BayOfPlenty
Member
Going back to the origins of this thread, shouldn't "Another Weeksy" be listed in the music quiz section? I was thinking maybe under "One Hit Wonders" ::3:
Penzance Harbour Development - a balanced view.
- Thread starter AnotherWeeksy
- Start date
treeve
Major Contributor
Charlie Cartwright's Scheme....
http://www.pznews.co.uk/Trythall-Shipping-Full-2009-06.pdf
ship ...
Cloud X
http://www.cloudx.com/sale.php
Harbour Revision Order 2009
http://www.opsi.gov.uk/si/si2009/uksi_20092325_en_1
http://www.pznews.co.uk/Trythall-Shipping-Full-2009-06.pdf
ship ...
Cloud X
http://www.cloudx.com/sale.php
Harbour Revision Order 2009
http://www.opsi.gov.uk/si/si2009/uksi_20092325_en_1
Last edited:
I must admit I've now got to a point where I'm finding it difficult to follow procedings as it's getting out of the realm of the average individual. The paperwork with the wherewithals, wheretoos etc. are getting beyond me, it seems that we are now beginning to be baffled by paperwork and only the more intelligent amongst us are able to comprehend it, and may I say thanks to those people. There are many people out there like me, we know what we want but are getting bogged down in things we don't understand. Looking at the 'Cloud' it looks to me that for a minimum of outlay, not destroying our heritage, there could be a solution that would increase traffic to and from the islands four fold. Is this a bad idea? Or am I just getting very confused with all the back biting and hopes of back handers in the offing? or am I missing the point completley. I notice the amount of people reading the threads on this site are phenominal, but not a lot of them post their opinion, this is a shame. People of the Islands are to me very single minded in what they want, and don't give a monkeys about other people, this was very obvious about their opinions of our local MP and the propsals put forward. We need to find a compromise as soon as possible. I may be old fashioned but it seems to me that there are a lot of people too up themselves and looking out for themselves instead of looking out for our heritage and everything that goes with it and getting a solution that suits the people instead of thier pockets.
treeve
Major Contributor
A sound view. Thank you ....
That appears to have been the policy of RP, to confound and to bewilder. I have been struggling, I have to say, to follow the jiggery pokery and wierd angles and 'reasoning'. It never ceases to amaze me the extent to which 'qualified' and 'professional' personnel will extend their limited intelligence to befuddle and to avoid issues that are vital. I have seen it so many times, and it would have been to the cost of the project or to individuals who, as you so rightly say, have no understanding of just how they are being sold down the line. For example, I have dealt with a structural engineer on a past contract who had back pedalled for three years, and got rather upset when I completed the survey and report in less than a month; it was not about a schoolplayground urination contest; it was about ensuring the building retained its value, it history (built 1900) and its usefulness as a block of flats under mixed ownership and under various legal constraints and pressures; the contract could then proceed. Frankly it all rather makes this harbour scheme look like a plan to build a sweet shop, looking back on those days. Any difficulties in this work now have arisen out of subterfuge and the interminable attitude of a fixed plan and hang the consequences and anyone that sits in their way. It is time that either they stopped crying or someone takes away their play ball for good. This is a grown-ups world.
I get rather tired of this posturing and petty mindedness by the RP. Why do they not sit down like adults and discuss it all instead of acting like spoilt kids.
It is to me vital to ensure the Islands are not drowned in feet, cars and sewage, and that I level at the Cloud X vision as well. I read the ship is to enhance the existing service, and increased sea traffic is fine, with a cost and provided increased visitor figures are monitored and capped.
We are asked to believe the proposal for a Falmouth based ferry, I see this as a desperate and spiteful knee-jerk response to being told that Option A is NOT an option. Putting myself in the position of the intending tourist, having been one on a number of occasions, to some pretty outlying places, it has to be admitted, with a wife and a family of three, I also know just how important it is to have all angles clipped and sorted. If I was intending making my way with family and luggage, I would give serious thought to the whole idea, when presented with the idea of getting off at Truro, changing trains to what (to me) is little better than a cattle truck, which rattles along some rough track (though meeting safety requirements), to arrive at either The Dell or the Main Station at Falmouth, and then to have to wend with entourage to and through the Dock and the Ferry, to board through all the undoubted melee, and then to proceed via sea out of Falmouth Bay, past The Manacles, Lizard Point and across Mount's Bay .... I would view the alternative of the helicopter or
aeroplane from Penzance/St Just with some feeling of satisfaction and resolve. The money will have to be recovered on the outlay for the scheme, in railway infrastructure, in size of vessel, in fuel costs and storage ... fares would need to rise; myself, I cannot see any financial
viability. I also have to be mindful of the fact that there will also be an opening then at Penzance to continue with a viable ship service that is shorter and less expensive, with an instant 'service bay' available.
Ships have been run from Penzance and St Mary's since long before 1779, it made sense then, and it makes sense now. The people were made of better stuff then.
That appears to have been the policy of RP, to confound and to bewilder. I have been struggling, I have to say, to follow the jiggery pokery and wierd angles and 'reasoning'. It never ceases to amaze me the extent to which 'qualified' and 'professional' personnel will extend their limited intelligence to befuddle and to avoid issues that are vital. I have seen it so many times, and it would have been to the cost of the project or to individuals who, as you so rightly say, have no understanding of just how they are being sold down the line. For example, I have dealt with a structural engineer on a past contract who had back pedalled for three years, and got rather upset when I completed the survey and report in less than a month; it was not about a schoolplayground urination contest; it was about ensuring the building retained its value, it history (built 1900) and its usefulness as a block of flats under mixed ownership and under various legal constraints and pressures; the contract could then proceed. Frankly it all rather makes this harbour scheme look like a plan to build a sweet shop, looking back on those days. Any difficulties in this work now have arisen out of subterfuge and the interminable attitude of a fixed plan and hang the consequences and anyone that sits in their way. It is time that either they stopped crying or someone takes away their play ball for good. This is a grown-ups world.
I get rather tired of this posturing and petty mindedness by the RP. Why do they not sit down like adults and discuss it all instead of acting like spoilt kids.
It is to me vital to ensure the Islands are not drowned in feet, cars and sewage, and that I level at the Cloud X vision as well. I read the ship is to enhance the existing service, and increased sea traffic is fine, with a cost and provided increased visitor figures are monitored and capped.
We are asked to believe the proposal for a Falmouth based ferry, I see this as a desperate and spiteful knee-jerk response to being told that Option A is NOT an option. Putting myself in the position of the intending tourist, having been one on a number of occasions, to some pretty outlying places, it has to be admitted, with a wife and a family of three, I also know just how important it is to have all angles clipped and sorted. If I was intending making my way with family and luggage, I would give serious thought to the whole idea, when presented with the idea of getting off at Truro, changing trains to what (to me) is little better than a cattle truck, which rattles along some rough track (though meeting safety requirements), to arrive at either The Dell or the Main Station at Falmouth, and then to have to wend with entourage to and through the Dock and the Ferry, to board through all the undoubted melee, and then to proceed via sea out of Falmouth Bay, past The Manacles, Lizard Point and across Mount's Bay .... I would view the alternative of the helicopter or
aeroplane from Penzance/St Just with some feeling of satisfaction and resolve. The money will have to be recovered on the outlay for the scheme, in railway infrastructure, in size of vessel, in fuel costs and storage ... fares would need to rise; myself, I cannot see any financial
viability. I also have to be mindful of the fact that there will also be an opening then at Penzance to continue with a viable ship service that is shorter and less expensive, with an instant 'service bay' available.
Ships have been run from Penzance and St Mary's since long before 1779, it made sense then, and it makes sense now. The people were made of better stuff then.
Last edited:
treeve
Major Contributor
The kids are still at play ...
Mixed messages are being transmitted; it is my understanding that the Scillonian and the Gry Maritha are up for inspection as to seaworthiness in 2014, yet I see claims as to that being 2010.
The fact of the matter is that no one knows yet just whether or not either vessel will achieve that qualification as to seaworthiness, until they have been inspected.
Here we have the outline and underlying fabric of the 'need for a new vessel'.
http://www.etcproceedings.org/paper/download/1556
The Report by Leeds University/Association for European Transport and contributors 2006; EVALUATING A REPLACEMENT FERRY FOR THE ISLES OF SCILLY USING A DISCRETE CHOICE MODEL FRAMEWORK It states 'The tool will be used by the Penzance to Isles of Scilly Route Partnership as part of a robust Cost-Benefit Assessement (CBA) of a possible replacement of the current ferry that is nearing the end of its operational life. The CBA is required by the UK Department for Transport in order to receive possible capital funding for improved transport links.
Reading through it, it is based on Puritanical
models, uses loaded questions, is written with
extremely woolly terms and uses the age old
technique of stating the bleeding obvious.
Funding ... ship ... Department for Trade a £10 million - the rest is a loan obtained by County, the cost of which will be borne by ratepayers. IoSSCo will not be involved in either funding or in ship running. The Isles of Scilly will not be involved. The harbour is a joint funding, EU and DfT. It has the mark of the Supermarket Offer, it is available so whatever it costs, we are having it. Like the free texts on mobiles ... they are not at all free .. someone pays for it, Usually the user.
Cornwall Council now report on the two proposals to maintain the Isles of Scilly sea link. The contention is that Option C cannot be delivered in time for the funding to be offered. They still recommend Option A as a 'safeguard' for that funding. In Option C it is currently being fully investigated by The Cabinet; Costings have been made, and are investigating the impact on current tenders received (rather jumping the gun since the ship design is in the air, not to mention the immediacy placed in blindly waving the flag for a Falmouth based ship) from Red Funnel (no mention of others tendered, which to my mind is an offence against Tendering Procedure in the UK. It appears that much of this is in the form of a Business Loan, repayable in 25 years, however Option A will offer repayment in 12 years. This is all rather glib and deliberately weighted towards the Option that was refused, and when viewed against the background of the Falmouth proposal and its implications in terms of costs and loans, let alone the present tender yearly costs of £330,000 as a charter fee by Red Funnel for the Penzance to St Mary's route, and the flim flam continues by stating 'Option A is better than Option C because it is simpler and easier to manage ... it allows the enhancement of South Pier by a series of measures agreed with the Conservation Officer; and the reclamation and rock armour protect the full length of the listed structure reducing storm damage upon it, improving safety for quay users and reducing the council's liabilities in its maintenance'.
Just think about that for a moment and just what it means and just how they view the harbour wall and beach ... and those who live here, as well as those that will be using the sea link. They do not give a damn. Why? Because they have not yet grown up and learned the responsibility that comes with being adult.
Mixed messages are being transmitted; it is my understanding that the Scillonian and the Gry Maritha are up for inspection as to seaworthiness in 2014, yet I see claims as to that being 2010.
The fact of the matter is that no one knows yet just whether or not either vessel will achieve that qualification as to seaworthiness, until they have been inspected.
Here we have the outline and underlying fabric of the 'need for a new vessel'.
http://www.etcproceedings.org/paper/download/1556
The Report by Leeds University/Association for European Transport and contributors 2006; EVALUATING A REPLACEMENT FERRY FOR THE ISLES OF SCILLY USING A DISCRETE CHOICE MODEL FRAMEWORK It states 'The tool will be used by the Penzance to Isles of Scilly Route Partnership as part of a robust Cost-Benefit Assessement (CBA) of a possible replacement of the current ferry that is nearing the end of its operational life. The CBA is required by the UK Department for Transport in order to receive possible capital funding for improved transport links.
Reading through it, it is based on Puritanical
models, uses loaded questions, is written with
extremely woolly terms and uses the age old
technique of stating the bleeding obvious.
Funding ... ship ... Department for Trade a £10 million - the rest is a loan obtained by County, the cost of which will be borne by ratepayers. IoSSCo will not be involved in either funding or in ship running. The Isles of Scilly will not be involved. The harbour is a joint funding, EU and DfT. It has the mark of the Supermarket Offer, it is available so whatever it costs, we are having it. Like the free texts on mobiles ... they are not at all free .. someone pays for it, Usually the user.
Cornwall Council now report on the two proposals to maintain the Isles of Scilly sea link. The contention is that Option C cannot be delivered in time for the funding to be offered. They still recommend Option A as a 'safeguard' for that funding. In Option C it is currently being fully investigated by The Cabinet; Costings have been made, and are investigating the impact on current tenders received (rather jumping the gun since the ship design is in the air, not to mention the immediacy placed in blindly waving the flag for a Falmouth based ship) from Red Funnel (no mention of others tendered, which to my mind is an offence against Tendering Procedure in the UK. It appears that much of this is in the form of a Business Loan, repayable in 25 years, however Option A will offer repayment in 12 years. This is all rather glib and deliberately weighted towards the Option that was refused, and when viewed against the background of the Falmouth proposal and its implications in terms of costs and loans, let alone the present tender yearly costs of £330,000 as a charter fee by Red Funnel for the Penzance to St Mary's route, and the flim flam continues by stating 'Option A is better than Option C because it is simpler and easier to manage ... it allows the enhancement of South Pier by a series of measures agreed with the Conservation Officer; and the reclamation and rock armour protect the full length of the listed structure reducing storm damage upon it, improving safety for quay users and reducing the council's liabilities in its maintenance'.
Just think about that for a moment and just what it means and just how they view the harbour wall and beach ... and those who live here, as well as those that will be using the sea link. They do not give a damn. Why? Because they have not yet grown up and learned the responsibility that comes with being adult.
Last edited:
What Next
This email marked confidential was leaked to us.... and this confirms treeve's suspicions that Route Partnership are still pushing for plan "A" despite four years of objections.
I've also attached the survey form for you all to see.
[FONT="]Dear All[/FONT]
[FONT="] [/FONT]
[FONT="]Please see below – I would appreciate it if you could spend a moment of your time completing the attached survey and emailing direct to Mike.[/FONT]
[FONT="] [/FONT]
[FONT="] [/FONT]
[FONT="]Dear Member[/FONT]
[FONT="]I would greatly appreciate it if you would complete the attached survey and return it to me [FONT="]as a matter of urgency and by the 3rd January[/FONT] at the latest. The form is completely anonymous and is intended to build upon the information that we already have about the economic links between Penzance and the Isles of Scilly. As we not only face losing the Scillonian to Falmouth but we also face losing the helicopter to either St Just or Newquay in 2011, the information will be used to justify the retention of both the sea and air links in Penzance. It will also be used for trying to draw down funding to help the business community should we be in dire straights as a result of the potential moves so it is vitally important that I have the information.[/FONT]
[FONT="]Please note that Cornwall Council have made it clear that they are not considering any options for the Sea Link in Penzance other than the South Pier (Option A), and they are also seriously looking at moving the ship to Falmouth - THIS IS NOT MERELY A THREAT! [/FONT]
[FONT="]For those of you who may have questioned the harbour scheme on the basis that it would result in 2 years of heavy lorries etc around the harbour please be advised that the total build period is 18 months and the HGV activity would be for between 3 and 6 months of the whole period. In addition HGVs would need to enter the harbour for that period of time to put rock armour against the pier and extend its length irrespective of where the passenger and freight terminals are. Even if an out of town freight depot materialised and the Trinity building was used for passengers (but this is no longer on the table) there would still have been 18 months work around the harbour!!![/FONT]
[FONT="]Regards[/FONT]
[FONT="]Mike Waters[/FONT]
[FONT="]Chairman[/FONT]
[FONT="]Penzance Chamber of Commerce[/FONT]
[FONT="] [/FONT]
[FONT="] [/FONT]
[FONT="]Regards, [/FONT]
[FONT="] [/FONT]
[FONT="]Andrew Curtis[/FONT]
[FONT="] [/FONT]
[FONT="]Mr A R Curtis[/FONT]
[FONT="]Chairman - Penzance & District Tourism Association[/FONT]
[FONT="] [/FONT]
[FONT="][/FONT]
[FONT="][/FONT]
[FONT="]Attachment below:[/FONT]
[FONT="][/FONT]
[FONT="]Business sector: [/FONT][FONT="]Accom/Hospitality/Retail/Service/Transport & Distribution/Other[/FONT]
[FONT="] [/FONT]
[FONT="]Number of employees:[/FONT]
[FONT="] [/FONT]
[FONT="]Is your business affected by tourism?[/FONT][FONT="] Yes/No[/FONT]
[FONT="] [/FONT]
[FONT="]Is your business affected by the Sea Link to IOS? [/FONT][FONT="]Yes/No[/FONT]
[FONT="] [/FONT]
[FONT="]Is your business affected by the Air Link to IOS?[/FONT][FONT="] Yes/No[/FONT]
[FONT="] [/FONT]
[FONT="]Do you trade with the Isles of Scilly?[/FONT][FONT="] Yes/No[/FONT]
[FONT="] [/FONT]
[FONT="]Do you trade on the Isles of Scilly?[/FONT][FONT="] Yes/No[/FONT]
[FONT="] [/FONT]
[FONT="]If the Scillonian moved to Falmouth would your business be affected? [/FONT][FONT="]Yes/No[/FONT]
[FONT="] [/FONT]
[FONT="]If so, how much would you lose annually?[/FONT]
[FONT="] [/FONT]
[FONT="]How many staff would you make redundant?[/FONT]
[FONT="] [/FONT]
[FONT="]If the helicopter moved to St Just would your business be affected? [/FONT][FONT="]Yes/No[/FONT]
[FONT="] [/FONT]
[FONT="]If so, how much would you lose annually?[/FONT][FONT="][/FONT]
[FONT="] [/FONT]
[FONT="]How many staff would you make redundant?[/FONT]
[FONT="] [/FONT]
[FONT="]If the helicopter service ceased to operate from West Cornwall would your business be affected?[/FONT][FONT="] Yes/No[/FONT]
[FONT="] [/FONT]
[FONT="]If so, how much would you lose annually?[/FONT]
[FONT="] [/FONT]
[FONT="]How many staff would you make redundant?[/FONT]
[FONT="] [/FONT]
[FONT="]Would you like to join a delegation of businesses to the Isles of Scilly in the New Year?[/FONT][FONT="] Yes/No[/FONT]
[FONT="] [/FONT]
[FONT="]Comments:[/FONT]
[FONT="] [/FONT]
[FONT="] [/FONT]
[FONT="] [/FONT]
[FONT="] [/FONT]
[FONT="]
[/FONT]
[FONT="] [/FONT]
[FONT="]Please return by email as soon as possible to:
email address removed
[/FONT][FONT="][/FONT]
This email marked confidential was leaked to us.... and this confirms treeve's suspicions that Route Partnership are still pushing for plan "A" despite four years of objections.
I've also attached the survey form for you all to see.
[FONT="]
[/FONT]
[/FONT]
[FONT="] [/FONT]
[FONT="]Please see below – I would appreciate it if you could spend a moment of your time completing the attached survey and emailing direct to Mike.[/FONT]
[FONT="] [/FONT]
[FONT="] [/FONT]
[FONT="]Dear Member[/FONT]
[FONT="]I would greatly appreciate it if you would complete the attached survey and return it to me [FONT="]as a matter of urgency and by the 3rd January[/FONT] at the latest. The form is completely anonymous and is intended to build upon the information that we already have about the economic links between Penzance and the Isles of Scilly. As we not only face losing the Scillonian to Falmouth but we also face losing the helicopter to either St Just or Newquay in 2011, the information will be used to justify the retention of both the sea and air links in Penzance. It will also be used for trying to draw down funding to help the business community should we be in dire straights as a result of the potential moves so it is vitally important that I have the information.[/FONT]
[FONT="]Please note that Cornwall Council have made it clear that they are not considering any options for the Sea Link in Penzance other than the South Pier (Option A), and they are also seriously looking at moving the ship to Falmouth - THIS IS NOT MERELY A THREAT! [/FONT]
[FONT="]For those of you who may have questioned the harbour scheme on the basis that it would result in 2 years of heavy lorries etc around the harbour please be advised that the total build period is 18 months and the HGV activity would be for between 3 and 6 months of the whole period. In addition HGVs would need to enter the harbour for that period of time to put rock armour against the pier and extend its length irrespective of where the passenger and freight terminals are. Even if an out of town freight depot materialised and the Trinity building was used for passengers (but this is no longer on the table) there would still have been 18 months work around the harbour!!![/FONT]
[FONT="]Regards[/FONT]
[FONT="]Mike Waters[/FONT]
[FONT="]Chairman[/FONT]
[FONT="]Penzance Chamber of Commerce[/FONT]
[FONT="] [/FONT]
[FONT="] [/FONT]
[FONT="]Regards, [/FONT]
[FONT="] [/FONT]
[FONT="]Andrew Curtis[/FONT]
[FONT="] [/FONT]
[FONT="]Mr A R Curtis[/FONT]
[FONT="]Chairman - Penzance & District Tourism Association[/FONT]
[FONT="] [/FONT]
[FONT="][/FONT]
[FONT="][/FONT]
[FONT="]Attachment below:[/FONT]
[FONT="][/FONT]
[FONT="]COMMERCE SURVEY[/FONT]
[FONT="] [/FONT]
[FONT="] [/FONT]
[FONT="]Number of employees:[/FONT]
[FONT="] [/FONT]
[FONT="]Is your business affected by tourism?[/FONT][FONT="] Yes/No[/FONT]
[FONT="] [/FONT]
[FONT="]Is your business affected by the Sea Link to IOS? [/FONT][FONT="]Yes/No[/FONT]
[FONT="] [/FONT]
[FONT="]Is your business affected by the Air Link to IOS?[/FONT][FONT="] Yes/No[/FONT]
[FONT="] [/FONT]
[FONT="]Do you trade with the Isles of Scilly?[/FONT][FONT="] Yes/No[/FONT]
[FONT="] [/FONT]
[FONT="]Do you trade on the Isles of Scilly?[/FONT][FONT="] Yes/No[/FONT]
[FONT="] [/FONT]
[FONT="]If the Scillonian moved to Falmouth would your business be affected? [/FONT][FONT="]Yes/No[/FONT]
[FONT="] [/FONT]
[FONT="]If so, how much would you lose annually?[/FONT]
[FONT="] [/FONT]
[FONT="]How many staff would you make redundant?[/FONT]
[FONT="] [/FONT]
[FONT="]If the helicopter moved to St Just would your business be affected? [/FONT][FONT="]Yes/No[/FONT]
[FONT="] [/FONT]
[FONT="]If so, how much would you lose annually?[/FONT][FONT="][/FONT]
[FONT="] [/FONT]
[FONT="]How many staff would you make redundant?[/FONT]
[FONT="] [/FONT]
[FONT="]If the helicopter service ceased to operate from West Cornwall would your business be affected?[/FONT][FONT="] Yes/No[/FONT]
[FONT="] [/FONT]
[FONT="]If so, how much would you lose annually?[/FONT]
[FONT="] [/FONT]
[FONT="]How many staff would you make redundant?[/FONT]
[FONT="] [/FONT]
[FONT="]Would you like to join a delegation of businesses to the Isles of Scilly in the New Year?[/FONT][FONT="] Yes/No[/FONT]
[FONT="] [/FONT]
[FONT="]Comments:[/FONT]
[FONT="] [/FONT]
[FONT="] [/FONT]
[FONT="] [/FONT]
[FONT="] [/FONT]
[FONT="]
[/FONT]
[FONT="] [/FONT]
[FONT="]Please return by email as soon as possible to:
email address removed
[/FONT][FONT="][/FONT]
treeve
Major Contributor
You are being conned .....
Another series of loaded questions, all the worse because a vast majority of answers will be based upon projected losses with no basis for fact or proof of fact possible. The whole premise is also based around the intangible idea of the posturing of the RP as to basing the ferry at Falmouth, an equally difficult point to cost forecast, because the ship has not been fully designed, or built or commissioned, the docking and servicing, let alone the infrastructure has not been investigated costed or installed; no investigation other than the 2006 report as to passenger prediction has been made. It is all Nuages, Fêtes et Sirènes. What I used to call Lies. It is also wrapped around another imponderable, the Helicopter service, considering it already was given a fresh term of service already, that could well happen again. In all honesty, I cannot see many local businessmen being able at this time of year to magic up a series of figures to illustrate their forecast losses, without some considerable effort and expense. Another subterfuge to force dandy figures and opinions before the meeting early in January.
Another series of loaded questions, all the worse because a vast majority of answers will be based upon projected losses with no basis for fact or proof of fact possible. The whole premise is also based around the intangible idea of the posturing of the RP as to basing the ferry at Falmouth, an equally difficult point to cost forecast, because the ship has not been fully designed, or built or commissioned, the docking and servicing, let alone the infrastructure has not been investigated costed or installed; no investigation other than the 2006 report as to passenger prediction has been made. It is all Nuages, Fêtes et Sirènes. What I used to call Lies. It is also wrapped around another imponderable, the Helicopter service, considering it already was given a fresh term of service already, that could well happen again. In all honesty, I cannot see many local businessmen being able at this time of year to magic up a series of figures to illustrate their forecast losses, without some considerable effort and expense. Another subterfuge to force dandy figures and opinions before the meeting early in January.
treeve
Major Contributor
off the beaten track
Another chestnut that is being tossed into the fireplace is that of Railway and the status of the line from Truro to Penzance. Reading the report for the Route Plan of the Route 12 to Penzance, Truro to Penzance had not been identified as a 'fragile route' in 2007, whereas Truro to Falmouth is identified as fragile. I cannot see that changing on the back of a tenuous and spiteful threat of ferry routing change involving a few passengers (comparatively). An upgrade to the Falmouth branch is forecast by external funding under private plans. Network Rail are working on plans for High Speed line construction from 2014 to 2026 - one of these proposals includes the Great Western London to Cardiff and Penzance. They see it as one of the five Strategic Routes. This is all under the auspices of Network Rail and Great Western; they anticipate increased services and increased rail traffic, with a view to more passenger and freight numbers. Bearing in mind the current study on the effects of Sea Level on the Railway line at the Exeter area, and the commitment to ensure it is maintained, I find it hard to embrace a backward looking thought as is being envisaged by RP as the foundation for a Falmouth based ferry, in their small minded and childish intransigency.
I add a remembered phrase that I used in my work, it helped me to ride through all the posturing and self inflated vermin I have met over the years ... 'Remember ... bullshit baffles brains' If ever I see a report that does not make sense, it has been dropped there by some Ox (a castrated Bull).
Another chestnut that is being tossed into the fireplace is that of Railway and the status of the line from Truro to Penzance. Reading the report for the Route Plan of the Route 12 to Penzance, Truro to Penzance had not been identified as a 'fragile route' in 2007, whereas Truro to Falmouth is identified as fragile. I cannot see that changing on the back of a tenuous and spiteful threat of ferry routing change involving a few passengers (comparatively). An upgrade to the Falmouth branch is forecast by external funding under private plans. Network Rail are working on plans for High Speed line construction from 2014 to 2026 - one of these proposals includes the Great Western London to Cardiff and Penzance. They see it as one of the five Strategic Routes. This is all under the auspices of Network Rail and Great Western; they anticipate increased services and increased rail traffic, with a view to more passenger and freight numbers. Bearing in mind the current study on the effects of Sea Level on the Railway line at the Exeter area, and the commitment to ensure it is maintained, I find it hard to embrace a backward looking thought as is being envisaged by RP as the foundation for a Falmouth based ferry, in their small minded and childish intransigency.
I add a remembered phrase that I used in my work, it helped me to ride through all the posturing and self inflated vermin I have met over the years ... 'Remember ... bullshit baffles brains' If ever I see a report that does not make sense, it has been dropped there by some Ox (a castrated Bull).
Last edited:
BayOfPlenty
Member
The "you'll lose the railway if you don't let us concrete over everything" threat made me smile - had they not noticed the 'somewhat-expensive-to-replace' HST depot at Eastern Green?
treeve
Major Contributor
Fly by days ....
The Isles of Scilly Steamship Company has an eye for its Future, with the six aeroplanes at St Just, [Skybus], the present fleet of ferry - Scillonian III and freightship - Gry Maritha, working will link with the helicopter company BI (moving from Penzance). Skybus is going from strength to strength, in its 25th year, it offers a great adavantage to business and to holidaymakers. Yes the fare is greater than that on the sea link ferry, but you are over there much quicker and back before the cold winds sweep Mount's Bay; the network covers Bristol, Cardiff, Newquay, Exeter, St Brieuc, Southampton, Land's End and St Mary's. The IoSSCo has recently taken over Penzance Dry Dock (oldest and first in Europe) and is offering all service in maintenance for vessels. Scillonian III has made over 6400 return voyages and [2008 statement] 'will continue to provide the vital connection between the mainland and Isles of Scilly for many years to come'. That is commitment.
BI Helicopters is planning to move to Land's End in a bid to keep fares down and tomaintain service. They have already extended the date by a year.
@BayOfPlenty - I doubt the RP sees or notices very much outside of their blinkered activity whilst they have their noses in the feeding bags ... they think the Cornish are bunch of ignorant smock wearing hay suckers.
The Isles of Scilly Steamship Company has an eye for its Future, with the six aeroplanes at St Just, [Skybus], the present fleet of ferry - Scillonian III and freightship - Gry Maritha, working will link with the helicopter company BI (moving from Penzance). Skybus is going from strength to strength, in its 25th year, it offers a great adavantage to business and to holidaymakers. Yes the fare is greater than that on the sea link ferry, but you are over there much quicker and back before the cold winds sweep Mount's Bay; the network covers Bristol, Cardiff, Newquay, Exeter, St Brieuc, Southampton, Land's End and St Mary's. The IoSSCo has recently taken over Penzance Dry Dock (oldest and first in Europe) and is offering all service in maintenance for vessels. Scillonian III has made over 6400 return voyages and [2008 statement] 'will continue to provide the vital connection between the mainland and Isles of Scilly for many years to come'. That is commitment.
BI Helicopters is planning to move to Land's End in a bid to keep fares down and tomaintain service. They have already extended the date by a year.
@BayOfPlenty - I doubt the RP sees or notices very much outside of their blinkered activity whilst they have their noses in the feeding bags ... they think the Cornish are bunch of ignorant smock wearing hay suckers.
Last edited:
treeve
Major Contributor
that Baldric moment ...
[I have a cunning plan ..]
Are we to believe that all present Legislation has been met in the current proposal? I cannot see how. Planning Law has only just been satisfied (briefly) in that it was submitted for approval under Historic Buildings; There are Building Regulations 2000 with Amendments up until 2009, [Statutory Instruments] - Thermal/Water/Drainage, etc; Means of Access, Means of Escape.... The Building Act 1984; Sustainable and Secure Buildings Act 2004; The Party Wall etc Act 1996. Oh yes and Construction (Design and Management) Regulations 2007 (CDM 2007).
If this happy band of infantile delinquents persists and contrary to the Planning Refusal, continues in Contructing works in contravention to the Spirit of that Refusal; they will have Set a Precendent in Planning Law which will allow all members of the public to persue building works which contravene the spirit of the Law which applies to that particular application or intended building works. Result - Anarchy across the land.
That is the weight that youthful irresponsibility carries.
[I have a cunning plan ..]
Are we to believe that all present Legislation has been met in the current proposal? I cannot see how. Planning Law has only just been satisfied (briefly) in that it was submitted for approval under Historic Buildings; There are Building Regulations 2000 with Amendments up until 2009, [Statutory Instruments] - Thermal/Water/Drainage, etc; Means of Access, Means of Escape.... The Building Act 1984; Sustainable and Secure Buildings Act 2004; The Party Wall etc Act 1996. Oh yes and Construction (Design and Management) Regulations 2007 (CDM 2007).
If this happy band of infantile delinquents persists and contrary to the Planning Refusal, continues in Contructing works in contravention to the Spirit of that Refusal; they will have Set a Precendent in Planning Law which will allow all members of the public to persue building works which contravene the spirit of the Law which applies to that particular application or intended building works. Result - Anarchy across the land.
That is the weight that youthful irresponsibility carries.
Last edited:
treeve
Major Contributor
Scillonian III and Gry Maritha
Back in July 2009, one statement came which indicated the IoSSCo's attitude towards the arrival of the new and combined vessel. The truth behind this is open to interpretation and it is only one Islander's view of the outcome. Claims were being made of the transport framework for reaching Tresco and St Mary's was inadequate, despite the helicopter, Skybus, Scillonian III and Gry Maritha, on which the Isles of Scilly depend for their 85% income (depending on the Visitor Markets), on their gig traffic and for materials and goods for the shops, hotels, restaurants, etc.
Remember, it is a Route Partnership statement that the new vessel will not be taking any more passenger traffic to the islands than exists at present; remember also there is a continuing commitment of air traffic at a higher level than exists at present];
What is in contention is the length of service available in the future for the two vessels owned by the IoSSCo, the Isles of Scilly Steamship Company would not have been able to competitively tendered against the other five tenderers for the management of the new vessel. If the Scillonian III and the Gry Maritha do not receive a Lloyd's Certificate of Seaworthiness, 'they will be considered unsaleable' [RP opnion], but in the light of history of vessels that plied their way across these waters, I have no doubt a buyer would be found in perhaps the Greek Ferry market, which always has a keen eye and hand for operating ferries. They have the right idea as opposed to the RP. It is imagined that the IoSSCo will continue in operation until the vessels' limitations in competition with 'the RP's vessel'.
All signs are to me that that will indeed be the case, and in view of the fare structure that will be a part of the RP's own heritage, I feel that they will have a fight on their hands. There are a number of logistical points on which I suspect the RP vessel will be struggling [and I will not delineate them here] to the advantage of the IoSSCo.
Scillonian III has been so well sailed and serviced by the company and the Dry Dock, she is to be considered many years younger than her physical age. However, the final determination will be entirely up to the Lloyd's Surveyor when that time comes. It would not surprise me at all to discover that she gains seaworthiness until well after 2014, that provided no interference is undertaken.
With all honesty, I did consider spending two weeks on The Islands, but was horrified to discover the cost for just one week was beyond my budget; for the same money as for a week's accommodation on St Mary's, I could travel (return) to Heathrow by train, take a flight across Europe to Santorini and stay there on FULL board for two weeks (including all meals and all drinks (tea/coffee/fizz and all alcoholic beverages) all travel on the island, and still have enough change to buy a collection of CDs, oh yes, it included in flight meals. I still have Euro notes left over. Costs may be reflective of the supplied costs to the Islanders, but I dread to think what it costs a family; I remember a few years ago we travelled to Glasgow and on to Fort William, taking the ferry across to Harris and Lewis (same physical island, I know) and we stayed there for two weeks for half the price it would have cost to travel 28 miles across to Scilly and to spend a week on the Islands. The situation has not changed. I enjoy travelling, but passing money throungh my nose is not part of the bargain. I would say that that experience is as much a part of the problem as any trumped up survey.
Back in July 2009, one statement came which indicated the IoSSCo's attitude towards the arrival of the new and combined vessel. The truth behind this is open to interpretation and it is only one Islander's view of the outcome. Claims were being made of the transport framework for reaching Tresco and St Mary's was inadequate, despite the helicopter, Skybus, Scillonian III and Gry Maritha, on which the Isles of Scilly depend for their 85% income (depending on the Visitor Markets), on their gig traffic and for materials and goods for the shops, hotels, restaurants, etc.
Remember, it is a Route Partnership statement that the new vessel will not be taking any more passenger traffic to the islands than exists at present; remember also there is a continuing commitment of air traffic at a higher level than exists at present];
What is in contention is the length of service available in the future for the two vessels owned by the IoSSCo, the Isles of Scilly Steamship Company would not have been able to competitively tendered against the other five tenderers for the management of the new vessel. If the Scillonian III and the Gry Maritha do not receive a Lloyd's Certificate of Seaworthiness, 'they will be considered unsaleable' [RP opnion], but in the light of history of vessels that plied their way across these waters, I have no doubt a buyer would be found in perhaps the Greek Ferry market, which always has a keen eye and hand for operating ferries. They have the right idea as opposed to the RP. It is imagined that the IoSSCo will continue in operation until the vessels' limitations in competition with 'the RP's vessel'.
All signs are to me that that will indeed be the case, and in view of the fare structure that will be a part of the RP's own heritage, I feel that they will have a fight on their hands. There are a number of logistical points on which I suspect the RP vessel will be struggling [and I will not delineate them here] to the advantage of the IoSSCo.
Scillonian III has been so well sailed and serviced by the company and the Dry Dock, she is to be considered many years younger than her physical age. However, the final determination will be entirely up to the Lloyd's Surveyor when that time comes. It would not surprise me at all to discover that she gains seaworthiness until well after 2014, that provided no interference is undertaken.
With all honesty, I did consider spending two weeks on The Islands, but was horrified to discover the cost for just one week was beyond my budget; for the same money as for a week's accommodation on St Mary's, I could travel (return) to Heathrow by train, take a flight across Europe to Santorini and stay there on FULL board for two weeks (including all meals and all drinks (tea/coffee/fizz and all alcoholic beverages) all travel on the island, and still have enough change to buy a collection of CDs, oh yes, it included in flight meals. I still have Euro notes left over. Costs may be reflective of the supplied costs to the Islanders, but I dread to think what it costs a family; I remember a few years ago we travelled to Glasgow and on to Fort William, taking the ferry across to Harris and Lewis (same physical island, I know) and we stayed there for two weeks for half the price it would have cost to travel 28 miles across to Scilly and to spend a week on the Islands. The situation has not changed. I enjoy travelling, but passing money throungh my nose is not part of the bargain. I would say that that experience is as much a part of the problem as any trumped up survey.
An anonymous email was sent to me with the most disturbing contents.
Basically Penzance and District Tourism Association, Chamber of Commerce, Councillor Graeme Hicks and Tim Wood from Route Partnership are all meeting up at 7.30pm in the Penzance Newlyn RFC in Alexandra Road with their new found friends from Consol Oil. It seems that this [FONT="]Kerrier based oil company is teaming up with the aforementioned to try to put together a plan to over turn the decision of the strategic planning committee. The email goes on to mention that plan "A" is the only plan that they will accept and are quite prepared to waste even more time to find a away to put pressure on the democratic process.
It seems that they really have lost it.... They are so far out of touch with this town that they are all prepared to damage their relationships with the people of this town.
The email sums up with a comment from Mike Waters who suggests that those supporting plan "C" have "shot their bolt" and they have a clear way forward to manipulate businesses through forming their own pressure group.
[/FONT]
Basically Penzance and District Tourism Association, Chamber of Commerce, Councillor Graeme Hicks and Tim Wood from Route Partnership are all meeting up at 7.30pm in the Penzance Newlyn RFC in Alexandra Road with their new found friends from Consol Oil. It seems that this [FONT="]Kerrier based oil company is teaming up with the aforementioned to try to put together a plan to over turn the decision of the strategic planning committee. The email goes on to mention that plan "A" is the only plan that they will accept and are quite prepared to waste even more time to find a away to put pressure on the democratic process.
It seems that they really have lost it.... They are so far out of touch with this town that they are all prepared to damage their relationships with the people of this town.
The email sums up with a comment from Mike Waters who suggests that those supporting plan "C" have "shot their bolt" and they have a clear way forward to manipulate businesses through forming their own pressure group.
[/FONT]
treeve
Major Contributor
Disturbing in one way, but expected in another ... they have sunk as far as any ferry would that they are backing, to the bottom. They will continue to act in this underhand manner until either they are ousted or they achieve whatever goals they have set out to achieve from the start. It appears to me that this message which has leaked this way should leak in another direction ... to the Strategic Planning Committee and further up the legal line, if you get my meaning. Just who are these Oily people from Consol, do they intend threatening or bribery? Do they plan on witholding home heating oil from users, or pouring it all over the Chairman's Lawn, sounds about their level of action. You realise that we have a number of 'Guests' here that secretly read this Forum, mind you, that is also their style. All cloak and dagger stuff and custard pies.
planning@cornwall.gov.uk
planning@cornwall.gov.uk
Last edited:
treeve
Major Contributor
Secret Non Public Access Meetings
Is there any truth in the rumour that at recent meetings to which the public had no access it was unanimously decided to appoint Chris Moyles, Chris Evans, Russell Brand and Jonathan Ross as joint spokespersons, as only acting in unison could they form what appears to be a cohesive and intelligent sentence. Attempts are also being made to raise Temujen (The Chinggis Khan) to take over leadership of the RP group, in order to unify them against the heathen hordes of Penzance, as the only Steppes left open to them.
Is there any truth in the rumour that at recent meetings to which the public had no access it was unanimously decided to appoint Chris Moyles, Chris Evans, Russell Brand and Jonathan Ross as joint spokespersons, as only acting in unison could they form what appears to be a cohesive and intelligent sentence. Attempts are also being made to raise Temujen (The Chinggis Khan) to take over leadership of the RP group, in order to unify them against the heathen hordes of Penzance, as the only Steppes left open to them.
treeve
Major Contributor
The world is still deceiv’d with ornament,
In law, what plea so tainted and corrupt,
But, being season’d with a gracious voice,
Obscures the show of evil? In religion,
What damned error, but some sober brow
Will bless it and approve it with a text,
Hiding the grossness with fair ornament?
In law, what plea so tainted and corrupt,
But, being season’d with a gracious voice,
Obscures the show of evil? In religion,
What damned error, but some sober brow
Will bless it and approve it with a text,
Hiding the grossness with fair ornament?
fact
option c is unworkable both in terms of increased frieght charge and therefore it cannot build up a fund for future boats, also it would take to long to repay the loan of the cost of a newboat {30 years which falls outside the eu regs and the life of the boat}
Fact
the council cannot put an unworkable scheme on the table
Fact
four million pounds and many years of work by specialists has gone into isolating which plan is workable and deliverable
fact
the above statements are the findings of not one but two independent shipping companies...lv shipping and red funnel ferries.
Fact
All the three main parties, including labour cannot garuntee the funding for this ....Labour have said that it may be subject to spending review if they win the election and Conservatives have said they support the scheme but can give no assurance of funding if they gain power.
fact
RP have explored many many options including at least one on Albert Pier which appeared to be approx75% more exspensive.
fact
passengers generally arive by car /coach or by foot from the direction of thier b&b , the promenade area, very few use the bus rail terminal
Fact
the council conservation officer has said that even if option c were to go ahead the 'beach' will need to be covered in rock amour to protect the listed structure from storm damage
Fact
option A will only mean taking away 1% of the total volume of the south pier, or 33 metres of the entire 297 meters of the wall section
fact
Option A will protect the barbican high sea wall from further damage where as option c will leave it vulnerable to flooding
Fact
if option A fails and no other options succeed the 750 000 of our council tax money will be lost.
fact
the Scillonian co have said that they need new boat within 3/5 years and that a one boat option would be better...they also say they are having to make ever more difficult decisions because of the age of thier exsisting boats
fact
the new terminal in Option A is largely hidden behind the exsisting sea wall and has practically no disadvantage re sea views.
fact
despite a year of professional campaigning only 18 businesses have openly opposed option a.......by contrast in a petition largely circulated in the business community there are currently 75 for and only 7 against....after a few days of effort.
Fact
Foph have no facts or figures or even an option on the table ..thier campaign now rests on discrediting anything RP say using the '' liar liar pants on fire ''defence
Fact
foph and theier supporters are willing to smear anyone with an oppsosing view......for information Consol oils is run by a man whose family have a huge history in shipping in Mounts Bay...and is a former fishing skipper.
Obviously i have looked at this project very hard and spent much time going over all the available information.
In my view, as a life long small business person of Penzance with no connection whatsoever to RP , I am very concerned that the ios link is under severe danger, and that a well meaning opposition are not being given the facts by thier leaders .
If you have'nt voted yet i would urge people to go and vote in the cornishman online poll......please go look at the option A photomontage
http://www.ioslinkharbours.co.uk/downloads/Lastest CGIs Of Penzance Option A.pdf
the petition is here
http://www.thisiscornwall.co.uk/cor...-sea-link/article-1708456-detail/article.html
don't let apathy rule Pz
option c is unworkable both in terms of increased frieght charge and therefore it cannot build up a fund for future boats, also it would take to long to repay the loan of the cost of a newboat {30 years which falls outside the eu regs and the life of the boat}
Fact
the council cannot put an unworkable scheme on the table
Fact
four million pounds and many years of work by specialists has gone into isolating which plan is workable and deliverable
fact
the above statements are the findings of not one but two independent shipping companies...lv shipping and red funnel ferries.
Fact
All the three main parties, including labour cannot garuntee the funding for this ....Labour have said that it may be subject to spending review if they win the election and Conservatives have said they support the scheme but can give no assurance of funding if they gain power.
fact
RP have explored many many options including at least one on Albert Pier which appeared to be approx75% more exspensive.
fact
passengers generally arive by car /coach or by foot from the direction of thier b&b , the promenade area, very few use the bus rail terminal
Fact
the council conservation officer has said that even if option c were to go ahead the 'beach' will need to be covered in rock amour to protect the listed structure from storm damage
Fact
option A will only mean taking away 1% of the total volume of the south pier, or 33 metres of the entire 297 meters of the wall section
fact
Option A will protect the barbican high sea wall from further damage where as option c will leave it vulnerable to flooding
Fact
if option A fails and no other options succeed the 750 000 of our council tax money will be lost.
fact
the Scillonian co have said that they need new boat within 3/5 years and that a one boat option would be better...they also say they are having to make ever more difficult decisions because of the age of thier exsisting boats
fact
the new terminal in Option A is largely hidden behind the exsisting sea wall and has practically no disadvantage re sea views.
fact
despite a year of professional campaigning only 18 businesses have openly opposed option a.......by contrast in a petition largely circulated in the business community there are currently 75 for and only 7 against....after a few days of effort.
Fact
Foph have no facts or figures or even an option on the table ..thier campaign now rests on discrediting anything RP say using the '' liar liar pants on fire ''defence
Fact
foph and theier supporters are willing to smear anyone with an oppsosing view......for information Consol oils is run by a man whose family have a huge history in shipping in Mounts Bay...and is a former fishing skipper.
Obviously i have looked at this project very hard and spent much time going over all the available information.
In my view, as a life long small business person of Penzance with no connection whatsoever to RP , I am very concerned that the ios link is under severe danger, and that a well meaning opposition are not being given the facts by thier leaders .
If you have'nt voted yet i would urge people to go and vote in the cornishman online poll......please go look at the option A photomontage
http://www.ioslinkharbours.co.uk/downloads/Lastest CGIs Of Penzance Option A.pdf
the petition is here
http://www.thisiscornwall.co.uk/cor...-sea-link/article-1708456-detail/article.html
don't let apathy rule Pz
Hi Palm123 please can you advise where you have got these facts from? ie put links to where this information has come from so that all members can see, you understand without being able to challenge these facts then they are only a matter of opinion. Thank you in advance!
Last edited:
treeve
Major Contributor
I have to say that I agree. The internet is FULL of garbage and myth as well as the factual and useful. It is hard to separate the two. The site that is quoted is also full of that good and bad. The word 'fact' on a sentence does not make it so. Please define your sources. The whole scenario has been one of smoke and mirrors, and I have been contentious to try and drive someone into actually coming forth with actual facts and actual intentions, as well as procedures that are not en loge. That page you suggest includes some fine letters, such as those by Linda Camidge, Cedric Appleby, William Cox, Peter Henshaw and Niki Dowrick. Other letters are based on bias and misinformation (or myths). I also have to say that despite the new proposals being less ugly than the previous scheme, it still is detrimental to all that I know and find of value in the harbour area. It is still ugly. It still has a damaging effect on our heritage. It still destroys our wildlife habitat........
I am particularly interested in the statement "for information Consol oils is run by a man whose family have a huge history in shipping in Mounts Bay...and is a former fishing skipper." More information, Please.
As sparky has said, more facts that are actual facts, and less of what appears to be opinion based on an irrational standpoint.
I am particularly interested in the statement "for information Consol oils is run by a man whose family have a huge history in shipping in Mounts Bay...and is a former fishing skipper." More information, Please.
As sparky has said, more facts that are actual facts, and less of what appears to be opinion based on an irrational standpoint.
Last edited:
Sparky
most of the information is from
http://www.ioslinkharbours.co.uk/?PHPSESSID=9b0fb40cd2a500ca3e7455cb534cd27a
so yes it is supplied by Route partnership. There are other sources such as cornwall council .
Foph will say that this is biased but i would urge you to check for yourself and reach your own conclusion. They seem to have presented all reports etc worts and all. At the above link you can get info on all the options ever looked at and info on option c..... it is not what i would call user friendly site but the info is there.
If you specify which of my facts you want verifying i will attampt to refind it and post a direct link.
most of the information is from
http://www.ioslinkharbours.co.uk/?PHPSESSID=9b0fb40cd2a500ca3e7455cb534cd27a
so yes it is supplied by Route partnership. There are other sources such as cornwall council .
Foph will say that this is biased but i would urge you to check for yourself and reach your own conclusion. They seem to have presented all reports etc worts and all. At the above link you can get info on all the options ever looked at and info on option c..... it is not what i would call user friendly site but the info is there.
If you specify which of my facts you want verifying i will attampt to refind it and post a direct link.
