What a waste of our money by LCC!

Neil · 31-03-2009, 17:04

I see something I noticed happening at the time has just been reported in the newspaper.

Several months ago Lancashire County Council dug up and re laid the foot paths opposite the row of houses near the Britannia Pub in Oswaldtwistle. I was amazed at the time they were doing the work as the plans for the roundabout had been approved and the work was only waiting for land acquisition to take place.

They are now building the roundabout in the slowest time possible and have dug up the new footpaths.

Here is a link to the newspaper article about it.

Anger as Oswaldtwistle's new paving stones ripped up (From Lancashire Telegraph)

accyman · 31-03-2009, 17:11

reminds me of how the gas board dig a hole and relay all the pavement only to have it dug up again a few weeks later by teh electric board

councils in any form seem only to be good at coming up with ideas to waste money

Boeing Guy · 31-03-2009, 18:43

Don't let Mancie see this, its all Thatchers fault you know. LCC really are Tories.......

katex · 01-04-2009, 09:11

Have consulted, and could be explained as this Neil ..

"Yeah it could be a lack of planning. However, the issues are (more
likely in my opinion) to stem from the ridiculous funding streams that
exist in local government. Local authorities (including the county as
the highway authority) get two, yearly (running from March - March)
funding streams - 1. A capital funding stream; and 2. A revenue funding
stream.

The capital funding stream is used for NEW capital investment
programmes, usually prioritised against meeting the Local Transport
Plan/Policy objectives (in Lancs I think these are tackling congestion,
delivering accessibility, delivering safer roads and creating better air
quality). The revenue funding stream is used for programmed
maintenance, renewal, compensation claims and other necessary works.
What I suspect might have happened in this case is that Lancs had the
footway highlighted for periodic renewal/maintenance improvements under
the revenue budget. Concurrently, the proposals for the Brittania
roundabout were being brought forward and delivered under the capital
budget. Given the uncertainty about delivering capital schemes (they
have to be approved by county council members), Lancs probably decided
to press ahead with the revenue stream funded maintenance of the footway
anyway.

Another potential reason this situation happened might be due to the
timing. It is interesting that the footway improvements have been
delivered towards 'year-end' for councils (end of March). This is when
their funding gets reviewed and set for the following year - if the
councils don't spend their full allocation from the previous year, they
will receive a lesser amount the following year... maybe Lancs just
needed to spend the money (I know that sounds terrible but it would be
equally bad press to receive less funding because Lancs couldn't
identify schemes to spend the money on).

I agree that there should have been a greater degree of joined-up
thinking here but sometimes it's not all down to incompetence or
oversight, it's that the council officers have to work within the system
(no matter what inefficiencies that breeds). The funny thing about the
news article is that Britcliffe will know all this, he must have some
understanding of how local authority funding streams work (at least, as
your elected official, I would hope he does!!!). "

Neil · 01-04-2009, 09:31

Quote:

Originally Posted by katex

The revenue funding stream is used for programmed
maintenance, renewal, compensation claims and other necessary works.
What I suspect might have happened in this case is that Lancs had the
footway highlighted for periodic renewal/maintenance improvements under
the revenue budget. Concurrently, the proposals for the Brittania
roundabout were being brought forward and delivered under the capital
budget. Given the uncertainty about delivering capital schemes (they
have to be approved by county council members), Lancs probably decided
to press ahead with the revenue stream funded maintenance of the footway anyway.

The path was done only a few weeks before the roundabout work started. It must take a few weeks from the approval of the roundabout to be built and the work actually starting. Just bad planning and departments wasting our money by not communicating with each other.

Quote:

Originally Posted by katex

Another potential reason this situation happened might be due to the timing. It is interesting that the footway improvements have been delivered towards 'year-end' for councils (end of March). This is when their funding gets reviewed and set for the following year - if the councils don't spend their full allocation from the previous year, they will receive a lesser amount the following year... maybe Lancs just needed to spend the money (I know that sounds terrible but it would be equally bad press to receive less funding because Lancs couldn't
identify schemes to spend the money on).

The work was done months ago, no where near year end. The roundabout was started at the end of November 2008 and all they have done is move a wall ( ok it is a longish wall) and dug out the ground works. The path was done a few weeks before November 2008.

Quote:

Originally Posted by katex

I agree that there should have been a greater degree of joined-up thinking here but sometimes it's not all down to incompetence or oversight, it's that the council officers have to work within the system (no matter what inefficiencies that breeds). The funny thing about the news article is that Britcliffe will know all this, he must have some understanding of how local authority funding streams work (at least, as your elected official, I would hope he does!!!). "

I think it is terrible that the person who signed off the work on the footpaths was not aware that the roundabout planning was close to completion. There are many more roads and paths in Ossy that are desperate for renewing. Just look at Lottice Lane, the road from Britannia Cross Roads to Guide. The surface is non existent, most of it has been thrown onto the footpath. If you travel that way the road noise is horrendous. Only when you stop at the current road works traffic lights do you notice that most of the surface has become detached from the road and ended up as stones on the foot path. I would hate to see what happened to a biker that fell off on that road.

When it comes down to it there is no excuse for building a footpath then digging it up weeks later. Someone has been incompetant and should get the boot. The plans for this roundabout were shown at the Area Council meeting at least 3 years ago. I am sure no one involved in road planning/design in this area could say they did not know about it.

A freedom on information request on who sanctioned both the footpath and the roundabout works would be interesting. I would not be surprised if the same name was on both.

jaysay · 01-04-2009, 09:42

Quote:

Originally Posted by katex

Have consulted, and could be explained as this Neil ..

"Yeah it could be a lack of planning. However, the issues are (more
likely in my opinion) to stem from the ridiculous funding streams that
exist in local government. Local authorities (including the county as
the highway authority) get two, yearly (running from March - March)
funding streams - 1. A capital funding stream; and 2. A revenue funding
stream.

The capital funding stream is used for NEW capital investment
programmes, usually prioritised against meeting the Local Transport
Plan/Policy objectives (in Lancs I think these are tackling congestion,
delivering accessibility, delivering safer roads and creating better air
quality). The revenue funding stream is used for programmed
maintenance, renewal, compensation claims and other necessary works.
What I suspect might have happened in this case is that Lancs had the
footway highlighted for periodic renewal/maintenance improvements under
the revenue budget. Concurrently, the proposals for the Brittania
roundabout were being brought forward and delivered under the capital
budget. Given the uncertainty about delivering capital schemes (they
have to be approved by county council members), Lancs probably decided
to press ahead with the revenue stream funded maintenance of the footway
anyway.

Another potential reason this situation happened might be due to the
timing. It is interesting that the footway improvements have been
delivered towards 'year-end' for councils (end of March). This is when
their funding gets reviewed and set for the following year - if the
councils don't spend their full allocation from the previous year, they
will receive a lesser amount the following year... maybe Lancs just
needed to spend the money (I know that sounds terrible but it would be
equally bad press to receive less funding because Lancs couldn't
identify schemes to spend the money on).

I agree that there should have been a greater degree of joined-up
thinking here but sometimes it's not all down to incompetence or
oversight, it's that the council officers have to work within the system
(no matter what inefficiencies that breeds). The funny thing about the
news article is that Britcliffe will know all this, he must have some
understanding of how local authority funding streams work (at least, as
your elected official, I would hope he does!!!). "

I'm just wondering who actually came out with these pearls of wisdom, one can hardly include PB in this as LCC took it on themselves to take over all road management procedures both new and maintenance and has nothing to do with HBC. As a local councillor PB was quite right to ask LCC why the rate payers money was totally wasted in his way, it appears that the Left hand doesn't know what the Left hand is doing at County Hall

katex · 01-04-2009, 16:33

Would be interesting to hear how this happened from the LCC, before we ask heads to roll.

Maybe this work, and money allocated, had been scheduled months before, and they did know about the roundabout coming up (sure they did, but not when), however, the silver lining is that they have only pulled up a quarter of the length of pavement and would know some of it would have to be relaid at some stage.

Possibly laying that extra quarter near to the crossroads did not add much cost to the job, and relaying cost would be minimal. Could be that that stretch of pavement was desperate for repair, and considered a hazard ?

Just my little theory, theory B ... just a cock up in liaison...

jaysay · 01-04-2009, 16:42

Quote:

Originally Posted by katex

Would be interesting to hear how this happened from the LCC, before we ask heads to roll.

Maybe this work, and money allocated, had been scheduled months before, and they did know about the roundabout coming up (sure they did, but not when), however, the silver lining is that they have only pulled up a quarter of the length of pavement and would know some of it would have to be relaid at some stage.

Possibly laying that extra quarter near to the crossroads did not add much cost to the job, and relaying cost would be minimal. Could be that that stretch of pavement was desperate for repair, and considered a hazard ?

Just my little theory, theory B ... just a cock up in liaison...

I think theory B has it kate, just imagine if HBC had done it, Jones would have been apoplectic about it, backed by sycophants are us

katex · 01-04-2009, 16:56

Quote:

Originally Posted by jaysay

I think theory B has it kate, just imagine if HBC had done it, Jones would have been apoplectic about it, backed by sycophants are us

Never miss an opening do you Jaysay ....

Don't you think though that HBC will have been informed on the scheduling of these works ?

jaysay · 01-04-2009, 17:40

Quote:

Originally Posted by katex

Never miss an opening do you May Say ....

Don't you think though that HBC will have been informed on the scheduling of these works ?

Of course they'll have been told but they wouldn't have been given a running commentary on what was being done and when, and you would actually think, that with having officers at Country Hall, on huge salaries they be able to sort out just what is in the offing, its not rocket science, and its something that wouldn't happen in the private sector, but of course its only the tax payers money, so they don't give a toss

katex · 01-04-2009, 17:45

Quote:

Originally Posted by jaysay

so they don't give a toss

Bit harsh and don't really agree with you Jaysay.

jaysay · 01-04-2009, 18:38

Quote:

Originally Posted by katex

Bit harsh and don't really agree with you Jaysay.

Well kate, that's what makes this site so good, its like life itself, opinions, it wouldn't do if we all agreed all of the time, life would be so boring

katex · 01-04-2009, 19:27

Quote:

Originally Posted by jaysay

Well kate, that's what makes this site so good, its like life itself, opinions, it wouldn't do if we all agreed all of the time, life would be so boring

Of course Jaysay, we all care about our town on here at the end of the day, no matter how we see perceive the best way forward .. x