Minutes:
Mr Munnelly assured that the major scheme work was making good progress and was on schedule. There had been minor delays completing works in the Beckenham Green area. There was a gap in the brickwork near the planters. This was because the contractors were waiting for delivery of the green bricks that would spell out the name, ‘Beckenham Green’. It was anticipated that this work would be completed during the next five weeks. Some of the lamp columns had been dug up and re-instated. Some electrical work was still required to be completed by UK Power Networks.
Mr Munnelly informed the Group that the phase 3 work at Thornton’s Corner was well advanced, and that a good space had been created for pedestrians. Orders had been placed for the phase 4 work around Village Way.
The contractors would be pulling off site at the end of November, and traffic would revert to two way; work would re-commence in the second week of January. Mr Munnelly felt that work was generally going well, with minimum disruption. Communication had been good, and the Beckenham Business Association had been regularly updated.
The Chairman asked about the re-order of the granite. It was confirmed that the new granite had arrived, and that it was pink. Mr Goy asked if it was the correct granite as he felt that the pink colouration was very hard to see. The Chairman asked if the granite was porous, and it was clarified that granite was not a porous material. It would require jet washing to be cleaned properly. Mr Munnelly assured that a budget was available for jet washing, and that enhanced cleaning would be incorporated into any future contracts. The granite areas were likely to be jet-washed quarterly. Jackie Groundsell was concerned that the cost of jet-washing may be borne by the BID. It was clarified that this was not the case and that LBB would be bearing the cost.
Chloe-Jane Ross remarked that a more stringent cleaning regieme may be required for outside of the Kebab Shop, and that jet washing quarterly was not sufficient.
The Group discussed matters relating to bus stops. It was noted that when the work paused for the Christmas break, all of the bus routes would return to their pre-scheme operations; this included Rectory Road. The Group heard that some bus stops had been removed during the course of the major scheme work. It was anticipated that these bus stops would be re-instated over the Christmas break, but it was likely that liaison with TfL would be required for clarification.
Sarah Niblock stated that there were many kerbs in the front of the High Street that were chipped. Assurance was provided that any damage to the kerbs would be made good.
Janice Pilgrim referred to perceived issues with the tactile paving by the crossing near to Beckenham Junction Station. The Chairman asked Ms Pilgrim to make a basic plan for the engineers so that they could investigate further.
Post Meeting Note 1:
Janice Pilgrim supplied the following information for clarification:
The issue: Tactile paving at controlled crossings
The location: The controlled crossings at the corner of Albemarle Road and Southend Road, on the O’Neill’s side of Southend Road, by the estate agent.
The problem: Tactile paving has been laid at each crossing, but the guidelines for this state that the ‘tail’ that crosses the main pavement (approximately perpendicular to the kerb) should extend back either to the building line or a distance of five metres from the kerb.
The tactile paving at the other controlled crossings laid so far do meet the national guidelines, however the tails on the aforementioned locations do not extend far enough. As a result, people with very low or no vision, which is a surprisingly large number particularly on a bright day when the sunlight is dazzling, will walk right past the crossing and will not be able to locate it if the tactile ‘tail’ stops too close to the crossing itself.
While the dimensions of the tactile paving at other newly laid controlled crossings in the High Street do meet the national guidelines, the colour contrast is not as great as had been hoped as the brindled paving is more “red” than the “earth” coloured sample at the chicken shop appeared to be. Hopefully the colour contrast will be sufficient to distinguish the crossing from the surrounding paving.
Post Meeting Note 2:
Sarah Niblock has sent in photos of damaged paving, and these will be emailed out with the minutes.
Nick Goy expressed the view that the tactile paving near to ‘Snappy Snacks’ and elsewhere was too short and it was at an unusual angle to the crossings by the former public toilets. Mr Munnelly assured that the relevant guidance pertaining to conservation areas was being adhered to, and that the original plans showed the tactile paving.
Mr Goy expressed the view that the tree roots from the planters at Beckenham Green had been exposed for too long. Mr Oliver responded that no problems had been reported by the Tree Officer.
Mr Goy complained about ‘random protrusions’ on kerb and parking bays paving bricks, and expressed the view that they were a trip hazard. Mr Munnelly responded that parking bays needed to show textual and visual changes, and that the bays corresponded to the relevant design parameters and took into account mobility issues. The kerbs were high, but they corresponded to the crop top design that had been specified from the onset.
Mr Goy further complained that the wider pavements were being used by cafes for al fresco dining. He expressed the view that this made it difficult for pedestrians to navigate the footways. Also, the public could not determine whether the cafés were exceeding the area allowed. The Chairman responded that he was pleased that al fresco style dining was taking place. He added that eating establishments providing al fresco dining had to apply for a licence, and that the licence would impose certain restrictions. The licences would normally be displayed in shop windows.
Chloe-Jane Ross felt that the work around Beckenham Green was taking too long. She also felt that the Green and the surrounding area were messy and untidy. Garry Warner asked if FM Conway could undertake a litter pick up as soon as possible. The Chairman was hopeful that this could be done the next day (22nd September) as there was going to be a market held on the Saturday (23rd September).
Marie Pender drew attention to a gas monitoring valve outside Lloyds Bank that needed either to be moved or camouflaged. She felt that something should be done with it to stop people falling over it.
David Wood stated that the paving around St George’s Church had not been finished on one side. He asked if this could be rectified so there was not a change in paving material halfway down a property frontage. (Post-meeting note from David Wood: the adjoining attractive listed St Georges’ alms houses ought also to have the new brick paving).
Gillian Morphy highlighted a lip on a dropped kerb in Church Avenue (on the opposite side to the bank), and asked if this could be checked. She felt that the kerb and the road were not as flush as those at the junction cross roads. There was still a lip which caused jolting in wheelchairs and Ms Morphy had seen a lady trip there. She understood that there had to be a significant difference in height for it to be considered a trip hazard and was unsure if it would meet the criteria. She hoped that FM Conway would be able to lay the rest of the dropped kerbs to the excellent standard they had displayed at Beckenham Junction. Garry Warner said the tolerance was 6mm.
The matter of the proposed long bench outside of Beckenham Junction was discussed. Mr Oliver explained that Network Rail were asking for £10k to engage, with another £5k for legal costs. The Group had to make a decision based on this information, as to whether or not the matter of the bench was really a priority. The minicab firm reportedly considered it would reintroduce congregating nuisance--removed when the low car park wall was removed. Mr Wood and Mr Goy considered the long bench would be an obstacle to commuters leaving the station in large numbers normally or in an emergency. The Group decided that the bench was not a priority, and should be abandoned. A ‘legible London’ street map here was still proposed.
The Group discussed telephone boxes that had become an eyesore. Many of these had received planning permission in the 1990’s and were principally lucrative advertising surfaces for the owning companies, eg. ‘New World’. New planning permission had been refused. Mr Munnelly estimated that the cost of removal of the boxes would be in the region of £10k to £15k. The Chairman requested a report on telephone boxes in Beckenham to assess the best way forward.
Marsha Berg also requested any action possible to deal with untidy unsecured cables on building frontages.
RESOLVED that:
(1) A cleaning test on the granite slabs be undertaken before the next meeting
(2) Liaison is undertaken with TfL to clarify if removed bus stops would be re-instated during the period of the Christmas Break
(3) Damaged or chipped kerbs in the High Street would be repaired or replaced
(4) Janice Pilgrim to submit a diagram to the engineers to highlight the location of the tactile paving which she felt was problematic, with a note to explain what the issue was
(5) FM Conway to carry out a litter pick up exercise in the Beckenham Green area as soon as possible
(6) The plan to locate a long bench outside of Beckenham Junction Station be abandoned
(7) A report on telephone boxes in Beckenham be drafted for the next meeting