Transparency report – Technical Annex
B1 - Highways maintenance funding and spending figures
B1.1 – Capital funding allocation source
| Financial year | 2024-25 | 2025-26 | 2026-27 (projected) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Highways maintenance capital funding allocated through DfT | £275,000 | £895,000 | £2,491,000 |
| Other DfT capital funding utilised by local authority for highways maintenance | £ nil | £ nil | £ nil |
| Other Government capital funding allocated by local authority to Highways Maintenance | £ nil | £ nil | £ nil |
| Other capital funding allocated to highways maintenance | £4,045,000 | £7,263,000 | £7,588,000 |
| Total Capital funding allocated to highways maintenance | £4,320,000 | £8,158,000 | £10,079,000 |
B1.1.2 - Additional information on funding figures
The above figures are for Capital funding to deliver improvements to highway assets. The Other Capital Funding values are from Bexley’s own funding.
B1.2 - Spending
B1.2.1 – Total spending
The questions in this section (B1.2.1) relate to the spending condition set out in the 2026-27 local highways maintenance incentive funding requirements. Completion of this section forms part of the evidence required to meet this incentive funding condition.
Please confirm that you understand the answers provided in this section (B1.2.1) relate to your compliance under the 2026-27 local highways maintenance incentive funding requirements, as set out to your authority via letter to your chief executive in April and as published online.
| Financial year | 2024-25 | 2025-26 | 2026-27 (projected) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Total highways maintenance capital spend | £4,320,000 | £8,158,000 | £10,079,000 |
| Total highways maintenance revenue spend | £2,688,000 | £3,757,000 | £3,926,000 |
| Total spend | £7,008,000 | £11,915,000 | £14,005,000 |
B1.2.2 - Additional information on total spending figures
The 26/27 projected figures also allow for contractual indexation not yet agreed/confirmed
B1.2.3 Spending on carriageways by type of spend in financial year 2025-26 and 2026-27 (projected)
| Carriageway spend related maintenance type | Capital 2025-26 | Revenue 2025-26 | Capital 2026-27 (projected) | Revenue 2026-27 (projected) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Planned maintenance | ||||
| Preventative carriageway maintenance | £0 | £0 | £0 | £0 |
| Structural carriageway maintenance | £3,399,000 | £0 | £4,228,000 | £0 |
| Planned carriageway repair / patching programmes | £2,882,000 | £0 | £2,426,000 | £0 |
| Reactive carriageway maintenance | ||||
| Reactive carriageway repairs / patching (temporary repairs) | £0 | £213,000 | £0 | £223,000 |
| Reactive carriageway repairs / patching (permanent repairs) | £0 | £359,000 | £0 | £376,000 |
| Reactive carriageway repairs / patching (total) | In above | In above | In above | In above |
| Other carriageway-related spend | £0 | £21,000 | £0 | £22,000 |
| Total | £6,281,000 | £593,000 | £6,654,000 | £621,000 |
B1.2.4 - Additional information on spending on carriageways by type of spend
In accordance with DfT guidance, preventative maintenance includes surface dressing and similar treatments intended to extend the life of existing highway assets. Bexley will continue to consider the use of such treatments where they are appropriate; however, they have not been applied to date and therefore a nil value has been reported in the table. The predominantly busy urban nature of Bexley’s highway network means that these treatments are less generally suited to the network than in some other environments.
Bexley instead undertakes targeted preventative maintenance through localised structural patching. This involves excavating damaged areas, reconstructing the underlying layers where required, sealing the joints and applying permanent surfacing materials, providing a more durable and longer-lasting treatment for the particular defects and conditions identified.
Our approach is to prioritise the most urgent need and direct available funding towards sections in the worst condition. We focus resources on these sections and other locations where intervention is most needed, using structural repairs, such as single-layer resurfacing and multi-layer strengthening, to provide a longer service life and longer and better value.
Anti-skid surface treatments are also treated using our structural repairs approach, ensuring the new anti-skid/high-friction surfacing provides the maximum road safety benefits, rather than risk failures due to underlying structural issues.
The use of thermal heat treatment is being considered, with a view to tackling pothole defects, but could also be considered for more preventative works as they reconstruct the surface layer rather than coat/cover developing issues.
Other carriageway-related expenditure includes ironwork and make-safe works where no materials are required, such as traffic management and the clearance of spillages.
B2 – Highway Maintenance Activity (Surface Treatments and Repairs)
B2.1 – Road resurfacing and surface treatments
| Financial year | Road receiving preventative road surface treatments (length, km) | Road receiving planned structural maintenance (length, km) | Area receiving planned repair / patching programmes | Area receiving reactive repair / patching (permanent methods) | Area receiving reactive repairs/ patching (temporary methods) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2025-26 | 0km | 3.89km | 22,005m² | 4,049m² | 959m² |
| 2026-27 projected | 0km | 6.29km | 47,944m² | n/a | n/a |
B2.1.1 – additional information on surface treatments and repairs
Does table B2.1 reflect all your carriageway-related road surface treatments & repair activities (for example, including pothole repairs)? If no, please add further information on any other types of treatments (planned to be) delivered and their extent in the table below.
B2.1.2 – Further information and context
Bexley is actively progressing the use of thermal heat treatment repairs and is currently assessing whether this approach is best suited as a primary treatment for reactive repairs or as a preventative measure to address defects before they require reactive intervention.
B3 – Pothole repairs
This section sets out how authorities identify and repair potholes and other defects in carriageways, and how this activity fits within their wider maintenance approach. The Department is clear that prevention is better than cure: planned, preventative maintenance should be the foundation of a well-managed network, reducing the need for repeated reactive interventions
B3.1 – Pothole/Defect intervention criteria
Building on section A3.1, please set out in the table below how your local authority defines potholes and other carriageway defects, and the intervention criteria that apply.
| Pothole/Defect category name (as used by your authority) | Minimum investigatory or definitional threshold (e.g. depth, area, width – include units) | Additional risk or contextual factors considered (e.g. road hierarchy, traffic levels, location in carriageway) | Target response time – make safe | Target response time – permanent repair |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Priority 1 | Depth >=40mm AND Width >=200mm (any direction) | All qualifying defects treated | 1 hour from inspection | 90 days |
| Priority 2 | Depth >=31mm and <=39mm | All qualifying defects treated | No immediate risk | 90 days |
| Other/Risk-based | Depth <=30mm | Treated on risk, such as high footfall or precise location | Varies based on risk | 90 days |
B3.2 – Number of potholes filled
| B3.2.1 - Number of potholes filled in 2025-26 (estimate) | 4,403 |
B3.2.2 - Of these how many do you estimate were resolved using each of the following approaches?
| Planned repair / patching programmes | Planned structural maintenance programmes | Reactive repair using temporary repair methods | Reactive repair using permanent repair methods |
|---|---|---|---|
| 890 | 1,122 | 1,642 | 749 |
B3.2.3 - Additional information on numbers of potholes resolved, by treatment type
There is no single national definition of a pothole, reflecting the wide variation in the type, size, depth and underlying cause of carriageway defects.
Bexley operates a defined policy for managing potholes requiring reactive maintenance, as described in section B3.1. Defects meeting these criteria are addressed through the reactive maintenance regime, with the estimated number treated in 2025/26 reported in section B3.2.2. Potholes that do not require immediate or reactive intervention may be considered as part of the Council's planned maintenance programme. This programme also addresses other forms of carriageway deterioration, including rutting, cracking and surface polishing.
For reporting purposes, Bexley estimates the number of pothole repairs undertaken by converting the total area treated through individual repair works into an equivalent number of pothole repairs. This recognises that a single repair may address one or several defects, or a larger area containing multiple defects.
Small repairs are generally counted as one pothole repair. As the area treated increases, the calculation recognises the practical and financial benefits of addressing defects together in a single patch, rather than undertaking multiple small, isolated repairs. This approach can also reduce the number of joints introduced into the carriageway.
For larger areas and structural repairs, the same principle applies. The Council considers whether it is more appropriate and cost-effective to undertake the work as one continuous treatment or to divide it into a number of smaller areas.
The overall objective is to maximise the number of potholes and other carriageway defects that can be effectively addressed within available resources, while avoiding unnecessary expenditure or the removal and replacement of carriageway material that remains in good condition. This approach also seeks to minimise the introduction of additional joints, which can become potential points of weakness within the highway network.
The following table is a guide to our estimation process:
| Area of repair | Pothole equivalent | Simple note |
|---|---|---|
| Up to 1 m² | 1 pothole | Small repair – generally equivalent to treating one pothole. |
| Over 1 m² to 6 m² | 1 pothole | Larger repair, but still generally treated as one defect. This reflects the contract pricing/banding and avoids splitting one repair into several smaller ones. |
| Over 6 m² to 21 m² | 3 potholes | Larger patch or several defects close together. Equivalent to around three pothole repairs, depending on the shape and nature of the defect. |
| Over 21 m² to 50 m² | 4 potholes | Normally treated as one larger patch where defects are close together, rather than carrying out several separate small repairs. |
| Over 50 m² to 100 m² | 5 potholes | Normally treated as one larger patch due to the proximity of defects and efficiency of carrying out the work together. |
| Over 100 m² | 5 potholes + 1.5 per additional 100 m² | The first 100 m² is equivalent to five potholes. Further areas are assessed at an average of 1.5 potholes per additional 100 m² where the repair continues as one patch along the route. |
Caution for readers – Authorities have different criteria for identifying potholes and different methodologies for counting how many they have filled or resolved. Summing the figures in the above table across authorities will therefore not provide a reliable estimate of the total number of potholes filled across England.
B3.3 - Prices of pothole interventions
| Unit/average cost of a permanent pothole repair on your network (reactive) | £865 |
| Unit/average cost of a temporary pothole repair on your network (reactive) | £92 |
B3.3.1 - Additional information on pothole prices (optional)
These unit and average repair costs are calculated by dividing the total cost incurred by the number of repairs completed. The costs include associated traffic management, street works permitting, and any out of hours call out costs, as well as materials and labour. The average cost also reflects that individual treatments may address either a single pothole or multiple potholes at the same location. They should not then be used as a basis to argue the value in repairing any individual location.
B3.4 - Defect repair quality
| ID | Question | Yes/no |
|---|---|---|
| 3.4.1 | Do you set requirements to those delivering repairs about the longevity of both a) planned repairs/patching and b) reactive repairs using permanent methods? | Yes |
| 3.4.2 | If yes, do you base your material and process specifications on these longevity requirements? | Yes |
| 3.4.3 | Do you regularly monitor the appropriateness of the carriageway interventions chosen by your workforce or contractor and the quality of work delivered? | Yes |
| 3.4.4 | If yes, do you systematically record information about expected and delivered longevity of repairs? | Yes |
B3.4.5 - Evidence Summary
The longevity of all works is subject to contractual warranty (ranging from 1 to 5 years) and is closely monitored, with final assessment towards the end of the period. Our contractor is then tasked with resolving any issues, with potential for the warranty period to be restarted.
B3.4.6 - Additional information
Planned and reactive repairs use the same permanent material standards and construction methods as larger resurfacing and reconstruction works, this being our localised structural maintenance approach. This improves overall operational life longevity in line with the wider network expectation. The warranty period provides for faults to be resolved without incurring additional cost to the council and encourages the contractor to do the work correctly, first time.
B3.5 - Public reporting system for defects and other issues
| ID | Question | Answer |
|---|---|---|
| 3.5.1 | Are defect reports from the public routinely used as an input into maintenance planning and inspection regimes? | Yes |
| 3.5.2 | Do you inform users about the outcomes from their feedback, including when no action is to be taken? | Yes |
B3.5.3 - Evidence Summary
All reports are assessed by a highway technician and actioned in accordance with the Council’s adopted policy. Identified defects also inform site selection for planned maintenance and patching programmes. Reports submitted by residents, including those with an email address, are recorded through Bexley’s tailored FixMyStreet service. Reporters are notified of the outcome by email and through the online report, with a brief explanation where no action is required and a link to the relevant policy information.
B3.5.4 - Tools used for reporting
Bexley uses a bespoke version of the national FixMyStreet reporting tool, enabling residents to accurately locate highway issues and provide photographs. Reports link directly to the Council’s published defect intervention criteria and are automatically routed to the appropriate team, including out-of-hours services, to support timely and efficient inspection.
B4 – Maintenance of highway structures
Please set out information about other highway structures and assets
B4.1 Highway Structures
| ID | Question | Answer |
|---|---|---|
| 4.1.1 | Number of highway structures on your highway network | 174 |
| 4.1.2 | Number of highway structures with interim measures in accordance with CS470 applied? | 2 |
| 4.1.3 | Number of structures due a General Inspection in 2025-26 in accordance with CS450 | 42 |
| 4.1.4 | Number of General Inspections carried out in 2025-26 | 41 |
| 4.1.5 | Number of structures due a Principal Inspection in 2025-26 in accordance with CS450 | 39 |
| 4.1.6 | Number of Principal Inspections carried out in 2025-26 | 13 |
A4.1 - Further context
The reduction in Principal Inspections was due to the changeover of contract for these specialist services. The 26 outstanding inspections are more complex, requiring specialist access arrangements or railway track possessions.
Routine observations have not identified any apparent immediate safety concerns at these locations, and the outstanding inspections are being actively progressed and will be completed as the necessary access arrangements are secured.
B5 – Asset Management
This section focuses on asset management practices that underpin how the authority plans, prioritises and delivers highways maintenance. It is intended to provide confidence that decisions are evidence led, risk based and aligned to whole life value, in line with the Code of Practice for Well Managed Highways Infrastructure.
B5.1 - Asset Management Strategy and Policy
The questions in this section (B5.1) relate to the asset management condition set out in the 2026–27 local highways maintenance incentive funding requirements. Completion of this section forms part of the evidence required to meet this incentive funding condition.
| 5.1.1 | Please confirm that you understand the answers provided in this section (B5.1) relate to your compliance under the 2026-27 local highways maintenance incentive funding requirements, as set out to your authority via letter to your chief executive in April and as published online. | Yes |
| 5.1.2 | Please provide a link to your authority’s published highways asset management policy and strategy. Bexley’s current HAMP document is available at: Bexley is undertaking a comprehensive review of its highways asset management policy and strategy, including consideration of the revised Code of Practice for Well-Managed Highways due in 2026. Once adopted, the updated policy and strategy will be published online, providing transparency on the Council’s approach to managing its highway assets. The timeline for completion and publication of this revised policy document is March 2027. | |
| 5.1.3 | Please provide the date it was last reviewed or updated | 2017/18 |
| 5.1.4 | Please provide proof of the review or update. The existing document is not being reviewed, we are developing a fully updated document. This in progress, and to be delivered alongside a specialist consultant. The commission has been awarded, with the work scheduled for completion during Quarters 3 and 4 of 2026/27. | |
| 5.1.5 | If your asset management policy or strategy has not been reviewed or updated since 1 August 2024, please confirm that it will be reviewed or updated by 30 September 2027 and provide a brief timetable for doing so. The commissioned work is scheduled for completion in Q4 2026/27 and will therefore be implemented ahead of the September 2027 deadline. | |
B5.1.6 - Further context (optional)
The development of our new Asset Management Strategy will include a comprehensive review and update of the network development plan, network hierarchy, operational risk by category, and designation of traffic-sensitive streets. This work will provide a stronger evidence base to support any future introduction of a Lane Rental Scheme in the borough and general street works permitting functions.
Key aspects of highways asset management approach
To get a sense of how each local highway authority is implementing best practice for asset management, we ask that you provide the following information across a sample of key areas.
B5.2 - Asset data
This section seeks to establish whether asset management decisions are supported by appropriate and up-to-date condition data.
Please complete the table below for your key highway assets.
| Asset type | Asset inventory held? (None / partial / full) | Condition data held? (None / Partial / Full) |
|---|---|---|
| Carriageways | partial | Partial |
| Footways and cycleways | partial | Partial |
| Structures | partial | Partial |
| Drainage assets | partial | Partial |
| Street lighting | full | Partial |
| Traffic signals | Held by TfL | Held by TfL |
5.2.1 - Further context (optional)
Items listed about have been stated as Partial (under the available options), as we are aware of some gaps in the available data, although the vast majority is held by the Council. Regardless, in 2024, 2025, and 2026, Bexley achieved Platinum Award status for its Street Data demonstrating the high quality of our existing data. The commissioned asset management work will resolve the remaining gaps and support a more comprehensive asset inventory, further improving the quality and value of both national and local highway data.
B5.3 – Asset data integration and management
This section seeks to understand the maturity of how asset data is managed and integrated to support planning and investment decisions.
B5.3.1 – Asset data integration
How is asset inventory and condition data for your key highway assets primarily managed? (please indicate one option with an X)
| Discrete spreadsheets or documents held by individual teams | |
| Multiple digital platforms with limited integration | |
| A single digital platform or a set of connected platforms used across the highways service | X |
| Other (please set out in further context) |
B5.3.2 - Further context (optional)
Bexley has used the industry recognised Symology asset management system for many years, including its integration with our contractor services. The Council is currently migrating its data to the new Symology Aurora system, which will enhance data management and analysis, support wider integration across highways functions, and enable improved access through public-facing online tools.
B5.4 – Lifecycle planning and investment decision-making
This section focuses on whether the authority uses lifecycle planning to inform maintenance investment decisions, rather than relying solely on reactive demand or short-term pressures.
| ID | Question | Yes / No |
|---|---|---|
| 5.4.1 | Do you use lifecycle plans for carriageways to support maintenance investment decisions? | No |
| 5.4.2 | Do you use lifecycle plans for footways to support maintenance investment decisions? | No |
| 5.4.3 | Do you use lifecycle plans for structures to support investment decisions? | No |
B5.4.4 - Evidence Summary
Whilst Bexley does not have formal lifecycle plans for its highway network, it applies a risk-based approach informed by network condition, inspection data, reactive repairs, preventative maintenance needs, planned works and local knowledge. This supports the prioritisation of available funding and risk towards appropriate treatments that maintain the network and address deterioration before more significant intervention is required. It also ensures that whole-life cost is considered and roads are not replaced solely based on age where they remain in a serviceable condition.
B5.5 – Performance monitoring and continuous improvement
This section focuses on whether the authority monitors the effectiveness of its asset management approach and uses performance information to inform ongoing investment and prioritisation decisions.
| ID | Question | Answer |
|---|---|---|
| 5.5.1 | Do you have a defined set of key performance indicators (KPIs) to monitor the outcomes of your highways asset management approach? | No |
| 5.5.2 | Are these KPIs reviewed on a regular basis (at least annually)? | No |
| 5.5.3 | Are KPI trends used to inform maintenance planning, prioritisation or changes to forward programmes or investment decisions? | No |
| 5.5.4 | Have you conducted a value for money review or peer review of your service in the last 3 years | No |
B5.5.5 - Evidence Summary
Whilst the items above have been answered as No, Bexley has extensive operational and contractual performance management but does not currently have a single formal asset-management KPI framework linking network condition, risk, investment, levels of service and whole-life outcomes. The commissioned Asset Management Strategy provides an opportunity to establish this framework and strengthen the use of performance trends in future investment and prioritisation decisions.
B6 - Maintaining footways and cycleways
| ID | Question | Answer |
|---|---|---|
| 6.1.1 | Do you have a defined footway hierarchy (e.g. based on footway function and usage levels) that underpins a risk-based approach to inspection frequencies and maintenance programmes? | Yes |
| 6.1.2 | For 2026-27, please provide the length of footways that you have earmarked for structural maintenance / reconstruction / renewal | 0km |
| 6.1.3 | For 2026-27, please provide the length of footways that you have earmarked for preventative maintenance treatments | 0km |
| 6.1.4 | Are priority footways and cycleways included in your winter service (e.g. gritting or snow clearance), and in a routine programme for keeping them clear of overgrown vegetation and debris (e.g. sweeping, cutting back)? | Yes |
| 6.1.5 | For 2026-27, are you planning to deliver structural or preventative maintenance to cycleways which is not yet covered as part of your carriageway maintenance programmes or footway maintenance programmes (e.g. segregated cycleways that are not shared with pedestrians or motorists). If yes, please set out the length of such cycleways that you have earmarked for: | No |
| a. Structural maintenance / reconstruction (in km) | Nil km | |
| b. Preventative maintenance treatments (in km) | Nil km |
B6.1.6 - Please provide any brief additional information you consider helpful in explaining your approach to maintaining footways and cycleways
Bexley operates a risk-based regime for reactive repairs based on broad hierarchy of use, with high footfall areas (town centres etc) inspections taking place at least monthly, and low risk area inspections taking place twice per year. Our inspection regime will be refined with our commissioned asset management strategy. The focus in recent years has been on carriageway condition treatments based on available condition information and level of use, with footway works tackled under reactive works. Bexley has limited segregated cycleways, so our footway and carriageway cycle lane provision is treated within these wider regimes.
B6.1.7 - Evidence Summary
Bexley’s footway condition inspection and cleansing regimes are provided online via the following links:
Response standards for Highways Service Level Agreements
Response standards for Street Cleansing Service Level Agreements
B7 – Drainage
| ID | Question | Answer |
|---|---|---|
| 7.1.1 | Please provide an estimate of your drainage maintenance expenditure split (in percentages) between: a) Reactive (incident- or failure-driven) maintenance | 3% for A |
| b) Planned maintenance (routine/cyclical and/or risk-based) | 97% for B | |
| 7.1.2 | Does your authority utilise a digital drainage management platform, covering asset inventory, inspection history, sensor data, and risk scoring? | No |
| 7.1.3 | Do you maintain a record of locations where drainage issues are known to cause or contribute to carriageway deterioration or surface water ponding? | Yes |
| 7.1.4 | Do you utilise smart sensors or other remote monitoring technologies to monitor performance of your drainage assets. If yes please provide some high level information in bullet points below | No |
B7.1.5 - Evidence Summary
Highway gullies are cleansed (emptied and flushed) twice a year, with those on our major Strategic Road Network dealt with as part of co-ordinated road closures for safety and cost-efficiency. Separate cyclical maintenance regimes are in place for ditch screens, soakaways and dumbwells. The Council’s Flood Risk Management team maintains records of reported and investigated flooding incidents. This information, together with operational knowledge and investigation findings, is used to identify and prioritise locations for further action, targeted maintenance or engagement with relevant third-party stakeholders.
B7.1.6 – Further context on approach to drainage asset management
Our established regime for cleansing drainage assets on our network allows for rain water to be removed from the surface, providing a safer and clearer environment for road users whilst also reducing water ingress into any weak points of the asset that may cause deterioration through freezing or water pressure from tyres.
The flood risk records incorporate flooding incidents reported by residents and other customers through both traditional reporting channels and the Council’s established FixMyStreet online reporting service. Ad-hoc cleansing is also undertaken in response to highway flooding and customer reports.
B8 – Skills and training
| ID | Question | Answer |
|---|---|---|
| 8.1.1 | Do you have an up-to-date training and development plan for those responsible for highways asset management in your authority? | No |
| 8.1.2 | Do you or your main highways contractors support professional development through a recognised professional training scheme (e.g. Institution of Civil Engineers (ICE) or Institution of Highway Engineers (IHE))? | Yes |
| 8.1.3 | Does your authority contribute towards the cost of professional membership or professional development required for relevant highways roles? | Yes |
| 8.1.4 | Do you employ a professionally qualified engineer (e.g. Chartered Engineer (CEng) or equivalent competence) with responsibility for the management of highway structures (either in house or through a contracted arrangement)? | Yes |
| 8.1.5 | Does your authority define competence requirements for key highways asset management roles and take steps to address any identified gaps (either directly or through contractual arrangements)? | Yes |
| 8.1.6 | Do you or your main contractors support early career development in your local area, for example through apprentice schemes, traineeships or pre-apprenticeship programmes, sponsored qualifications (e.g. HNC/HND, degree, MSc), graduate schemes etc | Yes |
B8.1.7 - Evidence Summary
Bexley has successfully recruited new highway technicians to strengthen the highways service. Following completion of their probationary period and initial operational training, they will receive appropriate asset management and highway inspection training. New staff are supported by experienced senior technicians and managers, including officers with established professional accreditations.
One-off training courses are also used to develop and enhance local knowledge where appropriate, including the new UKRLG/ADEPT Preventative Highways Maintenance Fundamentals training.
Where specialist advice or additional technical expertise is required, officers can access support through the Council’s existing consultancy services contract. Individual training, mentoring and professional support are in place, although these are not currently consolidated into a formal service-wide training plan.
B8.1.8 – Further context on skills/training (optional)
Bexley supports apprenticeship schemes and early career development opportunities, alongside further education and professional training. Social Value requirements within term contracts support local employment and skills development, creating opportunities for local residents where appropriate. These commitments align with the Council’s Bexley Business & Employment Support Programme, helping to connect local residents with employment, skills and training opportunities.
B9 – Adapting roads to withstand climate pressures
Climate and environmental factors, such as heavy rainfall, prolonged heat, and freeze-thaw cycles, are integral to effective highways asset management, as they influence asset performance, deterioration rates and long-term resilience. Understanding both the impacts of a changing climate and the carbon implications of maintenance activities supports better decision-making, helping authorities to optimise durability, manage risk and deliver best whole life value from their assets.
| ID | Question | Yes/no |
|---|---|---|
| 9.1.1 | Have you updated your asset management policy and strategy to reflect the increased probability of extreme-weather and/or geohazards now and in the future? | No |
| 9.1.2 | Have you identified your resilient network and agree this with senior decision-makers | Yes |
| 9.1.3 | If yes when did you last update this. | 09/2025 |
| 9.1.4 | Have you identified locations that are repeatedly affected by extreme weather (e.g. flooding, heat damage, storms)? | Yes – known informally |
| 9.1.5 | Which climate-adaptation measures are currently implemented on your network? | |
| - Targeted drainage upgrades or maintenance | No | |
| - Natural flood management / SuDS | Yes | |
| - targeted slope / ground stability / landslip mitigation | Yes | |
| - Heat-resilient materials or surface treatments | No | |
| - Tree planting / shading for heat management | Yes | |
| - Other (please specify) | No | |
| - None of the above | No | |
| 9.1.6 | Have you measured and benchmarked the greenhouse gas emissions from your highways maintenance service using a recognised industry standard? Or do you have arrangements in place to do this, such as by signing up to the DfT funded ADEPT Carbon Leadership Programme. | No |
| 9.1.7 | Have you formally engaged with the DfT funded ADEPT live labs 2 Programme, to understand what lessons your authority can utilise to increase the efficiency of your operations and support decarbonisation efforts? | No |
B9.1.8 - Evidence Summary
Bexley has an established resilient network supporting highway inspections and winter maintenance operations, with a general review each September. Records are maintained from reported incidents and local knowledge of locations particularly affected by flooding. Small-scale SuDS interventions have been completed and are considered within new highway designs. Recent major projects have addressed embankment stability alongside a major road and renewed and enhanced a culvert, resolving local flooding issues. However, these are not directly attributed to climate adaption.
B9.1.9 - Further context on your adaptation / resilience activities
Bexley’s wider emergency planning arrangements, including Gold command and Local Authority Liaison Officer (LALO) arrangements, provide an established framework for coordinating the Council’s response to significant severe-weather events. These officers being trained and having access to the National Situation Centre Response network. Out of Hours highways duty managers and technicians provide expert knowledge and experience in dealing with live incidents/event.
These arrangements support the highway service in managing local impacts such as flooding, snow, ice and high winds, alongside normal operational resilience measures. Investment into the existing weather station within the borough assists with decision making of extreme weather events.
Ongoing maintenance and inspections under the Reservoirs’ Act at our Category A dam, with on call officers and automatic mechanisms to deal with high rainfall events and flood risk.
B10 – Innovation
| ID | Question | Yes / No |
|---|---|---|
| 10.1.1 | Do your procurement and contracting approaches encourage and reward innovative practice? | Yes |
| 10.1.2 | Can you demonstrate that innovative materials and practices are regularly reviewed and, where appropriate, integrated into business as usual operations? | Yes |
| 10.1.3 | If you have conducted innovation trials, have you shared the findings of these publicly or with professional networks? | No |
10.1.4 - Evidence Summary
Bexley has considered trials of new methodologies, including Pothole Pro and thermal heat treatment, and is actively engaging with its contractor on the latter. Trials of warm-mix asphalt were successfully assessed and subsequently adopted as the Council’s default surfacing approach. Bexley has also worked with its contractor to assess and introduce newer surfacing materials and mixes where these are considered appropriate for specific locations and circumstances.
B10.1.5 - Further context on your innovation activities
10.2 – Examples of innovations that have been adopted
Bexley takes an open but cautious approach to innovative products and treatment methods, while maintaining a focus on proven techniques that support the overall condition of the network. This includes a preference for carriageway strengthening rather than surface-layer resurfacing or overlay forms of treatment.
Warm-mix asphalt is now the Council’s default surfacing material and forms the majority of surfacing works, providing potential energy, emissions and road-closure time savings. Contracts include cost-sharing arrangements for efficiency and improvement initiatives, encouraging contractors to propose and trial innovative approaches without bearing the full financial risk.
Enhanced polymer-modified binders are used at higher-trafficked locations where their improved strength-to-depth characteristics can reduce excavation, waste and material requirements.
The use of AI-powers defect recognition surveys has been used for a number of years, with the system being developed and new equipment adopted throughout this time as technology improves.
Our highway technicians and street works inspectors now use handheld tablet devices, enabling issues to be assigned directly to the correct officer (supported by a phone call where urgent) and allowing casework to be processed immediately and reduce data entry errors/delays. These live updates feed directly into our contractor ordering systems and online public reporting service responses.
Bexley is also working with its contractor to assess thermal heat treatment for reactive repairs, considering its environmental, operational and cost implications before wider adoption.
B11 – Working with utility companies to reduce disruption to road users
| ID | Question | Yes / No |
|---|---|---|
| 11.1.1 | Do you routinely monitor and enforce utility works quality as part of your streetworks management? | Yes |
| 11.1.2 | Have you undertaken a senior-endorsed assessment of whether a lane rental scheme would be suitable for your area? | Yes |
| 11.1.3 | Do you seek input from utility companies when determining your highways maintenance programme to help reduce disruption? | Yes |
| 11.1.4 | Have you conducted and published a permit scheme evaluation within the last three years? | No |
| 11.1.5 | Have you conducted a traffic sensitive review in the last three years? | No |
11.1.6 - Evidence Summary
Regular coordination meetings are held with key stakeholders to discuss major projects and emerging issues, and to identify planned works alongside the Council’s own major works and surfacing programmes. An in-house review of Traffic Sensitive Streets is currently underway ahead of a more comprehensive consultant-led review later in the year. This will also help inform the Council’s approach to any future Lane Rental Scheme, with the council decision at present not to adopt this scheme through discussions at committee and with the Cabinet Member.
B11.1.7 - Further context
As a London Borough, Bexley follows the London Permit Scheme (LoPS) and uses the DfT Street Manager system and Symology Aurora systems for Street Works Permits and so applies these assessment and inspection regimes.
B12 – Managing highways maintenance contracts effectively
Only answer this sections if you utilise a contractor to deliver any of your carriageway maintenance operations, including: structural maintenance, planned repairs / patching, or reactive repairs / patching
| ID | Question | Yes / No |
|---|---|---|
| 12.1.1 | Does your authority retain in-house technical capability to independently assess maintenance interventions proposed by contractors? | Yes |
| 12.1.2 | Do you routinely analyse actual unit costs (for example £/m² of road surface treatments, or £/pothole repair) for core highways maintenance activities delivered under contract and compare them against benchmarks or historic performance? | Yes |
| 12.1.3 | Do you have defined KPIs for your highways maintenance contract(s), and are they actively monitored by your authority to manage performance? | Yes |
| 12.1.4 | If reactive pothole repairs are delivered by a contractor, do your contracting arrangements incentivise single-visit permanent repairs where it is safe and appropriate to do so? | Yes |
12.1.5 - Evidence Summary
The in-house team comprises senior technicians and technicians allocated to discrete areas of the borough, supporting local knowledge of highway issues and asset condition. Officers undertake inspections, investigate reports, apply the Council’s treatment policy, and order and monitor works through to completion, including post-implementation checks. Warranty period inspections against the longevity standards force our contractor to resolve failures at their cost and so incentivises them to do the work right first time.
Unit costs for our procured term contractor are increased annually in line with industry-specific indexations keeping them relevant to the elements involved. These have been verified through cost build-up analysis to ensure suitable values applied. These are compared to other unit rates, when available, through other procurement activities.
Contract KPIs monitor work completion and compliance with required timescales for maintaining public safety. Performance is reviewed quarterly, with contractual provisions allowing penalties where appropriate. Operational performance is also discussed through weekly meetings, supported by quarterly strategic contract review meetings to consider wider performance, issues and improvement opportunities.
B12.1.6 - Further context
Contracted reactive pothole repairs are identified, instructed and managed by Bexley’s in-house highways technicians rather than outsourced to a contractor. As a result, no contractor incentive arrangements apply for treating defects multiple times, with the size and permanence of repairs determined and controlled by Council officers.