Damaged Pavement - advice needed

DaveF327

@ OP:
With respect, I don't feel it's your (or our) job to enforce the law. The local authority is exactly that.. an authority. They will already have had legal people look into the legalities of general highway work - whether on a 'continuing authority' basis or not - and their decision is usually final.

You asked for advice on whether to let sleeping dogs lie or become obstructive to prove a point. Posters have now given their advice. I really feel you're cutting off your nose to spite your face.

27col

But pavements are not normally constructed so as to be able to accommodate heavy vehicles driving over them. If they were, they would exorbitantly expensive. It just isn't going to happen. Especially in the straitened financial circumstances of today.

goldspanners

27col wrote: »

But pavements are not normally constructed so as to be able to accommodate heavy vehicles driving over them. If they were, they would exorbitantly expensive. It just isn't going to happen. Especially in the straitened financial circumstances of today.

exactly, our roads cant even take constant heavy traffic so what chance do we have a of a pavement being able to do so.

hundredk

KeithP wrote: »

Surely, if the council awards a contract to a contractor, the contractor is, by definition, approved, even if he wasn't before.

Please tell me what I have missed.

Contractors should be approved before they are awarded any contracts. Packs are sent to contractors wishing to work for Local Authorities. These packs request various details from the contractor such as copies public liability insurance, H&S records, risk assessments, method statements, scope of works they undertake etc. Once these are returned to the satisfaction of the authority they get approval and can bid for contracts.

The authority is responsible for ensuring the contractor carries out works in accordance with all the relevant rules and regs, ie responsibility is not passed to the contractor. Under Construction & Design Management (CDM) regs the LA has "client" responsibility. Similarly, it is the contractors responsibility to ensure any sub contractors comply with the same guidlines since they have agreed carry out works to certain standards in gaining approved contractor status.

If I understand correctly, from what has been described by OP, there should be traffic management around the construction that complies with NRSWA. This should provide appropriate segregation of traffic from pedestrians and vehiclar access to the construction site, including sinage, barriers, diversions as necessary to meet NRSWA.

Of course, what should happen and what does is not always the same.

OP - reinstatement of footpath would normally be towards the end of the project after everything else that affects the path is completed. In the meantime safe access should be provided as detailed above.

Throbbe

OK, a few random points.

While the Contractor/subbie are not engaged by highways on this project, they may well be on the approves list anyway. It's a fairly small world, so most contractors in the area will be.

For trying to resolve your issues, I'd say the real problem is the poor management of the site access rather than the construction of the pavement. Even if it does get repaired, it'll be damaged inside the week.

I'd go for a scattergun approach. The obvious thing is to actually talk to the contractor, and should always be the first move, but i get the impression you've exhausted that avenue, so ...

The development control team at the council will have dealt with planning for the site. Check with them to see if there are any constraints on access in the planning conditions. Unfortunately, they are often reluctant to upset developers, but if you catch the keen member of the department you may get some action. Highways wont really be interested in how the site is run, that's not their area.

The Education section will be the 'client' for this work. Since they are paying the bills they will be meeting regularly with the contractor, and will have some influence. Pester them. If there is a genuine risk, play up the safety aspect. The client does have certain responsibilities under CDM 2007 (as others have said). Quite often at an individual officer level, they are poorly informed about it, or plain terrified, and try to distance themselves from any sort of responsibility.

Keep pestering your local councillor, and if necessary your MP. Sadly, they do tend to carry a lot more clout than the public when getting council officers to deal with things.

Try the police as well. They would have been a consultee on the planning and may have had concerns about the access. Again, don't waste their time, but if the contractor is acting unsafely, or breaching traffic orders, then a quiet word from the community officer might carry some weight.

Is the contractor part of the 'Considerate Contractors' scheme? They'll have boards up if they are, with a contact number. Relations with local residents are an area that they get marked on.

Finally, is there someone supervising the work on behalf of the local authority? Depending on the form of contract they'll be called something like the Engineer/Architect/Project Manager/Supervisor. Speak to them.

I'm afraid it's probably going to be a case of being sufficiently annoying that it becomes easier for the contractor to resolve the issue than put up with you hassling them!

What I WOULDN'T do, is obstruct the access or similar. You'll just get everyone entrenched, and may get yourself into trouble. Similarly, "I'll go to the press" sounds exciting, but is a last resort. Your local press reporter is not a champion of fairness and decency (OK, maybe he's new and he's not had it beaten out of him), they are someone who wants to sell papers and advertising. If your aims help him (or her) then they'll help, if not you'll just as likely get ignored, or painted as a NIMBY.

If my general cynicism hasn't given it away yet, I do something a bit like this for a living. :rolleyes:

stargate222

Update. I took general advice of the board and didn't obstruct the works with my car and as DaveF327 said 'give them a chance'. Unfortunatley my worst fears was realised. The sub-contractor who was meant to be doing the work got another contractor to do the work!!!! They didn't believe that high visibility jackets were their style.... and barriers are for wimps!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! How the digger didn't hit this one car was a miracle. Two school kids had a very narrow escape with the tarmac lorry having to pin themselves against the hedge to avoid the lorry on the pavement (he had kangaroo clutch control). Obviously I repeatedly phoned the council highways department to report how dangerous. I first phoned at 9am and someone turned up at 11.30. Saw him take a photo and then he disappeared and the work continued. Kept phoning the council but nothing happened. I'm still waiting for the phonecall back. As for the materials used there was a large content of soil in the 'stone' - spoil from the building site. I don't envisage th pavement lasting long.

Thanks Throbbe for your thoughts. I have certainly been pestering the 'client' but haven't found that magic person. As you've said the council isn't an cohesive unit.

Throbbe -cynacism apparent but there is hope for you!

I'll post some pictures if I can figure out how to do it!

goldspanners

stargate222 wrote: »

Update. I took general advice of the board and didn't obstruct the works with my car and as DaveF327 said 'give them a chance'. Unfortunatley my worst fears was realised. The sub-contractor who was meant to be doing the work got another contractor to do the work!!!! They didn't believe that high visibility jackets were their style.... and barriers are for wimps!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! How the digger didn't hit this one car was a miracle. Two school kids had a very narrow escape with the tarmac lorry having to pin themselves against the hedge to avoid the lorry on the pavement (he had kangaroo clutch control). Obviously I repeatedly phoned the council highways department to report how dangerous. I first phoned at 9am and someone turned up at 11.30. Saw him take a photo and then he disappeared and the work continued. Kept phoning the council but nothing happened. I'm still waiting for the phonecall back. As for the materials used there was a large content of soil in the 'stone' - spoil from the building site. I don't envisage th pavement lasting long.

Thanks Throbbe for your thoughts. I have certainly been pestering the 'client' but haven't found that magic person. As you've said the council isn't an cohesive unit.

Throbbe -cynacism apparent but there is hope for you!

I'll post some pictures if I can figure out how to do it!

maybe you should get out a bit more. i doubt even if the contractor closed the road for a week and laid plates of solid gold you would still complaining about something.

stargate222

golden spanners - incorrect, I just believe that a job should be done properly and not pose a danger to anyone. Work on the roads by any chance?!!!!!

stargate222

goldspanners

stargate222 wrote: »

. Work on the roads by any chance?!!!!!

nope, but i do often get bogged down by an overwhelming amout of red tape sometimes when even trying to carry out the simplest of tasks,this red tape is usually caused by busybody interfering folk like yourself who seem to think they know best.

just getting the job done without the added hassles like (signing in,writing work permits,hot work permits, working at height permits, working at height while carrying out hot work permits,coning off areas,barriers, high viz vests,safety glasses,caution wet floor signs,permits to manouvre vehicles,hard hats,flashing beacons and reversing alarms,heath forms,site inductions). all this crap just makes life that little bit more stressful and much less productive. i agree with a lot of health and safety at work,but in context and in moderation,its just we all have to cater for the lowest denominator every single time,just incase they appear. natural selection if they do appear i say.
everyone could see the guys were working on the pavement so when a suitable time comes cross the f***ing road out of thier way,then there will be no getting crushed up the side of a lorry, and the digger didnt hit the car,not because of some miracle,because the guy driving it was confident and comfortable in his own ability to operate it without hitting anything.

seriously people like you with no real purpose in life just make it harder for folk who do.
stop looking out the window and put trisha on the telly or something.