| |
|
We
are VERY concerned at the planning application submitted by "World
Class Stratford" to remove and replace the footbridge at the
barge lock 56 at Bancroft Basin...
see our
letter of objection here
|
 |
The Planning
Committee of Stratford District Council on Thursday 12th July 2007 agreed
to a planning application to replace this bridge...
We give here some
of our thoughts on this tragic decision.
1. The importance
of the bridge is its history including its design, purpose,
fabrication and erection. It represents a memorial to the work of the
prisoners in the restoration as well as to the National Trust's co-ordination
of this most important early canal restoration carried out by volunteers
and masterminded by the late David Hutchings MBE and his close friend
Sir John Smith, the founder of the Landmark Trust, who died recently.
Four simple commemorative plaques, placed there by the National Trust
soon after the reopening, record these facts in summary form as illustrated
above. These are of historical significance giving valuable contemporary
information to visitors.
2. This bridge is now over 40 years old and the fact that it was built
before the majority of today's UK population were born renders it a skilfully
designed and constructed 1960's pastiche worthy of preservation in its
own right and it is recognised worldwide as one of Stratford's unique
features.
3. Built in late 1963 by prisoners in their workshops at Wormwood Scrubs
jail in London then placed in position by the Royal Engineers from Long
Marston in early 1964 and finally installed by prisoners from Winson Green
Goal in Birmingham It represents a fine and (hopefully) lasting monument
to the vision and enthusiasm of volunteers of all types. Its erection
in 1964 (NOT 1970s as erroneously stated on page 43 of the planning document)
allowed the removal of a fixed concrete structure over the middle of the
disused/unusable lock prior to the restoration. That bridge stood in the
place of the swing bridge that formed part of the extensive tramway around
the Bancroft Basins when it operated as a thriving inland port and
transhipment operation between canal river and tramway.
4. The approach slopes of the current bridge do exceed the Disabled Discrimination
Act recommended maximum slope of 1 in 20 (a 5% gradient) suggested to
allow easy wheelchair access. However the Act does not cover existing
structures. It seems that no real consideration was given to redesigning
the approach levels as the width of the bridge was deemed too narrow.
However observations at the bridge prove that wheelchair access does not
appear too difficult so we wonder where the evidence to justify the removal
of the bridge exists. The current bridge slope is 1:13.3 or a 7.5% slope.
The two approach brick slopes are steeper at 14% or 15% but these could
be reduced easily by a redesign of their slopes. This option was dismissed
by the applicants.
5. It is worth highlighting that another claim in the proposals is that
the
bridge is too narrow and creates a bottleneck. However the bridge is 2.3m
wide at its narrowest, the proposed replacement is 2.5m wide on the very
long approach ramps thereby producing a very long funnel which will be
even
more of a bottleneck, 2.3m being 92% of the proposed replacement's width
- how is that designed to solve the criticism that the current bridge
is too
narrow? The new much longer bridge would encourage cyclists to try to
ride
across the lower gradient and be a hazard to pedestrians and those with
wheelchairs or pushchairs.
6. We also have reservations about the ability of navigators to safely
operate the lock if the bridge were replaced as proposed since easy and
rapid access to both sides of the lock is required via the bridge. The
new
bridge would drastically compromise that requirement as two sets of steps
and a distance at least four times that travelled today would be involved.
7. Mention is made of the increased navigation headroom that would be
available under the new bridge but that available today has never been
a
problem raised by navigators of the waterway and in any event it would
vary
with the state of the river and since it would be unsafe to go onto to
the
river at such times the current bridge is a useful safety reminder.
8. The focus of the development proposed by this planning application
seems
to be the new theatre, the proposed redesigned gardens aiming to enhance
the views thereof and the plans seem to disregard the remaining (and original)
canal basin instead of recognising the gardens area as a bonus for the
town,
made possible by the decline of water borne traffic in the town which
allowed the second basin to be in filled as described above. The remaining
canal basin is 200 years old and deserves recognition for this heritage
in
own right and should not be lumped in with its neighbouring Bancroft Gardens
in this scheme.
9. It is disturbing to read the chronological history summary set out
on
pages 40 to 43 of the planning document to note ten references to the
two
canal basins being filled in and not a single reference to the work of
those
involved in restoring the current basin and removing this infill. Neither
is
there is a reference to the reopening of the canal and basin on Saturday
11th July 1964 by HM Queen Elizabeth the Queen Mother as part of our
National Festival of Boats and Arts held between 9th and 15th July that
year.
10. Sadly, it does not appear that the World Class Stratford hold the
inland
waterways in high regard. The opposition of the Stratford Borough Council
to the restoration during the 1960s is well documented but it would have
been hoped that the economic benefits brought to the district by the thriving
canal and basin area would recognised as they bring many visitors from
home
and the wider World whose primary interest is the canal and its history.
Despite the economic success created by the restoration and reopening
of the
southern section of the canal in 1964 (and the river in 1974) we wonder
if
World Class Stratford are aware of how much the canal contributes to
bringing in visitors and enhancing their time in the town.
11. It should be noted that the bridge is the property of British Waterways,
the navigation authority, and whilst in discussions they have been
supportive and understanding of our position they appear to have failed
to recognise the heritage of the bridge set out above. Note that BW stand
to gain from a new bridge because they can install straight uncranked
beams to the bottom lock gates and redesign the pump sump that balances
the basin level possibly making them easier to maintain. They originally
preferred a more ambitious bridge design that curved out into the river
and could have left the current bridge in place but apparently that option
cost too much for the funds available (World Class Stratford project is
funded by Advantage West Midlands) but it would probably have been a visual
disaster to the river scene.
12. An intrinsic part of Stratford's history is the canal's restoration
and
the outstanding contribution of volunteers under the coordination of the
National Trust and David Hutchings. The prisoners' contribution is recorded
in the present footbridge at the exit to the lock. The bridge represents
the
final piece of the restoration in reaching Stratford having started over
4
years earlier at Kingswood near Lapworth. It must be preserved and retained
in use in Bancroft.
13. The importance of the restoration of the completely derelict southern
section of the Stratford Canal by volunteers between 1959 and 1964 cannot
be overstated. It created the confidence and was the catalyst for all
the
subsequent restorations that contribute to the vibrant UK inland waterway
network that is enjoyed today by over 30 million people each year.
And finally, to end with a couple of quotations (unattributed here but
I
know who made them):
"David Hutchings, a skilled architect, and his associates, put a
lot of
thought into this bridge, he was well aware of the importance of its
position and the need for a pleasing structure. It is not a pastiche of
the
'split bridges', it is a functional metal span set into brick abutments
in
the style of Midland canals of the 18th and 19th centuries. The whole
structure is in proportion with the lock itself.
The views under the bridge are pleasing, curving lines of stone coping,
brickwork. bollards, etc. well worthy of an Eric de Mare photographic
study.
The whole basin and river port area is an arm of the canal system extending
into the very heart of Stratford and bringing with it the charm, scale,
history and attraction of the canals. This bridge is very much a part
of
that charm.
It has been in place long enough to become itself part of the history
of
Stratford. As part of the saga of restoration it is a precious and very
meaningful link to the past for those that love the waterways. People
gave
their own money to build this and other structures. David put his best
efforts into this little bridge and I know that he was proud of it.
I can recall occasions standing on this bridge with David looking across
the
basin at what had been achieved and given to Stratford, a gift that has
taken all too long to be appreciated by much of the town. It would be
more
than sad if they were now to sweep away this gem of proof that even in
the
reviled 1960s the flame of good architecture was still alive.
We really should have tried to get it listed, but David never dreamt that
anyone would want to change his lovely little bridge."
And
"I was present when the bridge was opened by the late Queen Mother
in 1964 as she sailed out of the lock into the river Avon to review the
assembled boats. It was an occasion of great historical importance in
the restoration movement and gave impetus to many other projects. This
Bridge must be retained. Later the same day as the Queen Mother was shown
round the main exhibition area surrounding the theatre and she stopped
to speak with the prisoners who had so proudly made the bridge, they were
delighted that their efforts had been so publicly acknowledged."
|
|
