History of the Danbury Street Ramp Project
Pre-2010
12th April 2010. Work in Progress
12th April 2010. Councillor Klute's Comments.
Councillor Martin Klute published the following comments on the construction activity at the Danbury Street ramp.
"I was first made aware that British Waterways had ideas to ‘improve’ the ramp after a meeting last summer of the ‘Friends of Regents Canal’. British Waterways were aware of pedestrian/cyclist conflicts on the ramp, and had attempted to solve this by putting a ‘kissing gate’ arrangement half way down the ramp. They soon decided that this arrangement was unsafe and removed it again, partly because cyclists continued to travel down the ramp at speed and then had to brake suddenly when they reached the obstruction halfway down. They had therefore come up with a scheme to extend the ramp, which addressed their stated concern, which was that the ramp was not ‘DDA compliant’, which is a rather daft argument for a 200 year old structure in a conservation area. These proposals looked cumbersome and expensive to me, and didn’t really address the issue of conflicts."
"I heard nothing more about this scheme, until I received a forwarded email from Gillian Comins, the very energetic and conscientious former secretary of Islington Living Streets. The email was advising her that British Waterways would be starting improvement works to the ramp in less than two weeks. No-one else locally knew anything about it."
"I contacted British Waterways, to ask why local Councillors had not been consulted about this, and the project manager admitted to me that “consultation with the local council was not done in this instance”. But he said the contract was placed and that they were going ahead anyway. I also found out that Islington Planners had not been consulted about the scheme, and that it involved felling two large trees to make way for the changes. The tree service advised me they had consented to the removal of the trees on the basis that British Waterways had assured them they had consulted locally on the proposal, which they hadn’t. The trees have already gone."
"The scheme they are now going to build has been significantly watered down from the original proposal, to the point where it now provides separate shallow steps for pedestrians, with the ramp rebuilt at the existing gradient. And whilst this resolves the conflict between able-bodied pedestrians and cyclists, wheelchair users and parents with buggies will still have to use the ramp, which is as steep as it was, and which will now be mainly a cycleway. So in short, the scheme is a huge expense, which fails to properly solve any of the problems originally identified."
"This is another example of a large public agency which is meant to serve the public (as are TFL) doing pretty much what they like, and just not bothering to consult local people. What I don’t think they realise is that by consulting locally; residents, cyclists and pedestrians, they could probably have got a much better scheme. I am passionate about proper local consultation and involvement, and If I am successfully re-elected on May 6th (which is quite soon) one of my main priorities will be trying to restore some level of accountability and transparency with organisations such as, TFL and British Waterways, the PCT, HFI, Enterprise, etc. I have begun this process with the PCT in the last year as Chair of the Health and Wellbeing Scrutiny Committee, but this is not much more than scratching the surface of the issue. I should also add that the Labour Group has made a specific manifesto commitment to tackle anti-social cycling, which gives all other cyclists a bad name."
"A footnote to the Danbury Street issue is the total road closure on Danbury Street Bridge, which has been given to the contractors whilst the work goes on. Local residents, motorists and cyclists are incensed that this seems to be almost entirely to provide free car parking for contractors visiting the site. So whilst the contractors get free car parking, local people have to drive all round the auction. Except that cyclists are now hopping onto the narrow pavement that is left, and risking accidents with pedestrians. I have spoken to Highways about the cycling issue, and suggested that they reduce the width of the compound sufficiently to allow cyclists to use part of the road – which would eliminate conflict and make it safe for both. They have said they will consider this. Lets see if it actually happens."
source: http://cllrmartinklute.blogspot.com/
5th September 2010. Angel Canal Festival
CONTRACT COMPLETION CHECKLIST (27th September 2010)
The following 26 issues were outstanding at the end of September 2010.
| Ref | Description of Defect / Outstanding Work | Corrective Action |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Replaced cobbles on arch pads covered with concrete | Clean cobbles |
| 2 | Sufacing required to ramp and steps | Resin surfacing to ramp, steps and landing |
| 3 | Temporary hand rail to step landing | Remove and replace with permanent handrail |
| 4 | Fiber board exposed on step landing | Cut back fiber board |
| 5 | Incomplete Concrete under kiosk | Fill void with self levelling grout |
| 6 | Exposed steel to C section | Rub down and paint with Hammerite |
| 7 | Exposed steel on pile capping plates | Rub down and paint with Hammerite |
| 9 | Sharpe edges on pile capping plates | Grind down and paint |
| 10 | Protruding welds on pile caping plates | Grind down and paint |
| 11 | Handrail at risk of theft | Replace all bolts with anti tamper |
| 12 | Timber risers loose | resin fix central round head bolt to risers |
| 13 | Raised concrete on step treads adjacent to sleepers | Grind/scabble level |
| 14 | Fiber board exposed at base of ramp | cut back fiber board in prep of surfacing |
| 15 | Bench broken | Remove and replace bench |
| 16 | Bin located in embankment works | Relocate bin |
| 17 | Construction debris on Towpath | remove all debris, recycle suitable material |
| 18 | Concrete foundations exposed | Fill embankment with 20t sub & 20t topsoil |
| 19 | Over spill of concrete surrounding trees | Break out and use as fill |
| 20 | Metal wires embedded in embankment | Cut off at ground level |
| 21 | Embankment eposed prior to landscaping | Cover Topsoil with Coir matting and pin |
| 22 | Level of towpath alters at base of ramp | break out concrete, remove vegitation and prep for surfacing |
| 23 | No paperwork for kiosk | Electrical report to be issued |
| 24 | Over sized capping plate to bottom step pile | Cut tosize and paint |
| 25 | Incorrect width of ramp | Remove handrail, cut steels flush with sleepers, fix sleepers to cut steels, paint and replace handrail |
| 26 | Welds to ramp handrail baseplates missing | Weld base plates |
29th September 2010. Friends of Regent's Canal Meeting.
Richard Rutter and Jon Guest from British Waterways responded to concerns raised about the ramp and the entrance feature.
Beverley Dean said that members of the Angel Assoc. had made a freedom of information request to find out the total cost of the scheme, including the closure of the road and consultation carried out. She added that the workmanship is poor, it was barely finished for the Canal Festival, the steps are not draining properly and that it doesn’t look finished. She felt it’s a missed opportunity.
Richard Rutter agreed with many of the points raised and offered an apology on behalf of British Waterways. Works stemmed from a hazard assessment carried out by Transport for London in 2007/08. The Danbury Street Ramp is the most well used ramp on the Regent’s Canal and something needed to be done to address the conflict between cyclists and pedestrians, including slowing down cyclists and segregating cyclists and pedestrians. Observations suggest that 70-75% of pedestrians now walk up the steps.
Richard Rutter conceded that the contractor got lots of things wrong and that there are lots of issues to be resolved. Most issues should be resolved by the end of October 2010.
The contractor only realised that the original method statement wasn’t possible when they started on site, which led to delays. The contractor used inappropriate machinery, which caused too much vibration. Further, third party wall issues were time consuming to resolve. Due to delays the contractor lost the road closure period and had to reapply. Only part of the road was closed off, which meant that the method statement had to be altered yet again.
The anticipated budget was £178k, spend to date is £219k, with an additional £54k still in dispute.
The arch was developed with input from Hanover school and cost £11.5k. It went up without design approval from British Waterways. It is too big, in the wrong location and impeded the steps. It is currently in storage in Enfield until a new, more suitable location can be found.
Del Brenner asked if trees would be replaced, as agreed with Islington Council. Richard Rutter confirmed that 2 trees will be planted. Del Brenner asked if they will be mature or semi matures trees. Jon Guest agreed to check.
Richard Rutter informed the group that more 2 Tings events will take place and a speed calming measure at the bottom of the ramp installed. The speed bump will be DDA compliant.
Fiona Maclean enquired why cyclists are no longer asked to dismount under bridges. Jon Guest told her that is unenforceable and that 2 Ting events are an effective means of engaging cyclists in particular.
Gillian Comins felt that local residents were not consulted about works.
Richard Rutter said that local residents were e-mailed, received a letter and questionnaire surveys were carried out.
Del Brenner felt that a one day event does not constitute consultation.
Beverley Dean added that she was not aware of works until contractors started on site.
Del Brenner had requested a copy of the revised design, but didn’t receive a copy.
Richard Rutter suggested that the Friends of Regent's Canal suggest a protocol for finding out about works on the towpath. British Waterways submit planning applications when required to do so.
Richard Rutter suggested that a protocol for consultation when no planning permission is required would be helpful.
30th September 2010.
E-mail from British Waterways to Friends of Regent's Canal
Dear Sandra
Please find attached a rough indicative diagram which hopefully helps explain the charity structure being proposed to replace BW.
Del asked about the trees we are obliged to replant. The narrative on the permission BW was granted is:
“The council expects to see at least two replacement trees planted along the canal in this area. The tree species and size to be agreed with the tree officer prior to planting. The trees are to be planted within one growing season of the trees removal.”
I also attach the snagging list which we discussed yesterday. Whilst the contractor is obliged to rectify these defects within 12 months, we remain hopeful that they will be complete by end of October.
I’d like to reiterate that BW would welcome the FORC’s thoughts on a protocol for consultation for major canal and towpath work. It is not our intention to apply for planning consent when we can use our General Permitted Development rights and therefore if we can agree a protocol, I believe it would be an important step forward.
I picked up that Del was concerned about the cost of BW commissioning Debretts to help promote our shared use path etiquette. Our communications team has confirmed that there was no fee paid to Debretts and they were delighted with the PR they received.
Thanks once again for inviting Jon and me to your meeting.
Kind regards
Richard Rutter
Head of Regeneration South
British Waterways
24th February 2011.
E-mail from British Waterways to Friends of Regent's Canal
Hi Ian
Having spoken to BW’s project manager there are still a couple of snagging items which are due to be resolved by the contractor now that the weather is improving and there is less likelihood of frost:
1. Water pooling on the steps.
2. Poor paint/galvanising finish on piles and handrail.
3. Replacement of the broken bench.
The trees are still to go in. On the issue of the trees – members of the FoRC may want to donate some native species of trees or indeed organise a small conservation day for local people? Perhaps this could be an agenda item?
Best regards
Richard
25th February 2011. E-mail from Ian Shacklock to British Waterways
Hi Richard
I'm very interested in progressing the idea of replanting local trees. I must admit that I have no experience of this type of project, but I will do whatever I can to bring together the right people.
I'm trying to streamline the agenda for next Wednesday, so I probably won't be adding this as a separate item. However, I think it is very appropriate to raise it during the open discussions with the biodiversity officers, and I will brief them beforehand.
Meanwhile I am passing questions around to some tree surgeons, ecology campaigners, etc, to get their views. I'm looking forward to their replies.
Regards, Ian
28th February 2011
At end of February 2011, there were 3 outstanding issues (apart from the replacement trees):-
| Ref | Description of Defect / Outstanding Work | Corrective Action |
|---|---|---|
| Water Pooling on the steps | ||
| 15 | Bench broken | Remove and replace bench |
| Poor paint/galvanising finish on piles and handrail |
28th April 2011
On the left of this photograph there are two trees that survived the construction work in 2010. A few days after this photograph was taken, both of these trees were removed.
2nd May 2011. Regent's Canal: Fallen tree closes section of walkway
A small section of Regent's Canal in London is closed after a tree fell into the water in front of a bridge.
The tree, which fell into the canal shortly after 1000 BST on Monday, is blocking the canal and towpath by the Danbury Street entrance.
A British Waterways spokesperson said a maintenance team from the company was assessing the situation.
Regent's Canal runs from Little Venice, near Paddington, in the west to Limehouse in the east.
It is the busiest canal in London.
The spokesperson said it was likely that high winds were to blame for the tree falling into the canal.
She said the tree would be removed after 1400 BST so that boats could navigate along the canal.
She added that the towpath near to where the tree fell had been closed for safety measures and would not reopen until Tuesday .
"We are advising visitors to avoid the Danbury Street entrance to the canal, but they can still use and enjoy the rest of the canal and the towpath, which is a very popular area, with lots of people and cyclists," said the spokesperson.
During peak times about 400 cyclists and an equal number of pedestrians use the route every hour.
source: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-13258208
7th May 2011
There are no longer any trees on this site. A total of four trees have been removed since the project started in 2010.
16th May 2011. E-mail from Ian Shacklock to British Waterways
Dear Richard and Jon,
I would like to resume our discussions about the two replacement trees at the Danbury Street ramp.
I understand that the best time to plant these trees is after early November, so I think we should start planning for it now.
We have yet to decide what type of tree to plant, and this will depend on expert advice about tree survival chances according to age and size. I have also asked the Angel Association to consider their preferred species. These dicussions are likely to continue for the next couple of months.
Meanwhile, I would like to know your project plans for procuring and planting the trees once we have chosen the size and species.
I think this should be discussed again at the September meeting of the Friends of Regent's Canal, but by then I hope that we will have agreed an action plan, with some provisional dates and with all key players identified.
Can you please put me in contact with somebody who can help to take this forward?
Regards,
Ian
16th June 2011. E-mails between Ian Shacklock and British Waterways
Subject: Re: Replacement Trees at Danbury Street Ramp
Richard and Jon,
Any update on this yet? Has it slipped through the net?
Regards, Ian
Hi Ian
From my understanding this hasn’t slipped through the net however I believe it isn’t the best time to plant trees – there is a greater failure rate if trees are planted now rather than the autumn / winter. By way of this e-mail I’ll ask Mish Patel the project manager to provide us with an update.
Best regards
Richard
Thanks, Richard
I totally agree, this is not a good time to plant. I think November to January is the best time, and I also think that young trees have a greater survival rate than older ones.
The reason I am flagging this now is that I want to ensure that the community can play a part in the selection and planting of the trees. I think the council can also help you. But it can take time to communicate with all the parties, so I want to get the ball rolling now
Regards, Ian
1st January 2012.
THERE ARE STILL NO AGREED PLANS FOR REPLACING ANY OF THE FOUR TREES
AT THIS SITE.