Marple Flight

[Kris9128]

Well thats a major spanner in the works. Looks like i need a new route. lol

 

01/09/2023 16:11

We are sorry for the continued disruption experienced by the closure of Lock 7 on the Marple flight. The detailed engineering survey carried out on the lock last week has concluded that the lock wall has moved substantially over a short period of time. The results indicate that, unfortunately, the lock cannot be operated safely, either by customers, or on the basis of managed passage, and that it would pose a substantial risk to anyone attempting to operate the lock or navigate through it.

The repair will require substantial work and the lock will remain closed for an extended period of time. Whilst this is disappointing news, we are evaluating the design and method of the repair and will be doing our best to make sure it is prioritised in our works programme as soon as possible. Our engineering team and contractors will be making sure that the design is both robust and cost effective.  We will keep customers fully updated throughout and share any further updates including expected start and completion dates as soon as possible. In addition to our apologies, we share the frustration that this unplanned and costly work will have on the navigation, particularly given the substantial and extensive work undertaken earlier this year to secure water resources for the Peak Forest canal.

If you require any further information of have any specific questions, please do not hesitate to contact us atenquiries.northwest@canalrivertrust.org.uk.

For the most up to date information about our navigations please follow the linkhere.

 

25/08/2023 15:19

Please be advised navigation remains closed along the Marple Lock Flight of the Peak Forest Canal due to the movement of the lock chamber wall at Lock 7.

Our contractors have been to site to carry out the in-depth survey that will help determine what works are required. The findings within the survey are currently being analysed, we anticipate the results will be ready next week.

A further update will be provided by Friday 1 September.

 

18/08/2023 12:25

Following our investigations yesterday at Lock 7 on the Peak Forest Canal, we have found significant subsidence of the lock side, along with movement of the lock chamber wall.

Our engineers are now in the process of arranging specialist contractors to carry out an in-depth survey of the lock which will be carried out next week. Once this survey has been carried out, we will be able to provide a further update regarding what works are required.

A further update will be provided by Friday 25 August.

[Jen-in-Wellies]

When lock 11 had a similar failure a few years ago, it took 10 months to fix, so you're going to need a new plan.

https://canalrivertrust.org.uk/notices/13560-lock-11-marple-marple-flight-peak-forest-canal

[Puffling]

If you've seen the photos in the toll cottage at Marple junction of the reconstruction of lock 11, you'll understand the immense amount of work involved in that project. The chamber was practically rebuilt from the bottom and concrete piling added behind the masonry to prevent future subsidence.

As all large projects of this nature are prone to, it had delays and overruns. I think the final cost of the works was on the £1m region,.can anyone confirm this?

[jam]

Latest news today from CRT is that Lock 7 is not expected to be opened until April 2024 at the earliest

 

Update on 11/10/2023:

Our teams are currently in the design phase for the repair to Lock 7, Marple Flight. Whilst we are currently unable to advise when the lock flight will re-open at this stage, it is unlikely that navigation will resume before Easter 2024.

We appreciate this is disappointing news, the works to repair the lock are substantial, however our teams will endeavour to advance on this timeframe.

In the meantime, our local team, with the help of our volunteers, have completed vegetation works along the lock flight and we are reviewing what further works we can do over the winter to make the most of the extended closure.

We will continue to provide updates as soon as we know more.

[Cheshire cat]

I cycled past today. The huge hole lockside is fenced off. There is still zero activity on the ground.

[Stroudwater1]

You mean there’s a hole and crt aren’t looking into it? 
 

I can imagine there’s all sorts of background work to be done. However did any canal get built in the first place considering the effort that has to be got through now? 

 

 

[Arthur Marshall]

It's the "design phase" that's interesting. Surely they can use some of the expertise built up in the repair of other locks on the flight - unless, of course , those designs were done by consultancies whose data is protected by commercial considerations... but CRT really ought to know how to build a lock by now. Though the existence of such things, I suppose, may well be a mystery to some of their staff.

[David Mack]

44 minutes ago, Arthur Marshall said:

those designs were done by consultancies whose data is protected by commercial considerations...

My experience of being a consultant was that most organisations specified that the work done became the intellectual property of the client, so that they could use it in future. The bigger issue was that whilst most client organisations would take receipt of the main deliverables - typically written reports and drawings - most had no proper process for receiving and archiving all the background detail so that it would be available for future projects. From time to time clients would ask us to retrieve data from an old project and reissue what we had already given them. At least our archiving processes were up to the task!

1 hour ago, Stroudwater1 said:

You mean there’s a hole and crt aren’t looking into it? 
 

I can imagine there’s all sorts of background work to be done.

I think the Marple flight are listed. CRT will need to do a certain amount of opening up to identify the cause of the failure and options for repair. They will then have to obtain Listed Building Consent for the works, and so while the design work is being done and LBC obtained, there will be little which can be done on site.

[Tracy D'arth]

I wonder how much -"design work"- was done when the locks were first built? 

I suspect that the navvies simply did what they had done elsewhere.

[Arthur Marshall]

4 hours ago, David Mack said:

 

I think the Marple flight are listed. CRT will need to do a certain amount of opening up to identify the cause of the failure and options for repair. They will then have to obtain Listed Building Consent for the works, and so while the design work is being done and LBC obtained, there will be little which can be done on site.

The listing is probably the main cause of the delay, especially if the heritage bods insist on them using the same stone from the same quarry etc etc. I suppose while we all just want a working lock, everyone else wants something pretty to look at, in the same style as everything else on the flight. And there's more of them than us.

[Jen-in-Wellies]

9 hours ago, Arthur Marshall said:

The listing is probably the main cause of the delay, especially if the heritage bods insist on them using the same stone from the same quarry etc etc.

and using the same style of hand tools only, wielded by navvies wearing authentic period costume and getting blind drunk each night on period correct beer and moonshine. The same 'ealth'n'safety rules too, so if there aren't enough deaths and serious injuries during the rebuild, CaRT will be instructed to tear it down and start again.

[Arthur Marshall]

As far as I'm selfishly concerned, Marple being closed for a fair bit of the year probably means the Macc will stay open and there might even be enough water to keep the T&M open all the way up to Middlewich next year...

[ditchcrawler]

38 minutes ago, Jen-in-Wellies said:

and using the same style of hand tools only, wielded by navvies wearing authentic period costume and getting blind drunk each night on period correct beer and moonshine. The same 'ealth'n'safety rules too, so if there aren't enough deaths and serious injuries during the rebuild, CaRT will be instructed to tear it down and start again.

Interesting that. when we are board and its raining we often watch Grand Designs on the TV and there was a case of a house not getting permission to be lived in because when they built it the workers didn't have showers, changing rooms and a covered cycle rack on site. It was an eco build.

[Ken X]

2 hours ago, Jen-in-Wellies said:

 The same 'ealth'n'safety rules too, so if there aren't enough deaths and serious injuries during the rebuild, CaRT will be instructed to tear it down and start again.

This reminds me of a visit to a small pharmaceutical plant I made as a consultant around March time. 

 

Whilst lunching in the Restaurant (remember company Restaurants), I spied a huge poster on the wall. It read

 

"We have had four safety incidents this year so far.

Remember our target is twelve."

 

Often wondered if they really meant that.🙂

[Cheshire cat]

No doubt listed status is an extra level of complication. I think one of the challenges will be access. It is the towpath lock wall that has slumped and has the hole in the ground.

On the towpath side there is a towpath wide enough for pedestrians and cyclists but not vehicles. Beyond the towpath is a dry stone perimeter wall and the other side of the wall is a fifty foot drop down to the tennis club. 

 

On the non-towpath side there is the lock side pound and then what I think is a private road

 

 

https://maps.app.goo.gl/z88iVCsKYwyDmLbx6

Edited November 15, 2023 by Cheshire cat
Tried to link to Google Earth but failed miserably

[cuthound]

5 hours ago, Jen-in-Wellies said:

and using the same style of hand tools only, wielded by navvies wearing authentic period costume and getting blind drunk each night on period correct beer and moonshine. The same 'ealth'n'safety rules too, so if there aren't enough deaths and serious injuries during the rebuild, CaRT will be instructed to tear it down and start again.

 

The navvies would have to be paid in original canal company tokens, only valid in the shops and pubs owned by said canal companies, so would probably starve to death within a couple of weeks...

 

 

 

 

2 hours ago, Ken X said:

This reminds me of a visit to a small pharmaceutical plant I made as a consultant around March time. 

 

Whilst lunching in the Restaurant (remember company Restaurants), I spied a huge poster on the wall. It read

 

"We have had four safety incidents this year so far.

Remember our target is twelve."

 

Often wondered if they really meant that.🙂

 

Probably a cheap alternative to a voluntary redundancy scheme...

 

Edited November 15, 2023 by cuthound
To insert spaces between merged posts

[Mike Todd]

9 hours ago, ditchcrawler said:

Interesting that. when we are board and its raining we often watch Grand Designs on the TV and there was a case of a house not getting permission to be lived in because when they built it the workers didn't have showers, changing rooms and a covered cycle rack on site. It was an eco build.

I suspect that the real reason lies in building before getting PP!

[Arthur Marshall]

3 hours ago, Mike Todd said:

I suspect that the real reason lies in building before getting PP!

Presumably off grid. I don't recall that one, but I can't see why the builders not having facilities would negate the owner living in it, though I can imagine them stomping off the site and never returning if they were meant to be provided and weren't.

[ditchcrawler]

23 hours ago, Arthur Marshall said:

Presumably off grid. I don't recall that one, but I can't see why the builders not having facilities would negate the owner living in it, though I can imagine them stomping off the site and never returning if they were meant to be provided and weren't.

It was an eco build and you had to have enough point for it to be signed off at the end of build. Lorry miles for materials energy performance and all that sort of thing

[furnessvale]

On 14/11/2023 at 18:42, David Mack said:

My experience of being a consultant was that most organisations specified that the work done became the intellectual property of the client, so that they could use it in future. The bigger issue was that whilst most client organisations would take receipt of the main deliverables - typically written reports and drawings - most had no proper process for receiving and archiving all the background detail so that it would be available for future projects. From time to time clients would ask us to retrieve data from an old project and reissue what we had already given them. At least our archiving processes were up to the task!

I think the Marple flight are listed. CRT will need to do a certain amount of opening up to identify the cause of the failure and options for repair. They will then have to obtain Listed Building Consent for the works, and so while the design work is being done and LBC obtained, there will be little which can be done on site.

What they can do on site is to ensure the locks are kept in water rather than drained, thus reducing pressure on the walls.

[magpie patrick]

1 hour ago, furnessvale said:

What they can do on site is to ensure the locks are kept in water rather than drained, thus reducing pressure on the walls.

 Not really

 

The wall has become detached from the surrounds, as a result of voids, voids caused by penetration of water when the lock is full. Leaky walls is a feature of all the Marple locks (except possibly 14 and 11 now they have been rebuilt) and has been for as long as I can remember, which is fifty years since they were restored

 

They withstood at least twenty years, probably a lot more, of hardly even being used and were empty most of that time. Most restoration schemes have struggled with locks that moved but not Marple

 

Keeping locks full to keep the walls apart is a great theory - practice doesn't really bear the theory out. 

 

When the locks were planned, there were dissenting voices in the canal company committee on the basis that such deep locks might be ill-advised - it is possible they were far sighted voices who saw 220 years ahead, but other shallower locks elsewhere have suffered inward movement too.

[BEngo]

Notably lock 12  on the Aylesbury Arm about 10 years back.

4 hours ago, magpie patrick said:

shallower locks elsewhere have suffered inward movement too.

N

[Mike Todd]

On 14/11/2023 at 17:52, Arthur Marshall said:

It's the "design phase" that's interesting. Surely they can use some of the expertise built up in the repair of other locks on the flight - unless, of course , those designs were done by consultancies whose data is protected by commercial considerations... but CRT really ought to know how to build a lock by now. Though the existence of such things, I suppose, may well be a mystery to some of their staff.

Hopefully there will have been some learning carry over from the previous project but every lock (as with every motorway bridge) is different and entail going through the same design processes for each one, looking at the variations which may not be apparent in the finished product. Planning, heritage approval, access etc all take time before boots on the ground.

[Ronaldo47]

On 14/11/2023 at 18:42, David Mack said:

My experience of being a consultant was that most organisations specified that the work done became the intellectual property of the client, so that they could use it in future.

In the absense of a written agreement to the contrary, unless the designer is  an actual employee, the intellectual.property rights in something that you pay someone to do for you,  normally belong to the designer.   There have been a number of cases over the years where the courts have had to decide whether or not the designer was working in the capacity of an employee or as a freelance consultant to determine who owned what.  Which is why there is a need to have ownership of rights explicitly stated  in a contract. 

 

I used to work in the GEC Patent Department.  GEC businesses were supposed to consult us before entering into contracts to ensure that the  IP rights were appropriate.

 

The consequences of not doing this were highlighted when one of the GEC companies, in their haste, hadn''t bothered, and then discovered to their not inconsiderable cost,  that the money they had paid for someone to design something for them, only covered the right to use the single  prototype apparatus he had built for them. They then had to buy the rights from him before they could  go into production.

Edited November 22, 2023 by Ronaldo47
typos

[David Mack]

1 hour ago, Ronaldo47 said:

In the absense of a written agreement to the contrary, unless the designer is  an actual employee, the intellectual.property rights in something that you pay someone to do for you,  normally belong to the designer. 

True. But my experience of working for public sector and large private sector clients was that the contracts under which we worked invariably assigned the ipr of what we produced to the client.