Meeting documents

Return to Agenda

ITEM CA15

CABINET – 20 SEPTEMBER 2005

AGENCY ARRANGEMENTS FOR MINOR HIGHWAY FUNCTIONS

Report by Head of Transport

1. Various agency arrangements exist with district, town and parish councils whereby they carry out minor highway functions such as grass cutting and vegetation clearance by agreement with the County Council as local highway authority. This report seeks to update the existing arrangements.

Background

2. Historically there have been two kinds of arrangements: those negotiated with individual authorities (mainly district councils) enabling them to discharge a range of specific functions as agents for the County Council; and framework arrangements (designed mainly for town and parish councils), which enable a council to request the right to discharge one or more functions from a standard list, subject to such detailed terms as may be considered appropriate in each case. These arrangements are of long standing. By virtue of regulations made under the Local Government Act 2000 all agency arrangements came to an end on 5 November 2001, when the County Council’s "executive arrangements" came into effect but at its first meeting, on 6 November 2001, the Executive approved the making of new agency arrangements in similar terms.
3. The standard list for the framework arrangements for parish and town councils, as renewed by the Executive in 2001, comprised the removal of unauthorised signs and the treatment of weeds on the highway. The specific agreements with three of the district councils include provision for verge maintenance (in Oxford, this activity falls within the City Council’s maintenance functions under the claiming arrangements for unclassified road maintenance) but did not cater for the removal of unauthorised signs.
4. Because some of the arrangements are of considerable age and documentation is scant there is currently a lack of clarity regarding who does what and on what terms and it is considered important that we formalise the arrangements and seek consistency of operation by the introduction of standard agreements. At the same time it would be helpful to amend the standard list to enable verge maintenance and other minor highway maintenance activities to be undertaken on request by any district, town or parish council; and also for the removal of unauthorised signs to be undertaken by district councils as well as town and parish councils.

Proposal

5. Legal Services have accordingly drawn up separate proforma agreements for:
   
   

1. the removal of unauthorised signs; and
2. grass cutting and weed clearance.
   
   

Copies are in the Members’ Resource Centre. The intention is that other minor highway maintenance activities could be added to the list of delegated functions if required.

6. The agreement for the removal of unauthorised signs delegates powers but does not confer responsibility. District, town and parish councils would choose whether or not to exercise the powers (subject to the terms of the agreement) and would do so without remuneration from the County Council.
7. It is not proposed to delegate the power to prosecute. In order to ensure consistency of approach in accordance with commitments contained in the County Council’s enforcement policy, the County Council would retain the sole to right of prosecution but where appropriate to do so would support an agent authority by the use of such powers. The district councils have various independent powers of prosecution.
8. The agreement for minor highway maintenance places an obligation on the district, town or parish council to perform the delegated function to at least a specified minimum standard so as to discharge the duty to maintain, which falls on the County Council as local highway authority by virtue of Section 41 of the Highways Act 1980. The minimum standard would be that which the County Council would provide if it performed the function itself and payment would be made to the agent council equal to the cost the County Council would otherwise incur in performing that function.
9. However, subject to this minimum requirement, the district, town or parish council will have full discretion as to how it undertakes maintenance: in particular it may undertake grass cutting to a much higher frequency than the County Council standard.
10. In all cases the agent council would need to comply with relevant County policies, guidance and directions and would be required to indemnify the County Council against claims arising from any act or omission on the agent’s part. The arrangement may be terminated on 3 months’ notice.

Environmental Implications

11. The reason for district, town and parish councils requesting delegated powers for highway functions is invariably to build on the service provided by the County Council by increasing the resource dedicated to service delivery. The environment would therefore benefit from that increased resource.

Financial Implications

12. There would be no direct cost implications for the County Council and administration would be carried out within the existing staff resource.

RECOMMENDATIONS

13. The Cabinet is RECOMMENDED:

1. without prejudice to specific agency arrangements between the County Council and individual councils, to approve the revised framework for agency arrangements with district, town and parish councils for minor highway functions as set out in the report;
2. to authorise the Director for Environment & Economy to negotiate, implement and administer specific agency arrangements with individual district, town and parish councils, subject to such detailed terms as he and the Solicitor to the Council may consider appropriate in each case.

STEVE HOWELL
Head of Transport

Background papers: Nil

Contact Officer Brian Fell Tel 01865 815083

September 2005

Return to TOP