I thought about the other water towers I’d climbed. The final part, the push towards the roof, was always the
most laborious, usually involving actually getting on the main water tank itself. It was almost as if
the access to the roof was an afterthought.
Which it almost certainly was. The most important thing was the water tank itself. Providing access
to that was probably enough for most architects; as typified by the designs of the water towers at Severalls and West Park. The water
tank also dictated the dimensions of the water tower, so an extensive, elaborate stairway past the tank would’ve
simply pushed out the tower’s dimensions and increased its cost.
However, inspection would be required of the tank and its covering to ensure there were no leaks nor that nothing
nasty had fallen in. Hence the requirement to be able to get to the top of the tank, but it was by the tightest
squeeze possible.
Howell’s trick of placing a ladder over the tank itself for access to the roof was
also used by Hine (as seen at both Rauceby and St. Mary’s).
The other commonality between water towers was the sheer amount of empty space in them. All the lower levels are typically empty,
sometimes used as store rooms (with appalling access) or simply left as empty spaces with flimsy ladders hugging the sides
of the wall. The reason was simple; you had to get your main water tank one hundred feet up in the area to provide enough
pressure. Anything below that would simply be at a lower pressure and of less use.
Therefore Cane Hill’s main water tank is right at the top of the tower, in the area occupied by
the twenty four lancet windows. And I don’t believe this was for totally decorative reasons; illumination of
the tank for inspection was probably a necessity and so Howell provided the extra lancet windows.
Original descriptions of the water tower mentioned five levels whilst I listed six. I believe this difference
was due to me counting the joists on which the main water tank sits as an extra level.
