Agenda item

Motion 1

 

It was moved by Cllr Niall Innes, seconded by Cllr Tony Riordan and unanimously:

 

RESOLVED

 

This Council notes the increasing concerns raised by residents across the Borough regarding unsafe, inconsiderate and obstructive parking, particularly around school entrances, bus stops and residential streets. Residents regularly report issues including blocked pavements preventing access for those with disabilities or pushchairs, vehicles stopping in restricted zones outside schools creating dangerous conditions for children and parents, and persistent parking in locations where enforcement is difficult to maintain. These issues not only cause daily frustration but pose genuine risks to safety and accessibility within our communities.

 

This Council further notes that a number of local authorities, including Middlesbrough Council, utilise mobile CCTV enforcement vehicles to support parking enforcement, particularly in locations where on-foot enforcement is difficult or impractical.

 

This Council further notes that:

 

·         Evidence from Middlesbrough shows such vehicles have issued hundreds of Penalty Charge Notices annually, historically generating around £18,000 per year, with more recent figures indicating ongoing income in the region of £5,000–£10,000 per year;

 

·         These vehicles are primarily deployed at school entrances, bus stops and high-risk locations, where they improve compliance and reduce dangerous parking behaviour;

 

·         Over time, the number of contraventions typically falls, demonstrating a clear deterrent effect and improved driver behaviour;

·         This Council recognises the ongoing concerns raised by residents regarding unsafe and inconsiderate parking, particularly around schools, and the pressure this places on existing enforcement resources.

 

This Council further recognises that a mobile CCTV enforcement vehicle has the potential to:

 

·         Support enforcement teams by covering multiple locations efficiently;

·         Improve road safety and accessibility in high-risk areas;

·         Generate income that can contribute towards offsetting its cost over time;

 

Therefore, this Council resolves to request that the Cabinet:

 

1)    Undertake a full options appraisal on the introduction of a mobile CCTV enforcement vehicle within Stockton-on-Tees Borough Council;

 

2)    Report on:

 

·         The full capital and revenue costs, and the expected payback period;

·         The anticipated impact on parking compliance and road safety, particularly around schools;

·         The potential level of income generation and cost recovery;

·         Comparative data and outcomes from neighbouring authorities, including Middlesbrough;

 

3)    Identify how any proposal could be funded within existing resources, including opportunities for reprioritisation within current enforcement, highways or transport budgets;

 

4)    Set out clear arrangements for transparency and reporting, annual publication of performance, income and compliance data.

 

Motion 2

 

It was moved by Cllr David Reynard and seconded by Cllr Tony Riordan:

 

“This Council notes that:

 

Despite receiving over £4.4 million per year in Central Government funding for highways maintenance, many roads across the Borough remain in a visibly deteriorating condition, with residents frequently raising concerns about poor surfaces, recurring defects, and roads worn down to their base layers.

 

Council further notes that:

 

·         Only 1.05% of the total road network has been treated through planned works in the last year

·         No Central Government funding has been used directly for reactive pothole repairs, despite these being one of the most common issues raised by residents

·         The cost of repairing a single pothole averages £75–£80, while resurfacing larger areas can deliver longer-term value at significantly lower cost per square metre

·         The Council does not hold key data on:

o   Repeat repairs within 12 months

o   Defects not meeting intervention thresholds

o   Outstanding repairs or response times

·         The proportion of unclassified roads in “poor” condition has increased to 22%, highlighting deterioration in the roads most used by residents

 

Council recognises that:

 

Whilst asset management principles and lifecycle modelling are important, residents judge the effectiveness of highways maintenance by the visible condition of roads in their communities, and there is growing concern that the current approach is not delivering the standard expected.

 

This Council believes that:

 

·         The current balance between reactive repairs and preventative maintenance is not delivering the improvements residents expect

·         A lack of transparency in key performance data makes it difficult to properly assess value for money

·         Too many roads are falling below acceptable standards but are not being addressed due to intervention thresholds

·         A more targeted, transparent and outcomes-focused approach is required

 

Council resolves to:

 

1)    Improve Transparency and Accountability

 

·         Publish an annual Highways Maintenance Report detailing:

o   Roads treated (by type and location)

o   Spend by category

o   Network condition trends

o   Backlog estimates

 

·         Introduce clear reporting on:

o   Average repair times

o   Number of outstanding repairs

o   Repeat repairs within 12 months

 

2)    Review Intervention Criteria

 

·         Undertake a formal review of current defect thresholds to ensure that roads with widespread deterioration are not excluded from repair due to technical criteria

·         Report back to Cabinet with recommendations within 6 months

 

3)    Prioritise Residential and Unclassified Roads

 

·         Develop a targeted programme focused on unclassified roads, where condition is deteriorating most significantly

·         Ensure future funding allocations better reflect the roads most used by residents

 

4)    Strengthen Value for Money

 

·         Expand the use of preventative and planned resurfacing programmes where this reduces long-term costs

·         Review the balance between reactive and planned maintenance spending, with a view to reducing repeated short-term repairs

 

5)    Introduce a “Worst First” Programme

 

·         Identify and publish a rolling list of the worst affected roads in each ward

·         Commit to a clear timetable for intervention

 

6)    Enhance Local Member Involvement

 

·         Provide Ward Councillors with greater input into prioritisation of local highways works

·         Introduce a mechanism for Members to formally raise roads for review

 

7)    Ensure Effective Use of Funding

 

·         Require a report to Cabinet within 12 months assessing:

o   The impact of Government funding on road condition

o   Whether current delivery models represent best value for money.

 

RESOLVED that as action requested in the motion is an executive function, the motion be referred to Cabinet under rule 3.42 of Council Procedure Rules.