Sponsored Links
Sounds reminiscent of the very common practice in this country whereby one utility digs a hole and fills it in then, a few days later, a different utility comes along and does exactly the same in exactly the same place!
When the Highways Agency put out to tender a particular motorway job, they will agree a target deadline taking into account poor weather etc.
If the sun shines, a simple 4 week task to you and me will suddenly become a 10 week saga, hence why we see nothing being done for 6 weeks as the provider's navvies are in no rush to finish and are away working on another job elsewhere on the motorway.
If the sun shines, a simple 4 week task to you and me will suddenly become a 10 week saga, hence why we see nothing being done for 6 weeks as the provider's navvies are in no rush to finish and are away working on another job elsewhere on the motorway.
Sponsored Links
- Joined
- 11 Jan 2004
- Messages
- 42,712
- Reaction score
- 2,629
- Country
You have obviously forgotten the joy that was the extension of Barton bridge (then M63, now M60) in the mid - late 80's.
A few years ago the council didn't just re-surface a road, near me,, they actually dug the road up and re-done it from scratch. Once completed it was a delight to drive along this smooth new stretch of road. Six months later one of the utility companies dug a 3ft wide trench (almost a mile long) Re-laying some service. Filled it in and re tarmacked it (with the usual predicable results) a couple of months later, yet another utility company dug another trench almost right alongside the previous trench, and filled this in with the now predictable results. So within a year the new road looked bloody worse than it did before it had been re-done.
Why , oh , why, can't the utility companies talk to each other and minimise disruption, ?? By working together, I'm sure many utility service works on our roads could be pulled in at the same time. Perhaps if these same companies had liaised with the council, their works could have been done in advance of the road getting dug up and re-done, so it would still be nice and smooth.. Better still, why can't they design services, like they do in the USA, where the services run under the pavements instead of the roads?
You have obviously forgotten the joy that was the extension of Barton bridge (then M63, now M60) in the mid - late 80's.
Oh no I haven't. I remember when they added a third lane to the M63 exactly where I used to drive to work (and my first wife too, for that matter)*. They did this because the traffic was too heavy. A few years on and...
...yes, the traffic is too heavy again. Now they're talking about making the hard shoulder a 'rush hour lane' (if that's the correct term), and this will take until after my wife has retired.
They just can't think ahead, can they?
(* I remember things got so bad that I had to start driving all the way around the M63 in the opposite (anticlockwise) direction.)
Because in this country everybody pulls in opposite directions. Just imagine what the country would be like if everyone pulled together.
I agree. I remember my dad saying that fifty years ago when they were digging up the main road near our house. I suppose the answer is that most of our services were put there in Victorian times (or not long afterwards) when roads were nowhere near as busy. Mind you, I'm sure it's not impossible to re-site them, but short-sighted councils and service providers prefer the cheapest possible option.
It would be a marvellous idea if all motorways could be widened so there would be three sets of three lanes plus hardshoulders to match.
This would mean that at any one time, one of the three lane sections could be "worked upon" by otherwise unemployed highway agency contractors whilst the rest of the human population went about its business unhindered on the other sets of lanes.
I realise of course that this might cost jobs in the "temporary metal crash barrier" industry, but hey ho, maybe they could utilise their skills and materials and build something useful, such as boats and train carriages.
This would mean that at any one time, one of the three lane sections could be "worked upon" by otherwise unemployed highway agency contractors whilst the rest of the human population went about its business unhindered on the other sets of lanes.
I realise of course that this might cost jobs in the "temporary metal crash barrier" industry, but hey ho, maybe they could utilise their skills and materials and build something useful, such as boats and train carriages.
L
longdogs
Or two extra, separate lanes to be used by HGVs only, so that they can do all their 1mph overtaking all to themselves and not hold up every other b*gger.
I've mentioned this before, but bring back the usage of canals for non-perishable goods.
L
longdogs
Probably quicker!
And fragile goods. At one time they used the Bridgewater Canal to transport things like crockery in preference, even to railways.
Sponsored Links
