Slow boot ups, inappropriate fall arrest and best wishes

My foolhardy injuries have been playing up a little this week but this morning I awoke relatively pain-free. I had to slowly rotate my left shoulder into action and coax the left wrist into the loud crack that indicates that it is serviceable, well at least by my standards, but that is just the morning routine. I shook righty into operation and rose, before setting the kettle on to boil. I was awake enough to use both hands with the kettle and not allow righty the opportunity to remind me that it was early.

And so it was that I entered the hotel bathroom feeling rather pleased with myself, naivety at best. Stepping forward to the mirror my left knee gave way and I crashed, always elbow first, into the sink. For those of you that don’t believe in Ms Nature I offer this as yet more proof, not only that she exists but that she is in league with our limbs. The conveniently timed knee failing can only be the work of the nefarious Ms Nature since from a mechanical point of view it should have failed when I first put weight on it. But where on earth does the human body conclude that, in the event of falling, an elbow is the appropriate means to arrest descent?

They do not call the ‘funny bone’ by that name for any reason of humour to the owner this bone is humorous only to a crowd. Throwing it at an immovable object to slow ones descent is like throwing gravel down in front of a child who has come out of his go-kart, in principle it will work but he would still rather that you didn’t bother. Following some rather unhappy comments sent regarding a recent post I should point out that I have nothing against the elbow, I find it all together an excellent device that solves a design problem, but it is not a parachute.

The elbow is simply not designed or intended for stopping a falling mass and only a vindictive force would use it for such a purpose. I will accept that the natural fall arrest system of the human body, the hands, is probably somewhat compromised in my case but my instincts don’t know that. Anyway it isn’t just me; every one of you reading this is recalling an incident of ‘funny bone’ collision and cringing. Next time that you crack your elbow on a hard edge, after you have done the obligatory funny dance, curse Ms Nature for her male

Check where you left your smile, it may no longer be there

I read, with sadness, of the decline of the wonderful art-deco style Grand in Sandown on the Isle. This is a wonderful building set in wide lawns opposite the beach. Sadly the building is owned by a ‘rot and redevelop’ type whose means of dealing with the planning authorities is to leave the building to decay to the point that they will pretty much accept anything. 

Sandown is a coastal town, much like my home, and these towns have suffered badly over the last ten years. It really worries me that the moronic planning system that we have does nothing to protect the fabric of these delightful buildings and their iconic status as landmarks. Anyone heading north out of Sandown would instantly recognise the grand and tens of thousands would recognise it as a family holiday location. A quick scan of the review sites reveals that as recently as 2013 people were raving about helpful staff trying to make the best of a tired building. Buildings do not decay overnight they decay because of long term neglect, where is the local authority during this? 

I have said before that I don’t believe in owning a pub I think that one can only be the custodian of the building. It is our job to protect and develop the fabric of the building for future generations. I know that my view is romantic and not everybody shares it but it really should not be so easy to take on a grand building and then suck its life out. Obviously businesses change and the economy cannot always support all of them, the licensed trade has seen this more than most, but we must do more to preserve our landscape. I can already hear the shouts of modernisation and need for housing but people need leisure spaces and pretty places. Housing estates are, in the main, dreary and soulless places let’s not let the country turn into one. 

I think that private funding should not absolve you of producing a business plan and that this plan should be shared with a local authority. When a person takes over one of these landmark buildings their business plan should be reviewed and set against a break price. All of the normal support for the business should occur of course, the best outcome is a trading and viable business after all. But an annual review against the business case could be used to ensure that the model is truly viable and that, more importantly, it is sustaining the building. I don’t for one minute want to restrict people from changing buildings or their use but an annual review would tell us if the ‘business’ was simply draining money from the venue and not preserving it. I am not alone in my thinking, looking at all of the hard work that my friends Andrew and Helen have put into their pub shows that some people really do want to preserve their premises. 

If the annual business plan review showed that the business was, in effect, trading the building to death then the local authority would be able to step in and buy at an artificially low break price. This element of planning would ensure that the people buying these businesses had a real and tested plan. Yes it would create a risk for the owners but we should not be so adverse to risk it forms a valuable check, in this case against greed. For most of us there is a real risk in business and perhaps where there is not we should pay closer attention to the plans if we want to protect our buildings. 

I have added a picture of the Grand and also of the gloriously tacky Wight City whose fate has gone the same way this year and is now boarded. The Wight City complex was an arcade, a café, a pub, nightclub and holiday lets before the owners concluded it was not viable. The building was shut this year and the owners applied to develop the site although at the moment I believe that they have been declined. Perhaps if the option to redevelop our history into accommodation didn’t exist then we would fight harder for alternative uses. I don’t for one minute think that the aging Wight City complex was a commercial gem or that its owners were making huge profits. My concern is that they are allowed to end anybody’s chances of retaining the building. In the glory days they may have earned good money and the current revenues therefore seem unsustainable but that is not to say that another operator couldn’t come up with a viable plan. 

Our seaside adventures did not take place in housing estates or gardens and our children deserve the opportunities that we had. I want children to grow up enthralled by the mystical scent of fried donuts and the dusty ghost train; I want them to remember how brave they felt standing on a wooden slatted pier staring down at the ocean. Our childhood memories are of the Wight Cities of the world unashamedly gaudy and strung in bright flashing lights. We might have to section off some of these buildings and look at alternative uses. To knock down and redevelop buildings whose very fabric is infused with the smiles and laughter of  generations is not only a crime it is irreversible and our children will never forgive us.