AMModels Posted June 12, 2018 Report Share Posted June 12, 2018 https://oldnblist.wordpress.com/2018/06/11/surveying-the-kingdom/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
john6767 Posted June 13, 2018 Report Share Posted June 13, 2018 The stoppage has been updated, the repairs will be complete by 6th July. They are also getting works planned by a 3rd party during the winter, done now to avoid that further stoppage. Seems a very positive plan. https://canalrivertrust.org.uk/notice/13210/teeces-bridge-stoney-lane-little-bloxwich-wyrley-and-essington-canal Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AMModels Posted June 13, 2018 Report Share Posted June 13, 2018 Does that mean the canal is now closed from Wednesfield? Thats a bigger closure and cuts off the Walsall canal from the north. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
john6767 Posted June 13, 2018 Report Share Posted June 13, 2018 5 minutes ago, AMModels said: Does that mean the canal is now closed from Wednesfield? Thats a bigger closure and cuts off the Walsall canal from the north. Seems like that is what is being proposed from the 18th to the 6th. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AMModels Posted June 13, 2018 Report Share Posted June 13, 2018 Arse and elbow, leaving the advice that the canal through to Walsall is open via wednesfield while also closing wednesfield. We need boaters in CRT who know what it actually means when you close a canal or bridge. Got some questions in with local CRT to see if we are right in our thinking. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RLWP Posted June 13, 2018 Report Share Posted June 13, 2018 (edited) I don't understand. Teeces bridge and Church bridge are both on the same section of the W&E. How is this making the problem worse? MORE! No, I'm wrong Right, you can navigate to either side of both closed sections. Plus, is it clear that the Church Bridge work closes the canal? Edited June 13, 2018 by RLWP Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
john6767 Posted June 13, 2018 Report Share Posted June 13, 2018 (edited) Here is the new stoppage notice for the 3rd party works https://canalrivertrust.org.uk/notice/12973/church-bridge-wednesfield-wyrley-and-essington So I guess you could say it makes matters worse as you can’t do a loop using the Walsall. Edited June 13, 2018 by john6767 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pearley Posted June 13, 2018 Report Share Posted June 13, 2018 16 minutes ago, RLWP said: I don't understand. Teeces bridge and Church bridge are both on the same section of the W&E. How is this making the problem worse? MORE! No, I'm wrong Right, you can navigate to either side of both closed sections. Plus, is it clear that the Church Bridge work closes the canal? The notice implies that scaffolding across the canal will prevent navigation. Not sure where the northern winding hole is as I don't recognise Basin Junction but the nearest winding hole if coming from Walsall way would be Hollybank Basin. We'll be at Bentley Bridge on Sunday whilst hanging about for a physio appointment so I'll walk up and look. Assuming the arthritis will let me! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AMModels Posted June 13, 2018 Report Share Posted June 13, 2018 (edited) 41 minutes ago, pearley said: The notice implies that scaffolding across the canal will prevent navigation. Not sure where the northern winding hole is as I don't recognise Basin Junction but the nearest winding hole if coming from Walsall way would be Hollybank Basin. We'll be at Bentley Bridge on Sunday whilst hanging about for a physio appointment so I'll walk up and look. Assuming the arthritis will let me! I reckon Basin junction is new CRT speak for Bentley Canal stub Edited June 13, 2018 by AMModels Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
springy Posted June 14, 2018 Report Share Posted June 14, 2018 Today on site - work progressing at a pace - access road laid, culvert excavated, as I left another pump was being placed to clear the water from the actual culvert excavation springy 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RLWP Posted June 14, 2018 Report Share Posted June 14, 2018 That's a very old culvert Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
springy Posted June 14, 2018 Report Share Posted June 14, 2018 (edited) Just had a quick look at nls maps - 1901 rev pub 1903 25"/mile shows very little development in the area, apart of course from the "Canal Tavern" adjacent to teeces br. there appears to be a clear line north of stoney lane which I would take to be the line of the stream, I guess the culvert could be "Original" http://maps.nls.uk/geo/explore/#zoom=18&lat=52.6267&lon=-1.9929&layers=168&b=5 later revisions also show very little development of the area north of stoney lane but 7th series (55-61) shows some development south of stoney lane edited to add - restricted opening hours now on ryders green locks - closed 4pm - 8am due to vandalism springy Edited June 14, 2018 by springy more restrictions Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RLWP Posted June 14, 2018 Report Share Posted June 14, 2018 I can't think of a reason why it isn't original - i.e. built at the time the canal was How do ST end up owning it? Richard Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
springy Posted June 14, 2018 Report Share Posted June 14, 2018 3 minutes ago, RLWP said: <snip> How do ST end up owning it? <snip> I wondered that ... but if ST is happy to pay for the repairs then ... springy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RLWP Posted June 14, 2018 Report Share Posted June 14, 2018 Just now, springy said: I wondered that ... but if ST is happy to pay for the repairs then ... springy I've got no problem with that. I was thinking of a couple of bridges around Brum. When the railway had to cross the Garrison flight, they were made to build a rather fancy bridge with some impressive stonework Similarly, when the Tame Valley was built over the Grand Junction Railway, the BCN paid through the nose Richard Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
archie57 Posted June 14, 2018 Report Share Posted June 14, 2018 1 hour ago, springy said: Today on site - work progressing at a pace - access road laid, culvert excavated, as I left another pump was being placed to clear the water from the actual culvert excavation springy - but can we trust CRT will check this roadway is removed properly...…… Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ray T Posted June 14, 2018 Report Share Posted June 14, 2018 On 07/06/2018 at 12:53, Victor Vectis said: You'll be sailing by next Richard! ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Victor Vectis Posted June 14, 2018 Report Share Posted June 14, 2018 1 minute ago, archie57 said: - but can we trust CRT will check this roadway is removed properly...…… I was thinking that too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ray T Posted June 14, 2018 Report Share Posted June 14, 2018 Just now, archie57 said: - but can we trust CRT will check this roadway is removed properly...…… After the Press briefing I attended on Wednesday 6th I can say yes, they will. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
john6767 Posted June 14, 2018 Report Share Posted June 14, 2018 24 minutes ago, RLWP said: I can't think of a reason why it isn't original - i.e. built at the time the canal was How do ST end up owning it? Richard You would guess because it is part of the surface water drainage scheme in that area. The good thing is they are getting on with it. Would they replace it completely with a concrete pipe? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Mack Posted June 14, 2018 Report Share Posted June 14, 2018 21 minutes ago, john6767 said: Would they replace it completely with a concrete pipe? In some ways that would be best. But on the other hand that would mean excavating the canal banks both sides (and towpath) and reinstating. So significantly more work/cost and perhaps more chance of creating another leakage problem, compared with just replacing the section under the canal bed, which doesn't look to be very far down. And possibly compounded if there are pipes or cables laid in the towpath here. It may depend on what the condition of the rest of the culvert is like. Or whether they want to take the opportunity to provide a larger replacement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nicknorman Posted June 15, 2018 Report Share Posted June 15, 2018 (edited) 16 hours ago, springy said: Today on site - work progressing at a pace - access road laid, culvert excavated, as I left another pump was being placed to clear the water from the actual culvert excavation springy Great pictures of the offending culvert, thank you. I must say I imagined something bigger and something further beneath the canal bed! One safe chucked in the cut at the wrong place, a heavy boat going over the top and its easy to see how it could be damaged. Maybe they didn't have safes in the canals in the 1790s! Edited June 15, 2018 by nicknorman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pearley Posted June 15, 2018 Report Share Posted June 15, 2018 On 13/06/2018 at 16:19, john6767 said: Here is the new stoppage notice for the 3rd party works https://canalrivertrust.org.uk/notice/12973/church-bridge-wednesfield-wyrley-and-essington So I guess you could say it makes matters worse as you can’t do a loop using the Walsall. And now stoppage back to its original November date. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
springy Posted June 17, 2018 Report Share Posted June 17, 2018 On site again - the excavation is now a bit deeper, probably about ready for the replacement springy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AMModels Posted June 17, 2018 Report Share Posted June 17, 2018 1 minute ago, springy said: On site again - the excavation is now a bit deeper, probably about ready for the replacement springy Great pics again, speaking to some engineers who work on this kind of thing they dont think the replacement will be as easy as just slotting a section of pipe in or redoing the brickwork. Bricking it back up just isnt how they do it these days so it is more likely to be a concrete pipe put in its place but its marrying up the two without creating problems down the line. Theyre interested to see how far back they will excavate in total before they start the actual repair as it were. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Featured Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now