Value for money?

The contract is intended to transform Sheffield’s roads from some of the worst in the country to some of the best. But is the rhetoric matched by the reality?

The upper part of Carterknowle Road was resurfaced by Amey in 2014.

Now, at the beginning of February 2016, the surface is already deteriorating to an alarming degree. There are clear signs of pressure damage and a six-foot section has already had to be repaired, none too expertly by the look of it.

They also raise a number of important questions.

Has Sheffield City Council inspected this stretch of road and, if so, is it satisfied with the quality and durability of the resurfacing work that has been carried out by Amey?

Will they require Amey to fully rectify the defects at their own expense?

Does the Streets Ahead contract contain penalty clauses to cover sub-standard work?

If so, have they been invoked in this, (or any other), instance?

Is this just a one-off problem or are there other instances where concerns have been raised regarding the quality and durability of the resurfacing work that has been carried out by Amey?

Is there a review mechanism to ensure that the council is receiving value for money from the Streets Ahead programme?

Is there any way in which Amey and, or the City Council can be held accountable if it turns out the Streets Ahead programme fails to deliver the best roads in the country or otherwise fails to provide value for money?

Jim Dignan

Charnley Close, S11