A Broads Authority Positive!

[Paul]

Is the site too small, or the ego too large?

[JennyMorgan]

2 hours ago, psychicsurveyor said:

Pick your outside,  " independent " planner carefully and you can guarantee the right result.

In the case of the proposed 'Packman's Folly', it being a public building built with public money it meets the requirements for being 'called in'. Now, I'm no planning expert but this whole indulgent scheme is contrary to a goodly number of local planning policies and guidelines. Not only that but apparently the project has to be shown to be self sufficient, e.g. financed by mooring, car parking, cafe and shop, presumably similar to the visitor centre at Whitlingham Lakes. Apparently the site as is is too small to provide sufficient income thus the need to go big. A little birdy tells me that the adjacent landowner is less than willing to sell the required land to Dr Packman. So no guarantee that the required land will be available, no guarantee that the application won't be called in, no guarantee that there will be no public objections, no guarantee that 'highways' won't object and no guarantee that funding will be available. 

[vanessan]

20 minutes ago, JennyMorgan said:

no guarantee that the required land will be available, no guarantee that the application won't be called in, no guarantee that there will be no public objections, no guarantee that 'highways' won't object and no guarantee that funding will be available.

And certainly no guarantee that anyone is going to like it! 

[dnks34]

The only thing that may be guaranteed at this stage is money is being wasted on a project born from one mans ego that is most likely unachievable under the guise of a competition!  

Earth calling Broads Authority...........

[ZimbiIV]

All great leaders have their downfall moment!

Look to history to find them.

The fall from grace is directly related to their greatness.

So a shed at Acle is fitting.

paul