1. MARK HODGSON ROAD2000 REVIEW KEY FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

2. ROAD2000

3. 2000 – Major political change in London Formation of GLA New Mayor Data requirement to allocate funding UKPMS software accredited, standardised surveys Proposal – survey and process to UKPMS standard 1300km roads and 1800km footways WHAT IS THE ROAD2000 PROJECT?

4. Aim Provide consistent data in useful and useable format Allocate funds Maintenance programming Monitor long term trends BVPI’s / NI’s Value for money WHAT IS THE ROAD2000 PROJECT?

5. Facts – over 10 years R2000 has: Surveyed equivalent lane length to circumference of earth (40,000km) £3.5m survey cost £300m allocation 1500 BVPI’s / NI’s WHAT IS THE ROAD2000 PROJECT?

6. Graph to show annual expenditure v condition

7. Asset Surveys Transport Commissioner wanted all TfL assets mapped Applied to BPRN 500,000 features, 100,000 changes p.a. 75,000 linked photo’s 125,000 posts & 100,000 signs 66,000 gully’s 57,000 lamp columns 33,000 trees WHAT IS THE ROAD2000 PROJECT?

10. Confirm still needed If needed scope going forward? 2005 – 5 year business plan Times have changed: 2005 £50m allocation 2011 £15m allocation BVPI / NI halved WHY HAVE A REVIEW?

11. Scope of review Still needed? Efficient processes? Contract arrangements, value for money? Are range and frequency of surveys appropriate? What is the resource requirement Is specialist consultancy used wisely? WHY HAVE A REVIEW?

12. R2000 still needed? Proven track record Consistent data NI’s Less money – data more important? Best practice in CSS framework for asset management National and international interest Finding: R2000 successful, new name R2010 Recommendation: Continue HOW ARE KEY FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS GOING TO AFFECT ME?

13. Are processes efficient, scope to improve? HOW ARE KEY FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS GOING TO AFFECT ME? Finding: Processes efficient and streamlined Recommendation: Continue existing approach

14. Do contract arrangements provide value for money? Rates 40% lower Benchmarked – R2000 very good rates New contracts being written – more scope for boroughs to access (eg DVI borough roads) Finding: Good VFM Recommendation: Make available for borough use HOW ARE KEY FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS GOING TO AFFECT ME?

15. Right surveys, right frequency? Full network coverage, both directions DVI, SCANNER, SCRIM Consider reducing frequency / coverage But, rapidly changing network LBHF – 50% reduction: lost consistency and ability to prioritise SCANNER AND DVI? HOW ARE KEY FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS GOING TO AFFECT ME? Finding: Current mix of surveys and frequencies is right Recommendation: Continue

16. Right Staff Resources? 3 FTE’s Data management and processing CAD and GIS Audit and contract management Finding: 3 FTE’s about right Recommendation: Spare resource directed to other commissions – eg. pan London contract HOW ARE KEY FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS GOING TO AFFECT ME?

17. Is specialist consultancy used wisely? 5 to 20% of annual budget Recent commissions included DVI v SCANNER comparison, skid resistance policy, supporting FCMG. Other groups also undertake special studies Finding: Used wisely, benefited London Recommendation: Aligned with other groups, agreed by HMSG HOW ARE KEY FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS GOING TO AFFECT ME?

18. Miscellaneous activities R2000 conference successful - TfL administering created savings Pan London UKPMS license required Website – better VFM if moved to LoTAG website Finding: Miscellaneous activities are necessary Recommendation: Continue to look for efficiencies and VFM HOW ARE KEY FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS GOING TO AFFECT ME?

19. Summary of recommendations: 1. Continue ROAD2000 – but change name to ROAD2010 2. Continue with current mix and frequency of surveys 3. Investigate if any other pan London work can be aligned to the R2010 work 4. Specialist consultancy needs to fully align with other groups (e.g. LoTAMB, HMEG) and be agreed by the HMSG Conclusions

20. Questions