Accrington Web - View Single Post - The Blythes Safety Threat and Church Redevelopment.

gumption · 06-11-2009, 11:44

As the supposed redevelopment of Hargreaves Warehouse and the surrounding area seems to have seriously hit the rocks (mainly because of the current economic climate) it throws up to me an interesting anomally about the so called safety issues from the Blythes chemical site which affects the whole area.

It would appear that the Health & Safety mob based in County Hall at Preston have the major word on what can happen in the area because it is classified as a `hazardous installation`. This has meant that restrictions have been placed on the planned new developments in the area because the number of people either living or working in these planned new developments eg Hargreaves Warehouse and the Commercial Hotel are limited by the H & S for safety reasons, and the local council etc. are aware of this.

However within the same `restricted area` on Bridge Street other companies have converted former industrial premises into offices, thus increasing greatly the number of people working in this supposed `restricted area`. However it would appear that because of recent changes to regulations change of use of these buildings is not needed and so this is not a problem, although they are increasing the number of people within this `hazardous zone`.

So the question then is when is a `hazardous installation` with restrictions on the number of people in new developments for safety`s sake not a a safety issue when the number of people in existing buildings is increased?

If there is a restriction over the area then surely it should cover all the buildings.

Seems like a touch of hypocracy or the left hand does`nt know what the right hand is doing, or even not letting the right hand know what is going on.

So who is responsible for these double standards, H & S, the council, who?

What is a fact is the restrictions from the H & S re Blythes `hazardous installation` are seriously limiting the options of what can be done in the development of the area. Unless of course you do what is required in the initial planning and then just change it to what you want afterwards because apparently that is`nt a problem.

Confused or what?

And exactly what is held at Blythes? And if it is so dangerous then in these days of terrorist threats should it be allowed so close to where so many people live?

Any views?

06-11-2009, 11:44	#1
gumption Junior Member Join Date: Apr 2007 Posts: 4 Liked: 0 times Rep Power: 0	The Blythes Safety Threat and Church Redevelopment. As the supposed redevelopment of Hargreaves Warehouse and the surrounding area seems to have seriously hit the rocks (mainly because of the current economic climate) it throws up to me an interesting anomally about the so called safety issues from the Blythes chemical site which affects the whole area. It would appear that the Health & Safety mob based in County Hall at Preston have the major word on what can happen in the area because it is classified as a `hazardous installation`. This has meant that restrictions have been placed on the planned new developments in the area because the number of people either living or working in these planned new developments eg Hargreaves Warehouse and the Commercial Hotel are limited by the H & S for safety reasons, and the local council etc. are aware of this. However within the same `restricted area` on Bridge Street other companies have converted former industrial premises into offices, thus increasing greatly the number of people working in this supposed `restricted area`. However it would appear that because of recent changes to regulations change of use of these buildings is not needed and so this is not a problem, although they are increasing the number of people within this `hazardous zone`. So the question then is when is a `hazardous installation` with restrictions on the number of people in new developments for safety`s sake not a a safety issue when the number of people in existing buildings is increased? If there is a restriction over the area then surely it should cover all the buildings. Seems like a touch of hypocracy or the left hand does`nt know what the right hand is doing, or even not letting the right hand know what is going on. So who is responsible for these double standards, H & S, the council, who? What is a fact is the restrictions from the H & S re Blythes `hazardous installation` are seriously limiting the options of what can be done in the development of the area. Unless of course you do what is required in the initial planning and then just change it to what you want afterwards because apparently that is`nt a problem. Confused or what? And exactly what is held at Blythes? And if it is so dangerous then in these days of terrorist threats should it be allowed so close to where so many people live? Any views?