Jump to content

Observation and monitoring in Marsworth???


RufusR

Featured Posts

19 hours ago, Flyboy said:

Probably why they are monitoring this site. Please don't ecourage this sort of behaviour. Some people won't get your jokey comment and think you are serious.

err, joke?

Just now, Markinaboat said:

err, joke?

and  just for the record, the one or more who moved immediately after they were built started complaining almost straight away and were very anti-boat, no matter how courteous, quiet and sympathetic boaters were to their new quayside. Just the engine noise and fumes alienated the boaters.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, Loddon said:

So ignorant gits that leave their engines running whilst filling with water and don't show consideration for others will cause this facility to be closed.

B'stards.

I don't mix with any boaters of that ilk. They were complaining just by arriving and departing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 01/03/2020 at 10:19, Loddon said:

So ignorant gits that leave their engines running whilst filling with water and don't show consideration for others will cause this facility to be closed.

B'stards.

TBH if this leads to it being closed I'll feel mighty bad. That said I'm not running to be obstinate, but because filling with water is when I do my washing (else the washer is using my precious supplies), washer on means the engine really really should be on too. The minute it finished I shut off. 

 

I also disagree strongly that facilities like this - which is a water point far far from the next one at Slapton, should be closed if it's in use.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If by monitoring they are weighing up complaints from boater v complaints from flat dwellers, then boaters need to register complaints, and not via the call centre, imho.

Edited by LadyG
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, sirweste said:

That said I'm not running to be obstinate, but because filling with water is when I do my washing (else the washer is using my precious supplies),

So why not do your washing  while boating towards the water point?

  • Greenie 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, sirweste said:

l also disagree strongly that facilities like this - which is a water point far far from the next one at Slapton, should be closed if it's in use.

You had better get used to boating up to Bulbourne or down to Slapton  to fill with water, at least your washing will be done when you get there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Loddon said:

Yes you are!

Do your washing on the move or even moored up with the engine on, when its finished go fill with water.

If you haven't got enough water fill up move away then when washing is over refill with water.

Failing that there is a good laundrette in Berko ;)

Its not difficult to show consideration for others.

I wonder how long a washing cycle lasts and how long it takes to fill a water tank while the washing machine is trying to empty it?

  • Horror 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, sirweste said:

TBH if this leads to it being closed I'll feel mighty bad. That said I'm not running to be obstinate, but because filling with water is when I do my washing (else the washer is using my precious supplies), washer on means the engine really really should be on too. The minute it finished I shut off. 

 

I also disagree strongly that facilities like this - which is a water point far far from the next one at Slapton, should be closed if it's in use.

Washing machines generally take about an hour to cycle through the programme - running your engine in that location whilst hogging the water point for that length of time is not only inconsiderate to the househloders but is also inconsiderate to other boaters - you are being selfish (I'd use more direct language if I was brave enough).

 

Not difficult in that location to move away from the water point to do your washing and then return to replenish your precious water.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, StationMaster said:

Washing machines generally take about an hour to cycle through the programme - running your engine in that location whilst hogging the water point for that length of time is not only inconsiderate to the househloders but is also inconsiderate to other boaters - you are being selfish (I'd use more direct language if I was brave enough).

 

Not difficult in that location to move away from the water point to do your washing and then return to replenish your precious water.

 

In addition, I bet the problem only exists in the first place because other boaters also feel entitled to run engines on the service point for similar reasons, leading to loadsa boats doing it. 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Mike the Boilerman said:

 

In addition, I bet the problem only exists in the first place because other boaters also feel entitled to run engines on the service point for similar reasons, leading to loadsa boats doing it.

 


It's not actually that straightforward.

 

There were always going to be problems with plush new housing where the boats using the facilities have to tie up just a few feet in front of the properties.

Those of us who were consulted on  made this very clear.  I felt strongly enough about this development to actively write an objection to planning consent  the  only time I have ever felt driven to do so in my entire life.

 

Even if all boaters suppressed engines, and stayed for the minimum time they required, there would still be complaints about smoking chimneys - it's not as if you can kill your solid fuel stove before going there.

 

That said, every boater who runs their engine there, stays longer than a tank fill, or does an messy self pump out, will surely be bringing closer the date that CRT throw in the towel, and another facility is lost.

 

Anybody who wants to use that facility should in my view be squeaky clean, and doing the absolute minimum that can possibly be objected to,

Running your engine because your washing machine is on is a very poor idea, and I can't imagine that when the facilities are lost you will be too popular with people on residential moorings there who will no longer have the facilities they need.

  • Greenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, alan_fincher said:

Even if all boaters suppressed engines, and stayed for the minimum time they required, there would still be complaints about smoking chimneys - it's not as if you can kill your solid fuel stove before going there.

If you burn decent smokless fuel and dont stack it up just before you arrive then the visible smoke is close to Zero.

No need to be antisocial. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, alan_fincher said:


.....

 

There were always going to be problems with plush new housing where the boats using the facilities have to tie up just a few feet in front of the properties.

..............

Totally agree with this, I knew the location from my first ever hire boat, couldn't believe what had been allowed when I stopped there last year - talk about setting everything up for conflict you couldn't have designed a worse scheme. However it has happened. You are right to say boaters should be squeaky clean here. Challenging why the development went ahead when anyone with intelligence could see the potential for conflict needs to be directed towards future developments.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 03/03/2020 at 11:13, Loddon said:

Yes you are!

Do your washing on the move or even moored up with the engine on, when its finished go fill with water.

If you haven't got enough water fill up move away then when washing is over refill with water.

Failing that there is a good laundrette in Berko ;)

Its not difficult to show consideration for others.

 

Well not intentionally. I'm not there for an hour with it on, put the washer on before I go if I have reserves, usually I have enough to do the wash cycle but not enough for the rinse (and spin) portion: As such the engine is usually on for 15 minutes when filling with water I'd say.

I try to be considerate (in life) to level in which I feel I would like - do to others as you'd do to yourself as they say. If I'd have bought that house I'd be happy with boat running engines for 15 mins while they filled up.

 

I'd counter that me having the hassle of going to a launderette is inconsiderate from the homeowners that bought the house next to the facilities. 

 

As I said previously the reason for the closure is not known, given that the water point is (?) remaining open but the pump out is being closed it's more likely smell perhaps. Total conjecture (if thats the right word) to the reason of the closure at the moment.

 

In a similar rumor fuel vein: If the facilities are closed due to homeowner complaints, it's incredibly inconsiderate of the homeowners  (2 people appear to live there) to have this point, used by many people, closed to please 2 people.

  • Greenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 03/03/2020 at 12:11, alan_fincher said:


It's not actually that straightforward

 

There were always going to be problems with plush new housing where the boats using the facilities have to tie up just a few feet in front of the properties.

 

This is a key point, there is 2 or 3 feet between the poxy little yard the houses have and the rings.

Madness to design this way, they could have easily moved them back 12 ft.

 

 

On a separate topic, I've been stopped twice when walking through the estate to be told that the estate is private property (apparently the, non-canal side, home owner thought I'd missed the two big signs as I entered) I informed them I was aware and was on the public footpath.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, sirweste said:

 

This is a key point, there is 2 or 3 feet between the poxy little yard the houses have and the rings.

Madness to design this way, they could have easily moved them back 12 ft.

 

 

On a separate topic, I've been stopped twice when walking through the estate to be told that the estate is private property (apparently the, non-canal side, home owner thought I'd missed the two big signs as I entered) I informed them I was aware and was on the public footpath.

 

Do you go out of your way to upset the house owners?

If not you are making a good job of it

Edited by Loddon
Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is a public footpath.  It runs across the top gate of the staircase, which is why that has two sets of handrails.

I never use the services for water, but have used them for the bucket.  Since that is a two minute job, and it would make a load of smoke to do a restart I always leave the Kelvin going.

The best part of the development is the vent lids in the lockside gardens over  the culvert from lock 1 to lock 2.  When you wind the intermediate paddle up these all jump up and down making a wondrous clatter.

N

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, sirweste said:

 

This is a key point, there is 2 or 3 feet between the poxy little yard the houses have and the rings.

Madness to design this way, they could have easily moved them back 12 ft.

It was not actually that simple if you had studied the plans at the time.

These developments are really only an "earner" for CRT and their development partners, if they are able to cram in as many houses as they can at the greatest density.

If they had allowed 15 feet or more from waterside to the face of the buildings, something else would have had to give.

A very similar problem existed with the plans for Bulbourne Yard, again trying to cram in what they said was required to make it an attractive development proposition resulted in something fairly horrendous, and with inadequate parking.  Unbelievable at one point they suggested residents could use the car park at the Grand Junction Arms, (or whatever it is currently called!).

I'm not condoning what has occurred - it was always going to be a problem, but at least the original fight stopped them knocking down the historic carpenters workshop entirely, (they declared it of no historic interest), and stopped the crane being relocated to a daft location where it would never have ever been used in the first place. The second modified planning application should have also been thrown out IMO, but unfortunately it wasn't, and it was at least an improvement over the first one submitted.

 

ll this is academic now.  The facilities will probably ultimately be lost anyway, but engines running, noise, smokey chimneys, and bad attempts at pump out will all serve to make it more likely, I fear.  All boaters will probably ultimately reap what only a few have sewn.

  • Greenie 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

i recall when the original wharf rings where removed without the knowledge of the then waterways manager one of CRTs  suggestions was that boats should just be held by mooring ropes whilst using the facilities!. By then it was too difficult to put all the rings back due to access. I suggested at the time that CRT put rings opposite and create a waiting area this was on the verge of being pursued when CRT discovered it was leased out for fishing and was actually no mooring. As a result rings were put back between the houses and the old office to create a waiting area. Being a pessimist i imagine that residents will get this is  valuable facility closed eventually 

Totally agree with Alan re Bulbourne, ruined a historic site. CRTs property arm overruling any other use. A really dangerous turn off a fast round. Once the residents get settled the pressure will no doubt start to stop mooring opposite.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Detling said:

If they close the pump out and elsan are they going to compensate the permanent mooring occupants opposite for effectively making the moorings useless for staying on.

I thought a lot of C&RT moorings did not have a pump-out / Elsan on site and the 'moorers' had to travel to get a pump-out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Detling said:

If they close the pump out and elsan are they going to compensate the permanent mooring occupants opposite for effectively making the moorings useless for staying on.

Simple answer is no.

 

Not sure how many of the moorings in that area are CRT moorings - if enough then if all/most give notice to leave that might be enough for CRT to re-evaluate pricing/policy but I wouldn't hold my breath on that.

9 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:

I thought a lot of C&RT moorings did not have a pump-out / Elsan on site and the 'moorers' had to travel to get a pump-out.

Yes but pricing depends on the needs/wants of the boaters taking the moorings.

Edited by Guest
Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:

I thought a lot of C&RT moorings did not have a pump-out / Elsan on site and the 'moorers' had to travel to get a pump-out.

There are genuine CRT residential moorings there, despite it being little more than an often muddy piece of tow-path with very little available parking easily accessed.

 

When the moorings are advertised, the presence of a facilities block within a hundred yards or two is obviously a major selling point.

 

Lots, (most!) nearby CRT linear moorings don't have nearby facilities, but of course they don't sell for as much money as these that do.

It would seem fair that CRT recompense people if the facility is lost, but don't hold your breath!

 

38 minutes ago, StationMaster said:

Not sure how many of the moorings in that area are CRT moorings - if enough then if all/most give notice to leave that might be enough for CRT to re-evaluate pricing/policy but I wouldn't hold my breath on that.

 

All the moorings fro the bottom of the locks to the services block are CRT operated, (or at least Waterrside Moorings, or whatever they now badge themselves).  They are on both sides of the cut, so there's a fair amount.  I'm not however sure how many are properly residential, (rather than improperly residential!).

Unless it has changed, they are auctioned to new tenants, rather than initial being sold at a fixed price, but I  no longer follow such things closely, no longer mooring close to there.

 

 

  • Greenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.