The following is a summary of the current status of this project, prepared by the Chairman of Penzance Chamber of Commerce.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Over the previous few weeks there has been much spurious information contained in the Cornishman, both on the letters page and in articles written by reporters, about the enhancement of Penzance Harbour . The purpose of this document is to state factual information only.
- Why is an enhanced harbour required?
- Some of the existing inadequacies of Penzance harbour are: lack of proper working area; conflict between passenger and freight activities; frequent overtopping of the sea walls by the sea; traffic congestion due to freight activities; need for enhanced security; insufficient freight storage facilities.
-
- How it started
- The project started over 9 years ago when the then Penzance Town Mayor, Jack Aitken, called a meeting of all public bodies, associations and societies which was held in St John’s Hall. The purpose of the meeting was to instigate regeneration projects for the town which could utilise Objective One funding.
-
- Around 80 groups attended and it was agreed that a smaller “Steering Group” (Now known as the Consultation Group) would be formed from those present. Amongst those involved in the Steering Group at that stage were: Penzance Town Council; Penwith District Council; Penwith College; Penzance Chamber of Commerce; Penzance Hotels and Restaurants Association; Penzance Dry Dock; The Isles of Scilly Steamship Company; the Civic Society; the Regional Development Agency; and several other local organisations. I was the first Chairman of the Steering Group and the Chairman is now the Town Clerk.
-
- The wish list drawn up at the initial meeting included: a marina; the reinstatement of a sandy beach along the promenade; enhanced harbour facilities; establishing a breakwater off the Gear Pole; creating a fish farm in Mounts Bay; the creation of a Diving Centre of Excellence based on Penwith College and the creation of facilities within Mounts Bay to support this such as the sinking of an old ship; easing traffic flow around the harbour; and many other such ideas all of which have been considered and discounted (at this stage) for a variety of reasons.
-
- The Penzance Town Forum
- Early on it was agreed that there should be a formal structure by which the Steering Group consulted with other organisations, as a result the Penzance Town Forum was formed and a representative of that group then sat on the Steering Group. The idea being that discussions at the Steering Group would be taken back to member organisations for consultation and their comments fed back into the Steering Group.
-
- Penzance Town Council
- There have been several reports that Penzance Town Council were not consulted or involved in the Harbour Regeneration project. This is not true as the Steering Group was set up by the Mayor, Jack Aitken, and the Town Clerk acted as Secretary. Since the initial group was formed several Mayors have participated, as have several Councillors. The Town Clerk remained as Secretary and latterly took over as Chairman of the group, minutes were distributed both to members of the Group and Councillors.
-
- Scillonian
- The current ship requires replacement in 2010, this is a fact which has been disputed by several people who are not directly involved in the Steamship Company nor are experienced in the operation of the Isles of Scilly Link, indeed some people disputing the claim are not even maritime experts.
-
- The Steamship Company will not be receiving a loan for the purchase of a replacement vessel. A replacement vessel will be purchased by Cornwall County Council and tenders for its operation will be invited from companies interested in running the Isles of Scilly link. This in no way guarantees that the Isles of Scilly Steamship Company will obtain the contract to run the new vessel and it in no way guarantees that the ship will sail from Penzance.
-
- Whether or not one or two ships are required is a matter of conjecture, however, I would suggest that the current operators are best placed to decide this issue. The opinions of others not currently involved in the Isles of Scilly Steamship Company, especially those of whom are not shipping experts, are not, in my opinion, fully credible. The decision to operate one vessel has been supported by both maritime engineers and people more knowledgeable than me, as such I suggest that their opinions are respected.
-
- The comments I made in an email last week regarding the danger of losing the ferry from Penzance, with the resultant loss of 89 directly related jobs and 500 associated jobs in the accommodation sector are, therefore, valid.
-
- Railway Station
- A few years ago it was muted that Penzance would lose its status as a mainline station and that the mainline would be Falmouth due to the higher volume of passengers going there as a result of the University in Penryn. At that time Penzance retained its main line status due primarily to the Isles of Scilly link.
-
- In the event that Penzance becomes a branch line then visitors to Penzance may need to change trains at Truro which may put off some people coming to Penzance, or at the very least making it a longer and more difficult journey.
-
- Harbour Revision Order
- A Harbour Revision Order is granted by an Act of Parliament and is required whenever there are any extensions to harbours. A Harbour Revision Order for Penzance has been in place since 1990 which allowed for a much larger reclaimation of land than is required for the current project. At the time that this revision order was granted it went through all of the required public consultation and received widespread support.
-
- Public Consultation
- There have been many reports that there has not been sufficient public consultation regarding the current project. This is simply not the case, there have been over 9 public consultation events over recent years, all of which were publicised as required in the Cornishman, in addition posters were put up in Council offices and other public buildings. There have been the same number, if not more, public consultation events regarding the Penzance end of the project as there has been for the Isles of Scilly harbour.
-
- At the public consultation event in July 2004 three proposals were put forward. 79% of those attending supported the need to improve existing facilities; 39% supported the low cost option (reproduced below) which is much the same as the current project, and 48% supported the higher cost option which would have resulted in a greater level of reclamation.
 -
- It should be noted that the current level of objectors, as detailed in the Cornishman, represents 1.25% of the population of Penzance.
-
- South Pier
- Prior to coming down to the three proposals which are mentioned above, the group considered ALL other options such as constructing new facilities to the East of the Albert Pier and so forth. All of the options were discounted either on the grounds of being unfeasible, impracticable or financially non-viable.
-
- As an example one of the much vaunted options, such as that of the Harbour Users Association, is that a new pier or breakwater should be constructed to the East of the Albert Pier. This option WAS considered by the Steering Group and maritime engineers with whom we consulted, it is however impracticable to build such a structure in this area due to the fact that tunnels run out into Mounts Bay from the sewage works by the railway station. The tunnels would be likely to collapse if there were any piling works on the sea bed in the vicinity which would be required to construct a pier or breakwater.
-
- Many of those who object to the South Pier project still insist that a pier should be constructed to the East of the Albert despite the fact that it is not possible and also despite the fact that they have been advised accordingly.
-
- Battery Rocks
- Environmental impact assessments have been made by Hyder Consulting which revealed that there would be NO lasting impact upon the flora, fauna and marine animals around Battery Rocks.
-
- Marina
- Ideally everyone involved in the project would have liked to have seen the creation of a marina, however, when consulted Penzance Harbour Users were against the proposals for fear that it would increase their mooring fees.
-
- We consulted several marina operators both in the UK and Europe who all unequivocally stated that it would not be financially viable for them to be involved in the construction of a marina. As a result it was discounted on the grounds of cost BUT remains on the “wish-list” for future development.
-
- Cruise Liners
- The possibility of providing facilities for cruise liners was considered, discussed and cruise operators were contacted. They required to be able to moor alongside the pier or, at the very least, have pontoons available that were able to be used at all states of the tide. In addition they required that some form of formal welcome was put on for cruise visitors, such as being met by the Mayor and having local groups entertain them with songs and dance. This was discounted at this stage based on the cost of providing the facilities and organising welcome groups.
-
- Ferrys
- Contact was made with ferry operators such as the Ireland – Spain ferry with a view to ascertaining whether they would be interested in coming to Penzance and what their requirements were. It was decided that this was neither feasible nor practicable at the time.
-
- Hydrographics
- A full hydrographic survey of Mounts Bay was undertaken looking at the effect of various projects on tidal flow around the bay and any resultant impact. As a result of this study the current project was deemed as being suitable and having no detrimental effect.
-
- Traffic
- The current project does NOT add to the traffic requiring access to the Scillonian, indeed, the project will enhance and reduce the flow of traffic around the harbour as the widened pier gets vehicles off the road and significantly negates the hazard between vehicles and pedestrians as currently experienced.
-
- Passenger terminal
- In order to comply with the International Ship and Port Security Code that came into effect on 1 July 2004 freight and passengers at Penzance Harbour will need to be separated upon the quayside, with freight cargo and luggage stored in a secured facility. Architects proposals were recently portrayed in the Cornishman which lead to several objections that they were not in keeping and so forth.
-
- The proposed buildings have been referred to a Design Consultation Group recently which supported them. The buildings themselves still have to go through the formal Planning process.
-
- Funding the project
- Funding the project in order to attract Objective One money was that it would be a public/private partnership. This relied on private organisations becoming involved with the project, such as funding a marina, with matched funding coming from the EEC. We have been unable to attract such private funding.
-
- One of the conditions of the Government funding for the harbour works is to ensure all mechanisms are in place for a continued and sustainable sea service.
-
- The Way Forward
- A further public consultation event will be held in January 2009, probably in the old Vospers Building near the harbour. It is vitally important that supporters of the project attend the event.
-
- Whilst the current project does not give us everything that we wished for it does provide a sound starting point for the further regeneration of Penzance, who knows we may get a marina yet!
-
- Further information
- Details of the project are available from the Isles of Scilly Link Partnership and can be viewed at www.ioslinkharbours.co.uk, this site contains factual information not like the spurious and, frankly, dubious information reported in the Cornishman and on unofficial websites.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
To show your support of these proposals, please SIGN OUR PETITION
|
