|
|
| Home | Search | Contact the IWAI | Join the IWAI |
|
Inland Waterways Association of Ireland
|
À PDF-format version of this document is
here
(890kB)Note, Click on the diagrams to see higher resolution versions. Become a Friend of the Ulster Canal.
For more information on the Ulster Canal, check out: |
The IWAI has made application to the Interreg III Programme for funding to begin restoration work on the Ulster Canal.
The project aims to begin restoration work on the Ulster Canal, and thereby to create a significant rural tourism industry and to provide a community resource.
This current project focuses mainly on the western end of the canal in Fermanagh and Monaghan (and to a lesser extent in Cavan), but ultimately we hope to see the canal restored all the way to Lough Neagh, extending the benefits to Counties Armagh and Tyrone. In the longer term, the restoration of the Ulster Canal could act as a catalyst for the restoration of several of the other historic waterways linked to Lough Neagh.
This document is largely derived from material included in the Interreg application. For further details, see contact section at the end.
IWAI is a long-established voluntary organisation that has, over the years, shown its capability in campaigning against waterways closures, for waterways development (long before there was a significant waterways tourism industry). In the early years of the Royal Canal's restoration, IWAI organised work-parties and a lock-gate factory; the very welcome increased state interest in waterways meant that that function was ultimately taken over by the Office of Public Works.
IWAI's fifteen branches, organising events on seven major waterways, are testament to our ability to organise voluntary activities, and we are a major provider of waterways-related information, having produced guidebooks, the biggest waterways website (www.iwai.ie) and our quarterly magazine Inland Waterways News.
The organisation can draw on a wide range of expertise from among its members to meet specific needs. However, although there are members who have relevant experience, the Association per se has limited experience of managing construction projects. For that reason, it is envisaged that we will appoint a professional Project Manager and a project board.
Interreg is a European Union initiative that aims to
… strengthen economic and social cohesion in the Community by promoting cross-border, transnational and interregional co-operation and balanced development of the European territory.
The programme applies to all borders in the EU: it is not confined to Ireland or to north-south matters. For example, Ireland and Wales are involved together in some Interreg projects.
Interreg has no interest in restoring canals per se. It is a regional development programme:
Within this context the overall aim of the Programme is to promote sustainable integrated regional development across the eligible region by building on the progress made under previous INTERREG programmes and by concentrating on the strategic dimension of cross-border development which involves and benefits local communities.
Thus any application for funding has to be justified in terms of its regional development benefits. More specifically, it must match one of Interreg's four priorities:
Priority 1: Integrated Local Development Strategies
Priority 2: Supporting Physical Infrastructure and the Environment
Priority 3: Civic and Community Networking
Priority 4: Technical Assistance
Each Priority is in turn broken down into Measures; IWAI's application falls under Measure 4, which aims to "diversify, develop and strengthen the rural economy in disadvantaged cross border areas." So IWAI's Interreg application is not about canal restoration: it is about benefiting the rural economy in the cross-border areas along part of the route of the Ulster Canal.
The Ulster Canal (see Figure 1), linking
Lough Neagh to Lough Erne, was opened in 1841. It is 45.7 miles long and has 26
locks. It was intended as part of a chain of waterways linking Limerick to
Belfast via the Shannon, the Ballinamore & Ballyconnell Canal (Shannon to Erne),
the Ulster Canal, Lough Neagh and the Lagan Navigation. However, it was
relatively unsuccessful for three reasons: its locks were the narrowest in
Ireland so that expensive transhipment was required, its water supply was
inadequate and one of the other links, the Ballinamore & Ballyconnell Canal,
closed after only a few years.
In 1994 the Ballinamore & Ballyconnell Canal was reopened, not to carry freight but as a tourism resource, renamed the Shannon-Erne Waterway. This cross-border project is seen as having been successful in promoting tourism and building confidence in its rural area, and in 1997 the northern and southern governments commissioned a consortium of consultants to undertake a feasibility study into the re-opening of the other main cross-border waterway, the Ulster Canal. That study (referred to as the Main Report) was updated in June 2001. A Funding Study was carried out by Pricewaterhousecoopers in 2003 and this proposal is based largely on those studies.
In the meantime, inland waterways became one of the functions allocated under the Good Friday Agreement to a cross-border implementation body, Waterways Ireland. It has responsibility for seven major navigations on the island: the Grand and Royal Canals, the Rivers Barrow, Lower Bann, Erne and Shannon and the Shannon-Erne Waterway. It is also responsible for bringing forward proposals for the re-opening of the Ulster Canal, which it has done in the reports mentioned above.
Departmental responsibility for Waterways Ireland rests with the Department of Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs in the republic of Ireland and with the Department of Culture, Arts and Leisure in Northern Ireland. It is accountable to the North/South Ministerial Council.
The 2003 Funding Study concluded that:
The scale of the capital funding required … makes it difficult to find any immediately available public sources …..
The most likely potential source of funding at this point appears to be the next Interreg programme for Ireland/Northern Ireland covering the period 2006–2012 ….
… inclusion in …future funding programmes will depend on the political priorities at that time ….
… all the necessary preparatory work [must be] completed before the private sector is asked to commit resources ….
In order to assist in the progress of the project, it has been suggested that some form of non profit-making trust might be established to ensure the momentum is maintained and that the most appropriate partnerships are developed. The approach would allow a concerted effort to be made in the promotion of the project and also provide a means for increasing public awareness and support. However, given the scale of the project and the extensive experience in the management and restoration of canals that Waterways Ireland already has, the sole utilisation of a trust in the management of funding and technical aspects of the restoration project, may not be the most appropriate approach to move the project forward. The trust could nevertheless play an important role in the restoration o the Ulster Canal which highlights the importance of partnering arrangements being established to provide the appropriate mechanisms that are required to move the project forward and obtain the necessary funding.
The Main Report (updated June 2001) to Waterways Ireland on the Reopening of the Ulster Canal includes some "lessons emerging from the Shannon Erne Waterway Experience":
The setting up of an appropriate framework or forum with participation by all relevant stakeholders allowed for a more cohesive approach.
A clear structure with all the necessary decision making powers needs to be in place as early as possible to successfully co-ordinate the reconstruction/development processes
Support structures should be in place at the same time reconstruction is undertaken to avoid some of the lags in development experienced along the SEW
Appropriate resources need to be allocated well in advance
An integrated approach to tourism development yields far greater results
Early community education and involvement is essential. Specific, specially targeted and tailored human resource training is needed
A clearly defined, integrated and understood set of objectives would lead to a clear vision for the project with a sense of purpose and direction. The link between developing a waterway product and developing tourism as a driving tool for economic development in the catchment needs to be explored further in light of the lessons learned along the Shannon–Erne Waterway.
It is in the light of the existing reports that this Project has been designed. The restoration of the Ulster Canal has been much studied and has been extensively discussed in the area, including at meetings organised by IWAI. However, Waterways Ireland is empowered only to carry out studies of the canal. Although that could change in the future, the Inland Waterways Association of Ireland (a voluntary body and registered charity with branches both north and south) has decided to take the initiative in beginning work, albeit in a small way, on the restoration project. We have extensive political support, from the central NI and RoI governments, from local authorities in the area and from a variety of local groups in the canal area.
The long-term aim is the restoration of the Ulster Canal from the Erne to Lough Neagh, as the locus for significant rural tourism industries and as a community resource. The 2003 Funding Study mentioned above estimated the capital cost at £90m at 2000 prices, with construction taking place over at least seven years. That is well outside the scope of the present project, but provides a context.
There are three medium-term aims:
to reopen the Ulster Canal at the north-eastern end, from Lough Neagh to Benburb in Co Tyrone
to reopen the Ulster Canal at the south-western end, from the Finn (a tributary of the Erne) to Clones in Co Monaghan
to create a "boating magnet" zone at the upstream end of Upper Lough Erne: a nexus of boat-related services (marinas, mechanics, restaurants, pub etc) large enough to attract Irish and British owners to base significant numbers of boats there and attractive enough for hirers to want to spend time there.
The two re-openings will
create an additional destination for boat traffic (hire-boats and private boats from the Erne; only private boats at present from L Neagh)
generate additional tourism revenue (from walkers, cyclists and anglers and other visitors, as well as boaters)
provide an additional community facility
allow for the building of a significant boating centre, with a network of related rural-based boating-oriented industries and services.
Even these aims require more time and money than will be available in the short term but, again, they provide a context. The Framework Project itself confines restoration work to two sections between the Finn and Clones, at the south-western end, with some actions in areas along the entire length of the Canal.
The short-term aim, the aim of the current project, is to begin work on the physical restoration at the south-western end of the Ulster Canal (Fermanagh and Monaghan) while simultaneously working with local communities to plan how they can maximise the social, economic and environmental benefits of restoration.
There are two principal actions or strands in the project:
· the construction strand
· the community action strand.
The construction strand in turn has two elements or activities:
re-excavation and re-watering of the line of the Ulster Canal from the Canal Stores in Clones to the Lackey River aqueduct. This activity will help towards the longer-term re-opening of the canal, but more significantly it will provide visible evidence in Clones (and surrounding area) that restoration is under way. The restored stretch will accommodate certain leisure activities, although of course not the full range that will be available later
creation of a new stretch of navigation from the Finn River near Derrykerrib Bridge to Lough Sarah and Castle Saunderson. This activity will provide a new boating destination at the upstream end of Upper Lough Erne, with the potential for supporting the Youth and Tourism project at Castle Saunderson. It will also help towards the creation of the boating magnet zone.
The community action strand encompasses six activities:
consolidating support for the canal in the area
attracting external attention to the area and its tourism potential
helping communities to explore the canal's potential
help communities to exploit the canal's potential
promoting voluntary restoration work along stretches of the canal
helping entrepreneurs to exploit the canal's potential.
The Association believes that the restoration, management and use of waterways are not simply matters of engineering and administration. A working waterway depends for its success not alone on what the navigation authority does, but on the interaction between that authority, the users (in several different categories), the local people and the providers of goods and services, as well as on the physical, heritage and natural environments and the availability of information.
From the perspective of a boating user, a waterway is attractive if
It works: there is enough water, the locks are operational, there are places to tie up, and the navigation authorities manage it and provide assistance where necessary. Getting that right is the job of the waterway restorers or builders and of the navigation authority
Basic boat-related services are available: water, diesel, pump-out, perhaps electricity and service blocks, mechanics. A boat based in the area will require more elaborate facilities including marinas and access to a wider range of electrical, mechanical and other services. Different Irish waterways have different arrangements for the provision of these services, with some provided by the private sector and some not at all. A planned approach to provision will improve the quality of the boating experience
the waterway and its surroundings are attractive and well kept
there is a range of entertainment and activities available, catering for all weather conditions and for different tastes
there are good pubs, restaurants, shops and music venues
the waterway is unthreatening: no vandalism, no stone-throwing, no noisy late-night events keeping visitors awake
local people are friendly
information on services and on history and environment is readily available
transport (usually by hackney) is available.
While that list may seem to concentrate over-much on the perspective of the user (and of one category of user at that, although similar lists could be generated for other categories like walkers, anglers, cyclists and bird-watchers), it is intended to make the point that the success of a waterway in attracting visitors is not solely a matter of what the navigation authority does. Nor does it depend solely on what major providers like hire-companies do: as one expert has commented, once the hire-boat leaves its base the quality of the holiday-makers' experience is (almost) entirely out of the hands of the hire-company.
To remain with the boating perspective for the moment, the quality of the visitors' experience, and thus the success of the waterway, are in fact dependent on six major factors:
the weather, which can be provided for but can be neither predicted nor controlled
the actions of the navigation authority
the other users
the hire companies (where appropriate)
the services provided by businesses along the waterway
the attitude of the local community and the activities of community groups.
A successful Ulster Canal will require that a range of facilities and services be provided for leisure-users of different kinds. Many of them can be provided by SMEs or micro-enterprises, and many of them are compatible with other rural activities. For example, in other areas waterside farmers have opened marinas: storing (say) 50 boats at €1,000 or more each can bring in a sizeable income, even before the marina provides (and charges for) ancillary services. Persons skilled with diesel engines find a ready demand for their services from boat-owners.
Tourists use waterside facilities like restaurants, but they are also interested in travelling some distance away from the water to take part in other activities such as golf and quad-bike-driving. Chapter 9 of the Rural Enterprise report (2000), prepared for the RoI National Spatial Strategy, makes that very point: "Currently, there are indications of an integrated approach to tourism development in the study areas. Examples are the closer linking of boating activities with land-based recreation such as golf and touring locally, and the promotion of product packages by a group of providers on the basis of initiatives taken by the Waterway promotions company."
Thinking on a larger scale and for the longer term, an integrated approach to development at the upstream end of Upper Lough Erne could see the creation of a "boating magnet area" to rival Enniskillen, Carrick-on-Shannon or Athlone. Such an area would provide services for private boat-owners (whose spending power is usually overlooked) and for hirers alike, and could also provide for other water-borne activities such as canoeing, canoe polo, training and dinghy-sailing. There could be a link with the Youth and Tourism plan for Castle Saunderson, while complementary land-based developments could include pubs, restaurants, shops and other entertainment and activities.
The area's proximity to Dublin and Belfast means that it should be possible to attract many more boats to the region, and Clones would add an extra range of shops to those available in Belturbet: there are relatively few places on the lake with easy access to shops.
IWAI believes that, where local people benefit from the presence of a waterway, they take an interest in it, thus improving the quality of the visitors' experiences. The benefits should not be solely economic and should not be confined to service-providers. A canal is a leisure and recreational resource for an area. Canalside walks are very popular, and set distances can be marked out for those following exercise routines. Canoe polo has proven to be a popular activity for young people on the Royal Canal. And restoration offers potential for local anglers and even for rowing.
The Community Action strand of this proposal is not an optional add-on: it is what will bridge the gap between (in the words of the Main Report) the "waterway product" and "developing tourism". In other words, it is what will transform engineering into a complete and enjoyable holiday package for the visitor and a social and economic resource for the area.
Most of Ireland's waterways became recreational facilities more or less by accident, and certainly without much overall planning. The main exception was the Shannon–Erne Waterway, but even there the planning was inadequate, with engineering considerations well attended to but perhaps some deficiency in "support structures", "an integrated approach to tourism development" and "community education and involvement".
IWAI is well positioned to work with local communities and entrepreneurs to maximise the benefits to be derived from restoration. Representing a significant body of users, it has extensive knowledge of their needs. It has excellent contacts with navigation authorities and hire-companies as well as experience of what has worked well in Ireland; contacts with IWA (GB) and through Inland Waterways International offer further opportunities for adopting best practice. It can help local communities and entrepreneurs to realise the potential benefits of restoration, while at the same time keeping within the bounds of what is realistic and practicable.
We have examined four options:
(covered elsewhere in this document)
The restoration of the Ulster Canal has been discussed in the area for many years, but with no progress made. We fear that, if nothing happens, people will lose hope and the present goodwill towards the project will dissipate. Furthermore, the studies on which we have based our application will become more and more out of date, either losing their relevance or having to be updated again. Accordingly, we are convinced that it is right to make a start — albeit a small start — on the restoration process now.
We believe that the Community Action Strand of our project is essential, and we would be most reluctant to cut it back. On the Construction Strand, dropping the Clones stretch would mean doing without a visible focal point for the project, and one that can be used, albeit not connected to another navigation. On the other hand, dropping the work at the Finn River would mean no new destination to sustain the interest of boaters, no progress with the revised canal route and no link to the Youth & Tourism project at Castle Saunderson.
The next stage up, linking the Clones stretch to the Finn River, is simply beyond our resources at present.
We also considered the option of beginning work at the Lough Neagh end of the canal, but as a stand-alone project it would have no cross-border element and would therefore be inappropriate for Interreg funding. We are however in the process of making application to the Lough Neagh Partnership for funds to commence work on providing navigation clearance under the M1 motorway crossing on the Blackwater near Dungannon.
The Inland Waterways Association of Ireland is governed by a Council made up of Senior officers (President, Vice President, Hon Secretary, Hon Treasurer) elected by the Annual General Meeting, the Chairpersons of 6 standing committees (also elected by AGM), two representatives of each of the 15 branches of the association and 6 ordinary members of the association (also elected by the AGM). The immediate Past President is an ex-officio member of Council. Representatives of three other bodies (Ulster Waterways Group, Royal Canal Amenity Group and Kilbeggan Harbour Amenity Group) also sit on Council. The Editor of Inland Waterways News attends Council meetings by invitation.
An Executive Committee consisting of the Senior Officers, the Chairpersons of the 6 standing committee and the immediate Past President looks after the day to day running of the association. The Editor of Inland Waterways News attends Executive Committee meetings by invitation.
The framework project will be managed by a project board made up of representatives of IWAI, key stakeholders and local interests, from both sides of the border. IWAI has already begun discussions with representatives of stakeholder organisations and local interests and has received agreement from a number of organisations to nominate members to the project board.
The composition of the project board will be submitted to the Council of the Association for approval and the Council will have oversight of the management of the project.
We intend to appoint two full-time staff to run the project.
The Project Manager will run the project as a whole but will be particularly concerned with the Construction Strand. This person will report directly to the project board. The Consulting Engineers appointed to manage the Construction Strand of the framework project will report to the Project Manager.
The Community Animateur will report to the Project Manager and will take responsibility for all projects in the Community Strand of the framework project.
For each sub-project, a plan will be produced prior to the commencement of work. The plans will detail the objectives of the project, the work to be done, the deliverables to be achieved, the timescales and resources for the work, the costs associated with the work, the key milestones and the major dependencies and risks. Plans must be approved by the project board.
Progress against these plans will be reviewed by the Project Manager on a regular basis (defined in the plan at the outset). Status reports will be prepared and submitted to the project board, detailing the progress against schedule and budget, key milestones achieved, major deviations from plan, revised plans for the coming period and major risks to the successful achievement of the plan. Significant deviations from original plans must be approved by the project board.
The Project Manager will be responsible for the management of day to day expenditure associated with the Framework Project. He/she will prepare an annual budget for these expenses and will report regularly on its out-turn to the project board.
Funding for projects undertaken by other groups, particularly in the Community Strand, will be only on the basis of plans approved by the project board; disbursements relating to these projects will in general be made only on foot of receipts for costs actually incurred. For projects or tasks undertaken by external contractors, payment terms will be agreed as part of the tender process.
All aspects of the project will conform with EU policies on competition, the award of public contracts, environmental protection and the application of the principle of equal opportunities.
The Association will maintain formal books of account (separate from the Association's standard accounts) for the project and these books will be audited annually by an external auditor. Separate bank accounts will be maintained for the project and two signatures will be required on all cheques drawn on the project bank accounts.
The major risks to the project can be classified under the following headings:
· Technical
· Environmental
· Land Ownership
· Personnel
· Political.
ESBI and Ferguson & McIlveen have conducted an extensive feasibility study on the restoration of the entire canal for Waterways Ireland, acting on behalf of the two government departments DCAL (NI) and DGC&RA (RoI), and our proposals are based on this work. As with any construction project, it is possible that the work will encounter unforeseen technical difficulties. However, we believe that adequate contingency has been included in the engineering costing to allow for this.
The new route proposed for the canal at the western end passes through environmentally sensitive areas. The initial work in the Construction Strand will include an extensive Environmental Impact Assessment and we believe that we will be able to address any issues arising from this in the design and construction phase.
An early piece of work in the project will be to acquire land needed for the restoration of the canal. Initial discussions with some of the land-owners have indicated that they are willing to sell their land. It is possible that some land-owner will emerge who is either unwilling to sell or asks too high a price for the property. Since the project will not have compulsory purchase powers (such as could be available if the project were being managed by a public body), we will be forced to rely on our ability to negotiate a suitable deal. It may be possible in a few areas to slightly alter the route to avoid these issues.
We will be heavily dependent on two key personnel in this framework project: the Project Manager and the Community Animateur. Unplanned departure of either of these personnel would adversely affect the project. We can minimise the risk by careful selection of the individuals from the outset, by adherence to strict project management and record keeping and by close supervision of the project by the project board.
A deterioration in the political situation in Northern Ireland, especially if it led to widespread violence, would adversely affect the project. However, the project has widespread support from all sides, and we intend to maintain that support throughout.
The project would run from mid 2004 until the end of 2008. An overview timetable has been included in the Gantt chart at the end of this document and some of the highlights are noted below.
The Project Manager and Community Animateur will be engaged as soon as funding is available and a project office established in the project area.
Initial work will include Land Acquisition, Planning Permission, Environmental Impact Assessment etc. Actual construction work is envisaged to commence in 2006.
As soon as the Community Animateur has been engaged work will commence on a range of project aimed at building up support for the overall restoration and helping communities and entrepreneurs to position themselves to take advantage of the canal as restoration proceeds. The Animateur will also encourage the organisation of voluntary restoration projects.
Under EU Rules, Interreg can fund up to a maximum of 75% of the project cost. IWAI has secured agreement from a charitable trust in Northern Ireland to provide up to stg£1.0M by way of matching funds.
In summary, the project budget is:
|
Non-Capital Costs |
£777,324.65 |
€1,121,518.75 |
|
Capital Costs |
£2,162,121.11 |
€3,119,493.74 |
|
IWAI Project Management |
£301,498.50 |
€ 435,000.00 |
|
Community Action Strand |
£328,529.40 |
€ 474,000.00 |
|
Project Review Costs |
£61,755.34 |
€ 89,100.19 |
|
Total Project Costs |
£3,631,228.99 |
€5,239,112.67 |
For further details on this proposal, please contact:
Colin Becker
2 Kylemore Park, Taylors Hill, Galway
Tel: +353 (0)91 527511 Mobile: +353 (0)87 24 26 249
Email Colin via our email form
All content is Copyright © The Inland Waterways Association of Ireland - all rights reserved. |