PUBLISHED: 17:46 03 December 2009 | UPDATED: 15:50 03 July 2010
THERE was some resistance in Great Yarmouth to the Yare Barrier plans first mooted in the late 80's/ early 90's owing to its planned location near Haven Bridge and its potential impact on Yarmouth as a 24-hour port particularly given its role as southern base for the Offshore Industry.
THERE was some resistance in Great Yarmouth to the Yare Barrier plans first mooted in the late 80's/ early 90's owing to its planned location near Haven Bridge and its potential impact on Yarmouth as a 24-hour port particularly given its role as southern base for the Offshore Industry. There was also anxiety from Southtown residents about any "wash-back" from such a barrier into low-lying residential areas.
With the arrival of the brand-new East Port outer harbour my feeling is that Yarmouth residents will now give their support to a Flood Barrier as long as it does not in any way jeopardise the progress of the key Third River Bridge from Harfrey's Roundabout to the South Denes - the line for which is awaiting approval next month by Norfolk County Council.
Getting that infrastructure (ie new Bridge) in place is absolutely central to improving Yarmouth's traffic problems and because the feasibility studies and consultations for a Yare Flood Barrier will take some considerable time to come to fruition I for one would not welcome any delay to try to combine the projects.
However, a Yare Flood Barrier in the future represents the best long-term defence for Broadland communities.
Borough Councillor for Yarmouth Central & Northgate
Leader of the Labour Group
I AM writing in response to Karen Baxter's letter (Mercury, November 27) regarding the recent consultation by First and Caister Parish Council. The consultation was carried out by both parties in order that local residents were able to give their opinions on whether our bus services should continue to operate along Prince of Wales Road or whether a revised route should be introduced.
At the beginning of the process we made a commitment to act according to the majority outcome - if local residents decided they did not want services to operate as they do now we agreed we would change the route. However, 58pc of responses indicated that they wished our services to continue as they are, and so we must comply with our original commitment. It would be erroneous for us to renege on this agreement and ignore the opinions of the majority of residents.
First East England
I WISH to respond to the comments made by R Burrage in last week's Letters reference the proposed windfarm. Stating that the "best place for the windfarm is the North Sea" is the kind of Nimby reaction which is so typical of those who are quyite willing to use power-generated by our dwindling fossil fuel resreves, but not to care where the replacement will come from - unless it affects them of course. The author states that within the proposed plans on display there was no artists' impression of how the turbines would look a little over 500m from their house. A whole lot better, I suspect, than a nuclear reactor. I'm sure the residents of Sizewell, if given the choice, would have much preferred a windfarm to gaze at over their breakfast cornflakes!
Winterton on Sea
I AM pleased to see the passionate debate developing, regarding Warren Road and the cyclepath, but as with any debate, if it's not based on facts it will become meaningless. So like it or not here are some honest facts.
Adults who dislike walking and regularly use cars for short journeys, breathe in more pollution, and are more likely to be overweight, develop things like heart disease and have a weaker immune system. In general more children are becoming obese, mirroring these adults.
Cycling is a cardio vascular activity which does the exact opposite when done away from busy roads. The first time a child learns to ride a bike they are normally exhilarated by the experience and who are we to deny them that experience.
A significant percentage of patients being treated by the NHS are in that situation because they choose to live a less than healthy lifestyle. I say this with the utmost respect for those who differ. Adults set the example, children follow.
Ok, now back to last weeks letters. I agree it may be wise not to make the track too smooth to keep speeds down, but the cobbles and half bricks I had ridden over last summer were hazardous to both cyclists and walkers.
As for the warning sign at the golf course indicating danger of death by golf ball, I'm sure the HSE would have something to say about the unsecured unguarded entrances. If this risk genuinely is, reasonably foreseeable, fit some childproof gates! Personally, I have survived being hit by a golf ball at high speed. Still, better that than a car.
Wildlife! I'm surprised there is any, with all these dangerous golf balls flying around and the last time I spotted a fox or a muntjak deer they were both dead in the road. I have a sneaking suspicion they had not been run down by cyclists either.
But seriously, children having the opportunity to cycle past the diverse wildlife described sounds a great idea. This may help children respect the reasons we are trying to reduce pollution.
As for access I am surprised vehicles are parked so foolishly they prevent the fire service reaching properties, let alone not leaving enough room for a cyclist to pass through.
In regards to cyclist picking up speed down a hill. I remember doing that, it used to be called fun, but if you're worried about out of control children don't be, even penny farthings were fitted with brakes.
If anyone living in this area is seriously worried about flash flooding, they could always replace sections of there ample driveways with wildlife areas.
I doubt any council would condone the “hacking away of hedgerows” without first risk assessing the suitable time of year as not to disturb nesting birds or adversely effect plant life, therefore conforming to guidance such as the wildlife and countryside act.
There has been an accusation towards Mr Butcher suggesting he does not have an accurate picture of who is for or against the cycle path. So, if it would help, may I offer my services to Mr Butcher regarding polling the people where I live in Hopton-on-Sea. I could cycle around with my children, the exercise will do them good. Just provide a suitable polling form. By the way hats off to the one!
Finally a joke for all the night time cyclists out there. Your path along the A12 will be safely lit by oncoming traffic.
CONCERING the jetty; probably every town or city has its stories of grossly inflated prices for public works; roofers saying they could have reduced by millions the costs of repairing a school roof or waterproofing the roof of a warehouse, or local tradesmen claiming they could have saved a council hundreds on the cost of emplacing a road hump. These stories may be exaggerated, perhaps even untrue, but they do prompt one to question the figure of £350,000 for a full restoration of the jetty, or £90,000 for the cost of a partial repair. After all much of the work, repairing the decking for example, seems to be little more than a DIY job while some of the other work, chipping off the Gunite for example, looks to be a laborious but otherwise unskilled job which could be completed by volunteer community workers. Admittedly some of the metalwork looks in a bad way but people in the trade say renovation is not as difficult as it appears to the layman, and in places away from the sea something not all that much superior to plumbers' tape could surely substitute for the Gunite.
The council may attach no value to heritage unless it provides an income but was it the ancient Greeks or the Romans who recognised the value of preserving old buildings to intensify social identity and local patriotism? or is that kind of thing no longer important? Numbers who use it as an amenity - whether those who wish to take the air away from the distractions of the Britannia Pier or stoic and self-contained anglers - may be small but they also have a right to service.
How regretable that at least some regeneration money could not have been put aside for the jetty instead of being squandered on unnecessary cosmetic work Marine Parade. And what a council to even think of demolishing it on the grounds of economy when there is so much over-employment in the public sector.
J F LAMBERT
I WAS surprised there has only been one letter against the proposed refurbishment and modernisation of St Andrew's Church, Gorleston. When the matter was suggested a few years ago, there were many letters in the Mercury, condemning the idea. I do not think it is realised that Anglican churches come outside the jurisdiction of the country's planning laws, and that they only need the approval of the Diocesan Board to proceed with these modern ideas. In the case of St Andrew's, the vicar says there is no hesitation by the Board in supporting the suggested refurbishment. This being so, it will not take long for notice of a proposed faculty is given. This is why it is imperative the opponents against this act as quickly as possible to nmotify the Board of their feelings. I feel the plan should be exhibited in the library to give the people of Gorleston a chance to see details of the proposals. Had this gone before the local planning authority, I am sure it would have been rejected out of hand. In the case of using the church for other purposes than traditional worship, we have the adequate Chapter House and incidentally, many thousands of pounds were spent a few years ago on providing a new kitchen. While I am writing about St Andrew's, in last week's Mercury there was mention of Capt Egbert Cadbury, who during the first world war married Mary, the daughter of the Rev Forbes Phillips, then vicar at St Andrew's. I know that during the time of the Rev Tony Clements, Peter Cadbury (Capt Egbert's son) had a meeting and money was left for the upkeep of his father's grave in Gorleston old cemetery. It would be interesting to know whether this trust has been maintained.
IT was disappointing to read of Karen Baker's "disgust" when reacting to the responses to the Caister bus questionnaire. It does seem her own reaction is motivated by emotional, rather than rational reasoning. She says it is only a short walk to the Norwich Road. It may well be from where she lives but would she feel the same if she was an elderly, or possibly disabled, person living at the far end of Diana Way? I am fortunate in being reasonably active but would not fancy carrying a load of shopping home from the suggested alternative stop. Perhaps opponents of the bus route who, no doubt mostly use cars, would consider an alternative solution such as double yellow lines down the length of Prince of Wales Road. No? I thought not, but would not be disgusted at their objections. If, heaven forbid, there is at some time in the future an accident involving a motor car along that road, would Ms Baker and those of similar mind, be advocating the banning of such vehicles. I make the foregoing points not to trivialise what has happened but to emphasise that if all parties work together we might find an acceptable solution. Karen Baker's letter does bring out some good points. If school buses do not need to stop in Prince of Wales Road, they could, and perhaps should, be routed elsewhere. There are occasions when buses do pass each other on this road, maybe the bus company could be persuaded to make alterations in the timetable to avoid this. Even then due to unscheduled delays such passes could not be entirely ruled out. It is wrong to suggest that the buses run every 20 minutes. The timetable is for a 30 minute service and they do stop regularly. If there was found to be good reason to stop the buses due to road width, I shudder to think what other routes within the area should also be cancelled. Consider particularly the routes around Gorleston and Bradwell for example. The general emphasis at the present time is to get us all to use the car less and public transport more. There would be even less chance of this if bus routes were restricted to main roads.
Caister on Sea
YOUR opinion comment last week came out in favour of a third wheelie bin for those who do not compost, but you rightly point out the problems that already exist with two bins. The borough council's “Dirty Stopout” campaign seems to have had very little, if any, effect as far as I can see. There are still bins left out all week all over the place and I haven't heard of anyone being fined for doing it. Will we now have even more bins being left out, and even worse with unwrapped food waste mixed with garden waste? There is also the very interesting question of where the compostable waste will be processed. I'm assuming that it will be done locally, creating local jobs and keeping the valuable compost resource in this area; rather than trucking it miles away, letting someone else have it and creating more pollution, more lorries on the road and more greenhouse gases. Also will garden waste now be banned from the grey bins?
I WAS puzzled to read the article last week on page 9 with villagers seeing red about a new phone box. Why do Parish Councilors not want it to be placed in a “conversation zone”, surely placing it in a “non-conversation zone” would render it useless? Or is dyslexia ruling KO?
Editor's note: Ho ho! Yes, we made a mistake it should have been conservation
WE have recently heard that an application to completely demolish the historic Jetty is likely to be made soon, and that if it is approved, the intention would be to demolish it as soon as possible. As the Jetty is in a Conservation Area, it would not be possible to demolish it without consultation with the relevant authorities, nevertheless the danger is real. The intention to demolish it quickly does not take account of the plans that we and other organisations are putting together to raise money to save and refurbish the Jetty. We are told by the National Piers Society that it is one of the oldest piers in the country, if not the oldest, and the postcard demonstrates its popularity in the middle of the last century. It could be popular again! The Jetty is an extremely important part of Great Yarmouth's heritage and we cannot lose it. Attempts are being made to have the Jetty listed, but in the meantime, if the application is made, and it may already have been, we ask everyone who feels strongly about the need to preserve the Town's heritage to object in no uncertain terms.
Great Yarmouth Local History and Archaeological Society
ON Friday last week, upon arriving at Morrison's car park in Gorleston, it became clear to me there was an altercation between two other motorists; the first a rather tall and imposing chap in his late 20s perhaps, the other a much older gentleman in his 70s at least. Now I don't know what the older gentleman was meant to have done, but nothing could excuse the behaviour of the younger chap.
Having abandoned his car in the middle of the car park with two very small children inside, he proceeded to front-up to the older gentleman, chest to chest, finger in face, shouting at him in a very aggressive manner. Now, if that wasn't disgusting enough, whilst there were plenty of bystanders, mostly male, standing and observing, not one person attempted to intervene and stop this poor man being verbally attacked and physically intimidated.
On arriving at the scene, I did intervene, all 5ft of me. Fortunately by this time, he had backed off anyway, but his victim should not have had to endure his behaviour at all and would not have done if someone else had intervened earlier instead of just gawping. The perpetrator then passed me several times in Morrisons and I overheard him telling his companion he “didn't need the Police banging on his door right now.”
I wonder why. Such a shame he got out of the store before I could obtain his vehicle details to pass to the Police so they could bang on his door. Well here is my message: I never forget a face and if the victim needs a witness, I'm the one in a red coat happy to be one.
Name and Address withheld
“THIRD bin to be wheeled out!” proclaimed the headline on the cover of the Mercury. Good news to end the year on, I thought, but then I read on. “And householders will have to pay….” Too good to be true, I should have known. Over the border in Waveney there has been a three bin system since before Yarmouth provided even two, plus separate collections for glass and food waste and all provided within existing council tax funding. There appear to be two reasons for the provision of a third bin, namely to meet externally imposed recycling targets and to raise revenue. There is clearly no interest among our councillors in environmental matters. If there were, they would long ago have been shamed by the paucity of their efforts by comparison with those of their counterparts in Suffolk. If Waveney can do it, Yarmouth can do it and should.
AN 87-year-old neighbour has lived in Burgh Castle most of her life and regularly used the old No 7 bus service every Thursday and Saturday to Gorleston to visit the doctor's surgery, chemist, Post Office for her pension and building society, plus other little extras.
She's a very independent lady, which is a very good thing for someone of her age. She now cannot afford to go to Gorleston so often as her trip means to get there safely she gets the new No 5 to Market Gates then the No 8 into Gorleston. To do this as a return trip with her shopping is too much so she has to pay for a taxi home which she can ill afford on her pension. She is not the only elderly person in this village that this applies to who has also been inconvenienced.
IN reply to Mr A Watker's question in letters in last week's Mercury I can give him the location of a further barrage balloon site.
There was a bomb site on the north side of Albion Road, just short of Alexandra Road. A balloon was sited there. I lived on Nelson Road Central at the time and some of us boys (there was not many of us about due to the evacuation) would go to the balloon site in the afternoons to watch the soldiers release the balloons. We watched in anticipation that some of the trailing wires would knock chimney pots off. Obviously, the space was too confined, so the balloon was moved to St George's Park.
During the early 1950s I returned to the Albion Road site as an apprentice bricklayer employed by Mr J Middle. We built a pair of semi-detached houses there. I know while digging the foundations we found lots of plaster casts for dentures and hypodermic needles. I earned £1.50 as a bonus and a bottle of brown ale when the foreman Jack Langham got married.
L J LISSAMORE