The Broads National Pike / The Answer Is! I Really Don't Know!

[marshman]

Come off it Griff - I would regard the dredging of the Waxham Cut an even greater waste of money!!! At least the Visitor Centre would be used more - and I am not trying to knock those who chose to moor up the Cut!

Cutting down trees is difficult - we have discussed this many many times on the Forum but it is hardly the BA's fault about cutting the trees back - or at least not all of the time! Firstly you should blame the landowners who deny access and then you have to blame the process - why on earth should the BA be forced to involve the Forestry Commission and then the EA as well?You are quick enough to blame the BA for every ill but forget the armies of other bum polishers!!! Even weed cutting involves the EA, especially on Hickling!!

[BroadAmbition]

So if I get this correct, you are suggesting / saying (Word it however)  that the toll payers at Waxham cut are to be forgotten about by the Blessed Authority just because it's too much bother re contacting EA / Forestry / Land owners etc to get the job done? - That beggers belief.  It's a waste of money to Waxham cut  but fine to spend the nav budget on a visitor centre? - if that really is their attitude that gives them a mandate to take the same attitude with every waterway on the Broads.  It seems to me that the toll payers at Waxham cut don't have the same rights as say large marinas / yards even though their money is just the same as everyone elses

Griff

[JennyMorgan]

1 hour ago, grendel said:

the simple solution would be to have a floating pontoon along that side of the building if it does go right to the edge.

That makes perfect sense although it would reduce the width of the river. As I said to Fred we shall have to wait and see but the published designs do show the building right on the edge of the river and with no signs of moorings. However we have yet to see the final drawings by which time the requirement for moorings might be well catered for.

Anyway, I suppose pontoons could be seen as impinging on the navigation, effectively a 'land grab' but in practical terms a logical idea. I don't know who owns the river bed at that point but some time ago a developer wanted to put pontoons in the river at St Olaves and was prohibited from doing so by The Crown Agents who own much of the land below the low water mark around the coast and in our rivers. An obvious idea, the carrying out of which might not be so simple. Pass it on the JP, you might be rewarded with a BNP t-shirt!

[smellyloo]

I really find it rather gauling that people who pay a river toll, to allow them to keep their boat on the Norfolk Broads, assume that they have the right to dictate what the BA spend their budgets on.

If the BA existed solely to pamper to the needs of a minority of Broads users (ie boat owners) then the area would quickly decline as a tourist magnate.

[MauriceMynah]

Specifically to Marshman and Broad Ambition I would say that although I see both points of view, I feel that neither of you has focused on the crux of the issue.

Why does Acle need more mooring space? What is there? There's a pub and an eatery plus some far from attractive sheds. If the proposed centre in itself required moorings, then this can be accommodated without too much of a problem.

Yes the sum involved could be used for other things, but perhaps Griff made a tactical error in suggesting what those other things might be. I would sooner see works prioritised on the amount of usage, even if that does adversely affect me.

Obviously my personal preference would be to spend the money on employing (genuine) experts to determine the cause f the reduced clearance of "That bridge" to enable the craft that used to be able to go under, to do so again. THEN perhaps dredge Waxham cut.

4 minutes ago, smellyloo said:

I really find it rather gauling that people who pay a river toll, to allow them to keep their boat on the Norfolk Broads, assume that they have the right to dictate what the BA spend their budgets on.

If the BA existed solely to pamper to the needs of a minority of Broads users (ie boat owners) then the area would quickly decline as a tourist magnate.

Sorry Smellyloo, I disagree with your post. We do not have the right to "dictate" We do however, have the right to discuss and perhaps even to request.

secondly, I'm not at all sure that boat owners are the minority. we are however the only group that directly pays for the navigation.

[BroadAmbition]

If the BA existed solely to pamper to the needs of a minority of Broads users (ie boat owners) then the area would quickly decline as a tourist magnate.

But if those boat owners including the hire yards that pay the increased tolls did not pay them, then there would not be a tourist magnate at all.  Besides one is missing my point here.  Toll payers do not demand pampering.  What toll payers demand is that the navigation budget is spent on navigation. The big clue here is 'Navigation Budget' put in black and white.    It used to be ring fenced for that purpose.  Nowadays Tampax Towers seem to regard it as a slush fund to be spent on any idea / folly they can conjure up

Griff

[JennyMorgan]

Are moorings required at Acle? Well, if this visitor centre turns out to be the attraction that I suspect JP has assumed then yes, more moorings and extensive car parking will be needed!!

[JennyMorgan]

15 minutes ago, smellyloo said:

I really find it rather gauling that people who pay a river toll, to allow them to keep their boat on the Norfolk Broads, assume that they have the right to dictate what the BA spend their budgets on.

If the BA existed solely to pamper to the needs of a minority of Broads users (ie boat owners) then the area would quickly decline as a tourist magnate.

Loo, tolls revenue provides not less than half of the Broads Authority's income, surely that should count for something?

[MauriceMynah]

42 minutes ago, JennyMorgan said:

Are moorings required at Acle? Well, if this visitor centre turns out to be the attraction that I suspect JP has assumed then yes, more moorings and extensive car parking will be needed!!

I refer my learned member to the second half of my second paragraph

49 minutes ago, MauriceMynah said:

If the proposed centre in itself required moorings, then this can be accommodated without too much of a problem.

 

[rightsaidfred]

55 minutes ago, MauriceMynah said:

 

Why does Acle need more mooring space? What is there? There's a pub and an eatery plus some far from attractive sheds. If the proposed centre in itself required moorings, then this can be accommodated without too much of a problem.

 

When I passed through Saturday evening all the moorings were full to round the bend  including the BBC and Bridgecraft yards.

Fred

[Paul]

6 hours ago, MauriceMynah said:

Why does Acle need more mooring space? What is there? There's a pub and an eatery plus some far from attractive sheds.

Perhaps not a particularly good choice of location for a visitor centre then? You can sit in your Viking Long Haul sipping your skinny decaf mochachino and gaze longingly at all those (agreed) not very picturesque sheds. You might even enjoy a walk along the river bank to get a better view of them. Surely this would be better at Whitlingham, oh wait, there is already something along these lines there. 

Maybe Oulton Broad where there are already lots of other activities to enthrall the visitor, and relieve him of his hard earned dollar. Maybe the green in Horning next to the Swan, lots to interest the paying public in Horning. 

[MauriceMynah]

I take those points Paul, but there is a dilapidated building at Acle bridge, which the BA bought. Something had to happen to it and I doubt there would be anything other than criticism what ever they did.

[marshman]

And as a result they, unusually, bought some mooring rights  and now will not have to lease that bit, and be at the mercy of selfish and grasping landowners, who merely at some fanciful whim can get rid of the lessee!!!

Now they have surplus land behind the moorings themselves it seems to me a good idea to utilise it by building another building on it - to me thats asset management as it should be. Some posters are trying to make great capital out of where the funds will come from to pay for the building - the BA seem to be able to access funds from many sources, so lets just wait and see when the full funding package is put together.

[JennyMorgan]

2 hours ago, MauriceMynah said:

I take those points Paul, but there is a dilapidated building at Acle bridge, which the BA bought. Something had to happen to it and I doubt there would be anything other than criticism what ever they did.

All a matter of scale, cyclists, walkers, boaters, indeed the vast majority of stakeholders would, I suspect, be quite content with something quite modest, somewhere to sit and watch the world go by, somewhere to moor , somewhere for a pee, a shower perhaps and maybe a snack and a drink. Perhaps the Authority would even receive universal praise for something on those lines.

[JennyMorgan]

5 minutes ago, marshman said:

And as a result they, unusually, bought some mooring rights  and now will not have to lease that bit, and be at the mercy of selfish and grasping landowners, who merely at some fanciful whim can get rid of the lessee!!!

Now they have surplus land behind the moorings themselves it seems to me a good idea to utilise it by building another building on it - to me thats asset management as it should be. Some posters are trying to make great capital out of where the funds will come from to pay for the building - the BA seem to be able to access funds from many sources, so lets just wait and see when the full funding package is put together.

Perhaps finding funding for what stakeholders need rather than what JP demands would be a much more acceptable way forward.

[smellyloo]

11 minutes ago, JennyMorgan said:

All a matter of scale, cyclists, walkers, boaters, indeed the vast majority of stakeholders would, I suspect, be quite content with something quite modest, somewhere to sit and watch the world go by, somewhere to moor , somewhere for a pee, a shower perhaps and maybe a snack and a drink. Perhaps the Authority would even receive universal praise for something on those lines.

No, today people are much more sophosticated in their tastes and expectations. Sitting in a shed just will not attract visitors. A statement centre is just what the area needs in the 21st century.

[ChrisB]

On my way to Ranworth to board Olive after crossing Acle Bridge you come to the "Acle" village road sign. Can anyone tell me what it says?

Because it caught my eye. If I had been in my car instead of a minibus I would have taken a photo as I have said more than once on here that crossing Acle Brige is many folks first glimpse of The Broads.

[JennyMorgan]

2 minutes ago, smellyloo said:

No, today people are much more sophosticated in their tastes and expectations. Sitting in a shed just will not attract visitors. A statement centre is just what the area needs in the 21st century.

Heaven forbid!

Why should a more modest structure not fit the needs of 21st century man?

 

[marshman]

For the same reason that simple boats are no longer suitable for todays hire market - if they were then the likes of Len Funnell and Barbara Greasley would build them!!!

[smellyloo]

1 minute ago, JennyMorgan said:

Heaven forbid!

Why should a more modest structure not fit the needs of 21st century man?

 

Nothing to do with God.

Just my, ever so humble, opinion as  a person who was born & bred in Broadland and still lives here and cares about the future ...... not just boat owners needs but evertbody who lives & visits the Broads.

[JennyMorgan]

I'm not insistent on simple, just more modest and well suited to the location.

[marshman]

Loo - you are exactly right but that is not to say you will continue beating your head against a rather solid object on this Forum!!!!

[BroadAmbition]

A shop within the monument for passing craft would be welcome 

Griff

[JennyMorgan]

2 minutes ago, smellyloo said:

Just my, ever so humble, opinion as  a person who was born & bred in Broadland and still lives here and cares about the future ...... not just boat owners needs but everybody who lives & visits the Broads.

Likewise.

[JennyMorgan]

1 minute ago, marshman said:

Loo - you are exactly right but that is not to say you will continue beating your head against a rather solid object on this Forum 

 

Solid objects, quite. Marsh, take a peep in the mirror.