Jump to content

£16 million funding announced to restore Montgomery Canal


Tim Lewis

Featured Posts

In 2016 a fairly brief and somewhat simplistic report published by Welshpool council (https://www.welshpooltowncouncil.gov.uk/documents/user/CANALCONSULTATION-ADOPTEDPLAN.pdf) estimated costs were provided for the various outstanding works.
 

The Arddleen ‘link’ was at that point estimated at £5.35M.  In 2022 money, adding a dash or realism as well, I’d round that up to around £8M.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am surprised at some of the negative posting on this subject. This is a grant to Wales,not England. Restoration of the Montgomery Canal has been going on for nearly 50 years,wih huge and sustained progress by volunteers and BWB/CART. Also much EU /BWB/vol fund raising. The towpath is one of the best maintained of all CART canals and passes through beautiful countryside. As to the cost of the Ardd lin blockages,anybdy who is familiar with the two road bridges on the A 38 (roundabout) over the Stroudwater Canal (wide canal) and the A483 blockages at Ardd lin lin (narrow canal) both have very heavy traffic and both have some similarity of scale (4 million Dept of transport costings.recently completed by Griffiths on target)

  • Greenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, nebulae said:

I am surprised at some of the negative posting on this subject

I am not being negative. Just expressing surprise that following the press reports a month ago (which seem to have been generated by a press release from the Welsh government, although I can't find a copy online), the bodies who are actually going to take the work forward have been remarkably quiet. I would expect them to be shouting it from the rooftops, not least to demonstrate their own success in moving the project forward, but also to help engender more public support.  Why the deafening silence?

  • Greenie 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree,it is worth shouting about. We get little enough from the UK government. If a certain cabinet minister had agreed to find match funding to match the offer of match funding from the EU,the whole canal to Newtown would have been restored by now. The legacy of his decision will be increased costs and probably the canal never being fully restoted.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I hope I’m not being negative, but I am frustrated with the official silence on the detail. My frustration has been heightened by the superficial ‘spin’ that has been applied in the loose reporting around the subject.  Being charitable, I’ll assume it’s caused by uniformed laziness on the part of some of the reporters involved.

 In a number of instances it has been reported that the existing isolated length goes to Arddleen, and the new funding for restoration from Llanymynech also goes to Arddleen, so - bingo - when this new money gets spent, everything links up.  

 

In fact, some of the most key bits appear to be out of scope.  Frustrating.


I’ve added a detail map from the Welshpool Town Council  (2016) published report below, showing the plan at Arddleen. The new lift bridge will be needed on the minor road on the diversion, the egregious drop lock on the lower re-crossing of the A483.

Cheers.  Tim
 

1ED8519A-9F2D-4BDE-88A5-655FC3AC66A1.png

Edited by Tarboat Tim
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Tarboat Tim said:

 

I’ve added a detail map from the Welshpool Town Council  (2016) published report below, showing the plan at Arddleen. The new lift bridge will be needed on the minor road on the diversion, the egregious drop lock on the lower re-crossing of the A483.

Cheers.  Tim
 

1ED8519A-9F2D-4BDE-88A5-655FC3AC66A1.png

What stops them putting in a longer diversion so the canal no longer crosses the A483?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What stops them putting in a longer diversion so the canal no longer crosses the A483?

Good question David :-).

 Unfortunately, the answer when you look at an aerial view or the OS map is easy to see: Arddleen. The village lies between the two secondary roads and is packed in pretty dense. No way through for the cut, and IIRC the land rises slowly as you move westward, so a ‘grand deviation’ around the back of the village wouldn’t be on the cards as the land would be too high.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, David Mack said:

What stops them putting in a longer diversion so the canal no longer crosses the A483?

To go round Aardlin would mean a far longer brand new cut around new housing estates and land destined for more,  and a new lock perhaps. The existing plan utilises the Maerdy Brook floodplain and an existing culvert under the A road

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, nebulae said:

I am surprised at some of the negative posting on this subject. 

 

Like David I am not being negative and would love to see the canal open to Welshpool or even further south, but I also am realistic that the problems of the A483 are going to be the biggest set-back to this. And I don't think that the Stroudwater roundabout is comparable to a major trunkroad between Mid and North Wales

Aerial view:

https://goo.gl/maps/j3oPkqgfzsSmrUsM7

Edited by Graham Davis
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, matty40s said:

 The existing plan utilises the Maerdy Brook floodplain and an existing culvert under the A road

Just looked at Google earth and seen the problem. But if that bridge over the Maerdy Brook is is suitable for the canal then the diversion for the first A483 crossing makes sense, and would be relatively low cost.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Graham Davis said:

 

Like David I am not being negative and would love to see the canal open to Welshpool or even further south, but I also am realistic that the problems of the A483 are going to be the biggest set-back to this. And I don't think that the Stroudwater roundabout is comparable to a major trunkroad between Mid and North Wales

Aerial view:

https://goo.gl/maps/j3oPkqgfzsSmrUsM7

Ah, of course not, it's only a minor B road between the hamlets of Birmingham and Bristol...with a dirt track to the old roman settlement of Cirencester.

Screenshot_20211118-221157_Maps.jpg

Edited by matty40s
  • Greenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

David, Indeed, quite so.
 

The first crossing - and the new canal that has to be cut, plus the new lift bridge on the B road - actually adds up to a lot more that the dratted drop lock they are proposing for the southern crossing.

In 2016 money £3.75M for the ‘Northern’ works, and £1.6M for the drop lock.  I suspect they may be planning to put the drop lock on the site of the old railway that passes under the 483 just next to the canals, but that’s just a guess.

Matty - there’s a lot more work here than on that roundabout. Two major road bridges, one drop lock, and around 1km new canal  

Edited by Tarboat Tim
  • Greenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Tarboat Tim said:

 I suspect they may be planning to put the drop lock on the site of the old railway that passes under the 483 just next to the canals, but that’s just a guess. 

Why not build it in the existing canal line?

 

And why can't the existing road level be raised (along with the side road to the east)?

Edited by David Mack
  • Greenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi David, one could.  I was thinking that the track bed was a lot lower than the canal and passed under the 483 in a real culvert.

 

Just checked and I must’ve been dreaming! It runs maybe 5’ lower than the cut, but is as thoroughly obliterated as the Canal is by the 483.  So probably they will stay with the line of the canal, unless there are some secondary reasons for moving slightly to one side (eg keep the water flowing through the extant culvert, less hassle keeping the works dry until ready for flooding, etc). 

Regarding raising the road levels, above my pay grade that one. If you want more guesswork as to why not I’d suggest the answer lies in the following points:

1. Acceptable sight lines for a high speed road (60 mph there??) around that junction
2. Length of the ramps required to provide these and comply with current regs.

 

Leading, I assume, to £MM price tab, way higher than £1.6m (never mind all the bitching about congestion during the works etc) 


Now the cynic in me growls at these arguments, cos if the Mont had been open when they wanted to put the 483 through (the current alignment is new from the last set of improvements) they surely would’ve found a way of doing it.   

Edited by Tarboat Tim
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I do agree that Ardd lin is a major problem. I was sitting on the bench by the "marina" in Welshpool eating my lunch. Contemplating the difference between Welshpool and Ellesmere. I think there are only the 2 Sunshine boats on the isolated Welshpool length.(may be a CART tug? I dont think narrow boats can get beond Gronwen Wharf at the moment,so quite a way from Crickheath Wharf. At least Schoolhouse bridge seems to be making progress.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually, I’m pretty optimistic about the long term prognosis for getting all the way, even to Newtown. It just doesn’t happen as fast as I would like.

I know I may get to Arddleen on my boat, probably Welshpool, but whilst one day I have little doubt the boat will get to Newtown, I really doubt I’ll be on it.  

I am intrigued about what might finally be done at the Newtown end when it finally gets that far (maybe 20 yrs from now?).  The original basin is well gone, but there is a little field nearby, or maybe something more exciting on the banks of the Severn??

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ignoring the snide comment, the A38 roundabout had an easy way to arrange a diversion around one side of it whilst the work was under way, this would not be available on the A438.

Nebulae,

I am sure there were two CaRT boats moored up at Welshpool a couple of months ago when I went past, but perhaps it was a tug and hopper.

Tim,
I'm not sure the residents of Maerdy Cottage would be too happy to have a new road embankment on the side of their house!
Realistically, could they ever get to Newtown? From Berriew I calculate there are 3 crossings of the A438, and much of the route in town has been obliterated and built over. I suspect if it did happen it would have to end somewhere near Rock Farm in Llanllwchaiarn or even down by the Nature Reserve.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Graham, I agree about the road - I think the drop lock may be the only game in town, but I detest them.  Two separate locks with a 100-200 yard pound between them would be much easier to work and safer, but would cost more to do. So we’ll get a 7’ version of that abort**n in Glasgow.

Running towards Newtown - nah, it’s a goer. If you take a look at the challenges that the Rochdale and HNC got over/under/around, this is small beer.  The 483 crossings are a bit nasty, and the worst is the first going south. The route there has already been identified, dont go under the road there, go another 150 yards or so south, where the 483 has climbed, then go under it.  Doable but not particularly cheap.

The other two crossings I only have a hazy recollection of, but IIRC the carriageway is quite a lot higher than the canal, so driving a ‘tunnel’ thro underneath is, again, viable.   I seem to remember that along that length the road embankment has also taken up part of the canal - that will need some sorting out as well.   There are lots of other bits and bobs, missing piped min-aqueducts etc, but no real deal breakers.

Entering Newtown the bed is drained & filled in, and sold off. However not really built on until you get to around Cymric Mill when it used to leave the side of the river and head into the terminal basin complex.  That last few hundred yards has gone.

The rest has been kept pretty open, largely preserved by that cycle route. Newtown council is also bound and determined it will get there one day, so the odds on getting planning permission for further development on the line are slim to none.

 

  It’ll happen, I do hope I stay around long enough to see it!!

Edited by Tarboat Tim
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 17/11/2021 at 13:07, nebulae said:

The Bristol Road roundabout work on the Stroudwater has recently been completed By Allan Griffiths, payed for by the Highways Agency. This involved two road bridges and major works to both carrage ways. The cost was,apparently 4 million. This may give an idea of the cost of the works needed at Ardd lin.  Bridge 103 and bridge102 Maerdy Bridge, Montgomery Canal,( lowered)

 

I believe that the £4m is the grant to restore the missing mile, and not just the Bristol Road section, at least that was how it was reported at the time the grant was awarded. TBF the roads cut the canal off so its only reasonable that the highways agency do fund this. Similar for these works. 

 

https://www.gloucestershirelive.co.uk/news/gloucester-news/huge-4m-project-see-missing-2840806

 

  • Happy 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

One of the problems restoring the final length of the Mongtgomery Canal is that a major sewer pipe is now in the bed of the canal as far as the sewage works/wildlife sanctury. I believe,but am not certain,that this pipe serves the whole of Newtown. This explains why this length now belongs to Severn Trent Water. I believe that the wier that impounds the water which the pump drew from the River Severn in Newtown would need work. The Water Wheel/Steam/diesel/electric pumps were removed as soon as the works that used this water,closed. Below Freestone Lock the canal takes water from the river via a substantial leat and is in good order The next lock, Newhouse Lock,has been restored. The towpath past the pump keepers house has been slightly diverted. The access for road vehicles to the pump keepers cottage would need a bridge of some kind. The basin has been built over and a major flood bank now infringes on the canal. There is some space for a new basin in the old dairy site/builders yard.?                    I think the article posted by Stroudwater 1 is a little unclear. Acording to The Trow magazine(Cotswold Canal Trust issue 190),the total cost of the phase 1b Ocean to Saul is £24 million,of which the National Lottery is giving 9 million.  Not sure if the 4 million Whitminster Rounabout scheme is included in the 24 million.

  • Greenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

One of the interesting things about progressive canal restorations (a bit at a time then argue about the next bit) is that how what seems possible changes with time, for better or occasionally for worse..

 

In this case, thinking about the Newtown length with all its  difficulties, isolated and an awful long way from where a network boat can get to, the possibility of restoration seems remote and a little other-worldly.

OK, that’s as maybe, just keep the line protected (which Newtown council seem to be very clear about).

Then fast forward and imagine a fully open length to Refrail or even Garthmyl, with an intense “Time for Newtown” type campaign, rallies etc.  Add to that Newtown council with the hots for it all.  Suddenly it moves up funding bodies priority lists, Severn Trent start negotiating, etc etc.   When the thing is banging on your door its real-er than when it is a theoretical possibility, and it sharpens the bureaucratic mind.

 

Same thing is happening with the phasing of the Cotswold canals - you can get far more momentum for the Herculean tasks of dealing with Sapperton etc if you have that as the only thing left preventing opening.

Incidentially, going back to the Mont and Arddleen, if no funds are forthcoming in the interim to do the tricky mile and its bridges, one waits until the restoration from Crickheath meanders its way thro Schoolhouse bridge and onwards through Pant until it links up with the newly restored  £16m section at Llanymynech.  Then all of a sudden Maerdys Bridge is the end of the network section, and the full force of ‘We need this last bit to get to Welshpool’ can be brought to bear with all the rallies and other arm-twisting.

So one might call this ‘Progressive Pressure’ strategy plan B for Arddleen, if funds are not produced beforehand.  And very probably plan A for Newtown.
   

The only trouble is - it’s so slow!!

 

Cheers.  Tim
 



 

  • Greenie 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Restorations like the Rochdale, Huddersfield and Droitwich all started by restoring the easier bits, which gave isolated navigable sections only accessible to trailboats and the odd locally based boat, as has been the case with the Welshpool length for years.  But in the case of those three there was the sudden injection of substantial Millennium funding to complete all of the difficult expensive bits in a single hit. But over the last 20 years there hadn't been funding on that scale, so you end up with piecemeal short extensions to connected routes, such as we have seen working south from Frankton, or more short unconnected navigable ponds such as on the Lichfield or Wey and Arun.

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.