What Do We Want At Acle Bridge?

[Guest]

1 minute ago, LondonRascal said:

I reckon if this is built the moorings outside will be 'short stay' for visiting the erm Visitor Centre and not 24hr ones.

Which effective is a reduction in 24 hr moorings if that were to be the case .

[vanessan]

2 minutes ago, LondonRascal said:

I reckon if this is built the moorings outside will be 'short stay' for visiting the erm Visitor Centre and not 24hr ones.

I wanted to ‘like’ that post for obvious reasons but I don’t like it! There is many a true word spoken in jest. 

[marshman]

Clearly none of you have ever visited the NWT visitor centre at Cley - thats outstanding. At least at Acle it will, if it goes ahead, be alongside  a decent road  so people coming to the Broadland area and not on a boat, can access it easily.

Yep, MM has it spot on and I am just glad someone else can see the benefit. Shame no one else here can see the wood for the trees IMHO but what else would I expect from a place struggles to say anything positive about the BA and continues to bring up, for reassurance they are right,  everything they want to beef over, with backhanded comments about everything they wish to moan about from architecture to rubbish bins.

And yes PW, I still prefer the  new Hunsett property!  Beauty is in the eye of the beholder as they say and not every new building has to be a pastiche of what some perceive of as "local" or "good"!

[Bound2Please]

9 minutes ago, marshman said:

Shame no one else here can see the wood for the trees IMHO but what else would I expect from a place struggles to say anything positive about the BA and continues to bring up

I hope any thing I have said that is negative (I'm sure I must have at some time )about the BA is taken as my view, also positive (I'm sure I must have at some point) things I said about them also.

When the BA do good things they really are good, but alas when they do negative/bad thing they truely are. They dont seem to have any middle ground in my honest opinion.

[Guest]

10 minutes ago, TheQ said:

Maybe JP thinks he's a property developer, put up a "land mark " property on the broads where you wouldn't normally get permission, and then flog it off in a couple of years for a fortune...

 

 one of the problems is they are allowing new buildings all over the place that don't '"mean the Broads" there used to be wooden sheds and houses all over the place. That was part of the broads. These are being replace by identikit modern buildings..

If JP thinks the broads needs a landmark property to promote it he's got the worst vision ever , its built on heritage and history not new fangled buildings , I doubt not one person comes to the broads because its an ( acclaimed) national park or to see visitors centres they come for the piece and tranquility of the place , at the end of the day we are talking about those on holiday n holidays to me and many others are a place to relax and to wind down , and that's why IMHO so many choose to holiday here and nothing to do with a national park or anything else .

It has been mentioned BA passing their own plans , and to me that's exactly what is happening no way would any consortium or individual get planning for a building of that scale or location .

[Wussername]

19 minutes ago, marshman said:

Clearly none of you have ever visited the NWT visitor centre at Cley - thats outstanding. At least at Acle it will, if it goes ahead, be alongside  a decent road  so people coming to the Broadland area and not on a boat, can access it easily.

Cley is of course one of the most important places for ornitholgists in the UK. I do not think that Acle is on many peoples bucket list. 

Where are all the visitors supposed to park?

Will we need a bridge on the bridge to assist those who wish to walk from one side to the other..?

[Guest]

29 minutes ago, marshman said:

Clearly none of you have ever visited the NWT visitor centre at Cley - thats outstanding. At least at Acle it will, if it goes ahead, be alongside  a decent road  so people coming to the Broadland area and not on a boat, can access it easily.

Yep, MM has it spot on and I am just glad someone else can see the benefit. Shame no one else here can see the wood for the trees IMHO but what else would I expect from a place struggles to say anything positive about the BA and continues to bring up, for reassurance they are right,  everything they want to beef over, with backhanded comments about everything they wish to moan about from architecture to rubbish bins.

And yes PW, I still prefer the  new Hunsett property!  Beauty is in the eye of the beholder as they say and not every new building has to be a pastiche of what some perceive of as "local" or "good"!

Marsh man wouldn't you agree that the NWT visitors centre is built in a proper location ? , Acle is not the right location at all , given its entrance would be the other side of a blind bridge that's positively dangerous given the amount of accidents on that road section , that alone should cause a re think .

Iv plenty to be positive about when it comes to BA but this isn't one of them, and instead of running down anyone who disagrees with you maybe its time to take more notice of those that actually praise BA when an I mean WHEN  it due . 

[Guest]

30 minutes ago, Bound2Please said:

I hope any thing I have said that is negative (I'm sure I must have at some time )about the BA is taken as my view, also positive (I'm sure I must have at some point) things I said about them also.

When the BA do good things they really are good, but alas when they do negative/bad thing they truely are. They dont seem to have any middle ground in my honest opinion.

Absolutely bang on .

[Chelsea14Ian]

Why not a visitor centre and a little shop.Its clear from the number of posts people want a shop.I get it about a visitor centre it can give the history of the broads advice etc.

[marshman]

Who says it will not include a shop although to be fair most little shops around Broadland, except the community ones, struggle because no one really goes to them.  Whilst I tend to agree with you, I suspect they would struggle. It will almost certainly contain a large tea room though!

[batrabill]

So, apart from, the loss of moorings (undecided)

the terrible inappropriate building (no one has designed yet)

the lack of shop (even though there may be one, and no one wanted this as a going concern)

the lack of parking (although parking should be included in the design)

the danger of turning off the road here (although Pedros and the Bridge In manage)

the waste of money

and generally the assumption that its bad because its BA....

can I  put you all down as "Broadly in favour"?

[Ray]

There is no shop in the downloadable competition brief sadly, however there are some positive things in it. Such as a desire for the centre to particularly attract passing boaters, cyclists and walkers on the Weavers Way. The retention of moorings which should include electric points, waste collection and washing/shower facilities - which would indicate 24 hour status to be kept at least for some of the length.

Consideration is included for safe road access and education facilities, the cafe is "planned" to be open all year with part of it's floor space given over to further education during the off season.

My concern over the creation of a landmark/eyesore remain but of course I acknowledge that it may end up as beautiful building in keeping with the location, I can't complain until I see it to be fair, I also include all of the above comments in an effort to be fair.

Final point is also mostly a positive one, to proceed they need partnership funding which puts a limit hopefully on BA's outlay and whether it is built at all.

Having been invited to speculate what we would like to see at the site, this still would not be my choice as I first laid out but if it goes ahead there is hope that it may yet be a useful addition to the Broads. I have my reservations but that is simply my personal view and not BA bashing

 

[ChrisB]

I really can't get the point concerning architecture and eyesore. Is it because Bridgecraft and the old Horizon Craft on the opposing bank have such a rich historical and important place in Lower Bure architectural heritage, I think not. The BA have aquired what is now a right dump, with rotten moorings and abandoned toilets and should be applauded for addressing both the lack of moorings and the state of the site in general.

[Ray]

4 minutes ago, ChrisB said:

I really can't get the point concerning architecture and eyesore. Is it because Bridgecraft and the old Horizon Craft on the opposing bank have such a rich historical and important place in Lower Bure architectural heritage, I think not. The BA have aquired what is now a right dump, with rotten moorings and abandoned toilets and should be applauded for addressing both the lack of moorings and the state of the site in general.

That's easy to explain, the stated purpose is for a landmark building ie something that stands out as a landmark. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, my view isn't the right one but it is my one and it is that a modern stand out bit of architecture is not what I'm looking for on the riverside of the Broads :)

[Bound2Please]

21 minutes ago, ChrisB said:

I really can't get the point concerning architecture and eyesore. Is it because Bridgecraft and the old Horizon Craft on the opposing bank have such a rich historical and important place in Lower Bure architectural heritage, I think not. The BA have aquired what is now a right dump, with rotten moorings and abandoned toilets and should be applauded for addressing both the lack of moorings and the state of the site in general.

I cant see why bringing Bridgecraft buildings or Horizon craft into this has to do with the old Bridge store site. To be honest spend money on the old building, repair the moorings, take over the old toilet block from the council. Spend the rest on more 24hour moorings or as an authority implementing and running waste disposal/recycling, to stop fly tipping that must cost more for them to clean up in the long run.

[Guest]

It seems a little off comparing to the Bridgecraft and Horizon Craft buildings anyway.

It's a waterway. I'd be happy to see more boatyard buildings than some sort of modern "landmark".

[Guest]

1 hour ago, Ray said:

Final point is also mostly a positive one, to proceed they need partnership funding which puts a limit hopefully on BA's outlay and whether it is built at all.

That could easily lead back to my previous post regarding BW and standedge tunnel visitors centre should they decide to go down the road of lottery funding , either way investors want to see a return not a disaster .

[MauriceMynah]

3 hours ago, LondonRascal said:

I reckon if this is built the moorings outside will be 'short stay' for visiting the erm Visitor Centre and not 24hr ones.

Sorry Robin. How you come to that conclusion is a total mystery to me.

[Islander]

Don't forget that a section of this mooring must be kept for demasting etc.

Colin

 

[Guest]

I have to ask myself the which of the two conditions below is correct;

We have recently acquired a new plot of land at Acle, what can we do with it?.......I know we'll build a Visitor Centre.

Or

We need a Visitor Centre where can we build it?..........I know Acle would be the perfect place.  

[Chelsea14Ian]

Like many people I sometime question whether BA are doing the right thing after all it is my money they are using,in the same way you should question what local councils and Government spend our money on.Do not confuse with BA bashing.Often they do good work,but they are not untouchable 

[Bluebell]

I would like the moorings to be quality 24 hrs with water and electric, a seasonal shop for essentials (possibly run by the Bridge Inn owners) as they are “on site” . Maybe toilets and showers and a visitor centre.

[MauriceMynah]

3 hours ago, Ray said:

That's easy to explain, the stated purpose is for a landmark building ie something that stands out as a landmark. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, my view isn't the right one but it is my one and it is that a modern stand out bit of architecture is not what I'm looking for on the riverside of the Broads :)

`I agree with your definition of "Landmark Building" and (but to a lesser extent) I agree that 'modern' is rarely in keeping with the broads... BUT... So often these days, words are used incorrectly ("That was a great film, I was literately glued to my seat") that I no longer necessarily expect people to mean what they say.

On this occasion I suspect "Landmark" to mean "of high quality" and/or "of modern design". The first being desirable, the second inevitable.

[Ray]

Good point and if that's how it turns out so much the better.

I have in my minds eye something like a wherry sized boat house.. I could live with that 

[ChrisB]

2 hours ago, Jayfire said:

It seems a little off comparing to the Bridgecraft and Horizon Craft buildings anyway.

It's a waterway. I'd be happy to see more boatyard buildings than some sort of modern "landmark".

 

2 hours ago, Bound2Please said:

I cant see why bringing Bridgecraft buildings or Horizon craft into this has to do with the old Bridge store site. To be honest spend money on the old building, repair the moorings, take over the old toilet block from the council. Spend the rest on more 24hour moorings or as an authority implementing and running waste disposal/recycling, to stop fly tipping that must cost more for them to clean up in the long run.

Because people are just assuming what is to be built is wrong before it even gets off the ground. Why the words eyesore? It can only be an eyesore when compared with it's neighbours, hence, reference to those over the other bank. I do not agree with many BA actions but I hope that I do not go into the type of abrasive auto-anti BA that is becoming, regretfully seen here, the other place (most of the time) and even the NSBA. Please sometimes stop and think what the effect of all these negative posts have on their staff, the ones I have met being dedicated employees and often view these sites. I am really concerned that inability of the boating fraternity to even consider the bigger picture for Broadland will be it's demise. Without the Bird Watchers and conservation bodies North Norfolk and The Broads would be a 14 week season. You can not survive 52 weeks on 14. You know there are quite a few folk who live here who get pretty upset about reading how the area should be run by people who actually contribute very little to the bigger picture, live elsewhere, have a very narrow interest in the area, ie one activity and then call them, that most objectionable Americanism NIBYs. Personally I like the Australian way. You have an obligation consider it a privilege to visit their National Parks and other areas of the country.

Anyway I shall not contribute any more.