Agenda item

To receive a report from the Director for Highways and Transport on the utilities engagement programme.

WITNESSES

• Marisa Heath, Cabinet Member for Environment
• Jonathan Hulley, Deputy Cabinet Member for Strategic Highways
• Matt Furniss, Cabinet Member for Highways, Transport and Economic Growth
• Owen Jenkins, Executive Director for Highways, Infrastructure and Planning
• Lucy Monie, Director for Highways, Transport and Network Management
• Amanda Richards, Assistant Director for Highways for Network and Asset Management
• Katie Sargent, Greener Futures Group Manager
• Melania Tarquino, Strategic Energy Lead
• Glen Westmore, SAB Implementation Manager

KEY LINES OF DISCUSSION

Water utilities

1. The Chairman asked whether the primary aim of improving strategic engagement and information sharing with utility providers had been achieved and inquired about the key areas of success or priorities for further work. In reply, the Cabinet Member for Environment reported improved engagement with Thames Water and SES Water, focusing on data sharing and local area energy planning. Relationships and connections had improved, with good engagement from SES Water, contributing to discussions on water pollution as part of the environmental strategy. The Strategic Energy Lead added that meetings and workshops had provided useful data for planning, involving neighbouring county councils to improve connection costs and timescales. The SAB Implementation Manager highlighted that engagement with water companies had significantly improved, leading to better responses to flood risk and supply inquiries, especially from engineers on the ground.

2. A Member asked if greater collaboration on demand management and demand reduction, including leakage reduction, customer metering, and education, remained a goal and inquired about the progress made so far to meet this goal. In reply, the Cabinet Member for Environment stated that reducing water demand was crucial due to water stress in the Southeast, with water companies taking action and the government setting reduction targets. The council supported these efforts through messaging, consultations, and social media. The SAB Implementation Manager said that Surrey's water usage was higher than the national average, but metering improvements were helping reduce usage and detect leaks.

3. A Member asked if the Council was studying water quality matters and, if so, how. In reply, the Cabinet Member for Environment stated that water quality was a concern due to sewage in waterways. The Environment Agency played a significant role, but the Council included this in the Nature Recovery Strategy. The Council measured and monitored water quality, worked with community organizations, and collaborated with utility companies and businesses to trace pollution sources and set KPIs to improve waterways. Infrastructure upgrades were needed in areas like Horley.

4. A Member asked about the progress made in the development of KPIs for water companies to drive improvements and encourage local authority collaboration and inquired about what more could be done to press for change. In reply, the Cabinet Member for Environment stated that not much progress had been made in the development of KPIs for community improvement and collaboration around water supply and mentioned that officers had met with Ofwat, representatives from Water UK, and Blueprint for Water to discuss better transparency in the water industry.

5. A Member asked if there were any further examples of improvements since the last utilities session. In reply, the SAB Implementation Manager stated that there had been additional improvements in development planning and responses to new strategic infrastructure. He noted increased collaboration and better communication with water companies, focusing on surface water runoff and its impact on flood risk. He emphasized the importance of local influence in decision-making processes.

6. A Member asked if the Council was able to access WINEP (Water Industry National Environment Programme) funding for local nature recovery plans and how WINEP funding was generally thought to be going. In reply, the SAB Implementation Manager stated that WINEP funding covered various aspects including outfalls from water treatment works, reduction of phosphorus and other chemicals, river restoration, and biodiversity improvements. He mentioned that contributions or add-ons to the WINEP programme had helped deliver local biodiversity needs in the past. He stated that there was scope to link WINEP programme objectives with the local nature recovery strategy to achieve increased benefits. The Cabinet Member for Environment committed to emailing the Nature Recovery Team to flag the point raised by the Member.

7. A Member asked about improvements made on the availability of information for residents on planned works through signage or communication. In reply, the SAB Implementation Manager said that street works were flagged to the public, but other works relied on water companies for direct engagement. He mentioned that larger, strategic works involved communication with local communities, but many works were reactive, particularly with water main bursts. He noted that there was room for improvement in informing communities about the longevity of outcomes and schemes.

Energy utilities

8. A Member asked if the increased demand for electricity was causing the challenges with connections to the transmission network, and if any improvements to the network could be identified and what future improvements could be expected. In reply, the Cabinet Member for Environment stated that the Council had not submitted new grid connection applications for large-scale solar farms due to long transmission connection timelines, typically between 2031 and 2037. She mentioned that national reforms to queue management were expected to improve the situation. The Strategic Energy Lead said that the transmission network needed transformation to handle more input from renewables, with current connection queues being very long. She highlighted that some large-scale solar farms had recently been granted grid connection, expected to be connected from 2030 to 2031. She mentioned that the regional energy strategic plan would help in the long term, with significant impacts expected after 2030.

9. A Member asked for thoughts on local government reorganisation, its direction, and where responsibility for it would best sit for Surrey's benefit after reorganisation. In reply, the Cabinet Member for Environment stated that there was no guidance on local government reform and mentioned looking at other authorities for best practices. She suggested that the mayoral strategic authority might be responsible for setting strategic plans. She indicated that continuing with the current process and not breaking it into multiple unitary authorities seemed sensible. The Strategic Energy Lead said the first stage of local energy planning would be to focus on preparation and understanding the current local energy system. She also mentioned the importance of regional collaboration and stakeholder engagement.

Street Works Taskforce

10. A Member asked if there was satisfaction with the progress made with the work of the Street Works Taskforce and inquired about areas for further and faster improvements. In reply, the Deputy Cabinet Member for Strategic Highways stated that the Street Works Taskforce had been established in July 2024 to improve collaboration and communication with utility providers, enhance signage of road works, digitise information about street works, and lobby the government to address legislative gaps. The Assistant Director for Highways for Network and Asset Management said that the Directorate was satisfied with progress, and she highlighted tangible outcomes, and emphasised the need for legislative changes to improve public outcomes.

11. A Member asked how much further coordination could be achieved, particularly around road closures for utility works and highways work. In reply, the Deputy Cabinet Member for Strategic Highways stated that the Street Works Taskforce would meet on 30 April 2025 and invited the Member to discuss concerns with utility companies directly. He explained that the Taskforce's work included unlocking planned emergency works and improving communication. The Assistant Director for Highways for Network and Asset Management discussed the development of a coordination mapping tool and the time scales for utility companies to notify the Directorate about works. She mentioned that Districts and Boroughs were informed about grass cutting and road closures to ensure better coordination.

12. A Member asked if the meetings were led by Surrey County Council or the utilities companies and expressed concern about any loss of momentum as Local Government Reorganisation progressed. In reply, the Deputy Cabinet Member for Strategic Highways stated that the task force meetings were led by the Council and chaired by the Assistant Director for Highways for Network and Asset Management. He acknowledged the risk of losing progress during local government reform but noted that future meetings were scheduled to maintain momentum.

13. A Member asked if there was an intention to increase the pace of work and inquired about any vision to get more engagement from different stakeholders and increase the pace of work to deliver for residents. In reply, the Deputy Cabinet Member for Strategic Highways stated that there was a risk of the pace of work falling off and mentioned the engagement of utility companies in subcommittees. He emphasized the importance of community work and sharing practical experiences.

14. A Member asked how regularly reinstatements were inspected after street works had taken place, inquired about the quality of the results and their timeliness, and questioned if there was an inspection to ensure the original pavement was replaced after street works on pavements were completed. In reply, the Assistant Director for Highways for Network and Asset Management stated that street works officers reviewed the reinstatements, which were guaranteed for two years, and if they failed within that period, they would be redone. She added that video technology was being considered to help identify defective reinstatements. She also noted that pavements reinstated with tarmac had to be replaced with the original material within six months, and street works officers ensured compliance in specific areas.

15. A Member asked whether any utilities had refused to sign the letter to the Department for Transport and who the six utility organisations that supported it were. In reply, the Deputy Cabinet Member for Strategic Highways stated that not all utility companies had agreed to sign the letter for various reasons.

16. A Member asked if the reduction in complaints from residents resulted from the improvements in the Street Works area, inquired if there was any direct evidence of the reduction in complaints in terms of numbers, and questioned if the improvements were being communicated to the general public well enough. In reply, the Deputy Cabinet Member for Strategic Highways stated that there had been a 9.5% year-on-year reduction in complaints in the 2023?24 and 2024?25 years. He mentioned a reduction in the duration of utility works from over 12,000 days in May 2023 to just over 4,000 days in November 2024. The Assistant Director for Highways for Network and Asset Management said that there had been a 43% increase in inspections from May 2023 to January 2025. She highlighted ongoing efforts to improve communication through social media and the NextDoor platform.

17. A Member asked whether there was a similar reduction in frequency, referring to the decrease in the number of utility works starting each day across the county, or if that was lagging behind. In reply, the Deputy Cabinet Member for Strategic Highways stated that utility companies intervened typically 88 times a day across the network, which amounted to 100,000 interventions a year. The Assistant Director for Highways for Network and Asset Management said that the number had reduced to 72 interventions per day over the past 12 months.

18. A Member asked about the Joint Communications Protocol, which was being developed, and whether utilities would need to sign up to it as part of applying for a permit. The Assistant Director for Highways for Network and Asset Management stated that street works were highly legislated, and issues often arose because certain requirements were not in legislation or guidance. The task force aimed to create a coalition of the willing and develop the communications protocol. Utilities companies were not required to sign up to the protocol as part of the permit process, but it was hoped they would recognise the benefits for their reputation and customer relations.

Digital utilities

19. A Member asked about the percentage of Surrey currently covered by 4G and inquired about the expectation of coverage by the end of this year. In reply, the Cabinet Member for Highways, Transport and Economic Growth stated that 4G coverage across Surrey districts and boroughs ranged from 98% to 100% by at least one supplier and 85% to 100% by all four suppliers. He mentioned that the update for the next round of improvements would be published by the end of 2025.

20. A Member asked about the inconsistent rollout of the broadband fibre network in Farnham, expressing concerns over the lack of control and management. In reply, the Cabinet Member for Highways, Transport and Economic Growth stated that the Council had limited control over the broadband fibre rollout, and this was mainly in issuing permits. He mentioned the involvement of regulators like Ofcom and noted the Government's fibre coverage targets. He highlighted the slowing commercial deployment due to costs and discussed the Government's funding programme to support premises.

ACTIONS AND REQUESTS FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

• Cabinet Member for Environment: Committed to emailing the Nature Recovery Team to flag the point raised by Councillor Catherine Baart about whether the Council could access WINEP funding for local nature recovery plans.

RECOMMENDATION

RESOLVED, That the Communities, Environment and Highways Select Committee

1. Welcomes the progress to date on the Utilities Engagement Programme.
2. Recommends that the Directorate considers whether the GLA Infrastructure Mapping Tool is a suitable model for Surrey.
3. Recommends that the Directorate further develops coordination with water utilities, Defra and Ofwat and to ensure that utilities companies are regularly attending the Surrey Flood Risk Management Board meetings.
4. Recommends that the Directorate encourages water utilities to have closer participation in the Drainage and Wastewater Management Board.
5. Recommends that the Directorate develops a strategy to build on the meetings with Ofwat and Water UK to improve environmental outcomes for the water industry both locally within Surrey and regionally.
6. Recommends that the Directorate continues to develop its engagement with Distribution Network Operators through the Local Area Energy Planning Process (LAEP).
7. Recommends that work is undertaken to avoid any disruption with the work that LAEPs has achieved following local government reorganisation.
8. Recommends that the Directorate identifies a strategy to maximise the benefit of the £1 Billion Shared Rural Network for Surrey residents, in particular with achieving 95% mobile phone coverage.
9. Recommends that the Directorate improves and expands communication so that residents are fully informed about street works activity in their area.
10. Recommends promotion of the One Network and widening Surrey County Council’s communication to help residents understand where repairs are being undertaken.