The 6Cs Design Guide
Our review process
NB: The 6Cs design guide in this case includes all appendices and companion documents.
1. Comments to be forwarded to the 6Cs design guideco-ordinator by e-mail on the ‘Your view’ form in the design guide, Appendix K. The completed form should set-out:
- which part of the 6Cs design guide is being referred to;
- any comments;
and where a change is being sought,
- the suggested change (this might be a point of clarification or require a matter to be looked at in more detail); and
- why it is being sought (for example, because current guidance is resulting in maintenance problems or because of a change in other guidance).
2. The 6Cs design guide co-ordinator to acknowledge comments and compile them using a standard pro-forma, for review every 6 months or other period as necessary.
3. Inside of 1 month after compiling, a ‘Project Team’ (PT) will review the comments. PT to consist of Htd co-ordinator; highways development control group manager; team leader district liaison; and team leader adoptions.
4. In terms of possible changes to Htd:
i) comments to be classified by PT as:
- A: rejected: no change proposed.
- B minor: no discussion required – beyond those in the PT – no formal consultation process
e.g. clarification of text or small change to a diagram or update to reflect a new national standard such as a British Standard.
- C less minor: some discussions outside of the PT, e.g. with other HDC group members, but formal consultation process unlikely
e.g. change to a standard drawing or a specification requirement.
- D major: discussions and formal consultations likely to be required
e.g. re-write of Part(s)/Section(s) or replacement of parts of the specification (other than to reflect a new national standard).
- E significant: as above, but a step-by-step* approach likely to be required to implement and member involvement may be required
e.g. replacement of the commuted sums policy.
- F new policy: as “significant change” but will require member approval.
*Note: A step-by-step approach would include, initial consultations on current document content; review of consultation comments received; drafting of initial, proposed change; consultations on proposed change; and finalisation of change in the light of any comments received.
NB: In all cases, Appendix A ‘contact details’ should be reviewed to ensure that the details are still correct.
ii) In the light of resources available, PT to determine how to take changes forward, e.g. which changes can be taken forward ‘immediately’; which require a separate sub-group to look at in some detail; and which cannot be implemented within a reasonable timescale.
iii) PT to liase, as necessary, with third parties with regard to any suggested changes to documents prepared outside of the group (the forthcoming public transport guidance is an example of such a document).
iv) PT will normally:
- make the final decision on the changes to be made (save where there is member involvement);* and
- decide how best to implement them, e.g. all in one go or phased over an agreed period.*
(*In liaison with any third parties, as necessary.)
v) Details of decision, proposed changes, etc. to be recorded on the review pro-forma.
vi) Proposed changes to be ‘vetted’ by the Plain English Campaign (PEC) as necessary (NB: Need to consider the cost implications. PEC have strict guidelines relating to the awarding and retention of the ‘Crystal Mark’.)
vii) Changes finalised.
5. Identify who is responsible for implementing the finalised changes on the web-site, including completing the ‘update and amendments’ pages. Details to be included on review pro-forma.
6. Send a copy of the completed pro-forma to the originator of the comment and thank them for their input.
7. Publish updated document on website (along with paper copies for internal use and for libraries and service shops).
8. ‘Launch’ of updated document. Depending on nature and quantum of changes, this might include one or more of:
- an explanatory note on the web-site;
- a letter to consultees;
- a letter to document users (address list based on original design guide publication circulation list for external users);
- a launch leaflet, setting-out the changes; or
- launch presentations.
9. Agree date for next review of any outstanding changes.
10. Review updating process in the light of lessons learnt and amend as necessary.
up to top | back to contents page
Page Last Updated: 10 April 2006
