Victorian Auditor-General’s report
7 December 2011

Management of Road Bridges 
Audit summary
Background
An efficient road system underpins economic prosperity and liveability. Bridges are critical links in the road network because they carry traffic over natural and man-made obstacles. If bridges are not properly maintained or fail to keep up with increasing demands, they become pinch points that prevent the free and efficient movement of people and freight. 
VicRoads is responsible for approximately 6 000 bridges and major culverts—which channel water under roads—located on the arterial road network. The five councils included in this audit—Bendigo, East Gippsland, Hume, Pyrenees and Strathbogie—are responsible for managing a further 1 000 of these structures.
Road users have expectations about the level of service—the safety, speed, reliability, comfort and cost of travel—provided when they travel across bridges. The freight industry needs bridges that allow the flexibility to use larger, more efficient trucks on direct routes. 
Effective asset management means applying plans that deliver the services the community requires cost-effectively over the lives of these assets, by:
·	setting clear and comprehensive target levels of service
·	forming long-term plans and annual priorities to make the most efficient use of available funding
·	regularly measuring performance and forecasting how current decisions and agencies’ long-term plans are likely to affect levels of service.
The audit assessed whether VicRoads and selected councils are managing road bridges and major culverts effectively. 
Conclusion
VicRoads is effectively managing the structural safety of bridges and culverts and prioritises annual funding to the areas of greatest short-term need. However, VicRoads has not formed detailed long-term plans nor adequately measured, forecast and reported on the levels of service experienced by road users. Doing these things is a prerequisite for VicRoads to adequately inform longer-term resourcing decisions.
While councils’ bridges and major culverts have been safe to use, their approach to managing these assets limits their ability to fully assure their continued safe operation. Examples of incomplete, out of date and unreliable information on bridge condition and weaknesses in councils’ asset management processes should be addressed so that councils can demonstrate effective asset management.
Both VicRoads and local councils recognise that competition for scarce resources means there is a risk that funding falls short of the levels required to meet road users’ expectations. Agencies need to understand and manage these expectations by completing robust long-term plans, establishing performance measures and improving their public performance reporting.
Findings
VicRoads 
VicRoads has effectively managed the condition and use of bridges and culverts which safely convey the vehicles that are allowed to cross them. VicRoads effectively monitors their condition and has acted to repair or limit the use of bridges where further deterioration is likely put road users at risk.
VicRoads developed a comprehensive overall asset management strategy in 2002 but has yet to capitalise on this by:
·	developing detailed, long-term plans
·	adequately measuring and reporting on the levels of service experienced by road users or forecasting how these are likely to change under assumed funding levels.
Addressing these gaps will enable VicRoads to appropriately inform government about the challenge of maintaining ageing assets. Over 50 per cent of structures have reached or are approaching an age where they will need major repairs over the next 10 to 15 years to continue to function as intended.
VicRoads’ projects to strengthen the West Gate Bridge and invest in complementary maintenance works means that we are assured that the bridge is structurally safe, has a sound management framework and improved maintenance access. The strengthening project has provided better information about the condition and behaviour of the bridge and VicRoads needs to finalise its 15-year bridge strategy to provide meaningful guidance on how to best manage the bridge. 
Councils 
Councils’ management of road bridges and major culverts has been partly effective.
Bridges and culverts have been safe for road users. However, councils need to address the following weaknesses in their management of these assets if they are to be fully assured about their future safe use:
·	the completeness, reliability and use of asset information, which applied to all councils in varying degrees
·	all councils had gaps in their documented processes, for example, none had adequately documented how they manage high-risk structures.
In terms of performance measurement, local communities do not have access to information that allows them to understand how well councils have managed bridges and culverts.
Councils have not measured bridge performance as experienced by road users. Much of the relevant, technical information they do hold is not made public. This includes budgeted and actual expenditure for creating, maintaining and renewing assets, the rate at which bridges are depreciated and ratings of bridge condition.
Councils need to define levels of service that are meaningful to road users, set targets that take account of community expectations and publish information that measures past achievements and the expected implications of future levels of resourcing.
Recommendations
Number	Recommendation	Page	
	VicRoads should:		
1.	develop comprehensive, long-term plans to manage bridges and major culverts	14	
2.	quantify the impact of past actions and forecast the likely impact of forward plans on the levels of service, including the safety, speed, reliability, comfort and cost of travel	14	
3.	complete a long-term maintenance strategy for the West Gate Bridge that measures levels of service that reflect the outcomes experienced by those using the bridge.	14	
	Councils should:		
4.	define bridge levels of service that capture the outcomes that are important to road users and incorporate associated targets and measures in their plans	25	
5.	publish information that will allow the community to understand councils’ performance in terms of the past and forecast costs and service outcomes	25	
6.	address the information and process weaknesses identified in this report.	25	

Submissions and comments received
In addition to progressive engagement during the course of the audit, in accordance with section 16(3) of the Audit Act 1994 a copy of this report, or relevant extracts from the report, was provided to VicRoads, the City of Greater Bendigo, Hume City Council, and the shires of East Gippsland, Pyrenees and Strathbogie with a request for submissions or comments.
Agency views have been considered in reaching our audit conclusions and are represented to the extent relevant and warranted in preparing this report. Their full section 16(3) submissions and comments, however, are included in Appendix A.