Agenda item

Report of the Cabinet Member for Highways and Transport

Members considered a second update on the Executive Response to the recommendations of the Infrastructure+ Working Group.  Of the eight recommendations within the agreed Action Plan three were now complete, four were scheduled to be substantially completed during November 2016 and one was being taken forward. 

A member Autumn Event had been held to update all members on the progress on the Infrastructure+ contract.  This had been well attended and provided an opportunity for two way discussion.  Members requested the slides from this event.

Members re-emphasised the importance of engaging local Members in highways matters as they were useful advocates and could improve communication.   

In relation to recommendation 8, that Community Highways Infrastructure Managers be asked to share details of meetings with Parish Councils with the appropriate local county councillors, members requested that local town councils be added.  Also, in regard to planning applications they requested that the form sent to the County Council for comment should include the question “Local Member consulted? Yes/No”, and that it should be a requirement that officers contact local members for their views on substantial planning developments. 

Members commented that whilst they appreciated improved communication on the work being done around potholes, the way the information was presented, in a long list covering all areas of the County, was not as helpful as it could be.  It was suggested that this could be improved by segregating the information into areas, possibly including a list of the work planned for that area every three months.  The Cabinet Member for Highways and Transport assured members that there would be ongoing improvement to the information provided, and that he was happy to discuss planning, highways and ongoing improvement on work around potholes.  Members requested further information on the prioritisation of pothole repairs.  In the interests of improved communication around recommendations three, four and five, members requested that priority be given to the development of the Highways Portal. 

The Chairman queried whether there were set timescales in which officers were expected to respond to member queries and was informed that these were set out in the Member/Officer Protocol.  He had experienced problems in trying to contact a member of the Community Infrastructure Liaison team, who had been off sick for several weeks but whose emails were not receiving an “out of office” response, and were not being picked up in his absence, which was a cause for concern.

RESOLVED – That:

a)    the six-month progress against the previously agreed Infrastructure+ Action Plan be noted;

b)    performance data on pothole repairs be brought to future meetings;

c)     in relation to recommendation 8, that details of meetings with town councils also be shared with the appropriate local members;

d)    wording be included in the  letters to District Planning Authorities requesting that local members be informed of substantial planning developments;

e)    measures should be put in place to ensure continuity of cover by local highways officers;

f)      officers should be reminded of the response timescales outlined in the Member/Officer Protocol; and

g)    the slides from the members’ Autumn event should be circulated for information.