Road Condition Management Group Survey

Transcription

1 Road Condition Management Group Survey 2016

2

3 Survey Response Rates by Region Responses Rate by English Region (2016) Response rate by English region (2012) Number of Responses % of region that responded Number of responses % of region that responded East Midlands 4 44 East Midlands 5 56 East of England 3 27 East of England 8 67 London 7 21 London North West 8 36 North West South East 7 = 39 South East 7 39 South West 6 40 South West 7 44 West Midlands 6 = 43 West Midlands 6 43 Yorkshire and the Humber 11 = 73 Yorkshire and the Humber North East 8 67 North East 4 33 Additional Responses Additional Responses Wales 8 Wales 7 Scotland 4 Scotland 5 Northern Ireland 1 = Northern Ireland 1 Total Responses 73 Borough Council 1 Total Responses 84

4 Q3 UKPMS system versions Versions Unknown 50% Current 46% Earlier 4%

5 Q4a Do you use any non-ukpms asset management systems to help manage your road assets No reply, 4% No, 40%, 56%

6 Q4b What other systems do you 24 different systems use? 17 of these were used by only 1 or 2 authorities 14 authorities used more than one other system

7 60 Q6d - Types of Surveys on Unclassified Roads survey 83% planning to continue with current surveys 17% considering changes CVI Scanner DVI FNS/FMS None/Don t Collect Data MRM Cat4a Bus Routes Scanner Condidtion Treatment Surveys SCRIM In-House Survey Other

8 Unclassified roads: Survey type percentage (based on length) CVI SCANNER Other None 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

9 Are you considering changing survey types for any of your road classes? If please provide details No No PART OF OUR U ROADS WE LABEL D WHICH IS 100KM AND WE TREAT THEM AS CLASSIFIED ROADS IN SURVEY.( BUS ROUTES,SCHOOLS HEAVIER TRAFFIC) CSS(Wales) and SCOTS have developed a bespoke visual survey method. It is intended to carry out this survey on all categories of road In house CVI surveys on unclassified roads Watching brief through LCRIG for Gaist surveys CVI for Unclassified roads We have started carrying out CVI surveys also on our Classified Road Network as we were not getting the info required to inform scheme choice from Scanner Experimented with SCANNER for U/C Distributor Roads Mini-SCANNER for some Unclassified Roads Considering using Korec MX8 to replace SCANNER, awaiting a trial Only carry out Coarse Network Survey on Unclassified roads No Scanner / CVI on Unclassifieds. Not sure but what to be able to model FW schemes We now base our survey type on our SPN (CoP Maintenance Category) where all SPN 1-3 roads are surveyed via SCANNER regardless of Road Class and all SPN 4 roads undergo a CVI survey regardless of Road Class. Would like CVI or DVI as well but limited funds. May reduce level of SCRIM in future Not at this time but may be looking at the proposed new AEI survey if/when it becomes available.

10 Q10 - What is road condition data used for? Whole of Government Accounts (WGA) Scheme identification Investment Planning No Other Corporate /departmental PI s? 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

11 Q10 Other uses of road condition data Modelling, LCP Asset management Reporting Safety, risks Corporate (incl FOI) None given 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

12 Q11 Amber data Would you find it useful if amber data as well as red was reported nationally? 86% No 14% Would you be in a position to provide amber data on a consistent basis for national reporting purposes 94% No 6% Do you use amber data for lifecycle and programme planning? 87% No 13%

13 Q12 Do you carry out analysis of your condition data in-house or via an external service provider? % 26% 1% % 13% 11% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% In-house External Both

14 Q13a - Have you developed any Local Weighting Sets? 27% 66% 3%4% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% No In Process of being created Not Indicated

15 Q13b - Would your organisation benefit from further guidance related to SCANNER data, use of UKPMS etc? Not Indicated 16% 51% No 33%

16 Q14a - Do you carry out Deterioration Modelling? No 29% 71%

17 Q18 - Would your Authority be willing to support a modest research levy to enable agreed developments? Not Indicated 4% Maybe (Would need further discussion) 10% 40% No 46%