MoD water tower sold to mystery buyer

Gazette: MoD water tower sold to mystery buyer MoD water tower sold to mystery buyer

A WATER tower believed to be part of Colchester’s original Royal Artillery barracks has been sold after being up for sale for just two weeks.

The landmark in Butt Road was put up on the market for just £75,000 and attracted scores of offers to agent Fenn Wright.

The successful buyer could convert the 19th Century, octagonal building into a commercial venture or even homes.

Graham Buxton, partner at Fenn Wright, said: “It is fair to say because it is a unique opportunity to acquire a water tower, we received a strong level of interest.”

Mr Buxton did not wish to disclose what the tower finally sold for.

But he revealed that while the buyer is not well known in Colchester, they are from Essex.

He added: “They don’t tend to come on the market on a regular basis.

“I am not sure we were surprised with how quickly it sold.”

It is unknown what the buyer’s intentions are but the building’s owners Taylor Wimpey were given planning permission in 2011 for change of use from a Ministry of Defence, water tower to commercial class.

Fenn Wright advertised to potential buyers the two-storey building has the potential to be converted to residential use, subject to the necessary planning consents.

The inside of the brick tower measures 450 sq ft and the ground floor originally housed some baths.

A squat water tank replaced the roof and some windows.

There is also a potential area for car parking.

Mr Buxton added: “It will need complete renovation, whatever the buyer decides to do with it.”

Comments (27)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

10:04am Thu 30 Jan 14

stevedawson says...

Originaly the break tank between the mod water and the town.l suppose were in for another minor jumbo experience.
Originaly the break tank between the mod water and the town.l suppose were in for another minor jumbo experience. stevedawson
  • Score: 0

10:13am Thu 30 Jan 14

angryman!!! says...

Hopefully somebody can do a good conversation and show that it could be done for jumbo
Hopefully somebody can do a good conversation and show that it could be done for jumbo angryman!!!
  • Score: 0

11:09am Thu 30 Jan 14

Jess Jephcott says...

I had been looking at buying it for use as a military heritage museum but didn't stand a chance as the cash was on the table from persons unknown. I look forward to seeing it converted into something interesting. What a wonderful opportunity for somebody, hopefully without all the nastiness and negativity and enforced decay imposed on Jumbo recently. Meanwhile the search for a suitable location for a Colchester Military Heritage Museum goes on. We have some wonderful buildings still standing at the old Cavalry Barracks, one of which would be perfect but which the developers will not give up. They have applied to demolish them and CBC have rejected that proposal. All credit to them. These buildings are the first brick built barracks built in Colchester and are the only examples of the type and period in the country. We must protect or heritage at all costs and it looks as if the military water tower has already been given the protection it needs. I look forward to seeing the finished project.
I had been looking at buying it for use as a military heritage museum but didn't stand a chance as the cash was on the table from persons unknown. I look forward to seeing it converted into something interesting. What a wonderful opportunity for somebody, hopefully without all the nastiness and negativity and enforced decay imposed on Jumbo recently. Meanwhile the search for a suitable location for a Colchester Military Heritage Museum goes on. We have some wonderful buildings still standing at the old Cavalry Barracks, one of which would be perfect but which the developers will not give up. They have applied to demolish them and CBC have rejected that proposal. All credit to them. These buildings are the first brick built barracks built in Colchester and are the only examples of the type and period in the country. We must protect or heritage at all costs and it looks as if the military water tower has already been given the protection it needs. I look forward to seeing the finished project. Jess Jephcott
  • Score: 11

12:27pm Thu 30 Jan 14

TheCaptain says...

Jess Jephcott wrote:
I had been looking at buying it for use as a military heritage museum but didn't stand a chance as the cash was on the table from persons unknown. I look forward to seeing it converted into something interesting. What a wonderful opportunity for somebody, hopefully without all the nastiness and negativity and enforced decay imposed on Jumbo recently. Meanwhile the search for a suitable location for a Colchester Military Heritage Museum goes on. We have some wonderful buildings still standing at the old Cavalry Barracks, one of which would be perfect but which the developers will not give up. They have applied to demolish them and CBC have rejected that proposal. All credit to them. These buildings are the first brick built barracks built in Colchester and are the only examples of the type and period in the country. We must protect or heritage at all costs and it looks as if the military water tower has already been given the protection it needs. I look forward to seeing the finished project.
Good luck with the idea. It's surprising that we don't have a military museum
[quote][p][bold]Jess Jephcott[/bold] wrote: I had been looking at buying it for use as a military heritage museum but didn't stand a chance as the cash was on the table from persons unknown. I look forward to seeing it converted into something interesting. What a wonderful opportunity for somebody, hopefully without all the nastiness and negativity and enforced decay imposed on Jumbo recently. Meanwhile the search for a suitable location for a Colchester Military Heritage Museum goes on. We have some wonderful buildings still standing at the old Cavalry Barracks, one of which would be perfect but which the developers will not give up. They have applied to demolish them and CBC have rejected that proposal. All credit to them. These buildings are the first brick built barracks built in Colchester and are the only examples of the type and period in the country. We must protect or heritage at all costs and it looks as if the military water tower has already been given the protection it needs. I look forward to seeing the finished project.[/p][/quote]Good luck with the idea. It's surprising that we don't have a military museum TheCaptain
  • Score: 6

1:12pm Thu 30 Jan 14

omgwtfbbq says...

It would make a good swingers club......
It would make a good swingers club...... omgwtfbbq
  • Score: 7

1:44pm Thu 30 Jan 14

stevedawson says...

The best building for a military museum is now a destroyed burnt out shell overlooking waste ground that was the garrison swimming pool.
The best building for a military museum is now a destroyed burnt out shell overlooking waste ground that was the garrison swimming pool. stevedawson
  • Score: 3

2:07pm Thu 30 Jan 14

Madcowmac says...

A military museum in the old garrison riding school
A military museum in the old garrison riding school Madcowmac
  • Score: -3

10:16pm Thu 30 Jan 14

Ourdogtess says...

Jess Jephcott said

'What a wonderful opportunity for somebody, hopefully without all the nastiness and negativity and enforced decay imposed on Jumbo recently'.

As he knows perfectly well, no one has enforced years of neglect by successive owners. Its condition is entirely their responsibility.
Jess Jephcott said 'What a wonderful opportunity for somebody, hopefully without all the nastiness and negativity and enforced decay imposed on Jumbo recently'. As he knows perfectly well, no one has enforced years of neglect by successive owners. Its condition is entirely their responsibility. Ourdogtess
  • Score: 0

11:23pm Thu 30 Jan 14

Boris says...

stevedawson wrote:
The best building for a military museum is now a destroyed burnt out shell overlooking waste ground that was the garrison swimming pool.
Yes, that would have been an excellent place for it. Let's hope there will be an insurance payout to enable the MoD to restore that building and thus make it available, at modest cost, to become a museum.
[quote][p][bold]stevedawson[/bold] wrote: The best building for a military museum is now a destroyed burnt out shell overlooking waste ground that was the garrison swimming pool.[/p][/quote]Yes, that would have been an excellent place for it. Let's hope there will be an insurance payout to enable the MoD to restore that building and thus make it available, at modest cost, to become a museum. Boris
  • Score: 1

11:36pm Thu 30 Jan 14

Boris says...

Ourdogtess wrote:
Jess Jephcott said

'What a wonderful opportunity for somebody, hopefully without all the nastiness and negativity and enforced decay imposed on Jumbo recently'.

As he knows perfectly well, no one has enforced years of neglect by successive owners. Its condition is entirely their responsibility.
Yes to Tess, No to Jess.
.
it takes somebody's dog to see through Jess and his twisted reasoning. He says "we must protect our heritage at all costs" but, in the case of Jumbo, he wanted to destroy our heritage. His own contributions to that debate were pretty nasty. Yet now he has the effrontery to accuse everyone except himself of being nasty. Jess is full of good ideas but, as so often, he ruins them by sneering at everyone who differs from his own point of view. I seriously doubt that a person so lacking in courtesy, good manners and diplomatic skills is capable of co-ordinating a complex project like establishing a museum of military history.
[quote][p][bold]Ourdogtess[/bold] wrote: Jess Jephcott said 'What a wonderful opportunity for somebody, hopefully without all the nastiness and negativity and enforced decay imposed on Jumbo recently'. As he knows perfectly well, no one has enforced years of neglect by successive owners. Its condition is entirely their responsibility.[/p][/quote]Yes to Tess, No to Jess. . it takes somebody's dog to see through Jess and his twisted reasoning. He says "we must protect our heritage at all costs" but, in the case of Jumbo, he wanted to destroy our heritage. His own contributions to that debate were pretty nasty. Yet now he has the effrontery to accuse everyone except himself of being nasty. Jess is full of good ideas but, as so often, he ruins them by sneering at everyone who differs from his own point of view. I seriously doubt that a person so lacking in courtesy, good manners and diplomatic skills is capable of co-ordinating a complex project like establishing a museum of military history. Boris
  • Score: 2

12:04am Fri 31 Jan 14

DL1970 says...

Its a shame EH refused to list it seeing as it dates from 1875.
Its a shame EH refused to list it seeing as it dates from 1875. DL1970
  • Score: 2

12:18am Fri 31 Jan 14

DL1970 says...

angryman!!! wrote:
Hopefully somebody can do a good conversation and show that it could be done for jumbo
When you consider the vast difference in size, national significance and uniqueness of a Grade 2* listed water tower like Jumbo, any conversion of Butt Road water tower could be in no way be considered an adequate comparison by which to gauge any conversion of Jumbo. Butt Road water tower is not listed, nor is it anywhere near as unique or substantial as Jumbo.
[quote][p][bold]angryman!!![/bold] wrote: Hopefully somebody can do a good conversation and show that it could be done for jumbo[/p][/quote]When you consider the vast difference in size, national significance and uniqueness of a Grade 2* listed water tower like Jumbo, any conversion of Butt Road water tower could be in no way be considered an adequate comparison by which to gauge any conversion of Jumbo. Butt Road water tower is not listed, nor is it anywhere near as unique or substantial as Jumbo. DL1970
  • Score: 3

12:36am Fri 31 Jan 14

Hamiltonandy says...

I would have confidence Jess Jephcott could lead the development of a military museum with help from a lot of interested parties. He has assiduously collected lots of historical photos now online. It is puzzling why the developer refuses to engage in reasoned discussion about the unique military buildings but instead is doing everything he can to destroy our history.
.
Everyone has their views on Jumbo but it is a fact that the present owner is neglecting the water tower and not allowing any form of public access. Another fact is the owner has refused to negotiate the sale of Jumbo as I can confirm when his agent ignored all communications.
.
Perhaps someone could explain why the ex army water tower was sold so rapidly to a secret buyer. Sellers normally welcome competitive bids so this instant sale suggests this seller it sacrificing profit for some other advantage.
I would have confidence Jess Jephcott could lead the development of a military museum with help from a lot of interested parties. He has assiduously collected lots of historical photos now online. It is puzzling why the developer refuses to engage in reasoned discussion about the unique military buildings but instead is doing everything he can to destroy our history. . Everyone has their views on Jumbo but it is a fact that the present owner is neglecting the water tower and not allowing any form of public access. Another fact is the owner has refused to negotiate the sale of Jumbo as I can confirm when his agent ignored all communications. . Perhaps someone could explain why the ex army water tower was sold so rapidly to a secret buyer. Sellers normally welcome competitive bids so this instant sale suggests this seller it sacrificing profit for some other advantage. Hamiltonandy
  • Score: 3

12:48pm Fri 31 Jan 14

olliewestover says...

Hamiltonandy wrote:
I would have confidence Jess Jephcott could lead the development of a military museum with help from a lot of interested parties. He has assiduously collected lots of historical photos now online. It is puzzling why the developer refuses to engage in reasoned discussion about the unique military buildings but instead is doing everything he can to destroy our history.
.
Everyone has their views on Jumbo but it is a fact that the present owner is neglecting the water tower and not allowing any form of public access. Another fact is the owner has refused to negotiate the sale of Jumbo as I can confirm when his agent ignored all communications.
.
Perhaps someone could explain why the ex army water tower was sold so rapidly to a secret buyer. Sellers normally welcome competitive bids so this instant sale suggests this seller it sacrificing profit for some other advantage.
....." it is a fact that the present owner is neglecting the water tower".....

How can he be neglecting it, when he isn't given planning permission to do anything with it?

The building is Grade II* and so ANY change to the appearance requires Listed Building Consent. Catch 22.

And as for allowing public access...ditto. Unless you think just opening the doors to a decaying water tower and letting people wander about would be a good idea?
[quote][p][bold]Hamiltonandy[/bold] wrote: I would have confidence Jess Jephcott could lead the development of a military museum with help from a lot of interested parties. He has assiduously collected lots of historical photos now online. It is puzzling why the developer refuses to engage in reasoned discussion about the unique military buildings but instead is doing everything he can to destroy our history. . Everyone has their views on Jumbo but it is a fact that the present owner is neglecting the water tower and not allowing any form of public access. Another fact is the owner has refused to negotiate the sale of Jumbo as I can confirm when his agent ignored all communications. . Perhaps someone could explain why the ex army water tower was sold so rapidly to a secret buyer. Sellers normally welcome competitive bids so this instant sale suggests this seller it sacrificing profit for some other advantage.[/p][/quote]....." it is a fact that the present owner is neglecting the water tower"..... How can he be neglecting it, when he isn't given planning permission to do anything with it? The building is Grade II* and so ANY change to the appearance requires Listed Building Consent. Catch 22. And as for allowing public access...ditto. Unless you think just opening the doors to a decaying water tower and letting people wander about would be a good idea? olliewestover
  • Score: -1

1:59pm Fri 31 Jan 14

Jess Jephcott says...

I welcome anybody with the diplomatic skills required to take the idea of a Colchester Military Heritage Museum forward. Rather than attack me, join us and show us all how to do the job properly. I will happily stand down. This water tower would have been an excellent place for a modest museum but there must be other buildings that could be used. Sadly though, as is typical on here, people would rather attack than support. Jumbo is a case in point. It will now continue to rot for another 20 years or until we get a regime change to non-pettypolitical and free thinking councillors. If it wasn't for dinosaurs, Jumbo could now be a wonderful example of modern architectural adaptation of a structure from our industrial past. We should all be hanging our heads in shame at the wilful neglect of such a building. Meanwhile I will continue a virtual museum to our military heritage, placing it on the internet for others to see and enjoy. All contributions are welcome, be it memories, pictures, artefacts, display items, etc. until such a time as we can achieve the goal of a real museum.
I welcome anybody with the diplomatic skills required to take the idea of a Colchester Military Heritage Museum forward. Rather than attack me, join us and show us all how to do the job properly. I will happily stand down. This water tower would have been an excellent place for a modest museum but there must be other buildings that could be used. Sadly though, as is typical on here, people would rather attack than support. Jumbo is a case in point. It will now continue to rot for another 20 years or until we get a regime change to non-pettypolitical and free thinking councillors. If it wasn't for dinosaurs, Jumbo could now be a wonderful example of modern architectural adaptation of a structure from our industrial past. We should all be hanging our heads in shame at the wilful neglect of such a building. Meanwhile I will continue a virtual museum to our military heritage, placing it on the internet for others to see and enjoy. All contributions are welcome, be it memories, pictures, artefacts, display items, etc. until such a time as we can achieve the goal of a real museum. Jess Jephcott
  • Score: 0

7:10pm Fri 31 Jan 14

DL1970 says...

olliewestover wrote:
Hamiltonandy wrote:
I would have confidence Jess Jephcott could lead the development of a military museum with help from a lot of interested parties. He has assiduously collected lots of historical photos now online. It is puzzling why the developer refuses to engage in reasoned discussion about the unique military buildings but instead is doing everything he can to destroy our history.
.
Everyone has their views on Jumbo but it is a fact that the present owner is neglecting the water tower and not allowing any form of public access. Another fact is the owner has refused to negotiate the sale of Jumbo as I can confirm when his agent ignored all communications.
.
Perhaps someone could explain why the ex army water tower was sold so rapidly to a secret buyer. Sellers normally welcome competitive bids so this instant sale suggests this seller it sacrificing profit for some other advantage.
....." it is a fact that the present owner is neglecting the water tower".....

How can he be neglecting it, when he isn't given planning permission to do anything with it?

The building is Grade II* and so ANY change to the appearance requires Listed Building Consent. Catch 22.

And as for allowing public access...ditto. Unless you think just opening the doors to a decaying water tower and letting people wander about would be a good idea?
As the owner of a Grade 2* listed building, the owner has a legal and moral obligation to maintain it, whether he has planning permission or not. Clearly he has chosen to neglect it.
[quote][p][bold]olliewestover[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Hamiltonandy[/bold] wrote: I would have confidence Jess Jephcott could lead the development of a military museum with help from a lot of interested parties. He has assiduously collected lots of historical photos now online. It is puzzling why the developer refuses to engage in reasoned discussion about the unique military buildings but instead is doing everything he can to destroy our history. . Everyone has their views on Jumbo but it is a fact that the present owner is neglecting the water tower and not allowing any form of public access. Another fact is the owner has refused to negotiate the sale of Jumbo as I can confirm when his agent ignored all communications. . Perhaps someone could explain why the ex army water tower was sold so rapidly to a secret buyer. Sellers normally welcome competitive bids so this instant sale suggests this seller it sacrificing profit for some other advantage.[/p][/quote]....." it is a fact that the present owner is neglecting the water tower"..... How can he be neglecting it, when he isn't given planning permission to do anything with it? The building is Grade II* and so ANY change to the appearance requires Listed Building Consent. Catch 22. And as for allowing public access...ditto. Unless you think just opening the doors to a decaying water tower and letting people wander about would be a good idea?[/p][/quote]As the owner of a Grade 2* listed building, the owner has a legal and moral obligation to maintain it, whether he has planning permission or not. Clearly he has chosen to neglect it. DL1970
  • Score: 3

9:37pm Fri 31 Jan 14

Hamiltonandy says...

The maintenance of the existing structure of Jumbo has only been done under pressure from Colchester Council to ensure the building is preserved. The current owner has done some of the work badly and ignored the rest of his obligations.
.
You have to face reality that the owner's plans were rejected and ask why the owner has just left the building to rot. He had several choices. Firstly to submit acceptable plans after discussion with planning officers. Secondly to restore the building. Thirdly to sell the building for what he could get. Fourthly to lease Jumbo to a charitable trust who could raise funds to restore the building and open it for public access. To do nothing is shameful, petty and spiteful.
The maintenance of the existing structure of Jumbo has only been done under pressure from Colchester Council to ensure the building is preserved. The current owner has done some of the work badly and ignored the rest of his obligations. . You have to face reality that the owner's plans were rejected and ask why the owner has just left the building to rot. He had several choices. Firstly to submit acceptable plans after discussion with planning officers. Secondly to restore the building. Thirdly to sell the building for what he could get. Fourthly to lease Jumbo to a charitable trust who could raise funds to restore the building and open it for public access. To do nothing is shameful, petty and spiteful. Hamiltonandy
  • Score: 4

1:52am Sun 2 Feb 14

Boris says...

Jess Jephcott wrote:
I welcome anybody with the diplomatic skills required to take the idea of a Colchester Military Heritage Museum forward. Rather than attack me, join us and show us all how to do the job properly. I will happily stand down. This water tower would have been an excellent place for a modest museum but there must be other buildings that could be used. Sadly though, as is typical on here, people would rather attack than support. Jumbo is a case in point. It will now continue to rot for another 20 years or until we get a regime change to non-pettypolitical and free thinking councillors. If it wasn't for dinosaurs, Jumbo could now be a wonderful example of modern architectural adaptation of a structure from our industrial past. We should all be hanging our heads in shame at the wilful neglect of such a building. Meanwhile I will continue a virtual museum to our military heritage, placing it on the internet for others to see and enjoy. All contributions are welcome, be it memories, pictures, artefacts, display items, etc. until such a time as we can achieve the goal of a real museum.
The only reason Jumbo will continue to rot is if CBC continues to allow the owner to neglect it. Any self-respecting local authority would compulsorily purchase Jumbo for a fair value (probably £1), having previously arranged to re-sell it the same day for the same amount to a body which is able and to willing to raise the funds to restore it.
As for your hope of a "regime change to non-pettypolitical and free thinking councillors", well, that would be nice, but it is not likely to happen in the lifetime of anyone currently reading this thread. Meanwhile we have to make do with the councillors that we have got. While they may have dropped the ball big time on the Mile End development (but this may have been under orders from central government), they have done a pretty good job on gimcrack schemes such as Horkesley Park or the nightmare that Mr Braithwaite wixhes to impose on Colchester.
[quote][p][bold]Jess Jephcott[/bold] wrote: I welcome anybody with the diplomatic skills required to take the idea of a Colchester Military Heritage Museum forward. Rather than attack me, join us and show us all how to do the job properly. I will happily stand down. This water tower would have been an excellent place for a modest museum but there must be other buildings that could be used. Sadly though, as is typical on here, people would rather attack than support. Jumbo is a case in point. It will now continue to rot for another 20 years or until we get a regime change to non-pettypolitical and free thinking councillors. If it wasn't for dinosaurs, Jumbo could now be a wonderful example of modern architectural adaptation of a structure from our industrial past. We should all be hanging our heads in shame at the wilful neglect of such a building. Meanwhile I will continue a virtual museum to our military heritage, placing it on the internet for others to see and enjoy. All contributions are welcome, be it memories, pictures, artefacts, display items, etc. until such a time as we can achieve the goal of a real museum.[/p][/quote]The only reason Jumbo will continue to rot is if CBC continues to allow the owner to neglect it. Any self-respecting local authority would compulsorily purchase Jumbo for a fair value (probably £1), having previously arranged to re-sell it the same day for the same amount to a body which is able and to willing to raise the funds to restore it. As for your hope of a "regime change to non-pettypolitical and free thinking councillors", well, that would be nice, but it is not likely to happen in the lifetime of anyone currently reading this thread. Meanwhile we have to make do with the councillors that we have got. While they may have dropped the ball big time on the Mile End development (but this may have been under orders from central government), they have done a pretty good job on gimcrack schemes such as Horkesley Park or the nightmare that Mr Braithwaite wixhes to impose on Colchester. Boris
  • Score: 2

2:01am Sun 2 Feb 14

Boris says...

Hamiltonandy wrote:
The maintenance of the existing structure of Jumbo has only been done under pressure from Colchester Council to ensure the building is preserved. The current owner has done some of the work badly and ignored the rest of his obligations.
.
You have to face reality that the owner's plans were rejected and ask why the owner has just left the building to rot. He had several choices. Firstly to submit acceptable plans after discussion with planning officers. Secondly to restore the building. Thirdly to sell the building for what he could get. Fourthly to lease Jumbo to a charitable trust who could raise funds to restore the building and open it for public access. To do nothing is shameful, petty and spiteful.
Andy, this is all spot on, except for your suggestion of leasing Jumbo to a charitable trust. We have had this exchange before, and correct me if I am wrong, but my understanding is that bodies such as the National Lottery or English Heritage will only release funds to a body which owns the freehold of the building in question. Therefore your fourth choice is, unfortunately, a non-starter.
[quote][p][bold]Hamiltonandy[/bold] wrote: The maintenance of the existing structure of Jumbo has only been done under pressure from Colchester Council to ensure the building is preserved. The current owner has done some of the work badly and ignored the rest of his obligations. . You have to face reality that the owner's plans were rejected and ask why the owner has just left the building to rot. He had several choices. Firstly to submit acceptable plans after discussion with planning officers. Secondly to restore the building. Thirdly to sell the building for what he could get. Fourthly to lease Jumbo to a charitable trust who could raise funds to restore the building and open it for public access. To do nothing is shameful, petty and spiteful.[/p][/quote]Andy, this is all spot on, except for your suggestion of leasing Jumbo to a charitable trust. We have had this exchange before, and correct me if I am wrong, but my understanding is that bodies such as the National Lottery or English Heritage will only release funds to a body which owns the freehold of the building in question. Therefore your fourth choice is, unfortunately, a non-starter. Boris
  • Score: 3

12:21pm Sun 2 Feb 14

Ourdogtess says...

Boris wrote:
Hamiltonandy wrote:
The maintenance of the existing structure of Jumbo has only been done under pressure from Colchester Council to ensure the building is preserved. The current owner has done some of the work badly and ignored the rest of his obligations.
.
You have to face reality that the owner's plans were rejected and ask why the owner has just left the building to rot. He had several choices. Firstly to submit acceptable plans after discussion with planning officers. Secondly to restore the building. Thirdly to sell the building for what he could get. Fourthly to lease Jumbo to a charitable trust who could raise funds to restore the building and open it for public access. To do nothing is shameful, petty and spiteful.
Andy, this is all spot on, except for your suggestion of leasing Jumbo to a charitable trust. We have had this exchange before, and correct me if I am wrong, but my understanding is that bodies such as the National Lottery or English Heritage will only release funds to a body which owns the freehold of the building in question. Therefore your fourth choice is, unfortunately, a non-starter.
Jess Jephcott wrote

"…Jumbo is a case in point. It will now continue to rot for another 20 years or until we get a regime change to non-pettypolitical and free thinking councillors. If it wasn't for dinosaurs, Jumbo could now be a wonderful example of modern architectural adaptation of a structure from our industrial past. We should all be hanging our heads in shame at the wilful neglect of such a building"

Jess, your wilful distortion of the facts is unbelievable. Why should 'we' hang our heads in shame? The wilful neglect of Jumbo is solely the responsibility of successive private owners over 26 years. You would not blame your neighbours if you allowed your own house to fall into disrepair.

To be consistent, you should applaud any scheme to convert the Garrison water tower into 'a wonderful example of modern architectural adaptation' rather than a military museum. You can't have it both ways.

A military museum is a laudable aim. The now burnt out shell of the old garrison gym would make a wonderful home, but it's a daunting task.
[quote][p][bold]Boris[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Hamiltonandy[/bold] wrote: The maintenance of the existing structure of Jumbo has only been done under pressure from Colchester Council to ensure the building is preserved. The current owner has done some of the work badly and ignored the rest of his obligations. . You have to face reality that the owner's plans were rejected and ask why the owner has just left the building to rot. He had several choices. Firstly to submit acceptable plans after discussion with planning officers. Secondly to restore the building. Thirdly to sell the building for what he could get. Fourthly to lease Jumbo to a charitable trust who could raise funds to restore the building and open it for public access. To do nothing is shameful, petty and spiteful.[/p][/quote]Andy, this is all spot on, except for your suggestion of leasing Jumbo to a charitable trust. We have had this exchange before, and correct me if I am wrong, but my understanding is that bodies such as the National Lottery or English Heritage will only release funds to a body which owns the freehold of the building in question. Therefore your fourth choice is, unfortunately, a non-starter.[/p][/quote]Jess Jephcott wrote "…Jumbo is a case in point. It will now continue to rot for another 20 years or until we get a regime change to non-pettypolitical and free thinking councillors. If it wasn't for dinosaurs, Jumbo could now be a wonderful example of modern architectural adaptation of a structure from our industrial past. We should all be hanging our heads in shame at the wilful neglect of such a building" Jess, your wilful distortion of the facts is unbelievable. Why should 'we' hang our heads in shame? The wilful neglect of Jumbo is solely the responsibility of successive private owners over 26 years. You would not blame your neighbours if you allowed your own house to fall into disrepair. To be consistent, you should applaud any scheme to convert the Garrison water tower into 'a wonderful example of modern architectural adaptation' rather than a military museum. You can't have it both ways. A military museum is a laudable aim. The now burnt out shell of the old garrison gym would make a wonderful home, but it's a daunting task. Ourdogtess
  • Score: -3

3:20pm Sun 2 Feb 14

Jess Jephcott says...

I don't know what planet some of the commentators on here are on but the likelihood of getting Mr Braithwaite spending good money to simply clean up Jumbo is pure pie in the sky. Nobody is going to make him do it and you must all know that. What he will do is spend good money on converting it into a useable building, as has been done with countless heritage buildings across the country. One only has to look at the voting pattern by the planners to see that this was pure political spite. But moving on, the military water tower will hopefully be unaffected by these political midgets and will be turned to another use. It will never be used as a water tower again - a bit like poor old Jumbo. As to the gymnasium, my understanding was that it was in such poor condition, a good old mystery fire was needed to enable the owners to be able to get the insurers to mitigate the potential loss. My bet is that it will go the same way as Jumbo and rot for another 20 years.
I don't know what planet some of the commentators on here are on but the likelihood of getting Mr Braithwaite spending good money to simply clean up Jumbo is pure pie in the sky. Nobody is going to make him do it and you must all know that. What he will do is spend good money on converting it into a useable building, as has been done with countless heritage buildings across the country. One only has to look at the voting pattern by the planners to see that this was pure political spite. But moving on, the military water tower will hopefully be unaffected by these political midgets and will be turned to another use. It will never be used as a water tower again - a bit like poor old Jumbo. As to the gymnasium, my understanding was that it was in such poor condition, a good old mystery fire was needed to enable the owners to be able to get the insurers to mitigate the potential loss. My bet is that it will go the same way as Jumbo and rot for another 20 years. Jess Jephcott
  • Score: -1

4:10pm Sun 2 Feb 14

Hamiltonandy says...

Unfortunately the owner of Jumbo is refusing to communicate and so we have no idea what he plans except based on the present evidence - do absolutely nothing unless legally forced into action by the council. I would not accuse the planning councillors as "acting in pure political spite" as Jess Jephcott suggests. It was as judgement call and they had to refuse on recognised planning grounds. The owner chose not to appeal and presumably gets some pleasure watching the dispute go on and on.
.
Hopefully Colchester Council will give an ultimatum to the owner to resolve the situation or face a compulsory purchase at the current valuation. I would be delighted to help a charity that takes on Jumbo so public access is permitted.
Unfortunately the owner of Jumbo is refusing to communicate and so we have no idea what he plans except based on the present evidence - do absolutely nothing unless legally forced into action by the council. I would not accuse the planning councillors as "acting in pure political spite" as Jess Jephcott suggests. It was as judgement call and they had to refuse on recognised planning grounds. The owner chose not to appeal and presumably gets some pleasure watching the dispute go on and on. . Hopefully Colchester Council will give an ultimatum to the owner to resolve the situation or face a compulsory purchase at the current valuation. I would be delighted to help a charity that takes on Jumbo so public access is permitted. Hamiltonandy
  • Score: 1

10:02pm Sun 2 Feb 14

Jess Jephcott says...

We all need to move on Andy. Jumbo is settled for the foreseeable future. We have the next battle on our hands to protect our military heritage, So much of it has been destroyed recently and more will be destroyed if we don't keep our eye on the ball. Developers only have an eye on profit. Heritage buildings are an inconvenience to them. The military water tower has a new owner and already has planning consent. Good luck to the new owners. But what about the 1860s Cavalry Barracks buildings that are the only ones of their kind left in the country? They are unique. Let's not squabble over this. They need our protection before it is too late.
We all need to move on Andy. Jumbo is settled for the foreseeable future. We have the next battle on our hands to protect our military heritage, So much of it has been destroyed recently and more will be destroyed if we don't keep our eye on the ball. Developers only have an eye on profit. Heritage buildings are an inconvenience to them. The military water tower has a new owner and already has planning consent. Good luck to the new owners. But what about the 1860s Cavalry Barracks buildings that are the only ones of their kind left in the country? They are unique. Let's not squabble over this. They need our protection before it is too late. Jess Jephcott
  • Score: -1

2:49am Mon 3 Feb 14

Boris says...

Jess Jephcott wrote:
We all need to move on Andy. Jumbo is settled for the foreseeable future. We have the next battle on our hands to protect our military heritage, So much of it has been destroyed recently and more will be destroyed if we don't keep our eye on the ball. Developers only have an eye on profit. Heritage buildings are an inconvenience to them. The military water tower has a new owner and already has planning consent. Good luck to the new owners. But what about the 1860s Cavalry Barracks buildings that are the only ones of their kind left in the country? They are unique. Let's not squabble over this. They need our protection before it is too late.
Jess, your poisonous bile is getting very boring. You love to support people who want to destroy our heritage, like the Bunting family and George Braithwaite, and yet you claim to defend that heritage. You accuse everyone else of being political midgets, of acting out of spite, or of inhabiting a different planet. You then say what you think should be done about the Cavalry Barracks, and warn everyone not to squabble with you about it. For you, there are only ever two solutions to a given problem: the Jephcott one, and the wrong one. You need to move away from this dictatorial approach.
[quote][p][bold]Jess Jephcott[/bold] wrote: We all need to move on Andy. Jumbo is settled for the foreseeable future. We have the next battle on our hands to protect our military heritage, So much of it has been destroyed recently and more will be destroyed if we don't keep our eye on the ball. Developers only have an eye on profit. Heritage buildings are an inconvenience to them. The military water tower has a new owner and already has planning consent. Good luck to the new owners. But what about the 1860s Cavalry Barracks buildings that are the only ones of their kind left in the country? They are unique. Let's not squabble over this. They need our protection before it is too late.[/p][/quote]Jess, your poisonous bile is getting very boring. You love to support people who want to destroy our heritage, like the Bunting family and George Braithwaite, and yet you claim to defend that heritage. You accuse everyone else of being political midgets, of acting out of spite, or of inhabiting a different planet. You then say what you think should be done about the Cavalry Barracks, and warn everyone not to squabble with you about it. For you, there are only ever two solutions to a given problem: the Jephcott one, and the wrong one. You need to move away from this dictatorial approach. Boris
  • Score: 0

7:01pm Mon 3 Feb 14

colcestrian says...

I was under the impression that the old garrison gymnasium along with the medical centre next door actually belong to the council as part of a land deal with the MOD. Therefore it is the council that allowed it to get to the state it was before the fire, a fire of which the origin is and will remain unknown as the investigation was dropped
I was under the impression that the old garrison gymnasium along with the medical centre next door actually belong to the council as part of a land deal with the MOD. Therefore it is the council that allowed it to get to the state it was before the fire, a fire of which the origin is and will remain unknown as the investigation was dropped colcestrian
  • Score: 0

7:04pm Mon 3 Feb 14

colcestrian says...

I was under the impression that the old garrison gymnasium and the neighbouring medical centre already belonged to the council as part of a land swap deal with the MOD when the new garrison was built. Therefore it was the council that allowed it to get into the state it was before the fire. A fire who's origins are unknown and will remain so as the investigations have been dropped.
I was under the impression that the old garrison gymnasium and the neighbouring medical centre already belonged to the council as part of a land swap deal with the MOD when the new garrison was built. Therefore it was the council that allowed it to get into the state it was before the fire. A fire who's origins are unknown and will remain so as the investigations have been dropped. colcestrian
  • Score: 0

7:32pm Mon 3 Feb 14

Boris says...

colcestrian wrote:
I was under the impression that the old garrison gymnasium along with the medical centre next door actually belong to the council as part of a land deal with the MOD. Therefore it is the council that allowed it to get to the state it was before the fire, a fire of which the origin is and will remain unknown as the investigation was dropped
If the investigation was dropped, that must mean there was no insurance payout, or maybe the building wasn't insured at all. Shameful, either way. Reconstruction costs will then rule it out as a home for Jess's museum.
[quote][p][bold]colcestrian[/bold] wrote: I was under the impression that the old garrison gymnasium along with the medical centre next door actually belong to the council as part of a land deal with the MOD. Therefore it is the council that allowed it to get to the state it was before the fire, a fire of which the origin is and will remain unknown as the investigation was dropped[/p][/quote]If the investigation was dropped, that must mean there was no insurance payout, or maybe the building wasn't insured at all. Shameful, either way. Reconstruction costs will then rule it out as a home for Jess's museum. Boris
  • Score: 0

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree