Dartagnan Posted July 11, 2018 Report Share Posted July 11, 2018 We travelled from near Harefield to Croxley Green on The Grand Union on Friday in order to get her lifted out and grit blasted then epoxied.. There were some beautiful moorings along the way but I noticed one in particular at Batchworth and another called Casio Wharf. These were exceptionally well kept by the residents and being new to the system I wondered if people would have bought the property or if they were CRT residential moorings? I presumed that they had been purchased as it looked as if a fair amount of time and effort had gone into making them attractive. I’m sure there are many such places elsewhere and am curious. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Machpoint005 Posted July 11, 2018 Report Share Posted July 11, 2018 7 minutes ago, Dartagnan said: We travelled from near Harefield to Croxley Green on The Grand Union on Friday in order to get her lifted out and grit blasted then epoxied.. There were some beautiful moorings along the way but I noticed one in particular at Batchworth and another called Casio Wharf. These were exceptionally well kept by the residents and being new to the system I wondered if people would have bought the property or if they were CRT residential moorings? I presumed that they had been purchased as it looked as if a fair amount of time and effort had gone into making them attractive. I’m sure there are many such places elsewhere and am curious. Ouch! The name "Wharf" implies private ownership on the offside, so there would in general be little to prevent the land being redeveloped for residential use. Don't forget that the owner of an offside site owns everything right down to the water's edge. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Mack Posted July 11, 2018 Report Share Posted July 11, 2018 21 minutes ago, Machpoint005 said: The name "Wharf" implies private ownership on the offside, so there would in general be little to prevent the land being redeveloped for residential use. Don't forget that the owner of an offside site owns everything right down to the water's edge. I disagree. A wharf was originally a place were boats were loaded or unloaded, and might be owned by the canal company, a private owner or indeed a public wharf. Over the years ownership may have changed, so could now be CRT, private or public. And since waterside property has become trendy all sorts of places that were never used for loading have been given the name "wharf". So basically it tells you nothing. As to ownership, in some places the adjacent landowner owns up to the waters edge, in others CRT has retained a strip of land alongside the water (although it may look like part of the adjacent land) and in other places the bank may have washed away so that the theoretical property boundary is now within the water space. Riverside owners generally own the river bed to the middle of the channel. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zenataomm Posted July 11, 2018 Report Share Posted July 11, 2018 26 minutes ago, Machpoint005 said: Ouch! The name "Wharf" implies private ownership on the offside, so there would in general be little to prevent the land being redeveloped for residential use. Don't forget that the owner of an offside site owns everything right down to the water's edge. I thought we'd ascertained that Waterways own the last strip of land that borders the off side and the water's edge. Which is why you have to apply for and then pay for EOG moorings. By the way isn't it Wharves? … in the plural? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rgreg Posted July 11, 2018 Report Share Posted July 11, 2018 (edited) 10 minutes ago, zenataomm said: I thought we'd ascertained that Waterways own the last strip of land that borders the off side and the water's edge. Which is why you have to apply for and then pay for EOG moorings. By the way isn't it Wharves? … in the plural? Wharves or wharfs Edited July 11, 2018 by rgreg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dartagnan Posted July 11, 2018 Author Report Share Posted July 11, 2018 Thank you all, the land definitely looked private ? I must admit I always understood a wharf to mean a place where a boat was loaded and unloaded and generally included ‘sheds’. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Machpoint005 Posted July 11, 2018 Report Share Posted July 11, 2018 1 hour ago, Machpoint005 said: The name "Wharf" implies private ownership on the offside, so there would in general be little to prevent the land being redeveloped for residential use. Don't forget that the owner of an offside site owns everything right down to the water's edge. There is a difference between "implies" and "means" --- which is why I chose the word. My remark was an inference, not a deduction. Sorry if that wasn't clear. 1 hour ago, David Mack said: I disagree. A wharf was originally a place were boats were loaded or unloaded, and might be owned by the canal company, a private owner or indeed a public wharf. In what sense, then, is a canal company or a private owner not private? 34 minutes ago, Dartagnan said: Thank you all, the land definitely looked private ? Which is what prompted my remark in the first place.. "if in doubt, read the question..." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Mack Posted July 11, 2018 Report Share Posted July 11, 2018 1 hour ago, Machpoint005 said: In what sense, then, is a canal company or a private owner not private? A private owner is private. A canal company would also be private, but might well have made its wharf available for all boatowners to us (on payment of the appropriate charges) whereas other private owners might restrict use to one particular carrier. As successors to the canal companies, British Waterways were a public owner. CRT occupy that somewhat unclear area between public and private. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BWM Posted July 11, 2018 Report Share Posted July 11, 2018 Cassio wharf is run by Jim Macdonald and I believe is still owned by Crt but under an agreement with him, I suspect the other is the residential mooring owned by the farm, possibly riparian but not sure? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim Lewis Posted July 11, 2018 Report Share Posted July 11, 2018 33 minutes ago, BWM said: Cassio wharf is run by Jim Macdonald and I believe is still owned by Crt but under an agreement with him, I suspect the other is the residential mooring owned by the farm, possibly riparian but not sure? The area has been under threat for a while as this is the location of the proposed new Met line viaduct which will form part of the planned railway from Croxley to Watford Junction. Hpwever the work seems to be getting the required finance to go ahead. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zenataomm Posted July 11, 2018 Report Share Posted July 11, 2018 4 hours ago, rgreg said: Wharves or wharfs Not wanting to get overly pedantic, just slightly, however OED says Wharves. ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rgreg Posted July 11, 2018 Report Share Posted July 11, 2018 4 minutes ago, zenataomm said: Not wanting to get overly pedantic, just slightly, however OED says Wharves. ? nounWord forms: wharves (wɔːvz) or wharfs 1. a platform of timber, stone, concrete, etc, built parallel to the waterfront at a harbour or navigable river for the docking, loading, and unloading of ships Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tam & Di Posted July 11, 2018 Report Share Posted July 11, 2018 4 hours ago, zenataomm said: I thought we'd ascertained that Waterways own the last strip of land that borders the off side and the water's edge. Which is why you have to apply for and then pay for EOG moorings. I don't know who "we" are, but they are wrong. There are lots of places where the landowner's property extends to the water's edge and where CRT do not own a ransom strip 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rusty69 Posted July 11, 2018 Report Share Posted July 11, 2018 Iirc there were only seven. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NB Esk Posted July 11, 2018 Report Share Posted July 11, 2018 I can't remember the exact details but didn't John Prescott get a bill passed, preventing wharf based development? It may have related to compulsory purchase. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim Lewis Posted July 11, 2018 Report Share Posted July 11, 2018 (edited) 1 hour ago, NB Esk said: I can't remember the exact details but didn't John Prescott get a bill passed, preventing wharf based development? It may have related to compulsory purchase. As far as I am aware the Safeguarded Wharfs you are referring to are all on the Thames, am not aware of any on the Canals. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Safeguarded_wharf Edited July 11, 2018 by Tim Lewis Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NB Esk Posted July 12, 2018 Report Share Posted July 12, 2018 13 hours ago, Tim Lewis said: As far as I am aware the Safeguarded Wharfs you are referring to are all on the Thames, am not aware of any on the Canals. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Safeguarded_wharf I believe it to be nationwide, Tim. Since I posted I've spoken to a mate who's a Wharf owner and has successfully fought a compulsory purchase, against his property. Prescott's initiative is Public Planning Policy number 13. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Mack Posted July 12, 2018 Report Share Posted July 12, 2018 40 minutes ago, NB Esk said: I believe it to be nationwide, Tim. Since I posted I've spoken to a mate who's a Wharf owner and has successfully fought a compulsory purchase, against his property. Prescott's initiative is Public Planning Policy number 13. If you are referring to Planning Policy Guidance 13: Transport, I think you will find it was withdrawn in 2012. I have no idea whether the protection of wharves has been carried forward into the successor National Planning Policy Framework. http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20120919160424/http://www.communities.gov.uk/archived/publications/planningandbuilding/ppg13 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Machpoint005 Posted July 13, 2018 Report Share Posted July 13, 2018 22 hours ago, David Mack said: >> I have no idea whether the protection of wharves has been carried forward into the successor National Planning Policy Framework.<< I doubt it. The NPPF swept away a whole lot of guidance and replaced it with sod-all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mark99 Posted July 15, 2018 Report Share Posted July 15, 2018 Re Batchworth - if the offside farm there was a boat for sale there with mooring - was circa £200K. The boat was an ex working boat can't remember its name. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Mack Posted July 15, 2018 Report Share Posted July 15, 2018 11 minutes ago, mark99 said: Re Batchworth - if the offside farm there was a boat for sale there with mooring - was circa £200K. The boat was an ex working boat can't remember its name. Cantley Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alan de Enfield Posted July 15, 2018 Report Share Posted July 15, 2018 On 11/07/2018 at 20:59, rusty69 said: Iirc there were only seven. I think there were actually Nine, this was Seven 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mark99 Posted July 15, 2018 Report Share Posted July 15, 2018 24 minutes ago, David Mack said: Cantley I think the moorings are: Hampton Hall Farm Houseboats Moor Lane RICKMANSWORTH WD3 1LF Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BWM Posted July 15, 2018 Report Share Posted July 15, 2018 In a similar area, does anyone know what the area below common mooring lock was used for? There is a fairly obvious wharf that stretches from the lock to the railway but no trace of anything there. I know there was a busy papermill above the lock but don't know if its connected in any way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rusty69 Posted July 15, 2018 Report Share Posted July 15, 2018 2 hours ago, Alan de Enfield said: I think there were actually Nine, this was Seven You must be really boreg 1 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