Penzance Harbour Development - a balanced view.

[treeve]

I state categorically that I have no connection with IoSSCo or the Dry Dock, or the relevant staff.

Whatever is ground by Admin, it must be remembered that Admin are here (as well as other factors) to try and get opinion and response, also to ask questions, to ensure thought is applied, rather than it being some XFactor show. This is real and important, the effect will be long lasting. If it does not work, it fails - itself and everyone. It HAS to be right NOW.

Speaking for myself, I have no personal bias, [I am 'half Scillonian' from my mother and 'half Penzance' and they are an intrinsic part of my being].

I am concerned for the historical legacy entrusted to Penzance, concerned for the maritime heritage of the Islands and Penzance, hoping the employment and income is kept local, rather than be wrested into the hands of an outside organization. People here need these jobs. If that is bias, then I put my hands up.

I have other things to say on the IoSSCo and other points, but they will come out in other discussions.

 

[palm123]

Fair enough Treeve and apologies if i got a bit shirty with you earlier.
Thanks for the other admin responses.

Again applause for Halfhiddens endeavour...but will it not lead to the same situation we already have ie. the protestors mobilising thier almost pavlovian response from thier round robin e-mail and accusing all RP's stats as 'rigged'....and PR giving the answers which we can all find for ouirself at the link i gave previously and others from Cornwall council.

Given the alledged succes of the pro option A street poll would it not be better to have an independent polling company do the job of finding what the locals think?
Of course i would say that as it appears that my suspicions, that most people are ok with option A, were correct.
If the poll could be framed to be as unbiased as possible and that then be put to the members of the Strategic planning comitte to revote on the scheme, would that not be a way forward.
If a local majority vote against option A, in free and fair election I would begrudgingly go along with it.
The RP polls have been flawed imho.......almost acting as a beacon to the protest lobby....they should have gone out on the streets to get real opinion.

I would just add that the historical significance of an obscure Battery wall escapes me. It's not like it's a St Micheals Mount or a Chysauster.
The listing process is there to guide us only. There are plenty of examples of listed structures having modern evolvement.

 

[Halfhidden]

The structural format of the forum would be in such a way as to advise people and not encourage the carnage I've witnessed on other sites. The whole idea is to bring to and end the misinformation and bickering.
The way this can be done is three separate threads clearly identifiable. Each thread would only be used for questions and answers. A fourth thread would be used for debate. That way no one party will have an advantage.

As for an opinion poll. This can be done here because we have the facilities to track members through their IP address and membership. But if you wanted to have a poll that could be presented as evidence of the direction people are thinking, then an independent poll is the only answer.
To be fair we are not proposing an online poll or extending the debate any more than necessary, but I think we all agree it would be good for everyone if the information was easily accessible and in one place.

 

[Halfhidden]

I did question Mike Waters quote on the Cornishman website. He claims that 700 signatures were collected in as little as five hours. I know from his email that only three people were collecting signatures in support for option "A" I questioned it because that's 1.28 signatures every 60 seconds.
The email said that a lot of people needed to be educated before they signed up because they didn't understand what option "A" was all about. It went on to say that once they understood they were happy to sign.
Now look at his claim again and tell me this is credible?
You'll understand my reasons for questioning this and this one of the reasons why this whole affair should be transparent.

If anyone made this claim (Option A, C or CC) I would want to see the evidence.

So by getting this online those claims can be examined by the populate and if needed questioned. It would be encouraging to get a response from someone within each organisation that could give a direct answer.

 

[treeve]

@Palm123 - Apology accepted. Valid points in that; however, I do not accept the argument regarding 'I would just add that the historical significance of an obscure Battery wall escapes me.' The harbour wall itself has merit in the fabric and construction not as a whole but as a growing account of the passage of time, and the methods used over the years. There are not that many harbour structures that remain and show this development, and what is more each stage has an affinity and a direct connection with much of the townspeople's personal history and written accounts to be found in publications over the centuries. The section of wall that extends away from the pier and into the 'parade ground area' which then extends on to the Battery proper, is an intrinsic part of the history of the area, connected with the cellars, the munpit and later lime kilns. My personal concern is that there may be evidence remaining either in the wall or under that parade ground that is vital to historical survey and record, for a better understanding of the history of the harbour. I also have grave concerns over the aspect that this 'beach and the wall is used by wildlife, in fact VITAL to the purple sandpiper, it is the only place that they have in this area. I also have considerable doubts as to the necessity of the 'rock-armour' and the applied breakwater to the old wall (South Pier), and its actual contribution to the whole structure. There are other ways (and better ones) that could be applied to this scheme, having worked on sea defence scheme designs in the past.
Listed Buildings being in other environments does not label it good, it merly states that the building is being preserved for itself, not because of the entire location and connection. As I say, this has the opportunity offered to get it right, and whatever other places have done x, y or z, this is not those places, this is Penzance.

 

[palm123]

I agree Halfhidden get the arguments out in the open because undoubtedly both sides are now engaged in spin.
Yes to an independent poll.......the brief for that poll to be agreed by all parties with no leading questions or pre ordained agenda.

However it still leaves the fact that we are running out of time.
Having watched the meeting in Parliament, and if memory serves, the opposition parties both declared that whilst they support the idea of funding an improvement they could not commit to the funding should they wind up in Government and the present Fund holder for the government seemed wishy washy saying something like there was no time scale but it would inevitably all be subject to spending review....anyone can look this on Hansard and challenge it .

The gentlemen were all agreed that any delay will cost 5 million pounds which ever scheme goes forward and that the deadline to begin retendering for costs on boats piers etc was within a few weeks. Thus taking the next decision stage past the election.

Imo that is Foph's victory ie. to delay this process to the point where it will simply be left gathering dust on the shelf marked 'Provincial follies'
and in 6 or 7 years the isssco will have to go cap in hand to the tax payer, yet again, to buy another boat while their customers will probably get a recycled bus shelter as thier new facility on the quay.

The 4 million spent will be totally wasted, 750 k of which is local rate payers money, and a scheme , whose aims were to install a self financing solution to the perennial problem of securing funding for a ship, will be dropped.

Strangely, though, if you ask several hundred of those rate payers {and voters} they seem to say ''i like the south pier option''

 

[CHILLYWILLY]

As another of the site staff administrators I too must declare that neither friend nor relative has any influence as to my opinions of the Route Partnership proposals or any other interested parties for that matter. I am not a Cornishman, being born in the town of glass in far off Lancashire. I do however consider myself as to being a man of Penzance having lived in or on the fringes of the town for 47 years. To those who know me will verify that I have a passion for certain historical areas of the town. I value the culture both past and present, along with the diversity of the architecture, which includes of course the harbour area.

I have looked at all of the proposals at length and have formed my own opinion. Yes it may only be an old harbour to some and not be as striking as St. Michaels Mount or the Market House, but to say it has no relevant history... Then I simply refer you to the following site. Cornwall County Council Halcrow Group Limited

This is not to influence anybody, I do not ask for you to take on any of the opinions stated. Just read the facts about the Harbour, Wharf and the Battery area. Give yourself time to read it all and then if you can tell me there is no historical value.

 

[symons55]

As one of the site admins, I'm not related to any I.O.S. staff or any of the dock staff, in no way do any of them sway my thoughts on the on going RP problems, but, I do know some of the I.O.S. staff and do know all of the dry dock staff, as a self employed electrician I have worked in the dry dock for two years prior to it closing, and since I.O.S. have taken over I have been there doing work again. I can honestly say that I have only heard one comment about the RP proposals. I have lived here for a lot of years and have lots of thoughts about a lot of things and none of them will be swayed by any one. I am my own boss and will think and vote accordingly.

 

[treeve]

Cornishness

I have just been in conversation with Colin Roberts Administrator of the Gorseth of Cornwall; I am preparing some items on Celts and Bardic Cornwall, to be included in Picture Penzance, when complete (I have been working on this research since 1995). He is clear that 'Cornishness' is not a matter of dna or place of birth or of prolonged genealogy, or the number of years in which a person is resident. 'Cornishness' is seen in pride and personal conviction of the importance of Cornwall, the presentation and promotion of its virtues and its culture, and in a general matter of carrying out debate with decorum and dignity.

 

[Halfhidden]

@palm123
Time is one of those things that was used in last years argument. If it is so precious then why not get the debate on the road.
I don't care how each side has acted in the past.
I do care how this is concluded! And I think I speak for most people when I say let's get the facts and information out to the mass. Lets get them answers to their question. Let's hear what the business in both Penzance and the Isles of Scilly want from this, let's listen to the resident of both area's, let's not needlessly destroy something that we regret (including relations between Isles of Scilly and Penzance) later. For all of that to happen surely we must talk?
Our proposals go to press and I have invited each group to take part. If they don't it will give a people a bad impression, I'm sure.
As I said earlier I have contacted Graeme Hicks both through his office and his private (home) email address. I have done the same for Charlie Cartwright.
Let's get this thing out in the open as soon as possible and everyone will benefit.

 

[symons55]

@ Palm 123, does it matter who we know or do not know? Why the question? May I ask the same question of yourself? Are you related to or affiliated to IOS staff, here or the Island, Dry Dock or Council??

 

[palm123]

SYMONS 55
i have no connections with with any of the staff or shareholders of iosssco or dry dock...i did work at the dry dock for a spell back in the days when it was Holmans. Being brought up and lived in Pz the majority of my life i inevitably know people who do work the boats, and i fear for thier future. That said i also have direct experince of Pz tourism trade and am acutely aware of the IOS link's importance to that trade.
I would hope that iossco win the operators bid and that any redundancies were voluntary or by retirement...but the overall value of a self financing and user friendly ferry service is the priority.

I too appreciate the history of the town and it's archietecture. Having an actual hands on responsibility for a part of that heritage ,in my own home, i am very much of the opinion that there needs to be a balance between what is worthy of saving and how functionality of any structure can enhance it's continued well being.
In that light I am drawn to the conclusion that Option A provides a solution to protecting the south wall. The new buildings are almost completely obscured. The unsightly exsisting features can be removed ie the tiolet block and the concrete reinforcement block. The overwhelming majority of passers by will not be going across the parade ground to check out the sea ward side of the new structure. Their eye and interest will always be drawn to the mount.
If we judge the battery wall and south pier on the grounds of who would want to visit it, as they visit chysauster or st micheals mount, then it becomes obvious what the level of it's historical significance is. That would be my criteria.

If option c had proved feasible then ok.

 

[Halfhidden]

I have just received an email suggesting that Route Partnership will involve themselves in this project. For that reason and to ensure a level playing field I will suspend this thread and leave it here for archive purposes.
A new forum thread will be created and the debate can start with a fresh footing.
I hope this is satisfactory.

 

[Halfhidden]

[FONT=&quot]European Parliament to investigate Penzance Harbour scheme[/FONT][FONT=&quot]
16/7/10

[/FONT][FONT=&quot]In an important breakthrough in the campaign to stop Option A the European Parliament yesterday agreed to investigate Cornwall Council's plans to build on Battery Rocks beach.[/FONT][FONT=&quot]
[/FONT][FONT=&quot]
The Friends of Penzance Harbour petitioned the Parliament in early 2009. The petition was deemed eligible in December 2009 and put on the agenda of yesterday's meeting of the Petitions Committee. A representative of the Friends of Penzance Harbour addressed the Committee and called for the Parliament's help in stopping Cornwall Council's EU-funded plans to build on Battery Rocks beach.

After hearing a report from the European Commission the Committee agreed that the matter required further investigation and that they would return to the issue at their next meeting after the summer recess. The Committee is in particular concerned about possible breaches of EU regulations.[/FONT]

 

[Halfhidden]

Breaking news!! Secretary of State has just granted Listed Building Consent on Penzance Harbour proposals. In affect allowing the landfill and harbour development to go ahead!

 

[Halfhidden]

Penzance's controversial ferry port takes another step forward.

The government has OK'd plans to build on the historic South Pier.

That is even though it is listed.

Campaigners are not happy.

They say it is an eyesore and should be out of town.
Julia Day, Chairman of the Council of the Isles of Scilly, said: “I am delighted that the planning process has finally reached its conclusion. This project is crucial to the Islands and the sea link is vital to every aspect of daily life. We look forward to the project coming to fruition.”

 

[tabtab13]

Not really a tactful comment from Julia Day, bearing in mind there is known opposition to this at the Penzance end. I'm wondering if there are any plans to develop the port and/or surrounding area at the Scillies to accommodate a bigger influx to the islands? Or is it a case of things will be left as they are there and it's just Penzance that will have to bear the brunt of the development?

 

[Halfhidden]

I agree... hardly tactful, but then again the whole Isle of Scilly council seems to be controversial.
As far as I know the IoS agreed to the development of their harbour some time ago.
However, may I just say this to everyone. The Isles of Scilly isn't some quaint set of islands off Lands End, they are a business and driven by business needs. That explains the reason why the Route Partnership have acted the way they have. I would imagine that most business owners on the IoS originated from somewhere on the mainland and have little historical interest in the place other than to make as much money as they can. Otherwise why else would they be backing such a destructive and clearly unpopular scheme.

 

[Halfhidden]

[FONT=&quot]Andrew George condemns Option A and the "bullying and intimidation" of its supporters[/FONT][FONT=&quot]
20/8/10

In a response to news that the Secretary of State has granted listed building consent in respect of Penzance Harbour South Pier, Andrew George MP has described the chosen scheme as the "most expensive", the "most damaging to Penzance's heritage" and the one that "does most to undermine the economic regeneration of the harbour area".

[/FONT]

 

[Bilge Rat]

The Missus and I have been fortunate enough to travel extensively in Europe and visit many
good examples of areas that have had the vision to actually implement
a harbour plan such as what is being proposed by PHUA, I have yet to
see such a development sitting empty and unused - they are great
catalysts for associated businesses and employment with the benefits
being shared by the community in general. I totally agree with the
theory that the 'powers that be' really do not understand how
harbours and marinas work and the potential they can bring to an
area. I'm wondering how much this could be changed if a
'fact-finding' visit to the a few successful examples on the other
side of the Channel like St Vaast or St Quay-Portrieux
were arranged to show the key decision
makers in the Council the real opportunities they are letting slip away...