There is so much history bound up in this area, yet it will all be lost when development starts soon on a block of 40 sheltered housing units. The site to be developed will be within yards of the Change Bridge and the canal and will cover most of the old wharf. How did this situation come about? The development could have been moved slightly, since it is an extensive site, to leave the wharf area clear. The wharf could have been emptied of landfill and filled with water to give a turning area or for short-term mooring.
In its place will be, as stated on the Grant of Planning Permission, “an interpretation board to explain and illustrate the function of the former canal wharf.” All that will be left will be the coping stones - which formed the boundary of the wharf - but not in situ. Again to comply with the Granting of Planning Permission these must be “carefully removed and stored by the applicant company before the commencement of development. The applicant company shall, when requested to do so, deliver the coping stones to such location for storage as the Local Planning Authority may specify.” It is meaningless to remove stones from their original site to re-use in a place for which they were never intended.


Why was this allowed to happen? Kendal Civic Society fought long and hard to save Thompson’s Wharf, even giving a heartfelt plea to the Planning Committee. It stood alone. Not British Waterways nor any other body concerned with the restoration of the Canal supported the Society or was at all opposed to the obliteration of Thompson’s Wharf and all its history, apart from requesting that the coping stones be removed. Consequently, permission was granted for this large development. How much more will be lost before the Canal is re-watered to Canal Head? The original ticket office is in line for demolition if plans, as yet in preparation, go through. Will the Canal Agent’s house, the covered wharf archways, and the Castle Foundry, amongst others be sacrificed so long as there is water for boaters? Kendal needs the Canal, it needs tourists and employment and all the benefits which the Canal will bring, but the destruction of Kendal’s past must not go unopposed. The Society has, successfully, recently argued for the Canal Head to be re-instated within the Conservation Area, but if all the remaining links with the Canal and Kendal’s rich history are to be preserved from the developer, then British Waterways, The Lancaster Canal Trust and all interested parties must realise how easily it can all be lost. Thompson’s Wharf is the wharf that got away. It need not have been. It must never happen again.
