The Authority Oversteps The Mark?

[Guest]

40 minutes ago, JennyMorgan said:

I quote from 'Granny's' letter in the EDP, see following picture. Dear Professor Burgess, please read what you, or your ghost writer, has written in the EDP, inwardly digest and then ask yourself whether the same comments might not equally apply to Mr Knight's yurts. The answer is blatantly obvious, don't you think? A rather silly letter in my honest and sincere opinion.

Seriously its readily moveable is she serious its bolted to the ground multiple times , it too BA a few month's to realise its potential ? Er like 2 yrs and only then because questions were being asked , bedsides should planning be sought before the installation ??? After all plenty of times BA have demand structures be removed because planning hadn't been applied for and spent a lot of money in seeing that done , why can't they see that leading by example and not pretending they are above the law is the right way to behave ! 

[grendel]

definition - yurt

A circular tent of felt or skins on a collapsible framework, used by nomads in Mongolia, Siberia, and Turkey.

the definition of nomads - they move around, thus the yurt is by definition a temporary structure.

just pick it up and move it every few months (turn the door to face a new view).

I used to do viking re-enactment, we had a tent 24 foot by 12 foot (by about 10 foot high) this had a wooden frame -  6 people could pick it up fully assembled and move it anywhere it was needed, assembly from flat was about 20 minutes, and that was with all the 12 foot timbers

[JennyMorgan]

I agree with Ricardo in that the Authority should lead by example. However, it doesn't mean that they should apply for prior consent for their tent as it is, by definition, a temporary structure. If their temporary structure doesn't require consent then neither should Mr Knight's.  Goose and ganders and the good thereof springs to mind on this one. Yes, lead by example, the Authority should apply the same rules to themselves as to others. 

Does anyone honestly believe that 'Granny's' letter was really written by the good lady? Perhaps it was actually written by the Doctor!

[grendel]

It could almost be construed that Mr Knight is being persecuted by the authority for not toeing the party line.

[JennyMorgan]

10 hours ago, marshman said:

Works both ways though, Pete!! Those yurts look pretty permanent to me - you would get pretty miffed if some appeared in your view from the bottom of your garden and they hadn't permission!

 

We agree, again! Yes, it does work both ways, I really can't argue with that.

 If I hang out of my bedroom window, when the leaves are off the trees, with a pair of binoculars I can see the camp site. As the crow flies I suppose that we are a mile and a half apart. I am a bit miffed at the roof on what was the shop but those yurts are pretty inconspicuous in comparison.

When I train to Norwich that Authority boat tent, bright white, really does stand out, I hope that for the Broad's sake that not too many boat yards follow the BA's legal but nevertheless poor example. Unlike the boat tent I don't find the yurts visually offensive. By the way, NOT an anti BA comment, I would find that boat tent offensive no matter who had erected it.

[dnks34]

58 minutes ago, grendel said:

It could almost be construed that Mr Knight is being persecuted by the authority for not toeing the party line.

Well put and I completely agree. 

[Timbo]

2 hours ago, JennyMorgan said:

Does anyone honestly believe that 'Granny's' letter was really written by the good lady?

I'd say 90% BA Planning Department, with a signature penned by the dear lady. I'd be interested to hear Boatingman's opinion, but it reads like a pro forma statement. 

[Boatingman]

I would agree with Timbo that some of the wording in the letter is direct extracts from planning legisilation

What you cannot do with planning is directly compare one permission with another, planning history and any conditions attached to permitted permissions have to be taken into consideration.

That is why you need the full information to make a considered comment.

Ray

[marshman]

I think that is pretty relevant! What we do know is that there are some differences in opinion and before we line up in allegiance order, perhaps we should wait for the facts! If we had waited for the facts at Thorpe Island, we could have saved many many pages of supposition!

This is a personal view but I think it somewhat below the standards of this forum to call individuals "names" which could even be a tad derogatory - do we even know that Prof Burgess is one of those hallowed persons everyone  on this forum now seems to call her? Very few of you have even met her yet feel it appropriate to call her by other than her proper name?

Probably me being sensitive but then I am...!

[JennyMorgan]

Marsh, with respect most of the higher echelon have gained nicknames along the rhond! Grey Beard for Dr Packman for example, terms of endearment don't you know! Nicknames have long been the custom in this neck of the woods, often gained as a nipper and such names often remain for life. Prof. Burgess is an elderly lady, the matriarch of the Authority, albeit manipulated and played by one who is technically her underling, so Granny she is and Granny I suspect she'll stay. There are far less elegant terms out there but they would be undeserved. No disrespect intended. 

Re the facts, please, PLEASE read Prof. Burgess's letter in the EDP, penned I suspect by Dr Packman, but the facts are clear, a temporary structure does NOT need consent, the official BA dictate as outlined in the EDP says so so who am I to argue that point? No other criteria or conditions mentioned.  At the latest planning meeting the yurts were described by one committee member as being flimsy. Well, not being permanent structures then what else was expected?  

A friend of mine was at the planning committee meeting and apparently rudeness was very much a feature. Clearly the whole debacle is becoming one of farce and absolute silliness, regretful in the extreme, far more worrying than a few tongue in cheek nicknames! In my days on the Nav Com the recipient's clearly used to find their nicknames amusing, indeed maybe those without such monikers were a tad disappointed. In return us lot have long been The Little People, good for the goose being good for the gander!

[Timbo]

25 minutes ago, marshman said:

This is a personal view but I think it somewhat below the standards of this forum to call individuals "names" which could even be a tad derogatory - do we even know that Prof Burgess is one of those hallowed persons everyone  on this forum now seems to call her? Very few of you have even met her yet feel it appropriate to call her by other than her proper name?

I agree with Marshman to a certain extent. There is a strict academic naming system in the UK, unlike the USA.  Holding a titular chair in a former polytechnic, and not one of the seven ancient universities, the correct title to use for the current Chair of The Broads Authority is Miss or Mrs Burgess, in the same way as your medical consultant is a Dr and the surgeon is a 'Mr'. The title 'Mrs' is the honorific. Mrs Burgess may like to use her doctorate if she has one, a titular professorship or 'emeritus' does not necessarily mean that she does, but without looking, I assume she has one. In that case, she could be referred to as Dr Burgess.

To be honest, all these 'titles' are just cobblers unless you know what all the letters mean, and they don't always mean what you think they mean. For example, Oxford and Cambridge will just give you an MA on application three to seven years after your Bachelor of Arts Degree. Whereas in other universities an MA implies a further three years of study. A Fellow of the Royal Geographical Society and a Fellow of the Royal Historical Society may sound similar. In one case your peers examine closely your research and award a fellowship on merit. In the other, you have a job that is loosely connected to the field and pay £120 a year for the privilege. So you get quite a few taxi drivers, lorry drivers, ooh and a bloke on the Broads Authority with FRGS behind their name. Just as a personal observation, those with them, don't use them. Just your first and surnames.

As for nicknames, my students took great delight in calling me Doc. Bearing in mind my surname, those that know...go on, Google it! I dare you! 

[Vaughan]

Interesting discussion. Two things are perfectly clear to me :

1/. Having passed it by boat twice last week there is no question that the white building on Griffin Lane is a total blot on the landscape of an otherwise beautiful river. Yes, I always remember this as a works site, by Hobroughs and later May Gurney but I have never seen it in such a dis-ordered and ugly mess as it is now. NO-ONE but the BA would ever be allowed to operate on the riverbank in such a fashion, as the BA would never give anyone else permission for it!

2/. It is quite clear that James Knight is now being deliberately persecuted because of opinions he has expressed earlier. He is obviously subject to the same sort of deliberate obfuscation that Roger Wood had to suffer in Thorpe for the last 11 years. The BA may find, however, that James is a rather different opponent than Roger. He is, remember, a planning consultant himself. (FRICS).

I just wish I could be there for the site inspection on Thursday. I have always enjoyed a Brian Rix farce!

 

[JennyMorgan]

2 hours ago, Vaughan said:

Interesting discussion. Two things are perfectly clear to me :

1/. Having passed it by boat twice last week there is no question that the white building on Griffin Lane is a total blot on the landscape of an otherwise beautiful river. Yes, I always remember this as a works site, by Hobroughs and later May Gurney but I have never seen it in such a dis-ordered and ugly mess as it is now. NO-ONE but the BA would ever be allowed to operate on the riverbank in such a fashion, as the BA would never give anyone else permission for it!

2/. It is quite clear that James Knight is now being deliberately persecuted because of opinions he has expressed earlier. He is obviously subject to the same sort of deliberate obfuscation that Roger Wood had to suffer in Thorpe for the last 11 years. The BA may find, however, that James is a rather different opponent than Roger. He is, remember, a planning consultant himself. (FRICS).

I just wish I could be there for the site inspection on Thursday. I have always enjoyed a Brian Rix farce!

 

You could be, in spirit! What time? Vroom vroom, I will be a 'stinky' for an hour, I fancy a pint at the Waveney!

[JennyMorgan]

The correct use of titles is an interesting topic in itself. Personally I find their use desirable when used in context but not when used either as a form of bluster or to suggest authority. 

[Polly]

I dislike name-calling. As a keen Daily Politics nerd, I love the way that presenters are scrupulously polite as to names but skewer their inteviewees on points where skewering is richly deserved. The politeness adds to the impact in my view, conversely, the disrespect in name calling weakens the arguments! I think.

Friendly nicknames are quite different.

[Islander]

Well, I think it's time to put the gazebo back up for the winter with my outdoor workbench and my mirror dinghy under it. So 28days doesn't apply to white party tents if you keep changing its use. My gazebo is green and is hard to see from the river or the green unless you live on the top floor of the flats and use binoculars when all the leaves have fallen.

Anyone come up with a nickname for Cally Smith head of planning. One from the Dallas series for a short blond actress comes to mind but I couldn't possibly post it here.

I bet these yurts are easier to move than the BA 'Party Tent'.

Colin

Edited September 20, 2017 by Islander
Edit because I no longer have the proof to a persons true identity.

[ExSurveyor]

I can't see anything wrong with the BA yurt,  it is quite discreet and easily moved

The whole site looked an eyesore this afternoon.

I did take a photo but can't upload it at the moment

 

[JennyMorgan]

9 hours ago, Vaughan said:

Interesting discussion. Two things are perfectly clear to me :

1/. Having passed it by boat twice last week there is no question that the white building on Griffin Lane is a total blot on the landscape of an otherwise beautiful river. Yes, I always remember this as a works site, by Hobroughs and later May Gurney but I have never seen it in such a dis-ordered and ugly mess as it is now. NO-ONE but the BA would ever be allowed to operate on the riverbank in such a fashion, as the BA would never give anyone else permission for it!

2/. It is quite clear that James Knight is now being deliberately persecuted because of opinions he has expressed earlier. He is obviously subject to the same sort of deliberate obfuscation that Roger Wood had to suffer in Thorpe for the last 11 years. The BA may find, however, that James is a rather different opponent than Roger. He is, remember, a planning consultant himself. (FRICS).

I just wish I could be there for the site inspection on Thursday. I have always enjoyed a Brian Rix farce!

 

Tomorrow afternoon at 2.30. All welcome, just cheer on the yurt moving team

[grendel]

I wonder if anyone could live stream it on facebook.

[Guest]

5 hours ago, Islander said:

Well, I think it's time to put the gazebo back up for the winter with my outdoor workbench and my mirror dinghy under it. So 28days doesn't apply to white party tents if you keep changing its use. My gazebo is green and is hard to see from the river or the green unless you live on the top floor of the flats and use binoculars when all the leaves have fallen.

Anyone come up with a nickname for Cally Smith head of planning. One from the Dallas series for a short blond actress comes to mind but I couldn't possibly post it here.

I bet these yurts are easier to move than the BA 'Party Tent'.

Colin

I'm guessing you mean Lucy Ewing 

[Guest]

What an appropriate nickname though

[grendel]

looks moveable to me.

 

[grendel]

lets see the BA do that with their tent.

[BuffaloBill]

Well done James and the crew!!

[Guest]

20 hours ago, Philosophical said:

What an appropriate nickname though

For Lucy Ewing that is.