Highway Infrastructure Asset Management Plan - Leeds Infrastructure Asset... · the assets in a...

u

Highway Infrastructure Asset Management Plan

2016-2021

Leeds City Council – Highways Infrastructure Asset Management Plan

Amendment List

Version Issue date Amendment Description

1 Nov 2016 Original Document

2 Jan 2017

5.2.3 page 30 - Link heirachy footways changed to Link and local

access footways.

Part 4 – Drainage added

Foreword V2 – January 2018

Page 2


Foreword

It is with much pleasure that I endorse Leeds City Council’s new Highways Infrastructure

Asset Management Plan (HIAMP). The Leeds highway network represents a major and

important feature of the physical infrastructure that impacts all of our lives. This plan marks

a major step forward in explaining and defining how Leeds City Council will deliver its

highway services in the coming years.

I am delighted that this plan will now provide a better understanding for those amongst us

who wish to contribute to future highway services. In this respect, the plan recognises the

need to collect and maintain asset and condition data that will allow objective decision

making with regard to investment and policy and ensure best value is being achieved.

This HIAMP embodies a local approach to asset management which compliments the

national requirements. I believe that this will enable Leeds highways to demonstrate the

basis of its decision making and that it is providing value for money to its highway users. I

am confident that this provides a foundation for successful delivery of highway services for

the people of Leeds, business and visitors.

I welcome it and commend it to all who read it.

Councillor Richard Lewis

Executive Member for Transport and The Economy

Executive Summary V2 – January 2018

Page 3


Executive Summary

Leeds City Council’s Highways Infrastructure Asset Management Plan (HIAMP) has been

designed to direct and inform service users and those involved in service delivery about the

way in which Leeds City Council intends to maintain its highway network over the next

five years. Particular emphasis has been placed upon service delivery improvements and

how outcomes will be realised through the asset management process strategically,

tactically and operationally. This plan should be read in conjunction with, or at least

with reference to, several other important publications such as:

• Current legislation

• Leeds’ Highway Infrastructure Asset Management Strategy

• National code of practice, which is called Well-maintained Highways – Code of

Practice for Highways Maintenance Management (The Code)

This plan will provide an integrated framework for the delivery of Highway Maintenance

services and Asset Management across the City’s road network and optimises resources

for the management of the highway infrastructure. The objective of the Plan is to develop

how highway services are delivered, in a way that makes the process more intelligence led,

customer responsive and ‘joined up’.

An intelligence led approach will ultimately bring greater value for money and help achieve

key Council goals that can be found in strategies such as our Sustainable Community

Strategy, Corporate Plan and Local Transport Plan. In line with all other Highway

Authorities in the UK, our aim is to provide a service that, so far as possible and within

financial constraints, meets the general objectives and requirements of the national code

of practice.

Executive Summary V2 – January 2018

Page 4


Leeds City Council’s and West Yorkshire’s Strategic Documents

Main Introduction V2 – January 2018

Page 5


Main Introduction

The Best Council Plan sets a priority to deliver quality highways assets, to maintain the

percentage of roads in need of structural repair and reduce the percentage of highways

structures in need of essential repair.

Highways Assets in Leeds are continually monitored for condition and maintenance needs.

Prioritised planned maintenance and strengthening programmes are developed to maintain

the assets in a safe and serviceable condition appropriate for their use together with a view

to minimising whole life costs.

Adoption of the Leeds Highway Infrastructure Asset Management Plan will ensure better

value for money through a sensible and forward thinking maintenance plan for all highways

assets. This Plan takes its lead from national and local policies and outlines how Leeds City

Council will fulfil these.

Leeds City Council is the Highway Authority for all highways in the Leeds area with the

exception of M1, M621, M62 and A1(M) for which the Department of Transport is the

Highway Authority.

Main Introduction V2 – January 2018

Page 6


Leeds City Council is represented by 99 Councillors, three for each of the City's 33 wards. The

area is represented at a national level by eight MPs. Leeds also has 27 Parish Councils and

four Town Councils.

The population of Leeds is around 766,000, covering an area of 552 Km2 and is 88% urban.

Leeds has borders with North Yorkshire (to the north and East), Wakefield (to the south

East), Kirklees (to the south west), Bradford (to the west)

Our highway infrastructure is the most valuable publicly owned asset managed and

maintained by the Council.

The major asset groups of our highway infrastructure consist of over:

• 2,800 kilometres of roads

• 5,000 kilometres of footways and cycleways

• 4,000 bridges and other highway structures

• 93,000 street lights

• 26,000 traffic signs

• 600 traffic signal installations

• 140,000 gullies (and other highway drainage assets)

• 58 kilometres of safety fencing

The highways asset also includes drainage, street furniture, road makings, public rights of

way and verges.

Outside of London, Leeds has the third busiest railway station and the sixteenth busiest

airport in terms of passenger numbers for England.

Contents V2 – January 2018

Page 7


Contents Page

Part 1 Highways

1 Introduction

1.1 Background ……………………………………………………….....…….............................. 11

1.2 Funding …………………...………….………………….………..………………………….….…….. 12

2 Legal Framework

2.1 Introduction ……………………………………………………………………………..……….……. 14

2.2 Legal Framework …………………………………………………….……............................ 15

3 Asset Management Information

3.1 Introduction...……..……………………………………………………..…………………………..… 16

3.2 Network Inventory ……………………………………………………….……………………….…. 16

3.3 Network Hierarchy ………………..…………………………………….……………………….….. 17

3.4 Carriageway Hierarchy ………………………………………………….……………………..…… 18

3.5 Footway Hierarchy ………………………………….……..…………….…………….………….. 19

3.6 Cycle way Hierarchy ………………………………………….…..……..………………………… 19

4 Asset Condition and Investigatory Levels

4.1 Introduction …….………….…….………….…….………………….……........................... 20

4.2 Principles and Considerations …………..….………….…….…………………………........ 20

4.3 Asset Condition Standards By Element ………………….…………..…………………….. 20

4.4 Levels of Service ……………………….…………………………….…….…………………………. 23

4.5 Investigatory levels and Response times…………………………………………………… 27

5 Inspection, Assessment and Recording

5.1 Introduction ……………………………………………………….…………………………………… 28

5.2 Safety Inspections ………….…………………………………….…………………………………. 29

5.3 Condition Surveys ………………………………………………………………….….….…………. 31

5.4 Service Inspections …………………………………………….…...……………….…….………. 33

5.5 Processing Data ...………………....………..………………..………………….….….….…….. 33

5.6 Reliability of Data and Training …….………..…….………………….….……...….………. 34

5.7 Investigatory Levels ………………………………………….………………….….…..………….. 34

5.8 Risk Assessment …………………………………………………………………………….………… 35

5.8 Inspection, Assessment and Recording Review ………………………………………… 38


Page 8


6 Programming and Priorities

6.1 Introduction …………………………………………………………………………………….………. 39

6.2 Balancing Priorities …………………………………………………………….….………………… 41

6.3 Priorities for Emergency / Reactive Maintenance. ………………….....………..…… 42

6.4 Priorities for Routine Maintenance ……………………………………….…………...…… 42

6.5 Priorities for Planned Maintenance …………………………………………….…….….…. 42

6.6 Lifecycle and Investment Planning ………………….…………..……….……….…..……. 43

6.7 Decision making Process ……………………………………………………………….………... 46

6.8 Producing the Annual Works Programme ….………………………..….……….……... 49

6.9 Materials Products and Treatments …………………..……..………….….……….…….. 50

6.10 Forward Works Plan …………………………………………….…………….….………….…….. 53

6.11 Risk Management ………………………………..……………………………….…………….…… 53

6.12 Efficient Delivery ………………………………………………….…………………..…….........… 54

6.13 Data Management …………………………………………………..…………………….........… 55

6.14 Communication and Consultation ……………………………………….….……..........… 55

6.15 Performance Management Framework ………………………………………..……….… 56

6.16 Benchmarking ……………………….…………………………………….…………….…….……... 58

6.17 Investment Strategy ...……………….……………………………………………….………..….. 59

Part 2 Structures

2.1 Introduction ………………………………………………………..………………………………..… 61

2.2 Inventory …………………………………………………………..……………………………………. 61

2.3 Condition …………………………………………………………..……………………………………. 62

2.4 Levels of Service …………………..……………………………..………………………………….. 63

2.5 Programme and Priorities………………………………………………………………………….. 63

2.6 Future Demands…………………………………………….………………………………..………… 65

2.7 Creation / Acquisition……………………..……………………………………………….………… 66

2.8 Disposal………………………..……….………………………………………………………..…………. 66

Part 3 Lighting & Traffic Signals

Lighting

3.1 Introduction ………………………………………………………….….………………………………. 69


Page 9


3.2 Inventory …………………………....……………………………………………..…………………… 69

Traffic Signals

3.3 Introduction …………………….……………………………………………..……….……………… 69

3.4 Inventory ……………………………………..………………………………..….……………………. 69

3.5 Asset Condition and Investigatory Levels ………………………..…….………………… 70

3.6 Levels of Service …………………………….……………………………..…………..………….… 71

3.7 Lifecycle planning (Replacement Strategy) ……………..……………….……………… 72

3.8 Programming and Priorities …………………………………………….…….………………… 72

3.9 Measuring Deliverables ………………………………….……………….…….………………… 73

3.10 Performance Monitoring …………………………….……..…………………….……………… 73

Part 4 Drainage

4.1 Introduction ………………………………………………………………………………………..…… 77

4A Highways Drainage ……………………………………………………………………………..…… 77

4A.1 Inventory ………..…………………………………………………………………………………..…… 77

4A.2 Asset Condition Standard by Element .………………………………………………..…… 77

4A.3 Levels of Service …….…………………………………………………………………………..…… 78

4A.4 Inspection, Assessment and Recording ………………………………………………..…… 79

4A.5 Highways Drainage Strategy ………………………………………………………………..…… 80

4A.6 Programming and Priorities ………………………………………………………………..…… 81

4A.7 Forward Works Programme ………………………………………………………………..…… 83

4A.8 Performance ………………………………………………………………………………………..…… 83

4B Other Drainage Features …………………………………………………………………………… 84

Part 5 Service Review

5.1 Introduction ………………………………………………………………………………………..…… 87

5.2 Future Demands / Improvement Actions ..…………………………………………..…… 87


Page 10



2016-2021

Part 1 - Highways

Section 1 – Introduction V2 – January 2018

Page 11

Part 1 – Highways Leeds City Council – Highways Infrastructure Asset Management Plan

Section 1 – Introduction

1.1 Background

Highway Infrastructure Asset Management Plan for Leeds.

Asset management is a means to deliver a more efficient and effective approach to

management of highway infrastructure assets through longer term planning, ensuring that

standards are defined and achievable for available budgets. It also supports the case for

funding and better communication with stakeholders, aiding a greater understanding of the

contribution highway infrastructure assets make to economic growth, improvements to

health and wellbeing and the needs of local communities.

The demand for a more efficient approach to the management of highway infrastructure

assets has come to prominence in the light of the economic challenges faced by both

central and local government as well as the devolved administrations.

As time goes by roads that are currently in good condition will deteriorate, just like any

physical asset such as a house or a car. To keep on top of the deterioration of our asset

continual investment in maintenance activities must be made.

In a climate where budgets and resources are reducing, Leeds City Council is facing

significant challenges in deciding how to manage assets effectively. The adoption of asset

management principles can deliver a systematic approach to this by planning well into the

future and making informed decisions based on sound principles. Our plan is therefore to

consider asset management which will allow us to make best use of resources and deliver

the most effective highway maintenance services.

The definition of Highway Asset Management is:

‘A systematic approach to meeting the strategic need for the management and

maintenance of highway infrastructure assets through long term planning and optimal

allocation of resources in order to manage risk and meet the performance requirements of

the authority in the most efficient and sustainable manner.’

Adopting these principles will enable us to identify the best allocation of resources for the

management, operation, preservation and enhancement of highway infrastructure to

meet the needs of current and future road users. Asset management supports business

decisions and provides longer term financial benefits.

Leeds City Council has a strategy for the maintenance of highway infrastructure which is led

by the principles of Asset Management. This will involve the use of lifecycle planning for all

our assets based upon historical data, current / future usage and design specifications,

allied to anticipated index-linked cost estimates.

Our lifecycle plan looks forward for up to ten years to determine the major maintenance

needs for all of Leeds’ roads. From the plan we are able to provide an indicative five year

rolling works programme of major resurfacing and a 2 year rolling programme of

preventative maintenance. The maintenance backlog is in excess of £100 million and has

been increasing. The lifecycle plan and works programmes are used to make informed

investment decisions aimed at managing this.


Page 12


Whilst the five year works plan remains ‘indicative’, the year one programme is confirmed

annually, via our engagement with Elected Members, Parish / Town Councils and through

the Highways and Transportation delegated decision process. Therefore, it is essential that

our approach is communicated clearly to ensure elected members’ engagement at a

strategic level. Asset management principles and methodology will only be successful if key

decision makers are on board and can visualise the long term benefits and savings to be

made from this approach.

1.2 Funding

The funds used to provide highways maintenance services are a combination of capital and

revenue. Capital funding is that which is used to add to the highway asset or significantly

increase its remaining life such as, resurfacing schemes. Revenue funding is used for the

day-to-day recurring activities required to maintain the City’s highway network such as,

pothole repair, grass cutting and gully emptying.

Funding for maintenance of the authority’s highways assets is made available from the

following sources.

• Local Transport Plan (LTP) Capital Grant

• Leeds City Council Capital Resources

• Leeds City Council Revenue Resources

Local Transport Plan (LTP) Capital Grant

Spring 2015 saw the culmination of over five years development work by the Department

for Transport to create a new set of funding models for highways maintenance across the

country. Funding for road maintenance is made available through a formula allocation

topped up with an assessed incentive element. In 2017 there is an opportunity to bid for a

limited ‘challenge fund’ for specific maintenance schemes over £5 million in value.

Formula Grant

Each Year the Government makes a specific formula based allocation to Local Authorities for

carrying out maintenance and strengthening work on highways assets through the LTP. The

allocation is based on road length and condition.

Incentive Fund

The purpose of the incentive funding (worth £578m nationally over the 6 year period) is to

promote the adoption of asset management good practice across all local authorities to

ensure value for money.

For 2015/16 each local authority received all of its funding. However, for each subsequent

year there is an expectation that continuous improvement in efficiencies of delivery will

take place. This level of improvement will be reflected in the funding awarded. Local

highway authorities will be categorised based upon where they are on the efficiency curve

as follows:

• Band 1: Early stage authority - Has a basic understanding of key areas and is in the

process of taking it forward.


Page 13


• Band 2: Mid stage authority - Can demonstrate that outputs have been produced

that support the implementation of key areas that will lead towards improvement.

• Band 3: Final stage authority - Can demonstrate that outcomes have been achieved

in key areas as part of a continuous improvement process.

The Incentive Fund places the need for a robust HIAMP at the heart of its self- assessment

methodology. In 2016 Leeds City Council was assessed as a Band 2 authority.

It is an essential requirement of the Incentive Fund that all highway authorities outline the

steps they are taking and the strategies they will employ to demonstrate their commitment

to the adoption of asset management principles in all highway maintenance activities. This

HIAMP is the document that is used to achieve this and will form an important element of

our plan to progress to Band 3 in 2017.

The Challenge Fund

Part of the government’s 2014 Autumn Statement assigned a proportion of the highways

maintenance budget to a Local Highways Maintenance Challenge Fund. The purpose of the

Fund is to enable local highway authorities in England to bid for major maintenance projects

that are otherwise difficult to fund through the normal needs element allocations they

receive. The next bid process is in 2017, Leeds will consider the submission of a bid once the

details and conditions have been announced by government.

Leeds Capital

Leeds recognises the importance of its highway network and has made significant capital

investment in roads since 2004. That investment has been impacted by bitumen cost

increases reducing the amount of work afforded and harsh winters have increased the rate

of deterioration of roads and footways. Nevertheless progress has been made with a notable

reduction in liability claims and defect reports.

Revenue Resources

The current economic climate has put pressure on all revenue allocations and whilst

highways maintenance is still seen as a priority for the council there is still a need to make

efficiencies in this area

Section 2 – Legal Framework V2 – January 2018

Page 14


Section 2 – Legal Framework

2.1 Introduction

The delivery of highway maintenance is largely based on statutory powers and duties

contained in legislation and precedents of case law. Highway authorities have a general

duty of care to users and the community to maintain the highway in a condition fit for

purpose, so far as is reasonably practicable.

2.2 Legal Framework

In addition to the duty of care there are a number of pieces of legislation which provide the

basis for powers and duties relating to highway maintenance these include the following;

• Highways Act 1980

• Traffic Management Act 2004

• New Roads & Street Works Act 1991

• Road Traffic Reduction Act 1997

• Transport Act 2000

• Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984

• Traffic Signs Regulations & General

Directions 2002

• Railways and Transport Safety Act 2003

• Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000

• Local Authorities (Transport Charges)

Regulations1998

• Environmental Protection Act 1990

• Noxious Weeds Act 1993

• Health and Safety at Work Act 1974

• Construction (Design & Management)

Regulations 2007

• Local Government Act 2003

• The Clean Neighborhoods and

Environment Act 2005

• Disability Discrimination Act 2005

• Flood and Water Management Act 2010

• Management of Health and Safety at

Work Regulations1999

The most strategically significant legislation are summarised as:

Highways Act 1980

The Highways Act 1980 sets out the main duties of Highway Authorities in England and

Wales. Section 41 imposes a duty to maintain highways maintainable at public expense,

and almost all claims against the Council relating to highway functions arise from the

alleged breach of this section. The Act identifies all powers that Highway Authorities

can exercise to undertake activities on or within the highway such as improvements,

drainage, acquiring land, authorising skips, scaffolds etc.

Section 58 of the Act provides for a defense against litigation relating to alleged failure

to maintain on grounds that the Council has taken such care as in all the circumstances

was reasonably required to secure that the part of the highway in question was not

dangerous to traffic.

Traffic Management Act, 2004

The Traffic Management Act places a network management duty that includes the co-

ordination of all works within the highway (including the authority’s own works). It

Section 2 – Legal Framework V2 – January 2018

Page 15


also introduces duties associated with reducing congestion and requires the

appointment of a Traffic Manager and close liaison with contiguous authorities

New Roads and Street works Act, 1991

Imposes duties upon the Council to monitor, inspect and co-ordinate the works of others

(especially utilities) within the highway

Section 3 – Inventory V2 – January 2018

Page 16


Section 3 – Asset Management Information

3.1 Introduction

Asset inventory is the foundation on which asset management processes are to be built.

When inventory is combined with condition data, an overall view and consistent

management approach can be achieved.

Asset data, both inventory and condition is required to enable the following processes:

• Effectively monitoring and reporting on the condition of the highway network, and

its individual assets, at any stage throughout its life.

• Helping to assess the current levels of service and develop future levels of service

along with their associated performance indicators.

• Identifying future investment strategies, modelling future maintenance options,

and developing long term forward programmes, which enable the assessment of

future budget needs.

• Conducting valuation assessments for each of the various assets and for predicting

their depreciation over time, bearing in mind any restorative works undertaken on

them.

• Valuation of the asset which is to be used for the Whole Government Accounts

(WGA) currently being implemented.

• All of the above leading to well informed, cost effective asset management

decisions.

3.2 Network Inventory

The inventory held for the highway network is generally good with all the major asset types

recorded as shown in the following table;

Major Asset Group Asset Element Asset

Quantity

Asset

Unit Highways Carriageways

Principal Roads 398 km

B & C Roads 247 km

Unclassified Distributor Roads 174 km

Local Roads 2065 km

Total 2884 km

Footways & Cycleways

Prestige Area 2 km

Primary Walking Route (1) 27 km

Secondary Walking Route (2) 66 km

Link Footways (3) 389 km

Local Access Footways (4) 2452 km

Cycleways 28 km

Total 2964 km


Page 17


Other Asset Group Asset Element Asset

Quantity

Asset

Unit Highways Carriageway & Footways

Road Restraint Systems (crash barriers) 58,673 lin-m

Pedestrian Guardrail 111,629 lin-m

Non illuminated signs 26,613 No.

Non Illuminated bollards ???? No.

Road Markings ???? lin-m

Road Studs ???? No

Privately Owned Infrastructure ???? No.

Green Spaces Managed by Parks & Countryside

Public Rights of Way – Footways (1025no) 620 Km

Public Rights of Way – Bridleways (182 no) 170 Km

Public Rights of Way – Byways (10 no) 9 Km

Embankments and Cuttings Unknown Km

Verges 9.2 Sq-km

Trees 14,397 No.

Hedges 28 Km

Table 3.2 – Asset Inventory for Highways

3.3 Network Hierarchy

The road hierarchy reflects the needs, priorities and actual use of each part of the network

and is used as the main tool in determining policy priorities, maintenance standards, targets

and performance. The hierarchy for carriageways, footways and cycleways is based upon

traffic flows for roads, and defined priorities for footways and cycleways. In addition, a

further assessment has been undertaken to consider the type of road, the role of the route

in a local context, and a consideration of functional factors that may influence how the road

is managed. The current hierarchy is detailed in the following tables.


Page 18


3.4 Carriageway Hierarchy

Carriageways have been categorised in accordance with the National Code of Practice for

Road Maintenance which recommends;

No. Hierarchy Description Detailed Description / Local Application

Pri

nci

pa

l

(A R

oa

ds)

1 Motorway Routes for fast moving long distance traffic. Fully grade separated and

restrictions on use

2 Strategic Route

Trunk and some Principal ‘A’ Roads between primary destinations. Routes

for fast moving long distance traffic with little frontage access or pedestrian

traffic. Speed limits are usually in excess of 40 mph and there are few

junctions. Pedestrian crossings are either segregated or controlled and

parked vehicles are generally prohibited.

Dis

trib

uto

r

( B

& C

Ro

ad

s) 3a Main Distributor

Major urban Network and Inter-Primary Links. Short medium distance

traffic. Routes between Strategic Routes and linking urban centres to the

strategic network with limited frontage access. In urban areas speed limits

are usually 40 mph or less, parking is restricted at peak times and there are

positive measures for pedestrian safety

Un

cla

ssif

ied

Dis

trib

uto

r R

oa

ds 3b Secondary Distributor

In rural areas these roads link the larger villages and HGV generators to the

Strategic and Main Distributor Network. In built up areas these roads have

30 mph speed limits and very high levels of pedestrian activity with some

crossing facilities including zebra crossings. On street parking is generally

unrestricted except for safety reasons

Rural B and C classified routes and major unclassified routes are considered

to meet these criteria in Leeds.

Loca

l R

oa

ds

4a Link Road

Roads linking between Main and Secondary Distributor Network with

frontage access and frequent junctions. In rural areas these roads link the

smaller villages to the distributor roads. They are of varying width and not

always capable of carrying two-way traffic. In urban areas they are

residential or industrial inter–connecting roads with 30 mph speed limits

random pedestrian movements and uncontrolled parking

4b Local Access Road

Roads serving limited number of properties carrying only access. In rural

areas these roads serve small settlements and provide access to individual

properties and land. They are often only single lane width and unsuitable for

HGV. In urban areas they are often residential loop roads or cul-de-sacs.


Page 19


3.5 Footway Hierarchy

Footways have been categorised in accordance with the National Code of Practice for Road

Maintenance which recommends;

Category Hierarchy Description General Description / Local Application

1a Prestige Walking Zones Prestige Areas in towns and cities with exceptionally high usage.

1 Primary Walking Routes Busy urban shopping and business areas and main pedestrian routes

linking interchanges between different modes of transport, such as

railways and bus stations etc.

2 Secondary Walking

Routes

Medium usage routes through local areas feeding into primary

routes, local shopping centres, large schools and industrial centres

etc.

3 Link Footways Linking local access footways through urban areas and busy rural

footways.

4 Local Access Footways Footways associated with low usage, short estate roads to the main

routes and cul-de-sacs

3.6 Cycle way Hierarchy

Cycle routes have been categorised in accordance with the National Code of Practice for

Road Maintenance which recommends;

Category Hierarchy Description General Description / Local Application

A Cycle Lane Forming part of the carriageway, commonly 1.5 metre strip

adjacent to the nearside kerb. Cycle gaps at road closure point

(exemptions for cycle access).

B Cycle Track A highway route for cyclists, not forming part of the carriageway.

This includes shared cycle/pedestrian paths, either segregated by a

white line or other physical segregation, or un-segregated.

C Cycle Trails Leisure routes through open spaces where, exceptionally, these are

publicly maintainable highways.

Section 4 – Asset Condition and Investigatory Levels V2 – January 2018

Page 20


Section 4 – Asset Condition and Investigatory Levels

4.1 Introduction

Standards for the management and maintenance of all elements of the highway network are

developed through risk assessment and take the needs of the users into consideration to

meet the core requirements of safety, serviceability and sustainability.

4.2 Principles and Considerations

Each element of the network has a variety of condition standards, a minimum level to satisfy

the need for safety, and higher levels, designed to meet local requirement for serviceability

or sustainability.

4.3 Asset Condition Standards by Element

The table below shows the condition standard effects of each highway asset element of the

network towards safety, serviceability and sustainability.

Asset Element Network Safety Network Serviceability Network Sustainability

Carriageways The nature and extent of

surface defects such as

potholes can increase risks to

the safety of the highway

user. Particularly on high

speed roads.

Nature and extent of

surface defects and ride

quality of the surface

Surface noise attenuation

characteristics. Nature and

extent of surface defects and

carriageway deflection

Footways The nature and extent of


potholes can increase risks to

the safety of the highway

user. Particularly on well used

footways.


surface defects. Extent of

encroachment and weed

growth. The slipperiness

and quality of the surface.

Integrity of the network

Convenience and ease of use.

Nature extent and locale of

surface defects.

Extent of damage by over-

running and parking.

Cycle Routes The nature and extent of


potholes can increase risks

to the safety of the highway

user. Particularly on well

used cycle routes.

Nature, extent and location

of surface defects.

Extent of encroachment

and weed growth.

The slipperiness and quality

of the surface.



Nature extent and location of

surface defects.

Extent of damage by over-

running and parking.


Page 21



Public Rights of Way Nature, extent and location of

surface, kerb and edging

defects.

Condition of surface and trip

hazards.

Defective path furniture and

structures.

Livestock and dogs.

Proximity of PROW to

watercourses.

Obstructions, barbed wire,

surface overgrowth and

overhanging vegetation,

unsafe trees

Shared usage with farm

machinery, private vehicular

use on public paths. Crossing

points & junctions with

adopted roads.

Unfenced precipice



encroachment and weed

growth.

The slipperiness and

quality of the surface.


Surface condition.

Poor drainage and muddy

waterlogged or eroded

paths.

Crops on paths or

ploughed out paths.

Defective and out or

repair path furniture and

structures.

Sloping unsurfaced paths

Inaccessibility of PROW’s

for use and maintenance


Nature, extent and location of


damage by over-running and

parking.

Susceptibility to flood damage

and erosion.

Damage by vehicular use,

motor cycles and quad bikes

Anti-social behavior – abuse

and vandalism

Illegal obstructions and

threatening behavior

Litter, fly tipping and dog

fouling

Privately

owned

infrastructure

There is no inventory of privately owned infrastructure but officers react to any safety reports

received and if necessary use the powers of intervention under the highways act.

Embankments

& Cutting

Risk of loose material falling to

injure users or damage facility

Risk of damage or service

interruption

Damage or loss of habitat.

Interruption or pollution of

watercourse.

Extent of damage and

reduce life.

Grass cutting Grass is cut to maintain

visibility for highway users

and to ensure that road and

footway widths are not

obstructed by overgrowing

vegetation. In areas where

no footway exists there may

be a need to provide a safe

refuge on the highway

verge for pedestrians,

particularly on busy roads.

Condition standards for

grass cutting in rural &

urban areas, and on

housing estates are

specified dependent on

location/use on average

thirteen cuts per year are

carried out. Additional cuts

may be added for amenity

purposes.

Between 3 and 14 grass cuts

are undertaken dependent

on road type and location.

Key sight line assets are

identified and mown

accordingly. Where road

speed dictates Traffic

management is in operation

to ensure safety. Naturalistic

grass management is being

introduced to increase

habitat and biodiversity.


Page 22



Weed Control The control of noxious and

invasive weeds is a

responsibility for authorities

under the Weeds Act 1959

and The Wildlife and

Countryside Act 1981 which

specifies control of noxious

and invasive weeks, these

are;

•Spear thistle;

•Creeping or field thistle;

•Curled dock;

•Broad leaf dock;

•Common ragwort;

•Giant hogweed;

•Japanese knotweed.

The Ragwort Control Act

specifies that Ragwort

growing in areas where there

is a risk of spread to land used

for grazing or hay production

should be managed so as not

to spread into neighboring

land

Weeds can cause

structural damage to the

highway, disrupt

drainage, obstruct

pedestrians and appear

unsightly.

The following legislation

controls the use of herbicides:

•Food and Environment

Protection Act 1985;

•Control of Pesticide

Regulations 1986;

•Health and Safety at Work

Act 1974;

•Control of Substances

Hazardous to Health

Regulations 1988.

•Ragwort Control Act

• Environmental Protection

Act

Trees & Hedges Trees and hedges growing on

or alongside the highway can

become a serious hazard to

highway users if they become

unstable or decay or if they

encroach onto footways,

carriageways and visibility

splays. They can also produce

root damage to footways and

adjoining property. Leaf fall

from trees can cause slippery

surfaces.

Trees and hedges are an

important amenity.

Significant pruning or

felling, even for safety

reasons, can be the

subject of strong local

concern. In urban areas if

left unchecked trees may

outgrow their location

giving rise to structural

damage to roads,

footways or drainage

systems or to adjacent

property. Hedges may

restrict widths of

footways or carriageways.

Requirements for

maintenance can be

greatly reduced by careful

selection of trees when

planning planting or

replacement

programmes.

Routine maintenance under

expert guidance provides a

valuable amenity for the public

and wildlife. With the exception

of urgent safety work, work to

trees and hedges should be

undertaken in Leeds outside the

bird nesting season. This

means that maintenance work

should ideally be carried out in

the autumn during September

and October or early February.

No hedge cutting should be

carried out in Leeds from March

to August to avoid disturbance

to nesting birds. It is important

to note that it is an offence to

disturb nesting birds under the

Wildlife and Countryside and

CROW Act.


Page 23



Fences, Walls & Barriers Safety fences, walls and

barriers provide separation

for traffic and vulnerable road

users from each other and

other hazards for example,

watercourses.

Unstable fences, walls and

barriers adjacent to the

highway can present risks to

the safety of highway users.

Breaches in boundary

fencing may lead to the risk

of stock escaping onto the

highway.

Fences and barriers in poor

repair may be detrimental to

the appearance of

environmentally sensitive

areas. Appropriate designs of

barriers should be used in such

areas.

Traffic Signs & Bollards The safe and efficient use of

the highway network depends

upon the presence of traffic

signs and bollards, both

illuminated and non-

illuminated. Illuminated signs

and bollards are covered by

the Street lighting PFI

contract

Regulatory and warning

signs contribute to road

safety by assisting highway

users to identify safety risks,

and separating potential

traffic conflicts.

Clear direction signing can

contribute to safety by

reducing driver confusion

and keeping traffic to

appropriate routes.

Contributes to ease of use

or the road network and

network integrity

Signing and bollards can

contribute to the local

economy (tourist signs,

signing for events) and avoid

users getting lost and

travelling unnecessary

distances.

Signing and bollards can

support sustainable

transport modes such as

cycling, walking and bus

services.

Routing of heavy traffic can

reduce the need for repairs

on minor roads.

However, signing can be

intrusive, especially signs in

poor repair situated in

environmentally sensitive

areas, and confusing if too

much signing is present.

Road Markings & Studs Road markings and studs

assist in the safe and efficient

use of the highway network

especially in darkness and

poor visibility.

Potential for damage and

injury if loose.

Road markings and studs

help with ease of use of

the highway in darkness

and bad weather

Support to sustainable

transport – delineation of

bus and cycle lanes and

traffic calming schemes.

Edge markings while being

an essential safety feature

can also reduce damage to

carriageway edges.

4.4. Levels of Service

Levels of service form a key part in the management of all assets. In order to successfully

manage these, it is vital to have defined levels of service that clearly balance users and

stakeholder’s needs and expectations for each asset against the available resources. Levels

of service also take account of the statutory duties of the Council as a highway authority and

the authority’s strategic goals.

The table below sets out the possible and current levels of service for each highway asset.


Page 24


Asset Element Service Level (minimum�, fair��, good�� and excellent��)

Carriageways,

footways and

cycleways

� Reactive maintenance. Safety inspection regime and responding to reports of hazardous defects

within 24 hours. Minimal intervention to prevent asset deterioration. Safety inspection and

maintenance regime to deal with all potentially hazardous defects within 24 hours. Little or no

repairs for non-hazardous defects. No annual programme.

�� Reactive and routine maintenance and some planned works reducing the dependence on

reactive maintenance. Condition stabilised at a serviceable level. Safety inspection and maintenance

regime to deal with all potentially hazardous defects within 24 hours. Resources insufficient to repair

all required non-hazardous defects. Annual programme with 2-3 year forward programming.

�� Planned investment in structural maintenance leading to improvements in condition,

reduction in backlog and further reducing dependence on reactive maintenance. Majority of arising’s

taken for recycling. Safety inspection and maintenance regime to deal with all hazardous defects. 3-5

year forward programme.

�� Backlog in maintenance significantly reduced, operating at a sustainable level, using

sustainable methods with minimal reactive maintenance. All arising’s taken for recycling. Safety

inspection and maintenance regime to deal with all hazardous defects within 1 hour of Officer

observation. 5 - 10 year forward programme.

Current Service Level for;

Carriageways, footways and cycleways

�� Standard routine maintenance and planned works reducing dependence on reactive

maintenance. Condition currently adequate, at a serviceable level, but likely to fall without further

investment. Safety inspection and maintenance regime sufficient to deal with all potentially

hazardous defects within 24 hours. Annual programme of capital works.

Public Rights of Way (PROW)

� Reactive inspection and maintenance only. Little or no action to increase disabled access.

Maintenance backlog growing.

�� Limited inspection programme. Rectification of signage & furniture faults resource limited.

Cutting back of vegetation reactive. Backlog of surface improvements stabilised. Disabled provision

and action on obstruction cases considered on a priority basis.

�� Routine inspection programme. Rectification of signage & furniture faults by next inspection.

Cutting back of vegetation annually on priority network. Backlog of surface improvements reducing.

Disabled provision and action on obstruction cases considered on a priority basis.

�� Routine inspection of all PROW. Rectification of signage, furniture and surface faults within

3 months. Cutting back of vegetation annually on majority of network. Backlog of surface

improvements eliminated. Annual programme to improve disabled access. All obstruction cases

actively addressed.


PROWs

�� Limited inspection programme. Rectification of signage & furniture faults resource limited.

Cutting back of vegetation reactive. Backlog of surface improvements stabilised. Disabled provision

and action on obstruction cases considered on a priority basis.

Privately Owned Infrastructure

Responsibility for defective infrastructure, e.g. ironwork cabinets and poles, where this is part of the

apparatus installed by a utility, lies with the company. Defects identified during inspection or from

users should be formally notified to the utility, with a follow up procedure to ensure that dangerous

defects are rectified within a specified timescale.


Page 25




Privately Owned Infrastructure

� Reactive only.

Embankments and Cuttings

� Service reactive in nature.

�� Inspection undertaken in response to flooding events. Backlog of minor improvements relatively

stable but some schemes dependant on one-off capital bids.

�� Routine inspection of areas of concern. Backlog of improvements to alleviate know problems

cleared.

�� Routine inspection of all assets. Backlog of improvements to alleviate known areas of

concern cleared. Progressive mapping embankments / cuttings and their condition.

Do geotech keep an eye on susceptible embankments


Embankments and Cuttings

� Service reactive in nature.

Grass Cutting � Routine cyclic maintenance of urban verges at quarterly intervals. Rural verges cut to provide clear

sight lines (reactive) Litter clearance separate to verge maintenance. Annual weed clearance to shrub

and rose borders. Little annual planting. Amenity areas grass cutting & litter clearing less than

quarterly Minimal maintenance to ensure establishment of young trees

�� Routine cyclic maintenance of urban verges 6-8 times a year. No co-ordinated litter clearance.

Rural verges cut one swathe width (1x per year) and to provide clear sight lines including traffic

islands. Litter clearance separate to verge maintenance. Annual weed clearance/ pruning to shrub

and rose borders. Annual planting limited to amenity sites. Reactive maintenance to young trees in a

hazardous state/legal nuisance and in response to customer reports. Amenity areas grass cutting &

litter clearing 6 x year Targeted Annual summer & winter bedding plants & provision of hanging

basket including watering provision

�� Routine inspection and cyclic maintenance of verges and young trees. Urban grass cut

minimum 8 times per year. Rural Verges: Grass cut 3 times per year with additional visibility cuts

where required including traffic islands. Shrub and Rose Borders have Weed cover <10% and pruned

in accordance to species. Litter and Debris removed as part of treatment schedule. Amenity areas

grass cutting & litter clearing 13x year Targeted Annual summer & winter bedding plants & provision

of hanging baskets.

�� Adopted policy for management of "soft estate". Urban grass cut minimum fortnightly,

including traffic islands (sponsored RABs every 7 days) Rural Verges: Grass cut 3x per year with

additional visibility cuts where required. Routine inspection and integrated cyclic maintenance of

verges and young trees Shrub and Rose Borders have Weed cover <5% Litter and Debris removed as

part of treatment schedule. Pruned in accordance to species. Amenity areas grass cutting & litter

clearing fortnightly Annual summer & winter bedding plants & provision of hanging basket

throughout the borough


Grass Cutting

�� Routine inspection and cyclic maintenance of verges and young trees. Urban grass cut

minimum 8x per year. Rural Verges: Grass cut 3x per year with additional visibility cuts where

required including traffic islands. Shrub and Rose Borders have Weed cover <10% and pruned in

accordance to species. Litter and Debris removed as part of treatment schedule. Amenity areas grass

cutting & litter clearing 13x year Targeted Annual summer & winter bedding plants & provision of

hanging baskets.


Page 26



Weed Control The weed control service is an annually planned maintenance activity and takes place in the months

between April and October. The aim of the weed control service is to ensure that the highway

network is kept as free as possible from unsightly vegetation, provide a safe environment for the

travelling public and limit the potential damage to the highway caused by weed growth. To achieve

this weed killer is sprayed along the length of the whole network 2 times per year. Footways and

immediately adjacent to kerbed channels - To be determined locally, best practice indicates that an

integrated approach of appropriate street cleansing activities and minimal use of herbicides should

adequately control weed growth.

Invasive and non-native species of weeds - Where a problem is identified then a one off treatment,

or series of treatments, will be arranged.


Weed Control

�� Weeds in footways are managed via an integrated pest management approach – contractual arrangements are in place allowing for the network to have weeds emerging from cracks, blemishes

and joints in the surface to be spot treated with a translocated herbicide on up to 2 equally spaced occasions during the main growing season. This complements existing street cleansing regimes.

There is a process in place for investigation and prioritization of long term control for Japanese

Knotweed and Giant Hogweed affecting the network. All other species (including horsetail, which is not registered as invasive but is a problem for highway infrastructure and resistant to most herbicides used for footpath spraying) are dealt with on an ad-hoc basis by the Operations Manager

for each area.

Trees and Hedges � Principal Highway Routes - Annual Rapid Tree Survey Reactive maintenance to trees in a

hazardous state/legal nuisance and in response to customer reports. All priority action maintenance

identified carried out (regardless of budget)

�� Principal & Classified Highway Routes - Annual Rapid Tree Survey Reactive maintenance to trees

in a hazardous state/legal nuisance and in response to customer reports. All priority action

maintenance identified carried out (regardless of budget)

�� Principal & Classified Highway Routes - Annual Rapid Tree Survey Cyclical programme of

detailed inspections and management of Principal Routes Reactive maintenance to trees in a

hazardous state/legal nuisance and in response to customer reports. All priority action & planned

maintenance identified carried out

�� Principal & Classified Highway Routes - Annual Rapid Tree Survey Cyclical programme of

detailed inspections and management of Principal & Classified Routes Reactive maintenance to trees

in a hazardous state/legal nuisance and in response to customer reports. All priority action, planned

maintenance & routine maintenance identified carried out


Fences Walls and Barriers

�� Principal Highway Routes - Tree service condition Surveys documented Reactive maintenance to

trees in a hazardous state/legal nuisance and in response to customer reports. All priority action

maintenance identified carried out (regardless of budget)

Fences Walls and

Barriers

� Reactive maintenance only. Growing backlog of maintenance and improvements

�� Reactive and ad-hoc maintenance and refurbishment. Identification of issues requiring attention

Backlog of necessary maintenance and improvement stable.

�� Routine inspections. General repairs undertaken prior to next scheduled inspection. Backlog

in maintenance / refurbishment reducing. Ad-hoc programmed environmental works such as

painting.

�� All fences, barriers and street furniture fit for purpose. Annual inspection and repair

programme with non-urgent works included in FWP. Condition & Tensioning Survey programme

Annual programme of environmental works such as painting.


Page 27




Fences Walls and Barriers

�� Inadequate inventory or condition assessment data. Inspection programme in progress Backlog

of potential necessary maintenance unquantified. Reactive and ad-hoc maintenance and

refurbishment.

Traffic Signs and Bollards

� Signs / bollards maintenance reactive. Signage reviewed as part of improvements.

�� Signs / bollards maintenance reactive. Annual clean of sign faces on priority routes. Bollards

cleaned on reactive basis on priority routes. Signage reviewed as part of improvements.

�� Annual clean of sign faces and reactive cleaning of all bollards. Basic inventory details held in

computerised system. Signs / bollards maintenance reactive.

�� Annual inspection for signs & bollards maintenance. Annual clean of all sign faces &bollards

All signs on priority routes reviewed every 5 years. Inventory details complete


Traffic Signs and Bollards

�� Annual inspection for signs & bollards maintenance. Annual clean of all sign faces & bollards

Maintenance reactive. Signage reviewed as part of improvements. Inadequate inventory under

improvement – data collected by Contractor

Road Marking and Road Studs

� Road marking refurbishment undertaken on a reactive basis following enquiries from third parties

to junctions and regulatory locations,

Cats eyes replaced when missing

�� Annual visual inspection as part of the highway inspection programme. Identifying and

prioritising areas for remedial action

�� Ad hoc reflectivity surveys, Basic inventory details held in a computerised system. Reactive

works programme

�� Bi annual reflectivity survey of road markings and Cats eyes.

Inventory data complete and future refurbishment programme developed


Road Marking and Road Studs

�� Annual visibility inspections undertaken. Ad hoc road marking surveys commissioned. Achieving

bi annual cats eye survey cycle. No road marking data. Reflecting road studs (cat’s eye) data 95 -

100% complete. Works instructed on a yearly reactive programme

4.5. Investigatory levels and response times

Investigatory levels and standards set for response times to inspections and user concerns

are covered in Section 5 of this document.

Section 5 – Inspection, Assessment and Recording V2 – January 2018

Page 28


Section 5 – Inspection, Assessment and Recording

5.1 Introduction

The establishment of an effective regime of inspection, assessment and recording is an

important element of highway asset management. The regime is designed to meet the

principles of this highway infrastructure asset management plan to:

• Collect data to maintain the network in a safe condition;

• Enable funds to be allocated and priorities to be set effectively;

• Establish the extent of outstanding work and future investment scenarios;

• Monitor trends in the condition of the network, both locally and against National

performance.

Information obtained from surveys provides the basic information for addressing the core

objectives of highway asset management: network safety, network serviceability and

network sustainability. It will also provide basic condition data for the development of

programmes for maintenance.

An effective inspection regime requires clearly defined:

• inspection frequencies;

• items to be recorded;

• investigatory levels;

• action required.

Inspections are carried out by trained personnel on foot or from a slow moving vehicle.

Teams of two operatives are used where a risk assessment has shown this to be necessary.

Additional inspections of specific defects are carried out in response to reports or complaints

from users.

All information obtained from the inspections and surveys, together with the nature of the

response, including nil returns, are recorded consistently to facilitate analysis.

There are three types of inspections and surveys in Leeds:

• Safety Inspections – designed to identify all defects likely to create a hazard to users

of the network or the wider community. These are regular inspections of the highway,

which generate the bulk of remedial works;

• Condition Surveys – machine based and visual surveys to collect data to allow

effective prioritisation of planned maintenance work. These are essential to build up a

comprehensive picture of the asset.

• Service Inspections – are focused on ensuring the highway meets the levels of service

required. They are undertaken as part of or at the same time as routine condition

surveys and coarse visual inspection (CVI) surveys.


Page 29


5.2 Safety inspections

Safety inspections are designed to identify defects that are likely to create a hazard or

serious inconvenience to the public. Safety inspections are visual inspections undertaken

from a vehicle or on foot. The inspection is designed to be able to identify defects within the

adopted highway and determine appropriate risk levels to enable an appropriate response.

Items to be inspected as part of the adopted highway include for example, carriageways,

footways, verges, landscaped areas, barriers and signs. Verges and landscaped areas are not

expected to receive the same level of use as a footway or carriageway and therefore will

receive only a cursory overview during the safety inspection.

The safety inspection also includes a Level 1 tree survey, this survey is for non-specialist staff

with a skill level appropriate to identify any tree issues when more specialist investigation by

an arboriculture officer is required. A system is in place for reporting any concerns to the

Forestry section by either telephone, for serious concerns, or by monthly monitoring report

from the asset management system. Forestry will undertake further investigation in

accordance with their own tree risk management system, which allows them to categorise

and prioritise works.

5.2.1 National Guidance

The ‘Well Maintained Highways Code of Practice for Highway Maintenance Management’

(the national code) recommends frequencies of safety inspection to be used as a starting

point when implementing an inspection regime. The frequencies suggested are not

mandatory but it is accepted that where authorities wish to deviate from the code they may

do so, providing they state the reasons for so doing.

5.2.2 Safety Inspection Frequency

The frequency of inspections recommended by the National code and the frequency of

inspections adopted by the council are shown in table 5.2.2 below:-

Feature Feature type Category

National code

recommended

inspection frequency

Leeds City Council inspection

frequency

Carriageway

Motorways 1 Not specified 1 month ± 5 working days

Strategic routes 2 1 month 1 month ± 5 working days

Main distributors 3(a) 1 month 1 month ± 5 working days

Secondary distributors 3(b) 1 month 1 month ± 5 working days

Link roads 4(a) 3 months 3 months ± 10 working days

Local access 4(b) 1 year Annually within same calendar

month

Footway

Prestige walking zones 1(a) 1 month 1 month ± 5 working days

Primary walking routes 1 1 month 1 month ± 5 working days

Secondary walking routes 2 3 months 3 months ± 10 working days

Link footways 3 6 months 6 months ± 10 working days

Local access footway 4 1 year Annually within same calendar

month


Page 30


Feature Feature type Category

National code

recommended

inspection frequency

Leeds City Council inspection

frequency

Cycleway

Part of the Carriageway A As for the carriageway As for the carriageway

Associated with a footway B As for the footway As for the footway

Not associated with a footway

(Bound surface) B 1 year

Annually within same calendar

month

Table 5.2.2 - Safety inspection frequencies

The operational tolerances shown in table 5.2.2 above of “±X working days” or “within same

calendar month” are applied to take account of variations in the available resources due to

national holidays, standard holiday entitlements, absence due to sickness and days lost due

to adverse weather. If ever the allowable tolerance is likely to be exceeded, the reasons and

the mitigation measures taken will be recorded.

5.2.3 Driven Safety Inspections

Driven inspections are carried out by an inspector and a driver in a conspicuously marked

vehicle. The driver follows the defined route, at a slow speed of 20 mph or less. The

inspector acts as the observer and is responsible for identifying actionable defects both in

the carriageway and the footways. The observer makes a note of any defects on the pre-

prepared inspection form.

The Secondary footways are walked, (the vehicle is stopped and a local inspection of the

footway is undertaken on foot). Link and local access footways are inspected from the

moving vehicle. Driven survey routes are undertaken in the reverse direction in alternate

surveys to allow the opportunity to concentrate on the nearside footway but always

providing the opportunity to inspect both footways and identify defects. Some footway

defects may be shielded from view, for example by parked vehicles. Where an inspector is

unable to make a decision from the moving vehicle, closer observation should be made on

foot.

5.2.4 Walked Safety Inspections

When undertaking walked surveys the Highways Inspector walks slowly down one footway,

inspecting that footway and half of the adjoining carriageway. He then returns slowly down

the other footway, inspecting that footway and the other half of the carriageway.

5.2.5 Defects Categories & Response Times

Following the risk assessment (see paragraph 5.8) each defect will be allocated a category

for attention as follows:


Page 31


Defect Category Description Response Time

Cat 1 Those defects which, following a risk

assessment, are deemed to require prompt

attention because they represent a potentially

imminent hazard or there is a risk of short term

structural deterioration.

Either made safe or repaired by the end of

next day

Cat 2 Those defects which, following a risk

assessment, require attention but do not

represent an immediate or imminent hazard.

Either made safe or repaired within 28

calendar days.

Category S81 Defective inspection chambers or chamber

covers within the responsibility of statutory

undertakers will be

Reported under the New Roads and Street

Works Section 81 protocol for repair by the

service owner.

In addition to the above there are occasions when defects are found that pose an immediate

hazard to road users. These are items such as missing chamber covers in footways or

carriageways. Such defects are an exception and will be reported by telephone for a rapid

response to make safe and/or repair.

The National Code recommends treatment times of category 1 defects of “within 24 hours”.

Many category 1 defects are recorded each day and given to the maintenance crews to

make safe or repair. In order to attend to defects in the most efficient manner within the

one day period the crews will deal with each defect in the most beneficial route order to

minimise travelling time. The recommended response time of 24 hours is very specific to the

minute of the day from the time at which the defect was recorded and a failure of just one

minute can be caused by the most sensible option to deal with defects on a route basis

rather than travelling long distances to achieve a timescale at the expense of removing a

hazard earlier at an intermediate location. The response time of next day enables the

maintenance crews to remove more hazards more quickly and in a more efficient manner.

For the avoidance of doubt, the response time to attend to a defect will begin when the

defect is recorded and allocated a category for response on the customer management

system.

5.3 Condition surveys

Condition surveys are carried out for the following purposes;

• To identify priorities for planned maintenance;

• To support long term and short term maintenance decisions;

• To support the LTP and other funding bids;

• To report network condition including against National criteria.

There are a number of types of survey used in Leeds, each providing information from a

different perspective, and which in combination can provide a comprehensive picture of the

condition of the asset. Table 5.4 below shows the type and frequency of condition surveys

carried out in Leeds


Page 32


Asset sub group Survey

method(s) Coverage Frequency

Data

stored Data used for

Confidence

level in data

Principal A and

Classified B Road

Carriageways

SCRIM 100% in both

directions

Annually –100%

coverage

UKPMS Identifying sites

where skidding

resistance is below a

defined level

High

Principal A and

Classified B & C Road

Carriageways

SCANNER 100% in one

direction only

Annually –100%

coverage every

two years

UKPMS BVPI’s and

identifying sites for

maintenance

funding needs

Medium

Unclassified

Distributor

carriageways

CVI 50% Annually –100%

coverage every

two years

UKPMS BVPI’s and


maintenance

funding needs

High

Unclassified Local

Road carriageways

CVI 25% Annually - 100%

coverage every

four years

UKPMS BVPI’s and


maintenance

funding needs

High

Table 5.3 – Type and Frequency of Condition Surveys

5.3.1 Skidding Resistance (SCRIM)

The maintenance of adequate skid resistance on running surfaces is an aspect of highway

asset management which contributes significantly to network safety.

Measurement of skid resistance requires the use of specialist testing equipment. Roads

carrying high traffic levels, particularly those with large numbers of heavy vehicles, are most

prone to loss of skid resistance. The principal (A class) road network and B classified roads

carry the highest traffic volumes and the strategy in Leeds is to survey all of these on an

annual basis using a Sideways-force Coefficient Routine Investigation Machine (SCRIM).

Surveys are carried out in both directions.

Sites with low skid resistance are investigated further, with particular reference to road

traffic accident statistics. Priority sites are identified for improvement.

5.3.2 Road Surface Condition (SCANNER) survey

Surface Condition Assessment for the National Network of Roads (SCANNER) surveys have

been developed to travel at normal traffic speed and measure road profile, texture, rutting

and cracking using laser technology. The survey may also include a forward facing video.

SCANNER surveys produce a similar condition index to the CVIs for each 10 metres of road

surveyed, but for carriageways only. Due to the size and nature of the machine undertaking

the survey, its use is currently limited to classified roads. The results of the survey are used

to monitor road condition and prioritise maintenance works on the classified road network.

SCANNER surveys are undertaken on all classified roads (A, B and C Class) once a year in one

direction only. The survey direction is alternated each year.


Page 33


5.3.3 Course Visual Inspection (CVI)

A CVI is a visual condition survey that follows nationally prescribed standards of data

collection. The surveys record the type, location (by start and end points) and extent of

defects. The CVI is sufficiently coarse to enable data collection from a slow moving vehicle

with a distance meter fitted however practice in Leeds is to do either driven or walked

surveys depending on the road type.

Each street section is assessed and the data is processed to give a condition score for each

length. The condition score generates a view on the total backlog of maintenance work

required and the relative needs between geographical areas. Its main benefits are in trend

analysis and to support the budget process. It also assists in the preparation of maintenance

programmes. Streets which would benefit from specific treatments are identified in

accordance with policies for the use of these treatments.

Coarse Visual Inspections are undertaken on approximately 25% of the unclassified road

network every year.

5.4 Service inspections

Service inspections are focused on ensuring the highway meets the levels of service

required. Service inspections are undertaken as part of and at the same time as the routine

condition surveys and CVI surveys.

5.5 Processing Data

The results of inspections, surveys and assessments are processed within a highway

maintenance management system. The management system used is accredited to the

national specification for maintenance management known as United Kingdom Pavement

Management System (UKPMS).

Insight by Symology Ltd is a computer program accredited to run UKMPS software designed

to assist with identifying and prioritising maintenance needs. Systems are accredited

nationally to ensure a consistency of results for national benchmarking. Carriageways and

“Scanner “ Vehicle


Page 34


footways can be separately assessed and prioritised, with footways being assigned an

independent hierarchy from the carriageway, based on pedestrian usage. Leeds uses the

Insight system developed by Symology.

The City Council is committed to targeting maintenance in order to maximise resources, and

the results of the surveys provide valuable information about surface and structural

condition which allows the development of efficient work programmes. Results from annual

condition surveys enable:

• sections of carriageway/footway that require further or detailed investigations to be

identified with a view to implementing remedial maintenance measures;

• engineers to use the information to support local maintenance planning process and

engineering knowledge;

• data to be used in higher level decision making such as target and budget setting.

5.6 Reliability of Data and Training

Highway inspectors carry out safety and visual condition inspections and surveys. They work

flexibly but are generally assigned areas which allow them to create a familiarity with the

area.

Training and audit of results are designed to ensure consistency between the inspectors and

compliance with the national requirements of UKPMS. Inspectors are trained in-house

through mentoring, internally run training events and courses providing LANTRA and/or City

and Guilds Qualifications

Machine surveys are procured from accredited sources. Machines for SCRIM and SCANNER

surveys are accredited annually to ensure that the data conforms to National standards.

All inspection and survey data is recorded in a consistent manner to facilitate analysis and

enable both visual and machine data to be processed to produce a holistic view of the

network condition and trends.

The highway maintenance management system is provided by a UKPMS accredited

supplier/developer.

5.7. Investigatory Levels

Investigatory levels are the basic definition of defects that require further consideration for

action to be required. If a defect exceeds the investigation level then further information of

its location and the use of the highway at that location will be needed to determine whether

or not it requires attention and if so how quickly it should be attended to.

The basic investigatory levels of the most common defects to be considered within a safety

inspection are shown in the table below;


Page 35


Asset Element Highway Defect Investigatory Level

Carriageway

Pothole, sunken trench or abrupt level

difference

Ironwork – cover / frame

Ironwork – cover / frame, depressed or

rocking

Greater than 40mm

Missing

Greater than 40mm

Footway & Cycleway

Trip, rocking slab, abrupt level difference

Dislodged, misaligned or missing kerbing

channels, edging representing a safety

hazard

Kerbing – Loose or rocking

Ironwork – cover / frame

Ironwork – cover / frame, displaced or

rocking

Greater than 20mm

Greater than 50mm horizontally or

vertically

Greater than 20mm

Missing

Greater than 20mm

Table 5.7.1 – Investigatory Levels

5.8 Risk Assessments

Inspectors carry out risk assessments to take into account the severity and location of each

defect. It is not the case for example that anything which is greater than 20mm in a footway

or 40mm in a carriageway is necessarily an imminent hazard, it is simply that anything that

exceeds the investigatory levels must be given careful consideration by the inspector when

they are assessing how to categorise the defect. The risk assessment guides for

carriageways and footways/cycleways are shown in the tables 5.8.1 and 5.8.2


Page 36


5.8.1 Carriageway Defect Risk Assessment


Page 37


5.8.2 Footway and Cycleway Defect Risk Assessment


Page 38


5.9 Inspection, Assessment and Recording Review

This is a continuous process and needs management information and regular reviews to

inform change.

Meetings will be held four times a year to assess information gathered and review the

service levels as necessary. The information discussed may include:

• Progress of safety inspections and formal record of reasons for any delay.

• Changes to hierarchy of carriageway, footway or cycleway as consequence of

changes on site.

• Changes necessary due to changes in other information e.g.: third party claims;

feedback from the public or elected members.

Section 6 – Programming and Priorities V2 – January 2018

Page 39


Section 6 – Programming and Priorities

6.1 Introduction

Developing and implementing effective systems for prioritising and programming Highway

Maintenance activity is a key requirement in the delivery of a user focused highway service.

Priorities are allocated at three different levels;

6.1.1 Strategic Level

The Strategic level is contained in the Highway infrastructure Asset Management Strategy.

This plan focuses on the Tactical and Local levels.

6.1.2 Tactical Level

The Highway infrastructure Asset Management Strategy is underpinned by a model of

deterioration of the network which divides the highway network into four condition groups

based on survey observations and makes use of a Red, Amber, and Green (RAG) rating

system.

Red roads - are sections of roads assessed as being in need of structural maintenance, with a

high level of structural deterioration. Treatment of these roads is aimed at restoring them to

a good condition.

High Amber roads - are sections of roads assessed as being in poor condition, close to the

red ‘threshold level’. If left untreated, these sections of road will deteriorate into the red

category. As the structural integrity of these roads is relatively sound their average cost to

return to a good condition is substantially less than that required to treat red sections of

road. Treatment of these roads is aimed at arresting deterioration.

Strategic Senior Decision

Makers

• Set asset management Policy and Strategy

• Promote Asset Management Framework

• Align Levels of Service with Strategic Objectives

• Agree Performance Targets

• Establish Context for Risk Management

Tactical Senior Asset

Managers

Local Asset Management

Team

• Implement Asset Management Framework

• Provide Information to support Decision

Makers

• Allocate Budget to Asset Groups and Elements

• Allocate Treatment types to Asset Elements

• Produce Annual Works Programmes

• Produce Forward Works Plans

• Track progress against targets

• Record Improvement

• Review performance

• Inspections and safety


Page 40


Low Amber roads - are sections of roads assessed as being in fair condition, with only

localised or general areas requiring treatment. If left untreated, these sections of road will

deteriorate further. Treatment of these roads is aimed at restoring them to a good

condition.

Green roads - are sections of assessed as being in a good condition. They will require some

treatment in the future to make sure they stay in good condition but this will be at lower

cost and aimed at prolonging their life.

The lengths and percentages of Leeds’s road network by condition and asset element at

April 2016 are shown below.

Asset Element Good (Km)

(Green)

Fair (Km)

(Low Amber)

Poor (Km)

(High Amber)

Very Poor(Km)

(Red)

Principal 'A' Roads 234 86 50 11

Distributor 'B&C' Roads 144 56 32 7

Unclassified Distributor Roads 116 32 12 15

Local Access Roads 983 538 321 262

1477 713 415 295

Table 6.1.2 – Kilometres of assets by condition band (April 2016)

Fig 6.1.2 – Percentage of assets by condition band (April 2016)

6.1.3 Local Level

Safety objectives relating to achieving minimum statutory duties are the highest priority for

the maintenance service and must be met, therefore, the cost of undertaking this work will

take priority when allocating budgets. All remaining objectives will be programmed and

prioritised with account being taken of:

• safety implications;

• risk assessments;


Page 41


• corporate and service group policies and objectives;

• maintenance policies;

• views of highway users and the public;

• the available maintenance budget.

6.2. Balancing priorities

The safety and service inspections are used to determine the highway maintenance needs as

shown in table 6.2 below;

Table 6.2 – Categories of Safety and Service Inspection and Condition Surveys

Data outputs from SCANNER and CVI (road condition) can be shown graphically. This gives an

indication of the maintenance requirements for the Highways Network across Leeds.

Based upon the Ordnance Survey mapping with the Permission of the Controller of Her Majesty’s Stationary Office © Crown copyright. Unauthorised reproduction infringes

Crown Copyright and may lead to prosecution or civil proceedings. Leeds City Council Licence No. LA 100019567

Diagram 6.2 – Example of Graphical Representation of Condition

Priorities and programmes are established for each of the following:

• Reactive Maintenance – attending to defects which represent a potentially imminent

hazard (Cat 1) also these defects that require attention but do not represent an

immediate hazard (Cat 2) and other safety matters arising from inspections or reports

from the Police or members of the public;

• Routine Maintenance – attending to non-urgent defects identified though

inspections and user requests;

Classified A, B & C Road Network Unclassified Road Network

SCANNER Coarse Visual Inspections (CVI)

SCRIM (A & B Roads only) Detailed Visual Inspection (DVI)

Condition Surveys Historic data

Historic data Third party insurance claims

Third party insurance claims Walked safety inspections

Walked safety inspections Enquiries and complaints

Enquiries and complaints


Page 42


• Planned Maintenance – providing coordinated sustainable schemes and projects to

meet the serviceability requirements of the network;

6.3 Priorities for Emergency / Reactive Maintenance

Reactive maintenance involves rectifying Category 1 and 2 defects. The options to rectify

such defects include:-

• Sign and make safe

• Provide initial temporary repair

• Provide permanent repair

The option selected, together with relevant follow up, will largely be determined by

operational practicalities and also whether the site is already part of a programme for

more comprehensive treatment, in which case a temporary repair may be an appropriate

course of action.

6.4 Priorities for Routine Maintenance

Routine maintenance is the regular ongoing day to day work that comprises of minor work

and patching. The priorities and programmes will be determined largely, but not

exclusively, from

• the outcome of CVIs,

• items from safety and service inspections not requiring urgent attention,

• user requests,

• risk control, safety and serviceability considerations

Activities include but are not limited to:

Asset Element Routine Maintenance Activities

Carriageways Minor works and patching

Footways Minor works and patching

Cycle Routes Minor works and patching

PROW’s Minor works including signage

Drainage Systems Cleansing and repair

Privately owned Infrastructure N/A reactive

Embankments and Cuttings Stability

Grass Cutting Managed by Parks & Countryside

Weed Control Managed by Parks & Countryside

Trees and Hedges Managed by Parks & Countryside

Fences, Walls and Barriers Repair

Traffic Signs and Bollards Cleansing and repair

Road Markings and Studs Replacement

Table 6.4 – Typical Maintenance Activities

Routine activities will be reviewed regularly to establish whether they still represent best

value for money, and adjusted to ensure they deliver the desired levels of service or

outcomes stated in this Plan.

6.5 Priorities for Planned Maintenance

Planned maintenance is undertaken in the interests of providing a sustainable outcome,

seeking to minimise cost over time, to add community value to the network or the

environment. It can also be to enhance safety i.e. to improve skidding resistance.


Page 43


Aquire Routine Renew Replace Dispose

Priorities and programmes are developed for carriageways and footways in respect of the

condition of the asset elements. Whilst planned maintenance schemes are generally more

extensive and therefore more expensive than routine or reactive treatments, they can be

designed to have a lower whole life cost, therefore, giving better value for money.

Planned maintenance schemes make use of condition survey data as well as engineering

judgement, anticipated budget, local priorities and targets to determine schemes to be

included in the indicative five year rolling forward works plan.

The planned maintenance programme is divided between two distinct programmes of work;

• Preventative maintenance schemes – Generally from the high amber category.

Roads that have poor surface / ride quality but which are structurally sound and

which can therefore be treated with lower-cost thin surfacing to extend their working

lives, and

• Structural schemes – Generally from the red category. Roads that are currently in

very poor condition and are in need of structural repair for full resurfacing /

reconstruction.

The balance of spend between these two programmes is critical to the overall management

of road condition. Enough preventative maintenance needs to be completed to arrest the

network deterioration, thus reducing the number of streets needing structural work. Those

streets already in need of major work must continue to be repaired at an acceptable rate to

reduce the maintenance backlog. This balance can be determined by life-cycle planning, the

objective of which is to minimise whole life costs.

6.6 Lifecycle and Investment Planning

Lifecycle planning comprises the approach to the maintenance of an asset from construction

to disposal. It is the prediction of future performance of an asset, or a group of assets, based

on investment scenarios and maintenance strategies. A lifecycle comprises of five stages:

1. Creation/Acquisition – A new asset arising as a result of a new development or capital

project.

2. Routine Maintenance – Cyclic and reactive, designed to maintain the asset in a

serviceable condition;

Inital or

Restored Condition

Deterioration

and / or damage

Condition

after Deterioration

Maintenace


Page 44


3. Renewal/Replacement – Major work used when cyclic and reactive work will not

sustain the asset (or part of it) which will return the asset to its original capacity and

condition;

4. Upgrading – Improving an asset (or part of it) to a state above its original standard to

meet increased capacity/future needs;

5. Disposal – Decommissioning of an asset (or part of it) by sale, relocation or demolition.

Effective lifecycle planning is about making the right investment at the right time to ensure

that the asset delivers the required level of service over its full expected life at the minimum

cost.

Lifecycle planning recognises that there are key stages in the life cycle of each asset

component and that there are options at each of these stages for the investment required.

The following graph illustrates this principle;

AGE OF ASSET (YEARS)

Graph 6.6 – Lifecycle Strategies for Roads

Red Line (deterioration curve) - This shows how a road deteriorates from the date it is

constructed over its life span of 25-30 years with no treatment. Without intervention it will

generally deteriorate to a point where it needs surfacing after around 10 years. It will then

reach an unacceptable condition and need full reconstruction after around 20 years.

Blue Line (major treatment) - This shows reconstruction of the road when it goes below an

acceptable condition (usually after 20 years) to return it to a “new” condition. At which

point it will again begin to deteriorate over the next 20 years. This is known as the “worst

first” method, where funding is invested into roads that are in a poor state of repair and

need full or partial reconstruction. Costs for reconstruction works are £400,000 per km for

replacement of the top 100mm (surface and base layers) £210,000 per km.


Page 45


Orange Line (intermediate treatment) - This shows resurfacing of the road to renew the

surface at more frequent intervals (usually every 10-15 years) which would be at a lower cost

than reconstruction. Costs for resurfacing works are £150,000 per km for replacement of

the surface layer (surface course).

Green Line (multiple treatments) - This shows how an optimum asset management strategy

works. It involves a combination of regular thin surface repairs. Costs for preventative

maintenance range from £25,000 per km for surface dressing to £35,000 per km for thin

surfacing.

This approach has cost benefits in terms of the whole life investment costs. The following

example shows how the maintenance of a 1km section of road can be planned in different

ways.

Table 6.6 – Examples of Lifecycle Planning Cost Models

Diagram 6.6 – Graphical Representations of Lifecycle Planning Cost Models

Costs decrease notably when lifecycle planning methods are introduced and therefore

significant savings can be realised over time by adopting lifecycle planning over the ‘wait until

failure’ or ‘worst first’ method.

Lifecycle planning

cost model examples

Wait until

failure

Major Treatment

(reconstruct)

Intermediate

Treatment

(resurface)

Optimum

Treatment (Incl

preventative)

AGE OF

ASSET

(YEARS)

5

10 £25,000

15 £150,000

20 £210,000 £150,000

25 £400,000

30 £150,000 £25,000

35

40 £210,000 £210,000

45 £210,000

50 £400,000 £25,000

55

60 £400,000 £150,000 £150,000

65

70 £400,000 £25,000

TOTAL COSTS £1,200,000 £820,000 £660,000 £610,000


Page 46


Network Hierarchy

Condition Assessment

Engineers Assessment

Lifecycle Planning

Value Management

Programme

It is recognised that there is almost never a single solution to achieving the desired objective.

Therefore the evaluation of lifecycle costs plays a large part in deciding which option is the

best in each set of circumstances to deliver ‘minimum whole life cost’ solutions.

A Forward Works Plan is produced each year which includes a definite year one Annual

Works Programme of both structural and preventative maintenance. The Forward Works

Plan includes a further four year programme of structural maintenance (year 2 specific,

year’s 3-5 treatment only). To maximise the benefits of highways asset management the

plan also includes an indicative list of potential works from year 6 onwards. This plan takes

into account the current asset condition through assessment of each road in terms of its age,

condition, usage and hence its ‘whole-life’ cycle.

6.7 Decision Making Process

Initial priorities for highway structural maintenance are established from the results of

technical and economic prioritisation process using the latest assessment information. These

enable the creation of a prioritised list of potential works which enables the creation of;

• Annual works programme

• Forward works plan

• Indicative list

These are reviewed and adjusted to take account of any planned programme of works by the

utilities, local circumstances. Highway maintenance work should realise its potential to add

community value at minimum cost, for example incorporating dropped kerbs to assist

disabled people, modifying unclear signing or road markings and reducing redundant street

furniture.

A preventative works programme of thin surfacing treatments is also developed as part of

the Annual Works Programme for roads that are not necessarily in the worst condition, but

where investment will extend their lifecycles and reduce costs in the long-term. There are

other advantages in adopting this approach it enables;

• longer term planning of works programmes for budgetary purposes; and

• a more efficient and cost effective highways service

This increases the life span of roads by identifying the point at which the road surface can be

refreshed to prevent more serious defects developing. The method by which structural or

preventative maintenance schemes are selected is described below. The key question is

how to decide which roads should have preventative maintenance treatment and which

require a full structural repair. The process of a planned maintenance prioritisation criterion,

where priority is determined by allocating scores under various headings is explained in

more detail over the following pages.


Page 47


Network Hierarchy takes into account the actual use of the highway by

allocating scores based on the hierarchy of both the road and footway.

Hierarchy Road Definition Score

2 Strategic Route - Principal 'A' roads 100

3a Main Distributor - B&C roads 75

3b Unclassified Distributors 50

4a Link Road 25

4b Access Road 10

Hierarchy Footway Definition Score

1a Prestige Walking Zone 100

1 Primary Walking Route 75

2 Secondary Walking Route 50

3 Link Footway 25

4 Local Access Footway 10

Condition Assessments determine the deficiencies of the highway

infrastructure which, if left untreated, are likely to adversely affect its long

term performance and serviceability.

Information on the nature and severity of deterioration is used to determine appropriate

maintenance in line with asset management objectives.

The scores are allocated based on condition survey data obtained historically and part

refreshed annually.

Road Condition Index (RCI) – A machine based condition survey for roads with a hierarchy of

2 or 3a (A, B, C Network) is undertaken. This measures a number of characteristics of the

carriageway such as rutting, longitudinal and horizontal profile, cracking and texture.

Coarse Visual Inspection (CVI) – Driven inspections on roads with a hierarchy of 3b, 4a, 4b

(Unclassified Network) are carried out. This inspection records the type and extents of

defects and produces a score.

Those streets in the greatest need will progress to the next stage of assessments: Engineer’s

Assessment, Lifecycle Planning and Value Management.

Road Hierarchy Assessment Process Score

2 Road Condition Index (RCI) - Scanner 0-100

3a Road Condition Index (RCI) - Scanner 0-100

Road Hierarchy Assessment Process Score

3b Coarse Visual Inspection (CVI) 0-18

4a Coarse Visual Inspection (CVI) 0-18

4b Coarse Visual Inspection (CVI) 0-18

Network

Hierarchy

Condition

Assessments


Page 48


The streets in greatest need of maintenance receive an additional Engineer’s

Assessment to determine the location and severity of the defects, and make

an accurate assessment of the appropriate maintenance treatment required.

The list of streets is refined to take into account the residual life of the asset

/ potential risk to highway users (on both road and footway) alongside the

degree of deterioration from any previous inspection.

The above assessments produce a ranked list of streets, to which a value

management factor is applied. As a result a number of streets may be either

promoted or deferred for various reasons.

Value Management is a process that is used to help evaluate the competing needs of the

streets within the forward works plan, identified through their condition and lifecycle

planning prioritization process. It provides a structured and consistent approach for

comparing the benefits of maintenance activities on each asset element.

For maintenance schemes the following needs to be considered:

• Combine improvement and maintenance schemes at the same location wherever

possible - This approach is likely to save traffic management costs, minimise

disruption to the travelling public, reduce congestion and travel times, and to bring

about environmental benefits.

• Extend scheme options to include preventative maintenance where possible - This

approach examines the potential to extend the scope or scale of a scheme option at

Road Assessment Footway Assessment Kerb Assessment

Description Score Description Score Description Score

Extensive 80-100 Extensive 70 Extensive 30

Major 60-70 Major 40 Major 20

Minor Works 20 -50 Minor Works 10 -20 Minor Works 10

Acceptable 0 Acceptable 0 Acceptable 0

Lifecycle Definition Score

High Road or footway has reached the end of its serviceable life and

requires immediate maintenance work 100

Medium Road or footway is reaching the end of its serviceable life and

requires maintenance work within the next 24-36 months 50

Low Road or footway has several years of serviceable life remaining

but may require minor works as an interim measure 25

Very Low Road or footway requires no planned maintenance at time of

inspection 0

Value Definition Action

High Value (e.g. coordinate with other Planned works, priority for single element work) Promote

Low Value (e.g. secondary access, ongoing building works etc.) Defer

Engineers

Assessment

Lifecycle

Planning

Value

Management


Page 49


the design stage, as it may be more cost effective to carry out preventative

maintenance to other asset components at the same time. Again, this would provide

the same benefits as a combined scheme at the same location.

• Determine scheme options that reduce risk and potential liability - As part of the

value management process, risk is assessed, both in terms of the service levels and

service delivery and to assess safety and potential liabilities. For example – where a

street is having multiple/repeat reactive maintenance visits on one element only (i.e.

footway) with the remainder of the street in a good condition ‘single element work’

would be prioritised ahead of a street which is a secondary access / bin store with

little vehicular or pedestrian traffic, the work on the secondary access would be

deferred and re-assessed the following year.

Section Reference 23007011/009

Street Alcacia Avenue

Ward Chapel Allerton

Extents Oak Drive to Church Lane

Length 262

Condition Assessment (SCANNER) N/A

Condition Assessment (CVI) 8.8 Red band

Network Hierarchy (Carriageway) 25 Link Road

Network Hierarchy (Footway) 25 Link Footway

Engineer's Assessment (Carriageway) 80 Extensive

Engineer's Assessment (Footway) 70 Major

Engineer's Assessment (Kerb) 10 Minor

Lifecycle Planning (Carriageway) 100 High

Lifecycle Planning (Footway) 100 High

Value Management Promote Coordinate with other planned works

Total Score 410

Table 6.7a – Example of Individual Street Score Resulting from the Decision Making Process

6.8 Producing the Annual Works Programme

The objective of a good asset management strategy is to determine the proportion of

structural and preventative maintenance work that should be carried out for each hierarchy

of road and footway.

Leeds has developed a whole life highway asset maintenance model which ensures a balance

between structural and preventative maintenance treatments by considering the current

condition and rate of deterioration for each street.

The five criteria described in paragraph 6.7 are used to produce a prioritised list of potential

schemes for roads and/or footways, to be included in the Forward Works Plan.

The final Annual Works Programme will include a mixture of;

Further Assessment Required


Page 50


Preventative Treatments (High Amber) –

The streets selected have been identified from the condition assessments as those that are

not currently in need of full structural treatment but are in the early stages of deterioration.

Structural Treatments (Red) –

• Street sections with the highest score (based on the decision making process

(detailed above))

• Adjacent sections of the same street (financial factors)

• Single Asset sections – road or footway only (economic factors)

• Street sections that have received numerous maintenance visits (economic,

social or political factors)

6.9 Materials Products and Treatments

Roads are constructed in layers, with a sub-base, followed by the structural bituminous

layers made up of the “base” course, “binder course” (layers) with a top “surface course”

layer, which is relatively thin and of a higher quality. It is the surface course that protects

against skidding and prevents water getting into the sub- surface ‘structural’ road layers and

damaging them. The structure of the road is all of the layers that make up that road. These

need to be in good condition, particularly the lower layers (which give it its structural

strength) to keep the road level and safe.

Diagram 6.9 – Road Construction Layers

The purpose of the road construction is to spread the load of the traffic travelling across its

surface. The type of maintenance treatment depends upon which layers of construction

have failed and what type of failure has occurred. This determines the type of treatment

required.


Page 51


There are two main categories of work with many treatments available within them:

I. Roads or footways with minor defects or those beginning to deteriorate:-

Preventative Maintenance (High Amber) - Surface course is ageing and brittle and needs to

be sealed against water ingress and/or needs an improved skid resistance. These treatments

prolong the life of roads and footways, restore skid resistance, aid waterproofing and arrest

their deterioration to needing structural maintenance.

Treatments include - Surface dressing, micro-asphalt, footway surface treatments.

II. Roads or footways with many defects or problems with base layer:-

Structural Maintenance (Red) - Structurally unsound, i.e. where the sub-surface is failing

causing major slumps and tell-tale surface cracking. These treatments are the most

expensive and disruptive type of maintenance that involves taking up and relaying surfaces

to varying depths depending on the severity of deterioration.

Treatments include - Reconstruction, resurfacing, overlay, recycling and the following

diagrams explain these in more detail.


Page 52


Preventative Maintenance

For Roads Surface Dressing – Any defects in the road are repaired ahead of the

treatment. The road is then sprayed with a hot bitumen binder which seals

the existing road. A layer of new stone chippings will then be spread over it

and rolled. Because the surface is soft the chippings will bed into the binder

and the existing surface. This will continue over the next few weeks under

the normal traffic action.

Micro Asphalt – Any defects in the road are repaired ahead of the

treatment. It is usually laid in two layers, the first layer to fill any defects and

regulate out any dips in the surface. The second layer provides the new

surface. Micro Asphalt is a mixture of bitumen mixed with crushed stone. It

is laid cold and stays liquid for about 20 minutes before it sets (hardens) at

which point the road can be opened to traffic.

For Footways

Footway Surface Treatment (Slurry seal) – This involves the laying of a thin

layer of bitumen mixed with crushed stone over the top of the existing

footway to seal the surface and extend its life.

Structural Maintenance

For Roads

Reconstruction - This is the most expensive type of treatment and usually

involves replacing the surface course, binder course and base with new

materials.

Resurface – The existing surface is removed and the surface course is

replaced. This can also include the binder course.

Overlay – The new surface course is simply laid over the top of the existing

surface.

Recycling - The road is broken up and new bitumen is added, these are then

mixed together and the material can be reshaped and rolled to create a new

solid structural layer. The surface is then sealed with a surface dressing. It is

also known Shallow In-Situ Recycling (because it only goes down 75mm (3")

and ‘in-situ’ because the material is recycled on site).

For Roads and Footways

Refurbishment – Typically this includes all elements (kerb, footway and

road) being treated to varying degrees. The kerbs may require isolated

repairs or the full length either being relayed or replaced with new kerbs.

The footway and road will either be covered with new material or the

existing surface will be removed and replaced.


Page 53


6.10 Forward Works Plan

The formalised prioritisation criteria ensures that available funding is matched to roads that

have the greatest need or the greatest benefit in a consistent, fair and cost-effective manner

city wide.

Current levels of funding allow approximately 100-200 (structural) and 200-300

(preventative) maintenance schemes to be included in the Annual Works Programme.

Schemes not added to the Annual Works Programme remain on the Forward Works Plan

(years 2-5). If subsequent inspections of these streets reveal additional defects they may be

re-rated and their priority changed accordingly.

The Forward Works Plan will be developed for a particular funding expectation and will be

reviewed if the expectation is not realized. Equally the opportunity for funding can be

allocated efficiently and accurately targeted.

Detail of the listing of the schemes in the Forward Works Plan will vary depending on the

time period the list covers.

Years Programme Objective Description Treatment Level

1 Annual Works

Programme

Schemes implemented in

current year Specific treatment measured and priced.

2 Forward Works

Plan

Firm recommendation Specific treatment, not measured but an

estimated price

3-5 Reasonable assessment Generic treatment, not measured but an

estimated price

6+ Indicative List An assessment of long term

need

Generic treatment, not measured or

priced

The forward works plan is reviewed and updated annually with reference to:

• new condition data;

• changes in anticipated budgets;

• changes in corporate priorities;

• changes in current and desired levels of service;

• changes in public perception of priority;

• changes in procurement.

6.11 Risk Management

Effective Risk Management is essential to achieve strategic objectives and improve outcomes

for local people. It is concerned with managing the barriers to achieving the objectives. It

enables an awareness of potential risks, and identifies what the consequences might be if

they occur. This will enable us to understand potential risks and take the appropriate action

where possible, to control and manage them.

Risk can be defined as an uncertain event which, should it occur will have negative effect on

the performance of the asset and service provided or the asset directly. The level of risk can

be defined as the likelihood of an event occurring, and the magnitude of its impact on the

asset which would result from the occurrence. The Highway Asset is subject to many risks:

• Safety – of staff engaged in works on the highway, or in the much wider remit of

highway user safety


Page 54


Risk

Management Process

Identify

Evaluate

Manage

Review

• Risk to Reputation – both of the Highways Authority itself and those who rely on the

asset in the course of their business.

• Loss or damage to the asset – ranging from total destruction in an instant due to an

extreme event to the steady deterioration of the asset due to wear and tear.

• Service reductions or complete failure – to lose some parts of the road network would

potentially adversely affect stakeholders.

• Environmental – threats both to and from the environment.

• Financial and Contractual Risks – for the Highway Authority and stakeholders.

• And most importantly - combinations of the above!

Risks can be classified according to type and to category. This can assist in the overall

management of risk. There are principally two types of risk that the council faces Strategic

and Operational.

Strategic Risks may be potentially damaging to the achievement of the Council's objectives,

for example risks relating to the environmental impact of the Council's service delivery, for

example energy efficiency, pollution or recycling and significant flood risks.

Operational Risks are faced in the day to day delivery of services, for example physical risks

relating to physical damage such as fire, security and accident

prevention.

The four main steps of Risk Management are;

Identify Risk – identify risk groups, identify risk events and

critical assets.

Evaluate Risk – Likelihood, consequence, overall risk

assessment.

Manage Risk – Reduction/mitigation/elimination, develop risk

action plan, risk register

Review Risks – Effective monitoring, re-evaluate risks, adjust processes

to reflect changes.

By managing threats effectively the council is in a stronger position to deliver its objectives.

Through accepting the need to take proportionate risks to achieve its strategic objective,

knowing that these need to be appropriately identified and managed. By managing these

in a structured process the council is in a better position to provide improved services and

better value for money.

6.12 Efficient Delivery

The funding streams available for the management of the highway asset are set out in 1.2.

To maximise the funding available and generate savings collaborative procurement and

working with other local authorities has been undertaken. Listed below are examples

where this has been put into practice;

• Leeds City Council (LCC) as part of the West Yorkshire Combined Authority

(WYCA), have taken part in procuring Winter Forecasting Services

• LCC has also taken part in procuring a contract (three year period) for

carriageway/footway condition surveys for seven Yorkshire Authorities.

• Procurement of a surface dressing programme has been conducted through the

West Yorkshire Highway Alliance.


Page 55


• LCC are the lead authority for the procurement of a new salt contract for winter

services across the West Yorkshire Combined Authority (WYCA).

• LCC as part of WYCA has taken part in producing a procurement template for

contracts across West Yorkshire Authorities.

• LCC as part of collaborative working across Yorkshire & Humberside, Rotherham

Metropolitan Borough Council are undertaking the procurement of a Highways

Technical Inspections and Testing Services Contract.

• LCC are the lead authority for the procurement of a new Traffic Control Systems

contract. This includes maintenance and supply/install of new traffic signals

equipment.

6.13 Data Management

Asset data describes the highway infrastructure assets that an authority is responsible for,

where they are and how they perform. It is used to support the requirements of the asset

management strategy and in determination of the approach to deliver the strategy,

including performance management, lifecycle planning, forward programming and risk

management.

During the life of each asset component, key interventions in the form of maintenance or

upgrading will be recorded. This is part of the data management regime. Without this

information being regularly and accurately recorded, the ability of the asset manager to fully

adopt the Lifecycle Planning approach could be seriously hampered.

The Insight system is used as the main highways asset management system as it provides the

authority with a robust tool for holding and reporting on Asset Data.

Diagram 6.13 – Main Modules of Asset Management System (Insight)

6.14 Communication and Consultation

Communications with stakeholders is an essential part of the management of highway

assets.

Customer need is identified both through formal consultation processes and regular

contact direct from key stakeholders, elected members, parish or town council

representatives, members of the public and a variety of local interest groups.


Page 56


Ward Councillors and Parish Councillors play a fundamental part in the decision making

process and are consulted and asked for input on Annual Works Programme (AWP) and

Forward Works Plan. The approved AWP is displayed on the Councils website for customers

to access and it is updated regularly.

Communication with statutory undertakers on the proposed the AWP is also crucial to

effectively manage the highway network. Knowledge of intended locations for future

statutory undertakers work provides valuable information in the decision making process for

developing AWP and FWP. These programmes are produced and shared through scheduled

quarterly meetings between works promoters, which include statutory undertakers (water,

gas, electric and telecommunication companies etc.) and highway maintenance

management teams. This ensures works on the highway are coordinated to minimise

disruption on the highway in accordance with the requirements of the Traffic Management

Act 2004.

Where proposed work on the AWP involves potential changes to the highway is an

important part of communication with customers to ensure service users’ needs are

reflected in changes made to the highway network. Therefore consultation is undertaken

with stakeholders affected by any proposed work where there is a significant change to the

existing layout or a change in materials. For example where Yorkshire stone paving is

proposed to be taken up and replaced with bituminous materials.

For schemes on the AWP, contact is made with all residents and businesses fronting the

works prior to commencement of any work; informing them of what work is planned, start

dates, duration and contact details. Where time and resources allow residents affected by

the work will be given the opportunity to undertake a questionnaire on completion of the

work and comment on the scheme in terms of information received, the standard of work

and the contractors performance. This customer information enables the development of

levels of service and shape future strategy and practice for maintenance and management of

the highway asset. Informing the public and stakeholders on how decisions are made and

what can be delivered with the available budget will help achieve a better understanding of

how, Highways and Transportation resources are used and to help shape how they are used

in the future.

6.15 Performance Management Framework

Performance is continually measured to monitor our progress at achieving our aims and to

drive continuous improvement.


Page 57


The table below sets out the primary performance indicators that will be used to measure

progress against Highway Infrastructure Asset Management Plan standards. The indicators

shown below are consistent with our West Yorkshire neighbouring authorities to provide

opportunities to share success and learn from each other.

Table 6.15 – Showing the suite of Performance Indicators

Ref Description

1 How satisfied are stakeholders with Highway Condition

2 How satisfied are stakeholders with the condition of pavements

3 How satisfied are stakeholders with the speed of repair to Street Lights

4 How satisfied are stakeholders with the efforts to reduce delays to traffic

5 How satisfied are stakeholders with the ease with which they can contact H&T

6 % of customer correspondence responded to on time

7 Number of customer contacts received through call centre

8 % Cat 1 potholes repairs completed on time

9 % Cat 2 potholes repairs completed on time

10 % of Road Gullies cleansed on time

11 % Street Light faults repaired on time

12 % of signalised installations repaired on time

13 % Principal Network (A roads) requiring major maintenance

14 % Non-Principal Classified Network (B & C roads) requiring major maintenance

15 % of Unclassified Network requiring major maintenance

16 % of footways requiring major maintenance

17 % of council owned highway structures in need of significant repair (excluding retaining walls)

18 % of bridges with width or weight restrictions

19 Number of street lighting faults as a % of total street lighting stock

20 % of UTMC Traffic Signal installations exceeding average expected service life

21 Average duration (in days) of all highway works on permit streets (KSM1)

22 % of Street Lighting columns with LED lanterns

23 % of UTMC Installations with LED lanterns

24 Preventative Maintenance completed (in kilometres) as a % of the total km's repaired as part of the Annual Works Programme

25 Average energy used per street light in kwh

Network Sustainability - minimising costs over time, maximising value to the community, maximising environmental contibution

Network Serviceability - ensuring availability, achieving integrity, maintaining reliability, resilience, managing condition

Network Safety - complying with statutory obligations, meeting user needs for safety

Customer Service - consultation, levels of service information etc


Page 58


Information on progress against these and an additional suite of internal performance

indicator targets are monitored on a monthly basis within Highways and Transportation.

Annual measures of performance, providing a year on year comparison of outputs and

therefore progress, will be reviewed by the Chief Officer on an annual basis.

6.16 Benchmarking

Local and national benchmarking is being used to compare performance of the Asset

Management Framework and to share information that supports continuous improvement.

Benchmarking is a systematic process of collecting information and data to enable

comparisons with the aim of improving performance, both absolutely and relatively to

others. It provides a structure to search for better practice in similar authorities that can

then be integrated into an asset management approach. Comparison is made by;

National Highways & Transportation Survey (NHT) – Leeds will

continue to contribute to the annual NHT Survey for the purposes of

both benchmarking alongside similar authorities and gauging the level

of stakeholder satisfaction with our services.

The DfT’s Highway Maintenance Efficiency Programme

(HMEP) provides guidance and tools to support local

authorities in managing their highway assets based on

efficient asset management principles. A lifecycle planning toolkit has been made available

as part of the HMEP resources which uses inventory and condition data to create

deterioration models. This can be used to consider the effects of different maintenance

planning strategies. Leeds City Council has the HMEP guidance at the heart of our approach

to highway maintenance now and in the future. This will ensure the ability to be properly

measured against all other local authorities for all development, programming and delivery

operations with regards to highway maintenance

Asphalt Industry Alliance – ALARM Survey – Leeds participates annually in the Asphalt

Industry Alliance independently commissioned ALARM survey which aims to take a

snapshot of the general condition of the local road network. Although the findings

are a snapshot it is useful to be able to identify specific comparisons that can be

used to inform service decisions. For example;

Average number of potholes filled per authority last year – This is significantly lower in Leeds

than the national average which could be an indication that the strategy is working and that

the highway network is improving.

West Yorkshire Combined Authority (WYCA) – Leeds is part of the

WYCA and by benchmarking alongside the other member authorities

it enables us to compare the level of stakeholder satisfaction with

our services against the others.


Page 59


6.17 Investment Strategy

In a climate where budgets and resources are reducing, local authorities are facing

significant challenges in deciding how to manage their assets effectively.

Asset Management is a strategic approach that enables decisions to be made about what

service the council can provide within its budgetary limits. It enables the best allocation of

resources for the management, operation, preservation and enhancement of the highway.

This plan sets out the general approach to asset management across all highway

infrastructure assets. The investment strategy for highways involves a sequence of lifecycle

planning that forecasts the maintenance needs of highways and predicts the consequences

of various funding scenarios, the lifecycle plan helps us to direct funding to the most

beneficial strategic and long term maintenance treatments.

Current investment of approximately 25% of the planned maintenance budget in

preventative maintenance and 75% resurfacing works and refurbishment schemes over the

next two to three years has been identified as the most cost effective approach to

minimising the highway maintenance backlog.


Page 60


Part 2 - Structures


2016-2021

V2 – January 2018

Page 61

Part 2 – Structures Leeds City Council – Highways Infrastructure Asset Management Plan

2.1 Introduction

The road network plays a vital role in maintaining the local economy and businesses,

encouraging new investment, new businesses and regeneration. Within this infrastructure,

bridges, retaining walls and tunnels form the essential link to allow access across obstacles

(rivers, railways, roads etc.). Without adequate maintenance, the structure stock deteriorates,

costing more to repair later, and weight restrictions on individual structures becomes

necessary to maintain structural integrity and safeguard the highway user and the wider

travelling public.

2.2 Inventory

The table below shows details of highways structures, divided into assets groups, numbers of

structures by road hierarchy, total number per group and group gross replacement cost. The

private structures are largely owned by Network Rail, Canal and Rivers Trust, Yorkshire Water

or Highways England. There are also a small number of cellars and service tunnels that fall

within the Highway Structures inventory. The stock is diverse in terms of age, construction

type, material, and engineering complexity, ranging from a scheduled ancient monument,

Otley Bridge built in 1228, to the UK’s first urban motorway. The Leeds Inner Ring Road

(A58(M)/A64(M)) was built in the 1960’s and 1970’s and is a 3km stretch of dual carriageway

road containing over 100 structures, including Woodhouse Tunnel, a 380m long unventilated

tunnel carrying the Leeds General Infirmary.

LEEDS HIGHWAY STRUCTURES STOCK

Type Motorways

Principal Non Principal

Unclassified

Roads

Total

Number

of

Structures

Gross

Replacement

Cost (£M)

Highways Highways

A Class

Roads

B & C Class

Roads

Bridges 14 71 17 122 224 814.54

Tunnels 2 5 0 0 7 574.21

Culverts (>900mm) 0 59 14 132 205 55.37

Subways 1 14 1 7 23 6.74

Footbridges 3 17 1 39 60 21.12

Retaining Walls

(>1.2m)

67 393 98 2167 2725 134.32

(5.2km) (28.8km) (4.9km) (58.4km) (97.3km)

Traffic Signal Mast

Arms and Sign

Gantries

7 87 0 19 113 15.33

Other 2 4 0 19 25 16.08

Private Structures 4 314 101 691 1110

V2 – January 2018

Page 62


2.3 Condition

The condition of the City’s structures is gathered through an inspection regime and scored

using the ADEPT national Structure Condition Indicator (SCI) guidance. F ive main types of

inspection are carried out by the Council’s own in house or Partner organisation inspectors

and engineers, with the exception of underwater and confined space inspections, where

specialist operatives are employed.

The inspection programme follows best practice guidelines derived from the

recommendations in the Management of Highway Structures Code of Practice and Highways

England standard BD63.

LEEDS HIGHWAY STRUCTURES INSPECTION REGIME

Inspection Description Frequency

General Remote visual inspections

1 year for footbridges, subways

1 year for Inner Ring Road structures

2 years for all other structures

Principal All elements are inspected within

touching distance 6 years

Underwater /

Scour

All elements inspected from within

the watercourse only Yearly and after major flooding events

Special

For specific requirements –

• Safety

• Uncommon construction

techniques

• Weak structures

• Monitoring

• Acceptance

As required based on risk analysis

and applicable standards.

Limited General

Similar to general but for private

bridges on the highway network as

a duty of care e.g. railway bridge

over highway

2 years

Routine Surveillance

A part of regular highway safety

inspections carried out by highway

maintenance staff.

x

The data produced and information gathered during inspections, enables completion of an

inspection pro forma and calculation of the Structure Condition Index (SCI). An SCI is

calculated for the structure as a whole (SCIAv) and just for critical structural elements

(SCICRIT). These scores are then combined to give a weighted condition for the whole

structure stock; this indicator is an essential tool for tracking overall condition, informing key

performance indicators, identifying trends within structure groups and feeding into the works

prioritisation process.

V2 – January 2018

Page 63


During a principal inspection a thorough examination of every accessible part of the

structure is undertaken and an assessment of any significant change in condition is made.

These recommendations are fed into a review of the load carrying capacity also taking into

account any change of use or new / revised national standard.

All data relating to the highway structure stock including inspection, spatial location data,

construction details, completed works, photographs and forward programmes are stored on

Leeds Highway Structures Asset Management System – ‘AMX’.

2.4 Level of Service

The desired condition of the structure stock as a whole has not currently been defined.

However, the ‘Best Council Plan’ gives strategic goals and objectives for the City and the

structure stock will need to be maintained or improved to meet these challenges. The SCI

rating system implies that the desired bridge stock condition should be somewhere in the

categories ‘good’ to ‘very good’, scores between 80 -100. T herefore working on the basis

that the desired strategy, subject to funding,

would be to move bridge stock condition into

the ‘good’ category for both critical and

average indicators and then to maintain it at

that level.

Irrespective of the journey towards the desired

‘good’ stock condition, individual structures

must always be safe and fit for purpose, as set

out in the Highways Act 1980. This will

necessitate safety and other related work not

always supported by the drive towards the

‘good’ rating. To give best value and ‘big

picture’ thinking whole life costing principles are being incorporated into the works planning

process.

2.5 Programme and Priorities

Maintenance work is divided into several categories, each addressing a different type of defect

/ issue.

• Routine maintenance activities can be classed as cyclic work and tend to be carried out

on an annual basis with the timings based on historical experience.

• Reactive maintenance is usually emergency work and is dealt with urgently on the

grounds of safety such as emergency repairs following a bridge strike.

• Minor works are items of work minor in nature but outside of routine maintenance.

2016 SCI VA

85.42%74.53%

Very Poor

0 to 40%

Poor

40% to 65%

Fair

65% to 80%

Good

80% to 90%

Very Good

90% to 100%

2016 SCI RITC 2016 SCIAV

85.42%

V2 – January 2018

Page 64


• Safety critical maintenance are defects identified from inspections that have a high risk

of causing harm to the travelling public; these defects are the highest priority and are

completed ahead of all other maintenance work.

• Steady state maintenance is carried out to maintain the condition of the structure by

protecting it from deterioration or slowing down the rate of deterioration. At this time,

with the current level of funding, this type of maintenance strategy is too costly and so

instead a greater focus on risk management is needed to make up the short fall.

• Element replacement can be identified as required through either inspections or

through a cross cutting desk study, for example parapets along LIRR. Once the

structures requiring replacement have been identified, a prioritised programme of work

will be delivered over a number of years.

All identified work, from inspections or desk studies, is stored in the bridge management

systems ‘work bank’. Work is regularly prioritised within each category and issued to

appropriate contractors. Year on year the identified work is greater than the funding to

complete it; this causes a backlog of maintenance. The maintenance backlog currently is

estimated at £54.1m (April 2016).

2.5.1 Forward Works Programme

The majority of future works are planned up to two years ahead with feasibility, design and

planning work undertaken in previous years. This allows major schemes to be delivered

within a specific financial year. The two year forward programme contains a blend of

schemes including minor works, strengthening, scour protection, assessment and asset

management.

A five to ten year programme is currently being developed for all major works based on

structural condition. The future condition is determined utilising the national asset

management toolkit, which reflects the structures current condition, construction,

environment and maintenance regime. Condition is not the only driver for works on a

structure; schemes are also generated from other work streams, for example strengthening,

new standards, and structures susceptible to pier impact or scour and public realm related

projects.

All works on the highway, within Leeds, are coordinated with other promoters using the

West Yorkshire permit scheme; this system gives the benefit of maximising coordination

and minimising conflicting traffic management thus minimising disruption to highway

users. All works on the structure stock comply

with the West Yorkshire permit scheme

requirements.

2.5.2 Works Prioritisation

The current stock of highway structures includes

nearly 3500 separately identified structures. Each

year over 800 inspections are carried out which

generate several thousand separate items of

potential maintenance work for consideration as

part of the annual programme. Added into this

work bank are more strategic items of work including parapet upgrades or scour protection.

V2 – January 2018

Page 65


It would be inefficient and time consuming to try to compare and consider all these

structures and maintenance work items en masse. An automated prioritisation system has

been developed which aids the production of a short list based on quantifiable factors, with

this then being evaluated against ‘softer’ prioritisation issues, engineering judgement and

local factors to produce the annual programme.

2.5.3 Asset Management Toolkit

Leeds has adopted the use of the ‘Structures Asset Management Planning Toolkit’ developed

by the Department for Transport. This excel-based toolkit supports bridge engineers and

managers in their management of the st ructure stock. The toolk i t ass ists with

financial planning, prioritisation of needs, lifecycle planning, risk management and asset

valuation. The toolkit facilitates long-term asset management, financial planning and asset

valuation/depreciation for highway structures. This functionality of predicting future condition

and producing budget estimates for condition based repairs is being integrated into the works

planning and feasibility processes.

2.5.4 Key Performance Indicators

Key Performance indicators are a small set of indicators that are monitored and reported to

help measure progress in delivering the priorities and, over time, to help assess whether any

progress has been made towards the outcomes. The indicators either directly support the

Best Council Plan or help to demonstrate the effective and safe management of the highway

structure stock (Local Performance Indicator – LPI). The 2016 performance indicators are

listed below:

• % of Council owned structures in need of essential repair (KPI)

• Condition of structure stock (SCIav and SCIcrit) (LPI)

• % of Council owned structures with weight or width restrictions (LPI)

• Number of structures being monitored (LPI)

• % of programmed inspections completed (LPI)

2.6 Future Demands

All of Leeds’ highway structures will need to meet the increasing demands of the highway

network in terms of the overall objectives of network safety, sustainability and serviceability.

Specific future demands related to highway structures, include the following:

• Maintain structures to serve 44t vehicles and

improve the capacity where traffic demands

make this necessary

• Improvements in safety

• Strengthen bridges piers where they are

susceptible to impact

• Protect against foundation scour

• Maintain and improve the Leeds Inner Ring

Road (A58(M) / A64(M))

• Maintain Abnormal Loads routes and access

into developments

• Work with strategic partners to complete historic strengthening (Network Rail)

V2 – January 2018

Page 66


2.7 Creation / Acquisition

The creation of structures by the City takes

place as part of new road schemes. In

recent years, there have been a total of 8

bridges, 6 culverts and 18 retaining walls

created on the A63 East Leeds Link, Inner

Ring Road Stage 7 and the A65 Integrated

Transport Scheme.

Highways structures are sometimes

acquired through the adoption of highways

following housing and industrial

developments. Normally the developer is charged a commuted sum to pay for future

maintenance liabilities.

Historically bridges have been acquired from the former British Rail Property Board and the

Highways Agency. The authority acquired 24 bridges following de-trunking of the A6120,

A660, A65 and A63 in 2002 and 2010.

2.8 Disposal

Bridges can become redundant, for example after the closure of a railway line or a major road

scheme or a public realm project. During the decommissioning process every effort is made is

minimise future maintenance liability for the Authority and to landscape the area to remove

visual evidence of the structure.

V2 – January 2018

Page 67



Part 3 – Lighting and Traffic Signals

Page 68



2016-2021

Part 3 – Lighting & Traffic Signals

V2 – January 2018

Page 69

Part 3 –Lighting and Traffic Signals Leeds City Council – Highways Infrastructure Asset Management Plan

Part 3 – Lighting and Traffic Signals

Lighting

3.1 Introduction

Street Lighting and illuminated signs maintenance is a significant aspect of network

management, both financially and in terms of its perceived importance to users, providing

direction and advice for all types of traffic. This Plan covers the management of key highway

infrastructure assets. However it does not cover the Street Lighting and illuminated signs both

of which are managed outside this plan and are covered by a Private Finance Initiative (PFI)

contract with Tay Valley Lighting (TVL)

3.2 Inventory

Type of Installation Number

Lighting Columns 93,866

Illuminated Bollards 3,609

Illuminated Signs 6,861

Zebra Crossings 329

School Crossing Patrol Flashers 65

Variable Message Signs (incoming

power supply and poles only) 22

Total 104,752

Traffic Signals

3.3 Introduction

Leeds City Council recognise the importance of traffic signals and other related assets ensuring

an effectively maintained and managed network, which contributes to the local economy and

assists in achieving corporate goals. This section outlines the agreed approach to effective

Asset Management giving clarity around standards and levels of service ensuring that available

resources are appropriately directed to maximise the benefit across Leeds.

Asset management is a tool to establish appropriate budget allocations by demonstrating the

effects of under-investment and the implications of not meeting safety and serviceability

requirements of the customers using the network.

3.4 Inventory

The highway network in Leeds has 632 traffic signal installations. Urban Traffic Management

Control (UTMC) teams are also responsible for the associated communications network and

computing, traffic monitoring CCTV, electronically variable road signs, bus priority units and

journey time measuring devises, and other related equipment. For the list of assets see table

3.4a/b/c below;

V2 – January 2018

Page 70


Type of Installation Number

Traffic Signalised Junctions 324

Stand Alone Crossings 308

Wig Wag signals (Fire Stations) 1

Total 633

Table 3.4a - Traffic Signals Inventory

Table 3.4b - Urban Traffic Management Control (UTMC) Installations

System Assets

UTC Yes

UTMC common database Yes

Communications Network Yes

Control Desk/ Room Yes

Table 3.4c - Urban Traffic Management Control (UTMC) Systems

A comprehensive database for all traffic signal installations is maintained. All salient attributes

of each traffic signal control installation are recorded. This allows easy analysis and reporting

of numbers of each physical/electrical unit, energy usage, expansion capability and control

strategies in operation, etc. Records are contained in a database linked to electronic data files,

drawings and photos.

These assets are used to manage traffic safely, balancing competing demands within defined

transport strategies to sustain the social and commercial well-being of the district.

A joint West Yorkshire maintenance contract has been in place since April 2013. As well as

providing considerable cost savings across the 5 districts, this joint contract ensures a uniform

approach and common standards across the area.

3.5 Asset Condition and Investigatory Levels

Electrical equipment needs to be electrically and physically safe, with everything in good

working condition. The communications, computer control and internal logical functions need

to be reliable so that control of timings and automatic fault reporting is fully functional. All

this requires equipment that is reliable to an acceptable standard and can be promptly and

cost effectively maintained.

Asset Type Number

Mast Arms / Catenary 74

Signals with Communications 533

Bus Priority (ACIS units) 37

CCTV Cameras 82

Variable Message Signs (VMS) (sign only) 22

Car Park Signs 12

Vehicle Actuated Signs (VAS) 32

Total 792

V2 – January 2018

Page 71


Factors relevant to safety, reliability and performance are the age of the asset, its fault history,

and its present condition.

Age. The asset database gives the age of the installation and the type of controller and

associated equipment. The age gives an indication of the likely condition of the hardware on

street. The equipment type identifies if the electronics are still available, or if spares are

difficult to obtain. The code of practise for traffic control and information systems (MCH

1869a) suggests a life expectancy of 15 years as being the viable limit beyond which major

traffic signal components become difficult to source and the integrity of the installation as a

whole can be compromised. The age of traffic installations across Leeds is given below. It can

be seen that a significant number of the Leeds asset is at risk due to age alone.

Average Age

(Years)

Number Greater

than 15 Years

Junction Signals 11.7 113

Pedestrian Crossings 9.8 70

Table 3.5 Age Profile of Traffic Signals

Asset average age will increase every year unless enough older signals are replaced to

maintain or reduce the average age. An ageing asset can rapidly become a liability.

Fault history. A 24/7 fault management system is in place, with faults automatically

highlighted by the UTMC computer, or by a member of the public or a responsible body. All

faults are recorded and a fault history can be extracted. Sites with a high number of faults are

investigated further, with a view to considering the appropriateness of a new replacement.

Condition. Included in the joint West Yorkshire maintenance contract is an annual inspection

of all signals. This includes an electrical safety test, a physical inspection of the on-street

furniture including rust, correct alignment and lamp faults. Urgent issues are dealt with

straight away with less urgent deterioration in condition being noted. A further site inspection

may be made by council staff. This information is taken into account in prioritising

maintenance.

Energy Consumption. Older signal equipment is very energy hungry, with electrical costs for

an average junction in excess of £1200 per annum. Modern traffic signals use low voltage LED

lamps, which are far more energy efficient. In addition there is a safety benefit as there is no

risk of mains voltage getting to signal poles in the event of a collision. Low voltage signals also

have a lower carbon footprint.

3.6 Levels of Service

For traffic signals Leeds City Council operates efficient economical systems to manage traffic

flow effectively, reduce congestion and allow automatic fault reporting. The systems

employed are maintained to a useable standard to ensure traffic conflicts are avoided and to

maintain safe passage for all highway users.

Pedestrian signals, and variable message signs (VMS) are managed in an effective an

affordable manner keeping the assets fit and safe for use by the community and are

maintained to a standard appropriate to their use.

V2 – January 2018

Page 72


3.7 Lifecycle Planning (Replacement Strategy)

There is a clear need to keep traffic signal equipment working efficiently all of the time. As the

asset deteriorates there is an increased likelihood of failure, and increased frequency of

disruption to traffic, and it can take longer to affect a repair. Traffic signals can be

replaced/refurbished for the following reasons: urgent repair of a major fault, as part of a

specific road scheme, as part of an energy reduction programme, or as part of a planned

maintenance programme.

The aim of an effective maintenance strategy is to reduce the number of emergency repairs,

and to increase reliability and ensure good performance from all traffic signal installation.

Given the fact that planned replacement is much less disruptive than emergency replacement,

it is imperative to have an effective and consistent replacement strategy for traffic signals.

As the asset ages every year, the target of good asset management is to replace/upgrade

enough installations each year to maintain the average age and condition as that which is

deemed acceptable. Given the life of traffic signal equipment is generally calculated to be 15

years, the appropriate target average age should be 7.5 years.

• Consideration of variables. It is recognised that variables in rates of condition and

deterioration means that some signals perform well even after 15 years. Conversely,

some equipment can rust or otherwise become a safety hazard and need replacing

before that time. Sometimes signals are replaced or upgraded, partially or fully, due to

a new scheme for a site, an energy saving programme, or due to accident damage. A

degree of micro management in the programme is therefore essential.

• Factors determining the strategy. The information listed above – age, fault history,

condition and energy consumption – are all recorded in a database, and form an

essential input into the decision matrix. The strategic importance of a site is also

significant. The other important factor is opportunity.

3.8 Programming and Prioritising

Priority is decided on considering projected lifespan in conjunction with a series of key tests

against a scoring system. Allocation of resources is be prioritised against the traffic signal

installations accruing the highest accumulated score, addressing the real issue of risk

reduction in a more informed manner.

1. Test One: Age, Condition and fault history (Maintainability). - Some installations fair

better than others. Our knowledge base permits accurate value judgements of

condition to be made. A total programme of prospective works based on a 15 year

age ceiling and gathered intelligence informs a base wish list against which successive

tests will be made. By inference, all installations considered for the refurbishment

programme must first meet this test.

2. Test Two: Opportunity - To maximise the value of available budgets, opportunities

would be sought to tie refurbishments to other capital and revenue projects.

Inevitably, some of these will be direct asset enhancement projects in their own right

as transportation strategies seek to deliver more from our intelligent transport

systems. Carriageway resurfacing and other work requiring traffic management can

provide an opportune time to replace signals without additional disruption for road

users and additional costs for the authority.

3. Test Three: Strategic Importance. - The strategic value of an installation can be

defined in its commercial, political and social importance to the highway network and

may be considered as being directly proportional to the accompanying risks

V2 – January 2018

Page 73


associated through an extended collapse in operations. Professional judgement

would be used to qualify the low/medium/high strategic importance of specific traffic

signal installations.

4. Test Four: Energy Efficiency. - The fact that replacing an older installation with low

voltage LED signals increases safety, reduces running costs and lowers the carbon

footprint means that there is additional benefit in replacing this equipment.

These factors are combined in a spreadsheet (see table 3.4) to give a priority ranking of all

sites. While this ranking is not static – condition may be found to have deteriorated, or there

may be an unexpected opportunity – it serves as a decision making tool that is objective and

functional.

Site Score Maintainability Opportunity Importance Energy

Efficiency Total Score

Obsolescence,

availability of parts,

fault history

Relation to key

road network

1= low

priority for

maintenance

1 No problems No opportunity Low traffic Extra Low

voltage (ELV)

2 Better than average n/a n/a n/a

3 Average small opportunity

(limited time)

Busy but not

key

Low Voltage

(LV) & LED

4 Hard to maintain n/a n/a n/a

5 Unmaintainable major opportunity On WY key

network Halogen

Junction

A 3 1 1 1 6

Table 3.8 – Asset Assessment Matrix

3.9 Measuring deliverables

The result of a good asset management plan will be maintaining the average age of equipment

as close to 7.5 years as possible, and reducing the number of faults across the whole network.

While there are other less tangible benefits, these two factors are objective, easily obtained,

and in fact serve as a proxy for less tangible benefits such as safety, smooth traffic flow, etc..

3.10 Performance Monitoring

Continued pressure on the Council’s revenue budget, and, in particular, the resulting under

investment in the operation and maintenance budget has required a prioritisation of the

services provided. The performance indicators listed below supports the asset management

strategy by having a systematic approach to measuring performance.

Indicator Ref Description Reported

LKI 1 Percentage of faults where the maintenance contractor attends within the

contract time Monthly

LKI 2 Percentage of faults where the maintenance contractor repairs within the

contract time Monthly

LKI 3 Percentage of periodic inspections performed on time by PEEK Monthly

LKI 4 Percentage of all signals across the city under UTMC control or monitoring Monthly

V2 – January 2018

Page 74


LKI 5 Average age of traffic signals controller (years) Monthly

LKI 6 Percentage of pedestrian crossings compliant with DDA tactile equipment Monthly

LKI 7 Cumulative number of unique visitors to Leeds Travel Info website Monthly

LKI 8 Number of signal switch ons in Leeds (new or modified) Monthly

Table 3.10 – Showing the suite of Performance Indicators

The Local Highways and Transportation Performance Indicators (LKI) are the indicators that

the section manager considers to be of high importance and require a strong focus.

Information on progress against these performance indicator targets are monitored on a

monthly basis within Highways and Transportation.

V2 – January 2018

Page 75


Part 4 – Drainage

Page 76

Part 4 –Drainage Leeds City Council – Highways Infrastructure Asset

Management Plan

Highway Infrastructure and Asset Management Plan

2016-2021

Part 4 – Drainage

V2 – January 2018

Page 77

Part 4 –Drainage Leeds City Council – Highways Infrastructure Asset Management Plan

Part 4 – Drainage 4.1 Introduction

The drainage asset is a substantial asset group within the Leeds City highway network,

comprising of a number of asset elements. Owing to the nature of the differing maintenance

needs these are managed more effectively by splitting then into two main groups:

a. Highways Drainage - Highway gullies, Linear drainage systems

b. Other Drainage Features – Culverts <900mm in width (Culverts >900mm in width are

within the scope of the Part 2, Structures), Debris screens, Catchpits, Pumping Stations,

Petrol Oil Interceptors, watercourses, etc

The condition of the drainage asset is proven to have a direct influence on the deterioration of

other highway assets, in particular the carriageway. Leeds City Council has adopted a

maintenance programme that seeks to minimise deterioration of other highway assets. For

the purposes of explaining the management of drainage assets in this plan the 2 main groups

are covered separately.

4A Highways Drainage

The council will ensure that the highway drainage asset is managed in an effective, efficient

and affordable manner, which limits the potential for blockages, to ensure effectiveness in

removing water efficiently from the surface of the highway.

4A.1 Inventory

Leeds City Council collected an inventory of both gullies and linear drainage assets during

2011-2013. These asset records are constantly updated following the adoption of new streets,

ongoing developments and changes to the highway. Table 4a.1 below shows the current

(December 2016) highway drainage asset inventory.

Asset Type Principal

Roads

B & C

Roads

Unclassified

Distributor

Roads

Local

Roads Footways Totals

Gullies including connection

(number) 15,357 7,422 7,327 113,208 3,105 146,421

Linear drainage - combined kerb

drainage systems (metres) 21,341 2,690 2,986 7,646 0 34,663

Linear drainage - channels with

grills or slots (metres) 2,227 438 857 4,098 291 7,911

Table 4A.1: Drainage Asset Inventory

4A.2 Asset Condition Standard by Element

In July 2016 Leeds City Council invested in KaarbonTech Gully Smart technology which is a

suite of asset management software which assists in the planning of cyclic operations,

monitoring and data capture of drainage activities. The software is used daily by cleansing

teams and data is collected relating to the condition of drainage assets. This information

enables the efficient identification of repairs of any defective assets and will also assist in

future changes to gully cleaning frequencies.

V2 – January 2018

Page 78


The maintenance implications for safety, serviceability and sustainability of the above drainage

items are shown in the table 4A.2 below.

Asset Element

Network Safety Network Serviceability Network Sustainability

Gullies

And

Linear

Drainage

Systems

Accumulations of water on

carriageways, footways and cycle

routes can increase risks to the

safety of highway users, or

frontagers, particularly on high

speed roads and when standing

water exists in freezing

conditions.

Displaced or damaged inspection

covers and frames can be a

hazard to highway users

Accumulations of water on

roads, footways and cycle

tracks can lead to an

accelerated deterioration

of road surfaces that are

close to the end of their

serviceable life. Also

damage to adjacent

properties due to spray

thrown up by passing

vehicles. In some cases

ineffective or non-existent

drainage systems can lead

to flooding of adjacent

properties.

Pollution of roadside watercourses can

occur due to contaminated run off from

carriageways.

Inadequate drainage will reduce the

effective life of road pavements and may

cause nuisance to adjoining landowners by

flooding.

Roadside gullies require periodic cleansing.

Arising’s may contain pollutants and should

be disposed of at licensed sites

Table 4A.2 Maintenance Implications

4A.3 Levels of Service

Levels of Service form a key part in the management of any asset. In order to successfully

manage an asset it is vital to have defined levels of service that clearly reflect users and

stakeholders’ demands and expectations for each asset group. This must be balanced against

the cost of providing the service, whilst also taking account of the highway authority’s

statutory duties and the council’s strategic goals.

The reason for cleaning gullies and linear drainage systems is to remove detritus to ensure all

elements of the highway drainage system work effectively and efficiently so that surface water

is captured and discharged appropriately. This reduces the likelihood of standing water and

minimises flood risk on the highway.

The frequency of cleansing depends upon the location, volume of detritus, degree of tree

cover, gradient of the terrain, level of rainfall and frequency of sweeping. Cleansing is

therefore arranged on a cyclic basis, dependent upon location and subsequent risks to road

users of flooding should the drainage asset not function properly.

Historically, gullies were programmed to be cleansed three times over a two year period and

outputs were not linked to the maintenance needs of the asset. With the introduction of

KaarbonTech Gully Smart technology, all gullies will be cleansed by June 2018 to identify the

gully cleansing effectiveness. From 2019 onwards a risk based approach will be introduced

based on the data gathered.

Linear drainage system cleansing frequencies have not been defined previously and hence

there has not been a consistent approach to their maintenance. Again, additional data

gathered by 2018 will be used to develop an appropriate risk based cleansing regime.

The levels of service to be adopted for 2017/18 to 2021/22 are shown in table 4A.3

V2 – January 2018

Page 79



Drainage Systems

Gully

Linear drainage system

� 3 to 4 years to complete a full cycle of all gullies. Hit and miss service to cleanse known

problematic wet spot gullies at an increased frequency (gullies which are identified by highways/

flood risk management as being in need of a more regular cleanse due to location, historical flooding

issues etc.). Backlog of drainage faults increasing. Ad hoc response to cleansing linear drainage

systems.

�� . Cleansing frequency less than need and prioritised on traffic use. Inspection undertaken in

response to flooding events. Backlog of drainage faults still high but reducing. Planned programme for

cleansing linear drainage systems.

�� Gullies on resilient network cleansed annually, gullies in areas identified as being prone to

flooding cleansed quarterly, all other gullies categorised as low risk will be cleansed bi-annually.

Backlog of drainage faults reduced. Gullies and silt traps contained within linear drainage lengths will

be cleansed at the frequencies stated above. Linear drainage itself will be cleansed when identified

from a safety inspection or when a report is received.

�� Cleansing frequency is risk based and stated timescales achieved. Backlog of drainage faults

at manageable levels and achieving identified timescales for repair. Achieving cleansing frequency for

linear drainage systems.

Current Service Level

� 3 to 4 years to complete a full cycle of all gullies. Hit and miss service to cleanse known problematic

gullies in ‘flooding hotspots’ at an increased frequency (gullies which are identified by highways/

flood risk management as being in need of a more regular cleanse due to location, historical flooding

issues etc.). Backlog of drainage faults increasing

Proposed Service Level

Introduction of KaarbonTech Gully Smart and other identified improvements will assist in improving

the current level of service and by June 2018 the aim is to achieve a �� Service Level

Table 4A.3 – Levels of Service for Drainage 2017-2022

4A.4 Inspection, Assessment and Recording

The highway drainage assets will be inspected during the following operations;

• Highway safety inspections,

• Cyclical cleansing operations

Highway Safety Inspections

Item Defect

Standing Water Standing water two hours after cessation of rainfall

1.5m from edge of c/way

Substantial running water across carriageway

Substantial running water across footway

Property inundation as a result of defective highway drainage

Drainage Substantial standing water adjacent to edge of c/way

Gully grate cover and frame damaged or missing

Gully grate cover and frame depressed or rocking >40mm

Blocked gully (silted above outlet)

Collapsed/blocked/ settled items or systems

V2 – January 2018

Page 80


Cyclical Cleansing Operations

During cleansing operations crews will assess;

• The condition of the gully grating and the frame

• The condition of the silt trap and its connection

• Silt levels

4A.5 Highways Drainage Strategy

The approach to cyclical maintenance of highway gullies is to undertake an optimised

programme of cyclical cleansing across the city with cleansing frequencies based on historical

levels of silt recorded during previous cleaning cycles. This risk based approach minimises the

unnecessary cleansing of gullies and ensures gullies requiring higher cleaning frequencies are

attended to.

A GIS (Graphical Information System) showing the position of all gullies and linear drainage is

used to record location details. This will be enhanced by the KaarbonTech Gully Smart

technology to electronically record each gully visited during cyclical cleaning to build a history

of maintenance. This record will include the following details:

• Street name and ward name

• Date and time attended

• A unique gully asset reference / gully type

• Location coordinates (via GPS)

• Percentage of silt found in the gully prior to cleaning

• Defects (if any present)

• Reason if gully obstructed from cleaning (parked car, stuck lid etc.)

The silt level data for each gully is recorded, which is then compared with other gullies along

the same sections of road and an appropriate cleansing frequency for the section of network

is determined. The cleaning frequencies currently used are:

• Once every 6 months – Utilising electronic mapping techniques gully positions have

been mapped against known flooding hotspots. This helps to align and identify any areas

that may affect the highway during prolonged heavy rainfall when for example local rivers

and streams struggle with the amount of rainfall and surcharge the gully network. Whilst

in most cases this will be beyond the council’s control it will assist understanding of

individual locations and their effect on the network in terms of potential accelerated

highway deterioration.

• Once every 12 months (annually) - Utilising electronic mapping techniques gully

positions have been mapped against the City’s resilient network, which consist of principal

roads and routes to emergency services (police, fire, ambulance and hospitals). It also

gives priority to economic links between localities and to the wider national network.

• Once every 24 months (bi-annually) – All remaining gullies not included in the above

cyclic frequencies.

When sufficient data is available in the KaarbonTech Gully Smart system it will be reviewed

and the frequency of cleansing will be increased or reduced as appropriate to ensure gullies

are cleaned at a frequency appropriate to the levels of demand.

V2 – January 2018

Page 81


4A.6 Programming and Priorities

A risk based strategy to prioritise drainage maintenance is in place and will be reviewed after

2018.

Maintenance is undertaken as follows;

Cyclic

Maintenance

Current Regime Works History Lifecycle Impacts

Gullies A minimum of once every two

years in all locations but more

frequently for those sites

identified as at a higher risk

of blockage or prone to

flooding.

All works are recorded onto the

KaarbonTech Gully Smart

System which records and

monitors gully cleansing

operations.

Regular gully cleaning helps to

alleviate flooding problems and

reduces the rate of deterioration

of the highway network.

Sometimes a gully may appear to be blocked but the problem could be with the piped system into which the gully is

connected. Such blockages can ordinarily be cleared by high pressure water jetting of the connection. Initially this

type of report along with other defects (e.g. gully pot full with concrete/tarmac etc.) will be passed to the jetting

team. The cleansing team will assess the gully location and prioritise any service requests to the jetting teams using

the following risk based priorities:

Work Priority 1: High

• Locations where flooding affects or is quite likely to affect a dwelling

• locations where standing water is at a critical location for braking or turning

• locations where standing water is on a high speed road and may lead to safety issues

Work Priority 2: Medium

• locations adjacent to well used footways

• locations adjacent to footways near elderly person's homes

• locations where flooding problems are frequent and have been persistent for some years

Work Priority 3: Low

• locations not covered by the above two priorities

Reactive

Maintenance


Gully Repair Isolated gully repairs are

identified from;

1. reports received from

the gully cleaning team

2. reports received from

the public

3. safety inspections

Damaged gullies are recorded

onto the appropriate systems

which will be regularly

interrogated and the

appropriate action taken. This

action will be recorded and the

system updated.

Repairs to gullies are reactive

which when completed can have

the effect of reducing the need for

greater drainage maintenance at a

later time.

Cleaning of linear

drainage.

Identified from safety

inspections or when standing

water is reported.

These are recorded onto the

appropriate systems which will

be regularly interrogated and

the appropriate action taken.

Regular cleaning of these assets

would help to alleviate standing

water problems and reduce the

rate of degradation of the

drainage asset.

Blocked gullies referred by cleansing teams will be attended by a jetting team who will attempt to clear any

blockage by high pressure jetting. If the team is unable to clear a blockage or additional work is identified it will be

placed on a list for routine maintenance and prioritised as per jetting referrals.

V2 – January 2018

Page 82


Routine

Maintenance


Gully connections and

piped systems.

A list of known drainage

defects is maintained, with

each site being subject to

investigation to establish

proposed solutions. Funds are

then allocated to undertake

repairs based on a priority

rating and within the available

budget.

All works are recorded onto a

computerised database (Insight).

Repairs to the drainage system are

reactive and only if they are noticed

at an early stage can they have the

effect of reducing the need for

greater drainage maintenance at a

later time.

Blocked gullies that cannot be cleared by high pressure jetting may require other works for example

• CCTV survey may be needed to establish if the connection has been broken by other work in the road (i.e.

by statutory undertakers) or penetrated by tree roots.

• Broken gully pot which requires replacing

• Broken or damaged gully lid or frame and requires replacing

• Gully pot filled with concrete, tarmac etc. and requires digging out

• Repair to connection or pipework

Where a CCTV survey or other investigatory works determines that extensive work (beyond one day’s work) is

necessary the work will be placed on a list for planned maintenance and prioritised as per jetting referrals.

Planned

Maintenance


Gully connections and

piped systems.

A list of known drainage

defects is maintained, with

each site being subject to

investigation to establish

proposed solutions. Funds are

then allocated to undertake

repairs based on a priority

rating and within the

available budget.

All works are recorded onto a

computerised database

(Insight).

Repairs to the drainage system are

reactive and only if they are

noticed at an early stage can they

have the effect of reducing the

need for greater drainage

maintenance at a later time.

Planned maintenance repairs are identified either as explained above or through a number of sources e.g. flood investigation,

stakeholders, and highway inspections. If after the investigation further repairs to the gully, connection or pipe are determined

then a separate works instruction will be created. The work will be included on a prioritised list and subject to funding the work

will be passed to the appropriate contractor to undertake the necessary repairs.

Reports (Service requests)

At present there is a backlog of gullies that require cleansing and as a result the number of

reports is higher than it could be. When a report is received relating to a blocked gully it will

initially be passed to one of the gully teams to cleanse. Currently the aim is to cleanse

reported gullies within 20 days.

Once all gullies within the city have been cleansed and an appropriate cleaning frequency

determined for each gully based on observed silt levels, among other factors including

information from customers and inspector reports, blocked gullies will not be cleaned on a

request basis unless it is part of a response to flooding on the highway.

V2 – January 2018

Page 83


4A.7 Forward Works Programme

With the introduction of KaarbonTech Gully Smart technology, all gullies will be cleansed by

June 2018 and the gully cleansing effectiveness identified. From 2019 onwards a risk based

approach will be introduced based on asset inventory data and information relating to

observed silt levels.

Forward Works Programme 2017 to 2019 2019 Onwards

Cyclic Maintenance Collect inventory and condition

data for highway drainage gullies

including linear drainage

Risk Based drainage cleansing

programme i.e. gullies and linear

drainage

Reactive Maintenance Not applicable as this work is reactive by nature

Routine Maintenance Prioritised list of work

Planned Maintenance Prioritised list of work measured and priced.

Table 4A.7.1 – Forward Works Programme

A cyclic gully cleansing programme for Leeds has been created. It is available on the Leeds City

Council website in order that stakeholders can see what work has taken place in the year and

the programme for each ward.

The number of locations where planned maintenance (drainage) work is required far exceeds

the budget available and therefore work is prioritised based on road hierarchy (usage of the

affected asset), safety (risk to the public), impact of flooding (structural effects etc.) and traffic

speed. The outcome is a list of ranked streets based on priorities. See table below.

High Priority – e.g. where

flooding to public highway or

properties are imminent

Medium Priority – e.g. where

flooding to public highway or

properties are at risk

Low Priority – e.g. where flooding to

public highway or properties are

occasionally at risk

Work required to be carried

out within a short timescale

subject to funding

Work required to be carried out

within a reasonable timescale

subject to funding

Work required to be carried out within

the Council’s Programme of Works, and

timescale subject to funding being

available

Table 4A.7.2 – Priorities for Planned Drainage Repairs

The ranked list of sites requiring maintenance will form the basis of the drainage planned

maintenance programme of work. The full list contains between three and five years’ worth of

work. In year one each scheme will be fully measured and priced, schemes in following years

are allocated estimated costs.

4A.8 Performance

A number of performance indicators applicable to the drainage asset will be introduced,

however gully cleansing is currently under review and at present there are no defined

performance indicators. The introduction of KaarbonTech Gully Smart will assist in the

collection of gully data and will identify gully cleansing effectiveness.

V2 – January 2018

Page 84


To be consistent with West Yorkshire neighbouring authorities the following will be used as an

interim measure of performance.

Indicator Ref Description Reported

LKI 10 % of Road Gullies cleansed on time Monthly

4A Other Drainage Features

This section is under development and will be added as soon as it has been

prepared

V2 – January 2018

Page 85


Part 4 – Drainage

Page 86

Part 4 –Drainage Leeds City Council – Highways Infrastructure Asset

Management Plan

Highway Infrastructure and Asset Management Plan

2016-2021

Part 5 – Service Review

Part 5 – Service Review Leeds City Council – Highways Infrastructure Asset Management Plan

Part 5 – Service Review 5.1 Introduction

Improvement actions have been undertaken throughout the development of this HIAMP,

particularly in relation to data collection, works prioritisation and development of forward works

programmes.

Further improvement actions have been identified within this plan that are key to the ongoing

implementation of asset management principles and as such are seen as a priority within the

service.

Leeds City Council is committed to improving the management and maintenance of its highway

infrastructure and is keen to engage all parties in progress towards providing a safe, accessible,

economically viable, environmentally friendly and well maintained asset.

5.2 Future Developments / Improvement Actions

Improvement actions necessary for an asset management approach may have varying impacts on

current business processes and/or the organisation’s culture. Some may take considerable time

and/or additional funding to implement before finally reaping the benefits, while others can be

introduced more easily with little adverse effect on current systems or procedures, giving some

early “quick-wins”.

The following topics are included within the review.

• Adequacy of inventory information/data.

• Adequacy of condition information/data.

• Review levels of service and consult with stakeholders.

• Continuous review of the forward works programmes.

• Review investment strategy.

• Continue to review risk assessment strategy.

Highway Infrastructure Asset Management Plan - Leeds Infrastructure Asset... · the assets in a...

Documents

Transcript of Highway Infrastructure Asset Management Plan - Leeds Infrastructure Asset... · the assets in a...