Jump to content

RS2021

Full Members
  • Posts

    631
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Everything posted by RS2021

  1. I've seen tread drift before, but his one's really gone down the pan
  2. Stupid question, but if the BAs ringfenced budget is only for navigation only what does the toll actually pay for? There are no locks to maintain, no old tunnels and aqueducts. No ancient reservoirs nearly collapsing potentially destroying whole towns. The banks are largely 'natural'. Since the recent debate on flooding, we discover that dredging is the responsibility of the EA. OK there are a few free mooring spots which the BA has to maintain, but as we know they are starting to charge for these. Have I missed anything? Maybe we should encourage the BA to charge for the remaining free 24 hour mooring and then reduce the toll to zero.
  3. But if all you have to do is download the app, think of all the pennies that are saved in printing costs... I'm happy to embrace new technologies, but there is something special about a paper map. I can waste many hours looking at them.
  4. Next move. BA takes over the mooring complete with up an running payment platform which it can roll out across other sites...
  5. NBDs Fair Viscount 1 &2 are up for sale on NYA.
  6. The third one - run by Miles comes up second in an Internet search now Richard's is down. Miles did take his down sometime ago and announced he was re-launching as a blog. But its still branded as a 'forum'.
  7. I usually find the best place to see information like this is the documents page on BAs planning portal https://planning.broads-authority.gov.uk/PublicAccessDocs/planningdocs.aspx?appType=Development Control&appNumber=BA/2021/0456/FUL
  8. Another comparison would be Bannau Brycheiniog - like the Lake District a proper National Park. In 2016 Beacon Park Boats built a new boathouse and basin as a new base for their hire fleet on a greenfield site in the National Park. So boating businesses and National Parks are not necessarily incompatable.
  9. I see Horning Pleasurecraft have got their planning consent to extend the marina.
  10. RS2021

    Richardsons

    Great to see some major investment in the current economic times. I'm not sure how long they plan to take to do it, but the work at Stalham looks very significant. New lodges, masses of new moorings (new basins and basins extended - visitor moorings on the main river), canopies over the hire fleet hand over area for wet days, visitor centre (I wonder if Richardson's or the BA will run that?) etc etc. I don't know how to post it directly here, but this link will take you to the master plan on the BA's planning area https://planning.broads-authority.gov.uk/PublicAccessDocs/planningDocs.aspx?doc=/sites/planning/2023/Documents/Development Control/BA20230443FUL/7762-p03g proposed master plan-compressed.pdf
  11. I see the BA have introduced a new policy for non payment of Tolls. Check out Bridgecrafts Facebook page to see their new enforcement equipment 🥺
  12. Opening hours yes, but reviews... that's a minefield and I fully understand a business that doesn't engage. Most businesses don't stand a chance and many a good business has been destroyed by a rogue influencer/reviews. I do look at reviews for businesses, but sometimes I wonder why I bother.
  13. Whilst I believe it's only a matter of time before JP goes. You have to ask what next for the Broads. JP has been very good at maintaining spending on the Broads (at toll payers expense). Elsewhere everyone has been cost constrained. Whoever takes over will no doubt have to implement quite severe cost cutting. It is quite likely it will affect both 'National Park' and Navigation functions. I only hope that whoever comes next is better at engaging stakeholders on the Broads. I also love the canals and would really like to hire a boat to do the Huddersfield Narrow canal. I'm very hesitant to do so as with current CRT management and funding there is no guarantee the canal would be even open when I hired a boat. At present between the Broads Authority and CRT, the Broads seem to be in a much better situation. But, for how long...
  14. We are living in very economically challenging times. Local authorities are saving costs. National Park authorities are saving costs. The Broads Authority is still spend spend spend. This has been spotted by MPs. This is the beginning of the end of JP. However, I have no doubt he will linger on well past his sell by date. He has removed all those from around him who would have a quiet word in his ear.
  15. Just wondering how the number of people aboard applies to boats going under Ludham Bridge when the river is up...
  16. In reading both the James Knight blog and the BRAG open letter there appear to be two issues at the heart of this debate. Firstly in a time of economic stress where many businesses are having to make difficult cost saving decisions why does the BA appear to consider itself above this and secondly the way the BA apportions these overheads between navigation and NP appropriate. On the first issue I find it astonishing that the BA does not even consider reduction in overheads an option. It would be the first option most businesses would consider in such circumstances. It would be interesting to compare how other National Parks and Navigation Authorities are tackling the current economic climate. On the apportionment of overheads I know from experience that these are as much an art as a science. But... accounts need to be independently audited. I don’t know if the accounts for last year have been prepared yet, but I would expect to see a statement of the accounting principles by which the BA apportions its overheads. I would then expect to see an opinion expressed buy the auditors as to the suitability/legality of this basis. James Knight states that the BHBF’s barrister is of the opinion that the shift of overheads from NP to navigation functions is illegal. In such circumstances I do not believe any independent auditor could sign off accounts prepared on the current basis without at least considering the apportionment methodology and providing a robust counter argument. I strongly suspect that the BA will not have told their auditors of the controversy surrounding this issue and will simply expect the auditors to take the BA’s word that everything is OK. Maybe someone should draw their attention to this issue. I’m sure they won’t want to risk the reputational hit of signing off potentially illegal accounts for such a high profile client. Another issue which also jumps right out is the roll of BA Directors. Directors of any business have the obligation to act legally. The legality of their current actions is being challenged. As with the accounts I sincerely hope that the Directors are simply not being asked to rubber stamp this issue, but are asking critical questions and obtaining their own legal opinion (not just the opinion of the Chief Executive). For Directors there could be personal consequences and liabilities if they are found to have approved an illegal policy. James Knight is right in his assessment that protecting BA jobs is not a statutory function of the BA. It’s a brutal assessment, and I wish job loss on no one, but the BA’s insistence on trying to protect a handful of jobs at head office may ultimately cost dozens of jobs across the Broadland economy.
  17. I always understood that if a boat (and this does not apply to just the broads) was carrying more then 12 passengers (no mention of how many crew) then it was subject to different regulations to both the crew and boat. e.g. the master must possess an appropriate boat masters certificate and the boat carry enough life saving equipment for all the passengers and crew etc. A bit like you need a different category of driving licence to drive a bus or a HGV.
  18. Not on their own they dont, but those are two of the Beam Exemptions in the Vessel Dimension Bylaws, so if you are compliant with them they do. The bylaws also give beam exemptions for other craft such as maintenance craft, older craft and even replica sailing wherrys.
  19. Exemptions (e) if the vessel has not since the preceding 1 January made on the stretch of water in question four passages and if also notice of the proposed passage specifying the start and finishing places has been given in writing to the Authority at least seven days before the start of the passage; or (f) while it is undergoing test or trials and is in the charge of a person bona fide employed by a boatyard provided that notice of the movement has been given to the Authority at least seven days before the start of the test or trials; or Now, I wonder if any notice was given...
  20. I think under GDPR its down to is the data being used for the purposed for which it was collected. I haven't read BA's Ts & Cs, but would be surprised if it didn't permit use of data for the business of the Authority, rather than just the bylaws. You may be interested in clause 37 of the broads act. "37(1)The Authority shall have all the powers of an owner or occupier (including, in particular, power to take criminal or civil proceedings) for the purpose of preventing unlawful interference with any staithe within the Broads, or with any rights exercisable by any person in relation to any such staithe." Whether the boatyard would be in breach of GDPR is another matter. There has ben comments on here about standard Ts & Cs which you are deemed to have read and agreed to. However, at least on the interenet, when it comes to personal data the principle is you must actively opt in to give permission for your date to be shared. Unless of course the BA would argue it requires the date for 'statutory' purposes. Really time to consult a lawyer who specialises in GDPR I think...
  21. BA beam restrictions. Part 1 (Beam Restrictions) (a) Vessels having a beam of 3.8 metres (12ft 6ins) or less. No restriction. (b) Vessels having a beam exceeding 3.8 metres (12ft 6ins). River Wensum: Upstream of Foundry Bridge River Yare: Upstream of Trowse Eye Bird’s Dyke and Surlingham Fleet Dyke Rockland Boat Dyke, Fleet Dyke and Short Dyke Langley Dyke Hardley Dyke River Chet: The entire waterway River Waveney: Geldeston Boat Dyke River Bure: Upstream of “The Rising Sun”, Coltishall Upton Dyke Hermitage Dyke, Acle River Ant: The entire waterway and its navigable branches including Barton Broad River Thurne: Upstream of Dungeon Corner Catfield Dyke and its branches Waxham Cut Meadow Dyke Candle Dyke Womack Dyke and Womack Water (c) Vessels having a beam exceeding 4.27 metres (14ft). River Waveney: Upstream of Beccles Town Road Bridge River Bure: The entire waterway including Ranworth Dam and South Walsham Fleet Dyke River Thurne: The entire waterway downstream of Dungeon Corner (d) Vessels having a beam exceeding 5.5 metres (18ft). Haddiscoe New Cut: The entire waterway River Waveney: The entire waterway downstream of Beccles Town Road Bridge (e) Vessels having a beam exceeding 6.10 metres (20ft). River Wensum: Downstream of Foundry Bridge River Yare: Downstream of Trowse Eye
  22. It's not just those rivers. You can't take it on many smaller Broads as well. E.g Rockland, Surlingham etc. I think many of the places you can't go are places which make the Broads for me. So I'd say probably not, but... it is a nice boat. What concerns me more it whether you are aware when you book. The Hoseasons Website is fairly clear. But try looking for any information on NYAs own Website. I have yet to find it and they even quote a similar boat as having a 3.78m beam which would mean it's not restricted.
  23. I thought a hybrid from Martham would be a leccy bottom and a flappy top.
  24. If you're happy to leave it to the last minute, you could always wait and see what the weather/rivers are doing close to the time. Or if you book with Richardsons would they let you upgrade/downgrade at the last minute?
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

For details of our Guidelines, please take a look at the Terms of Use here.