Strategic Consultation on Works on Scottish Roads - April 2013

5. CO-ORDINATION OF WORKS

Introduction

5.1 The NRSWA provides a legislative framework for all 'works in roads' in Scotland. This includes road works by utility companies and works for road purposes by roads authorities - to the extent that these must be co-ordinated by the roads authorities. The aim is to balance the statutory rights of roads authorities and utility companies to carry out works, with the expectation of road users that disruption from works shall be kept to a minimum.

5.2 A Roads Authorities and Utilities Committee (Scotland) [RAUC(S)] Working Group chaired by the Commissioner has recently reviewed and re-drafted the Code of Practice for Co-ordination, consolidating all existing advice and providing a more user friendly guide for those with responsibility for the planning, co-ordination and management of works in roads. This is the core document for anyone involved in organising and managing road works.

5.3 The Code of Practice for Co-ordination is intended to help roads authorities carry out their duty to co-ordinate works in the road, under section 118 of the NRSWA, and utility companies to fulfil their duty to co-operate in this process, under section 119 of the NRSWA. In undertaking these duties to co-ordinate and co-operate, the roads authorities and utility companies are required to undertake all of their duties under the NRSWA and supporting regulations and to apply any guidance provided in any other codes of practice issued or approved under the NRSWA or such practice as appears to the Commissioner to be desirable.

5.4 A consultation on the revised Code of Practice was undertaken recently, closing on 12 October 2012. A copy of the consultation version can be found on the Transport Scotland website.

5.5 In reviewing the Code, the Working Group identified a number of more technical issues where it was felt that the existing legislation could be a barrier to improving co-ordination and where new or revised legislation could improve the situation.

Advance Notice Periods

5.6 The Commissioner is aware that individuals within some roads authorities and utility companies are of the view that the 3 month advance notice period for major works is too long and can in some situations be perceived as a barrier to good co-ordination. Some individuals also question the need for advance notice on non-traffic sensitive roads as the impacts of the works on traffic and the inconvenience caused are not likely to be significant. There would still be a requirement to place a notice of expected starting date at least 7 days before the works commence and it has been suggested that this could be sufficient to allow co-ordination.

5.7 The Commissioner considers that the three month notice period for major works is appropriate in all situations, that it aids co-ordination and that the early start procedure provides flexibility in appropriate circumstances.

Views Sought

18 What are your views on the 3 month advance notice period for major works?

19 Do you consider that the requirement to provide advance notice for works on non traffic sensitive roads should be removed? If you do, what benefits do you consider this would bring?

Early Start Procedure

5.8 An early start procedure has been created and endorsed by the Commissioner to provide flexibility to allow works to start without providing the statutory minimum notice period for an 'advance notice' and in some circumstances for a 'notice of expected starting date'. This means that works can be brought forward in situations where there is no good reason to delay them. The road works community agrees that this is required to manage and co-ordinate works effectively and has adopted the procedure into RAUC(S) Advice Note 17, with this procedure being introduced into the draft revised Co-ordination Code of Practice. This means however that the statutory requirement for the provision of advance notices within prescribed minimum notice periods, as set out in regulations, is not met when the early start procedure is used.

5.9 Although the previous Commissioner reported that to date the voluntary use of the non-statutory RAUC(S) Advice Note 17 had worked well and has been accepted by both roads authorities and utility companies, his opinion was that as the procedure will now form part of a statutory code of practice, its use should be placed on a statutory footing.

Views Sought

20 Should the early start procedure be a statutory requirement?

Urgent Works

5.10 The draft revised Code of Practice for Co-ordination now proposes that under normal circumstances it would be expected that urgent works would be commenced as soon as is reasonably practicable and in any event within hours of the need being identified, with an absolute maximum period of noon the following day. This has been introduced because of concerns regarding proposed works being entered on to the SRWR categorising them as being urgent but with the actual works not being commenced for days or even weeks.

5.11 By definition there should be a level of urgency in starting such works and it is proposed that the maximum period of noon the following day should become a statutory requirement.

Views Sought

21 What are your views on making noon the following day a statutory requirement for commencing urgent works?

Roads Authority Noticing Obligations

5.12 The rules under which roads authorities enter information on to the SRWR differ from those under which utility companies operate. The differences are outlined at Annex C. Roads authorities are not presently required to enter on to the SRWR details of all expected starting dates, urgent works and emergency works. There is also no time limit set within which the completion of works requires to be entered. Although the roads authorities have agreed to operate in the same way as utility companies with regard to the information placed on the SRWR and its timing, it is proposed that they should also be under the same statutory obligations.

5.13 Having a situation where roads authorities are under the same obligations to enter information on to the SRWR will remove any uncertainties as to what is required and will strengthen the position of the Commissioner when considering the performance of roads authorities.

Views Sought

22 Should legislation be introduced to ensure that roads authorities are required to provide the same information as utility companies and to the same timescales?

Minor Works Involving No or Minimal Excavation

5.14 Regulations are already in place which allow utility companies the flexibility of not requiring to place notices for works involving no or minimal excavation on non-traffic sensitive roads. [Regulation 7(3) of the Road Works (Scottish Road Works Register, Notices, Directions and Designations) (Scotland) Regulations 2008]. The wording of this regulation would suggest that the original policy intent was that it should encompass both utility companies and roads authorities. However the exact wording does not reflect this intent.

5.15 In February 2010 the then Commissioner issued an Advice Paper stating that until such time as the appropriate legislation can be promoted and brought into force, he was content that it would be appropriate for roads authorities to operate on the same basis as utility companies. The revised Code of Practice for Co-ordination reflects this advice, and it is proposed that regulations are introduced.

Views Sought

23 Should regulations be introduced to allow roads authorities the flexibility around placing notices for works involving no or minimal excavation on non-traffic sensitive roads?

Actual Start Notices

5.16 Although there is currently no statutory obligation on roads authorities or utility companies to place notices on to the Scottish Road Works Register when works commence, the road works community has recognised the value of "actual start" notices as a co-ordination tool and they have formed part of the existing Code of Practice for Co-ordination for some time and are again included within the draft revised version. It is proposed that entering a notice when works actually commence should become a legal requirement.

5.17 As well as the co-ordination benefits to roads authorities and utility companies of being aware that works are under way, there are also significant potential benefits for third party organisations and the public to know that works have actually commenced.

5.18 The draft revised Code requires that actual start notices should be issued by noon the following day after works commence. Although this appears to be appropriate to allow general co-ordination to be undertaken, it does mean there is a time lag and reduces the value of the information for use by roads authorities in say, adjusting their traffic signal timings, by the public for journey planning or bus companies in relation to the effect on their timetables. This is an issue particular to traffic sensitive roads.

Views Sought

24 Should regulations be introduced to require roads authorities and utility companies to enter actual start notices on to the Scottish Road Works Register?

25 Is the current requirement for actual start notices to be lodged by noon the following day for all works in roads, including traffic sensitive routes, acceptable? Please can you explain your answer.

Works Closed Notices

5.19 The current legislation requires a utility company to place a works closed notice by the end of the next working day on completion of their works. (It is proposed at 5.12 that this also becomes a roads authority requirement). In effect, if a works is closed early in the morning, then the best part of 2 working days can elapse before a works closed notice requires to be entered.

5.20 As with actual start notices, although this appears to be appropriate to allow general co-ordination to be undertaken, it does mean there is a time lag and reduces the value of the information for use by roads authorities in say adjusting their traffic signal timings, by the public for journey planning or bus companies in relation to the effect on their timetables. This is an issue particular to traffic sensitive roads.

Views Sought

26 Is the current requirement for works closed notices to be lodged by the end of the next working day a reasonable period? What alternative period would you propose for traffic sensitive roads and what are the advantages or disadvantages?

Validity Periods

5.21 The current legislation states that when a 'notice of expected starting date' is placed by a utility company, depending on the type of works and whether or not the road is traffic sensitive, the company has a period of up to seven working days from the expected start date given for the works to actually commence on site. These validity periods do not currently apply to roads authorities, however the revised Code of Practice for Co-ordination states that they should apply, to provide a level playing field of requirements between road authorities and utility companies.

5.22 The current legislation relating to validity periods was part of the framework for co-ordinating works 20 years ago when, at best, information was being exchanged by fax. Given that the flexibility now provided by the SRWR allows proposed works dates to be easily revised at the press of a button, these extensive validity periods are considered to be far too long and it is proposed that they be shortened to a maximum of 2 days and apply to both utility companies and roads authorities.

5.23 It is considered that this would aid co-ordination by giving greater certainty as to when works will actually commence. It will also reduce the extent of dead time within the SRWR e.g. currently works of 5 working days with a validity period of 7 days will effectively "book" a 12 day window in the SRWR. With a 2 day validity period the "booked" time will be reduced to a 7 day window.

Views Sought

27 Should we reduce the validity period to a maximum of 2 days and should it apply to both utility companies and roads authorities alike? If you consider that a different validity period would be appropriate, please state the period and provide the reasons for your view.

Duration of Works

5.24 Roads authorities have powers to give directions to utility companies with regard to the timing of works, but have no powers to issue directions as to the duration of works where they consider that the period proposed is longer than required. Roads authorities do discuss such issues with utility companies but have no powers to require the proposed period to be revised before the works commence. They can only use their powers under section 125 of NRSWA once works have commenced and they have evidence that works are not being undertaken with all such dispatch as is reasonably practical.

5.25 The Commissioner considers that there might be merit in giving roads authorities powers to challenge the proposed durations of works and impose maximum periods within which the works must be completed if they consider the period proposed to be excessive.

Views Sought

28 Should roads authorities be provided with statutory powers to impose maximum durations for works on utility companies?

Embargoes

5.26 RAUC(S) Advice Note 20 published in October 2009 provides advice on roads authority embargoes on works in roads. This advice has been incorporated into the draft revised Code of Practice for Co-ordination. Part of the advice relates to voluntary embargoes where the roads authority seeks a voluntary agreement with the utility companies to place an embargo based on economic factors rather than because of potential significant traffic disruption. This is mainly related to the pre-Christmas and New Year periods in city and town centres and around shopping centres. It is proposed that this situation be regularised and that roads authorities might be given statutory powers to impose such embargoes on utility company works.

Views Sought

29 Should roads authorities be given statutory powers to impose embargoes on works for reasons other than traffic disruption?

Definition of "working day"

5.27 The definition of working day at section 157(2) of NRSWA includes a definition for bank holiday exclusions. Given that many organisations now do not take bank holidays and others use local holidays, the Scottish road works community has agreed that the following definition be used.

"Working day (regulation 2(1) of SI 2008 No88), which is a day other than a Saturday, Sunday or the public holidays for Christmas Day, Boxing Day, New Year's Day and the day following New Year's Day; and a notice given after 16:30 on a working day is to be treated as given on the next working day."

5.28 The importance of the definition is that the time periods relating to providing notice of works are based on working days. The above definition is included in the revised version of the Code of Practice for Co-ordination. It is proposed that regulations be introduced to reflect the revised definition of working day currently being used.

Views Sought

30 Do you agree with the definition of a working day given above?