Lapal Canal Trust - Mirrored Strategy

There are useful similarities between Lapal's East and West approach canals.

The Leasowes	Abbeyfields	St Mary's	Tunnel	Weoley Castle	Lodge Hill	Selly Oak Park
500	375	1320	3795 < - yards ->	894	1273	911
Parkland	Backland Meander	Heritage Flank		Heritage Flank	Backland Meander	Parkland
West-Phase-I	West-Phase-II	West-Phase-III		East-Phase-III	East-Phase-II	East-Phase-I

The two lengths of derelict canal, selected to be the Phase-1 projects at each end, both flank open recreational parkland; The Leasowes [W] and Selly Oak Park [E]. The potential impact on these amenities is immediately significant in providing an additional ‘water feature’ to stimulate a range of benefits for the community, particularly those that accrue from additional wildlife diversity and the general enhancement of traditional recreational activities. The Leasowes has already been restored to operate as an interim linear lake while the Selly Oak Park length is being targeted as the first site of pre-restoration works in the East. These two parkland sections were both substantially free from infill, making it possible for pre-restoration work to be undertaken by volunteers, and each has a masonry structure that has been (may be) restored by voluntary expertise; the spill weir [W] and Park Lodge Bridge [E]. These Parkland Sectors are each separated from their Navigation Links by a bridge; Heywood, A459, Mucklow Hill [W] and Harborne Lane, A4040 [E], that is a significant landmark on a busy A-road in each case.

The next two lengths of derelict Lapal canal, both proceed as backland meanders away from the Parklands towards the Tunnel Portals, forming a corridor which is now flanked by houses on both sides. Being a contour canal, one flank of houses is below water level and will require special restoration detail to ensure against future deterioration and related issues. In both cases, the opposite flank of houses is either at, or well above, water level. Houses that flank the offside (the non-towpath side) will benefit from 'moat security' and may wish to take imaginative steps to provide their gardens with a waterside patio and the like?

It is useful to note that some significant differences between the two Meanders also exist.

The Lodge Hill backland [Birmingham] is long (1500+ yards) and is substantially in-filled whereas the Abbeyfields backland (Narrows to Fordrove Bridge [W]) is significantly shorter (?? yards) and is free from in-fill. Conversely, the Lodge Hill sector has no significant obstacles to restoration whereas the Halesowen sector (south of Fordrove Bridge) has the very significant issue of the A456 crossing. A suitable engineering solution for this (e.g. a modern aqueduct, further 'down the hill', and re-aligned local approaches) is likely to be so significant that it is useful to view this as an additional sub-sector in the Western strategy. Similarly, the length of the Lodge Hill backland [E] and its need for a midway crossing bridge, suggests that this long meander could also become two separate restorations in the Eastern strategy.

The two final sectors both commence in the approximate vicinity of sites of historical significance that have become ‘isolated’ or ‘diminished’ by recent (post war) developments; Halesowen or St Mary’s Abbey [W] and Weoley Castle Ruins [E]). In the Eastern case, the restored canal can provide additional security from the possibility that the presently dry moat around the site, could become connected to the canal to isolate the Ruins against illegitimate access. Conversely, in the West, the canal would provide an additional water feature in the Abbeylands and thereby stimulate the provision of other recreational facilities. In both cases, the historical site is a significant attraction that should draw boating visitors in the future. Conversely, the canal towpath, as part of the Lapal Greenway, will provide improved access to both sites for the walker, jogger or cyclist.

Also, in both cases, there is ample 'uncommitted' land between the canal and the heritage itself that some imaginative design could lead to a development in which both artefacts benefit each other. Certainly for Weoley Castle, but for St Mary's too, there is the prospect of an adjoining 'visitor centre' premises large enough to also house a restaurant and sporting facilities to benefit the local community.

The parallel strategies for phased restorations leading incrementally towards the Tunnel Portals, assume interim limits of navigation. Fortunately, in all cases, there is adequate space in the vicinity of the interim limits to construct Winding Holes (as vessel turn-around ponds). The first pair of these is planned for Fordrove Bridge [W] and the west end of Selly Oak Park [E]. These will ensure that the ‘early’ Lapal restorations result in viable navigation extension arms to their respective main canals, even if the Tunnel and Final Approach restorations are held in abeyance for a significant period.