Dunholme Road, Welton resurfacing works

I am writing to request information under the Environmental Information Regulations 2004 regarding resurfacing works carried out in late 2025 at the following locations:

Dunholme Road, Welton

The road between the Co-op and the A46

The section of road near Nettleham Police Headquarters

To assist with locating the information, I understand these works were carried out approximately in late 2025 (please advise if a narrower date range is required).

1. Decision-making and supporting evidence

Please provide details of how the decision was made to resurface the above roads, together with all recorded information supporting that decision, including:

a) Condition surveys, inspections, and assessments

b) The criteria or policy used to prioritise these roads

c) Internal reports, decision records, and approval documents

d) Meeting minutes where the works were discussed or approved

e) Risk assessments

f) Inspection reports and maintenance records

g) Technical assessments or evaluations

h) Correspondence (internal or external) discussing or influencing the decision

2. 'Slippery surface' justification (Dunholme Road, Welton)

Please provide recorded information relating to the decision to resurface this road on the basis that the surface was considered 'slippery,' including:

a) Skid resistance test results (e.g. SCRIM data) prior to resurfacing

b) Any risk assessments identifying skid risk

c) Records of road traffic collisions or incidents attributed to surface conditions

d) Any reports, emails, or internal communications referring to the surface being slippery

e) Details of the decision-making process followed

3. Resurfacing contract and procurement

Please provide details of the contract relating to these works, including:

a) The contractor(s) awarded the work

b) The procurement route used (e.g. framework agreement, open tender, etc.)

c) Tender evaluation or award decision documents

d) Due diligence, performance assessments, or pre-qualification checks carried out

e) Contract value and scope of works

4. Noise impact and guidance

Please provide recorded information relating to the assessment of noise impacts arising from the resurfacing works, including:

a) Any government or industry guidance followed (e.g. Department for Transport guidance)

b) Any pre-works noise impact assessments

c) Any post-completion noise monitoring or evaluations

d) Any internal correspondence discussing expected or actual changes in noise levels

5. Remedial works and contractor responsibility

Please provide recorded information relating to statements made on FixMyStreet that remedial works would be undertaken at the contractor's expense, including:

a) Details of remedial actions identified or planned

b) Any timetable or schedule for these works

c) Records confirming that the contractor will bear the cost

d) Any inspections, defect reports, or snagging lists

e) Any consideration given to noise levels as part of remedial works

1.

a. The roads in question form part of the authority’s planned preventative maintenance programme and are routinely monitored through a combination of visual inspections and condition survey data, including Surface Condition Assessment of the National Network of Roads (SCANNER) surveys and other network-level assessment tools, undertaken in accordance with national highway asset management guidance. Data is used at a network level to inform condition trends and assist in the prioritisation of maintenance activity across the network, alongside engineer inspections and other condition information held within the asset management system. The AC10 surface course exhibited early-stage deterioration typical of aged bituminous surfacing. Surface dressing was considered an appropriate preventative maintenance treatment to seal the surface and extend pavement life. The decision was made on the basis of a preventative maintenance strategy rather than reactive repair or structural renewal, in accordance with the authority’s asset management objectives. The decision was therefore made on the basis of a preventative maintenance strategy, rather than reactive repair or structural renewal, in accordance with the authority’s asset management objectives.

b. Please see link to the Highways infrastructure asset management plan (HIAMP):  https://www.lincolnshire.gov.uk/directory-record/61685/highways-infrastructure-asset-management-plan

As such, this information is exempt from disclosure in accordance with the exemption set out at Section 21 of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 which provides that a public authority need not comply with a request for disclosure under the Act where that information is reasonably accessible by other means.

c. The authority holds information relevant to the development and delivery of these schemes within its asset management systems and Early Contractor Involvement (ECI) documentation.

ECI documents relate to the planning and delivery of works under the Highway Works Term Contract and may include scheme scoping, programming, and constructability input from the contractor. These documents support the delivery of works but do not constitute formal decision-making records beyond the authority’s established asset management process. The ECI documentation contains commercially sensitive information relating to pricing, methodology, and contractor proposals. The public interest in maintaining confidentiality has been considered and, in this case, outweighs the public interest in disclosure.

d. No meeting minutes are held in relation to the approval of these individual schemes.

The development of the annual surface dressing programme is undertaken through the authority’s routine asset management process, which involves condition data review, engineer assessment, and programme prioritisation. This is an operational process and does not involve formally minuted meetings at an individual scheme level.

e. The authority holds risk assessments relating to the operational delivery of the works (e.g. health and safety and site-specific construction risks).

The authority does not hold risk assessments relating to the decision-making process for selecting these schemes. Scheme selection is undertaken through the authority’s established asset management approach, which is based on condition data, inspection regimes, and lifecycle planning rather than a discrete, documented risk assessment process.

f. Attached documents of inspection reports and maintenance records Appendix 1, 2 and 3.

g. Scheme design is undertaken in accordance with Road Note 39 and established preventative maintenance best practice for surface dressing operations. Engineering assessment is embedded within routine condition surveys and inspection records held in the asset management system, which inform treatment selection based on observed pavement condition, deterioration indicators, and lifecycle optimisation principles.

The following appendices include the condition survey data associated to each scheme:

• Appendix 4 - Scothern Lane, Dunholme - condition data
• Appendix 5 - Dunholme Road, Welton - condition data
• Appendix 6 - Deepdale Lane, Nettleham - condition data
• Appendix 7 - Deepdale Lane, Nettleham - Vaisala AI picture

h. The authority has not identified any recorded internal or external correspondence that specifically relates to or influences the decision to include these schemes within the programme. The inclusion of sites is determined through the routine asset management process and does not typically involve separate correspondence or consultation at an individual scheme level.

2.

a. The authority does not hold SCRIM survey data for Dunholme Road, Welton. This route is not included within the authority’s routine SCRIM survey network.

b. No survey skid data recorded as above.

c. No recorded collisions at Dunholme Road, Welton within the last three years.

d. No recorded information has been identified which specifically refers to the surface being described as “slippery” in relation to the decision to resurface this road.

e. While routine inspections noted surface deterioration (e.g. fretting, oxidation, reduced texture), these are qualitative observations used to inform maintenance decisions rather than quantified skid resistance measurements or formal skid risk assessments.

3.

a. The works were delivered by Kiely Bros Ltd who are a supply chain partner working for Balfour Beatty, Lincolnshire County Council Highway Works Term Contract supplier.

b. Procurement for the Highway Works Term Contract, of which the surface dressing programme forms a part, was undertaken during 2018/19 with a start date of 1st April 2020. The procurement route was a Competitive Procedure with Negotiation.

c. Award decision records can be found here on the LCC website: https://lincolnshire.moderngov.co.uk/ieListDocuments.aspx?CId=492&MId=5347

d. Updates are received by the Highways and Transport Scrutiny Committee every quarter and can also be found in the Scrutiny records. The most recent report can be found here: https://lincolnshire.moderngov.co.uk/ieListDocuments.aspx?CId=492&MId=9016

e. The contract runs for 12 years and has a value of around £700m and covers all highways works including, reactive repairs, surfacing, patching, footways, drainage, structures, street lighting and cyclical works.

4.

a. The works were carried out in accordance with relevant UK guidance, including the Noise Policy Statement for England and Design Manual for Roads and Bridges, which do not prescribe specific noise limits for maintenance activities such as resurfacing works. TRL research informs the wider understanding of tyre–road noise characteristics and surface texture effects but does not require formal noise appraisal for maintenance activities of this nature.

b. As the works comprised routine maintenance (surface dressing) rather than a new road scheme or significant alteration, no formal pre-works noise impact assessment was required under current guidance or legislation.

c. No post-completion noise monitoring was undertaken, as there is no statutory requirement to carry out noise evaluation for maintenance works of this nature.

d. No specific internal correspondence was identified regarding predicted or actual changes in noise levels, as surface dressing is a standard maintenance treatment and not typically subject to detailed noise appraisal.

5.

a. Remedial works have been identified consisting of re-surface dressing of sections where the original treatment has not performed as expected. These works fall within the contractor’s two-year defect liability (guarantee) period.

The works are programmed for delivery in Summer 2027 in accordance with the contractual obligations for defect rectification.

b. The works are programmed for delivery in Summer 2027.

c. The authority has recorded within its Highways Asset Management system that the relevant works have been flagged as a defect as part of its routine asset management processes.

In accordance with the Highways Term Maintenance Contract, responsibility for rectifying eligible defects during the defect liability (guarantee) period lies with the contractor under the contractual provisions. No separate standalone document confirming liability is held beyond the contract terms and asset management system records.

d. This information is held within asset management system records and not held as a standalone document.

e. No specific noise assessment is held in relation to the proposed remedial works. Works will be undertaken in accordance with standard highway maintenance practices and relevant environmental and construction controls.

Should you require the attachments mentioned above please contact customerinformationservice@lincolnshire.gov.uk with the below reference number and this can be provided.