Thursday 15 May 2014

Dropped Kerb at The Paddockholm EH12 7XR

The contractors returned yesterday, 14th May 2014, to address the dropped kerb issues at The Paddockholm. They dug out the tarmac they had laid previously and put down new. However, it looks as though the joint with the existing tarmac has not been properly sealed or caulked with bitumen? Also, there are cracks in the surface around the join which looks as though it will break down in no time.

The specified concrete edging stone has now been installed, but the surrounding turf was just hammered down to get the ground level right. The kerb stones have not been grouted with cement mortar, although some tarmac has found its way into the cracks. As previously noted, the kerb stones have still not been properly grouted with cement mortar, leaving the job looking unfinished? Note also the exposed lawn edge which is liable to collapse. All in all, in my opinion, this is not a quality job: it ought to be possible to achieve a higher standard?

Update: There was a suggestion on the City Cycling Edinburgh Forum that the contractors would go back to The Paddockholm on Friday 16th May to grout the setts, however, they did not do so as is clear in the photographs taken at 5.30pm that day.

Update: On Saturday, 14th June 2014, the contractors returned to The Paddockholm.

All of the kerb blocks were properly pointed with cement mortar.

To address the exposed lawn edge issue, the kerb blocks on the north side were re-laid at their former level - top photograph below.

The grassed area on the south side which had been re-shaped has been re-styled and neatened up - bottom photograph.

The joint between the new and the old tarmac has yet - close of play on Monday, 16th June - to be sealed with bitumen, however, overall this is a big improvement on how the job had previously been left.

Epilogue: This dropped kerb appears - see photograph - to fail the 6mm or two pound coins test? Final, final word: The joint between old and new tarmac has been sealed at last. 20-JUL-2014

1 comment:

  1. Yes private property damaged. Ground is maintained at residents expense but no consultation preceded work.

    ReplyDelete