On the slow road to nowhere fast....

Avid readers (!) of this blog will remember a post in June discusing the damage caused to cycle lanes and advance stop line (ASL boxes) by contractors working for the utility companies and the seeming reluctance of Manchester City Council to use their statutory powers to require the contractors to repair the damage. See Digging a hole, don't dig there, dig it elsewhere !

An initial Freedom of Information Act (FoIA) request attempted to find out when the work (damage) had been carried out and by which contractors.  After a little bit of to-ing and fro-ing, this FoIA request was answered on 4th July (answers in bold).

"You have requested the following information for the Charles Street / Princess Street junction area:

a) When (date) was the work on the highway, which resulted in the damage to the Advanced Stop Lines (ASLs), originally carried out?

The first phase of work was started on 31 January 2010 and completed on 17 February 2011.  No defect was recorded.
The second phase of work was carried out between 12 April to 21 April
b) Which utility company/contractor was authorised to carry out that work?

The work was carried out by Electricity North West - Escalon.
        Escalon Ltd, Duncan Street Yard, Duncan Street, Salford M5 3SQ

c) Were the completed road works inspected by Manchester City Council staff, and if so,

i) on what dates were the inspection(s) undertaken?

No inspection was carried out at the above site at the time of the opening, as no Random Sample sheets had been generated by the Exor computer for this site. Note only 10% of each layer of inspection of all works are generated for inspection by the Exor computer.

ii) What information was recorded as a result of any inspections?

A reported inspection was carried out on this section of carriageway on 28 June.  The information recorded as a defect was: "no temporary lining" each side of the cycle bay prior to permanent reinstatement.
iii) What actions, if any, were initiated as a result of the inspections?

A site meeting has been requested by the inspector with Escalon to discuss the temporary and final reinstatement of the surface and lining."

Only repairing a pothole!

 

So what have we learnt from this response?  The Department for Transport (DfT) document: Specification for the Reinstatement of Openings in Highways: Second Edition 2002  Section 6.4.5.4 Coloured Surfacings states that : "Coloured surfacings used to highlight highway features such as speed warnings, bus or cycle lanes, ‘gateways’ etc. shall be permanently reinstated using like materials of equivalent type and similar colour.

It is fairly clear that contractors who work on the roads should be required to reinstate the road to how they found it. However, in this case the works were not inspected after completion - despite causing quite major changes in the road surface at a busy junction.

But the good news was that a "defect" had now been recorded and a "site meeting" requested with the contractor, Escalon.  So far, so good.

Unfortunately, any progress has been a little more elusive. With no progress on repairs visible by mid October, another FoIA request was submitted. The following response was received on 3rd November (answers embolded):

"You requested:

a) What was the date of the site meeting with an Escalon representative?  A meeting has not taken place despite continued requests to the utility company, they have not yet contacted the Manchester City Council.

b) Which personnel were present at the site meeting? N/A

c) What outcomes / actions were identified / recorded from that site meeting? N/A

d) Has a scheduled date been agreed for "the temporary and final reinstatement of the surface and lining." ? No, this is an ongoing defect, we have defected the repair through computer system (central computer system used by all who wish to excavate/carry-out works on the highway).  This defect has been reported to the utility on the following dates: 15/06/2011, 28/06/2011, 25/10/2011.

The third notice (fine) expires on the 7th November and we are unable to action any works ourselves until the said expiry date. Thereafter we will investigate the possibility of carrying out the works and recharging the utility concerned. "

 So....  what I thought was a simple task of asking the Highways Section to request the contractor to repair the damage to the ASL has turned into quite a saga.... never realised it would be so difficult to get a private sector company to provide a quality service.  Doesn't seem to square with the current Government's mantra of 'public sector bad - private sector good'.

I will shortly be asking MCC what the results of the investigation into the "possibility of carrying out the works and recharging the utility concerned" were...... watch this space!