With all the facilities at the Rockport ledge (parking, bathrooms, shady areas) that location seems like the ideal spot for development. Why didn't that happen?
The original idea put forth by the best surfers in the ACC was a project to build a wave that worked at the minimum release flow level at Tanner Street. That way there would be surfing at Tanner Street when the generators at Remmel Dam were not running, and surfing at the current Rockport ledge when generation was taking place. That was going to be good enough. Four years later when the engineers from Recreation Engineering and Planning (REP) began work on the project, the top surfer's plan had become one of a full scale competition level wave at generation flow at Tanner Street and some enhancements at the current Rockport ledge. When REP filed the 404 Permit application the concept drawings for the project included changes to the current Rockport ledge (as spelled out by the top surfers) as shown in the drawing below which is from the 404 Permit application. The present sidewalk out to the wave is located at the far right side of the drawing behind the row of stones shown, but didn't exist at the time the drawing was made so it is not shown.
REP UPPER LEDGE PERMIT DWG by
CaptainAleve, alias Mike Coogan, on Flickr
As it became clear that cost might become an issue, work at the Rockport ledge was dropped. At the same time there had been comments from ACC members who opposed altering the existing Rockport ledge because that would be an unnatural act. There was also a question of whether or not development would be allowed near Malvern's new (in 2007) water intake that is just above the ledge, centrally located in the river near the big rock. That's why no actual plans were ever developed for improvements at the Rockport ledge. It should be noted the the existing Rockport ledge has been heavily modified from its natural form, first by surfers who moved and anchored a large stone that is essentially responsible for there being any surfing at all (prior to 1999), second by Malvern (in 2007) which blocked off flow that was eroding the bank where the present sidewalk out to the wave is. That sidewalk work was made possible by the ACC's $12,000 donation to the sidewalk,trail, and parking lot project in 2007. That money was matched by federal funds for the project in a 20 - 80 split with the $12,000 being the twenty percent. Yay! Free Money! After the sidewalk project was completed, the original $12,000 was still available (due to the payment timing required to get the fed money, you pay the contractor first and get reimbursed by the feds afterward, so you had to have money to get free money) and remains available in the Malvern account for the wave project.
Clearly there was no consensus in the ACC on whether or not to alter the Rockport ledge. It should be pointed out that the membership of the ACC as a whole has never been consulted as to what they might want the club to do at either Tanner Street or the Rockport ledge. As Maggie Powell said in the Malvern Wave post, the ACC should develop a plan for the future that includes what to do with the wave project. I would hope that in this modern era of communication all members would be given the opportunity to comment, whether electronically or by prepaid post card, or whatever means reaches all members best.
Mike Coogan, alias Captain Aleve