Jump to content
  • Announcements

    Welcome! New around here? Take a look at the New Members' Guide for some pointers.

    Not a member yet? Sign up here and you can soon be chatting away with friends old and new..

    Check out our Handy Information section if you're after something quickly!

  • If you would like to support the forum, please consider visiting the forum shop, where you can purchase such items as NBN Burgees, Window Stickers, or even a custom Limited Edition Wooden Throttle Control Knob

    Forum Shop

JennyMorgan

Acle Bridge Vanity Project

Recommended Posts

All of those plans in the article run completely contrary to the BA's own laid down planning restrictions with regard to the height of buildings in open marshland. Don't these educated architects already know that??

Someone around here is, yet again, wasting a whole lot of time and money, tilting at windmills.

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In my view children at my local primary school could do better

I do not consider that any of them suit the location or the environment

Also as Vaughan states, I think all three are outside planning guidelines

 

Ray

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

I'm an engineer so lacking in other qualities but I don't see the broads theme in any of the designs. IMHO any of those designs could have been submitted as a proposal for a steel works visitor centre  a small mammal enclosure or a modern art gallery. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

My guess is that it's going to happen, despite the criticisms, but surely the architects could have designed something a little more in keeping with it's landscape. Making something that just echoes 'White sails in the sunset', doesn't cut it. The 'viking longhouse' or barn conversion look, doesn't really do it either and as for the door stop wedge look...

Perhaps, they could take a look at the Norfolk Wildlife Trust's 'Hickling Broad Visitor Centre'. It isn't an architects 'ego trip' and it fits in well with it's surroundings. The pitch stained wood and red clay tiles are a typical broads build and don't look out of place. It's a simple building, is light and airy and does exactly what it was designed to do.

So really, it's a case of 'go back to the drawing board'. But first, open your eyes and walk around the marshes and rivers, dump your ego's and design something that looks like it belongs there...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No. 2 is obviously meant to echo a wherry sail.  I like no 1, simple and beautiful.  I don't like No. 3 at all.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
39 minutes ago, kingfisher666 said:

My guess is that it's going to happen, despite the criticisms, but surely the architects could have designed something a little more in keeping with it's landscape. Making something that just echoes 'White sails in the sunset', doesn't cut it. The 'viking longhouse' or barn conversion look, doesn't really do it either and as for the door stop wedge look...

Perhaps, they could take a look at the Norfolk Wildlife Trust's 'Hickling Broad Visitor Centre'. It isn't an architects 'ego trip' and it fits in well with it's surroundings. The pitch stained wood and red clay tiles are a typical broads build and don't look out of place. It's a simple building, is light and airy and does exactly what it was designed to do.

So really, it's a case of 'go back to the drawing board'. But first, open your eyes and walk around the marshes and rivers, dump your ego's and design something that looks like it belongs there...

Thank you for explaining, I'd never have guessed particularly as the White Sails one has the sails backwards. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have to ask, why do these places need to be so tall? All of them seem to provide huge cathedral style ceilings full of ...... empty space. 

And as the most likely outcome of this project is that the building will 

1) not be economically viable

2) be considered beyond the means of the authority to maintain

3) be sold to the private sector

shouldn't they just opt for something more functional in the first place. 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh dear what's the point of any of these designs. Perhaps go back to the drawing board and come up with something that blends in with the area.

  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And there speak a load of qualified architects who know a huge amount about modern building design!!

Whenever the Forum discusses modern building design, we always have the same comments from those oh so qualified to do so. My own view is that only time will tell and it is not just not good enough to leave it as it was - whatever it is it cannot be worse than the structure now standing  - the utilitarian toilet block!!

Good architecture will stand the time criteria test and we will all be long gone before that is decided. I personally think No 2 is especially attractive.

Of course you all hate it - you all disagree so wholeheartedly with the whole idea!! Especially as it is BA centric!!

 

  • Like 1
  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, marshman said:

Of course you all hate it - you all disagree so wholeheartedly with the whole idea!! Especially as it is BA centric!!

Actually I didn't say I hated it.

Just that it disagrees wholeheartedly with the BA's own restrictions on the height of new buildings within the Broads area and I would have thought that design professionals should have known this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, marshman said:

Of course you all hate it - you all disagree so wholeheartedly with the whole idea!! Especially as it is BA centric!!

Not at all, I'm all in favour of the BA, or anyone else for that matter, improving the riverside, especially if that means better facilities for people using the river or, equally important visiting the river by road. The design featured in the aerial photo looks quite nice, but it would look even nicer if it was half the height, which it easily could be.

You are correct in as much that I am not an architect, but I know an eyesore when I see one. When they extended the cottage at Hunsett Mill I disapproved, it's a bloody carbuncle I said. Nah, give it time and it'll blend in was the reply. Well I've given it time and you know what? It's still a bloody carbuncle, just as these designs are. 

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Paul said:

Not at all, I'm all in favour of the BA, or anyone else for that matter, improving the riverside, especially if that means better facilities for people using the river or, equally important visiting the river by road. The design featured in the aerial photo looks quite nice, but it would look even nicer if it was half the height, which it easily could be.

You are correct in as much that I am not an architect, but I know an eyesore when I see one. When they extended the cottage at Hunsett Mill I disapproved, it's a bloody carbuncle I said. Nah, give it time and it'll blend in was the reply. Well I've given it time and you know what? It's still a bloody carbuncle, just as these designs are. 

 

:default_icon_clap:

I saw another one, right next door to Horning Sailing Club.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
34 minutes ago, marshman said:

 

Of course you all hate it - you all disagree so wholeheartedly with the whole idea!! Especially as it is BA centric!!

 

I don't disagree with the whole idea and I certainly don't have anything against the Broads Authority, quite the opposite. I like the idea of an 'education/visitor centre' for the Norfolk Broads. Anything, which can spread the values of looking after our rapidly diminishing wild places and the flora & fauna that they hold, is a good thing in my book. Education about the history of the Norfolk Broads, both geological and social, would also be good too.

I'm just not to keen on any of the three chosen designs., of course that is just my opinion and other opinions will differ and I happily accept that. I actually quite like the 'Hunsett Mill' rebuild (apart from those windows) which almost everyone seems to hate. Whichever design is chosen, may actually look better, when built, than the images seem to show. Anyway, I'll live with it, simply because it really won't affect my life to any degree and I'll hope that the building does the good work it is designed to do. It was just my opinion of the designs, no more, no less...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, marshman said:

And there speak a load of qualified architects who know a huge amount about modern building design!!

Whenever the Forum discusses modern building design, we always have the same comments from those oh so qualified to do so. My own view is that only time will tell and it is not just not good enough to leave it as it was - whatever it is it cannot be worse than the structure now standing  - the utilitarian toilet block!!

Good architecture will stand the time criteria test and we will all be long gone before that is decided. I personally think No 2 is especially attractive.

Of course you all hate it - you all disagree so wholeheartedly with the whole idea!! Especially as it is BA centric!!

 

I am certain you are incorrect there Marshman, there were several of us putting forth ideas for this proposal, despite the authority not actually owning all of the land shown in their proposal. did you put forward a proposal?  they limited the competition to architects, so when I put forward a suggestion that we submit one we would have needed an architect to come forward to submit it.

You seem to think everyone here dislikes the BA - not true, they do many good things, but they also excel at getting things wrong at times, and throwing away the toll payers money, its that getting things wrong that people dislike, not the dedicated staff that run things.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, marshman said:

And there speak a load of qualified architects who know a huge amount about modern building design!!

qualified or not - we all have a right to say it looks good or it looks ugly - thats down to having an eye for things of beauty - one doesnt need to be an architect for that. having seen some of the monstrosities that come from architects (and I have to work with their drawings on a daily basis) they certainly dont win prizes for beauty in my book, or accuracy sometimes, when they cant even line up the electrical risers between floors.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I do work in the Building Industry, My company are Design and Build Contractors with in house design teams

Those designs shortlisted in my opinion are very poor, I made a statement that primary school children could design better and they have in competitions we have run through schools in the past

BA should be commended for purchasing the site for the public to use but I hope they put a building on there that blends in with the environment and not overpowers it as those designs do

Ray

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What is wrong with a wooden shed of a reasonable size with a nice thatched roof? Does it have to be futuristic looking and why so high? I suppose they have money to spend.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lets face it, the up river side of the bridge doesn't have any attractive buildings, but even so, I don't like the designs put forward.. However any of these would be an improvement.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like the first two. It will make the place look a bit more up market. Whatever people say Acle Bridge is still many visitors first view of The Broads coming off the A47. It will provide an excellent stop when too early for your boat or accommodation.

The BA should be applauded for taking on what could have been a real eyesore.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

looking at them again, if they are to choose one of the three designs shown on the article, i hope to high heaven it's the first one (the Viking Long Hall I shall call it). I still think it's inappropriate, though not unattractive in the right setting. The second two, "Wherry Sails" and "Mayan Pyramid" are awful. They make Cantley Sugar Factory look aesthetically pleasing.

I get the idea that many of the designs submitted were drafted far, far away and then the architect said, "right, now where is it going?"

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think no 1 has a feel of a Saxon great hall - it's OK but like all three, not really in keeping with the environment.

Criticising the architects is wrong however - after all, according to the article, there were 95 entries received before the deadline, we don't know what the other 92 were like! We should be directing our comments at whoever shortlisted these three, somewhere in the 92 rejections may be some very good designs much closer to what many of us think would be appropriate!

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It amazes me that architects seem to think that everyone wants any new building to look like it belongs in Startrek.

Why can't they design something that looks like it "belongs" in the area it is to be built in....   i.e. The Broads   ???

The answer may be that they feel there is a lack of proper craftsmen who can create a proper broads style and actually build it.

Jeff 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All of us at the NBN, all 2000 active members, are qualified to comment on the aesthetics of the proposed development. Why? Because all of us, whether you agree with the raison d'être of the development of this site, disagree with it, think the whole scheme a marvellous idea or the biggest waste of money since the last crackpot idea, whether you like the proposed structures or think they are superb works of art or a blot on the landscape...all of us are qualified to comment because all of us are stakeholders in The Broads! 

There are over 2000 active members of the NBN and we come from such a vast array of backgrounds. We are locals, holidaymakers, hirers, owners, motor boaters, sailors, canoeists, environmentalists, conservationists and have so many different careers and skills between us that 'yes' we do have people qualified to speak with authority on this and a vast array of other subjects. Yes, we have got a rocket scientist!

My personal feelings...The Ziggurat made me chuckle. Smacks of brutalism and left me wondering if there was to be an altar on top dedicated to Quetza-quango, the god of 'bureaucratic visions'? Kids could buy obsidian knives in the gift shop below and play at sacrificing the kids on Clozaril.  To be honest, all three have an air of the work of Le Corbusier, remind me of the Chapelle Notre-Dame-du-Haut de Ronchamp. The first two are both variations on the modern A-frame and smack of revisiting the mid-century modern style for the umpteenth time. Nothing new, original or of merit here. 

As an individual stakeholder, I would sooner the site was made suitable for boating traffic with a small gift/coffee shop and the hundreds of thousands of quite obviously available cash spent on providing refuse collection at key points around the Broads. To be honest, that would be the action of a responsible authority. But as I say, only my personal thoughts on the subject.

 

I would like to hear everyone's thoughts on the scheme. Good or bad they are your thoughts and opinions and just as valid as anyone else's. For or against, it's your opinion and your landscape. It's not BA bashing, it's not having a row, it's called consultation. it's what 'we think'. It may not be something that gets pointed out often but....you see, The Broads Authority...shh, is supposed to work on our behalf. We are all stakeholders in the Broads. Our opinions do matter. There are 2000 of us. Over 40,000 individuals read our public forum every week, and we can make some noise if want to...of course staying within forum guidelines so that we don't give the moderators headaches. Please don't give them headaches? I need Grendel nice and fresh so he can finish my cabin doors! :default_norty:

  • Like 11
  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • NBN Mobile App

    Want to use NBN when you're out and about?

    Get our mobile app for Android and iOS!

    Get it on Google Play

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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