Your browser is no longer supported

For the best possible experience using our website we recommend you upgrade to a newer version or another browser.

Your browser appears to have cookies disabled. For the best experience of this website, please enable cookies in your browser

We'll assume we have your consent to use cookies, for example so you won't need to log in each time you visit our site.
Learn more

Entry point


I strongly urge the use of Option 1 as a means of access to our building (NCE 13/20 April).

The building is of note for its form, the whole world sees it on occasions on TV and thousands pass it every day.

To despoil it in order to provide for a very occasional disabled visitor seems entirely out of scale to the need or demands.

Yes we should (and legally probably must) ensure convenient and safe access for all and particularly for all our members of all grades, but we should not do so by damaging the aesthetics of our fine building.

I would be surprised if anyone other than an odd selsh disabled person would really object to using a side access in order to preserve the grandeur of the building for all and for future generations.

I know I would prefer to see the building retain its integrity even if it meant I had to take an alternative way in.

I do presume anyone accompanying me would be allowed to use the same access as me were I disabled and would not leave me in order to access by the front and then have to nd me inside the building!

MJ Hampton (M) 29 The common West Wratting Cambridgeshire

Have your say

You must sign in to make a comment

Please remember that the submission of any material is governed by our Terms and Conditions and by submitting material you confirm your agreement to these Terms and Conditions. Please note comments made online may also be published in the print edition of New Civil Engineer. Links may be included in your comments but HTML is not permitted.