NWHAUC Actions Summary

Outstanding Actions from February 2010

Action No / Description / Who / When
61 / JW to update group on High court judgement S81 / JW / ASAP
66 / Secretariat to circulate expenditure sheet for 2009/10 / KG / ASAP

May 2010 Actions

Action No / Description / Who / When
70 / Review and amend action numbering / KG / ASAP
Action No / Description / Who / When
71 / Invite Baz Lokat to a future NWHAUC meeting / JW / MW / ASAP
Action No / Description / Who / When
72 / Ensure contact details for coring are up to date on the contacts list / All Utilities / ASAP
Action No / Description / Who / When
73 / Contact NE and YHAUC regarding printing of HAUC UK Leaflet / All / Next Meeting
Action No / Description / Who / When
74 / Review new product included in the new SROH for reinstating manhole covers / JW / MW / ASAP

North West Highway Authorities & Utilities Committee Minutes

Date:19 May 2010

Held at:Blackburn Technology Management Centre

Attendees

John Webb UnitedUtilities plc (Utility Chair)

Michael White Lancashire CC (Highway Authority Chair)

Kay GawthorpeSecretary

Chris RooneyWirral Metropolitan Borough Council

Stephen HardmanKnowsley Metropolitan Borough Council

Dave ReevesCheshire East County Council

Paul CarterNational Grid

Duncan DavidsonBury Metropolitan Borough Council

Gary ClubbsCumbria County Council

Gary LomaxBolton Council

Hilary RyanScottish Power

Ian ElliottTrafford Council

Ian LargeBlackpool Council

Jon BrownStockport Metropolitan Borough Council

Jon AnsellWarrington Borough Council

Michael WhiteLancashire County Council

Mo KahnNetwork Rail

Paul HobbsVirgin Media

Peter MortonTameside Metropolitan Borough Council

Phil JonesDee Valley Water

Chris SharpesHalton Borough Council

Simon LittlerBlackburn with Darwen Borough Council

Steve ManganSalford City Council

Tony HemingwayWigan Council

Valerie EgertonUnited Utilities

Veronica WongManchester City Council

Doug CoyleCumbria County Council

Gary MaxwellCumbria County Council

Steve RimmerHalton Borough Council

Andy BithellCheshire West and Cheshire

Kelly BrownSt Helens Council

Julie LeacySefton Metropolitan Borough Council

Elwyn HoltWigan Council

John HorrocksUrban Vision CC

Angela HughesUrban Vision CC

Mark WilliamsLiverpool City Council

Paul FauxManchester City Council

Alison WilliamsBT / Openreach

Guests:

Jason Stetford-Smith – Greater Manchester Permit Scheme Project Manager

1.APOLOGIES

Andy ReillyOldham Metropolitan Borough Council

Bob ChadwickRochdale Borough Council

Chris NesbittCable & Wireless

Jennifer HullSt Helens Council

Dave MaguireLiverpool City Council

Chris HaywardBT / Openreach

Jerry McConkeySefton Metropolitan Borough Council

2.WELCOME AND INTRODUCTIONS

JW opened the meeting and introduced the guest, Jason Stetford-Smith from the GMADE Permit scheme.

3.REVIEW OF PREVIOUS MINUTES (17th February 2010)

3.1Accuracy of content

.1MK advised that the numbers on the actions were out of sequence.

Action No / Description / Who / When
70 / Review and amend action numbering / KG / ASAP

3.2Progress on previous actions

.1The progress on previous actions is recorded above.

3.3Matters arising

3.3.1JW advised the group that the quality of information in some HA Gazetteer’s is still an issue and he stated that Baz Lokat should be invited to a future meeting.

Action No / Description / Who / When
71 / Invite Baz Lokat to a future NWHAUC meeting / JW / MW / ASAP

3.3.2Request from Utilities to ensure that all HA’s are sending coring programmes to allow the Utility to be present. HA’s requested all Utilities to ensure the contact details on the website were correct.

Action No / Description / Who / When
72 / Ensure contact details for coring are up to date on the contacts list / All Utilities / ASAP

3.3.3DR stated that at present there was no update available with the Cheshire East Gazetteer and would provide the group with an update as soon as it was available.

3.Performance Information

.1KG collated the Performance Summary prior to the meeting and advised that results were provided by some Highway Authorities and not all results were provided in a timely manner. The return this quarter was disappointing especially as agreement at several NWHAUC meetingswas reached that all HA’s would endeavour to provide results.

.2KG provided an overall summary of the Utilities performance for Quarter one as follows:

 Category A = 95.08% compliance

 Category B = 89.86% compliance

 Category C = 94.10% compliance

JW stated that Cat B sample inspection results provide important information and are the indication of what is happening now.

4Greater Manchester Permit Scheme

4.1(A copy of the presentation has been provided).

The main points raised during the presentation and question and answer session are detailed as follows:

  • The Permit fee cost structure is defined by DFT. The numbers are fed into the matrix which then determines the fees. The intention is to adopt the Kent Model and apply the Permit scheme to traffic sensitive streets only.
  • MK queried the issue of parity and how much detail had been given to a HA requirement to comply with the Permit scheme. JSF confirmed that KPI’s will demonstrate Parity between HA’s and Utilities.
  • MK queried whether the 10 Permit Authorities will demonstrate that they have used all their current available powers and why a Permit Scheme needs to be adopted. It was confirmed that it will be down to the Cost Benefit Analysis to demonstrate the benefits of adopting a Permit Scheme.
  • The next step in the process will be to issue a Consultation document with the fee structure included. The consultation document will be available to all who those who would like to respond
  • JW stated that a separate forum for Utilities (NWJUG) forum should be established.
  • St Helensstated that they have been to see the DFT regarding the adoption of a Permit Scheme and are determining who wants to join scheme
  • Chester West are also considering a Permit scheme.

5.3 HAUCs Roadshow update

.1JW and MW reminded the group that the 3 HAUCs roadshow was free to attend and encouraged all members to ensure they registered to attend

.2A meeting will be held on 6th June to finalise plans and rehearse the family fortunes quiz.

6.Co-ordination Working Group / ETON Update

.1JW stated that the working group are meeting on the 9th June and are discussing the following issues:

  • There is nothing in ETON 5 to facilitate the processing of Temporary Works. The Eton Developers groupare meeting to discuss the issue and potential solutions.
  • A guidance note regarding the storage of materials. The group discussed the possibility of issuing a no-excavation notice but that could cause problems with FPN’s and Section 74. HA’s can charge reasonable costs for investigation and possible removal of materials under Section 171 of the Highways Act. JW will provide the group with an update when it is available.
  • Technical issues with ETON5

7.Trunk Roads Gazetteer Update

.1JW informed members of the group that there were issues with notices being issued to the Highways Agency.. There are problems with the Gazetteer and identifying the correct road and road name. HA’s should not have trunk roads on their Gazetteer and should be on the Trunk Road Gazetteer. Utilities are going to review their own processes.

8.HAUC UK Leaflet – Availability

.1JW presented a leaflet produced by HAUC UK for issued to operatives and queried whether NW / NE and Yorkshire HAUC could combine funds to print leaflets to make them cheaper.

Action No / Description / Who / When
73 / Contact NE and YHAUC regarding printing of HAUC UK Leaflet / All / Next Meeting

9.Alternative Reinstatement Material Sub-group

.1VW provided the members with a document regarding the progress of the alternative reinstatement material sub-group. The document was presented in detail and a copy has been issued with the minutes. The main points in the document are detailed below:

  • The group was set up as an advisory body and was not to “approve” the use of any materials.
  • When the group was first established a list of approved suppliers was issued however this caused problems with some suppliers who queried why they were not on the list.
  • There has never been a successful trial with CBEM3 and the trial was recently stopped due to changes within BBUSL. A trial will commence soon within Manchesterand the product has been renamed as Pro-flo within BBUSL.
  • The remit of the group has been discussed and it was agreed that it was the responsibility of the individual promoting organisation wishing to use the material to accept responsibility for its performance and acceptance.
  • Overbanding can only be used if it has HAPAS approval.
  • Appendix 9 trialled and approved products will be listed by the working group.
  • Materials can only be monitored through their use and performance monitoring data should be collated for inspection.
  • If ARM’s are to be used,the material has to be a from a consistent feedstock
  • 6 advice notes have been issued by the working group to date.
  • VW has discovered that 1 certificate is covering 9 suppliers and 3 different plants (Tarmac plant)
  • There is 1 space on working group for another Utility representative

.2VW passed around examples of materials being used in Manchesterthat have not been formally trialled

.3VW stated that she was concerned that Manchester have 4 years of backfill which has no warranty

.4The group agreed that an update from the working group should be a standard agenda item on NWHAUC

10.Overview of HSC10

.1JW provided the group with an overview of the Cardiffconference and stated the numbers attending were down on previous years.. The Key message from the conference was that organisations still have a lot of work to do on working together. It was suggested that the event might potentially be run every 2 years to resolve the lack of numbers issue.

11.AOB

.1It was stated that there are a lot of extension requests being issued by National Grid Gas.PC requested the HA’s to contact National Grid to discuss the issues.

.2Some of the HA’s have concerns that water leaks are being reported then urgent notices are being issued 2 weeks later. JW stated he would reinforce the criteria for issuing urgent notices within UU.

.3The HA’s requested budgets and details regarding diversionary works and information should be issued to HA’s in a timely manner. JW stated that this issue has been raised nationally.

.4MK stated that the Network Rail asset protection team are being approached in too short timescales with requests to work. He stated that all Utilities should be consulting HA’s ASAP with particular reference to bridges and rail crossings. MK stated that Network Rail would be stopping works if they haven’t been consulted within the prescribed timescales.

.5JW requested that Section 58 notices should state whether the embargo will cover the footway and/or the carriageway.

.6It was stated that although the new SROH will only be implemented in October it was requested whether a new manhole material could be introduced sooner. It was agreed that the product should be reviewed by the ARM working group.

Action No / Description / Who / When
74 / Review new product included in the new SROH for reinstating man hole covers / ARM Working Group / ASAP

Next Meetings

Date:

18th August 2010

17th November 2010

Time:13:00

Location: Blackburn Technology Centre, Blackburn

Page 1 of 7