Woodcut courtesy of John O'Connor

LOST WHARVES

Wharves are the gateways to our two thousand miles of waterways. Our waterways were built for trade and navigation. Trade today comprises both carrying in the traditional sense of non-time sensitive loads of goods, and just as important the new trade of leisure and tourism.  

We are losing our traditional gateways at a rate of knots.

David Blaygrove produced in 1999 a very extensive list of lost and potential gateways which I have available for you and would ask you to update for the areas you know.    Either let me have your additions or send them to Penny Barber of Parliamentary Waterways Group.  

I just want to quickly boat you through my town – a canal town - Berkhamsted and show you what inappropriate building “regeneration” can do, how a canal town in just ten years can loose it’s waterside gateways - and therefore it’s trade both in goods and tourism become merely a memory as Tom Rolt predicted in the 1940’s.  

As one enters the town from the South

1. Cooper's Wharf used for the transhipment of chemicals—now a very ugly housing estate without wharfage access.

2. Ravens Lane Wharf—a coal wharf—now flats—no wharfage access.

3. Half of Castle Wharf—my home—originally a boat building yard—still accessible and not likely to change in my lifetime—even through it is worth a fortune for housing devel-opment.

4.  The Northern half of Castle Wharf was orig-inally part of the boat-building yard—later Bridgewater Boats for thirty years—currently being sold for residential development. The loss now of a leisure and amenity facility important to the economic and visual health of town.  

5. Alsford Wharf—was used for boat building—then a timber yard—now flats with no wharfage access.

6. The Animal Feed Mill with a wharf adjacent to the road and opposite the railway station.   Now has planning permission for flats with no access to the wharf.

7. The Northbridge Road industrial estate wharves—now all built on up to the waters edge ignoring the potential of moving anything by water.

8.  The Northbridge Road recycling unit was sited on a plot positioned by the local authority on land one small plot inland of the canal— even after pressure both from me and David Hilling of the Inland Shipping Group units have built adjacent to the canal only last year.  (After the introduction of PPG.13)   Thus precluding the movement of the town’s recycling waste by water—a non-time sensitive load – ideal for water transport.  

Why are wharves used for leisure disappearing?

The independent service providers who run the small boatyards in the south east are all reaching their sixties and want to retire – their wharves are worth far more as development land for housing and supermarkets than to retain them as boatyards – they have to consider funding their retirements and we lose yet more wharves. 

Why has this happened?

The changing economic structure, but most important the negative attitude of planners.  

Regeneration activities
All too often exclude the traditional transport and leisure boating role of waterways and in favour of high income generating activities – residential, offices, hotels, supermarkets etc.

There is Growing pressure to safeguard
Leisure boating wharves/moorings servicing facilities - slips, boat yards, refuelling, water, waste etc and cargo handling facilities.  

The track itself must be safeguarded against: - encroachment: - reductions in air draught (new bridges),

Channel width (pontoons, business barges),

These all interfere with rights of navigation.  

Why should we be vigilant?
The arguments are obviously practical usage – heritage implications – and the safeguarding of waterways as sustainable transport arteries.       

Safeguarding in practice
1994 London Rivers Assn called on Sec of State to safeguard waterside sites for river related economic activity and transport – It was seen as critical policy gap.  

There was a positive response from government in Feb.1997.

John Gummer Direction - 32 Thames wharves listed as safeguarded.   I am led to believe that this legislation could equally be applied to canals.  

The Dunwoody House of Commons Commons. Report on Inland Waterways (March 2001)— identified loss of wharves as a critical constraint on development of water transport. The idea that local development plans should recognise wharves as 'strategic assets' and protect them against development for alternative uses. A proposal was made that developers should provide alternative facilities where existing wharves were lost. It was felt that Planning Policy Guidelines should be strengthened.  

The Freight Study Group was established and reported in June 2002.

It recommended

a.  that there must be a halt in the loss of valuable wharfage

b. that there must be provision of adequate lay-by facilities, moorings, sanitation and water points

c.  that there must be stronger protection for wharves with   freight and leisure potential  

If these recommendations are not acted upon soon there will be too few boatyards to service the facility in the south east where land values are high.   We only have to look at the Thames above Teddington to see how few facilities and boatyards remain.               

There is a need for good practice planning guide to support existing PPGs.  

Association of Inland waterway Authorities (AINA) is in process of (May 2003) of preparing such a guide.   It is envisaged that safeguarding will be an important element in this and they need input and ideas to AINA.  

This is so important, every wharf that is lost, is lost for ever once an inappropriate development is in place.  

British Waterways, as statuary consultees are in a position to help prevent inappropriate deveopments.  If we a remain silent we share in the blame for the demise of the viability of our waterways as we know and love them.  

Parliamentary Waterways Group Westminster 06.05.03

Lindy Foster Weinreb