Page:Hillsborough Taylor Interim Report Cm765.pdf/31

 Also in 1985, electronic counting equipment was installed at all turnstiles. This conveyed the running count for each bank of turnstiles, for example A to G, to a television screen in the Club control room where the figures were displayed. In 1986, an electronic eye was installed in each turnstile booth to catch and record anyone who climbed over the turnstile.

Barrier 144

In June 1986, the police requested that the crush barrier nearest to the tunnel at the entrance to pens 3 and 4 should be removed to assist the flow of fans into the pens. They found it caused obstruction because it was in a good viewing position and spectators liked to stand against it in numbers thereby blocking access by others further into the pens. The police also suggested it might hamper effective evacuation through the tunnel especially in an emergency. Dr Eastwood considered the pros and cons of this proposal and accepted the police view. The Officer Working Party approved the proposal at a meeting on 7 August 1986 on site. Authority was given then and there by Mr Bownes on behalf of the Sheffield City Council which had taken over responsibility for the Safety Certificate from South Yorkshire County Council on 1 April 1986. Two spans of the barrier were therefore removed, leaving only one span in pen 4 as shown on Appendix 4.

Effects of the Layout

The result of these changes was to divide the terrace into a number of small areas without providing any computerised or mechanical means of limiting entry numerically into any one area if all areas were open for choice. Before the fences and pens had divided the terrace, the overall figure of 10,100 could be monitored via the turnstiles and in theory the crowd could even itself out laterally. Even then, it was not possible strictly to ensure compliance with Schedule 3 Part 1 of the Safety Certificate which prescribed a maximum of 2,900 for the north-west terrace and 7,200 for the west terrace. Paragraph 3 of Schedule 2 of the Safety Certificate provides:

""The number of spectators admitted to the Stadium and to the several areas of spectator accommodation within the Stadium shall not exceed the figures specified in Part 1 of Schedule 3"."

The Club had to rely upon visual monitoring.

The situation became worse however with the division of the west terrace into pens. Not only were there more and smaller discrete areas but some were likely to attract more than their appropriate share of the 10,100 total. It is well recognised that the area behind the goal is very popular. Moreover, the position of the tunnel vis-a-vis the turnstiles A to G, its labelling and the absence of signposts advertising the wing pens would draw to it those with terrace tickets. It was therefore highly likely that pens 3 and 4 would fill to capacity and indeed exceed it unless preventive steps were taken. Had Dr Eastwood's plan for separate turnstile access to separate sections with separate toilet and refreshment facilities been implemented, total computerised control could have been kept. Rh