 | IWA Peterborough Branch www.iwapeterborough.org.uk | |
 |  |  |  |  |  |  |
 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| ||||||||
| ||||||||
| ||||||||
The Inland Waterways Association (IWA) is a registered charity and a company limited by guarantee. It has some 17,000 members nationally organised into 36 branches throughout England and Wales. The objects of the Association are to campaign for the Conservation, Use, Maintenance, Restoration and Development of the Inland Waterways of this country. We are not a boater organisation but one which supports the use of waterways by all compatible users.
The area of interest of Peterborough branch of the IWA covers not just the River Nene in and around Peterborough but also the whole of the area of the Middle Level system of waterways. The Branch has been invited to comment on the Ramsey Gateway consultation document.
We propose to address the document by considering two issues namely 1) the improvements required to Ramsey Basin and Ramsey High Lode to benefit boaters and to encourage visits by boaters and 2) our general comments on the schemes for improvement put forward in the consultation document.
There are in this country some 2000 miles of inter-connected waterways (both rivers and canals) stretching from as far north as Ripon to as far south as Godalming (near Guildford) and incorporating no less that four east - west routes across the country. There are thousands of powered craft registered on these waterways. Ramsey is directly connected to that system. It has an historic centre and many facilities including shops where boaters can stock up. It should not therefore be too difficult to increase the number of waterborne visitors to the town provided that Ramsey is perceived by boaters to be a welcoming place with safe moorings and provided further that the Middle Level system is marketed as a whole not just as a "through" route. In that connection for some years publicity has been concentrated on the "through route" being the route through Peterborough, Whittlesey, March, Outwell, Upwell and Salters Lode. This has been put forward as the most convenient route between the rivers Nene and Ouse [which it is]. Unfortunately in so doing the impression has been given that navigation on the rest of the Middle Level system is not encouraged or indeed banned [which it is not] and has meant that much of the system is very much under-used. Ramsey High Lode has to date suffered from this factor.
Our first point is, therefore, that if there is to be an improvement in the number of craft visiting the Middle Level [and with it Ramsey] the slant of promotion of the system must be altered. We are aware that Fenland District Council does its best to promote that part of the system within its area as part of general promotion of the Fens in conjunction with councils in Lincolnshire. Parts of the Middle Level system fall within the areas of four district councils namely yourselves and Fenland together with Peterborough City and North Norfolk. It would make sense if those four authorities co-ordinated a publicity effort specifically aimed at promoting the whole of the Middle Level system. Even if such co-ordination is impossible it ought at least to be possible for the two district councils in Cambridgeshire i.e. yourselves and Fenland to co-operate. Such an effort would no doubt be conducted in conjunction with the Middle Level Commissioners should they wish to be involved. Without such "joined up" promotion it is difficult to see how the numbers of water borne visitors to any sites in the Middle Level not on the "through route"are going to be increased whatever the merits of the individual sites and the improvements made to them.
At present the approach to Ramsey by water is uninspiring and consists of a number of business premises. While some are modern the balance are at best not distinctive and at worst run down. The Basin itself contains a selection of dilapidated and dangerous moorings. Indeed it is surprising that someone has not been injured before now. The Council is we know aware of the situation.
To attract visitors there is a very obvious need to carry out improvement to the Basin. In particular, if boaters are to visit, sufficient and safe moorings for boats must be created in the Basin. At the same time the southern-most section of the Basin must be available to allow craft to turn, Ramsey High Lode being a dead end. Following the lengthening of a number of the locks in the Middle Level system in recent years it is now possible for craft of up to 70 feet in length to reach the Basin. We believe that if a major redevelopment of the area of the High Lode/ Basin and surrounding area is to be carried out this is the moment to put in place plans to accommodate these larger craft. More particularly we suggest that the following changes/ improvements are made:
a) The turning point is immediately in front of the pleasant landscaped area which in turn is alongside the main road. Adjacent to the turning point on the west of the High Lode there is a short stretch of mooring. When craft are moored there (particularly if they are moored alongside each other) they can obstruct the mooring point. We therefore suggest that the moorings on the west of Ramsey High Lode at this point be removed.
b) As already indicated, craft of up to 70 feet in length can reach Ramsey Basin. When they achieve this end they are stuck. It is only possible to turn craft of length up to 60 feet in the available space in the Basin. If money is available we would suggest that steps are taken to dig out a section of the eastern Basin wall to enable craft of 70 feet to turn there. To do otherwise would ensure that for the foreseeable future the Basin is closed to what we all hope will otherwise be an increasing number of larger visiting craft.
c) Given the need to plan for visits by craft up to 70 feet in length and having removed the moorings on the west of the High Lode there will be a need to provide on the eastern bank more extensive moorings than those that presently exist. Our view is that not only must the moorings on the eastern bank be repaired but they should be substantially extended so that they reach almost to the boundary of the first of the existing factories on the eastern bank. This should be sufficient to allow visiting craft to moor without having to moor two abreast and would at the same time leave sufficient room in the channel for craft to journey to the end of the Lode to turn.
d) A set (or sets) of steps will need to be created up the eastern bank along with a ramp for disabled access to connect the moorings with any footpath/cycleway which is created on that bank [see later].
While moorings are the most obvious improvement required in the Basin area we have also considered whether to recommend the creation of any other facilities. Boaters do need access to a water supply to fill the tanks on their craft and also facilities for sewage disposal. We do not propose the creation of such facilities in the Basin both because there is a nearby marina which can fulfil them and because such facilities could be the subject of vandalism attacks which would soon detract from the quality of the environment which we believe you are seeking to create.
The other need of boaters is for locations for refuse disposal. Such disposal points are in short supply in the Middle Level. We assume that you will be providing public refuse bins in the area of the Basin. Unless you make specific provision for the disposal of boater rubbish you could easily find that visiting boaters also use them. Such use could lead to unsightly overflowing bins.
The most normal facility for the disposal of boater rubbish is a small skip which is hidden behind a fenced compound. It is emptied as part of the local authority refuse collection scheme. There would be space to create such a facility in the Basin area and we would recommend that this be done. We would further suggest that the compound is locked so that access can only be gained by use of the key which is currently required for boaters to operate a number of the locks and facilities on the Middle Level system.
The bringing of more boats to Ramsey is not just desirable in terms of the additional "spend" they will bring to the town but also in terms of the help they will give to generate a vibrant waterway environment. Boats will however be only part of the process: what is built in the area will be even more important.
The High Lode is a comparatively narrow waterway. If development is allowed to happen too close to it, even if that development is of only 2/3 storeys, it could create a sterile "canyon" effect. On the west of the Lode is Horse Drove which helps to open out the site in that direction. We suggest that a roadway/ cycleway to serve part of the area on the new development in section "F" of Figure 4 should be built alongside the eastern bank of the High Lode again to open up the vista. Footpaths/cycleways on both sides of the river would enable residents and others to view what is happening on the river.
As to the buildings to be erected on plots "D" and "F" of Figure 4 we see that it is suggested that there is to be a large residential component. This seems entirely sensible. Presumably the dwellings would be 2/3 storeys high and as a result they will not dwarf the Lode itself. We note with approval the suggestion that any development should be of high quality. We also suggest that the buildings should be designed on both sides of the Lode to face onto the Lode so that residents can view what is happening there and so that boaters will feel that the community is interested in them. [There are some parts of the country where the built environment gives completely the opposite impression]
We were concerned to see the latest plan which has apparently been approved by the Cabinet and suggests that the foodstore be built on block D and on the southern part of block C of Figure 4 with a resultant reduction in housing provision between the store area and the Lode. This seems to us to be a mistake. A store (however it is dressed up) will be a large structure which is likely to be out of sympathy with the scale of the housing to be erected elsewhere in blocks D and F. Built so close to the Lode it could also have the effect of showing a blanket wall to the river, particularly at the point where the site would abut directly onto Horse Drove. We much prefer the idea of building a quantity of housing on block D to cover the area set out in Figure 6.
We note the plans to tie blocks D and F with a bridge across the Lode for use by pedestrians and cyclists. We suggest that access should also be provided to the bridge from any footpaths/cycleways constructed along the sides of the Lode. As to the bridge itself, perhaps we could take this opportunity to make two practical points:
a) the bridge should be constructed to give adequate headroom to all craft able to use the Basin.
b) while we are, as explained above, anxious to ensure that additional moorings are provided we do at the same time wish to ensure that opportunities for vandalism are engineered out of any scheme. If the bridge is built over the moorings which we have suggested for the eastern bank there is a danger that vandals might be tempted to drop items from the bridge onto boats moored underneath or even to jump onto craft from the bridge. We therefore recommend that no moorings are provided directly under the bridge or for a short distance on either side of it.
Generally, we have noted from Figure 2 the suggestion that landscaping should be installed along both sides of the Lode and welcome this. We hope that it will be possible to include some trees in the planting. Planting will help to combat any feelings of sterility that so much building is so small a space could produce.
Throughout we have been arguing for an opening up of the waterway and for the creation of an attractive environment around it. We were in this connection concerned to note the "indicative view" at paragraph 5.2. The impression given is exactly what we have been seeking to avoid namely the creation of a "concrete canyon".
Before dealing with that illustration there is one detail on it on which we must comment and this relates to the presence of railings. The illustration suggests that the Lode will be separated from the surrounding land by continuous railings on either side. Not only is this, we suggest, visually unattractive but it is potentially dangerous. We suspect that they may have been included in the illustration on the basis that they would help safety by keeping out (particularly) the young from the Lode. Such railings will not deter the determined child from playing near the water or from entering it. What it will prevent is any rescuer being able speedily to reach anyone in trouble in the water. If you require any further demonstration of the lack of a need for such railings we suggest that you visit the waterfront in Ely which is much used but where there are virtually no railings. Equally we commend the waterfront in Loughborough. There a well used footpath runs right alongside a canal for a least a mile. There are no railings at all.
Returning to the "canyon" effect we are not suggesting (as does your illustration) that the Lode should in effect be lined with concrete. To make our position clear we set out how we believe our suggestions would work:
The existing moorings on the eastern side of the Lode would be repaired with additions and the moorings on the western bank removed.
The turning point would be enlarged
Beyond the bank on the west: Horse Drove would be adopted and beside it would be created a footpath/ cycleway.
Beyond the bank on the east: a footpath / cycleway would also be created along with a perimeter road to serve those parts of the development on block F nearest to the Lode.
On each side of the Lode between the roads, the footpath/ cycleways and the bank landscaping (including trees) would be planted as space permitted.
We hope that our comments will be found helpful
Peterborough Branch IWA
June 2004
All material on this site is copyright, © IWA Peterborough Branch unless otherwise stated. The Inland Waterways Association may not agree with opinions expressed on this web site, but encourages publication as a matter of interest. Nothing here may be construed as policy or an official announcement unless otherwise stated.