Buckets of money to be poured into the Harbour

Our Council put a lot of time and effort into this bid to get a heap of European funding that will boost Whitstable's tourism by enhancing its museum offering and information centre.

Excellent. Well done.

Now it's Herne Bay's turn.​

---

Harbour funding bid gets green light

A city council bid for European funding for Whitstable Harbour has been successful.

The money is coming from the European Union Interreg IVa programme, for the partnerships bid Fostering Long Term Initiatives in Ports. The project sees the council working with a number of other small and medium sized ports including Dieppe, Le Havre, Newhaven and Torbay on initiatives that will improve performance, trade, efficiency and the local economy.

At Whitstable, the funding will go towards studies and models for the redevelopment of redundant buildings, a feasibility study for the development of a maritime heritage and information centre, studies into improved water and energy efficiency and cross border training and capacity building into innovative port financing.

Half of the money for the €600,000 project comes from the European Interreg fund, with the city council providing match funding for the other half.

The council’s Deputy Head of Culture and Enterprise, Dawn Hudd, said:

“Naturally we are very pleased that the bid was successful and are looking forward to working with our partners on both sides of the channel. We can all learn much from each other as we build up close links over the next few years. There is great potential for revamping some areas of the harbour, such as through the redevelopment of the south quay shed. But we want to make it clear that we will be working with local people throughout the process and making sure there is full public consultation on any development plans. We know how passionate the town’s residents are about their harbour.”

CCC 19th Apr 2013

The Pier Trust does some explaining

A response to Shaney’s letter from Pier Trust Chairman, Doreen Stone (11th Jan 2013)

Shaney and I met up yesterday to discuss her open letter about CCC’s possible leasing of the pier platform and I think she does have a cause for grievance that a concession of this magnitude was not advertised for tenders. We agreed with her that although anyone has a right to put in for planning permission on a site whether they own it or not, the opportunity to lease the platform should have been opened to everyone.

As Chairman of the Pier Trust, I assured her that at no point had the Pier Trust been involved or consulted about Mr Cain putting in for planning permission to build a mini golf course there. None of the trustees knew anything about it until we were told in late November, nine days before the AGM by Dawn Hudd who made it clear to me that CCC were under no obligation to consult the Trust as the Memorandum of Understanding had lapsed on June 30th 2012. At this meeting, we were given a single page artist’s concept sketch (which was not in the public domain at that time) to discuss with the Board.

The trustees’ first reaction was disappointment that it would prevent us implementing our own plans for a café, a community stage and an income from concessions on the platform including roller skating, markets and a weddings’ venue. However, as I am sure David Shepherd, our then Events Manager would confirm for me, during the summer the Trust met with so many problems including Health and Safety, stewarding, submission forms specific to each event to be submitted three months before the date of the event – that we were never able to run the farmers’ and other markets, the art weekend, the performance and music events we had hoped to organise once the pier was ready for us in June.

Also, in our 2011 -2012 business plan, we had included concessions within our income calculations. However, although we returned detailed comments and our approval for at least 6 concessions, we were never given any feedback on CCC’s final choice of only 2 concessions and we certainly didn’t receive any income from them.

So, in the light of our awareness of how little we had been able to deliver on the platform in 2012, a majority of the Board began to see the reciprocal value of a well-run attraction on the platform to increase the footfall to our retail beach hut village we are still intending to build along the leg. Three trustees requested and met – all 6 were invited to attend - David Cain mid-December (after the AGM) to find out more about his proposal and whether he would involve the Trust if CCC decide to go ahead with his proposal. We were not aware that the leasing had not been advertised so that others like Shaney could also apply.

This was our position and how we came to it when I sent out the members’ Christmas Newsletter.

Pier Trust still has some explaining to do...

One local business owner has some strong opinions and a lot to say about the handling of the "mini golf on the Pier" shambles. Read it carefully, then act.

---

Dear Pier Trust Members and Herne Bay Residents,

My family and I have lived and worked in Herne Bay since 1953. We have been members of the Pier Trust for quite some time and we are all avid supporters of Herne Bay and the Pier Trust's aims to reclaim, regenerate and rebuild the Pier for the benefit of the whole of the Community.

It has come to my attention that recent plans for the development of the Pier, proposed by David Cain, are in direct contradiction to the original functions of the Trust and, therefore, arguably harmful to the town as a whole. I have been over the "Memorandum of Association" put forward by the Trust on their website. In this document, the "Objects" of the Trust are outlined as:

3.1 The preservation, renovation, reconstruction and enhancement of Herne Bay and the surrounding areas…

3.2 The promotion and use of the Pier for recreational purposes and as a community and heritage building for the general use and benefit of all inhabitants of, and visitors to, the town of Herne Bay and surrounding areas.

I next examined the "Powers" of the Trust and the first piece of information available was that these powers, "may only be exercised in promoting the objects as quoted above." The plans put forward by Cain's Amusements date back to April 2012, and multiple members of the trust, myself included, have only recently learned of this mini golf proposal. The fact that Trust members have not been made aware of these plans, directly contradicts the "objects" of the Trust and the way it is supposed to be run. If Trust members are not made aware of future plans for the Pier, how can it claim to be run for "the benefit of all inhabitants"? This breach of the Trust's constitution is morally unbecoming of the organization and detrimental to the Trust's success.

One of the main areas that I don't believe is working is the relationship between the Pier Trust and Canterbury City Council. This relationship is dictated in The Pier Trust's "Memorandum of Understanding" with Canterbury City Council, a document also available on the website. This document also features many broken promises, made between the Council and the Trust. It reads:

"The Trust will be treated by the City Council as the principle trustee within the town in relation to Pier matters. The City Council will actively consult with the Pier Trust on all aspects of the future of the Pier, including the Pier Pavilion building, the Pier head, the maintenance of the Pier structure and any proposals for the future use or development of the Pier.

The Trust and City Council will respect each other's views and will work together in the interests of the Pier and the town generally."

This agreement put forward in 2008 has been compromised. It's a very frustrating read. I cannot see how the Trust and the Council can "respect each other's views" if those views, and in this case, plans, are not revealed to Trust members. Dawn Hudd of Canterbury City Council has consulted directly on and has carried out a site visit to advise on the mini golf planning application. The date on those plans are April 2012. This suggests the council were in full knowledge of these plans but failed to share the information with the trust or its members while the "Memorandum of Understanding" was still in force.

I personally, have been in email contact with Dawn Hudd of CCC since May 2012 as I was one of 2 concessions granted on the Pier last summer and wanted to keep abreast of any plans for the Pier for the following year. Even though I asked directly by email, on 2nd October and 21st November 2012, if there were any plans, I was not told anything other than that a report would be going to Executive on Dec 13th. There has been no mention of this planning proposal to me or of the councils desire to "off load" the Pier to a mini golf operator or any other long term sole operator.

We all attended the HBPT AGM on 27th Nov 2012, which I'm sure you will all agree did not go as intended, no plans for the mini golf were mentioned there either. The trust put forward a short term plan for a Beach Hut Village which would be in place until the long term Marina Plan was developed and was ready to go ahead.

The first time the mini golf planning application was mentioned to members in an official capacity was in the Christmas newsletter, emailed to members on 20/12/12. In this newsletter under the title "The Adventure Golf on the Platform" the Trust talks of a "crowd pulling" attraction that the trust is happy to collaborate with. This statement was made without consulting with any Trust Members and certainly not with the only trust member who currently runs a mini golf and has in fact held a fund raising day on the mini golf for the benefit of the trust. Was this statement made by the co-chair, who also happens to be a councillor, who also happens to be on the Executive Committee that decided to keep the running of the Pier away from the Trust and in the councils control on 13th Dec 2012? This was 7 days after the planning application went in and was based on a report, criticizing the ability of the trust to run the Pier and recommending the council reclaim control, written by… Dawn Hudd.

I am not aware that the views of the Pier's close neighbours were sought. Our business has received no correspondence on the matter and even if the rules make no obligations for our views to be solicited, common courtesy dictates that they should have been sought or that we should, at the very least, have been informed.

I also can find only one notification in the local papers 13-12-2012.

Many of the declared goals of the Trust would no longer be possible were this planning application to be granted, such as :-

1. To create a community space to host a wide variety of events which could be enjoyed by the whole community and in which they can participate.

2. To rebuild a Pier that would ensure that Herne Bay would return to its former prominence as a desirable seaside destination in its own right.

I want to know why these plans seem to have gone so far without official consultation with any Pier Trust members? Why there have been no official or public consultation meetings with the people of Herne Bay, either by the council or the Trust. Also mentioned in the newsletter is Mr. John Gilbey's comment that the CCC "did not want to stand in the way of any sustainable ideas and only wanted what was right for the Pier". This comment seems unfounded as the Council had already met with David Cain and pre plans for the mini golf have already got underway with no consultation or approval from the Trust. If this project goes ahead the rebuilding of the pier prospect will be dead in the water. No investor would consider a project that would be hindered by a 10 year single leaseholder.

This is another issue in contention, the leasing of the Pier and the length thereof. I believe the Trust agreed the Council should not market the Pier as a long term commercial opportunity. The lease options that were suggested between the 2 parties were leases of only 1-2 years. I reiterate, any lease of such a length currently being proposed, would stop any rebuild prospects from proceeding in any way.

The Council is dismissing the Pier Trust and the Pier itself as a liability that they seek to get rid of at the first and easiest opportunity with no thought or consideration for what the people of Herne Bay want or what is best for the town's future, from attracting new residents, to tourism, to attracting new businesses which would all go to vitally boost our local economy.

Many trustees, who freely give up their own time, have left, due to frustration and disillusion with regard to the Council's interference, lack of support and manipulation of the Trust. I have personally experienced the council telling me the lack of progress was wholly the fault of the Trust. This obviously has a negative and demotivating impact on the Trustee's who try to follow the ethos of the Trust's constitution, for the good of the town as a whole and not just what the council wants. These enthusiasts "giving up" impacts on the efficiency of the Trust and its ability to achieve its goals.

This is not merely my opinion as it appears to be shared by virtually all of the local people and businesses that we have canvassed.

Whether you agree with my opinion or not, I urge Pier Members, Herne Bay residents and anyone who cares about the future of the Pier and Herne Bay alike to please register your opinion by writing or emailing the Pier Trust at: piertrust.office@talktalk.net also Mr Steve Musk, Development Control, Canterbury City Council, Military Road, Canterbury, CT1 1YW or by emailing development.management@canterbury.gov.uk

Please quote Planning Application Number CA//12/02132.

Any objections to the planning application must be in by 14th January 2013.

Please feel free to contact me by email to: shaneypashley@sasamusements.co.uk

Christmas message from the Pier Trust

Good News for the future of the Pier

Three trustees of the HB Pier Trust attended the executive meeting of Canterbury City Council last Thursday and although they arrived smarting from the negative vibes in the press about an ultimatum to "shape up or ship out", they were pleasantly surprised by the positive attitude of the councillors at the meeting. Anyone wanting to hear what actually happened and what was said can listen to the recording of the executive meeting on the CCC website.

Repairs to the Existing Pier

The first item on the agenda relating to the pier was what actions should be taken about the poor condition of the wood in the substructure - not the planks you see when you walk on the pier but the wooden joists underneath them. The Pier Trust and CCC had already discussed this problem and it was mutually agreed that the Trust is not in a position financially to tackle repairs on this scale. This was a major reason for the Pier Trust preferring the management of the pier to remain at present with the council. Until it has established the hut village as a regular source of income, it knows it is not ready to take on management of the pier.

The 4 options to fund the urgently needed repairs ranged from a 2 year patch-up to a major overhaul and the good news for Herne Bay and the Pier Trust is that the executive unanimously voted for the best option which will cost in the region of £200,000. It will be carried out in stages with minimal disruption to the short term plans to progress activities on the pier.

That Report!

Dawn Hudd, the Culture Officer’s report was the next item about the future of the pier and it also contained 4 options: close the pier, hand over management to the Pier Trust, CCC to retain management, or a combination of the latter two options. Both the CCC and Pier Trust favoured this recommended option 4 – that the CCC retain control including maintenance costs until the Pier Trust is in a sufficiently strong financial position to take over management. This, especially in the light of this year’s huge maintenance bill, is seen as the only realistic option for us this year.

The executive councillors expressed very supportive comments about the current Pier Trust. They wished us well with the plans we are submitting for a beach hut village up the leg of the pier. The executive viewed the pier as an integral part of the regeneration plans for Herne Bay. Mr John Gilbey, Leader of CCC, said he had attended our AGM and assured us that CCC did not want to stand in the way of any sustainable ideas and only wanted what was right for Herne Bay and the Pier. We three trustees thought the comments at the meeting fair and positive.

The Adventure Golf on the Platform

Last week, we met with Mr Cain to discuss his plans for a crowd-pulling tourist attraction on the tarmac of the platform. The Trust is happy to work together with Mr Cain and the beach hut village and the Smugglers’ Adventure Golf will be mutually beneficial this year both bringing in tourists and locals. There will still be full access for walkers to enjoy the walks on the pier. Mr Cain will be investing a large amount in the pier and hopes to attract over 5000 visitors to the pier in August. Maybe next winter we shall see the pier lit up with lights and a Christmas Market complete with Santa on the pier.

Looking forward to 2013

Thank you for all your support this year. Don’t believe all you read in the press – we have come to realise that a good story built on a few disconnected comments is often a priority for journalists – we are learning, with difficulty, to take it as modern media speak.

A special thank you goes to our volunteers who have been standing in the cold this month outside supermarkets meeting members, collecting subs, manning the office and the Santa’s grotto in the bandstand and doing so much to keep us going. Their help is much appreciated by us. Thank you.

The Office in the Pier Gallery on Central Parade is now up and running and we are in the process of sorting out the administrative problems that we have suffered in the last year. Hopefully 2013 will be a good year all round for the Trust.

We are moving the Wine and Wisdom date from the 4th of January to a later date as general opinion indicates that was too near Christmas. We shall email you the new date as soon as possible. The bands event specifically aimed at the younger audience will take place at the King’s Hall on Feb 9th and tickets will be available at £5 each in the New Year – we shall email you with details then.

If any Member wishes to stand themselves or wishes to nominate another Member to stand for the role of trustee next year we are looking specifically for members with expertise in the following areas : legal experience, promotional expertise, financial and fund-raising (big fund-raising!) expertise.

Lastly but by no means least come down to the Bandstand at the weekend and find out more about the 2013 on the Pier. We together with other community organisations will be there between 11:00am and 4:00pm. Santa will also be there so bring the kids or grandkids and they will receive a free gift. All we ask is that you bring a few tins of food as a donation to the parcels that will be given to the less fortunate at Christmas.

Happy Christmas

Doreen Stone & Joe Howes - Joint Chairmen

Council demolition failure

Now this is interesting. Firstly Mr McMahan doesn't say where his figure of £750,000 comes from - is this what CCC have actually paid the contractors? - but I really like his idea that money generated from the demolition could have been re-invested in the Pier.

Secondly, the Council spokesman (Wormtongue, as I think of him) seems to be having trouble with numbers when he says "... it was discovered that the amount of asbestos in the building was understated and its removal was more problematic than first envisaged. The council has incurred no extra cost ...".

In June of last year, the local press reported that the cost of demolition was £243k more than the budgeted £425k because of the asbestos revealed by a structural survey. As Cllr Vickery-Jones said at the time:

This is a huge increase but there is no alternative.

Hmmm... "no extra cost" or "a huge increase" - which do you think best describes £243,000?

So our Council got a fixed price deal and handed over the value of all the scrap to the contractors, at a time when most metal prices seemed to be rising steadily (apparently due to demand for raw materials in China pushing up prices globally).

Are any of CCC's bean-counters going to figure out how much we lost out as a result? I doubt it. They won't bother to find out how costly this mistake was, and as a result will probably repeat it.

---

Counting the cost of pier demolition

Pulling down Herne Bay's Pier Pavilion has cost tax-payers £750,000 and left the town with nothing in return, claims former city councillor Vince McMahan. He says a clause in the demolition contract means contractors have been allowed to strip the pier of valuable scrap metal and pocket the cash. The dad of three stormed:

"It beggars belief. It is a slap in the face to the people of Herne Bay that firstly the cost shot up to £668,000 because the council didn't realise there was so much asbestos there. And then the deal means the company can keep the scrap.

The whole building was clad in aluminium, which is worth a lot of money now. With scrap metal prices soaring, the council should have insisted the money was recycled to, say, the Pier Trust or ring-fenced for the town's regeneration."

Council spokesman Rob Davies insisted:

"We held a competitive tender for the demolition contract to ensure we got the best possible price. The salvage and sale of recyclable materials such as metal, steel and timber are being carried out by the contractor but it is important to stress that any money made from this was included as savings to the council in the tender price.

It also makes sense on a practical level because, if the council had kept these materials, it would have incurred substantial transport and storage costs. The council let the contract on a maximum price basis, where the risk of any cost increase was transferred to the contractor.

This decision was a very good one as, when the building envelope was opened, it was discovered that the amount of asbestos in the building was understated and its removal was more problematic than first envisaged. The council has incurred no extra cost but has allowed the contractors extra time to deal with these difficult issues.

We are forecasting that the demolition works will be completed by mid-April and that the post-demolition works will be completed in time for the summer season."

The row erupted as the council was blasted by former Pier Trust bosses for failing to back the group. Former treasurer and accountant Jason Hollingsworth, 40, from Victoria Park, who stood down from the Trust three months ago, said in a joint letter with former chairman Graham Cooper:

"In our view, the trust has never been effectively or adequately supported by the council. Indeed, that is at the core of why so many trustees have stood down. Throughout 2011, the Herne Bay Pier Trust participated in a joint working group with Canterbury City Council but from our experience the key difficulty was getting clear and consistent answers from the council as to its plans, ideas and funding."

Former chairman of the trust's business group Michael Khoury said:

"We worked out that a pier platform reaching the old pier head would cost £11 million, not £60 million as some claimed. The council has spent more than half a million pounds just knocking the building down with nothing left. Where's the vision?"

Pier campaigner Kim Hennelly asked the city council's deputy head of culture and enterprise Dawn Hudd outright about the council's intentions and received this reply:

"The council does not have any current intention of rebuilding the pier itself. Our corporate plan pledges to improve the seafront and the current pier platform. The Herne Bay Pier Trust was set up so that a business plan could be developed by the trust working with the people of Herne Bay.

The council is supporting this process by helping the trust to develop its business plan during this year and deliver events and activities on the pier platform for the 2012 season. We expect the trust to pursue rebuilding or extending the pier if it considers that to be right."

thisikent 23rd Mar 2012

Pier Trust reveals extension plans

Campaigners have unveiled plans to extend the pier and build a new pavilion. Members of Herne Bay Pier Trust revealed details of the scheme – the brainchild of graphic designer Dave Parish – ahead of a crucial council meeting to debate the pier's future after council officers claimed the lack of a clear plan for the site meant that "difficult decisions" would have to be made.

In a six-page report due to be discussed by the council's ruling executive on 2nd Feb, council officer Dawn Hudd raised a number of issues. She said:

"Communications with the trust have been contradictory and we are now at a point where difficult decisions need to be made about any programme of activity this year. A clear understanding needs to be obtained of any planning limitations for the site. Given the Pier Trust's lack of experience and its own admission about its capacity… significant input from council officers will be required."

But pier bosses hit back, and said they were reviewing several options, including a row of beach hut-type stalls, a cafe, a local-information stall and an area for angling. They hope to attract private funding for their plans. Spokeswoman Doreen Stone said:

"We have been working hard for the future of the pier through our two appointed councillor trustees, Andrew Cook and Joe Howes. The trust sent its business plan to the council before Christmas. We have agreed to present a final business plan in mid February. On the main platform, we have suggested a multi-purpose floor, which could be used for skating, musical events, comedy, dancing and live performances. A local designer has presented rough drafts of two domes to cover the activity areas and the trust is currently planning several events this summer."

Council officials have warned any events need to be planned urgently, as most will need a premises licence, which takes 56 days. Health and safety issues, planning limitations and how to get power and water to the pier platform also need to be considered.

Councillors will be told tonight that they have four options, including leaving the site empty and closed off once the pavilion is demolished in about six weeks' time, keeping full control of the pier and putting activities in place, or keeping control of the pier platform but helping the Pier Trust and other organisations to organise events.

They were expected to choose the last option, and request an additional £40,600 from Canterbury City Council on top of their current budget for the pier of £75,000. The increased budget will include £18,000 for insurance, £10,000 for gates, £5,000 for a tide gauge and £10,300 for navigation lights, as well as £20,000 contingency money.

Heron councillor Andrew Cook told the Times:

"The council and the Pier Trust are working very closely to ensure activities are put in place. We will be presenting those at the King's Hall business and community exhibition on March 21. Local designer David Parish has presented us with a exciting model of a Victorian building with modern elements as a possible cover for the pier platform, which is quite exposed.

We are looking at the feasibility and finances of putting something like this in place; if not this summer, then during phase two, possibly over a platform doubled in length. Realistically, the pier platform is likely to open for its first event to coincide with the Queen's Jubilee."

HB Times 3rd Feb 2012