This site is supported by the advertisements on it, please disable your AdBlocker so we can continue to provide you with the quality content you expect.
  1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. Picture Penzance is free to join and use. So why not join our community. As a member you can upload images, add comments, participate in our contests and connect with like minded people.
    All the best,
    Halfhidden (founder member)

Sign up for free today
Membership Is Free
No Adds
Members Only Areas
And lots More!

CLICK HERE

Harbour Developments 2010

Discussion in 'Harbours' started by treeve, Jan 27, 2010.

  1. pendarves

    pendarves

    Messages:
    14
    Likes Received:
    0
    Of course nothing is written in stone - but Cornish contractors are able to bid for contracts/sub-contracts according to EU rules, if they lose out to lower bids from overseas (other EU) bidders at least they tried. If there is no company in Cornwall able to bid for any part, then that must be a reflection on how much Cornwall has declined in engineering and other potential over the last half century. Lack of development due to what reason? Too many local objections to developments?
     
  2. treeve

    treeve Major Contributor

    Messages:
    3,074
    Likes Received:
    118
    For forty years I observed just what happened to Contractors in Cornwall and with 'new' tendering rules, they began to decline. We were allowed to select suitable contractors local to any specific area or discipline, ensuring local employment and continuance of businesses; so nine people were selected locally for selection of six tenders. We had the luxury of ensuring it stayed in the area. That luxury is now dead. The result is definitely bad for local contractors in any county. It is also bad for the contracts, I can assure you, and for the clients.
     
  3. Halfhidden

    Halfhidden Untouchable Staff Member Administrator

    Messages:
    3,466
    Likes Received:
    949
    Ohh I love a good debate.
    As far as I know Pendarves, nobody has objected to the development.... rather how this development is to be done.
    The problem is simply too many plans and absolute and total confusion about the real benefits and drawbacks of each.
    One way or another the development will have to start soon, but the possibility of the ferry going to Falmouth has been taken out of the equation because the EU funding was specifically for an upgrade sea link between Penzance and Isles of Scilly.
    What development would you like to see go through?
     
  4. treeve

    treeve Major Contributor

    Messages:
    3,074
    Likes Received:
    118
    I was also wanting to ask this question, as I there is that other chestnut cracking in the fire.

    How many projects have been stopped due to 'objections' in Cornwall to be able to even consider that there is that marked and major reason behind the decline of business in the Duchy.

    The Cornish have been slagged so much and too often for being 'stick in the muds' and for 'living in the past'. I personally am hacked off about such talk.
     
  5. pendarves

    pendarves

    Messages:
    14
    Likes Received:
    0
    Harbour Developments

    If the problem with developments in Cornwall is not due to too many objections - what is the reason? Locally, in Penwith, we have a potential development of a disused quarry which has run into difficulty; a new fish market for Newlyn which seems to be in difficulty; the delay in developing Hayle harbour; the lack of a decent sports stadium in Cornwall - care to add others anyone?
     
  6. pendarves

    pendarves

    Messages:
    14
    Likes Received:
    0
    I'd like to see the most economical solution in terms of future costs to the Isles of Scilly and the best solution in terms of jobs and economic growth for Penwith. I have not great desire to retain the beach at Battery Rocks - having been born here, I can never recall seeing anyone swimming from that beach. Sure, I remember swimming from the 'mens bathing place' at the Battery Rocks, but east of the War Memorial? Never.

    As for retaining the old Harbour Wall - when was the last time any visitors were seen studying it? Construction may cause some upheaval, but what would the situation be once construction is finished?

    I'm at the age where I would be lucky to see the finished product- but I would certainly not vote against it if is the best economic solution.
     
  7. Halfhidden

    Halfhidden Untouchable Staff Member Administrator

    Messages:
    3,466
    Likes Received:
    949
    Those are fair points... but I know the "Harriers" swim off this are and have done for 50 years (I think).
    But some sentiment must be included or else progress will soon become a disease as it did in this town during the 1960's... and that is still fresh in the minds of many.
    Personally, I would like to see a compromise and a deal that could suit businesses as well as residential and if that cost's just that little bit more... then it's worth the investment.
     
  8. pendarves

    pendarves

    Messages:
    14
    Likes Received:
    0
    Harbour Developments

    Not sure what 'progress' you are referring to. If you are referring to the plasticising of the main shopping street shop signs - then I agree with you, or maybe you are referring to a town where many families are still required to live in pre-Edwardian buildings for the sake of a sentimental need for a 'Conservation area'; or a lack of a coherent on-street parking policy which would enable the gutters to be swept at least once a fortnight; or the failure of street cleaning to at least keep pavements clean of leaves. Certainly have an Historic Area - if there is one - but lets have it limited to, say, pre-Victorian sites, otherwise in another ten or twenty years public housing projects like the Teneere Estate will qualify as Conservation areas.
     
  9. Halfhidden

    Halfhidden Untouchable Staff Member Administrator

    Messages:
    3,466
    Likes Received:
    949
    I can't see what connections street cleaning and harbour developments have in common.
    Conservation is important and should not be ignored.... however the management of whatever is conserved is another matter.
    If you are talking about things like the colour police (AKA Penwith Council) who insisted that all buildings whether Victorian or Edwardian were painted magnolia and that they couldn't incorporate sensible and tasteful additions like secondary glazing.... then I agree!
    But this is Penzance and the very reason why we attract visitors is because of the history we have preserved through conservation.
    I'm simply saying that any development of the harbour area should be sensitive.
     
  10. treeve

    treeve Major Contributor

    Messages:
    3,074
    Likes Received:
    118
    OK, seriously, if you know and revere Penzance so much, I would be interested to know which building areas you consider to be worthy of the bulldozer?
    This town is primarily c1840 and earlier. The 1842 Tithe Map is very little different from that shown on the 1962 Ordnance Map.
    Just who pays for this sterilisation?
    I visit other towns of great design merit and heritage and I see dramatic efforts to preserve building and maritime history.
    There are other places though that have injected the town with a disease, having introduced elements that satisfy every need to 'conform', creating lifeless and bland townscape, with no inspiration of identity or a uniqueness of place, no community.

    It comes to something when it has been admitted to me that one department of Cornwall County objects, in writing to me, vehemently to what another department is attempting to do and has done.
    It comes to something when those policies also are seen by our custodians of what is good in the Duchy, also object to those policies proposed.
    I had worked for forty years on the basis of using what is there, rather than simply dozing it inro oblivion. Once again you talk about the 'beach', falling into the trap laid by certain people to discredit local opinion by trivialising it. This is not (for objectors) a matter of objecting to the scheme, just to the method in which it is planned to be executed.
    There is a dichotomy in the ideals quoted. First, it is only a pier, then say preserve Victorian.
    I have never been in favour of the measure and record it then doze it down policy. I have been in those souless places in London, where the very idea of having to visit my aging aunt because of the conditions under which she is living horrifies me.
    As to whether or not the humanus maritimus has been seen swimming off Battery or anywhere else is concerned that is irrelevant. It is a part of our sea front.
    It appears that you have not read this thread or the adjoining thread, or the detailed histories on the site. There is something of value here.

    As to schemes mentioned, one has developed internal commercial problems, the other is not viable because of the state of the fishing industry generally, that the fishermen survive at all is down to their own tenacity and dedication driven by the fact that they have nothing else to place food on the table. They run on debt, and that feeds the banks.
    As to a Sports Stadium, who says that every county MUST have stadia?
    This economy is run by banks, insurance, HES, ISO9001, PI, Food & Hygeine and all the other agencies. It has very little to do with personal initiative or 'investment and development', how any business survives under such stranglehold these days is a miracle of perseverance.
     
  11. pendarves

    pendarves

    Messages:
    14
    Likes Received:
    0
    I was trying to clarify what you had meant by 'progress' in your prevous posting.
     
  12. pendarves

    pendarves

    Messages:
    14
    Likes Received:
    0
    With a few exceptions the developed town in 1842 was mainly bounded by Mount Street, Taroveor Road, Clarence Street and Alverton Street. No sign of Tolver Road/Place, York Street, Richmond Street, Pendarves Road, Morrab Road, Penlee Street, St. Mary's Street etc. All of which were developed at the turn of the 19/20th Century. Treneere and Penalverne Estates were built some 25 years later.
    By all means retain appropriate parts of the historic town centre but just be careful that we dont condemn people to live in historic buildings unsuitable for the 21st Century.
    Maybe this is where we differ - I agree with you about using what is there, but I also believe in developing what is there for the benefit of future generations.
    It sounds like you agree with the scheme but not the disruption it will cause. (Something like Shylock the 'Merchant of Venice' being offered a pound of flesh but only if he doesn't spill any blood?)
    Waterfront - Yes. Seafront (if you mean part of the Promenade)- No. What if there is access from the War Memorial area to the new waterfront? You could end up with more 'seafront' than you have now.
    Now who is misinformed? In an area where there is a need for 3,000 private leisure craft moorings the quarry scheme is viable. Those bidding to operate the market (a fishing industry cooperative) think it is viable. A Sports Stadium is the least we can provide for our future generations when we have taken almost all school playing fields away. Why not a Stadium for Cornwall?
    Personal initiative and personal investment is the seed from which business development and employment opportunities come. The points you mention are (unfortunately) time-consuming distractions which are part of the modern world our generation seems to be hellbent on allowing our governments to create to satisfy their own egos.
     
    Last edited: Feb 27, 2010
  13. Halfhidden

    Halfhidden Untouchable Staff Member Administrator

    Messages:
    3,466
    Likes Received:
    949
    Yeah that's fine. I was trying to explain that progress needn't be so destructive. My reference to the 1960's when the council red mist took hold and they pulled down everything and rebuilt it just for the sakes of development and progress is something that people are still scared to see a repeat of.
    Personally, I would like to see more debate on the whole development of the harbour area so points of view from all parties could be taken into consideration.
    After all, whatever development finally takes shape down on the harbour we will all need to live with for many many years to come.
     
  14. Halfhidden

    Halfhidden Untouchable Staff Member Administrator

    Messages:
    3,466
    Likes Received:
    949
    Ok, so I get an email telling me that Friends of Penzance Harbour are now Option PZ, or at least are now fighting the same cause.

    Is it me or is this just getting like one big slanging match. Take a look at Facebook, Look on the streets. is it all about how many signatures can be collected, is it about were you born here, is it about are you a business or is it really about what gang you're in?

    Thanks for putting up the option Pz rrrrrrichie, I asked Andrew George twice several weeks ago and despite his promise but got nothing back.

    Hey why don't we put an option up as well? We could call it option "X", I'll whip up a bit of press coverage and start of a slanging match on Youtube or Facebook.
    What has this area come too!
    Incidentally this wasn't directed at anyone, I'm just frustrated at the appalling behaviour and the way that Penzance is being portrayed on the internet right now... It's like a bloody kindergarten out there.
     
  15. treeve

    treeve Major Contributor

    Messages:
    3,074
    Likes Received:
    118
    @pendarves - Thank you : As you agree the town is the same area, the borough is a different matter; if the scheme that was proposed for Penalverne had been built, I probably would not be thinking as I do now, but in the case of that estate I agree it is an eyesore, substandard and a poor layout. Treneere was the first with expanded layout, proper housing standards; Alverton was a reduced house plan size to the same standards but with an estate layout that was groundbreaking and is still the most pleasant of surroundings. No one is forced to live in Edwardian standards. With grants and standards raised on a Building Regulation level, internal living conditions have changed. No one got me in here at gun point. No one is condemned to live in buildings unsuitable for the 21st C. They can all be upgraded, the history remains. But, it is down to who develops, who pays, who gets. With the aftermath of changes in housing policy, the towns are decimated into cells which are not possible to re-develop, not without compulsory purchase.

    Have you ever been in charge of a redevelopment scheme with multi-occupancy, with legal constraints in all directions, with a major road system along its front and a major rail at its flank, the building dating from 1897 and in a serious state of disrepair and decay, the exterior protected by a Listed Building control, the building having suffered the ravages of WWII incendiaries and a V2 rocket, let alone undermining by the railway? The fabric itself was a record of initial changes in construction techniques, and every possible effort had to be expended in ensuring cross-insurances were managed.

    It all needs balance and flexibility, which is not what I see in expended effort in Penzance or in the scheme proposed for the Harbour.
     
  16. pendarves

    pendarves

    Messages:
    14
    Likes Received:
    0
    Its just that in this neck of the woods people love to try and make problems out of solutions. Must be something in the mackerel.
     
  17. treeve

    treeve Major Contributor

    Messages:
    3,074
    Likes Received:
    118
    In connection with the repeat application (March 8th) with no radical changes (I have been informed that that itself is irregular) to a ( I have been told) freshly selected committee, with the same HES objections, I have started a fresh thread Application March.
     
  18. rrrrrrichie

    rrrrrrichie Member

    Messages:
    115
    Likes Received:
    4
    Hmmmm, that smells a bit.

    What will happen if a) the committee rejects the plans again? Will it then go to the Secretary of State, or will another batch of committee members be selected again? b) the committee accept the plans, what route is there to appeal the decision?
     
  19. treeve

    treeve Major Contributor

    Messages:
    3,074
    Likes Received:
    118
    I have just received an email directed by John Denham MP, posted in the thread Application March. Extract ...
    'however I can confirm that this application will also be referred to the Secretary of State for consideration, if the council are minded to approve the application at the committee on the 8th March 2010. We are currently considering all requests for the Secretary of State to call-in both applications and we will notify you of our decision in due course'
     
  20. rrrrrrichie

    rrrrrrichie Member

    Messages:
    115
    Likes Received:
    4
    Trinity House building

    Driving past the old Trinity House building today I noticed a ladder and then a big For Sale sign being erected. Isn't this council property and could a possible sale scupper Option Pz plans?
     

Share This Page