Jump to content

Berney Arms


Recommended Posts

  • 1 month later...

Appears that Broadland Council will consider the licence application tomorrow (22nd) 

BA and RSPB objecting. They are referring to access for patrons across permissive rights of way although I suspect Mr Hollocks and Co are not expecting patrons to arrive that way. I've not done the trip personally but I gather it is lengthy, involves various gates and knowledge of the marsh tracks. it wouldn't be feasible. I guess they expect to accept patrons by river, foot possibly or of course on the train but these are infrequent and don't run after dark for obvious reasons. 

Interesting to see what happens although as others have mentioned one wonders about the motives. Wonder who Netty Southgate is? Name rings a vague bell. A cursory Google search does find a Norwich artist of that name although not the same necessarily. 

Watch this space 

https://www.eveningnews24.co.uk/news/politics/owners-of-berney-arms-to-learn-fate-of-bistro-plan-1-6755611

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, NorfolkNog said:

A cursory Google search does find a Norwich artist of that name although not the same necessarily. 

 

There is a lady of that name on FaceBook, seemingly a dog rescuer and friend of the homeless, both meritorious traits in my books. Among her pictures is a rather fine snap of a Breydon sunset. 

As for permissive rights of access, something of which I have some experience. The original consent will probably have been granted by someone who is diseased, might even have no heirs thus there might not  be a living owner of the land in question. That can cause problems but then there might also be a question of migrating boundaries, a very real problem in identifying relevant landowners. I don't doubt that a right of access from the public highway to the property in question exists but most likely that is only a pedestrian right. Mr Horrocks will probably need very deep pockets, especially where the RSPB is involved. 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Hylander said:

Netty Southgate ,William Hollocks and his son Raymond.    Are you sure we are referring to the cast of The Archers?   Sounds like names from a good novel.

Netty, if I have discovered the right one, could well be a decent human being therefore a suitable member of the Archers. Regretfully I have yet to meet a tenant who has a good word to say about the others, perhaps not obvious Archers characters.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This made me smile:

"In a written objection, RSPB conservation officer Ian Robinson said: “The tenants do not have legal consent to access the property using the concrete road/graven track from the A47 via the Britannia Farm entrance and Breydon pump. As such we are unsure how they are expecting patrons to access the site, which is jointly-owned by the RSPB and two other landowners.”

Well, there's these very clever devices known as boats....

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, JennyMorgan said:

There is a lady of that name on FaceBook, seemingly a dog rescuer and friend of the homeless, both meritorious traits in my books. Among her pictures is a rather fine snap of a Breydon sunset. 

As for permissive rights of access, something of which I have some experience. The original consent will probably have been granted by someone who is diseased, might even have no heirs thus there might not  be a living owner of the land in question. That can cause problems but then there might also be a question of migrating boundaries, a very real problem in identifying relevant landowners. I don't doubt that a right of access from the public highway to the property in question exists but most likely that is only a pedestrian right. Mr Horrocks will probably need very deep pockets, especially where the RSPB is involved. 

Corona Virus?

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The decision has been made. The Bereny Arms will remain closed because the application has been rejected. The moorings are going to be closed by the landowner because he can no longer afford to maintain them without income from a working pub. The BA are claiming that the moorings are unsafe. The license was also refused on the grounds that the noise would affect the local residents. A change of use has also been refused. Looks like it is back to square one, but with the prospect of no moorings. A sad day for those of us who wanted to see it re-opened.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
  • Sad 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, socrates said:

affect the local residents

Assume they mean the birds! 

Very sad. But it operated as a pub perfectly well for many years, why are the RSPB getting excited now? 

It can't be used as holiday accommodation, can't be used as a pub, what's next? I glorified bird hide? Unless there is more behind the scenes. We will never know. If he was trying to prove it's unviable then he's saved the bother of opening to find out. 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
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.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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