Highways
- Salt usage in Trawden area
- Pinfold Lane, Scarisbrick - Frequency of road surveys
- Safety inspections of Castle Road, Colne
- Consultation on 20mph Zone at the Larches ward
- Pothole claims
- Cost of potholes
- Potholes
- Sunny Road, Churchtown, Southport - repairs, schedules, maps from 1960 to 1974
- Improved Street Lighting and CCTV on Cannon Street, Preston
- Potholes on Glenway, Penwortham
- Number of potholes
- Cost of installing the illuminated sign at the M6/M55 roundabout
- Spend on temporary road signs, cones, etc
- Compensation paid by Council for damage caused to vehicles by poor road conditions
- Number of potholes
- Gullies and Gully Cleaning
- Road excavations
- Unadopted roads in Whitefield Ward, Nelson
- Road Maintenance Budget
- Street Lighting
- Cost of installing signs in Lancashire
- Winter maintenance
- Breakdown of costs for installing dropped kerbs
- Cost of Signs on Sycamore Close and Eton Park
- Street Lighting
- Winter Maintenance Vehicles
Salt usage in Trawden area
| Reference | 805.31 |
|---|---|
| Date Responded | 17/01/2011 |
| Response Type |
Full disclosure
|
| Request |
Details of the quantity of salt put down in the Trawden area right up to the Lancashire / West Yorkshire border (Laneshawbridge to Haworth road) each day from 10 December 2010 to 10 January 2011
|
| Response |
Further to your email dated 10 January 2011 we are now in a position to respond.
Details of the quantity of salt put down in the Trawden area right up to the Lancashire/West Yorkshire Border (Laneshawbridge to Haworth Road) each day from 10th December 2010 to 10 January 2011.
Please find attached a spreadsheet for Pendle route E17, which incorporates the section of road referred to above. Below are definitions which you may find useful in order to fully understand the content within the spreadsheet.
|
| Attachments |
Attachment (excel)
|
Pinfold Lane, Scarisbrick - Frequency of road surveys
| Reference | 805.48 |
|---|---|
| Date Responded | 18/01/2011 |
| Response Type |
Full disclosure
|
| Request |
Pinfold Lane, Scarisbrick
Can you please let me have details of how often this road is checked for defects, and when it was last surveyed for defects, eg potholes, what is the frequency of surveys.
|
| Response |
Access to Information under the Freedom of Information (2000)
Thank you for your email dated 13 January 2011, in which you request disclosure of information under the provisions of the above Act; we are now in a position to respond.
Pinfold Lane, Scarisbrick was last inspected on 10 January 2011 and has a 3 monthly inspection frequency.
|
| Attachments |
None
|
Safety inspections of Castle Road, Colne
| Reference | 805.39 |
|---|---|
| Date Responded | 19/01/2011 |
| Response Type |
Full disclosure
|
| Request |
Under the general requirements of the Freedom of Information Act 2000, I would be grateful if you would provide the following information in relation to Castle Road, Colne, and in particular the section between Castle Road and Castle Court
Can you please provide the following
Whether or not you have formally adopted all or part of the standards contained within the national code of practice for highways maintenance management. |
| Response |
Request for information under the Freedom of Information Act 2000
Further to your email of 12 January, we are now in a position to respond to your enquiry regarding safely inspections relating to Castle Road. We have answered each point of your enquiry below:
Dates of all safety inspections undertaken on the carriageway in the two years preceding the date of your incident
Please see attached document named 'Safety Inspection Reports'.
Details of all carriageway defects identified during safety inspections in the two years preceding your incident
Please see attached document named 'Safety Inspection Reports'.
Details of how carriageway safety inspections are undertaken, including whether walked or driven, the speed of the inspection vehicle and the number of persons in the vehicle.
Safety inspections in urban areas are undertaken on foot. In rural areas they are undertaken in a vehicle with two occupants at an appropriate speed such that defects can be seen. Should it be difficult to obtain the necessary level of accuracy then inspections must be walked.
The intended frequency of carriageway safety inspections.
Please see attached document named 'SI Inspection Frequencies'.
Details of all complaints and/or enquiries relating to the carriageway, received in the two years preceding your incident.
Please see attached document named 'PEM – Carriageway Enquiry, Castle Road'.
The hierarchy classification.
The road is category 3b (Secondary distributor).
The road/section number.
4013C681 0/00010.
The defect intervention criteria adopted in relation to the identification of all categories of carriageway potholes (in other words, this means how they define a pothole as requiring attention)
Please see attached document named 'CoP Extract'.
The time period(s) adopted between identification and repair (temporary and permanent) of all categories of carriageway defects.
Please see attached document named 'Response Times'.
Whether or not the authority has formally adopted all or part of the standards contained within the national code of practice for highways maintenance management.
The authority has formally adopted the national code of practice for highways maintenance management in its Highway Maintenance plan which details where we deviate from the national code.
|
| Attachments |
SI Frequencies (word)
PEM enquiry (pdf)
Code of Practice Extract (word)
Response times (word)
|
Consultation on 20mph Zone at the Larches ward
| Reference | 805.41 |
|---|---|
| Date Responded | 24/01/2011 |
| Response Type |
Full disclosure
|
| Request |
Would be obliged if you would provide me with the response to the consultation on the 20mph zones that took place in part of Larches ward in 2009
The following information would be appreciated
How many consultation documents were distributed?
How many residents responded in numbers?
How many residents in numbers were in favour?
How many residents in numbers were against?
|
|
Response
|
Further to your email dated 12 January 2011 we are now in a position to respond.
How many consultation documents were distributed? 1150
How many residents responded in numbers? 347
How many residents in numbers were in favour? 277
How many residents in numbers were against? 70
|
|
Attachments
|
None
|
Pothole claims
| Reference | 805.35 |
|---|---|
| Date Responded | 25/01/2011 |
| Response Type |
Partial disclosure, partial refusal under section 12(1)
|
| Request |
1. How many claims for damage to cars (or other vehicles) due to potholes have been submitted to the council in each of the last 24 months? (i.e. please breakdown by month)
2. How many of these claims have been successful?
3. How many of these claims were unsuccessful?
4. How many are yet to be settled?
5. How many went as far as court proceedings/other external body? How many resulted in the issuing of court proceedings but were settled out of court?
6. How much has been paid out in total? What is the average payout?
7. Please identify the five highest payouts due to pothole damage in the last 24 months. Please provide the following information:
- Payment/compensation paid () - Did this claim succeed first time? Were solicitors consulted? Did this case go to court? - What was the damage? Please describe, including photographs if they were submitted - Date complaint lodged - Date complaint settled - Did this claim go to court/was it reported to an external body? 8. Please provide an estimate for the total legal costs involved in dealing with claims relating to pothole-damage to cars?
|
|
Response
|
Request for information under the Freedom of Information Act 2000
Further to your email dated 11th January 2011, in which you request the disclosure of information under the provisions of the above Act, we are now in a position to respond.
1. How many claims for damage to cars (or other vehicles) due to potholes have been submitted to the council in each of the last 24 months? (i.e. please breakdown by month)
296 (see attached s/sheet)
2. How many of these claims have been successful?
157 (based on claims which have concluded)
3. How many of these claims were unsuccessful?
98 (based on claims which have concluded)
4. How many are yet to be settled?
41 cases are still outstanding (these are additional to the answers to questions 2 and 3)
5. How many went as far as court proceedings/other external body? How many resulted in the issuing of court proceedings but were settled out of court?
To locate the information would require a manual trawl of case files. To collate this information would incur a commitment of resources in excess of the limit of £450 set by the Freedom of Information and Data Protection (Appropriate Limit and Fees) Regulations 2004 (SI No. 3244 of 2004), which equates to 18 hours of work. Section 12(1) of the Freedom of Information Act provides that a public authority is not obliged to comply with a request where to do so would exceed such a limit.
6. How much has been paid out in total? What is the average payout?
Total: £44,833.22, average £289.25 (based on claims which have concluded where damages have been paid)
7. Please identify the five highest payouts due to pothole damage in the last 24 months. Please provide the following information:
See attached spreadsheet
- Payment/compensation paid () - Did this claim succeed first time? Were solicitors consulted? Did this case go to court? - What was the damage? Please describe, including photographs if they were submitted - Date complaint lodged (used date file opened) - Date complaint settled (used date files closed) - Did this claim go to court/was it reported to an external body? : No external parties were involved in any of the 5 claims listed and none went to court. 8. Please provide an estimate for the total legal costs involved in dealing with claims relating to pothole-damage to cars? £50,755.76 (based on time and disbursements for concluded claims. Excludes recoveries).
With regard to question 7, pdf copies of the photos are attached.
|
|
Attachments
|
Supporting Information (excel)
Photo 5 40584 (pdf)
Photo 5 37722 (pdf)
Photo 5 38482 (pdf)
|
Cost of potholes
| Reference | 805.49 |
|---|---|
| Date Responded | 11/02/2011 |
| Response Type |
Full disclosure
|
| Request |
1. How much did your authority budget for highways maintenance in the past financial year (2010-11) and the previous one (2009-2010)? 2. How much did your authority actually spend on highways maintenance in the past financial year (2010-11) and the previous one (2009-2010)? 3. How much is your authority looking to budget for highways maintenance in the coming financial year (2011-12)? 4. Do you believe that will be enough to deal with road repairs in the area your authority covers? 5. How much has your authority had to pay out in compensation relating to potholes/highways maintenance to individuals in the past financial year (2010-11) and the two previous years (2009-10 and 2008-2009)? |
| Response |
Request for information under the Freedom of Information Act 2000
Further to your email dated 14th January 2011, in which you request the disclosure of information under the provisions of the above Act, we are now in a position to respond.
1. How much did your authority budget for highways maintenance in the past financial year (2010-11) and the previous one (2009-2010)?
2. How much did your authority actually spend on highways maintenance in the past financial year (2010-11) and the previous one (2009-2010)?
3. How much is your authority looking to budget for highways maintenance in the coming financial year (2011-12)?
4. Do you believe that will be enough to deal with road repairs in the area your authority covers?
5. How much has your authority had to pay out in compensation relating to potholes/highways maintenance to individuals in the past financial year (2010-11) and the two previous years (2009-10 and 2008-2009)?
1-3. Please see the attached document. Please note that the figures for maintenance include other works as well as potholing which cannot be easily extracted from the data.
4. The Freedom of Information Act 2000 relates to recorded information, as such we are unable to answer this part of your request.
5. The damages paid are as follows:
10/11 = £287,784
09/10 = £237,809
08/09 = £193,839 |
| Attachments |
Attachment (excel)
|
Potholes
| Reference | 805.69 |
|---|---|
| Date Responded | 15/02/2011 |
| Response Type |
Partial disclosure, some information refused under section 12(1)
|
| Request |
|
| Response |
Request for information under the Freedom of Information Act 2000
Further to your email dated 19th January 2011, in which you request the disclosure of information under the provisions of the above Act, we are now in a position to respond.
There are approximately 4360 miles of road for which Lancashire County Council has responsibility.
2008/09 19000 potholes
2009/10 22500 potholes
2010/11 24000 potholes
2008/09 17000 potholes
2009/10 20000 potholes
2001 to date 16500 potholes
The nature of the way the data is held makes it difficult to provide a list of the 'worst' 10 roads. To collate this information would incur a commitment of resources in excess of the limit of £450 set by the Freedom of Information and Data Protection (Appropriate Limit and Fees) Regulations 2004 (SI No. 3244 of 2004), which equates to 18 hours of work. Section 12(1) of the Freedom of Information Act provides that a public authority is not obliged to comply with a request where to do so would exceed such a limit.
|
| Attachments | None |
Sunny Road, Churchtown, Southport - repairs, schedules, maps from 1960 to 1974
| Reference | 805.173 |
|---|---|
| Date Responded |
21/02/2011
|
| Response Type |
Full disclosure
|
| Request |
I would like details of the repairs schedules, with dates, maps plans etc for Sunny Rd, Churchtown, Southport when Southport County Borough was part of Lancashire, from 1960 to 1974. Throughout this period the road was resurfaced from cobbles, gas lighting changed to electric etc, by the Council.
|
| Response |
Request for information under the Freedom of Information Act 2000
Further to your email, dated 16 February, in which you request the disclosure of information under the provisions of the above Act, I am now in a position to respond.
Having made enquiries, I regret to inform you that Lancashire County Council does not hold the information you have requested.
My colleagues within Lancashire Record Office have advised that the Lancashire Archive does not hold records of individual roads. A search of the County Council's archive catalogue for "Sunny Road" did not yield any relevant results. Ordinarily, you may be able to find mention of repairs to highways, road widening, major road improvements etc. in the minutes of Southport County Borough's Highways and Bridges Committee. However, while we hold the records of Southport County Borough (ref CBSO) (see http://archivecat.lancashire.gov.uk/CalmView/TreeBrowse.aspx?src=CalmView.Catalog&field=RefNo&key=CBSO) , these consist solely of police records. If the alterations to the road were in any way politically significant (i.e. following a public petition or in response to pressure from local groups), then there may be some mention in local newspapers of the time. Local newspapers are usually held on microform: in this case most probably at Sefton Library.
I have also been informed that, during the period in which you are interested, Southport was a County Borough and would have had the power to undertake highways work without the involvement of Lancashire County Council.
It is, of course, possible that any records that were held by Lancashire County Council were transferred to the new authority following the changes to local government in 1974.
I'm sorry that I have been unable to assist further on this occasion, but if I can be of any further help, do not hesitate to contact me.
|
| Attachments | None |
Improved Street Lighting and CCTV on Cannon Street, Preston
| Reference | 805.246 |
|---|---|
| Date Responded | 15/03/2011 |
| Response Type |
Full disclosure
|
| Request |
Please could you provide me with the details of all requests by residents/business owners for improved street lighting and CCTV on Cannon Street, Preston, as per the Freedom of Information Act?
|
| Response |
Request for information under the Freedom of Information Act 2000
Further to your request for information made under the provisions of the above Act, I am now in a position to provide you with a response.
Details of all requests by residents/business owners for improved street lighting and CCTV on Cannon Street, Preston, as per the Freedom of Information Act.
After having made enquiries with the relevant Department, I can confirm that Lancashire County Council have no records on file of anyone requesting improved street lighting or CCTV on Cannon Street.
I am sorry that I have been unable to assist you on this occasion.
|
| Attachments |
None
|
Potholes on Glenway, Penwortham
| Reference | 805.423 |
|---|---|
| Date Responded | 16/03/2011 |
| Response Type |
Full disclosure
|
| Request |
I would like a report, or information, on how many times in the last 12 months, pot holes have been addressed in the road Glenway in Penwortham. The postal reference is PR1 9AJ, and as the road is now in an appalling state, I would like to know how many residential complaints have been lodged, and how many times the council have been out to make repairs to the road. The pot holes in this road are worsening and the whole road has fallen apart. The road is in need of a resurface fully, and as such temporary repairs are constantly failing.
Therefore can you please supply me schedules of repairs carried out by the council, frequency of these repairs and amount of complaints lodged on this road by the residents in the last 12 month period. I wish to know how many times also you have been called out to repair the same parts of the road unsuccessfully, and had to then come out and end up repairing them again. |
| Response |
Request for information under the Freedom of Information Act 2000
Further to your email dated 18 February 2011 we are now in a position to respond.
Potholes have been addressed 3 times in Glenway in the last 12 months and Lancashire County Council have been out 3 times to make repairs.
7 residential complaints have been received, however, a number of these complaints refer to the same pothole.
All repairs made on Glenway are of a temporary nature, out of our Duty of Care, pending a more permanent fix. Glenway was due to be resurfaced in 2009/10 but this was put on hold in order to accommodate the Gas Alliance works later that year. The resurfacing of Glenway is due to commence shortly and provisionally booked for April 2011.
|
| Attachments |
None
|
Number of potholes
| Reference | 805.202 |
|---|---|
| Date Responded | 23/03/2011 |
| Response Type |
Partial disclosure, partial refusal under Section 12(1)
|
| Request |
1) The total number of potholes in the county according to current figures, and broken down into each district.
2) The 10 roads or stretches of roads that have generated the most complaints about potholes in*
*According to whichever method is used to record this. Could be in the past year, two years, etc.
|
| Response |
Request for information under the Freedom of Information Act 2000
Thank you for your email dated 23 February 2011, in which you request disclosure of information under the provisions of the above Act; we are now in a position to respond.
1) The total number of potholes in the county according to current figures, and broken down into each district.
The latest figures for potholes / district for 2010 are as follows
Lancaster 254
Wyre 243
Fylde 16
Preston 187
South Ribble 135
West Lancs 203
Chorley 95
Ribble Valley 123
Pendle 319
Hyndburn 153
Burnley 57
Rossendale 350 *Estimated
Total in Lancashire 2135
* The figure for Rossendale is currently being reviewed .
These figures represent the total number of potholes which have not been administratively signed off within the electronic recording system. The pothole could still have been filled but there may be a backlog on the administration side. These totals represent approx 10% of total number of potholes recorded in the full year.
2) The 10 roads or stretches of roads that have generated the most complaints about potholes in*
*According to whichever method is used to record this. Could be in the past year, two years, etc.
|
| Attachments |
None
|
Cost of installing the illuminated sign at the M6/M55 roundabout
| Reference | 805.242 |
|---|---|
| Date Responded | 29/03/2011 |
| Response Type |
Full disclosure
|
| Request |
Please supply the cost of installing and maintaining the illuminated road sign just north of the M6/M55 roundabout on the A6 north of Preston
|
| Response |
Request for information under the Freedom of Information Act 2000
Further to your email dated 3rd March 2011, in which you request the disclosure of information under the provisions of the above Act, we are now in a position to respond.
Please supply the cost of installing and maintaining the illuminated road sign just north of the M6/M55 roundabout on the A6 north of Preston.
The information provided relates to the Variable Message Sign, (VMS) that is located on the A6 just North of the M55.
The information regarding the installation costs is no longer held, however we can confirm that it costs £240 per year for the telecommunications link and maintenance of £202 per year.
|
| Attachments |
None
|
Spend on temporary road signs, cones, etc
| Reference | 805.362 |
|---|---|
| Date Responded | 04/04/2011 |
| Response Type |
Full disclosure
|
| Request |
Could you please specify how much has been spent on temporary road signs, barriers, traffic lights and traffic cones by Lancashire County Council from 1 April 2010 to 1 April 2011?
Could you also provide the equivalent figure for 1 April 2009 to 1 April 2010 and 1 April 2008 to 1 April 2009?
|
| Response |
Request for information under the Freedom of Information Act 2000
Further to your email dated 4 April 2011, in which you request the disclosure of information under the provisions of the above act, we are now in a position to respond.
The value of temporary road signs, barriers, traffic lights and traffic cone materials purchased is as follows:
|
| Attachments |
None
|
Compensation paid by Council for damage caused to vehicles by poor road conditions
| Reference | 805.221 | |||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Date Responded | 05/04/2011 | |||||||||||||||
| Response Type |
Full disclosure
|
|||||||||||||||
| Request |
*The amount paid in compensation by the council to individuals for the damage caused by potholes and poor road maintenance in
2007/2008
2008/2009
2009/2010
And the financial year 2010/2011 up to the current date.
* Please also provide the road maintenance budget for each of these years.
|
|||||||||||||||
| Response |
Request for information under the Freedom of Information Act 2000
Thank you for your email dated 28 February 2011, in which you request disclosure of information under the provisions of the above Act; we are now in a position to respond.
*The amount paid in compensation by the council to individuals for the damage caused by potholes and poor road maintenance in
2007/2008
2008/2009
2009/2010
And the financial year 2010/2011 up to the current date
* Please also provide the road maintenance budget for each of these years
Please note the information on 'compensation paid' has the following restrictions:
· This data is based on Highways files closed during each financial year
· It is restricted to show Personal Injury and Damage To Vehicle claims only
· It is further restricted to show incidents where potholes have been cited specifically
The sum of damages is the total amount paid by the time the file was closed. This figure may include interim payments which were made in previous years. |
|||||||||||||||
| Attachments |
None
|
Number of potholes
| Reference | 805.280 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Date Responded | 07/04/2011 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Response Type |
Full disclosure
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Request |
Please supply any information you hold on the number of potholes in each of the county's boroughs in 2010.
Please indicate how many potholes there were in each borough in 2010 and how many potholes were repaired by the council in 2010
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Response |
Request for information under the Freedom of Information Act 2000
Further to your email of 11 March, we are now in a position to respond to your enquiry regarding potholes.
Please find below a table containing the information you requested.
*The figure for Rossendale is currently being reviewed.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Attachments |
None
|
Gullies and Gully Cleaning
| Reference | 805.434 |
|---|---|
| Date Responded | 15/04/2011 |
| Response Type |
Full disclosure
|
| Request |
· Roughly how many gullies are on the network?
· Is the cleaning of the gullies completed in house or by a sub contractor?
· Can you please provide a name/source for this information for our records
|
| Response |
Request for information under the Freedom of Information Act 2000
Further to your email, we are now in a position to respond to your enquiry regarding 'gullies'. Please see below for the information you requested.
· According to Lancashire County Council's database, the total number of gullies within Lancashire is 282,890.
· Gully emptying is undertaken in-house by Lancashire County Commercial Group but supplemented by sub-contractors in times of high demand.
· Trevor Hargreaves in our Asset and Database Team (Transport & Strategic Highways) holds this type of highway inventory data.
|
| Attachments |
None
|
Road excavations
| Reference | 805.423 |
|---|---|
| Date Responded | 03/05/2011 |
| Response Type |
Full disclosure
|
| Request |
Would you please supply me with the following information, all of which is related to streetworks carried out in Lancashire.
1. How many excavations were carried out from January 1st 2010 - December 31st 2010 2. What percentage were carried out by the Council, or their agents? 3. How many reinstatement failures were there for the period? 4. How many permitted works overruns were there, that resulted in penalties being applied? 5. How many inspectors do the Council have looking at street works? I would prefer to receive the information electronically, via email. |
| Response |
Request for information under the Freedom of Information Act 2000
Thank you for completing the online form on 11 April 2011, in which you request disclosure of information under the provisions of the above Act; we are now in a position to respond.
1. How many excavations were carried out from January 1st 2010 - December 31st 2010
37,225
2. What percentage were carried out by the Council, or their agents?
5%
3. How many reinstatement failures were there for the period?
1476
4. How many permitted works overruns were there, that resulted in penalties being applied?
136
5. How many inspectors do the Council have looking at street works?
13
|
| Attachments |
None
|
Unadopted roads in Whitefield Ward, Nelson
| Reference | 805.728 |
|---|---|
| Date Responded | 05/07/2011 |
| Response Type |
Full disclosure
|
| Request |
1. How many roads and backstreets in Whitefield ward, Nelson, Lancashire are unadopted
2. A list detailing the roads and backstreets in Whitefield ward, Nelson that are unadopted |
| Response |
Access to Information under the Freedom of Information (2000)
Further to your email, dated 30 June, in which you request the disclosure of information regarding unadopted roads in the Whitefield Ward of Nelson, I am now in a position to respond.
The information you are seeking is available via 'MARIO' the County Council's online mapping system, which can be accessed at http://mario.lancashire.gov.uk/agsmario/
Accordingly the County Council has already satisfied the requirements of Environmental Information Regulations 2004 by making this information available.
Instructions which should assist your use of the MARIO system can be downloaded in PDF format from http://mario.lancashire.gov.uk/agsmario/marioguide.pdf
Within the MARIO viewer, use the zoom tools above the map to navigate to the Whitefield area of Nelson. Then, to show the boundary for the Whitefield Ward you need to tick the 'Ward Boundary' box within the 'Local Government Information' tab on the left. To show which roads are unadopted, tick the 'Road Status' box within the 'Highways and Transportation' tab on the left; unadopted roads are indicated by a cyan line (▬▬).
I trust you find this useful, but in the event that you wish to complain about the manner in which your enquiry has been handled, you should write in the first instance to The Freedom of Information Officer, Lancashire County Council, PO Box 78, County Hall, Preston PR1 8XJ, or email freedomofinformation@lancashire.gov.uk
If, after this stage, you remain dissatisfied, you have the right to refer the matter to the Information Commissioner, whose contact details are as follows:
The Information Commissioner
Wycliffe House
Water Lane
Wilmslow
Cheshire
SK9 5AF
Tel: 0303 123 1113
Email: enquiries@ico.gsi.gov.uk
Website: http://www.ico.gov.uk
|
| Attachments |
None
|
Road Maintenance Budget
| Reference | 805.829 |
|---|---|
| Date Responded | 15/08/2011 |
| Response Type |
Full disclosure
|
| Request |
1. By how much, if at all, have you cut your road maintenance budget in 2011-12 (compared to 2010-11)?
2. How many road accidents were reportedly caused by potholes in your area in 2010-11? 3. How much compensation has your authority paid out during 2010-11 as a result of damage to vehicles caused by potholes? 4. What is your road maintenance / pothole repair strategy for 2012? 5. What is the average cost of repair per pothole? 6. On average, how often each year are roads resurfaced? 7. How many complaints from the public did you receive per month regarding poor road conditions? 8. How many complaints regarding poor road conditions do you actually respond to by repairing the road? |
| Response |
Access to Information under the Freedom of Information (2000)
Thank you for your email dated 19 July 2011, in which you request disclosure of information under the provisions of the above Act; we are now in a position to respond.
1. By how much, if at all, have you cut your road maintenance budget in 2011-12 (compared to 2010-11)?
None
2. How many road accidents were reportedly caused by potholes in your area in 2010-11?
There were 8 road traffic accidents in the Lancashire County Council administrative area in the financial year 2010/2011 which were reportedly caused by potholes, according to the Nature of Accident description recorded by Lancashire Constabulary.
3. How much compensation has your authority paid out during 2010-11 as a result of damage to vehicles caused by potholes?
£53,734.35
4. What is your road maintenance / pothole repair strategy for 2012?
The current strategy, through the Highway Safety Inspection regime, is to repair all hazardous defects within either 24 hours or 5 days depending on severity.
5. What is the average cost of repair per pothole?
£35.00
6. On average, how often each year are roads resurfaced?
The frequency of repair depends on the road classification, the rate of deterioration and the road condition. Road condition surveys, Scanner, Scrim and Deflectograph, are used to provide objective condition data to aid in the prioritisation of resurfacing schemes.
7. How many complaints from the public did you receive per month regarding poor road conditions?
April 2010 890
May 2010 462
June 2010 495
July 2010 480
August 2010 426
September 2010 433
October 2010 375
November 2010 447
December 2010 256
January 2011 1234
February 2011 1430
March 2011 1185
8. How many complaints regarding poor road conditions do you actually respond to by repairing the road?
All complaints regarding road condition are looked at and a decision taken with regard to treatment. The type of problem reported will determine whether an immediate repair can be carried out or whether the problem is considered alongside other works required for future repair programmes.
|
| Attachments |
None
|
Street Lighting
| Reference | 805.1095 |
|---|---|
| Date Responded | 31/10/2011 |
| Response Type |
Full disclosure
|
| Request |
1. The number of street lights run by the local authority.
2. The current arrangements for turning off or dimming streets lights overnight including the number of lights affected and the hours that apply. 3. The saving of any arrangement in 2 above. 4. The cost of switching off or dimming street lights as per 2 above. 5. The cost of upgrading any road markings and/or removing any light columns to meeting arrangements in 2 above. 6. Details of any decisions pending as relate to the running of street lights. |
| Response |
Request for information under the Freedom of Information Act 2000
Further to your email dated 20 September, we are now in a position to respond to your enquiry regarding street lights. Firstly, however, please allow me to apologise for the length of time it has taken to deal with your request for information.
The dimming of street lighting requires lanterns to be fitted with at least an electronic ballast. Lancashire County Council started to install these a number of years ago to help reduce the energy consumed by its street lighting. Once a street light has been fitted with an electronic ballast it can be converted from standard operation to dimming operation via the use of a dimming photocell.
As it was County Council policy to fit electronic ballasts in most new and replacement street lighting lanterns many thousands had been fitted prior to the commencement of the dimming programme, which has accelerated the use of such equipment throughout Lancashire.
Bearing the above in mind, please find below the information you require:
We are currently dimming approximately 28,800 street lights between 10pm and 6.00 on residential roads, dimming approximately 11,000 street lights between 12midnight and 6.00 on main roads and turning off approximately 500 street lights between 12midnight and 5.00am on the M65.
|
| Attachments |
None
|
Cost of installing signs in Lancashire
| Reference | 805.1104 |
|---|---|
| Date Responded | 10/11/2011 |
| Response Type |
Full disclosure
|
| Request |
1. What is the total number of
a. New posts required in each District
b. New signs required in each District
to fulfil LCC's commitment to 20mph areas across Lancashire?
2. What is the total cost (including internal costs) of purchasing
a. New posts required in each District
b. New signs required in each District
to fulfil LCC's commitment to 20mph areas across Lancashire?
3. What is the estimated cost of installation of
a. New posts required in each District
b. New signs required in each District
to fulfil LCC's commitment to 20mph areas across Lancashire?
4. What is the provisional repair and maintenance budget allocation per District, and which type of repairs have been costed or estimated to fulfil LCC's commitment to 20mph areas across Lancashire?
5. What is the provisional cleansing budget allocation per District in respect of LCC's commitment to 20mph areas across Lancashire?
6. What steps has the County Council taken to award the contract for cleaning of the signs in each District in respect of LCC's commitment to 20mph areas across Lancashire?
7. What steps has the County taken to procure alternatively sourced signs to fulfil LCC's commitment to 20mph areas across Lancashire?
8. What impact assessment has the County Council made of increasing the numbers of street signs on the quantity of street furniture to fulfil LCC's commitment to 20mph areas across Lancashire?
9. What steps have the County Council taken to reduce street signage in areas that possess traffic calming but which are not yet subject to a 20mph speed restriction to fulfil LCC's commitment to 20mph areas across Lancashire?
|
| Response |
Access to Information – Ref. 805.1104
Further to your letter dated 20 September, in which you request disclosure of information regarding 20mph zones, I am now in a position to respond. Please accept my apologies for the delay in collating this information.
1. What is the total number of
a. New posts required in each District
b. New signs required in each District
to fulfil LCC's commitment to 20mph areas across Lancashire?
2. What is the total cost (including internal costs) of purchasing
a. New posts required in each District
b. New signs required in each District
to fulfil LCC's commitment to 20mph areas across Lancashire?
3. What is the estimated cost of installation of
a. New posts required in each District
b. New signs required in each District
to fulfil LCC's commitment to 20mph areas across Lancashire?
Please see the enclosed table for answers to 1 – 3. Please note that these answers are for phase 1 only; details for phases 2, 3 and 4 will become available as design work is undertaken. Please note also that the answers to questions 2 and 3 have been combined.
4. What is the provisional repair and maintenance budget allocation per District, and which type of repairs have been costed or estimated to fulfil LCC's commitment to 20mph areas across Lancashire?
5. What is the provisional cleansing budget allocation per District in respect of LCC's commitment to 20mph areas across Lancashire?
6. What steps has the County Council taken to award the contract for cleaning of the signs in each District in respect of LCC's commitment to 20mph areas across Lancashire?
The position with items 4 – 6 is that the initial project is for the installation phase, which will be followed by a review of the maintenance, cleaning and ancillary costs. Until the project is completed any costs will be contained within the revenue budgets for routine maintenance. It is not clear at this point what the total number of signs will be at the completion of the project. As detailed design work is ongoing a separate budget allocation has not been created at this time.
7. What steps has the County taken to procure alternatively sourced signs to fulfil LCC's commitment to 20mph areas across Lancashire?
Lancashire County Commercial Group (LCCG) Signs and Graphics Department has been charged with the manufacture of all the highways signage required for the 20mph project currently identified.
In order to achieve deadlines and fulfil their current high volume order book of phased works items, Signs and Graphics Department have had to undertake a tendering exercise in accordance with LCC Standing Orders for approved traffic grade signs. This is in order to supplement our own production lines whilst fulfilling our contractual obligations; the value of the purchased signs is £9,628.
8. What impact assessment has the County Council made of increasing the numbers of street signs on the quantity of street furniture to fulfil LCC's commitment to 20mph areas across Lancashire?
Designers have been instructed that terminal and repeater signs should, where practicable, be located on existing street furniture in order to minimise street clutter. Every effort will be made at the detailed design stage to ensure that news signs are located on existing street furniture.
9. What steps have the County Council taken to reduce street signage in areas that possess traffic calming but which are not yet subject to a 20mph speed restriction to fulfil LCC's commitment to 20mph areas across Lancashire?
At locations where existing 20mph zones are present designers have been instructed that where practicable and local circumstances are suitable they remain as 20mph zones and no additional signs are required. Every effort will be made at the detailed design stage that the number of additional signs is kept to a minimum.
Other roads, for example those with 30mph limit and traffic calming, are signed in accordance with the regulations and relevant guidelines
|
| Attachments |
None
|
Winter maintenance
| Reference | 805.1093 |
|---|---|
| Date Responded | 12/12/2011 |
| Response Type |
Full disclosure
|
| Request |
1. How many gritting vehicles does the council have at its disposal and how many tonnes of salt and grit are held?
2. At what temperature forecast are the council's gritting resources deployed?
3. Has the forecast temperature which triggers deployment of gritting resources changed in the last three years or is it planned to change it? If so, please provide details of the trigger temperature change and date of implementation.
|
| Response |
Request for information under the Freedom of Information Act 2000
I refer to your request for information made under the provisions of the above Act. After having made enquiries with the relevant Department, I am now in a position to provide you with a response. 1. How many gritting vehicles does the council have at its disposal and how many tonnes of salt and grit are held? 2. At what temperature forecast are the council's gritting resources deployed? Please find attached a copy of the Winter Service Plan which answers Q 1 & 2 of your enquiry. Please note, this is currently being updated with a revised plan for Winter 2011/12, which I have been advised will be available publicly mid-November. 3. Has the forecast temperature which triggers deployment of gritting resources changed in the last three years or is it planned to change it? If so, please provide details of the trigger temperature change and date of implementation. Please see attached the Decision Making Matrix and the Treatment Matrix from October 2008. The impacts of the last three winters have resulted in a plethora of national guidance and changes to codes of practice, which the County Council's Winter Service Plan seeks compliance with. |
| Attachments |
Attachment 1 (pdf)
Attachment 2 (pdf)
|
Breakdown of costs for installing dropped kerbs
| Reference | 805.1434 |
|---|---|
| Date Responded | 06/01/2012 |
| Response Type |
Full disclosure
|
| Request |
I would like to enquire as to known cost and projected total cost of the introduction of the residential area 20 miles per hour speed limits, with particular reference to the cost of purchasing all signs and posts and the labour cost/contract cost of erection. I would appreciate a breakdown estimate for the Rossendale area. |
| Response |
Access to Information under the Freedom of Information (2000)
Further to your email dated 24 November 2011, in which you request disclosure of information regarding 20mph zones in the Rossendale area, I am now in a position to respond. Please accept my apologies for the delay in collating this information.
The initial phase of the project is for installation which will be followed by a review of the maintenance, cleaning and ancillary costs. Until the project is completed, any costs will be contained within the revenue budgets for routine maintenance. It is not clear at this point what the total number of signs will be at the completion of the project. As detailed design work is ongoing a separate budget allocation has not been created at this time.
It is however estimated that the installation phase will require a total number 578 new posts and 4710 new signs to cover the Lancashire area as a whole; and the projected total cost for the installation and the purchase, will be in the region of £514 880.
So far as Rossendale is concerned, it is estimated that 30 new posts and 172 new signs will be required. The estimated cost for the installation and the purchase will be in the region of £16000.
Lancashire County Commercial Group (LCCG) Signs and Graphics Department has been charged with the manufacture of all the highways signage required for the 20mph project currently identified, and there is therefore no external contractor involved.
|
| Attachments |
None
|
Cost of Signs on Sycamore Close and Eton Park
| Reference | 805.1574 |
|---|---|
| Date Responded | 11/01/2012 |
| Response Type |
Full disclosure
|
| Request |
There have been new speed signs fitted at the entrance of sycamore close. Two signs attached to an existing lamp post and two signs fitted to a new post. Can you tell me how much this cost in total for production and fitting. Also there were two sign posts erected at the entrance of Eton Park off Midgery lane. Can you tell me how much they cost in total for production and fitting. |
| Response |
Access to Information under the Freedom of Information (2000)
Further to your email of 23 December, in which you request the disclosure of information under the provisions of the above Act, I am now in a position to respond.
Having made enquiries, I can confirm that the supply and installation of signs is £72 per sign, and, where posts are also required, the supply and installation of these is £55 per post. Note that, where possible, signs are affixed to existing street furniture.
|
| Attachments |
None
|
Street Lighting
| Reference | 805.1485 |
|---|---|
| Date Responded | 13/01/2012 |
| Response Type |
Full disclosure
|
| Request |
1. How many streetlights (columns and/or lamps) has Lancashire County Council replaced in the last three financial years: 2009/10, 2010/11 and 2011/12 so far.
a) How many of these were like-for-like replacement of unsafe or faulty streetlights?
b) How many of the above were replacement with new low-power lamps to deliver cost savings / cut carbon emissions?
c) How many of the above were replacement of 'unsafe' old cast iron streetlights with modern versions?
2. What is the estimated unit cost of a) b) and c) (i.e. raw materials plus labour?)
3. Therefore what is the estimated total cost to LCC of a) b) and c) over the last three financial years.
4. How many LCC streetlights are there? How many more streetlights are programmed to be replaced under b) and c) and over what time frame?
5. What is the estimated annual saving of replacing an individual streetlight with a low-power lamp? Therefore, what is the estimated annual saving to be delivered once all streetlights are replaced?
6. How many reports of accidents (e.g. streetlights toppling over, fires) have faulty Lancashire County Council streetlights caused in the last five years?
7. What has the council paid out in claims on faulty streetlights over this period? |
| Response |
Request for information under the Freedom of Information Act 2000
7. What has the council paid out in claims on faulty streetlights over this period?
LCC has paid out approximately £450 plus costs over the period in question.
|
| Attachments |
None.
|
Winter Maintenance Vehicles
| Reference | 805.1521 |
|---|---|
| Date Responded | 17/01/2012 |
| Response Type |
Full disclosure
|
| Request |
1. The number of winter maintenance vehicles including gritters and snow ploughs in the authority's current fleet.
2. Any changes in the number of the winter maintenance fleet, either up or down, in the past five years or for the years available. 3. Any planned decisions related to the number of winter maintenance vehicles including gritters and snow ploughs. |
| Response |
Access to Information under the Freedom of Information (2000)
Further to your email dated 12th December, in which you request the disclosure of information under the provisions of the above Act, we are now in a position to respond.
1. The number of winter maintenance vehicles including gritters and snow ploughs in the authority's current fleet.
2. Any changes in the number of the winter maintenance fleet, either up or down, in the past five years or for the years available. 3. Any planned decisions related to the number of winter maintenance vehicles including gritters and snow ploughs. Dedicated Gritting vehicles
22no 3 axle 26000kg vehicles
40no 2 axle 18000kg vehicles
2no 2 axle 12000kg vehicles
There has been no change in the numbers of gritting vehicles over the past 5 years
Snow Ploughs
3no 7500kg tippers fitted with snow plough frames and ploughs (2005)
2no existing 18000kg tippers fitted with snow plough frames and ploughs (2009)
5no new 18000kg tippers specified with snow plough frames and ploughs (2010)
Footway gritters
8no horticultural tractors fitted with small salt spreading bodies for footpath gritting (2010) |
| Attachments |
None
|