Table of contents
- Introduction
- Breakdown of respondents
- Q1: Are there any problems with using the simplified works categories and works definitions?
- Q2: Do you anticipate any particular problems or impacts with the new notice periods?
- Q3: For information on street location and infrastructure to be reliable, it needs to be up to date. How frequently should local street gazetteers be updated to ensure the information prescribed in Regulation 4(3) and 4(4) is included?
- Q4: For local highway authorities only - What level of information do you currently include in the street works register about your authorities own works for road purposes?
- Q5: What do you regard as the minimum information needed to demonstrate parity of treatment with other works promoters?
- Q6: Do highway authorities agree with the proposal in the Technical Specification for EToN to require them to use the same system to provide information about their own works to the Register?
- Q7: Do you anticipate any problems in moving to XML web services for transmission of EToN notices? If so, why?
- Q8: How long will you require to prepare for the introduction of the new EToN system based on XML web service applications? This would be the period between the Regulations, and the Statutory Code of Practice being laid and the XML web service application Schema being finalised and the new Regulations coming into effect.
- Q9: Do you see any need or benefit for the Secretary of State to prescribe a period within which the restriction following substantial street works lapses, if those street works are not complete?
- Q10: Should the definition of substantial street works be changed to exclude major works of 10 days duration or less?
- Q11(a): Would you wish local authorities to continue to publish in local newspapers its intention to restrict street works following either substantial road works or street works and what benefits does this bring?
- Q11(b): Should similar provisions be retained for the designation of a street as protected?
- Q12: Do the criteria for traffic sensitive streets allow those streets, where works will have the greatest impact on the road network in the immediate vicinity, to be designated as traffic sensitive?
- Q13: Would you wish to see the provision to designate a road as traffic sensitive by agreement of the majority of statutory undertakers with apparatus in a street to be reinstated in the draft Regulations?
- Q14: Which other bodies, if any, should be consulted on proposed designations of streets as protected, with special engineering difficulties or as traffic sensitive?
- Fixed Penalty Notices
- Q15: Do you have any new concerns about the introduction and application of Fixed Penalty Notices for offences under the NRSWA?
- Q16: Should Regulations for fixed penalty notices come into effect at the same time as those for Noticing and s74 charges?
- Charges for unnecessarily prolonged occupation of the highway (s74)
- Q17: What are your views on these proposed levels of charges for all except off-carriageway works on non-TS Cat 3 and 4 streets? What impact will they have?
- Q18: What are your views on a s74 charging regime where the rates for overruns are significantly higher, but do not apply to those works on category 3 or 4 streets that are not traffic sensitive? What ways are there to ensure prompt completion of works on such streets without the ability to apply s74 charges?
- Proposed alternative
- Q19: How will this (prescribed period of two days) work in practice? Will there be any impacts on standards of quality and safety?
- Prescribed period
- Q20: Should the technical specification for EToN become a stand-alone volume?
- Q21: Are you content with the proposals on handling notice cancellation and error correction?
- Q22: Do you have any comment on the analysis of the costs and benefits in the RIA for Noticing, Directions and Designations Regulation? Please provide information on the estimated costs or savings of the proposed changes and underlying assumptions where possible. Are there any additional costs that need to be considered?
- Q23: Do you have any comment on the analysis of the costs and benefits in the RIA for fixed penalty charges? Please provide additional information on the estimated costs or savings of the proposed changes and underlying assumptions, if possible separating administrative costs from the charges paid following an FPN. Are there any additional costs that need to be considered?
- Q24: Do you have any comment on the analysis of the costs and benefits in the RIA for charges for unreasonably prolonged occupation of the highway (s74 charges)? Please provide additional information on the estimated costs and underlying assumptions if possible separating administrative costs from the potential charges that may be levied. Are there any additional costs that need to be considered?
- Q25: Do you agree that in principle works which have begun or were noticed under the existing regulations should continue to follow the requirements of the existing regulations?
- Q26: Do you anticipate any problems with the practical application of the detailed protocol set out in section 13.7 of the Code of Practice?
- Q27: (a) Do you agree that works notified under the existing system and not commenced within three months of the new Regulations coming into force should be deemed to have lapsed?
- (b) In these circumstances, a new notice should be sent following the notice periods set out in the new Regulation. Are there any problems with this approach?
- Q28: Do you agree that permanent reinstatements for works carried out under the existing Regulations and not noticed or completed under the existing regulations, should be treated as new works and follow the noticing requirements of the new Regulations?
- Q29: Do you envisage any problems with setting a final date for use of the existing EToN system for works notified under the 1992 Regulation? If so how might these be mitigated?
- Q30: (a) Are the options for handling major works with a long duration during the transition suitable? What other options are there for handling such works?
- (b) Would you prefer just one approach set out in the Code of Practice or would you prefer to negotiate suitable arrangements on a case-by-case basis? If so, what?
- Q31: Do you envisage any problems with this approach to Section 74 charges? If so how could these be mitigated?
- Q32: What are your views on the above proposals for the transition period on s74 charges for remedial works? What alternatives are there and why?
- Other Issues Arising from Consultation Responses
- Charges for Unreasonably Prolonged Occupation of the Highway
- Registers, Notices, Directions and Designations
- List of Respondents
Back to top
