Mack, David wrote: > Martin Clark wrote: > >> BW has now responded to the criticisms by announcing a >> package of measures to improve safety at Lock 86 and "design >> out" the need for boaters to climb over the wall and use the >> historic steps. >> >> The planned additional safety measures at Lock 86 are: >> * the offside landing above the lock to be extended by adding >> a new landing stage (possibly floating) * the existing >> landing stage below the lock (under the bridge) to be >> re-surfaced to improve safety * bespoke steps to be added to >> the steep cobbled slope between the lock side and the lower >> landing stage >> >> More about these improvements and photos of the locations, >> along with questions arising from the plans can be found on this page: >> http://www.penninewaterways.co.uk/news/canalstreet2.htm >> >> Of course, the proposals do nothing to placate those who just >> don't want the heritage of the street ruined by the fence... > > I hesitate to play the elfin safety card, but has BW carried out a risk > assessment in relation to creating a place to which there is no access > other than by boat, and where a person could be trapped - whether a crew > member who has literally missed the boat, or a drunken reveller who has > managed to scale the new fence, or for that matter the emergency > services who are called to deal with the latter? > I'm afraid I cannot answer that, David. It is a matter that you would need to seek answers to from BW or raise in a comment about the planning application through the council website. -- Martin Clark
Pennine Waterways Website http://www.penninewaterways.co.uk
