Politicians have clashed with highways bosses after complaining they are being excluded from important decisions over how cash is spent improving Watford’s roads.
The rift was provoked when borough and county politicians discovered that officers were planning to use a special Watford fund to pay for projects instead of the main Hertfordshire budget.
At the Hertfordshire Highways Watford Joint Member Panel on Thursday politicians said they wanted a more “democratic” process for controlling how cash is spent on improving roads.
The row was over how Section 106 money, cash paid by developers to off-set the impact on extra traffic on the town’s roads generated by new building projects, was being divvyed up.
Local councillors were displeased to learn that officers had slated two projects, for work on Clarendon Road and to improve the W30 bus service between Watford Junction station and Watford Business Park, for funding from Watford 106 money instead of from the county budget.
When faced with questions about which projects were getting section106 funds, Nick Gough, the county’s area highways development control manager, said the decisions were not made by him.
He said: “I am not a project manager, I am a fund manager. I see myself as a bank manager. I manage a set of funds.”
Councillors, such as borough Liberal Democrat, Andy Wylie expressed anger that democratic representatives had not been consulted and said the money should be spent in areas where there had been large developments.
He said: “I don’t care about protocol, this needs democratic accountability.
“We are the elected members and we’re the people expected to be in control.
“When members of the public have to suffer development and disruption they expect it to be spent in area where they live.”
The overall pot of section 106 cash available for projects in Watford has been drastically reduced since the Croxley Rail Link was approved in December.
The government has agreed to stump up £76m of the £119m project, which will see the Metropolitan line extended from Croxley station through the town and connected with Watford Junction.
A consortium of public bodies, including Hertfordshire County, Three Rivers District and Watford Borough councils, has been tasked with finding the rest of the cash.
Over £1m of section 106 money initially meant for road projects in Watford has been hovered up by the Croxley Rail Link.
However councillors representing the town managed to successfully argue at county hall that £250,000 of section 106 funds to be left for road projects in Watford.
One of the sources of contention at the meeting was traffic calming works planned for North Western Avenue, where a teenager was knocked over in November.
Highways bosses had agreed £60,000 worth or works for the road, with a £35,000 worth for future consideration.
However borough and county councillors Conservative Steve Johnson and Green Ian Brandon, expressed annoyance not all the work had been okayed, especially given the amount of development in the and Leggatts area in recent years.
After the meeting Leggatts councillor Asif Khan said: "For years, this section of NW Avenue has had problems of speeding and we've long anticipated some speeding restrictions. It must happen."
Another area where councillors said they wanted to see section 106 money beings spent was on improving roads around the Dome Roundabout.
Following the meeting Stephen Giles-Medhurst, the Lib Dem councillor for Central Oxhey and chairman of the Highways Joint Member Panel, said there needed to be more accountable process of divvying up road improvements cash.
The current joint members panel may be scrapped in the future with the introduction of highways locality grants, which give councillors each direct control of £90,000 to spend on road repairs in their division.
Councillor Giles-Medhurst said the grants amounted to a small overall proportion of the county’s highways budget and there still needed to be more involvement from elected-representative in decisions.
He added: “There is no consultation. The members are democratically elected and we are the ones who get it in the ear if the systems not working.”
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel