Claydon Marina

[Tonka]

Just come through Claydon. There are planning signs with reference to a new marina between bridges 143 and 144. Not sure what stage is it at yet

[Athy]

We've been through there twice in the last few days and did not notice any signs - but then we didn't tarry.

[MtB]

There was a residents meeting planned to moan about it apparently. I dunno if it has happened yet. 150 boat marina apparently part way up the flight. 

[Athy]

11 minutes ago, Mike the Boilerman said:

There was a residents meeting planned to moan about it apparently. I dunno if it has happened yet. 150 boat marina apparently part way up the flight. 

Well that will make a right horlicks of the Claydon flight - not only in terms of excessive boat movements and concomitant water loss, but also of blemishing what I think is the prettiest lock flight on the waterways (of those which I have seen, of course).

[OldGoat]

22 minutes ago, Mike the Boilerman said:

There was a residents meeting planned to moan about it apparently. I dunno if it has happened yet. 150 boat marina apparently part way up the flight. 

Part way up the flight seems daft to me - especially as there are always (?) water problems / challenges on the summit.

I'm  probably talking cojones - so discuss... 

Edited July 13, 2018 by OldGoat
spelling - so I'm told

[zenataomm]

Cojones

[Tonka]

According to the signs it is planned for on the summit between bridges 143 and 144. Can't remember which side of canal. Don't know where Mtb gets his info from!!!

[OldGoat]

3 minutes ago, Athy said:

Well that will make a right horlicks of the Claydon flight - not only in terms of excessive boat movements and concomitant water loss, but also of blemishing what I think is the prettiest lock flight on the waterways (of those which I have seen, of course).

Aha - indirect support (while I typed) - and I agree; it's especially pretty on the long reach. However (if it has to be) what about the leat to the old pump house, that's a bit scruffy??

[Tim Lewis]

48 minutes ago, Tonka said:

Just come through Claydon. There are planning signs with reference to a new marina between bridges 143 and 144. Not sure what stage is it at yet

 

This one:

 

https://www.publicaccess.cherwell.gov.uk/online-applications/applicationDetails.do?activeTab=externalDocuments&keyVal=P9315YEM0N400

 

[Nightwatch]

If you look at the site if SB Rice (consultants) they have a pending application fir a 250 berth marina at Cherwell DC.

Looks like a local farming partnership, WA Adams Partnership, arable farms. Bet it's their land. The above cobsultants are the agents.

[Nightwatch]

1 hour ago, Tonka said:

According to the signs it is planned for on the summit between bridges 143 and 144. Can't remember which side of canal. Don't know where Mtb gets his info from!!!

We have moored at the end of the straight at the bottom of Claydon locks. Must have seen you but not aware of boat name. Did you turn round and head back as we were mooring?

[Old Son]

Probably find that once the boats get into a marina very few will actually venture out again!!

[Nightwatch]

Just now, Old Son said:

Probably find that once the boats get into a marina very few will actually venture out again!!

I agree. But that's okay. More funds in CRTs coffers and they're not abusing the system.

When Cropredy marina was proposed, we were moored on farm moorings a couple of locks up from the site. Local fear was lack of water. There's always been periodic water shortages in the area. We entered Cropredy marina this morning to use the services. 90% of the boats were in there. The water shortage has not got any worse as far as I can tell. We have been away from here for about four years apart from a dash down and through this time last year. 

So, true. Get them all tucked away in marinas I say.

[Old Son]

Same happened at Roydon on the Lea. Only a handful of boats actually got out regularly from some 250 or so moored there.

[MtB]

3 hours ago, Tonka said:

According to the signs it is planned for on the summit between bridges 143 and 144. Can't remember which side of canal. Don't know where Mtb gets his info from!!!

 

That well known and reliable source, the towpath telegraph!

 

And it's planned for the east side of the canal apparently. Or it might be the west...

[Athy]

47 minutes ago, Mike the Boilerman said:

 

That well known and reliable source, the towpath telegraph!

 

And it's planned for the east side of the canal apparently. Or it might be the west...

No, it's going over it, like the HS2.

[ditchcrawler]

The same side as the cottage at the top of the flight

[dogless]

The prettiest flight of locks on the system, is of course Bank Newton in either direction.

The back drop alone is stunning.

Rog

[Tecka]

Being quite sad and having a bit of free time I've read most of the information in the link posted by Tim. So for those without the time to read through.

 

It's a 250 berth marina, set up as semi-individual lagoons. Essentially the owners cite potential loss of agricultural grants due to Brexit and the need to diversify

 

Every public comment is an objection

 

The EA has objected on 4 points

1/ The proposal is in a flood risk area

2/ Because the proposal requires banking to bring the level of the field to the canal it means a reduction in flood relief.

3/ There will be an impact on Wildlife and fisheries not yet mitigated

4/ Lack of connection to public sewerage and related risk of pollution

They have recommended possible ways to mitigate

 

The local council have objected due to the rural nature of the area, unsuitable access from road and lack of public transport in the area

 

The area planner objects due to visual impact and recommended reducing the scale

 

CRT have objected to the bridge and clubhouse design due to impact from the canal

 

I may not have got all this 100% right as I've spent an hour reading through and paraphrased a fair chunk.

[Nightwatch]

I'm not surprised.

[Tim Lewis]

33 minutes ago, Tecka said:

Being quite sad and having a bit of free time I've read most of the information in the link posted by Tim. So for those without the time to read through.

 

It's a 250 berth marina, set up as semi-individual lagoons. Essentially the owners cite potential loss of agricultural grants due to Brexit and the need to diversify

 

Every public comment is an objection

 

The EA has objected on 4 points

1/ The proposal is in a flood risk area

2/ Because the proposal requires banking to bring the level of the field to the canal it means a reduction in flood relief.

3/ There will be an impact on Wildlife and fisheries not yet mitigated

4/ Lack of connection to public sewerage and related risk of pollution

They have recommended possible ways to mitigate

 

The local council have objected due to the rural nature of the area, unsuitable access from road and lack of public transport in the area

 

The area planner objects due to visual impact and recommended reducing the scale

 

CRT have objected to the bridge and clubhouse design due to impact from the canal

 

I may not have got all this 100% right as I've spent an hour reading through and paraphrased a fair chunk.

Interestingly though CRT have stated that the development will have no adverse effect on water supply

 

Also that the EA objection point 4 is based in it being a 250 dwelling development!

 

2 hours ago, Old Son said:

Same happened at Roydon on the Lea. Only a handful of boats actually got out regularly from some 250 or so moored there.

Er, isn't Roydon on the Stort ?

 

Edited July 13, 2018 by Tim Lewis

[matty40s]

7 minutes ago, Tim Lewis said:

 

 

Er, isn't Roydon on the Stort ?

 

Most people who live there dont even realise there's a river passing by......

[Tecka]

2 minutes ago, Tim Lewis said:

Interestingly though CRT have stated that the development will have no adverse effect on water supply

 

Also that the EA objection point 4 above assumes that it is a 250 dwelling development!

 

I've often wondered about the relationship between CRT wanting money through a NAA and the supply of water for marina development, there must be a income/benefit calculation somewhere!

 

I didn't pick up on the dwelling vs lesuire mooring point, well spotted!

[David Mack]

1 minute ago, Tecka said:

I've often wondered about the relationship between CRT wanting money through a NAA and the supply of water for marina development, there must be a income/benefit calculation somewhere.

CRT will want a water resources impact study doing (at the developer's expense) as part of the process of agreeing a NAA. So they already hold all the cards on this subject, and don't need to make an issue of it in the planning process.

[Tecka]

13 minutes ago, matty40s said:

Most people who live there dont even realise there's a river passing by......

I've seen this myself, way back in 2008 I project managed the HLF restoration of part of the Lambourne through Newbury. I remember talking to people whose gardens actually backed into the river who didn't know it existed. The really stupid thing was that most of them actually crossed the river via a bridge to get to the houses. It's crazy how little some people pay attention to their surroundings!

7 minutes ago, David Mack said:

CRT will want a water resources impact study doing (at the developer's expense) as part of the process of agreeing a NAA. So they already hold all the cards on this subject, and don't need to make an issue of it in the planning process.

They've actually already done a water resources impact study as part of the expression of interest and feasibility stages. From what I can tell this was done by CRT, there is probably a cost to the developer I agree.

Edited July 13, 2018 by Tecka