Road resurfacing, Amey & Streets Ahead

[dave_the_m 61]

20 minutes ago, rudds1 said:

Are amey still doing road resurfacing. Not seen any going on for a good while now 

They're past the initial 5 year blitz (apart from a few roads delayed by the tree felling protests such as Western Road). In theory in they're in the 20 year maintenance part of the contract now.

[choogling 14]

They resurfaced Yew Trees Lane at Bolsterstone just before the bike races ,a few months later they re-resurfaced it claiming faulty materials , pot holes are appearing again in the same section.

[Fudbeer 12]

Well I know that snow and ice cause issues but the amount of damage on some roads I saw today looks almost like they need a full resurface. Am obviously  not qualified to say its been done on the cheap but many roads in the Peaks exposed to serious weather every winter hold up much better which leads me to believe it may have.The roads around Ringinglow village are particularly bad with holes everywhere.

[enntee 10]

11 hours ago, dave_the_m said:

They're past the initial 5 year blitz (apart from a few roads delayed by the tree felling protests such as Western Road). In theory in they're in the 20 year maintenance part of the contract now.

Better quality initial work would minimise the demands on maintenance.

We are all (apart from some profiting from our taxes) the losers for allowing these standards to be downgraded.

 

[ads36 214]

10 hours ago, Fudbeer said:

but the amount of damage on some roads I saw today looks almost like they need a full resurface.

we see the damage to the surface. 

 

we don't see that the road-bed on our old roads often isn't strong enough - for modern heavy vehicles, which causes the road-bed to flex, cracking the surface.

 

re-surfacing is a waste of time without fundamentally strengthening the road foundation below.

 

it's about time we started taxing vehicles by weight : a 2te 4WD does 16x the damage of a 1te hatchback.

Edited February 17, 2021 by ads36

[Planner1 428]

5 hours ago, enntee said:

Better quality initial work would minimise the demands on maintenance.

We are all (apart from some profiting from our taxes) the losers for allowing these standards to be downgraded.

 

The contract which Amey have with SCC stipulates that the roads are brought up to an agreed standard within an agreed investment period (5 years). After that they have to maintain them to an agreed standard for the remainder of the contract (20 years). For this they receive an agreed annual fee.

 

Amey will have worked out what they think is the most profitable way for them to fulfill the contractual requirements. That might well mean that instead of doing the traditional full depth reconstruction,  they decide to do a thin resurfacing job more than once over the contract period.  It's largely up to them how they do it.

[Resident 1,185]

43 minutes ago, Planner1 said:

The contract which Amey have with SCC stipulates that the roads are brought up to an agreed standard within an agreed investment period (5 years). After that they have to maintain them to an agreed standard for the remainder of the contract (20 years). For this they receive an agreed annual fee.

 

Amey will have worked out what they think is the most profitable way for them to fulfill the contractual requirements. That might well mean that instead of doing the traditional full depth reconstruction,  they decide to do a thin resurfacing job more than once over the contract period.  It's largely up to them how they do it.

Meanwhile drivers have to foot the bill due to damage caused by the road surface not being up to a proper standard. Look at the state of the parkway where in places it'd do less damage driving at 50 mph through the streets of Aleppo in late 2016. 

It's come to the point that I have separate insurance on my car now specifically for replacement of tyres, wheels and suspension components for damage caused by poor roads. I've had to do this because just ONE shock absorber on my car is an eye-watering £605 (factory original, LINK) and have to be replaced in axle pairs. 

It'll be fun to watch the council squirm when they're presented with a £4500 + legal costs bill by my insurer. 

[enntee 10]

1 hour ago, Planner1 said:

The contract which Amey have with SCC stipulates that the roads are brought up to an agreed standard within an agreed investment period (5 years). After that they have to maintain them to an agreed standard for the remainder of the contract (20 years). For this they receive an agreed annual fee.

 

Amey will have worked out what they think is the most profitable way for them to fulfill the contractual requirements. That might well mean that instead of doing the traditional full depth reconstruction,  they decide to do a thin resurfacing job more than once over the contract period.  It's largely up to them how they do it.

We know all that, but it does not change the fact that it does not produce the best result for those that are paying for it.

It represents poor professionalism and raises questions of competence in several quarters.

[RollingJ 2,001]

51 minutes ago, Resident said:

Meanwhile drivers have to foot the bill due to damage caused by the road surface not being up to a proper standard. Look at the state of the parkway where in places it'd do less damage driving at 50 mph through the streets of Aleppo in late 2016. 

It's come to the point that I have separate insurance on my car now specifically for replacement of tyres, wheels and suspension components for damage caused by poor roads. I've had to do this because just ONE shock absorber on my car is an eye-watering £605 (factory original, LINK) and have to be replaced in axle pairs. 

It'll be fun to watch the council squirm when they're presented with a £4500 + legal costs bill by my insurer. 

Keep us posted on that one, @Resident- it will be an eye-opener.

11 minutes ago, enntee said:

We know all that, but it does not change the fact that it does not produce the best result for those that are paying for it.

It represents poor professionalism and raises questions of competence in several quarters.

Agreed @enntee, but I'm sure someone will roll up with the excuses.

[Bargepole23 337]

1 hour ago, Resident said:

Meanwhile drivers have to foot the bill due to damage caused by the road surface not being up to a proper standard. Look at the state of the parkway where in places it'd do less damage driving at 50 mph through the streets of Aleppo in late 2016. 

It's come to the point that I have separate insurance on my car now specifically for replacement of tyres, wheels and suspension components for damage caused by poor roads. I've had to do this because just ONE shock absorber on my car is an eye-watering £605 (factory original, LINK) and have to be replaced in axle pairs. 

It'll be fun to watch the council squirm when they're presented with a £4500 + legal costs bill by my insurer. 

Take a spin around Kenwood, nr Netheredge. You'll be longing to be back on the Parkway.

[Jeffrey Shaw 90]

9 hours ago, ads36 said:

we see the damage to the surface. 

 

we don't see that the road-bed on our old roads often isn't strong enough - for modern heavy vehicles, which causes the road-bed to flex, cracking the surface.

 

re-surfacing is a waste of time without fundamentally strengthening the road foundation below.

 

it's about time we started taxing vehicles by weight : a 2te 4WD does 16x the damage of a 1te hatchback.

Yes. The so-called "Chelsea tractors", I think. I've yet to understand why they're needed in a city.

 

Wear and tear on road surfaces is, however, not really a new concept.

(And 'cheapest' does not always equate to 'best value for [taxpayers'] money!)

[Resident 1,185]

13 hours ago, Jeffrey Shaw said:

Yes. The so-called "Chelsea tractors", I think. I've yet to understand why they're needed in a city.

 

Wear and tear on road surfaces is, however, not really a new concept.

(And 'cheapest' does not always equate to 'best value for [taxpayers'] money!)

The 'cars have got heavier' argument doesn't hold much weight (excuse the pun). 

 

Most of the damaged roads are frequently used by buses, vans and HGVs. 

 

The roads should be built to those standards.