Jump to content

Nash Mills lock 68 going to 69 look out for fffffing concert sticking out


gregg62

Featured Posts

Concrete even!

 

Yes - they have rather made a mess of it, haven't they?

 

Previously discussed on here, I think, but for those who wonder what is being talked about, a new footbridge is to be installed below the upper Nash lock, as part of the new housing development on the Nash Mills site.

 

Unfortunately they have managed to lay concrete well beyond the original line of the bank, to the extent it somewhat blocks a straight line entry or exit on the towpath gate of the lock.

 

Plonkers!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

They really have made a complete lash up of things on the approach to the upper Nash Mills lock on the Southern GU.

 

I don't often write letters of complaint to BW, but this time I did get of my backside!

 

To Jeff Whyatt, Manager South East waterways.

 

Complaint about new concrete works below Upper Nash Mills Lock (Lock 68) on the Grand Union

 

Dear Mr Wyatt,

 

You told me at a public meeting that if I saw anything happening on British Waterways South East that I felt to be particularly unwise or unsafe that I should bring it to your direct attention.

 

Am hoping that the topic on which I am writing will already have been made known to you, because it is, in my view, a rather striking example of simply “getting things completely wrong”.

 

Ground-works have been carried out below the upper Nash Mills Lock on the Grand Union, (Lock 68), which I understand to be in connection with the planned installation of a new foot-bridge to serve the residential housing development going on at Nash.

 

I was very aware when these works started that steel piling appeared to be being inserted further into the canal than the current edges of the lock approach, but only when a massive concrete capping has been added to this is it obvious the extent to which the line of the canal bank has been compromised for this new construction.

 

The resulting raised coping now projects maybe a foot beyond the former line of the canal edge immediately below the lock, and has also raised the edge at this point by up to a foot.

 

Although not completely obstructing a straight line approach for boats about to go uphill through the lock on the towpath side, it has none the less created a significant obstruction that sits firmly in the approach path that many boats might have taken in the past, particularly if setting down crew.

 

Coming out of the lock, the result is more alarming, as boats are faced by a large raised concrete obstruction, that many are failing to appreciate is there, and which they are therefore hitting.

 

The reaction to this poor design, (or possibly failure to implement a better design as planned?), has amazingly been just to stick a large yellow sign on it saying “Caution Obstruction”.

 

Unfortunately, because the whole lot sits on top of steel piling, I suspect it would be no easy matter to sort this unfortunate construction out, as really the correct solution should have been to stay within the confines of the existing bank, and not to try and “pinch” a foot from the canal. My guess is that, unmodified, boats will continue to strike this lump as a very regular occurrence.

 

I attach some photos that show what I am referring to.

 

I would welcome your reaction, and your view on whether what has been done is satisfactory. Do you see any possibility of trying to make any modifications after the event that will mitigate what has been done, please ?

 

IMG_1030.jpg

 

IMG_1025.jpg

 

I have just received the following reply.....

 

Dear Alan,

 

My team have been aware of this for some short while

It is not as per the signed off plans – the developer is aware of this and we are progressing with discussions on how this situation can be modified

You may or may not be aware that this precise location is where a landing for a new pedestrian bridge will be going in due course – this has driven the complication

The Conservation officer is involved as the lock itself is listed and possible modifications to the copings will need CO approval

Overall we are clear that the existing situation cannot remain

 

Regards

 

Jeff Whyatt

 

It is hard to see how the mess will be resolved, as the damage has already seriously been done.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

With the listing surely BW will have to get this redone?

 

Piling has been driven through the canal bed well beyond the original line of the lock apron.

 

Then I think the whole thing has been back-filled with poured concrete, and more capping over the top of everything, (old and new).

 

I can't see it being removed in a way that doesn't leave scars, and possibly leaks.

 

My guess is it will be fudged, and the bit of canal that has been "pinched" will not be won back again. They will probably just try and deal with the hard corner that boats are now colliding with.

 

We shall see, I guess.

 

Shame BW didn't have someone inspecting progress that the works were to plan, before quite so much almost immovable matter was put there, (which took a lot of weeks). They should have been able to call a halt when they first saw plans were not being followed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Even if this detail is corrected, I assume that the need to put this foundation so close to the edge means that the approved plan has a footbridge support close to the canal edge. This should not be acceptable since it imposes difficulties on anybody towing a boat from the bank. In my book the ability to tow by a horse should be maintained whenever works of this sort are carried out, but BW seems to have given up on this point long ago. But in a location like this, so close to the lock entrance, surely provision should be made for anybody bowhauling a boat into the lock, or even just keeping keeping hold of a line to the bank while the boat is moved from the lock mooring to the lock (or vice versa).

 

Does anyone know where the approved plan is on the local authority website?

 

David

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Well found that person !

 

So the intention really is to stick a bloody great concrete pillar right at the very water's edge ?

 

Brilliant! :angry:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Looking at the design there seems to be no inkling of the bridge or any other thing obstructing the canal. Therefore the design is not consistent with what they have built.

 

Start again I say and do it right as they said they would.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I can't see it being removed in a way that doesn't leave scars, and possibly leaks.

 

 

Removing without scars is tricky, the way to remove it without leaks is to cut away the structure just above puddle level and leave the bit through the puddle in place

 

This is what BW asked for when I asked about putting a gantry crane with two legs in the water, a barge width from the bank, they also needed to be satisfied that cantilevered gantries weren't an option

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

My guess is it will be fudged, and the bit of canal that has been "pinched" will not be won back again. They will probably just try and deal with the hard corner that boats are now colliding with.

 

Came through here today, and I was waiting to see what had happened to the sticking out concrete corner. The answer is that they've put on some rubber bits.

 

022.JPG

Edited by adam1uk
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Quo Vadis

Came through here today, and I was waiting to see what had happened to the sticking out concrete corner. The answer is that they've put on some rubber bits.

 

022.JPG

Sorted! ... Brilliant <_<

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Came through here today, and I was waiting to see what had happened to the sticking out concrete corner. The answer is that they've put on some rubber bits.

 

Is it not possible to get the local IWA group involved? - create a fuss about the effect on a listed structure? On here it will get a lot of tut-tutting, but won't get anything done to rectify the situation. Embarrass BW and get them to force the builders to put it right. Do a Lindy Foster!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is nothing on earth that could ever justify that!

 

:rolleyes: However ...... if something happens on the canal that she takes exception to she makes a lot of fuss and goes to the top man, and quite often gets what she wants. Alan has obviously been in touch with BW which is a good start, but maybe it needs winding up further in order to get something done. How about if all the people who've read this thread and think it is unacceptable for the lock approach to be restricted, especially when it was someone's cock-up anyway, wrote to BW/MPs/English Heritage/construction company/Waterways magazines? Simply muttering about it on here won't actually get anything done, and if nothing is done at this stage then it won't be done at all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.