Jump to content

Canal & River Trust to receive over £1.4m for major works from Government's Heritage Stimulus Fund


Ray T

Featured Posts

PRESS RELEASE

 

22nd October 2021

 

CANAL & RIVER TRUST TO RECEIVE OVER £1.4M FOR MAJOR WORKS FROM GOVERNMENT’S HERITAGE STIMULUS FUND

 

The Canal & River Trust, the national waterways and wellbeing charity, has been awarded over £1.4 million in funding for seven major heritage projects across the country. This is the second tranche of funding for the Trust, which received over £1.6m in the first round last year.

 

The funding, which has been awarded via the Heritage Stimulus Fund, part of the Government’s Culture Recovery Fund, will help the charity’s vital work to safeguard the nation’s historic canals and rivers, so the public can enjoy the physical and mental health benefits of being by water.

 

The following projects will benefit from funding: Locks 13 and 15 on the Ashton Canal in Greater Manchester, Ryders Green Locks 1 and 3 in Sandwell, Wigan Locks 73 and 80 and Bingley Five Rise on the Leeds & Liverpool Canal, plus conservation work along the Hertford Union Canal, at Soulbury in Bucks, and at Marple on the Peak Forest Canal in Stockport.

 

Richard Parry, chief executive at the Canal & River Trust, said: “Canals are at the heart of the nation’s industrial heritage, forming the transport network that enabled trade and industry to expand more than 200 years ago. Now they provide valuable health and wellbeing benefits to those who spend time by or on the water, boating, exercising, or simply enjoying the peace of mind that can come from stepping away from the hustle and bustle of everyday life. They provide corridors for nature in the heart of our towns and cities.

 

“Faced with the demands of a changing climate and more extreme weather events, the task of looking after these ageing assets is a greater challenge than ever, so that we keep them in good working order.  We are delighted that the importance of our work has been recognised once again by Historic England and the Government. 

 

“These Heritage Stimulus Fund grants will be spent during our annual winter works programme, which is essential to ensure our canals and rivers can continue to provide a valuable resource to the public.”

 

Heritage sites across England received a boost of £35 million thanks to the Government’s Culture Recovery Fund. Administered on behalf of the Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport by Historic England, 142 sites will receive support, bolstering local economies and supporting jobs across the country. Money from the government’s £2 billion Culture Recovery Fund is intended to open up heritage and the benefits it brings to everyone, helping to level up and improve life and opportunities for people in places that need it most. The latest £35 million funding awards builds on £52 million already allocated from the first round of the Heritage Stimulus Fund, which has supported works at 800 of the country’s treasured heritage assets.

 

Culture Secretary Nadine Dorries said: “From local churches to ancient buildings and landscapes, the UK's unique heritage makes our towns, cities and villages stronger, more vibrant and helps bring communities together. 

 

“This latest funding - £35 million from our unprecedented Culture Recovery Fund - will help protect sites including Jane Austen's House and Hampton Court Palace for future generations and help them build back better from the pandemic."

 

Duncan Wilson, Historic England’s Chief Executive, said: “Funding from the government’s Culture Recovery Fund is hugely welcome at a time when the people and organisations who look after our vast and varied array of heritage urgently need support to carry out essential repairs. Heritage is a fragile eco-system, with an amazing cast of characters who keep our historic places alive, with specialist skills that take time to learn and experience to perfect. These grants will protect their livelihoods, as they use their expertise to help our heritage survive.”

 

Trust projects that received grants of over £100k from Round One of the funding included Hunts Lock on the River Weaver, Sawley Locks 1 and 2 on the River Trent, Diglis Lock 1 where the River Severn meets the Worcester & Birmingham Canal, Soulbury Three Locks on the Grand Union Canal, and Wigan Flight Lock 71 on the Leeds & Liverpool Canal

 

For more information about the Canal & River Trust, including how to volunteer and donate, visit:  www.canalrivertrust.org.uk.

 

ENDS

 

For further media requests please contact:

Jonathan Ludford, Canal & River Trust

m 07747 897783  e jonathan.ludford@canalrivertrust.org.uk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

£3m over two years is a drop in the ocean compared to CRT's Treasury bid last year. In addition to the normal grant, CRT were asking for £200m extra funding over a five year period. 

The largest proportion of that (£125m) was for reducing public safety risks at CRT's 72 reservoirs, repairs to high-risk embankments, cuttings and culverts and other critical assets such as aqueducts and tunnels.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Heartland said:

A canal project that will benefit boaters in the West Midlands is the Bradley Canal Restoration, which could benefit from funding.

Having walked the route of the Bradley restoration I'm not convinced it would benefit that many boaters.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Rob-M said:

Having walked the route of the Bradley restoration I'm not convinced it would benefit that many boaters.

Much as I would like to see it reopened, I find myself reluctantly agreeing. The number of boats that would use it would be minimal (apart from specific organised events), there are significant obstacles in connecting the existing route at Bradley Workshops to the top of the flight, the costs of construction would be significant, as well as the need for funding for ongoing maintenance. If it had remained open the case for keeping it open would be clear (although the Ridgacre Branch / Wednesbury Old Canal's fate suggests that is not a given), but the case for reopening is hard to make.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lets face it, for the amount of visitors you could close half the BCN and 80% of boaters wouldn't notice. How many visitors go up to the pools or the Bradley Workshops, the curly whirly is just plane bandit territory.

Edited by ditchcrawler
Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Having walked the route of the Bradley restoration I'm not convinced it would benefit that many boaters."

 

Those pushing forward with the scheme would disagree especially as most of the infrastructure is buried, but still there.

The BCN society does its best to promote their navigation and this is one scheme that will open up a new route. The canal to the Workshops sees a reduced usage, at present, and restoration to the Walsall canal would encourage increased use as well as creating potential new boating rings.

 

The same argument could have been said about the Droitwich!

  • Greenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry to be blunt but the Bradley and Lapal restorations are a waste of time and any money going that way might as well be disappearing into a black hole. 

 

Now the Lichfield and Hatheton canal restoration would actually be well used, it provides a really useful alternative route and would benefit a very quiet corner of the BCN.  To my mind all those working on the Bradley and Lapal restorations would be well advised to re-direct their energies to the Lichfield and Hatherton.

  • Greenie 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Heartland said:

"Having walked the route of the Bradley restoration I'm not convinced it would benefit that many boaters."

 

Those pushing forward with the scheme would disagree especially as most of the infrastructure is buried, but still there.

The BCN society does its best to promote their navigation and this is one scheme that will open up a new route. The canal to the Workshops sees a reduced usage, at present, and restoration to the Walsall canal would encourage increased use as well as creating potential new boating rings.

 

The same argument could have been said about the Droitwich!

The BCNS were very enthusiastic when we walked the route back in May, there are a number of challenges which may be significant in terms of cost.

 

I did wonder what the local residents would think when the nice grass area becomes a muddy wet ditch.

6 minutes ago, doratheexplorer said:

Sorry to be blunt but the Bradley and Lapal restorations are a waste of time and any money going that way might as well be disappearing into a black hole. 

 

Now the Lichfield and Hatheton canal restoration would actually be well used, it provides a really useful alternative route and would benefit a very quiet corner of the BCN.  To my mind all those working on the Bradley and Lapal restorations would be well advised to re-direct their energies to the Lichfield and Hatherton.

I agree.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Rob-M said:

The BCNS were very enthusiastic when we walked the route back in May, there are a number of challenges which may be significant in terms of cost.

 

I did wonder what the local residents would think when the nice grass area becomes a muddy wet ditch.

 

The main reason it's a non starter is that to get boats past Bradley Lane you either need to drop the canal level under the bridge and then raise it again afterwards or you need to raise the bridge height significantly (build a new bridge).  The cost of either of these is prohibitive for the number of boats who would actually go that way.  With the bridge raised up, maybe 1 a week.  With the two lock solution, maybe 1 a month.

 

The Lapal restoration is far, far more complicated and expensive and would create a route which would be barely quicker than following the Birmingham pound all the way round to the other side.  Connecting two spots which are on the same level and are already connected, by building a new route with 16(?) new locks (plus pumps or a reservior) is utterly ridiculous.  Once it became clear that the tunnel couldn't be restored, the whole thing should have been scrapped.  It looks to me like someone just couldn't let go of it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, Heartland said:

The canal to the Workshops sees a reduced usage, at present, and restoration to the Walsall canal would encourage increased use as well as creating potential new boating

Indeed that is true. But the numbers of boat movements with and without the link are low, so the benefits (however you calculated them) are going to be pretty low as well. There's plenty of underused waterway already in Birmingham and the Black Country, so you can hardly argue that increased boating opportunity is needed.

35 minutes ago, Heartland said:

The same argument could have been said about the Droitwich!

Yes. But the Droitwich runs through pleasant countryside, and connects two waterways which were already well used. You can't say the same about the Bradley route, interesting though it may be to die hard enthusiasts.

Edited by David Mack
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, doratheexplorer said:

The main reason it's a non starter is that to get boats past Bradley Lane you either need to drop the canal level under the bridge and then raise it again afterwards or you need to raise the bridge height significantly (build a new bridge). 

Or drop down one or two lock(s) before Bradley Lane and continue in cutting to rejoin the Bradley Locks route below the top/second lock. 

  • Greenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, doratheexplorer said:

you ... need to drop the canal level under the bridge and then raise it again afterwards

 

Why?  Just move the top lock to the workshop side of the bridge and dig the connecting pound a bit deeper.  It seems daft to have a pumped pair of drop locks there when there's a flight of locks close by.

 

I don't particularly object to the Bradley concept, but if the society really want it to progress they should ignore Bradley Lane for now and dig out the locks and the link first and bring a useable canal to the other side of the bridge.

Add: Crossed with David, same idea.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, doratheexplorer said:

The Lapal restoration is far, far more complicated and expensive ...

Once it became clear that the tunnel couldn't be restored, the whole thing should have been scrapped.

Although there is some merit in reopening the section beyond Hawne Basin as far as Manor Way and re-excavating the length from Selly Oak to California.

2 minutes ago, TheBiscuits said:

Crossed with David, same idea.

Although credit should be given to @magpie patrick as it is an option in his restoration study report.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, TheBiscuits said:

 

Why?  Just move the top lock to the workshop side of the bridge and dig the connecting pound a bit deeper.  It seems daft to have a pumped pair of drop locks there when there's a flight of locks close by.

 

I don't particularly object to the Bradley concept, but if the society really want it to progress they should ignore Bradley Lane for now and dig out the locks and the link first and bring a useable canal to the other side of the bridge.

Add: Crossed with David, same idea.

The road bridge across the locks may also need replacing but it is a bit of an unknown until some excavation is done.

 

The section from the junction has started to be cleared and this could be extended up to the first lock with mostly just tree clearing required.

I think this was the bottom lock.

IMG_20210515_104627361.jpg.687e43c7fbd1d3875b2de083f9bd23af.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, doratheexplorer said:

The main reason it's a non starter is that to get boats past Bradley Lane you either need to drop the canal level under the bridge and then raise it again afterwards or you need to raise the bridge height significantly (build a new bridge).  The cost of either of these is prohibitive for the number of boats who would actually go that way.  With the bridge raised up, maybe 1 a week.  With the two lock solution, maybe 1 a month.

 

Why not just drop the canal under the road and continue at that level until the tailgates of what was the top lock.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Moving locks is not unknown and reducing complexity is a sensible step forward.

Nearer to Tup Street bridge is the site of Bradley Marr staircase lock, a private venture, whether that could be used in the scheme is yet another possibility.

 

As to the local residents, there have been consultations with them. There was a an issue recently where houses were flooded because of disruption to the water supply.

 

As to Lapal, that does seem to be a canal scheme too far, but with the new link at Selly Oak being restored there may yet be a section restored.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, TheBiscuits said:

 

Why?  Just move the top lock to the workshop side of the bridge and dig the connecting pound a bit deeper.  It seems daft to have a pumped pair of drop locks there when there's a flight of locks close by.

 

I don't particularly object to the Bradley concept, but if the society really want it to progress they should ignore Bradley Lane for now and dig out the locks and the link first and bring a useable canal to the other side of the bridge.

Add: Crossed with David, same idea.

The cost would still be prohibitive for the possible benefit.  It's still a non-starter IMO.  Who in their right mind is going to pay for this?

18 hours ago, TheBiscuits said:

 

Must confess I don't recall reading the report, it just seems obvious to move the top lock along the proposed link to reduce complexity and cost.

Excavating that length of canal would still be costly.  You'd probably have to drop the towpath too, for safety reasons, and in doing so create a mugging hotspot.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, David Mack said:

Although there is some merit in reopening the section beyond Hawne Basin as far as Manor Way and re-excavating the length from Selly Oak to California.

 

Even getting the canal to Leasowes Park would be difficult.  It's got to pass through an industrial estate with a variety of private owners, then find its way across Mucklow Hill.  Just to add a small length of extra dead-end?  It would still be hardly used.  Hawne Basin itself should be a major draw for boaters, but it still gets hardly any visitors.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, doratheexplorer said:

Even getting the canal to Leasowes Park would be difficult.  It's got to pass through an industrial estate with a variety of private owners, then find its way across Mucklow Hill.  Just to add a small length of extra dead-end?  It would still be hardly used.  Hawne Basin itself should be a major draw for boaters, but it still gets hardly any visitors.

I bet lots of boaters don't even know its there. Its down an arm, why bother some would say. just like the Engine Arm or the loops on the old main line. The number of hire boaters who come up the GU and then down the B&F who think they have been through Birmingham

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, doratheexplorer said:

Even getting the canal to Leasowes Park would be difficult.  It's got to pass through an industrial estate with a variety of private owners, then find its way across Mucklow Hill.  Just to add a small length of extra dead-end?  It would still be hardly used.  Hawne Basin itself should be a major draw for boaters, but it still gets hardly any visitors.

I walked that whole length in about 1974, and at that time I'm pretty sure the canal was in water, but full of rubbish, all the way from Hawne Basin (then empty and disused) through to Mucklow Hill. And then in water through Leasowes Park to Manor Way.  Has some of that been filled in since?

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.