Glamping Development Approved By B A

[Boaters]

On the North Walsham and Dilham canal upstream from Wayford bridge.Many comments at the end of the article regarding this development?

http://www.edp24.co.uk/business/broads-authority-grants-planning-permission-for-new-glamping-development-1-5429064

 

[SteveO]

Nice to see a bit of flexibility on the part of the planners, but am hard pressed to see what a derelict canal has to do with the Broads Authority.

No doubt an apologist will come out of the woodwork soon to tell me. 

[MauriceMynah]

I understand they are the relevant planning authority for that area.

If the canal were to be restored to a navigable level, would it come under  their remit? I don't know.

[JennyMorgan]

Don't forget that what is upstream of the navigation area is relevant to the condition of what is downstream of it. The BA is is also the LPA (local planning authority) for the waterway from Geldeston to Bungay. Don't think that there is anything sinister in that.

[SPEEDTRIPLE]

I may be wrong (often am), but i think the BA may be responsible for all tidal stretches, which means the NWD Canal, from the junction of Dilham Dyke, to Honing Lock.  Hopefully someone who actually knows for sure will correct me if i am wrong?.

[marshman]

The Canal is privately owned - the ownership of the section you refer to is a trifle contentious, to say the least!

It is definately not the BA - the tidal reaches bit stops at the entrance to Barton Broad - check your National Parks OS map as it is shown on there I think.

I believe the landowner believes he owns it, whilst the NWDCT shareholders would like to think they have a claim also!! And I know nothing further!!

[BroadAmbition]

It is definitely not the BA - the tidal reaches bit stops at the entrance to Barton Broad - check your National Parks OS map as it is shown on there I think.

Well that's a load of squit, even if it does say that on the National Parks OS map (I've not checked btw) as we know for certain that the rise and fall of tide can be clearly witnessed at Wayford bridge and beyond

Griff

[ChrisB]

I know that area very well. I walk at East Ruston and often take the footpath over South Fen (but not after the weather of recent times) The development is really out of the way and can do no harm what so ever IMHO. Many Norfolk villages in that area have no main drainage including where I live and the run off eventually ends up in that waterway. It is only in the last three years that East Ruston has been on pumped drainage. So the impact of a few holiday pods is really insignificant.

[ChrisB]

8 hours ago, marshman said:

The Canal is privately owned - the ownership of the section you refer to is a trifle contentious, to say the least!

It is definately not the BA - the tidal reaches bit stops at the entrance to Barton Broad - check your National Parks OS map as it is shown on there I think.

I believe the landowner believes he owns it, whilst the NWDCT shareholders would like to think they have a claim also!! And I know nothing further!!

 

8 hours ago, BroadAmbition said:

It is definitely not the BA - the tidal reaches bit stops at the entrance to Barton Broad - check your National Parks OS map as it is shown on there I think.

Well that's a load of squit, even if it does say that on the National Parks OS map (I've not checked btw) as we know for certain that the rise and fall of tide can be clearly witnessed at Wayford bridge and beyond

Griff

Normal Tidal Limit can be a bag of worms and very emotive as it could have legal consequence with regards to ownership and rights of navigation before you even start on SSSI and AONB etc etc.

[ChrisB]

Marshman is indeed correct.

[ChrisB]

And for the sake of interest the NTLs of the Upper Thurne area.

 

 

[MauriceMynah]

Hang on a sec !!! I'm moored on Hickling Broad and I check the tide there, The rise and fall may me small, but it does exist. So, What does "NTL" stand for? Who decides it? and How often is it re-appraised?

[stumpy]

We get about 5" at Broadsedge which was above Barton last time I looked.

[MauriceMynah]

5" can make a difference you know. :)

[Bound2Please]

you bin looking MM ?

[Vaughan]

We have talked about this before in relation to Black Horse Broad.

We all know there is an actual rise and fall of water, but the point is, whether it is "officially" tidal or not and this is determined by Ordnance Survey.

[MauriceMynah]

Thank you Vaughan, I too have been doing some homework on the subject, the results of which you've just confirmed.

[JennyMorgan]

My understanding is that rise and fall is not necessarily the deciding matter but 'diurnal flow' flow is. 

[ChrisB]

With the above Normal Tidal Limits you may be interested in this from "The Song of the Paddle published this time last year.....

[marshman]

Mr Waller - how come we are now discussing "diurnal flow" ? I had mine tested sometime back and it seemed OK but a bit like the real tide, it can vary a bit!

I am not sure where the pods are to be sited exactly but I guess its somewhere around Tonnage Bridge - and somewhere around said bridge is the real issue as Mr Paterson or someone else believes he owns the bed of the canal from the end of the BA bit, wherever that is, to Honing Lock. Above the lock the local restoration group have made sterling headway especially in parts but that bit below the lock, and around it, remains a bit squeaky!!

In theory when the Canal Company was bought relatively recently, that SHOULD have included right all the way to the BA bit, but noone has pockets deep enough to prove take the issue, I suspect to Court. It could well revolve around what occurred when Tonnage Bridge was rebuilt - any one recall when that was? Somewhere between 1970 and 1995??

I remember taking a cruiser through that bridge and right up to Honing Lock and overnighting on Honing Common in probably, the late 60's. Subsequent to that I have also taken a powered craft up the bit to East Ruston - not sure the landowner can actually stop you using it, but I believe can stop you landing/mooring.

It is all a bit of a grey area - sorry if I have something I shouldn't or with which you disagree!!   Griff - I think subsequent posts prove I may have been somewhere near!!!!

[ChrisB]

As I understand it:-