No disclosures of interest were made at the commencement of the meeting, however, during the course of the item relating to local highway maintenance (minute 26), Councillor Jamil disclosed in the interests of transparency that she was employed by a local firm of solicitors.

Recommended –

That the minutes of the meetings held on 16 June and 21 July 2016 be signed as a correct record (previously circulated).

(Tracey Sugden – 01274 434287)

Resolved –

That the minutes of the meetings held on 16 June and 21 July 2016 be signed as a correct record.

(Access to Information Procedure Rules – Part 3B of the Constitution)

Reports and background papers for agenda items may be inspected by contacting the person shown after each agenda item.  Certain reports and background papers may be restricted. 

Any request to remove the restriction on a report or background paper should be made to the relevant Strategic Director or Assistant Director whose name is shown on the front page of the report. 

If that request is refused, there is a right of appeal to this meeting. 

Please contact the officer shown below in advance of the meeting if you wish to appeal. 

(Tracey Sugden - 01274 4287)

There were no appeals submitted by the public to review decisions to restrict documents.

(Access to Information Procedure Rules – Part 3B of the Constitution)

To hear questions from electors within the District on any matter this is the responsibility of the Committee. 

Questions must be received in writing by the City Solicitor in Room 112, City Hall, Bradford, BD1 1HY, by mid-day on Tuesday 13 September 2016.

(Tracey Sugden - 01274 434287)

There were no questions submitted by the public.

The report of the Strategic Director of Regeneration (Document “K”) details how the service currently manages the Local Highway Maintenance (LHM) function and allocates resources.

It also updates the committee with regard to current operations being undertaken on the network and the indicative costs of works undertaken in the current financial year.

Recommended -

(1)       That the current operational methods adopted for Local Highway Maintenance be noted.

(2)       That the indicative costs to date for the current financial year be noted.

(3)       That the list of current and proposed CAT3/4 works as shown in Appendices 5 and 6 be approved.

                                                                        (Andrew Whelan 01274 434409)

The report of the Strategic Director of Regeneration (Document “K”) detailed how the service currently managed the Local Highway Maintenance (LHM) function and allocated resources.

It also updated the Committee with regard to current operations being undertaken on the network and the indicative costs of works undertaken in the current financial year.

The Principal Engineer made a detailed presentation in respect of the report, following which Members of the Committee asked questions and made comments as set out below:-

·        There had previously been a serious problem in respect of bogus insurance claims; what was the current situation ?

·        How did the Council quantify how well it was doing ?

·        Was there any evidence of fabricated claims ?

·        Was there still a practice of surface dressing roads ?

·        How did the Council communicate with the public ?

·        Was it correct that Leeds Road appeared within appendix 5 ?

·        How did Bradford’s expenditure compare with other West Yorkshire Authorities ?

·        How did unexpected circumstances affect the area ?

·        Was it expected that maintenance works could be completed in full ?

·        Would the available funding cover all necessary gully cleaning works ?

·        Some gullies in Bradford East had not been cleaned for up to four years

·        Was there a programme of inspection ?

·        How much did it cost to clean a single gully ?

·        Gully cleaning problems were of concern as it could result in flooding so it must be a priority

·        Was enforcement in respect of parking on pavements undertaken, especially where it led to broken flagstones ?

·         Was there still an issue of the public pouring liquid waste into gullies ?

·        There was an extremely good programme in the area where waste oil and fat was collected and used as bio-fuel. This could be signposted for others to emulate.

·        How were problems in respect of trees on pavements and highways dealt with ?

·        Was there still a problem with theft of drain covers etc ?

In response the Principal Engineer and Highways Maintenance Operations Manager advised that:-

·        New regulations had limited the level of damages which could be claimed which had resulted in fewer claims being submitted. The Council was still working to reduce that number even further, this was assisted by a good level of revenue budget being maintained which meant repairs could be undertaken in a timely fashion.

·        The Council worked in partnership with the other West Yorkshire Authorities and met regularly as a group to discuss new measures for repairs. Bradford was very proactive in terms of patch repairs on potholes

·         Although fabricated claims were still an issue, their number had reduced as the new regulations meant it was no longer a lucrative practice

·        Restorative treatments such a surface dressing were still utilised as they were a very useful solution to the issue of ageing in respect of roads

·        The public was in regular contact with the department and responses were provided within five days via updates on the Customer Service System.

·        Leeds Road appeared in  ...  view the full minutes text for item 26.