Utility Week - authoritative, impartial and essential reading for senior people within utilities, regulators and government
Issue link: https://fhpublishing.uberflip.com/i/818772
UTILITY WEEK | 5TH - 11TH MAY 2017 | 11 Utility Week Live 2017 However, one of the big complaints from the industry is the inconsistent way that permit schemes work. Thomas Ward still sees says "big variances" across the country in his work as a solicitor specialising in streetworks disputes. "You can have two neighbouring authori- ties who will apply the legislation and regulatory functions in completely differ- ent fashions, so there will be a complete absence of consistency," says Ward, who is head of business defence and dispute reso- lution at the Ipswich-based law firm Olivers Solicitors. "Neighbouring authorities will provide two sets of requirements for identical works. Scale that up and larger utility companies will be working with 100-plus different inter- pretations: it becomes very difficult." Virgin's Myers says that part of the prob- lem is that the TMA itself is open to inter- pretation, which leads to variations in how it is implemented. And highways authorities hold the whip hand when deciding whether permits should be issued. Anita Solanki, head of streetworks policy at contractor Kier's utility business, says: "You are stuck between a rock and hard place trying to deliver for the customer and complying with the rules. If you don't meet you those (conditions), you don't get your permit granted." These gripes are echoed surrounding the way councils exploit their charging powers. Since 2010, governments have increased the fines that highway authorities may impose for over-running works. For the busiest streets, the maximum councils can charge is £5,000 a day during the first three days of overruns. Thereaer, the fine rockets to £10,000 a day. Ward says: "Authorities have been placed under pressure by central government to look to their own resources and central gov- ernment has provided local authorities with the means of providing a revenue stream from works they undertake." Burley argues that highways authorities are increasingly nit-picking about what they can charge for. "Charges were bought into make sure that sites were cleared and signs and cones removed but some highways authorities are laying charges if we've le a stain on the road. "The charges don't reflect the disruption caused. They're no longer being used for what they were designed for, which was to keep traffic flowing, they're being used as a revenue stream." David Latham, highway policy and inspections manager at Kent County Coun- cil, insists though that local authorities not using utilities as cash cows. "If we charge, we will provide the resource. A contribution The pros and cons of permitting schemes Even with the permitting powers, many councils still don't feel they have sufficient powers to prevent disruption on their road networks. Originally introduced by the last Labour government, lane rental schemes are designed to disincentivise utilities from digging roads when they are busiest. Essentially an evolution of the permit regime, companies rent road space, but can avoid high charges by carrying out works during quieter periods such as overnight. In 2012 the government announced that there would be three pilot schemes to trial the lane rental concept. Highways authorities would be able to charge £2,500 a day to utility companies to dig up the busiest roads during peak times. However only two highways authorities have so far volunteered to undertake LRS pilot projects: Kent and Transport for London (TfL). The first pilot scheme covered 200 miles of roads in the capital run by TfL. A study of the scheme, published in 2014, found that following the introduction of the scheme, around 90 per cent of utility works and 99 per cent of works carried out by TfL in the lane rental areas had taken place outside of peak times. However, there were a number of other factors at play and the report did not attribute the success to the LRS. All the main utility companies using the LRS had signed up to the use of rapid drying materials, which Tfl said had considerably reduced the time required to reopen roads and helped to save approximately 2,700 days of disruption across London. Counterbalancing these cost and time savings, the study found that utilities and their contractors had to pay staff more to work unsocial hours. Even the price of accessing some materials was higher out of normal office hours, it found. The Local Government Association, which represents councils in England, claims its members are being held back from introducing lane rental schemes by having to obtain approval from the Department for Transport to do so. But Kier's Anita Solanki worries that that utilities could be put off from carrying out day to day maintenance and refurbishment works if lane rental becomes more common, which could ultimately lead to a deterioration in the quality of assets. "Works would become reactive because of the cost." With a number of questions still to be answered around lane rental schemes, the Department for Transport is expected to begin another evaluation of the trial projects shortly. the Department for Transport is expected to begin another evaluation of the trial projects shortly. from the utilities helps with that equation, he says. "A majority of authorities act in a respon- sible way. It's always the few that push their luck a bit that cause a perception of a poor reputation." Latham, who is also co-chair of HAUC (Highways Authorities and Utilities Commit- tee) England, says the utilities industry must understand the pressures councillors face from constituents fed up with delays. A bit of stability is what people want, rather than wheezes like former transport secretary of state Sir Patrick McLoughlin's plan to introduce seven day a week street- works, which was quietly dropped by his successor Chris Grayling in March. Ward says the last thing the streetworks scene needs is fresh legislation. "We have a lot of legislation and it doesn't work. Some legislation could do with being refined but there is uncertainty about what existing leg- islation can do and uncertainty about how it should be applied." Kent's Latham argues that it is in the interests of both highways authorities and utility companies to ensure there is as little disruption as possible. " What a utility does impacts a highway authority and what a highway authority does impacts on a utility: we all stand or fall together."