DOCSLIB.ORG

OVERVIEW and SCRUTINY CANALS TASK GROUP Update

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
OVERVIEW and SCRUTINY CANALS TASK GROUP Update OVERVIEW AND SCRUTINY CANALS TASK GROUP Update Report 22nd November 2007 PURPOSE OF REPORT To update Members on work undertaken for the Canals Task Group. This report is public. RECOMMENDATIONS (1) That the definition of a Community Asset as set out in 2.1 be adopted for use by the Canals Task Group. (2) That the History and Development of the Canal be noted. (3) That the work undertaken by other Councils be noted. (4) (i) That the position of Lancaster Canal within the City Council’s Policy Framework and County Council’s Transport Plan be noted and consideration given to how the Council should be positioned in the policy framework. (4) (ii) To consider whether a change of status is needed to enhance and protect the canal. (5) That the information on residential moorings be noted and future work considered. (6) That the information on the Disability Discrimination Act in reference to British Waterways be noted. (7) That the Task Group note that there are no current maps of access points to the Canal and consider different ways to gather this information. (8) That the Task Group consider the maps showing ownership of the canal and discuss how to ascertain responsibility for the canal, maintenance and an understanding of the relationship between the City Council and British Waterways. (9) That the information in this report, recommendations and discussion thereon be forwarded for consideration in forming the recommendations of the Canals Task Group This report is part of the evidence gathering process of the Task Group and may not indicate the views of the Task Group. 1 Introduction 1.1 Press Release A press release regarding the Canals Task Group was released and appeared on BBC Lancashire’s Website, in the Lancaster Guardian and the free local newspaper the Reporter. BBC Lancashire Radio also requested an interview and this was broadcast on 25th October 2007 during ‘drive time’, The press release requested that members of the public send any representations regarding the canal to Democratic Services. Three representations from members of the public have been received thus far (Appendix 1). Other representations have been found in the letters pages of local newspapers. British Waterways are currently running a test marketing campaign in Lancaster, as well as four other sites around the country. Billboard signs have been used in Lancaster City Centre and leaflets have been distributed stating that the canal is an everyday get away. 1.2 Parish Councils, Ward Councillors and Lancaster District Chamber of Commerce have been asked to make representations to the Task Group. Members of Lancaster Canal Trust, Lancashire County Council, British Waterways, the Inland Waterways Association, Carnforth Area Regeneration Partnership and Lancaster Canal Regeneration Partnership have been invited to the meeting. 2 Details 2.1 Community Asset A Community Asset can be defined as an asset being used by the public and/or an asset developed by the community. The asset could be material as in buildings such as health centres and school facilities or non-material as in information and/or ideas/ideology such as security information of a particular country or community or the normative and belief systems of a community. Water bodies are important community assets through their provision of open space and recreational resources and their interaction with the built environment, forming both divides between urban areas and the centre of towns. Still waters such as Lancaster Canal are used extensively for recreation. 2.2 The History and Development of Lancaster Canal Lancaster Canal was originally designed in the late 18th century as a line from the Bridgewater Canal at Worsley through to Kendal. The plans were redrawn several times, and the Canal as it is today bears little resemblance to the original proposals. The Lancaster Canal is unique. It is a contour canal which means it was built along the natural lie of the land and has 41 miles without locks, the longest stretch in the country. The original purpose of the canal was to transport coal from the Lancashire Coalfields and limestone from Cumbria. In 1820 the Glasson branch was added to allow cargo to be transported from sea going vessels that could not travel up the River Lune. In its prime the canal carried up to 460,000 tons of cargo a year between Preston and Lancaster. John Rennie, the designer of Lancaster Canal, had originally designed two aqueducts, one over the Lune and one over the Ribble at Preston. Local merchants had demanded that the Lune aqueduct be built in stone instead of brick to match the area and subsequently the company ran out of money to build the Ribble aqueduct and a tramway was built instead. The north section and the south section of the Lancaster Canal were only ever joined by the tramway and eventually the south section became part of the Leeds-Liverpool Canal. It was thought that Lancaster Canal and Leeds- Liverpool Canal would be eventually joined, but this never happened. Lancaster Canal has architectural heritage of national importance. 166 structures along the canal are Grade II listed and is know as the ‘Architectural King of the Waterways. The Lune Aqueduct is one notable structure. North of Preston, the Lancaster Canal prospered with express passenger services from Preston to Kendal running regularly. The passenger service continued to be successful after the introduction of train services, but was damaged by roads. The M6 was constructed through the line of the canal, isolating 14 miles of the Northern Reaches at Tewitfield. Lancaster Canal has recently experienced a revival with the numbers of boating holidays increasing. The new Millennium Ribble Link was opened in 2002 and connects Lancaster to the national network via the River Ribble, the River Douglas and the Leeds-Liverpool Canal. 2.3 Other Councils Lancaster Canal falls within the boundaries of Lancashire County Council, South Lakeland District Council, Cumbria County Council, Preston City Council and Wyre Borough Council as well as Lancaster City Council. These Councils have been contacted to gauge what work they have undertaken with regards to Lancaster Canal. Cumbria County Council are supportive of the restoration of the northern reaches of the canal but the County have not carried out any analysis or scrutiny. Further replies are still being waited on. Lancaster Canal Restoration Partnership is a partnership of South Lakeland District Council, Cumbria County Council, Kendal Town Council, British Waterways, Lancaster Canal Trust, Inland Waterways Association, The Waterways Trust, Lancashire County Council and Lancaster City Council. This Partnership is currently working towards the restoration of the Northern Reaches. The restoration of the Northern Reaches of the Lancaster Canal is an ambitious multi-million pound project to re-open the most northerly 14 miles from Tewitfield to Canal Head in Kendal. The Preston City Link Canal Trust was formed in 2003, the aim being to restore the filled in section of the Lancaster Canal from its present terminus in Ashton, Preston to a proposed new marina in the Maudland area, near to the University of Central Lancashire. A further aim is to restore part of the disused Preston to Longridge Rail Line which will pass over the marina by a viaduct, and continue as far as Gamull Lane to connect with Park and Ride facilities. 2.4 Biological Heritage Status Biological Heritage Sites are the most important non-statutory wildlife sites in Lancashire. Together with the statutory SSSIs they make a significant contribution to Lancashire’s biodiversity, by means of the habitats and the species they support. Particular concentrations of Biological Heritage Sites are evident in Lancaster and Ribble Valley districts. Further information on Biological Heritage Status is being awaited from Natural England and Ecologists from Lancashire County Council. 2.5 The Canal within the City Council’s Policy Framework and County Council’s Transport Plans Documents within the City Council’s Policy Framework and County Council’s Transport Plans including the Lancaster and Morecambe Vision, the Local Development Scheme, the Community Strategy and the Corporate Plan were searched for reference to Lancaster Canal. Lancaster Canal does not appear within all of the Council’s policy framework or the County Council’s Transport Plans. However, it is included in the following policies and strategies: Within the Tourism Strategy – Tourism Vision for Rural Areas The proposed re-opening of the Lancaster Canal to Kendal will enhance rural tourism. Long term action:- To encourage the restoration of the Lancaster Canal to Kendal to enhance sustainable tourism through the Northern Reaches Group. Within the Lancaster District Local Plan adopted 16th April 2004. Section 5 – Environmental Protection and Enhancement: The City Council proposes to develop and safeguard green corridors along the River Lune, Lancaster Canal and rural cycle paths. The limited expansion of existing uses will be permitted. The banks of the River Lune provide relief from the built up area and access to the countryside. The Lancaster Canal provides a similar function in both Lancaster and Carnforth. Section 6 – Recreation and Community Services The City Council proposes to develop a new park in central Morecambe and concentrate on other initiatives on the River Lune, the Lancaster Canal, Morecambe Promenade and Lancashire Coastal Way. The Canalside Park The Lancaster Canal is highly valued by visitors and residents for its quiet attractions and the unusual and contrasting views it offers both within the urban areas of Lancaster and Carnforth and in the open countryside. The Canal is navigable south of Tewitfield whilst the spur to Glasson Dock provides access to the sea. In total, there is public access to around 40 km of canal towpath within the District. This in turn gives access to Kendal in the north and Preston in the south.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • PRESTON LOCAL PLAN 2012-26 APPENDIX B: PARKING STANDARDS Appendix B Car Parking Standards
    PRESTON LOCAL PLAN 2012-26 APPENDIX B: PARKING STANDARDS Appendix B Car Parking Standards A B C Disabled Parking Coaches Specific Land Broad Land Use Spaces per gross floor area (unless Up to 200 Over 200 Bicycles Motorcycles Parking Drop off Use Class otherwise indicated) bays bays (minimum) (minimum) 1 per 1 per 1 per 1 per 1 per 3 bays or 4 bays + 140sqm 350sqm Food retail - - 16sqm 15sqm 14sqm 6% of total 4% of total (min. 2 (min. 2 spaces) spaces) 1 per 1 per A1 Shops 1 per 1 per 1 per 3 bays or 4 bays + Non-food retail 200sqm 500sqm - - 22sqm 21sqm 20sqm 6% of total 4% of total (min.2) (min.2) 1 per 1 per Retail 1 per 1 per 1 per 3 bays or 4 bays + 200sqm 500sqm - - warehouse 60sqm 45sqm 40sqm 6% of total 4% of total (min.2) (min.2) Banks/building societies, betting offices, Financial and estate and 1 per 1 per 1 per 1 per 1 per 3 bays or 4 bays + A2 professional employment 200sqm 500sqm - - 35sqm 32sqm 30sqm 6% of total 4% of total services agencies, (min.2) (min.2) professional and financial services Restaurants, 1 space Negotiated Negotiated cafes/snack 1 per 8sqm 1 per 6sqm 1 per 5sqm 1 space per Restaurants and 3 bays or 4 bays + per on a case on a case A3 bars, fast food of public of public of public 125sqm cafes 6% of total 4% of total 50sqm by case by case and drive floor space floor space floor space min.2) (min.2) basis basis through Public 1 space Negotiated Negotiated Houses/wine 1 per 8sqm 1 per 6sqm 1 per 5sqm 1 space per Drinking 3 bays or 4 bays + per on a case on a case A4 bars/other of public of public of public
    [Show full text]
  • North West River Basin District Flood Risk Management Plan 2015 to 2021 PART B – Sub Areas in the North West River Basin District
    North West river basin district Flood Risk Management Plan 2015 to 2021 PART B – Sub Areas in the North West river basin district March 2016 1 of 139 Published by: Environment Agency Further copies of this report are available Horizon house, Deanery Road, from our publications catalogue: Bristol BS1 5AH www.gov.uk/government/publications Email: [email protected] or our National Customer Contact Centre: www.gov.uk/environment-agency T: 03708 506506 Email: [email protected]. © Environment Agency 2016 All rights reserved. This document may be reproduced with prior permission of the Environment Agency. 2 of 139 Contents Glossary and abbreviations ......................................................................................................... 5 The layout of this document ........................................................................................................ 8 1 Sub-areas in the North West River Basin District ......................................................... 10 Introduction ............................................................................................................................ 10 Management Catchments ...................................................................................................... 11 Flood Risk Areas ................................................................................................................... 11 2 Conclusions and measures to manage risk for the Flood Risk Areas in the North West River Basin District ...............................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Let's Cycle Preston and South Ribble
    The Guild Wheel www.lancashire.gov.uk The Preston Guild Wheel is a 21 mile Stop at the floating Visitor Village where circular cycle route round Preston opened you will find a cafe, shops and information comms: xxxx to celebrate 2012 Guild. Preston Guild centre. There are lakes, hides, walking trails occurs every 20 years and has a history and a play area. The reserve is owned by going back 700 years. Lancashire Wildlife Trust. www.brockholes.org The Guild Wheel links the city with the Getting about by bicycle surrounding countryside and river corridor. Preston Docks – Stop for a drink at one It takes you through the different landscapes of the cafes and pubs by the dockside or Did you know that there are now over 75 Cycle to the station that surround the city, including riverside ride down to the lock gates. When opened km of traffic free cycle paths in Preston Fed up with motorway driving. More and meadows, historic parks and ancient in 1892 it was the largest dock basin in and South Ribble? With new routes like more people are cycling to the station woodland. Europe employing over 500 people. Today the Guild Wheel and 20 mph speed limits and catching the train. A new cycle hub is the dock is a marina. it is becoming more attractive to get opening at Preston station in Summer 2016. Attractions along the route include: www.prestondock.co.uk around the area by bicycle. There is good cycle parking at other stations Avenham and Miller Parks – Ride through Cycle clubs in the area.
    [Show full text]
  • Savick Brook Electrofishing Survey 2001
    6 A' NofcTW ^ o X 7 ENVIRONMENT AGENCY NORTH WEST REGION Savick Brook Electrofishing Survey 2001 Rebecca Oldfield and David Charlesworth March 2002 Environment Agency Lutra House Dodd Way Walton Summit Bamber Bridge Preston PR58BX i En v ir o n m e n t Ag e n c y Information Services Unit Please return or renew this item by the due date Due Date Summary A total of 8 sites were electrofished in Savick Brook on 29th & 30th May 2001. Savick Brook was surveyed to determine fish species and abundance as part of the Ribble Link Project. The electrofishing procedure consisted of a single upstream sweep of the electrode at each site. The fish densities (expressed as numbers per 100m2) calculated from this method and presented in this report are semi-quantitative, or minimum estimates and therefore do not represent the complete population in survey sites. The majority of the sites had excellent fish populations, with only one fishless site. Limnophilic (stillwater) (roach and gudgeon) coarse fish were present at 38% of the 8 sites surveyed. Rheophilic (flowing water) (chub and dace) coarse fish were present at 87.5% of the sites with a couple showing high densities. Excellent numbers of juvenile flounder were also present at 7 of the sites. The present water quality is suitable for coarse fish species. This is reflected in the densities of coarse fish found in Savick Brook. The length frequency analysis showed that the populations of coarse fish were established and self-sustaining and reproducing naturally CONTENTS Page No Summary 2 Contents 3 1 Introduction 4 2 Methodology 5 3 Results 7 3.1 Overview 7 3.2 Coarse Fish Densities 7 3.2.1 Rheohilic Fish Densities 2001 8 3.2.2 Limnophilic Fish Densities 2001 8 3.23 Flounder 8 4 Discussion 10 1.1 Species Composition 10 1.2 Water Quality 10 13 Savick Brook Description 11 5 Conclusions 12 6 Recommendations 13 7 Appendices 14 3 1 INTRODUCTION This report aims to find the distribution and abundance of fish in Savick Brook.
    [Show full text]
  • Preston LOCAL Plan 2012-26 Site Allocations & Development Management Policies
    Preston LOCAL Plan 2012-26 Site Allocations & Development Management Policies Adopted 2 July 2015 Contents Preston Local Plan 2012-26 6 Introduction 132 Glossary 16 Vision for Preston 139 Appendix A Local and District Centre Boundaries 22 Delivering Infrastructure 144 Appendix B Parking Standards 32 Areas for Development 147 Appendix C 44 Homes for All Schedule of Superseded Preston Local Plan 2004 Policies 64 Delivering Economic Prosperity 151 Appendix D 84 Catering for Sustainable Travel Preston Local Plan 2004 Policies Not Superceded 92 Protecting and Enhancing the Built and Natural Environment 160 Appendix E Preston Secondary Schools 400m Buffer 118 Promoting Health and Wellbeing 161 Appendix F 126 Tackling Climate Change Monitoring Framework 3 List of Policies Preston Local Plan 2012-26 17 V1 Model Policy 80 EP4 Local Centres 28 IN1 Western Distributor 81 EP5 Riversway Phase B Site Specific Policy 29 IN2 Broughton Bypass 83 EP6 University of Central Lancashire 30 IN3 Park & Ride Sites Cottam Campus (Broughton and Riversway) EP7 Telecommunication IN4 New Railway Station 83 and Park and Ride site – Cottam 90 ST1 Parking Standards DELETED – See Inspector’s Report Main Modification MM7 91 ST2 General Transport Considerations 37 MD1 Cottam 94 GB1 Green Belt NEW POLICY – See Inspector’s Report 38 MD2 North West Preston Main Modification MM27 42 AD1(a) Development within 95 EN1 Development in the (or in close proximity to) Open Countryside the Existing Residential Area 97 EN2 Protection and Enhancement 42 AD1(b) Small scale development within
    [Show full text]
  • River Ribble the River Ribble Is One of the Longest Rivers in the North West of England
    River Ribble The River Ribble is one of the longest rivers in the North West of England Did you know? • The tidal limit of the Ribble is 11 miles inland (above Preston); • The River Ribble is home to a variety of protected species, including the Eurasian otter, Atlantic salmon and white- clawed crayfish; • The mouth of the Ribble Estuary is 10 miles (16 km) wide; • An average of 340,000 water birds over-winter on the Ribble Estuary, making it the most important wetland site in Britain; • The Ribble estuary is the 7th largest estuary in the UK; • The Ribble marked the ancient northern boundary of Mercia, and at the time of the Domesday Book was the northern boundary of Cheshire; • The Ribble catchment is the pilot basin for the implementation of the EU Water Framework Directive in the UK. Location and Basic Geography Map showing the catchment of the River Ribble in North West England. Location and Basic Geography The Ribble Basin, located in the North West of England, includes all of the land that drains into the Ribble Estuary. This includes five main rivers and all their tributaries (the Ribble, Hodder, Calder, Darwen, and Douglas) and the Crossens drainage system. The River Ribble rises in the Pennines in the Yorkshire Dales at the confluence of Gayle Beck and Cam Beck. It flows east 100km before running into the Irish Sea. It is one of the longest rivers in the North West, draining a catchment of 2128 km2 (860 miles2) and covering a distance of 110 km from source to sea.
    [Show full text]
  • Ribble Pilot
    CAUTION It is hoped that you find the information contained in these Sailing Directions helpful. Whilst every care has been taken to ensure that the information contained in the Directions is accurate the Author formally disclaims any and all liability for any accident, loss or damage howsoever caused whether by reason of any error, inaccuracy, omission or ambiguity in relation to the information in the Sailing Directions or otherwise. The Author will at all times be grateful to receive information which may improve the work. WARNING All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced in any form or by any means – graphic,electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, taping or information storage and retrieval system – without the prior permission in writing of the Author / Publisher. A BRIEF HISTORY OF THE PORT of PRESTON Preston’s history goes back to the very earliest times when the town arose from the ruins of the ancient Coccium or Ribchester and received its name of Priest – town, corrupted over the years into Preston. It received its first charter in 1179 from King Henry II. Situated on the main north – south road where it crossed the Ribble, The town’s strategic importance gained prominence especially during the Civil Wars. By the first half of the 19th century Preston was a growing “cotton town”(with over 70 mills in 1860) and also an increasingly important port on the Ribble.It had, during two decades, become an equally important rail centre with lines diverging from it to Lancaster and Scotland; to Crewe and Fleetwood, Manchester, Liverpool and Blackburn.
    [Show full text]
  • OVERVIEW and SCRUTINY CANALS TASK GROUP Update
    OVERVIEW AND SCRUTINY CANALS TASK GROUP Update Report 10th January 2008 PURPOSE OF REPORT To update Members on work undertaken by the Canals Task Group. This report is public. RECOMMENDATIONS (1) That the upcoming site visits be noted and that the issues raised by these site visits are considered at the following meeting of the Task Group. (2) That the representations of users and parishes (Appendix 1) be noted. (3) That the Biological Heritage Status of the Canal and the site description (Appendix 2) be noted. (4) That the information gathered regarding Satellite Navigation Systems be noted. (5) That the information regarding bridges across the Canal be noted and future work considered. (6) That the data received from the questionnaire undertaken by Lancaster Canal Trust be noted. (7) That the Group note current uses of the canal and consider potential further uses of the canal. (8) That the Group consider the evidence given on residential moorings. (9) That the information in this report, recommendations and discussion thereon be forwarded for consideration in forming the recommendations of the Canals Task Group This report is part of the evidence gathering process of the Task Group and may not indicate the views of the Task Group. 1 Introduction 1.1 Invitations to the meeting have been made to owners of residential moorings and users of the canal. A briefing note will be produced by Gary Bowker, Senior Technician in Planning Services and member of the Cycling Demonstration Town Steering Group on accessibility and issues for cyclists along the canal. This will be distributed before the start of the meeting.
    [Show full text]
  • Minutes 13Th June 2012
    Page 1 of 8 INGOL AND TANTERTON NEIGHBOURHOOD COUNCIL MINUTES of the Parish Council Meeting of Ingol and Tanterton Neighbourhood Council held on Wednesday 13th June 2012 @ St Margaret’s Church Hall Ingol Present: Cllrs Anderson, Brookes, Dodd, Ellison, Roskell, Speakman, Soole, Thompson and Wright. 6 members of the public were present 16/12 APOLOGIES Cllr McGrath 17/12 DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST None 18/12 MINUTES It was resolved that the Minutes of the Meeting held on the 9TH May 2012 should be approved and signed by the Chairman as a correct record. 19/12 PUBLIC PARTICIPATION The meeting was adjourned A resident mentioned the issue of dangerous dogs which had been raised at the recent PACT meeting and was currently being followed through by that group. It was suggested that should the Neighbourhood Council decide to enlist the services of a lengthsman that such a person might be able to be nominated as an official authorised to carry out enforcement of the PCC dog control orders. It was mentioned that the last remaining PCC dog control order relating to ‘dogs on leads’ would likely be published shortly. It was suggested that members should read the dog control orders so as to understand their ramifications and areas covered. Mention was made of the Ingol Ward Profile Document which had been produced by PCC in the past. It was suggested that this document might be useful to the Neighbourhood Council in undertaking and producing a locality/action plan for the neighbourhood. It was noted that PCC were no longer updating the document which was perhaps something the Neighbourhood Council might consider as part of the overall exercise.
    [Show full text]
  • Revocations Approved by the ENTRUST Board June 2014
    Revocations approved by the ENTRUST Board June 2014 Voluntary revocations approved by the ENTRUST Board, June 2014 EB EB name Date number revoked 713518 Alloa North Parish Church 18/06/2014 312603 Berwick Environmental Group, The 18/06/2014 640956 Blakenhall Community Hall 18/06/2014 173163 Blythburgh Community Council 18/06/2014 351347 Brinkworth Recreational Group 18/06/2014 456231 Campsie Golf Club 18/06/2014 855138 Castlegate Area Residents Association 18/06/2014 418062 Charleston Trust 18/06/2014 321265 Church of Scotland Social Care Council 18/06/2014 614440 Common Wheel 18/06/2014 254834 Community Impact Bucks 18/06/2014 344290 Congregational Board of Penicuik North Kirk, Church of Scotland 18/06/2014 272867 CREATION SKATEPARK 18/06/2014 184143 Currie Community Council 18/06/2014 269436 Daisy Chain Environmental Project 18/06/2014 790367 Datchet Village Society 18/06/2014 609539 Devereaux, Foxmoor and Robbins Community (DFR Community) 18/06/2014 541227 Dun Beag Community Composting Scheme 18/06/2014 619402 Evesham Cricket Club 18/06/2014 653580 Friends of Waddington Park 1 18/06/2014 156243 Glencorse Parish Church 18/06/2014 032196 Great Western Trust 18/06/2014 668146 Groundwork Ashfield & Mansfield 18/06/2014 824016 Groundwork Manchester, Salford & Trafford 18/06/2014 025158 Groundwork Tameside 18/06/2014 303513 Harleyford Road Garden Association 18/06/2014 591024 Harrow Agenda 21 Environmental Forum 18/06/2014 172614 Heritage Building Preservation Trust 18/06/2014 Page 1 of 69 257927 Hillside Church 18/06/2014 361620 Holy Trinity
    [Show full text]
  • March 2001 NUMBER1
    C & 0 Canal Association concerned with the consetvation of the natural and historical environment of the C & 0 Canal and the Potomac River Basin VOLUME XXXIII March 2001 NUMBER1 THE CHESAPEAKE & OHIO CANAL THIS YEAR'S DOUGLAS MEMORIAL HIKE Walking through History Along the Canal's First 10 Miles CONSTRUCTION AND OPENING HISTORY fascinating aspects of the canal in Georgetown, including the two canals the C&O had connections to there, will be discussed Last fall we celebrated the 150th anniversary of the Chesa­ in my talk after the hike banquet. peake and Ohio Canal reaching its western terminus at Cum­ The initial construction history of the locks on this part of berland and this spring the Douglas Hike appropriately features the canal is complex. Locks 1 through 4 were begun in June the eastern terminus. Here the canal makes a dramatic 10 mile, and July 1829, and completed in April 1831, by contractor Dib­ 14-lock climb from tidewater at Georgetown, past the first wa­ ble, Beaumont and McCord. But the contracts let in October terfalls of the Potomac, and into the Maryland piedmont. In 1828 to several different contractors, for locks 5 through 14, terms of history, topography and engineering, perhaps no other were replaced by new contracts on 5, 6, 7, 8, 10, 12, 13, and 14 ten-mile section of the canal is as significant or as filled with the next year. Despite the difficulties with the initial contractors things to look at and learn about. for these locks, by September 1830, locks 5 through 14 were Surprisingly, neither Georgetown nor Rock Creek was the completed and in October 1830, the first boat passed from the intended eastern terminus when construction of the canal was Little Falls area to Seneca, thus initiating service on the first started.
    [Show full text]
  • Notes of the Last Meeting of the Lancashire Cycle Liaison Group
    Cycle Liaison Group Meeting Notes Date/Time: Monday 16 th November 18:00 Venue: Cabinet Room B, County Hall, Preston Present Jack Stokes (Preston) Councillor John Fillis Steve Kilner (Lancashire Cycle Link) Peter Ward (Preston) (Cabinet Member for Transport Eddie Robertson (Lancashire Cycle Robin Field (CTC and Highways) Link) Lancashire) Chris Marshal (Burnley & Pendle Debbie Thompson ( Health Equity, Matt Hodges (Wyre CTC) CTC) Welfare and Partnerships Manager, Steve Carson (Leyland) Colin Hubbard (Rossendale) Lancashire County Council) Chris Smith (Wyre CTC)) Paul Stubbins (Dynamo, Lancaster) Alasdair Simpson (Cycling - Lancashire Neil Illing (Preston CTC) David Lee, (Lytham St Annes) County Council) Apologies Mark Ellery (UCLan), Rob McDougall (Bae), Tom Shannon (West Lancashire), Ted Dempsey (Garstang) Lancashire Cycle Link The Chair welcomed Steve Kilner and Eddie Robertson from Lancashire Cycle Link. Lancashire Cycle Link is a facebook magazine with over 2500 members for people with an interest in cycling in the county. http://www.lancashirecyclinglink.co.uk/ 1. Minutes Agreed 2. Matters arising a) Guild Wheel (Ribble Link – A583). It was confirmed that £80,000 Community Levy Funding had been allocated to improve this section, in addition to the £20,000 already allocated by the County Council. Progress was dependent on getting the agreement of the De Hoghton Estate to improve the surface. b) Shared surfaces – A low upstand had been provided between the carriageway and footway on Fishergate to help blind and partially sighted people identify the edge of the footway. Other shared surface schemes were likely to have a similar upstands. Members of the meeting felt that a kerb with a low upstand might cause a hazard to cyclists if they had to cross onto the footway, though it is illegal for cyclists to ride on the footway.
    [Show full text]