Committee Reports > List of Committees > Dáil > 1986 > Committee on Public Expenditure > Report No. 16 - Review of Procedures relating to road openings by utilities

APPENDIX 1

Letter to the Department of the Environment from Dublin Corporation

10th February, 1986

Dear Sir,

I refer to your request for supplementary comments on practices relating to reinstatement of road openings arising from work by sanitary services and by the statutory undertakers. Specific comment was requested on the following

(i)“Whether or not statutory undertakers might carry out their own reinstatement work”

The present position in Dublin is that each public utility backfills its own trench with suitable stone, (not the spoil which has been excavated) compacts it, and dresses same with tarmacadam following which the opening is “returned” to the Corporation, until such “return” liability remains with the public utility. Exception to this procedure is granted on occasion. Recent examples of this are trunk mains for the ESB and main trunk gas pipes for Bord Gais and New Dublin Gas. In these cases arrangements were made for permanent reinstatement by the utilities to a specification prepared by Dublin Corporation. In these cases the backfill material consisted of concrete, thus avoiding the difficulties inherent in using stone and compacting in layers. While this concreting method is suitable for trunk mains it is not suitable for services mains which have to be accessible at a later date for additional service tappings. The trunk mains are of rare occurrence and do not constitute the main problem which is related to the relaying of services and emergency work.

The legislation under which the utilities have the right to open roads is very old and was designed for a different traffic era. This legislation needs to be updated and clear liability placed on public utilities for work done. For several years the Corporation has endeavoured to achieve (a) the use of more suitable materials in the back filling of trenches, (b) the consolidation of back fill material in layers. Considerable progress has been made with (a) the position with (b) is extremely unsatisfactory. This failure to consolidate means that the permanent reinstatement of trenches cannot be undertaken for a considerable period.

The Deputy Chief Engineer reports -

“I recall a deep trench which was back filled with suitable material but was not adequately compacted and three years had to elapse before the final reinstatement could be carried out. During the 3 year period the road required repeated repairs and dressings. In my opinion the only way by which we will force utilities to adequately compact trenches is by means of legislation which makes the utilities responsible for the settlement of all trenches for a period of two years”.

In the absence of such legislation it is not recommended that final reinstatement by public utilities should be allowed. It is generally accepted that openings in roads no matter how well reinstated have a permanent deleterious effect on the road structure.

The carrying out of such work by Public Utilities would pose a particular problem for Dublin Corporation in keeping present staff engaged on roads maintenance employed. Traditionally this work has been done by the Corporation and staff numbers set accordingly. Due to the increased activity by the service authorities this problem has now been exacerbated. In late 1984 and 1985 Roads   Traffic Department was in a position to take on 120 men from the disbanded and unfunded Environmental Works Section to deal with the unprecedented increase in work. During 1985 210 men were engaged full time on this work. It will take a number of years before these men can be absorbed into the regular maintenance work of the Department. In the meantime the income derived from these repayable works is essential to maintain employment at present levels.

(ii)Duration of road openings i.e. why trenches have to be open for long periods

This usually happens where service mains are of Non standard size and special parts have to be ordered or manufactured sometimes from abroad. Dublin, being an old city, has mains of varying sizes many of which were installed before standardisation of such pipes was achieved.

(iii)Whether or not services could be co-ordinated to the extent where they would all be provided via a single subterranean channel

This is not a practical proposition in an old city where mains and services are in various positions in the carriageways and footways. Apart from the cost of providing the duct it would entail the re-laying of mains and services at a huge cost and subsequently a complete reconstruction of the surfaces. The high cost os obvious; in addition, the disruption of services to homes, offices, factories etc. while the work was in progress would be great. The general disruption would far exceed the experience of recent years which arose due to the expansion/ renewal programmes. It is not possible to comment fully on the technical problems but the Deputy Chief Engineer expresses doubt as to whether gas and electricity services could be laid in the one duct due to the high risk of gas explosion. high tension cables are laid with an adequate distance between them to allow for heat expansion.

Cost of reinstatement of road surfaces

The cost of reinstating openings is recouped from the public utilities on a ‘measured’ basis. Following completion of the service or main laying the location is “returned” to the Corporation. The area is measured and monthly accounts are submitted to the statutory authorities. Charges per square metre are set at the beginning of each year based on the real cost of the previous year adjusted by known increases for materials and National Wage Agreements in the year ahead. Smaller openings are more expensive to reinstate than larger openings. Many years ago a graded charge system obtained to cater for this fact but it proved impractical and an average charge system was adopted and retained. The cost of reinstatements is maintained separately from other maintenance work. There is provision in the charge system to submit supplementary accounts where the backfill proves unsatisfactory. It would not be practical to relate the charge to the duration of the work.

Utility road works impose costs in a variety of forms including delays to road users, damage to vehicles and persons from poor reinstatement. The most substantial cost is to the statutory undertakers. Within local government and the utilities there are differing accountabilities and a diversity of interests.

Professor MR Horne Report - Review of the Public Utilities Street Works Act 1950

The problems relating to openings and reinstatement of roads are not unique to this country. In Britain new legislation governing all aspects of laying of apparatus in streets - The Public Utilities Street Works Act - was enacted in 1950. This legislation governed all aspects of excavation and reinstatement of roads, but did not contain a specification for the actual reinstatement, and its subsequent performance. In 1974 the Department of the Environment published a Model Agreement and Specification with the objective of improving the standard of reinstatements carried out by public utilities, and reducing the time taken by the Highway Authority to carry out permanent reinstatement. This Model Agreement was not universally adopted in Britain, and the problem of reinstatement of trenches has continued. In 1984 the Minister of State for Transport appointed Professor M.R. Horne to chair a committee to review all aspects of the Public Utilities Streets Works Act 1950, and 1974 Model Agreement and Specification. This committee reported in November 1985 in “Roads and Utilities Review of the Public Utilities Streets Works Act 1950”. The report highlights the difficulties with the reinstatement of trenches, liability on public utilities for the restoration of roads to a satisfactory condition by continuing liability after reinstatement, the need for supervision by the Local Authority of the backfilling and restoration work and the question of who pays for what. This report will be invaluable in the ongoing examination of the problems to be tackled the approach to be adopted for the future.

The Report stresses the following:-

Permanent reinstatements should be carried out more quickly and possible should be done immediately upon completion of work.

The variation in standards by different utilities in unsatisfactory. Clear specifications should be set and adhered to.

Standards of training of those employed in reinstatement should be improved.

Notice procedures should be reviewed and modified where necessary.

A solution to the problem of long term damage to road surfaces should be sought.

Necessity for improved mapping of underground plant.

Most of these matters have been considered in the current review and discussed by the Operations Group of the Dublin Transportation Task Force having regard to the power proposed for the Dublin Traffic Authority under Section 40 Dublin Transport Authority Bill.

Yours faithfully,

___________________________

Principal Officer

DUBLIN CORPORATION

EXISTING PROCEDURES FOR NOTIFICATION OF ROADWORKS

The primary function of the Traffic Division of Dublin Corporation is to ensure the safe and efficient movement of traffic throughout the city street network. In order to carry out this function it is essential that up to date information is available at all times concerning the activities of all statutory bodies engaged in roadworks. This information should be received by the Traffic Division well in advance of planned roadworks in order for the traffic implications to be studied and appropriate action taken to alleviate any problems which may arise.

The procedures currently in use for notification of roadworks were laid down by the Dublin Transportation Task Force in 1981 following consultation with the various statutory undertakers. These procedures are as follows:-

(1)Statutory undertakers should inform the Traffic Division each week of roadworks planned for the following two weeks. In respect of roadworks during the first week, precise details should be furnished in the format shown in Fig. 10. In respect of roadworks during the second week, general information only (e.g. location, side of carriageway and approximate width of carriageway involved) is required.

(2)The information should be conveyed to the Traffic Division not later than Thursday of each week.

Since this information is used, among other things, for the preparation of a publicity sheet to be used by R.T.E. and the newspapers, it is important that the information supplied is as accurate as possible. If, due to unforseen circumstances, the scheduled work cannot go ahead, the Traffic Division should be notified immediately (Tel. 780811).

When it is proposed to carry out major roadworks on the main commuter routes into the city, at least six weeks notice should be given. This is particularly important if it is anticipated that .

ROADWORKS INFORMATION SHEET

DEPARTMENT OR AUTHORITY: ____________________ WEEK COMMENCING: