Doncaster Council Permit Scheme Evaluation 2015 …...2 Table of Contents 1 Executive Summary 3 2...
24
1 passqw Doncaster Council Permit Scheme Evaluation 2015-2018
Transcript of Doncaster Council Permit Scheme Evaluation 2015 …...2 Table of Contents 1 Executive Summary 3 2...
1
passqw
Doncaster Council
Permit Scheme Evaluation 2015-2018
2
Table of Contents
1 Executive Summary 3
2 Introduction 3
3 Objectives of the Yorkshire Common Permit Scheme for Doncaster MBC 4
4 Fee Structure 4
5 Cost and Benefits 5
6 Evaluation of Scheme 6
6.1 PIs 6
6.2 HAUC England KPIs 6
6.3 Authority Measures 6
7 Performance Indicators 7
7.1 PI1 The Number of Permit and Permit Variations Applications 7
7.2 PI2 and PI3 The number of permit applications granted and the number of permit applications refused
8
7.3 PI3 The Number of Approved Revised Durations 8
7.4 PI4 The Number of Occurrences of Reducing the Application Period 9
8 HAUC England KPI Measures 10
8.1 TPI1 – Works Phases Started (Base Data) 10
8.2 TPI2 – Works Phases Completed (Base Data) 12
8.3 TPI3 – Days of Occupancy Phases Completed 13
8.4 TPI4 – Average Duration of Works 14
8.5 TPI5 – Works Phases Completed After The Reasonable Period 16
8.6 TP16 – Number of deemed permit applications (not included under Geoplace Figures)
17
8.7 TPI7 – Number of Phase One Permanent Registrations 18
9 Authority Measures 19
9.1 AM 1 – Average duration of works by permit type 19
9.2 AM2 – Inspections 20
9.3 AM 3 – Days of Disruption Saved/Number of collaborative works 20
9.4 AM 4 – Response Code – Broken Down by Promoter 21
9.5 AM 5 – FPNs (Permit Breaches) 21
9.6 AM 6 – Levels of Customer Enquires 23
10 Conclusion 23
10.1 Conclusions 23
10.2 Recommendations 24
3
1. Executive Summary
The Yorkshire Common Permit Scheme (YCPS) commenced operation on the 12th June 2012 in six
authority areas, Barnsley, Doncaster, Kirklees, Leeds, Rotherham and Sheffield. Three further
authorities, Bradford, Calderdale, and Wakefield (Tranche 2) commenced operation of the scheme
on 31st March 2015.
The scheme focuses attention on the strategically sensitive highway networks with the New Roads &
Street Works Act noticing rules apply on the rest of the highway network.
The report evaluates the progress of the permit scheme in meeting both the stated objectives and
parity of treatment of both works for road purposes and utility street works. In both respects the
scheme is already demonstrating successful outcomes.
The main objectives of the Scheme were to minimise delay and reduce disruption arising from works
on the highway, and to demonstrate parity of treatment amongst all works promoters.
A total of 2269 permit applications have been received for highway authority works and 14254 for
utility promoters. This equates to a split of 13.73% highway authority and 86.27% utility promoters,
with Doncaster Councils refusal rate at 17.19% and Utility refusals rate at 23.37%.
Overall the performance of the Scheme during the review period has demonstrated that it is
meeting the objectives of the scheme. The scheme has allowed the authority the tools and
resources to effectively coordinate the highway network and reduce both the number of days of
highway occupation together with the amount of disruption caused by street works and road works.
2. Introduction
The Traffic management Act 2004 (TMA), Part 3 Sections 32 to 39, and the Traffic Management
Permit Scheme (England) Regulations 2007 make provision for Permit Schemes to be introduced in
England. The Yorkshire Common Permit Scheme came into effect in Doncaster Council on 12th June
2012, and was revised in accordance with the 2015 Amendment Regulations.
This report is the ‘Year 6’ evaluation of the operation of the Permit Scheme in the Doncaster Council
area. The time period covered by this report is 12 June 2015 to 11th June 2018. A number of the
reports included are produced on a monthly or quarterly basis, and so in these instances the
reporting period has been extended to include 2015 Q1 (April to June) to 2018 Q1 (April to June.)
The additional data will have minimal impact on the results.
Under the YCPS, registerable activities on roads that are reinstatement category 0, 1 or 2, or on
category 3 or 4 streets that are traffic-sensitive, require a permit; activities on other streets continue
to follow the NRSWA ‘notification system’ and are outside of the scope of the YCPS.
4
3. Objectives of the Yorkshire Common Permit Scheme for Doncaster Council
The objectives of the Permit Scheme for Doncaster Council are set out in a ‘Supplementary
Information’ document which can be found on the council’s website.
The objectives in summary are:
Minimizing delay and reducing disruption to road users arising from road and street works
activity.
Ensuring parity between promoters of street works and works for road purposes.
To protect the structure of the street and the integrity of apparatus in it.
To encourage proactive rather than reactive attitudes to activities by promoters.
To ensure safety for those using, living or working on the street, including those engaged in
activities controlled by the Permit Scheme.
To improve activity planning by all promoters.
To help improve public transport efficiencies.
To reduce the disruption caused by street and road works and to improve journey time
reliability.
To encourage works promoters to develop innovative working practices to reduce the time
and road space their works require so that the disruption the cause is reduced to a
minimum.
4. Fee Structure
The Traffic Management Permit Scheme (England) (Amendment) Regulations 2015 require that the
permit authority shall give consideration to whether the fee structure needs to be changed in light of
any surplus or deficit;
Doncaster Council is committed to undertake an annual review of the permit fees, and make any
necessary adjustments to the subsequent years fees. Since the commencement of the scheme, no
adjustments to the fee levels have been made.
The permit fees for Doncaster Council and Department for Transport (DfT) Maximum fee levels are
set out in Table 1 Below:
Road Category 0 -2 or Traffic-sensitive
Doncaster Borough
Council Permit Fee
Maximum allowable fee
(DfT)
Provisional
Advance
Authorisation
£91 £105
5
Major works –
over 10 days
and all major
works
requiring a
traffic
regulation
order.
£211 £240
Major works –
4 to 10 days.
£109 £130
Major works –
up to 3 days
£64 £65
Standard
activity permit
£109 £130
Minor activity
permit
£64 £65
Immediate
activity permit
£59 £60
Table 1 - Fee Levels
5. Cost and Benefits
Based upon this evaluation of the sixth full year of operation of the YCPS, Doncaster Council does
not propose to increase or reduce its current level of permit fees.
The last 3 years have seen a relatively stable income over expenditure leaving a rolling excess
balance of £3191.24 over the full 6 year period of scheme operation. This balance will be closely
monitored over the next year to evaluate if the fee levels remain fit for purpose.
The Traffic Management Permit Scheme (England) (Amendment) Regulations 2015 require that the
permit authority also shall give consideration to whether the permit scheme is meeting key
performance indicators where these are set out in the Guidance. This report contains performance
indicators and authority measures to which Doncaster Council has provided data to evidence that
the authority is meeting key performance indicators and the objectives as set out in the YCPS.
6
6. Evaluation of the Scheme
The Statutory Guidance for Highway Authority Permit Schemes October 2015 states that (Regulation
16A) authorities must evaluate their permit scheme every 12 months of operation for the first 3
years of operation and then every 3 years thereafter.
This report is the fourth evaluation covering years four to six of the scheme and is specific to
Doncaster Borough Council, it evaluates the progress of the permit scheme in meeting the objectives
and parity of treatment for both street works promoters and works for road purposes.
This evaluation report includes details of scheme-specific performance indicators (PI’s), HAUC
England KPIs, and additional authority measures (AMs) that reflect the business case and objectives
put forward in the scheme submission documentation.
6.1 Scheme Specific Performance Indicators
PI1 The number of permit and permit variation applications received, the number of
granted and the number refused; excluding any applications that are subsequently
withdrawn; broken down by promoter.
PI2 The number of permit applications granted as a percentage of the total applications
made.
PI3 The number of permit applications refused as a percentage of the total applications
made.
6.2 HAUC (England) Key Performance Indicators
The HAUC (England) KPIs are set out in Annex A to the Statutory Guidance for Permit Street Schemes
(October 2015), and are based upon the TMA Performance Indicators (TPIs) collated by Geoplace.
The HAUC (England) KPIs included in this evaluation report are:
TPI 1 Works Phases Started
TPI 2 Works Phases Completed
TPI 3 Days of Occupancy Phases Completed
TPI 4 Average Duration of Works
TPI 5 Works Phases Completed after the reasonable period.
TPI 6 Number of Phase One Permanent Registrations.
TPI 7 Number of Phase One Permanent Registrations
6.3 Authority Measures
AM 1 Average Duration of Works by Permit Type
AM 2 Permit Compliance Inspections
AM2 Days of Disruption Saved / Number of Collaborative Works
AM4 Response Code – Broken Down by Promoter
AM5 FPNs (Permit Breaches)
7
7. Performance Indicators
7.1 PI1 The number of permits and permit variation applications
This performance indicator lists;
The total number of permits and permit variation applications received,
The number of applications granted as a percentage of the total applications made
The number of applications refused as a percentage of the total applications made
The table below shows a breakdown of permit applications received granted and refused for the 4th
to 6th year of operation in Doncaster.
7.1.1 Results
Works Promoter Granted % Granted Refused % Refused Total
Cadent Gas 1692 84.10% 320 15.90% 2012
Highway England 3 100.00% 0 0.00% 3
BT 2015 76.35% 624 23.65% 2639
Doncaster 1879 82.81% 390 17.19% 2269
NPG 1894 88.46% 247 11.54% 2141
Western Power 4 80.00% 1 20.00% 5
National Grid Electric 9 90.00% 1 10.00% 10
Vodafone 6 100.00% 0 0.00% 6
Network Rail 359 95.99% 15 4.01% 374
Virgin Media 1260 80.25% 310 19.75% 1570
O2 38 92.68% 3 7.32% 41
Century Link UK 5 71.43% 2 28.57% 7
Romec 3 100.00% 0 0.00% 3
GTC 29 93.55% 2 6.45% 31
Orange 21 95.45% 1 4.55% 22
Zayo 3 100.00% 0 0.00% 3
T-Mobile 34 87.18% 5 12.82% 39
ES Pipelines 1 100.00% 0 0.00% 1
Northern Gas Networks
168 82.76% 35 17.24% 203
Fulcrum Pipelines 22 61.11% 14 38.89% 36
GEO 5 55.56% 4 44.44% 9
City Fibre 5 100.00% 0 0.00% 5
Harlaxton 42 85.71% 7 14.29% 49
Anglian Water 4 57.14% 3 42.86% 7
Severn Trent Ltd 79 84.04% 15 15.96% 94
Yorkshire Water 3122 64.48% 1720 35.52% 4842
8
South Yorkshire PTE 100 98.04% 2 1.96% 102
Totals 12802 77.48% 3721 22.52% 16523
Table 2 - Permits Granted / Refused
7.1.2 Analysis
The following consideration must be noted in relation to this data; each application has an
appropriate response period which means that the number of applications received in any one
period does not correspond to the permits granted and refused within that same period. In other
words, a permit application received in one period may be responded to within the next period. This
means that there are a number of permit applications where the status cannot be determined.
Table 2 demonstrates that each works promoter’s permit applications are treated on an individual
basis and assessed on the quality of information provided. Each works promoter approaches the
permitting of works differently which can be demonstrated by the variance in the percentage of
applications that are granted or refused.
7.2 PI2 The number of conditions applied by condition type.
Unfortunately the reporting structure required to produce this data is currently not operational.
Doncaster Council is addressing the issue and is hopeful this report will be available for the next
annual review.
7.3 PI3 The Number of approved revised durations.
This will be measures by promoter and shown as:
The total number of permits granted
The number of requests for revised durations shown as a percentage of permits issued
The number of agreed revised durations as a percentage of revised durations applied for
7.3.1 Results
Organisation Total Total Total %
Sent Rejected Rejected
Cadent Gas 184 7 3.80%
Highways England 0 0 NA
BT 98 1 1.02%
Cable & Wireless 0 0 NA
Doncaster 211 0 0.00%
Northern Powergrid 173 4 2.31%
Western Power Distribution 0 0 NA
National Grid Electric 0 0 NA
Vodafone 0 0 NA
Kingston Communications 0 0 NA
Network Rail 13 0 0.00%
9
Virgin Media 20 1 5.00%
Telefonica O2 0 0 NA
Century Link 3 0 0.00%
Dept for Transport 0 0 NA
Independent Pipelines 0 0 NA
Romec 0 0 NA
Arqiva 1 0 0.00%
GTC 6 1 16.67%
Orange 0 0 NA
Zayo 0 0 NA
Tycom 0 0 NA
T-Mobile 2 0 0.00%
ES Pipelines 0 0 NA
Energetics Elec 6 0 0.00%
Northern Gas Networks 7 0 0.00%
Fulcrum Pipelines 4 1 25.00%
GEO 0 0 NA
ESP Elec 0 0 NA
Energetics Gas 0 0 NA
H2O Networks 0 0 NA
Thales UK 0 0 NA
City Fibre 0 0 NA
Harlaxton Energy Networks 11 0 0.00%
Arqiva Ltd 0 0 NA
Anglian Water 0 0 NA
Severn Trent Water 5 0 0.00%
Yorkshire Water 162 4 2.47%
South Yorkshire PTE 0 0 NA
Totals 906 19 2.10% Table 3 - The Number of Approved Revised Durations
7.4 P14 The number of occurrences of reducing the application period
The number of permit applications granted and refused as a percentage of the total applications
made is shown in Table 4. The information shows a comparison of the numbers granted and refused
for the Doncaster Councils own works compared to the number granted and refused for other works
promoters. In additions to this data the table also shows the number and percentage of early start
requests along with early start requests that were not agreed, split between Doncaster Councils own
works and other works promoters.
6.4.1 Results
Description Authority Percentage Utilities Percentage
Permits / Variations Granted 1879 82.81% 10923 76.63%
Permits / Variations Refused 390 17.19% 3331 23.37%
Total Variations Summary 2269 13.73% 14254 86.27%
Number of Early Start Requests 445 36.75% 766 63.25%
10
Number of Early Starts with Agreement
89 37.08% 151 62.92%
Table 4 - Permits Granted & Refused
6.4.2 Analysis
This Measure was considered to be in relation to the number of times promoters were allowed by
Doncaster Council to start their works without having to comply with the minimum permit
application lead-in period, commonly known as an early start agreement.
The YCPS provides a framework for Doncaster Council to treat all activates and activity promoters
covered by the scheme on an equal basis. The above data shows that largely to be the case. Early
start requests are considered individually on their own merits by Doncaster Council and are never
refused without a valid reason.
Table 4 displays that a total of 2269 permit applications have been received for highway authority
works and 14254 for utility promoters. This equates to a split of 13.73% highway authority and
86.27% utility promoters. A higher percentage of utility works applications (23.37%) are refused or
modified in comparison with highway authority works (17.19%).
The percentage refusal rate has decreased significantly since the previous report which showed
Doncaster Councils refusal rate at 17.19% and Utility refusals at 23.37%. This is mainly due to the
increase in discussions prior to the permit being submitted and better co-ordination of works.
Another reason behind the drop in refusals can be attributed to the adoption of the HAUC (England)
advice note on Standard Response Codes which is helping deliver a consistent approach nationally.
8. HAUC England KPI Measures
This section outlines the Permit Indicators (KPI) contained as Annex A within the Statutory Guidance
for Highway Authority Permit Schemes.
These indicators for permit schemes are additional to the general TMA Performance Indicators (TPIs)
which are already being produced.
8.1 TPI1 – Works Phases Started (Base Data)
Quarter Minor Standard Major Immediate Urgent
Immediate Emergency
Total
2015-16 Q1 298 94 68 97 17 574
2015-16 Q2 286 66 68 122 17 559
2015-16 Q3 294 71 34 121 32 552
2015-16 Q4 266 102 64 169 43 644
2016-17 Q1 296 90 63 125 15 589
2016-17 Q2 235 46 45 116 28 470
2016-17 Q3 242 66 25 108 27 468
2016-17 Q4 309 81 45 125 35 595
11
2017-18 Q1 365 113 67 116 31 692
2017-18 Q2 363 113 59 113 34 682
2017-18 Q3 322 83 37 156 37 635
2017-18 Q4 266 102 64 169 43 644
2018-19 Q1 307 65 76 176 30 654
Total 0 0 0 0 0 0 Table 5 - Works Phases Started
Figure 1 - Phases Started by Works Category
The data demonstrates overall volumes of works across all works categories have remained at a
consistent level throughout the 3 year evaluation period, with the biggest swing evidenced within
the volume of minor works taking place on the network between Q2 2016-17 and Q2 2017-18 of
over 100 additional phases started. Since that peak levels have remained relatively stable.
12
Figure 2 - Total Number of Works Phases Started
The number of total works phases started on Doncasters Highway Network has seen an increase in
volume since Q3 2016-17 which is due to an increase in major works renew and new build schemes
carried out by Virgin Media and Cadent Gas.
8.2 TPI2 – Works Phases Completed (Base Data)
Quarter Minor Standard Major Immediate Urgent
Immediate Emergency
Total
2015-16 Q1 318 91 51 98 15 573
2015-16 Q2 292 73 79 119 16 579
2015-16 Q3 314 72 51 119 34 590
2015-16 Q4 266 100 60 171 42 639
2016-17 Q1 299 93 59 130 14 595
2016-17 Q2 235 54 43 114 27 473
2016-17 Q3 241 66 30 109 28 474
2016-17 Q4 309 80 40 123 34 586
2017-18 Q1 363 115 66 112 32 688
2017-18 Q2 366 107 58 118 37 686
2017-18 Q3 334 91 46 152 36 659
2017-18 Q4 266 100 60 171 42 639
2018-19 Q1 303 66 63 179 29 640
Total Table 6 - Works Phases Completed
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800N
um
be
r o
f W
ork
s P
has
es
Quarter
Total Number of Works Phases Started
13
Figure 3- Number of Phases Completed
A slight uptrend in the volume of phases completed has been identified which is predominately
following the same trend as the volume of phases started. The figures for phases completed are
slightly higher than the figures for phases started which may be attributed to the on-going work
Doncaster Councils is carrying out with all works promoters to correctly close down historic works.
8.3 TPI3 – Days of Occupancy Phases Completed
Quarter Minor Standard Major Immediate Urgent
Immediate Emergency
Total
2015-16 Q1 1533 1009 1961 1036 625 6164
2015-16 Q2 1469 1146 2020 511 1246 6392
2015-16 Q3 1303 978 1397 1530 662 5870
2015-16 Q4 1342 1485 1559 1273 567 6226
2016-17 Q1 1366 1079 1350 1572 739 6106
2016-17 Q2 1198 819 43 1579 788 4427
2016-17 Q3 1200 962 1008 879 1640 5689
2016-17 Q4 1549 1007 1254 706 1676 6192
2017-18 Q1 1693 1609 1606 1161 684 6753
2017-18 Q2 1867 1558 1322 1147 481 6375
2017-18 Q3 1635 1288 1336 1023 491 5773
2017-18 Q4 1342 1485 1559 1273 567 6226
2018-19 Q1 1524 1097 1724 1320 561 6226
Total 19021 15522 18139 15010 10727 78419 Table 7 - Days of Occupancy Completed
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
4002
01
5-1
6 Q
1
20
15
-16
Q2
20
15
-16
Q3
20
15
-16
Q4
20
16
-17
Q1
20
16
-17
Q2
20
16
-17
Q3
20
16
-17
Q4
20
17
-18
Q1
20
17
-18
Q2
20
17
-18
Q3
20
17
-18
Q4
20
18
-19
Q1
No
. of
Wo
rk P
has
es
Quarter
No. of Phases Completed by Works Category
Minor No.
Standard No.
Major No.
ImmediateUrgent No.
ImmediateEmergencyNo.
14
Figure 4 - Days of Occupancy Phases Completed
Figure 5 - Total Days of Occupancy
Total days of occupancy have returned to normal levels following an downward swing of 1000 seen
over a full 3 quarter period between 2015 and 2017. The down turn is due to a decrease in works
for road purpose major works scheme within Doncaster.
8.4 TPI4 – Average Duration of Works
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
20
15
-16
Q1
20
15
-16
Q2
20
15
-16
Q3
20
15
-16
Q4
20
16
-17
Q1
20
16
-17
Q2
20
16
-17
Q3
20
16
-17
Q4
20
17
-18
Q1
20
17
-18
Q2
20
17
-18
Q3
20
17
-18
Q4
20
18
-19
Q1
No
.of
Day
s
Quarter
Days of Occupancy Phases Completed
Minor Days
Standard Days.
Major Days
Immediate Urgent Days
Immediate Emergency Days.
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
3500
4000
4500
5000
Day
s o
f O
ccu
pan
cy
Quarter
Days of Occupancy Total Phases Completed
15
Quarter Minor Standard Major Immediate Urgent
Immediate Emergency
Total
2015-16 Q1 3.51 7.10 22.71 3.17 4.93 5.77
2015-16 Q2 2.91 12.78 21.61 14.63 3.71 7.19
2015-16 Q3 2.30 7.14 24.14 5.88 3.33 5.19
2015-16 Q4 4.85 8.44 16.80 4.06 4.02 6.27
2016-17 Q1 2.18 7.73 12.17 6.57 3.09 4.34
2016-17 Q2 1.96 9.11 11.56 3.31 22.11 5.12
2016-17 Q3 2.01 7.82 15.47 4.01 5.75 4.35
2016-17 Q4 2.20 6.80 17.63 1.14 20.32 5.34
2017-18 Q1 2.40 9.60 16.88 3.81 12.00 5.67
2017-18 Q2 5.58 11.39 34.76 12.41 3.58 8.29
2017-18 Q3 5.64 8.26 29.31 18.61 3.83 12.27
2017-18 Q4 4.85 8.44 16.80 4.06 4.02 6.27
2018-19 Q1 2.41 10.00 15.44 6.09 3.62 5.56 Table 8- Average Duration of Works
Figure 6 - Average Duration of Works per Category
16
Figure 7 - Average Duration of Works
The average duration of all works types has remained relatively stable throughout the monitoring
period, with a slight overall rise to the average durations of works since the beginning of the
monitoring period.
8.5 TPI5 – Phases Completed After the Reasonable Period
Quarter Minor Standard Major Immediate Urgent
Immediate Emergency
Average Overall
2015-16 Q1 16 5 4 2 0 27
2015-16 Q2 12 5 4 0 1 22
2015-16 Q3 9 2 2 1 1 15
2015-16 Q4 3 2 1 1 0 7
2016-17 Q1 1 4 0 0 1 6
2016-17 Q2 0 1 0 1 1 3
2016-17 Q3 3 1 1 1 3 9
2016-17 Q4 1 2 3 1 1 8
2017-18 Q1 1 2 3 1 1 8
2017-18 Q2 3 6 1 1 3 14
2017-18 Q3 6 1 1 4 0 12
2017-18 Q4 3 2 1 1 0 7
2018-19 Q1 2 4 0 2 0 8
Total Table 9 - Phases Completed After Reasonable Period
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14N
o. o
f D
ays
Quarter
Average Duration of Works
17
Figure 8 - Phases Completed After the Reasonable Period
The total number of phases completed after the reasonable period has significantly reduced over
the monitoring period and maintained a consistent level for the over the last 18 months.
8.6 TPI6 – Number of Deemed Permit Applications
Quarter Minor Standard Major Immediate Urgent
Immediate Emergency
Total
2015-16 Q1 1 0 0 0 0 1
2015-16 Q2 2 0 0 0 0 2
2015-16 Q3 0 0 0 0 0 0
2015-16 Q4 0 0 0 0 0 0
2016-17 Q1 0 0 0 0 0 0
2016-17 Q2 4 0 0 0 1 5
2016-17 Q3 0 2 0 0 0 2
2016-17 Q4 0 0 0 0 0 0
2017-18 Q1 0 0 0 0 0 0
2017-18 Q2 0 2 0 0 0 2
2017-18 Q3 2 2 3 0 2 9
2017-18 Q4 4 0 1 6 0 11
2018-19 Q1 0 3 0 2 0 5
Total 13 9 4 8 3 37 Table 10 - Number of Deemed Permit Applications
The number of deemed permits within the reporting period is very low. Doncaster Council has a
robust procedure for ensuring all permits are processed within prescribed timescales. The primary
reason for deemed permits is unplanned system outages.
0
5
10
15
20
25
30N
o. o
f D
ays
Quarters
Phases Completed After the Reasonable Period
18
8.7 TPI7 – Number of Phase One Permanent Registrations
Quarter Minor Standard Major Immediate Urgent
Immediate Emergency
Total Overall
2015-16 Q1 171 58 31 85 13 381
2015-16 Q2 185 38 28 93 11 355
2015-16 Q3 144 45 27 101 27 344
2015-16 Q4 134 71 29 136 29 399
2016-17 Q1 171 59 11 121 12 374
2016-17 Q2 126 35 11 20 86 278
2016-17 Q3 107 54 10 91 22 284
2016-17 Q4 158 63 16 107 23 367
2017-18 Q1 243 43 16 91 25 418
2017-18 Q2 224 61 27 98 28 438
2017-18 Q3 191 57 16 113 25 402
2017-18 Q4 134 71 29 136 29 399
2018-19 Q1 174 53 12 140 20 399 Table 11 - Number of Phase One Permanent Registrations
Figure 9- Number of Phase One Permanent Registrations per Category
19
Figure 10 - Number of Phase One Permanent Registrations
The number of phase one permanent registrations is demonstrating an upward trend with
approximately 58% of all works taking place on Doncaster’s highway network having a phase one
permanent registration within this 3 year monitoring period.
9. Authority Measures
These measures reflect the business case objectives specified in the Permit Scheme submission
documentation.
The following are the complementary measures Doncaster Council has used to reflect the
performance of the scheme.
9.1 AM1 – Average Duration of works by permit type
This measure reports upon the average durations of works by works category.
9.1.1 Results
Quarter Minor Standard Major Immediate Urgent
Immediate Emergency
Total
2015-16 Q1 3.51 7.10 22.71 3.17 4.93 5.77
2015-16 Q2 2.91 12.78 21.61 14.63 3.71 7.19
2015-16 Q3 2.30 7.14 24.14 5.88 3.33 5.19
2015-16 Q4 4.85 8.44 16.80 4.06 4.02 6.27
2016-17 Q1 2.18 7.73 12.17 6.57 3.09 4.34
2016-17 Q2 1.96 9.11 11.56 3.31 22.11 5.12
2016-17 Q3 2.01 7.82 15.47 4.01 5.75 4.35
2016-17 Q4 2.20 6.80 17.63 1.14 20.32 5.34
2017-18 Q1 2.40 9.60 16.88 3.81 12.00 5.67
2017-18 Q2 5.58 11.39 34.76 12.41 3.58 8.29
050
100150200250300350400450500
Nu
mb
er
of
Re
gist
rati
osn
Quarter
Number of Phase One Permanent Registrations
20
2017-18 Q3 5.64 8.26 29.31 18.61 3.83 12.27
2017-18 Q4 4.85 8.44 16.80 4.06 4.02 6.27
2018-19 Q1 2.41 10.00 15.44 6.09 3.62 5.56
Total 3.29 8.82 17.09 9.29 7.25 Table 12 - Average Duration of Works by Permit Type
9.1.2 Analysis
The average duration of all works types has remained relatively stable throughout the monitoring
period, with a slight rise to the average durations of works since the beginning of the monitoring
period.
9.2 AM2 – Inspections
Number of failed permit compliance inspections (where one or more permit conditions have been
breached).
9.2.1 Results
This information has been collated by Doncaster Council and the chart below shows a breakdown of
the all permit conditions inspections with their outcomes that have taken place during the reporting
period.
Quarter Compliant Non-Compliant
Total % Compliant
2015-16 Q1 17 6 23 74%
2015-16 Q2 13 4 17 76%
2015-16 Q3 12 0 12 100%
2015-16 Q4 11 0 12 92%
2016-17 Q1 3 0 3 100%
2016-17 Q2 4 1 5 80%
2016-17 Q3 11 0 11 100%
2016-17 Q4 11 7 19 58%
2017-18 Q1 25 11 36 69%
2017-18 Q2 7 11 18 39%
2017-18 Q3 42 18 60 70%
2017-18 Q4 154 31 185 83%
2018-19 Q1 69 13 82 84% Table 13 - Inspections
9.2.2 Analysis
Unfortunately the quantity of data collected on this measure is affected by the inspection resourcing
problems experienced by Doncaster Council during the monitoring period which has led to an
inconsistent volume of permit compliance inspections.
9.3 AM3 – Days of Disruption Saved / Number of Collaborative Works
This measure is the number of days of disruption saved by an authority through the various co-
ordination methodology available e.g. collaborative works or challenging initial durations etc.
21
The authority data of the number of collaborative works and the number of days saved as a result of
collaborative works on the authority road network.
9.3.1 Results
Calendar Days Saved
QTR Total
2015/16 – Q1 5
2015/16 – Q2 8
2015/16 – Q3 0
2015/16 – Q4 2
2016/17 – Q1 1
2016/17 – Q2 1
2016/17 – Q3 1
2016/17 – Q4 7
2017/18 – Q1 2
2017/18 – Q2 0
2017/18 – Q3 3
2017/18 – Q4 1
2018/19 – Q1 3
Total 34 Table 14 - Calendar Days Saved
9.3.2 Analysis
The result produced for this measure is disappointing as a much higher number of days saved was
anticipated. Doncaster Council will address the reasons why this figure is low and implement
operational changes to ensure that all options for collaborative working are explored and record.
9.4 AM4 – Response Code – broken down by promoter
This measure is the number of refusals broken down by response code where this has been used by
the authority.
Unfortunately the reporting structure required to produce this data is currently not operational.
Doncaster Council is addressing the issue and is hopeful this report will be available for the next
annual review.
9.5 AM5 – FPNs (Permit Breaches)
This report shows the number of FPN’s given and not withdrawn for FPN codes 5 (an offence under
s70(6), 6 (an offence under s74(7B), 7 (an offence under s74A(11), 8, (working without a permit) and
9 working in breach of permit conditions).
9.5.1 Results
22
Works Promoter
20
15
/16
– Q
1
20
15
/16
– Q
2
20
15
/16
– Q
3
20
15
/16
– Q
4
20
16
/17
– Q
1
20
16
/17
– Q
2
20
16
/17
– Q
3
20
16
/17
– Q
4
20
17
/18
– Q
1
20
17
/18
– Q
2
20
17
/18
– Q
3
20
17
/18
– Q
4
20
18
/19
– Q
1
Tota
l
Cadent Gas 1 1 2 7 3 1 4 2 2 3 2 6 7 41
Highways England
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
BT 5 6 6 5 5 6 3 10 11 15 11 16 7 106
Cable & Wireless
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Doncaster 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Northern Powergrid
1 2 5 1 2 2 1 4 4 1 1 9 2 35
Western Power
1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
National Grid Elec
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1
Vodafone 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Kingston Comms
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Network Rail 7 6 4 4 4 6 7 4 9 0 1 3 0 55
Virgin Media 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 10 4 1 24
Telefonica 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Century Link 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Dept for Transport
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Independent Pipelines
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Romec 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1
Arqiva 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
GTC 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
Orange 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Zayo 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Tycom 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
T-Mobile 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2
ES Pipelines 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Energetics Elec
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Northern Gas Networks
3 1 3 0 0 1 0 2 0 0 1 4 1 16
Fulcrum 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 1 0 0 4
GEO 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 2
ESP 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Energetics 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
H2O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Thales 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
City Fibre 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Harlaxtons 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 3
23
Arqiva 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Anglian Water 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Severn Trent 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 4 1 7
Yorkshire Water
4 14 3 7 1 14 10 10 12 9 9 12 6 111
South Yorkshire PTE
0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 3
All Organisations
25 30 26 27 16 31 26 34 39 34 36 61 27 413
Table 15 - FPN (Permit Breaches)
9.5.2 Analysis
Table 16 demonstrates that relatively few FPN’s have been served for breach of permit conditions
over the 3 year monitoring period. FPN’s were served for a variety of reasons ranging from working
without a permit to not displaying a permit number. No trends have been identified for why BT or
Yorkshire Water has been served over half of the total number of FPN’s served to all works
promoters.
9.6 AM 6 – Levels of Customer Enquires
The number of customer enquires made regarding permit works split between utility works
promoters and Doncaster Council internal; works promoters.
Unfortunately the reporting structure required to produce this data is currently not operational.
Doncaster Council is addressing the issue and is hopeful this report will be available for the next
annual review.
10. Conclusions & Recommendations
10.1 Conclusions
The Yorkshire Common Permit Scheme (Doncaster) has achieved all the objectives of the scheme
during the reporting period.
There is a general increase in the number of permit applications which can be explained by the
increase in immediate activity by Yorkshire Water and the commencement of the Fibre to the
premises project by Virgin Media across the borough.
It was not possible for Doncaster Council to produce performance information on several measures
due to ICT issues. Doncaster Council will be working on a solution to these issues for the next annual
report.
The increased use of Roadworks.org has assisted us assess the impact of works with significant
traffic management and authority variations are often imposed to improve the smooth running of
the network.
24
The number of deemed permits continues to be low and demonstrates that the majority of permit
applications are coordinated and accessed on time. Doncaster is committed to actively coordination
all works on the highway network and will continue to ensure all applications are processed within
the allowed timescales.
Early discussions with all works promoters has shown parity and such meetings have helped permit
applications to be granted first time with careful consideration being given to traffic management,
timing and location of works.
10.2 Recommendations
Doncaster Council will:
Continue to adhere to national guidance and advice regarding the operation of permit
schemes
Continue to work closely with all works promoters to prove parity and co-ordinate medium
and long term activities.
Strive to increase the number of collaborative works in the Doncaster area.
Actively engage with all works promoters to ensure the continued effective operation of the
Yorkshire Common Permit Scheme (Doncaster).
Seek to address the number reporting capabilities of Street Works ICT system.
Engage and support the role of the YJAG representative on the HAUC (England) Permit
Forum.
Continue our vision to move to an all street permitting scheme, thus transferring the
benefits already realised as part of this permit scheme onto the whole of the Doncaster
network.
