What Do We Want At Acle Bridge?

[SPEEDTRIPLE]

All i`d like to see at Acle bridge is some decent public moorings with water and electric hook up, plus a small seasonal shop with some decent toilets and showers.  Forget education centres, bike hire (unless they`re Triumph Motorcycles lol), coach party facilities and multi function buildings etc.

If you want all the other stuff, it DOES`NT have to be adjacent to the navigation system.  Keep it inland where it would be better suited.

[JennyMorgan]

Personally I firmly believe that JP has to show a real, sustainable need for what he is proposing, to date that quite simply hasn't happened.  

1 hour ago, SPEEDTRIPLE said:

All i`d like to see at Acle bridge is some decent public moorings with water and electric hook up, plus a small seasonal shop with some decent toilets and showers.  Forget education centres, bike hire (unless they`re Triumph Motorcycles lol), coach party facilities and multi function buildings etc.

If you want all the other stuff, it DOES`NT have to be adjacent to the navigation system.  Keep it inland where it would be better suited.

Well said, that man!

[vanessan]

2 hours ago, SPEEDTRIPLE said:

Keep it inland where it would be better suited.

Playing devil’s advocate here, where ‘inland’ would you choose bearing in mind we are (I think) talking about a visitor centre and education relating to the Broads? 

[marshman]

And its no use saying Wroxham, or Horning, unless you know of a fairy godmother who will give you the land!!!!

[Ray]

Birmingham?

[JennyMorgan]

Sensibly UEA Campus has educational potential, overlooking the 'Broad' there.  

By inland I take that to mean away from the river bank which, from a child safety point of view, is sensible. A classroom, indoctrination centre, does not need to be placed on the river bank.

All that aside I see the original suggestion as simply saying 'don't  clutter up the river bank'. Is there really a need for a 'statement' building at Acle, Packman Towers perhaps?

The Curtiss Shop, part and parcel of the 1960's/70's Broads culture and landscape, perhaps that should be preserved as a facade to a shower block? 

What is actually and sensibly needed, not just what is wanted please. Hallucinatory, unbridled visions can be somewhat over the top!!

[JohnK]

So in summary we don’t want anybody other than us boaters around and whatever the BA chooses will be wrong?

[Bound2Please]

21 minutes ago, JohnK said:

So in summary we don’t want anybody other than us boaters around and whatever the BA chooses will be wrong?

Now now that is not how 99% of boaters think John

[Guest]

50 minutes ago, JennyMorgan said:

Sensibly UEA Campus has educational potential, overlooking the 'Broad' there.  

By inland I take that to mean away from the river bank which, from a child safety point of view, is sensible. A classroom, indoctrination centre, does not need to be placed on the river bank.

All that aside I see the original suggestion as simply saying 'don't  clutter up the river bank'. Is there really a need for a 'statement' building at Acle, Packman Towers perhaps?

The Curtiss Shop, part and parcel of the 1960's/70's Broads culture and landscape, perhaps that should be preserved as a facade to a shower block? 

What is actually and sensibly needed, not just what is wanted please. Hallucinatory, unbridled visions can be somewhat over the top!!

The Curtiss Shop, part and parcel of the 1960's/70's Broads culture and landscape, perhaps that should be preserved as a facade to a shower block? 

 

Excellent idea

[MauriceMynah]

1 hour ago, JohnK said:

So in summary we don’t want anybody other than us boaters around and whatever the BA chooses will be wrong?

 

1 hour ago, Bound2Please said:

Now now that is not how 99% of boaters think John

Well the second half of the sentence does have a certain following.

[JohnK]

Well the second half of the sentence does have a certain following.

Assuming B2P is right about the 99/1 split I think we have more than our fair share of the 1% here
[JOKE]

[Lulu]

1 hour ago, Philosophical said:

The Curtiss Shop, part and parcel of the 1960's/70's Broads culture and landscape, perhaps that should be preserved as a facade to a shower block? 

  

 Excellent idea

Totally agree.  Id hate to see the existing shop pulled down.  Its a key landmark and much loved by many 

[Guest]

1 hour ago, Lulu said:

Totally agree.  Id hate to see the existing shop pulled down.  Its a key landmark and much loved by many 

The trouble is, old wooden buildings have a lifespan and the  'Curtiss Store' has reached the end of it's life. Many of us can remember Wroxham/Hoveton from the 60's & early 70's, virtually everything you would have viewed from the bridge is now gone. Replaced by by 'modern' structures, constructed from modern materials, none are wood built like the original boatyard buildings they replaced. Most of the original wooden framed riverside homes along the Bure at Wroxham & Horning, built early in the last century are gone too, replaced by new homes. Much as though many of us would love to keep the beautiful buildings we remember, it just isn't possible. Much like the beautiful wooden boats we once hired, in the end they became uneconomic to maintain. Some are kept going, as a 'labour of love' but in time they too will be gone. It's a sad fact of life, but nothing lasts forever.

[Guest]

3 minutes ago, kingfisher666 said:

The trouble is, old wooden buildings have a lifespan and the  'Curtiss Store' has reached the end of it's life. Many of us can remember Wroxham/Hoveton from the 60's & early 70's, virtually everything you would have viewed from the bridge is now gone. Replaced by by 'modern' structures, constructed from modern materials, none are wood built like the original boatyard buildings they replaced. Most of the original wooden framed riverside homes along the Bure at Wroxham & Horning, built early in the last century are gone too, replaced by new homes. Much as though many of us would love to keep the beautiful buildings we remember, it just isn't possible. Much like the beautiful wooden boats we once hired, in the end they became uneconomic to maintain. Some are kept going, as a 'labour of love' but in time they too will be gone. It's a sad fact of life, but nothing lasts forever.

Many places around the world are realising the value of preservation, some use the existing building front as a facade on a new building others re create the old facade on the new building.

If any value is put on preserving buildings or at at least the look that has been there for many decades it is not that difficult.

[Guest]

29 minutes ago, Philosophical said:

Many places around the world are realising the value of preservation, some use the existing building front as a facade on a new building others re create the old facade on the new building.

If any value is put on preserving buildings or at at least the look that has been there for many decades it is not that difficult.

The preservation of historic buildings is a laudable aim and the Norfolk and Suffolk broads area, does fairly well on that score, I'm thinking of our beautiful windmills (pumps) in particular. But, preserving old buildings costs a lot of money and apparently we just aren't awash with that, at the moment. I have to say, I'm always a bit dubious about re-creating facades, just to keep a memory alive, it strikes me as a bit 'Disneyland' really.

I think we just have to accept, that over time buildings will reach the end of their life and be replaced with something new. Burgh Castle & Potter Heigham Bridge excepted, they will still be here, alongside cockroaches and Keith Richards, when everything else is gone...

[Guest]

13 minutes ago, kingfisher666 said:

The preservation of historic buildings is a laudable aim and the Norfolk and Suffolk broads area, does fairly well on that score, I'm thinking of our beautiful windmills (pumps) in particular. But, preserving old buildings costs a lot of money and apparently we just aren't awash with that, at the moment. I have to say, I'm always a bit dubious about re-creating facades, just to keep a memory alive, it strikes me as a bit 'Disneyland' really.

I think we just have to accept, that over time buildings will reach the end of their life and be replaced with something new. Burgh Castle & Potter Heigham Bridge excepted, they will still be here, alongside cockroaches and Keith Richards, when everything else is gone...

But we are awash with money, there is £750K on the table.

As a question: Burgh Castle & Potter Heigham Bridge excepted.

Who gets to decide if it is "worthy" of being saved?

Long live Keith Richards

If the building facade at Acle was copied (recreated) in real wood as opposed to fiberglass I think that would give sufficient distance from something created in Disneyland.  

[Guest]

8 minutes ago, Philosophical said:

 

 

Who gets to decide if it is "worthy" of being saved?

Long live Keith Richards

I really don't know who has that onerous job. I know, I would hate to be the one who has to make those decisions. Whatever you decide, you can guarantee that not everyone will be happy.

On Keith Richards, we agree 100%. Long may he live, love the man and his music...

[Guest]

7 minutes ago, kingfisher666 said:

I really don't know who has that onerous job. I know, I would hate to be the one who has to make those decisions. Whatever you decide, you can guarantee that not everyone will be happy.

On Keith Richards, we agree 100%. Long may he live, love the man and his music...

I think we have a duty to protect anything truly iconic that many people will remember, even the "bad things" as they will serve as an example of what not to do.

We shouldn't try to "correct" history

[grendel]

7 hours ago, JennyMorgan said:

By inland I take that to mean away from the river bank which, from a child safety point of view, is sensible. A classroom, indoctrination centre, does not need to be placed on the river bank.

I think JM has a point here, an educational centre right next to the water has to be a health and safety nightmare, will the kids learn, surely they will, but some may well learn that the water is cold and that they cannot swim.

[Minifer]

There are plenty of educational activities occurring near and on water in Norfolk alone, it is tricky with health and safety (not as bad as construction say, the area I work in now - I create 60-page long risk and method statements for masonry works on individual sites), but not at all impossible.  I managed to teach all ages by the water with no accidents for years.  The BA have a great educational team too, I just think that the location does not offer the right waterside opportunities to make it viable.  Either you are on the water in boats, in which case you need a broad,  or you are dyke dipping on marshland and comparing different habitats etc.  I don't think it will serve.  But I still think it is a good site for a visitor centre, for inland people as well as boaters.   I don't think they will have the money to do it all anyway. 

[JennyMorgan]

What worries me, the implications are not healthy, but John Packman has announced this wonderful competition and his proposed £750.000 spend and guess what, he doesn't have planning consent, not even outline consent. 

If you or I owned the site, would we stand an earthly chance of gaining consent not only for any 'landmark' buildings but also for change of use? It does seem to me that JP is both jumping the gun and taking consent for granted and that I find worrying. 

If this one goes as far the planning stage then I can see it being 'called in':

 http://researchbriefings.parliament.uk/ResearchBriefing/Summary/SN00930

[JennyMorgan]

Many a true word written in jest!

http://www.broadsnationalpike.com/2018/05/blessed-white-elephant-planned-for-axle.html

[ChrisB]

But until there is detail, planning consent could not be granted. So jumping the gun it is not IMO. I have to agree with some of the previous comments and say that the boating fraternity is becoming a little narrow minded. 

Please let me say what I have already said:- " Acle Bridge is often the first sight of The Broads for many heading to Herbert Woods and Richardsons, but in addition also those heading for the small seaside villages twix Caister and Cromer. 

Given good signage I can see a visitor centre getting really good patronage. 

As for "The Broads National Pike" it is about time it was gaffed and served up Polish Style, it was amusing when it started but I think most people can see it has run it's course and does not serve the wider interests of Broadland.

[JennyMorgan]

Outline planning does not need in depth detail but it does confirm intent and feasibility. It would have been more fair for would be entrants.

I don't always agree with the National Pike but in this instance his references to previous planning applications in the area are both apt and relevant.  

[MauriceMynah]

55 minutes ago, JennyMorgan said:

I don't always agree with the National Pike

Yes you do !!!   :-)