Posted by Peter James

Tue, July 27, 2010

Well I am normally mild mannered, but this really did enrage me to the point of wanting to leave. We were visiting as a Mills' Group so there is no hope for anyone else to gain access! The powers to be who took this decision, and it was not clear exactly who did, have not thought it through as it would actually be safe with people on every floor as a potential fire could be spotted straight away. Whereas in this case only staff are allowed up to the top, but without any one to spot a fire below. So the whole thing is not really logical. Somehow we must all campaign to prevent this 'desease' from spreading as it will eventually threaten the viability of all mills and indeed other heritage sites due to visitor numbers dropping. Lets hope that Lord Young lives up to his promise! In the meanwhile be vocal!!

Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)

Thu, July 29, 2010

About 25 or so years ago, if I recall correctly, it was reported to the SPAB Mills Committee that the Hampshire County Council's Safety Officer, having visited the mill, had stipulated that all visitors to the mill should wear hard hats 'in case anything fell off the machinery'.
The Mills Committee members were equally horrified, and asked one of the committee, John Boyes, who was a retired Safety Officer, to speak to the Hampshire Council, to point out that in a mill, a hard hat often results in more heads being banged than without! I was not present at the resultant discussion, but it certainly resulted in the requirement being lifted!

Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)

Mon, August 02, 2010

William Hill commented on FaceBook re "The Brick Chimney":

"DO Hampshire Mills Group know about it-Seems odd decision given their members expertise and regular mill activity in the County"

Posted by Adam Marriott

Mon, August 02, 2010

just goes to show what we're up against. very sad. Common sense just isn't common any more.

Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)

Mon, August 02, 2010

Perhaps it would be worthwhile 'someone' contacting Hampshire CC to enquire about this ruling and to protest.

It worked last time!

Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)

Mon, August 09, 2010

Whilst I have only been actively involved in mills and milling for a few years, I have been taken by the consistency of common sense demonstrated by the vast majority of the milling fraternity. They collectively know all the foibles and hazards of a mill and are constantly pointing them out to their visitors during Open Days. In many cases these are the self-same millers who have rebuilt/restored mills from the weather beaten wrecks which they 'inherited', and/or are involved in the maintenance and repair of restored mills.

Prior to retiring, I was responsible for carrying out and applying risk assessments associated with much more hazardous tasks than just walking around and looking at an old mill. In the case of the Bursledon Windmill, the Hampshire County Council has declared the upper floors to be hazardous because of 'a brick chimney' perception of the environment. The predominant fuel in that area is the stout oak timbers from which the inner floors and milling machinery are made, but even brief consideration would make one realise that it takes a great deal of heat over a protracted period to ignite such timbers.

Admittedly, I and the other SMG millers only saw the ground and stone floors, but assuming the upper floors are not atypical of all the other mills I have visited, my experience of formal risk assessments would leave me to rate the situation at Bursledon Windmill, overall, as low to medium at the worst for members of the public, and low for experienced millers. Furthermore, assuming easily ignited flammable materials are not stored on the premises, I would rate the fire risk as low.

Whilst I and the other Sussex Mill visitors were surprised and in some cases cross about not being allowed to look at the upper floors, what really concerns me is that the general public are, at present, not allow to see the heart of the mill. How are youngsters supposed to visualise the way in which, for instance, the rotation of the sails is transformed into a driving force sufficient to turn the runner stone in order to mill grain? More importantly, how are we supposed to inspire youngsters into getting involved in the preservation and running of these heritage buildings? Without a continuing supply of fresh faces from the next generation, I fear for the future of traditional milling.

Assuming Hampshire County Council see the above and other comments, I hope they will seriously reconsider their current position on restricted access to Bursledon Windmill.

Posted by Michael Chapman

Mon, August 09, 2010

I was on that visit and agree with the previous comments regarding the limited access. However in the interests of accuracy Hampshire CC were given directives on relevant fire risks by Hampshire Fire and Rescue. To ignore their directives could would put Hampshire CC in difficulties with their insurer. The people managing the opening of the mill are employees of Hampshire CC so are unlikely to want to raise objections. As I see it objections to the current procedure regarding access to a public building would have to be argued with Hampshire Fire and Rescue.

Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)

Sat, August 14, 2010

The word from Hampshire Mills Group is ' This is an old problem and I don't see a way around it. Perhaps many emails to HCC may cause a change of mind....'

Ouch!

Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)

Tue, August 17, 2010

Why don't these people put their comments on the proper place. If all the Sussex Mills Group members who took part in this tour posted a complaint on the Bursledon windmill website action might get taken.
They should also involve other persons with the appropriate qualifications who could refute the statements made by Hampshire Fire Service. Hampshire Mills Group have commented to Hampshire Museums who run the windmill only to be dismissed as amateurs.

Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)

Tue, August 17, 2010

Bursledon Windmill does indeed have a facility for publishing "reviews" the form can be found at http://www3.hants.gov.uk/museum/windmill/review-windmill.htm#section100586-2

Reviews are only published "after approval" I have submitted the following comment:

"On the mill writing blog at http://www.millsarchivetrust.org/index.php/blogs/more/the_brick_chimney almost 200 people have now read serious criticisms of the way the mill is managed. The criticisms on fire safety are well argued by experts on mills and on safety assessments.

I suggest it is in Hampshire CC's and the mill's interest that whoever is responsible for managing the mill should respond on the blog, either to set the record straight or suggest how they will address the concerns expressed."

Perhaps others should add more!

Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)

Wed, August 18, 2010

Ron,
May I suggest that you submit a pointer to this blog on the Bursledon Windmill comments page. It would have more impact than anything from me as they know my feelings on the matter.
Cheers, Mick

Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)

Sun, August 22, 2010

Hmmm

Don't seem to want Ron's review as nothing visible...

Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)

Sun, August 22, 2010

So now I have sent the link to this discussion to the Hampshire Chronicle with the comment:

"You may be interested in a developing issue concerning health and safety at an important County landmark. The Council does not seem to want to get engaged - even though it is their responsibility"

Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)

Mon, October 17, 2011

It would appear that Hampshire CC has had the comments in this discussion for well over a year.
Can I assume that they have not replied? If this is the case, then perhaps they should be reminded of their duty to reply to letters!.

If you'd like to respond to this article, please use the form provided below.

Please note that your comments will need to be moderated first, so it might take a little while for your remarks to be published. If you'd like to avoid waiting for moderation, you will need to register first, or login if you've done this already.