruption and burden to business and other road users. The disadvantage would be that some costs would still be borne by the Council in relation to dealing with, works on non-hierarchy roads, so there would be only partial cost recovery. 3.4 Option 4: Full Permit Scheme Chargeable permits on all roads sliding scale of charges depending upon location and nature of the works. The additional revenue income will allow provision of adequate resources to manage the network. There would only be one system in operation and the Council would have full permit powers (controls to force coordination, time / duration of works etc). Full permit powers will reduce the number of street works on the road network, which will reduce disruption and burden to business and other road users and provide full cost recovery, in relation to statutory undertakers permits. The chargeable permits on all roads will maximise control to coordinate works and ensure robust communications to other road users. As the scheme will also apply to works undertaken by the Council, controls but not fees, will be imposed on all of the Council s own works, which will increase Council s own works administration costs. 4. Implications 4.1 Policy The scheme, if approved will enact the Policy of the requirement to apply for a Permit applicable to both statutory undertakers work on adopted highways and to Highway Authorities own highway works. There is a requirement in the regulations to demonstrate parity of treatment of Highway and Utility works and their Permit applications. The requirement is that overall fee income should match overall allowable costs. In the event that there is a surplus in any given year the requirement is that the money should be applied towards the cost of the scheme in the next year and

5 that fee levels are adjusted accordingly, so that taking one year with another, fees do not exceed the allowable costs. The DfT guidance is very clear that schemes should not generate surplus revenue and that income should therefore only be used to meet allowable scheme costs. 4.2 Resources and Risk There will be resource implications for the authority as it introduces the Permit Scheme. New resources will be required that will be funded from the new Permit Fee revenue. 100k of one off funding has been put aside as part of the Revenue Budget 2014/15 for costs associated with the setup of the scheme. There will not be additional income from the scheme as it needs to be cost neutral and the DfT will review the scheme and income after the first year to ensure that fees and costs are fairly applied. Fees and charges will be subject to ongoing review by the Authority in addition to the DfT review, to ensure that revenue and costs and fees are fairly apportioned over the first three years, where adjustments to fees may be considered subject to DfT guidance. N Capital Y Revenue X Accommodation Y IT Y Medium Term Plan N Asset Management 4.3 Carbon and Energy Management 4.4 Legal Carbon emissions are considered in terms of the change in the equivalent tonnes of carbon derived from reduced disruption to the highway network. Please see section 5 of the cost benefit analysis attached at the Annex. The necessary legal steps under the Traffic Management Act 2004 part 3 will have to be taken, which gives the Council the power to prepare and submit an application to the Secretary of State for Transport to make an Order giving effect to the scheme, with or without modifications. Any application must be submitted in accordance with the Traffic Management Permit Schemes (England) Regulations 2007 and must take into account the relevant statutory guidance. As the Permit Scheme will operate alongside the current noticing system, the same or equivalent definitions and requirements are used as in the New Roads and Streetworks Act 1991 (NRSWA) notice system, namely: Registerable activities/works Categories of activities/works, (major, standard, minor and immediate activities/works)

6 (d) Street gazetteers, including street referencing by means of a Unique Street Reference Number (USRN) and Associated Street Data (ASD) Street reinstatement categories as defined in the New Roads and Streetworks Act 1991 Reinstatement Specification Streets designated as Protected Streets, streets having Special Engineering Difficulties, (SED), or a Traffic Sensitive Street When the Permit Scheme is implemented on the specified streets, and in accordance with the Regulations, the Permit Scheme will result in the disapplication and modification of the following sections of the New Roads and Streetworks Act 1991: Sections: s53; s54; s55; s56; s57; s66 disapplied Sections: s58; s58a; s64; s69; s73a; s74; s88; s89; s90; s93; s105; Schedule 3A modified. Regulations modified: The Street Works (Registers, Notices, Directions and Designations) (England) Regulations 2007 SI 2007/1951 Changes to Section 58 and 58a (restrictions on works following substantial road works) and Section 74 (charges of occupation of the highway where works are unreasonably prolonged) apply only to Statutory Undertakers activities. The Permit Scheme makes arrangements so that procedures are followed for Highway Authority Promoter activities in relation to timing and duration, in order to facilitate the operation of the Permit Scheme and ensure there is parity of treatment for all Promoters. 4.5 Other Implications Increased highway network stakeholder engagement regarding proposed road works. N Equalities/Diversity N Sustainability N Human Rights N E-Government Y Stakeholders N Crime and Disorder Background Papers: The completed permit scheme document The MKPS formal consultation report including outcomes The Traffic Sensitive Streets list and formal consultation report The National Condition Text for Permit Schemes report