Canal to be fenced off

[alan_fincher]

The low wall has been there for two hundred years or so...why not leave it as it is and let the canalside revellers take some personal responsibility for their own actions?

Yes,

 

I have already agreed I think that's what should continue to be the case.

[Ike]

I believe a fence is the right thing to do because this is a very popular spot with drinkers sitting on that low wall, it would be very easy to topple over.

 

I disagree. The wall currently has a low, flat top which is easy to sit on by all but the most intoxicated revelers, perching on a railing a few inches higher could well prove a lot more challenging. If someone did fall in it's all very well saying the railing will not prevent throwing lines but what if the would-be rescuer didn't have a line to hand or the casualty was not in a state to grab the other end and hold on? The rescuer now has another obstacle to negotiate.

 

A far more sensible approach in my opinion would be to install more fixed seating positioned to discourage use of the wall, require (as a condition of their premises licences) bars and clubs on canal street to have trained rescue personnel and rescue equipment and to instruct their doorstaff to be more vigilant with regards the situation.

 

I assume the amount of money identified will be to provide a high quality barrier of some sort that fits in with the built environment

High quality possibly but not, in my opinion, in keeping with the built environment. I suspect it wouldn't be long either before someone took a key to one of the glass panels and then how long do you think it would be before they were covered in graffiti and looking like crap?

 

Needless to say I've objected.

[SarahB]

I've objected too.

[the grinch]

added my details as an objector as well.

[Tim Lewis]

Picture from 2002:

 

 

Tim

[FadeToScarlet]

 

http://nbluckyduck.blogspot.com/2009/01/al...g-rochdale.html

 

This is the wall in question, I think.

 

I'm in two minds about this. On one hand, I dislike the idea of anything altering the old fabric, as it would fundamentally change the canal side in that area and stop any bow-hauling or horseboating.

 

On the other hand, I remember thinking, "that wall's rather low" when I saw it the first time, and so I can see how people could hurt themselves falling off.

 

I think that Something Must Be Done, but I don't think it ought to be a chromed metal and glass fence, which would be completely out of character.

 

It seems like the problem is that people sit on the invitingly curved stone top of the wall, and can fall over backwards. Why not, thinking laterally, do people try and do something to stop them sitting there? How about a triangular strip of wood along the middle of the curve, so that sitting is uncomfortable? Cheaper and far, far less intrusive than the "designer" fence!

Edited May 1, 2009 by FadeToScarlet

[alan_fincher]

Picture from 2002:

 

 

Tim

Interesting picture, Tim.

 

I'm not sure of the legal status of the bit of land to the immediate side of the wall.

 

Some have described it as the towpath, whilst I think others might reasonably call it the street.

 

What is obvious is that you can't really take a horse drawn boat along there now, without disturbing a few tables.

 

It doesn't really affect the outcome, (or my views of this issue), but surely my earlier statement that...

 

it looks like the proposal isn't even on canal property

 

wasn’t actually that far off the mark after all. If it is legally on canal property, it certainly doesn’t look that way!

 

It’s a unique scene though, I think – I’ve certainly not seen anything similar, and I believe it should be preserved untainted.

 

Alan

[kiki]

I can't imagine any of the bar owners would agree to this. Having spend many a sunny afternoon with my work collegues skiving off from the University along canal street !!! The access to the canal, the whole area, if you have not been lucky enough to ecxperience it, is unique in manchester and would be horrific if it were tampered with.

We have a drunk bloke who staggers down our section of canal every day with his sheep dog, the dog sort of herds him back from the brink every few yards....should we have a fence put up on the entire towpath between Hyde and the Globe pub, or perhaps just fence off the whole canal,end of story, stop anyone falling in.....honest to God, council memebers should be drowned at birth

[mayalld]

Interesting picture, Tim.

 

I'm not sure of the legal status of the bit of land to the immediate side of the wall.

 

Some have described it as the towpath, whilst I think others might reasonably call it the street.

 

What is obvious is that you can't really take a horse drawn boat along there now, without disturbing a few tables.

 

Well, that much is true.

 

However, given that most of the horseboating that is likely to go on there is done by one person, I don't think she really cares how much she upsets a few tables.

 

I can't imagine any of the bar owners would agree to this. Having spend many a sunny afternoon with my work collegues skiving off from the University along canal street !!! The access to the canal, the whole area, if you have not been lucky enough to ecxperience it, is unique in manchester and would be horrific if it were tampered with.

We have a drunk bloke who staggers down our section of canal every day with his sheep dog, the dog sort of herds him back from the brink every few yards....should we have a fence put up on the entire towpath between Hyde and the Globe pub, or perhaps just fence off the whole canal,end of story, stop anyone falling in.....honest to God, council memebers should be drowned at birth

 

If BW could actually work out where our bit of the canal is, I'm sure they'd be here to fence it off.

[journeyperson]

I can't imagine any of the bar owners would agree to this. Having spend many a sunny afternoon with my work collegues skiving off from the University along canal street !!! The access to the canal, the whole area, if you have not been lucky enough to ecxperience it, is unique in manchester and would be horrific if it were tampered with.

We have a drunk bloke who staggers down our section of canal every day with his sheep dog, the dog sort of herds him back from the brink every few yards....should we have a fence put up on the entire towpath between Hyde and the Globe pub, or perhaps just fence off the whole canal,end of story, stop anyone falling in.....honest to God, council memebers should be drowned at birth

 

I do agree with everything you say here - but how do you tell a future councillor at birth?

[kiki]

I do agree with everything you say here - but how do you tell a future councillor at birth?

 

 

Hmmm they dont so much cry as whine a lot, pick at everything and sit on their arses doing nothing from day one...while their little buddies crawl about.....maybe that will be a start.

[RLWP]

Hmmm they dont so much cry as whine a lot, pick at everything and sit on their arses doing nothing from day one...while their little buddies crawl about.....maybe that will be a start.

 

Not sure about that. Crawling and local counsellors seems a natural fit...

 

Richard

 

Even if it only my skin doing the crawling!

[david and julie]

I'd imagine one of the reasons people sit on the wall is due to the shortage of seats outside the bars (I've seen people sitting on the floor at particularly busy times). A simple solution would be a more in-keeping wrought iron railing fence between the wall and the trees and then pedestrianise(what an awful word) the street. This would both protect an historic wall, enable any boaters to use it as intended and also enable more seats to be put out for the pub customers - as a bonus the lack of vehicles would make it even safer. Deliveries could be made in the morning before the bars open by having a simple barrier at each end - traffic is already restricted to a degree anyway.

 

However, what we must remember about Manchester City Council is that Canal St is one of their pet area's and I'm quite sure they would put that above the canal.

 

I'd imagine the glass and stainless steel is to match the surrounding flats and bars really.

 

There was a mention in yesterdays local rag too.

http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/new...r_tragedy_canal

[denboy]

I'd imagine one of the reasons people sit on the wall is due to the shortage of seats outside the bars (I've seen people sitting on the floor at particularly busy times). A simple solution would be a more in-keeping wrought iron railing fence between the wall and the trees and then pedestrianise(what an awful word) the street. This would both protect an historic wall, enable any boaters to use it as intended and also enable more seats to be put out for the pub customers - as a bonus the lack of vehicles would make it even safer. Deliveries could be made in the morning before the bars open by having a simple barrier at each end - traffic is already restricted to a degree anyway.

 

However, what we must remember about Manchester City Council is that Canal St is one of their pet area's and I'm quite sure they would put that above the canal.

 

I'd imagine the glass and stainless steel is to match the surrounding flats and bars really.

 

There was a mention in yesterdays local rag too.

http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/new...r_tragedy_canal

Looks like the locals dont want to spend that much money on the place either

[DHutch]

I have just been reading the "Design Statement" which is here and in paragraph 1.3 it incorrectly states "There are no access points to any of these landing stages from Canal Street."

 

So, presumably, Manchester City Council along with the heritage officer of British Waterways are unaware that there are steps carved into a stone block allowing lock operators to climb up and down (see photo below). I hope some of you will point this out. I shall! It will be nearly impossible and certainly dangerous to climb over the proposed fence at this point to get to the steps down to the lock.

Yeah i hadnt thought about that.

- But yes, i have certainly used the very steps myself. Because using them is the only way to go ahead and set the lock.

 

 

Daniel

[Hairy-Neil]

so maybe these were once access steps but long since abandoned

 

I've used them every time I've boated on the Rochdale 9, maybe 7 - 8 times over the last twenty years.

[Theo]

Hm...

 

I, too, am disenfranchised by a glitch in the technology. I have tried both FireFox and IE and they give the same error.

 

Nick

[CanalWalker]

Making the wall higher seems sensible to me, a 16 inch wall is a bit low. This rather mundane issue seems to have upset a lot of teetotallers (not just here) who think drinkers deserve to die and generated a bit of comment by those who resent money being spent in the gay district.

Maybe the design could include some proper steps to make access easier for rescue services and boaters. I dont see that the plans would be a bad thing for boaters, indeed it could be a good thing.

 

The comments about improved lighting and life saving devices seem sensible too.

[Hairy-Neil]

Objected.

 

 

It's the Nanny State gone mad......

[Ike]

Making the wall higher seems sensible to me, a 16 inch wall is a bit low. This rather mundane issue seems to have upset a lot of teetotallers (not just here) who think drinkers deserve to die and generated a bit of comment by those who resent money being spent in the gay district.

 

Those are a couple of rather large assumptions. I'm far from a teetotalar, used to work in Manchesters gay 'district' and have no objections to money being spent there. I do however think the plans are ill-conceived. Proper steps would IMHO lead to more problems by encouraging people to explore the currently hidden bits poorly lit tow path below the various bridges.

[CanalWalker]

I dont think that proper safe steps would be a bad thing, I know plenty of boaters that just could not get down to the lock via those lumps of stone. Steps with a hand rail would help boaters access the lock. If you dont want anyone else on the lock side put a gate on them. If access isnt needed there isnt a problem with the higher wall.

[mayalld]

Making the wall higher seems sensible to me, a 16 inch wall is a bit low. This rather mundane issue seems to have upset a lot of teetotallers (not just here) who think drinkers deserve to die and generated a bit of comment by those who resent money being spent in the gay district.

Maybe the design could include some proper steps to make access easier for rescue services and boaters. I dont see that the plans would be a bad thing for boaters, indeed it could be a good thing.

 

The comments about improved lighting and life saving devices seem sensible too.

 

I am anything but teetotal, and I think it's a bloody stupid idea

 

I dont think that proper safe steps would be a bad thing, I know plenty of boaters that just could not get down to the lock via those lumps of stone. Steps with a hand rail would help boaters access the lock. If you dont want anyone else on the lock side put a gate on them. If access isnt needed there isnt a problem with the higher wall.

 

So, the steps that have been there for hundreds of years, and which are an original feature have to go, to be replaced by something that meets with the approval of the elfin safety people.

 

Yup, any excuse to destroy any little bit of the unique heritage of this section of canal.

[DHutch]

Also, while i object to anything being done at all. If you where to do something, in my mind, the thing to do would be to removed top course of stonework. Add an additoinal layer of new stonework, and replace the top course.

- This is what they have done recently at the bridge downstream of beestone iron lock, and while its clearly not the same high, 6months on the new stone as weathered so well you would stuggle to even notice the change had been made if not informed.

 

 

Daniel

[kiki]

Also, while i object to anything being done at all. If you where to do something, in my mind, the thing to do would be to removed top course of stonework. Add an additoinal layer of new stonework, and replace the top course.

- This is what they have done recently at the bridge downstream of beestone iron lock, and while its clearly not the same high, 6months on the new stone as weathered so well you would stuggle to even notice the change had been made if not informed.

 

 

Daniel

 

Thats a very sensible suggestion !!!

[Hairy-Neil]

Thats a very sensible suggestion !!!

 

My thoughts too, but there are implications for boaters from making the wall higher.

 

Whilst we are using a 200 year old infrastructure, ie. the stone block steps, to access those two locks there is not a problem. Once they are raised, if the boaters access were to remain the same dodgy method it would leave BW/The Waterways Trust open to litigation were someone to get hurt using the modified arrangements.