Jump to content

‘Unlocking’ the challenge of London’s congested waterways


Ray T

Featured Posts

9 minutes ago, Phoenix_V said:

 They used to have no return within so many week rules but seemingly these are now ilegal,

This to me is one of the major problems CRT have.   Any solution to any problem (real or imagined) is greeted with wails of "you can't do that you haven't got the power".   As long as that happens I suspect we all need to get used to the status quo and non of the problems which have or do develop will get dealt with.

 

There is only so long you will bang your head against a wall and CRt must be feeling like that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Jerra said:

This to me is one of the major problems CRT have.   Any solution to any problem (real or imagined) is greeted with wails of "you can't do that you haven't got the power".   As long as that happens I suspect we all need to get used to the status quo and non of the problems which have or do develop will get dealt with.

 

There is only so long you will bang your head against a wall and CRt must be feeling like that.

 

They do have the power to limit mooring times and / or charge for the facilities.

 

See post #49

 

They cannot charge an 'access charge' to (say) London, but once there they can charge you to moor, or use the tap, or empty the toilet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Alan de Enfield said:

 

They do have the power to limit mooring times and / or charge for the facilities.

 

See post #49

 

They cannot charge an 'access charge' to (say) London, but once there they can charge you to moor, or use the tap, or empty the toilet.

I am not merely talking about London it is the standard response to virtually any change that CRT want to make.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Jerra said:

I am not merely talking about London it is the standard response to virtually any change that CRT want to make.

 

Sorry, working on the fact the thread is about how to ovecome the problems in London and didn't allow for thread-drift.

The the 1962 Act covers all of the waterways under C&RT control, so there are 'things' they can do to reduce congestion, limit mooring and charge for 'facilities'.

 

They just don't seem to want to use the powers they have, they just keep dreaming up new things to do which are those that are 'shouted down'.

I wonder if they have anyone who actually kows what existing powers they have? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Phoenix_V said:

We have been boating through London for forty years, gave up in 2013. There was always somewhere to stop and we never had any problems. The Narrowboat, Victoria Park, Camden Lock, The Constitution, none are possible now. I understand why people want to live on boats but there needs to be some facilities for genuine visitors to be able to moor. They used to have no return within so many week rules but seemingly these are now ilegal, though I do not understand why these were dropped in Paddington Basin which is privately owned? I don't think there is any law against them charging and perhaps this is what they should do perhaps first two weeks in London free then £50/week gradually escalating to £200 or so to match the marina prices. I know it is the thin end of the wedge but what else. The extra money raised could be invested in new moorings.

I suspect this charging for zones is what CRT have already decided to try. I just don't see how it will work without spending a lot more money on enforcement staff and boat checking even more rigourously. It will probably only cover central/zone 1 not the entire M25 ring. My experiences of finding central moorings in 2017/18/19 is quite different to yours. But I knew to arrive early , just as is common in 100s of other places in the country like Pangbourne, Llangollen, Napton etc and be prepared to double moor.

Any congestion charge is gentrification which is at the route of a lot of the 'solutions' to London. 

  • Greenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can someone clarify exactly what the problem is that we're trying to solve?

"Too many boats in London" isn't in itself a problem.

 

  • Is it that there aren't enough moorings for people visiting from outside the city?
  • Is it that "without a home mooring" licenses aren't contributing enough for the maintenance of the network?
  • Is it that the facilities are strained and aren't adequately meeting the needs of the boaters in the city?
  • Is it that the diesel fumes and stove smoke from the boaters is causing air quality problems?
  • Is it that there is a health and safety risk from having so many boats packed into a small space? e.g. Fire risk?
  • Or is it just a generalised feeling that it isn't fair in some way or that London boaters aren't real boaters?

 

The ideal solution depends on the problem.

 

I've spent a substantial amount of time in London in my time boating and in my view this is entirely a non-issue. Yes the London waterways are congested, but as with many types of congestion I believe it's self-limiting. A number of people above have said they have stopped going into London due to the congestion. Congratulations, you're part of the solution! If there are so many boats in London that it's uncomfortable to be there, then fewer people will be there.

 

The same holds true of roads by the way. Increasing capacity of roads doesn't help congestion, because motorists will find an equilibrium of the convenience of driving themselves vs the inconvenience of traffic. Remember that if you are in the congested zone you are the traffic.

 

I feel some sympathy for people visiting from outside the city for a short time but if you are prepared to settle for your 2nd or 3rd choice of mooring then I don't honestly believe this is a big problem. If this is really what everyone is bothered about, to solve it, I'd suggest making more of the concreted towpath moorable by adding rings (there is miles and miles of potential moorings in London) and making it sharply restricted to 48 hour moorings with no-return within a calendar year. That, or have more bookable moorings.

 

But I doubt that's really what most people here are concerned with. Judging from the comments I've read on this forum for the past couple of years, it's just people who love to hate the city and the boaters in it, because they prefer to boat elsewhere. If you hate boating in London - that's great, you're part of the solution (if we even need one).

 

I replied to the survey with the above opinion. Curious to hear what solutions are proposed, but more importantly I'm curious to hear clarity on why congestion on London's waterways is a problem.

  • Greenie 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, ivan&alice said:

Can someone clarify exactly what the problem is that we're trying to solve?

 

[snip]

 

Excellent post Ivan.

 

I've not been myself (yet), but having to moor three abreast with the hoi polloi wouldn't put me off - I am the hoi polloi!

 

More seriously, I understand that there are moorings available if you simply accept that they might not be the best prime locations, but you get that in Middlewich too and there aren't too many complaints about how busy it is there ...

 

By the time you have removed the "social cleansing" brigade and the "it's not fair" brigade, there won't be many actual objections left about London boating.

  • Greenie 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I share a lot of Ivan's concerns.  It is frustrating how little hard data is available,  eg the proportion of boats that are not actually lived in. Without that it is hard to work out what the problem really is .

 

I certainly prefer the London canals now to 25 years ago - deserted between Camden and Limehouse.  I kept my boat here in a marina 1993-2003. But for a whole range of reasons - mainly because day trips would not  be as relaxing as they were - I would not want to do that now. My choice. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Scholar Gypsy said:

It is frustrating how little hard data is available

The Data is available.

C&RT regularly undertake surveys of London boaters (due to the isues actual or perceived). The latest one I have is 2017 (I believe later ones are available). It will be considerably 'out of date' due to the influx of boats into London over the last 3-4 years.

 

I would also suspect that the boats used as 'liveaboards' will be on the 'low side' of the actual numbers due to people not admitting to being liveaboards.

London boaters also seem to suffer a disproportionate number of mechanical breakdowns meaning they cannot move their boat (33% of boats).

 

From 2017 :

 

In total the survey was sent directly to 3675 boaters. It was sent by email to 1837 boaters with a home mooring and 1427 boaters without a home mooring, and, by post with a web link and details of how to request a paper version of the survey to 268 boaters with a home mooring and 143 boaters without a home mooring.

 

Key headlines

58% of respondents to the survey say they use their boats as their primary home.

69% of respondents said they are currently living on a boat in the London waterway area.

50% of those who responded said that affordability / financial reasons what a motivation for living on a boat.

50% have been living on boats on London’s waterways for three years or less.

Over 70% of respondents to the survey said that they owned their boats outright, a further 11% said they owned their boat with a loan or mortgage.

33% of respondents said that their boat had experienced mechanical issues in the past 12 months that has prevented them from moving it.

 

The top five specific improvement people want to see on the London waterways are

(1) more mooring places,

(2) more mooring rings,

(3) water points,

(4) more Elsan facilities,

(5) more dredging.

 

34% of those living on boats are under the age of 35

5% of those living on boats are over the age of 65 63 children under the age of 16 living on boats identified through the survey.

43% of those living on boats live alone.

42% of those living on boats live as part of a cohabiting couple.

12% of those living on boats live as part of a wider family group.

45% responding said they would have some or definite interest in a mooring if permanent / long-term moorings were more readily available in the London

 

The most important factors when considering a permanent / long-term mooring (other than price) were

(1) somewhere people feel personally safe,

(2) good services nearby (sewage and rubbish etc),

(3) public transport nearby.

 

77% of respondents said they are white (English, Welsh, Scottish, Northern Irish or British), this rises to 89% when white other is included.

10% said that their day-to-day activities are limited because of a health problem or disability which has lasted, or is expected to last, at least 12 months

 

 

Edit to add :

 

49.83% said they lived on a boat for "Affordability / Financial reasons"

48.03% said the lived on a boat as they wanted an alternative to 'mainstream living'

Edited by Alan de Enfield
Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:

The Data is available.

C&RT regularly undertake surveys of London boaters (due to the isues actual or perceived). The latest one I have is 2017 (I believe later ones are available). It will be considerably 'out of date' due to the influx of boats into London over the last 3-4 years.

 

 

Thanks - yes I recall that now. Surveys are useful though there are obvious problems with them. How the responses change over time would be useful - a spot value is hard to interpret without knowing if the number is bigger or lower than last year.

 

I also suspect there is a huge amount of data available from the spotting records. I have not seen any aggregate level data or analysis published from that, which I think would be really helpful in assessing if the changes brought in by the mooring strategy are having any effect. For example, of the boats that have visited London in the last year x% spent 28 days or left in the wider region, y% spent all year between A and B z% spent between 28 days between A and B, w% were granted dispensations for [broad reasons A B C], x% were in CRT's opinion not cruising enough to meet terms of licence etc etc. Maybe all of the above split between winter and summer, I'm not sure. Anyway my overall point is that it would be useful to all stakeholder and build trust to publish as much of this data as possible, aggregated to make it useful, and with trends over time so that people can see what is actually happening (ie keep tracking the same data over time rather than looking afresh at the issues once a year). I can but dream ...

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Scholar Gypsy said:

Thanks - yes I recall that now. Surveys are useful though there are obvious problems with them. How the responses change over time would be useful - a spot value is hard to interpret without knowing if the number is bigger or lower than last year.

 

I also suspect there is a huge amount of data available from the spotting records. I have not seen any aggregate level data or analysis published from that, which I think would be really helpful in assessing if the changes brought in by the mooring strategy are having any effect. For example, of the boats that have visited London in the last year x% spent 28 days or left in the wider region, y% spent all year between A and B z% spent between 28 days between A and B, w% were granted dispensations for [broad reasons A B C], x% were in CRT's opinion not cruising enough to meet terms of licence etc etc. Maybe all of the above split between winter and summer, I'm not sure. Anyway my overall point is that it would be useful to all stakeholder and build trust to publish as much of this data as possible, aggregated to make it useful, and with trends over time so that people can see what is actually happening (ie keep tracking the same data over time rather than looking afresh at the issues once a year). I can but dream ...

 

 

In the same survey 86.67% did not leave London waters or use any other canal.

 

(Only 390 actually answered this question)

 

Enforcement monitoring / Action is available (but patchy) and is very regional as you would expect.

 

For the K&A (a few years ago - last time I collected 'canal stuff')

 

Between February and April, of the 279 boats only sighted in the Local Plan area, 231 did not attract any enforcement action.

A further 60 boaters had taken up winter moorings. 33 additional boats had been sighted both within and outside of the plan area.

Of these, none had received pre enforcement letters and none are now in the enforcement process.

 14 boaters have received pre enforcement letters (pre CC1)

 10 have received first enforcement letters (CC1)

 13 received second stage enforcement letters (CC2)

 16 received third stage enforcement letters (CC3)

 

At the end of April 33 boats were still in the CC enforcement process. However, many cases were closed in readiness for the new CC process.

All boats that had only received a pre CC1 by the end of February had their enforcement cases closed.

 

Extended Stay Requests

26 requests for extended stay have been approved in the Local Plan area between 1 February and 30 April,

1 is pending, and no request has been declined.

K&A Local Plan Canal & River Trust boat sightings records 14 boaters have requested their Canal & River Trust sighting record. These have been provided.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:

 

In the same survey 86.67% did not leave London waters or use any other canal.

 

(Only 390 actually answered this question)

 

Enforcement monitoring / Action is available (but patchy) and is very regional as you would expect.

 

For the K&A (a few years ago - last time I collected 'canal stuff')

 

Between February and April, of the 279 boats only sighted in the Local Plan area, 231 did not attract any enforcement action.

A further 60 boaters had taken up winter moorings. 33 additional boats had been sighted both within and outside of the plan area.

Of these, none had received pre enforcement letters and none are now in the enforcement process.

 14 boaters have received pre enforcement letters (pre CC1)

 10 have received first enforcement letters (CC1)

 13 received second stage enforcement letters (CC2)

 16 received third stage enforcement letters (CC3)

 

At the end of April 33 boats were still in the CC enforcement process. However, many cases were closed in readiness for the new CC process.

All boats that had only received a pre CC1 by the end of February had their enforcement cases closed.

 

Extended Stay Requests

26 requests for extended stay have been approved in the Local Plan area between 1 February and 30 April,

1 is pending, and no request has been declined.

K&A Local Plan Canal & River Trust boat sightings records 14 boaters have requested their Canal & River Trust sighting record. These have been provided.

Thanks, as I suspected the data is there, just not being used.  CRT should be publishing much more on data dashboards on their website. It's ridiculous  that the current consultation on the London issue does not give the respondent any data to look at.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

People from London boaters Facebook that attended the first of the zoom meetings CRT held about this fed back that CRT seem to have already decided to implement some sort of congestion zoning and had no response when it was pointed out the increase in boats has slowed. What I don't see is how they will enforce this zone. Presumably you'll be allowed some free time in it. This will need extensive boat checking. With all the normal excuses for not moving on when this is up just as there is with the 14 day rule. Will this zone/charge need a new act of parliament to give it teeth? The rumour is the £25 overstay charge/fine for 48h moorings is never enforced for this reason? I think 'some' of the problem is people getting a cheap boat to save rent money for a year or so who will soon work out it takes longer than that for CRT to do anything about rule breaking. It will definitely make things worse on the edges of the zone. Cowroast had problems with rubbish when everyone left London before lockdown. Just can't see how this will work in itself, never mind the fact congestion charging isn't a solution to the problem that doesn't exist anyway!

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.