Dropped Kerb Dilemma

[worldwidewebs]

We've just had the kerb in front of our driveway dropped but I'm not happy with it and am getting conflicting information about what is allowable and what is not. Hopefully one of you guys can help

 

A bit of background info... The house is in a rural area. The gravelled drive area is quite large, slopes from the road to the house and we have made a new gateway opening (no gates now or planned) at the front of the plot. We have permission to drop the kerb. Our normal groundworks guys don't have the street works certs or insurances to do the work themselves so they recommended another local firm. We wanted to have 7 dropped kerbs plus 2 transition ones as we want to have as wide a gateway as possible to help with visibility, although I can't actually remember what went into the application, whether that aspect is relevant or not.

 

They did the work this week and there are a couple of problems. Firstly, they only dropped 6 kerbs. They told me (after the event) that the council only wanted them to do 5 but compromised on 6. They said that the council told them this last Thursday but we had a site meeting 3 days later and this wasn't brought up even though I pointed out exactly what I wanted doing. Secondly, and more importantly, it's become almost impossible to get in the drive without grounding the car! The slope of the pavement from the road to the drive makes a significant peak at the threshold as the driveway slopes towards the house. They said there is nothing they can do about this as the pavement must be a consistent height apart from where it drops at the road-side and therefore, we must 'fix' the driveway.

 

Now, the following day a chap knocked on the door and spoke with Lynne. He was another street works guy (or so he claims) and commented about how bad the work was! He made some comment about the kerb stones themselves (which look ok to me although I've not looked too closely as it's always been dark) but mainly he spoke about the height of the pavement where it meets the driveway and said it should be lower! I gave him a call yesterday and he basically said there were limits on the number of dropped kerb stones, but we would be within the limit at 7 play 2 transition ones. He also said the pavement should dip down where it meets the driveway. So 2 things that contradict the first guy and that I have an issue with. The second guy claims to do work for the council and also claims to be street works certified, although I have no proof as of yet.

 

I can't find any regs online anywhere and I'm loathe to speak to the council as I might just get the pavement re-tarmaced in a few weeks/months and I'd rather not alert them to the fact! So, who is right? The initial works cost £1450 and the second guy has mentioned an additional £600 to re-tarmac plus an additional £150 if we want an extra dropped kerb

 

In the meantime I've added some additional MOT1 to make getting in and out easier but it's not a long terms solution.

 

 

[nod]

I’ve just had mine droped

 it’s quite correct they do need a certicate to touch Curbs or pavements 

I asked for six They guys who did it said that only leaves four full height curbs between yours and next door

Do you want us to join them

So they droped ten

i was told that the curb must be a minimum of 25 above the road surface

My drive is also going to be gravel

Highwaus have told me that I must have a rumble strip of at least a metre wide Full width of the opening 

 

 Hopethos helps. 

              Gary 

[TerryE]

You don't own the bit at pavement or verge between the physical boundary of your property (e.g. the front  garden fence) and the road.  This is still classed as highway and the local authority does.  You are crossing their land subject to their permission.  The basic rule is that so long as the highways dept and planning OK the work, then they maintain a list of approved contractors who they license to do the work, so long as your pay for it, but it's their land and they have design authority.  They maintain their own guidelines to standardise on openings and variation is usually a result of negotiation.  This is the process that you described in your first two paragraphs.

 

I would be deeply suspicious of any cold caller and the claims that he made. The authority take a very dim view of unlicensed and unapproved work on their property. They might require you to rectify such work by one of their licensed contractors at your cost. They also have quite a few ways of making your life hell, so tread very carefully

[Ferdinand]

2 hours ago, TerryE said:

You don't own the bit at pavement or verge between the physical boundary of your property (e.g. the front  garden fence) and the road.  This is still classed as highway and the local authority does.  You are crossing their land subject to their permission.  The basic rule is that so long as the highways dept and planning OK the work, then they maintain a list of approved contractors who they license to do the work, so long as your pay for it, but it's their land and they have design authority.  They maintain their own guidelines to standardise on openings and variation is usually a result of negotiation.  This is the process that you described in your first two paragraphs.

 

I would be deeply suspicious of any cold caller and the claims that he made. The authority take a very dim view of unlicensed and unapproved work on their property. They might require you to rectify such work by one of their licensed contractors at your cost. They also have quite a few ways of making your life hell, so tread very carefully

 

I think it can sometimes be different to this, but with same impact. It is common for a householder to own land up even to the midline of the road, but if it is designated as Highway Land that means that there is a right which overrides aspects of your control of that land - similarly in principle to the situation where you own the land over which eg your neighbour has a Right of Way, and that Right owned by your neighbour prevents you eg building a shed on the RoW if it is a 'substantial interference' to the RoW.

 

You would then be constrained by the overriding rights of the Highway Authority .. usually the County Council or similar.

 

We had a whole slew of objections to our big Planning App by people who thought that land outside their fences was part of their gardens. It wasn't, and the objection was baseless ... though I can understand why they might have thought that. They were quite angry / upset on the basis of entirely untrue opinions, unfortunately.

 

Ferdinand

 

 

 

Edited November 25, 2017 by Ferdinand

[Ferdinand]

@worldwidewebs @TerryE

 

This looks like the document equivalent to the one you need. This is from Kent CC.

You could then see if they have met the requirements, which you would expect from an accredited contractor, and have reason for calling them back. Aspects not covered by that will be down to whether they met your contract imo.

 

This FOI seems to have the doc for Cheshire West and Chester attached but you will need the most recent version.

https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/dropped_kerbs_2

 

The doc

https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/179596/response/444144/attach/3/Application pack MASTER COPY.doc?cookie_passthrough=1

 

CHeshire East have a page on their website on the Planning Aspects

http://www.cheshireeast.gov.uk/highways_and_roads/highways-licences-and-permits/dropped-kerb.aspx

 

I do not think you will prejudice your position by asking for a copy of the spec. If necessary just use a pseudonym from a throwaway address. Or whatdotheyknow.com.

Ferdinand

 

Edited November 25, 2017 by Ferdinand

[worldwidewebs]

Thanks for the help chaps. I've now been able to see the work properly in daylight and it really is a very poor job they've done. Not one of the kerbstones they've installed are bedded down so they all move slightly; the tarmac was whacked rather than rolled so the finish is pretty rubbish; where they've finished off by the driveway could easily have been lower (as I wanted) and still met the criteria they mentioned. It's so bad I'm not even going to ask them to come back and will get someone else to do the work!

 

In terms of the chap that popped around it seems he is also street works certified (checked him out). I may or may not use him but he is an option at the moment.

 

The document linked for Cheshire West is very useful - thanks @Ferdinand  It has a couple of potentially conflicting statements though

• The surface of the crossing should have a straight crossfall where practicable of 1 in 16 (maximum crossfall 1 in 12) from the back of the footway to the back edge of the kerb
• The back of the crossing should be at the same level and/or gradient as the back of the footway either side of the crossing.

Due to the poor state of the pavement generally and the fact that the contractors arbitrarily took some high spot each side of the gateway the slope is way more than 1 in 12. 

 

 

 

[ProDave]

Have you paid them yet?

 

You need to get them back to do it properly.

[worldwidewebs]

16 minutes ago, ProDave said:

Have you paid them yet?

 

You need to get them back to do it properly.

 

No, not paid yet. But given that they did such a bad job and that I know I'm going to get someone else to re-lay the tarmac I'm thinking I'll get the second firm to do it. 

[Stones]

I'd be wary of simply refusing to pay, and getting someone else in. I think you have to offer them the opportunity to rectify. I'd be inclined to say you've inspected the work, list all the problems, give them 7 days before you get the LA roads guy out to inspect the standard of their 'approved work'. If they refuse / fail to rectify to the right standard, that's when you revert to another contractor to sort it out.

[worldwidewebs]

7 minutes ago, Stones said:

I'd be wary of simply refusing to pay, and getting someone else in. I think you have to offer them the opportunity to rectify. I'd be inclined to say you've inspected the work, list all the problems, give them 7 days before you get the LA roads guy out to inspect the standard of their 'approved work'. If they refuse / fail to rectify to the right standard, that's when you revert to another contractor to sort it out.

 

I'm not going to refuse to pay - I'm going to pay them in full and then wipe my hands of them. I know it'll be easier for me to swallow the cost and get the job done properly than it will be to have to keep chasing them - they should have done the work in September but only got round to it last week!

[Vijay]

22 minutes ago, Stones said:

I'd be wary of simply refusing to pay, and getting someone else in. I think you have to offer them the opportunity to rectify. I'd be inclined to say you've inspected the work, list all the problems, give them 7 days before you get the LA roads guy out to inspect the standard of their 'approved work'. If they refuse / fail to rectify to the right standard, that's when you revert to another contractor to sort it out.

+1.  bad workmanship survives if people pay for it    I wouldn't keep chasing them, I would give them one chance and one chance only to put it right to what you asked for, if they don't, you move on and wash your hands of them. It's a lot of money to walk away from and I know I couldn't do it.............................

[Stones]

49 minutes ago, worldwidewebs said:

 

I'm not going to refuse to pay - I'm going to pay them in full and then wipe my hands of them. I know it'll be easier for me to swallow the cost and get the job done properly than it will be to have to keep chasing them - they should have done the work in September but only got round to it last week!

 

Why should you pay for defective workmanship? One letter sent to the original contractor recorded delivery, cc by email, giving him 7 days to put it right.  If you don't hear from him, or he argues, move on, call the LA roads guy out to inspect (I think you should be doing this regardless if the workmanship is so poor), arrange your new contractor and get it done right.  If the original company ever come back looking for money, you have a chain of proof of the defective work and your actions, you can deduct the cost of sorting it out and only pay them the difference. 

[ProDave]

I would never pay the full price for poor work.

 

I would give them the chance to come back and do it properly, and I would be there to watch them.  If they refuse I would be telling them I will get the council to inspect their work and see what they think of it and see if they still think them fit to have a street works permit.

[TerryE]

Surely there are two separate issues here:

1. The curb included 6 dropped curbs not 7 as you wanted, but the the contractor said was an agreed spec with the council.  I've just had a look at ours that was put in a couple of years ago and we have 4 dropped curbs (+2 sloping curbs) and that is pretty standard on our road.  Even the pub oppose which regularly has HGV3 deliveries only has 5+2.
2. The work isn't to an acceptable standard (and which you first mentioned a few hours ago).

I don't think that you should confuse the two.  By all means don't pay until shoddy work has been rectified, but in my view at least you won't help by conflating these. 

 

But from your blog, your site entrance is crossing an adopted pavement onto a class B or C road, so I can understand why the council might insist on entrances conforming to their guidelines:

 

If you want to revisit this then surely this is a discussion to have with the highways department.  For example if you own the entire frontage then you might get them to agree on the grounds of increasing ease of turning onto the road, but the LA will have all these guidelines online, anyway.  For example, our LHA has a guideline that vehicular access for a single dwellings should have a maximum width of 3.7m at the highway boundary, and limit drops to the corresponding number of curbs.  Your best way ahead is negotiation, not confrontation.  If they say that there isn't  this 5 curb limit, then you can call the contractors bluff.

 

BTW, your blog is a fantastic resource for anyone interested in the life-cycle of an MBC frame and slab self build.  Have you though of adding it as  link in your signature? (Look at the top RH drop down, and pick account settings -> signature and paste the link in there using the link button.

[worldwidewebs]

Hi @TerryE - I'm not confusing the two issues, far from it. In terms of the number of dropped kerbs I'll stay with what we have - I'm just a bit disappointed as it would have helped visibility a bit and also annoyed by the fact that on the Sunday the contractor was happy with what I asked for but the following day he said the Council told him 4 days earlier he would have to do 1 less. I think he's lying. I think they just 'did the job' and then when challenged made up some story so that they didn't have to re-do it. I've looked around the area and there are plenty of the same size (or larger) than I wanted. 

 

Anyway, I've just ordered myself a new car so all is good in the world again!