Agenda item

(a)       That the revised completion date for the project and the engagement of the Agency Engineer to carry out the work required to deliver the speed limit review within the revised timescale be supported; and

(b)       That a verbal update on the Speed Limit Review be provided at the Committee meeting scheduled for 16 September 2015. 

Prior to the introduction of the report, the Deputy Leader apologised to the Committee because the Speed Limit Review had not progressed as fast as it should have.  He expressed his disappointment that this report was before the Committee and added that he should have checked on progress earlier in the process than he had done. 

                        The Chief Officer (Streetscene and Transportation) introduced the report to provide the Committee with details on the progress made on the County wide Speed Limit Review for the classified A and B road network.  The report was also to inform the Committee of the revised programme to complete the project. 

A report was approved by Cabinet in July 2013 detailing the outcome of the review which had been carried out on the Flintshire classified road network and included schedules and plans of those sections of roads where a change in the speed limit was necessary.  The proposals included a programme to complete the associated orders and implement the revised speed limits for 37 sites within a two year period.  The cost of carrying out the works was estimated to be £210,000 and the funding for this was to be provided from a bid to the Welsh Government (WG) prudential borrowing initiative.  Progress had been slower than expected and only five had been completed, with seven to be completed within the next three months and 25 yet to be ordered and advertised.  There were a number of reasons for the delay and these were reported in paragraph 3.01. 

It was now necessary to develop a new programme and method of delivery to complete the work at the earliest opportunity, and because the final delivery of the project was beyond the expected deadline date required, the funding from WG was no longer available.  The Chief Officer explained that it was proposed that the Council engage an Agency engineer who was capable of carrying out all the necessary works to progress the outstanding schemes with a revised completion date of 30 November 2015.  The estimated costs for engaging the Agency engineer and advertising & construction works was £210,000 and as the costs would need to be met from the Streetscene and Transportation budget, an in-year budget pressure would be created as a result.  Progress against the new timetable would be monitored monthly by the Deputy Leader & Cabinet Member for Environment and a verbal update on the progress made would be presented to this Committee in September 2015. 

The Chair queried whether an officer of the Council could undertake the work prior to an Agency engineer being appointed.  The Chief Officer advised that there were no members of staff within the Streetscene and Transportation portfolio with the skill sets to allow them to undertake both elements of the speed limit orders. 

Councillor Clive Carver thanked the Chief Officer for the report and the Deputy Leader & Cabinet Member for Environment for his acceptance of the responsibility for the problem.  He commented on an email response that he had received about a scheme in Hawarden which indicated that the scheme had not progressed because of funding.  He sought clarification on whether there were dedicated solicitors in the Environment directorate and raised concern that the problem had arisen.  Councillor Carver also sought reassurance that it was not reoccur in the future and queried why a scheme outside Hawarden High School had been stopped. 

The Deputy Leader & Cabinet Member for Environment provided a response to the comments made by Councillor Carver and spoke about a recent press article which indicated that the Council had lost money as a result of the reviews not being completed.  He assured the Committee that the Agency engineer would be capable of completing the outstanding reviews within six months of their appointment.  The Chief Officer advised that he would provide Councillor Carver with a written response to his question about the scheme outside Hawarden High School following the meeting.  On the issue of funding, he explained that a bid to WG had been successful for the original project but this was no longer available; he added that the Council had not lost money because of the lack of progress as had been reported in the press.  The new programme would create an in-year budget pressure for the service to ensure that the works were completed within six months. 

In response to a query from Councillor David Evans, the Chief Officer confirmed that the 20 mile per hour speed limit schemes outside schools had been completed and therefore were not included in this Speed Limit Review.  Councillor Evans commented on a scheme for the removal of restrictions in Shotton which had been delayed and sought clarification on the reason for this.  He also queried where the funding for the £210,000 in-year budget pressure would be allocated from and whether progression of the scheme was a priority.  The Deputy Leader & Cabinet Member for Environment confirmed that the orders had to be carried out due to a WG ruling and spoke of the consequences for not progressing the schemes.  He confirmed that the £210,000 could not be found from the current budget and indicated that he would make a recommendation that the funding be taken from reserves. 

Councillor Paul Shotton expressed significant concern that only five schemes had been completed and queried whether it was possible to collaborate with other authorities to undertake the necessary works.  The Chief Officer explained that neighbouring local authorities did have the necessary specialist officers but they could not release them to carry out this work due to their own priorities.  It was felt that the most cost effective way was to employ an Agency engineer. 

In referring to the restructure of the Streetscene and Transportation Service, Councillor Chris Dolphin welcomed the review which he felt would provide a more efficient and effective service.  He sought clarification on the figures in brackets referred to in the table of identified speed limits.  He also indicated that he was awaiting details of accident figures, particularly for the Celyn Bends, and queried why this stretch of road was not included in the speed review and whether the decision to extend the speed limit would be reconsidered based on the accident figures for the area.  The Chief Officer indicated that the brackets in the table referred to particular sites on the roads identified for speed limit reviews.  Following a request from Councillor Dolphin, the Chief Officer advised that he would circulate full details to Members about the locations of the proposed speed limits on the roads identified in the table on page 67.  He added that he would consider reviewing the decision about the speed limit on the Celyn Bends.  Councillor Dolphin invited the Chief Officer and the relevant officer to attend the area so that they could view the issues that were causing concern. 

Councillor Cindy Hinds thanked the Deputy Leader & Cabinet Member for Environment and the Chief Officer for the report.  She commented on a speed limit review in her ward and queried whether the receipt of objections to orders could delay the progress of the review.  The Chief Officer detailed the mechanism for dealing with objections and advised that he and the Deputy Leader & Cabinet Member for Environment had delegated authority to deal with any objections to the proposals; he added that it was important that these were dealt with quickly. 

In response to a query from Councillor Amanda Bragg about whether officers were being held accountable for the lack of progress on the orders and what measures were in place to prevent it happening again, the Deputy Leader & Cabinet Member for Environment confirmed that the officers no longer worked for the Council.  The Chief Officer advised that an action plan was now in place which would prevent the situation reoccurring in the future. 

Councillor Colin Legg queried the figure of 180 in the table of identified speed limits and was advised by the Chief Officer that this reflected only those schemes which had yet to be completed.  He added that the scheme with the highest Matrix score would be undertaken first. 

The Chair referred to the sections on Environmental Impact and Equalities Impact and queried whether a full impact assessment had been undertaken.  The Chief Officer indicated that he would provide an answer to the Committee following the meeting. 

The Chair suggested that an additional recommendation be included that the Committee receive a verbal update on the Speed Limit Review at the September 2015 meeting.  On being put to the vote, this was agreed.      

RESOLVED:

(a)       That the revised completion date for the project and the engagement of the Agency Engineer to carry out the work required to deliver the speed limit review within the revised timescale be supported; and

(b)       That a verbal update on the Speed Limit Review be provided at the Committee meeting scheduled for 16 September 2015.