I refer to your constituents’ queries regarding the resurfacing of Glamis Road and Westgrove Avenue. These two locations were surfaced using different processes.
Glamis Road was surface dressed which is a cost-effective method of re-waterproofing and restoring the skid resistance to the existing carriageway surface and is used where the underlying road profile remains in reasonable condition. It is used on routes with high vehicle numbers as the action of the traffic is required to embed the applied stone chips.
Westgrove Avenue carriageway had a thin surfacing applied which is a proprietary process used on quieter/ residential routes where traffic flow is less and where there may have been some wear of the existing carriageway fabric.
With regard to the enquiry you received I can advise that although the bus bay markings were worn and required repainting, the surface dressing works were known to be programmed to be carried out within the month.There are some circumstances where it would be appropriate to renew road markings when a road resurfacing is to follow within weeks, ie junction stop lines for which are there for public safety reasons, but mistakes do happen and these bus bays should not have been repainted in advance of the surface dressing works for which I apologise.
As road maintenance activities are delivered in partnership with Tayside Contracts, this allows us jointly to have the opportunity to consider all future works that are to be carried out by the depot for all clients, to identify conflicts and organise programming of works for mutual benefit and obtain best value. If the Partnership was not in place I believe there would be more chance of these conflicts occurring.
I believe this to be an isolated incident and am not aware of any other similar issues recently.
“The Engineers have now carried out a site survey for this location and have confirmed the carriageway is greater than 9m wide and therefore a central refuge island can be accommodated.The island design with drop kerb provision will be carried out for this scheme for inclusion within this year minor works and drop kerb programme.”
“I am an elderly woman who frequently visits friends in Hillside Road off Glamis Drive and am finding it increasing difficult to safely cross the road at the Glamis Drive circle when coming to and from the bus stops in Blackness Road and I’m sure I am not the only one who finds this to be the case. The traffic can come very fast from different directions around the circle.”
I spoke on Wave 102 News about the matter yesterday and you can hear this by clicking ‘play’ below:
1. THE DUNDEE CITY COUNCIL AS TRAFFIC AUTHORITY being satisfied that traffic on the road should be prohibited by reason of surface dressing works being carried out HEREBY PROHIBIT the driving of any vehicle in Explorer Road (from Apollo Road to Mallaig Avenue), Dundee.
A plan of the Glamis Road work is given below:
|Above : I am pictured beside the box in question|
A new large-style utility box in the West End installed by BT Openreach has rightly incurred the wrath of local residents because, not only is it large and unsightly, it did not require planning permission to be installed.
The box – on a prominent site at the roundabout at the west end of Blackness Road at the roundabout with Glamis Road and Glamis Drive – is much larger than adjacent utility boxes and has been installed as part of BT’s “super broadband” installations. It is used to convert signals from copper wire cabling to fibre optic cabling. Residents have said they have nothing against the principle of improving broadband but question why cabling could not have been put underground or in smaller box casings.
It is concerning that the box is being placed on a prominent site without any need for planning approval. Having checked with planning officers, I am advised that these boxes will start springing up right across the city but only those in Conservation Areas will require to go through the planning process.
BT Openreach’s representatives have been willing to discuss the concerns with me but the bottom line is that the box won’t be moved and I can fully understand residents’ complaints about this obtrusive box on such a prominent site.
I have asked of BT Openreach :
a) For an assurance that these boxes be painted with anti-graffiti paint,
b) and that it reaches agreement with the City Council to ensure proper arrangements are in place for graffiti removal – this already happens in the case of Virgin cable TV boxes across Dundee.
I have also asked of City Council planning officers :
a) That the West End proposed boxes in Conservation Areas that do require planning permission be referred to committee for a decision (and not delegated to officers). Whilst each of these applications must be decided on their individual merits, it is important that they are democratically determined through the committee process.
b) That the council investigate ‘screening’ the box on the Blackness/Glamis roundabout by planting such as clematis or honeysuckle. Anything that could be done to screen the box here on such a prominent site in a residential area should be considered.
* Following my raising residents’ complaints about the potholed road surface in Perth Road at the Hazel Avenue junction, I have received the following feedback from the City Council :
Address: Land Opposite Carseview Gardens, Glamis Road, Dundee
Proposal: Installation of 14.2 Metre High Telecommunications Mast
1. The proposed development is contrary to Policy 1 – “Vibrant and Sustainable Communities” of the Dundee Local Plan Review 2005 as the proposed mast will have an adverse impact on the environmental quality enjoyed by local residents by virtue of its inappropriate design. There are no material considerations of sufficient weight to justify the granting of planning permission contrary to the policy.
2. The proposed development is contrary to Policy 61 – “Development in Conservation Areas” of the Dundee Local Plan Review 2005 as it fails to preserve or enhance the character of the West End Suburbs Conservation Area by virtue of the inappropriate size, design, location and appearance of the mast. There are no material considerations of sufficient weight to justify the granting of planning permission contrary to the policy.
3. The proposed development is contrary to Policy 78 – “Location of Telecommunications Equipment” of the Dundee Local Plan Review 2005 as there is a failure to mast share and fully demonstrate that mast share is not a feasible proposition. There are no material considerations of sufficient strength to justify the granting of planning permission contrary to the policy.