John Gilbey's blueprint for Herne Bay

The Leader of our Council has produced a blueprint for debate. As he says:

Cllr John Gilbey

As a member of the City Council for 11 years and as Portfolio Holder for Regeneration for 9 years, I have had a unique insight into many issues across the District and the County.

I don’t have all the answers to questions that are asked and would never make such a claim, but I would like to use my years of accumulated knowledge to present my ideas for the future of the Canterbury District.

This is not a plan, or a proposal, these are merely my own personal thoughts, a blueprint to encourage meaningful debate on these issues. This is a document to encourage you to write to me with your views and opinions, to stimulate positive ideas on the ways forward for all of us.

After a little chat about how in love with the Local Plan he is, and how we will all be living in "garden towns", basking in the glow of "sustainable urban design", Cllr Gilbey goes on to focus on specific areas.

Here's what he has to say about Herne Bay [with my comments] - do feel free to add your own comments below.

---

Herne Bay

The council will complete the town centre upgrade [after how many years, while you were portfolio holder for regeneration?] including moving the market and preserving some of the buildings currently in a state of decay [examples?]. There is a need to re-open some disused buildings and homes [examples?], and tax second homes appropriately [why, how, and how much?].

A proposal to open up Beach Street and rejuvenate that environment will also be completed [completed? has planning been approved?] as part of the upgrading of the town and in that context the sea front itself should be the subject of renewal/upgrading with analysis and decisions to be taken in the light of local views and aspirations [NO! it should be DRIVEN by local views and aspirations] on the future purpose of such an attractive location. We should widen the appeal and facilities of Herne Bay even further to encourage both tourism and business to provide local jobs.

We will have a solid foundation for a greater marketable attraction with all these planned developments. I strongly believe we should also support the Pier head activities [I think you mean the Pier stub - your Council has long since admitted it has no intention of rebuilding to the Pier head], satisfactorily resolve the future of the Museum [after YOUR Council cut its opening hours, following YEARS of neglect] and continue protection for the Downs [your Council is the ONLY objector to the village green application - village green status is the greatest possible protection under English law]. King's Hall needs to be fully supported in its endeavours to become a self supporting venue for events while providing community facilities. The replacement of the Beach Huts at the base of the Downs should also be part of the package [NEVER!].

The Roman fort remains at Reculver need to be enhanced and protected. The general environment of the coast at Reculver needs firm and direct action to provide an environment worthy of the history, nature, culture and attraction of this unique area [yes, it could be a great place for a caravan site...]. Overall Herne Bay should strive to be a modern vibrant town that provides attractions and facilities for residents and tourists, both taking advantage of the seaside location. The Bends should always be protected as a valuable green gap and open space.

This council has, over the last 9 years made huge progress in Herne Bay and this is often forgotten about. We have renovated the clock tower (with the recent announcement there is much more renovation to come) [so how good was your first renovation?] and sea front flood defences [er, no - this was Environment Agency funded], we have enhanced the whole concept and environment of Memorial Park, designated large Queen Elizabeth II Fields which permanently protects green open spaces from development [it affords no such protection - QEII land can be developed on, if a matching area nearby is provided as a replacement - in contrast, a village green can NOT be developed, which is why the Council is objecting], upgraded the Leisure Centre facilities and cleared the pier head [knocked down a building which had become unsafe through Council neglect, and put down a poor tarmac surface]. We have built a sports centre at Herne Bay High School incorporating a roller hockey rink while also encouraging and supporting local involvement throughout. We have prepared an Area Action Plan for the Town Centre and work is now underway. With residents there is much to be done still to preserve and enhance the ambiance and economic well being of the Town but we are well on our way.

Sense prevails, flagpole safe.

So they won't be knocking it down, but the Engineers say it's nearing the end of its life. Has anyone thought of repairing it? "A stitch in time saves nine"  as my Gran would say. "Make do and mend" that was another catch-phrase.

---

The flagpole opposite Herne Bay pier has been saved - for now. The Gazette exclusively revealed last week that councillors were considering rushing through plans to pull down the historic mast while construction workers were employed on the seafront.

The plans were shelved at the latest meeting of the regeneration committee on Monday, which sits in private, after there was no clear majority on what to do with the flagpole.

The mast is not completely safe, however, as engineers say it only has another four or five years' life left. Councillors agreed to leave the flagpole and to revisit the issue in the future. Cllr Peter Lee said:

"It will not be a permanent fixture but for the moment, people think leave it where it is. Given the time it will take to consult the public, the opportunity with construction workers on site will be lost, so on that basis we decided not to take it any further."

Cllr Ron Flaherty said:

"I said there is no rush and I would rather leave it for the moment. I am not so sure the plantage around the flagpole should be removed to have an open space."

HB Gazette 27th Jun 2013

Rogue councillor

The suggested demolition of the flagpole at the Pier is a shining example of some of the problems that our town faces.

Penny-pinching short-termism. Cllr Peter Lee - one of our own town councillors - decides it's a good idea to start knocking things down on the seafront, simply because it's cheap to do it now.

Lack of Planning. Cllr Lee claims this idea is to make "event space" that has been lost to the crazy golf and beach hut village on the Pier - clearly, this didn't cross anyone's mind at the time they were granting planning permissions.  Anyway, there's no certainty that the crazy golf will go ahead.

Disregard for the residents. Cllr Lee is ignoring (or is unaware of) the months of public consultation that have gone in to shaping a management plan for the new QE2 Coastal Park, which agreed to keep this flagpole. Councillor - when the people speak, it literally pays you to listen.

Greed. Cllr Lee says this will create an "events space" - translated into plain English, this is simply "a space the Council can charge for". For the 98% of the year that it's not being used, it will be just another swathe of paving or tarmac - not very inviting for visitors, not very good for regeneration.

Anyway, this irked me enough to write to the press (don't know if they'll print it). 

Dear Sir,

I am horrified by the casual vandalism of Cllr Peter Lee and his regeneration committee ("Fears over plan to demolish pier pole", HB Gazette 20th June 2013).

The Council has created a new park - the QE2 Coastal Park - that covers the seafront from Hampton to Reculver, and ran a consultation with local groups to agree a management plan for the park.

Over a period of months, dozens of residents spent hour after hour thrashing out how to make the most of this new attraction. We were keen to keep both flag poles, but the incredibly high costs (£32,000) that CCC quoted for repairing the pole by the bandstand persuaded us to lose one and keep the other.

But now one of our own councillors has taken it into his head to ignore the results of the lengthy public consultation (is anyone surprised?) and knock it down, because it's cheap to knock it down while there are workmen on site.

The argument seems to be that it's fine to destroy the flag pole because "it is rarely used". This is a very odd argument. The Westgate Towers in Canterbury are completely unused since the museum there closed - will Cllr Lee propose demolition? I doubt it.

Cllr Lee says he wants to create an "events space". We already have a superb "events space" on the pier platform... but our Council swapped that for a quick buck without a thought for the consequences.

Would you like to know what else Cllr Peter Lee and his regeneration committee have up their sleeves? Well, that's tough - all their meeting are held in secret, and are un-minuted.

Yours etc,

Pier flagpole under threat

The flagpole by the Bandstand being demolished.

12th Jan 2013

Plans to remove the flagpole at the front of the pier could be rushed through to save money, say opposition groups.

On Monday the council's regeneration group will discuss getting rid of the rarely-used mast near the pier entrance and transforming the area into an events space. Although the group has no decision-making power, it may recommend the plans to the executive if it considers them viable.

Councillors looking to minimise cost want the proposals pushed ahead while construction firms are still working on the seafront. They argue that redeveloping the flagpole would replace the space lost when the beach hut village and crazy golf course open on the pier.

Yet there are fears the plans could be approved without consulting residents to meet deadlines of construction firms. Another flagpole by the bandstand was taken down in January because the council said it had "decayed beyond repair" and would cost £32,000 to replace.

Cllr Ron Flaherty

Lib Dem Cllr Ron Flaherty said:

"I'm not happy about it. It is vandalism of a piece of heritage on the seafront as far as I'm concerned. At the moment, the demographic of the town is mainly over-55s. Elderly people, particularly, like to sit there in the summer months facing the sun and looking at the gardens. Will the gardens and seating have to be taken up as well? I am not convinced by this. I wouldn't like to see the executive rubber stamp this one without residents' consultation about it." 

Geoff Wimble

Also opposing the idea is former town partner Geoff Wimble of events organisation Herne Bay Group Community Projects Ltd. Mr Wimble, 65, of Sea Street, said:

"Where the flagpole stands is a lovely garden. Is this some kind of forward planning to develop something on the pier? They have destroyed one lot of gardens this year where they have built the playground. That won't grow back this year. Talk of taking the flagpole down is barmy. At the moment there are beautiful gardens. The seafront has got notoriety for its gardens. Why destroy more?"

Council spokesman Rob Davies said:

"There has been a proposal to remove the flag pole near the pier entrance, which is rarely used, to create an events space to complement other activities proposed for the pier. This idea would allow events to be staged at that end of the seafront, because currently these activities all take place by the clock tower. Two new flagpoles are also planned to go on the pier itself." 

Cllr Peter Lee

The idea to remove the flagpole was first floated at a meeting  of councillors on the regeneration committee some months ago. Cllr Peter Lee, who sits on the regeneration committee, said:

"If we have development on the pier, with the beach huts and a crazy golf course, it means we will have lost area to host events.  We have events near the clock tower and some businesses have said they could do with events at their end of the seafront, so we thought why not look at removing the flagpole and creating extra open space there.  We have a contractor working on the seafront at the moment and while someone is in place with equipment and man power, this would be an ideal time to do it."

It is thought councillors have investigated moving the flagpole to the site where the one at the bandstand used to sit but have been told it will be too fragile and old to survive.

HB Gazette 20th June 2013

Altira supermarket

HB Gazette 23rd Jun 2011

Asbestos work adds £¼m to Pier costs

The cost of demolishing the Herne Bay pier pavilion has risen dramatically because much higher quantities of asbestos than expected have been discovered in the building. The city council had originally budgeted £425,000 but the latest structural survey has revealed the full extent of extra work needed.

Now the lowest acceptable tender from a specialist demolition company is nearly £668,000 - £243,000 more than expected. The new figures were revealed to members of the council executive on Thursday which agreed to fund the extra cost. Cllr Peter Vickery-Jones said:

"This is a huge increase but there is no alternative. We have to find the money because we can't leave the building as it is."

Cllr Peter Lee added:

"The pier is a key part of Herne Bay's regeneration and investment in the town. But it will enable its replacement with something more for tourists which will provide an income for the Pier Trust."

Pier Trust chairman Julian Jennings told the executive he hoped there would not be any delays because it wanted the pier platform to be available for summer activities in 2012.

The contract is now expected to last 24 weeks and work is expected to start in the autumn when the sports facilities, currently housed in the pavilion, are transferred to a new sports centre at Herne Bay High School.

HB Gazette 23rd Jun 2011

Community space

HB Gazette 16th September 2010

Mervyn King praises Marlowe

HB Gazette 9th September 2010

Gale's View: Town Centre

It has been a long and frustrating time in coming but at last serious proposals for the re-development of the centre of Herne Bay are out in the open.  We need a good mix of high-quality retail, leisure facilities and residential accommodation in the heart of the community to keep the town alive night and day; and I believe that these plans warrant and deserve the backing of the town.

We either see the continuation of the drift towards out-of-town shopping that has blighted other town centre retail outlets or we give support to an imaginative and creative plan that will breathe life into a seaside town that, if we are honest, has for historical reasons never really enjoyed the benefits of a "town centre". The creation of such a focal point will not only prove to be a magnet in itself but will help to revitalise business for those outlets that are, particularly at present, having a difficult time in the High Street and in Mortimer Street.

The proposed developer, Denne Construction, have a good track record (they are, by the way, one of the Kent companies that have blazed a trail in the creation of construction trade apprenticeships) and if Canterbury City Council gives this project the go-ahead then I think that we shall live to witness the realisation of a dream (see 1980s editions of the Gazette!) that some of us have adhered to for a long time.

The present Council's ambitions for the town have, following wide public consultation, been impeded by a government moving of goal posts and consequent delays in the approval and implementation of a cohesive local plan. We are, I think, now getting back on track and if we can dovetail the development of the Market and William Street Car Park sites with the regeneration of the pier and other improvements planned for the waterfront then in relatively short order, and notwithstanding a dire national economic situation, The Bay is going to be a very exciting place to be.

Roger Gale M.P. (November 25th 2009)

2004 Pier Report: PMP executive summary

Herne Bay needs a major visitor attraction if it is to thrive in the 21st century, a pier could provide such an attraction and could be the catalyst for regeneration and prosperity. There is the potential to provide a new pier which would "help regenerate Herne Bay as a thriving seaside town with good employment opportunities for local people" but there would need to be considerable effort in securing external funding.

Executive summary

PMP was appointed by Canterbury City Council in February 2004 to undertake a feasibility study into a new pier at Herne Bay. The consultancy team was comprised of:

• PMP (a specialist sport and leisure consultancy),
• Marks Barfield Architects,
• Donaldsons (property consultants),
• Yolles (structural engineers) and
• Gardiner and Theobold (cost consultants).

The aim of the study is to put forward technically feasible ideas for rebuilding the pier and to assess the financial viability and achievability of proposals. Two main types of proposals have been assessed:

• rebuild to the style of the former pier, with free public access and limited commercial development
• develop a large-scale commercial complex intended as a spur to regenerate the town as a major regional centre for leisure, maritime activities and other visitor attractions. Options for varying the length of the pier may have been considered.

The primary objective of the project is:

"to help regenerate Herne Bay as a thriving seaside town with a strong local economy and provide good employment opportunities for local people"

Five key conditions must apply to any proposal:

1. the pier must be accessible to local people
2. the present or improved sports facilities must be incorporated within the pier complex or be relocated to an appropriate alternative site within the town
3. the proposal will need to be fully funded by external sources, primarily the private sector. lt must not be assumed that significant capital or revenue sums will be available from Kent County Council or Canterbury City Council to fund this project nor to underwrite any losses
4. the project must be financially, environmentally and technically sustainable in the long term
5. any improvements required to the highway and transport network and other essential infrastructure development work must have a realistic prospect of being deliverable.

Summary of Conclusions

Herne Bay needs an attraction...

• Herne Bay needs a major visitor attraction if it is to thrive in the 21st century, a pier could provide such an attraction and could be the catalyst for regeneration and prosperity.

...but it also needs an overall strategy

• A missing component at this stage, however, is a clear strategy for the regeneration of Herne Bay. This is one of the fundamental points in Sea Changes, the strategy for resort regeneration. lt also anticipates the first question which will be asked by any potential funding body: "so where does the pier sit in the bigger scheme of things?"
• Furthermore, the pier project and the regeneration strategy are more likely to be successful if they are placed in the wider East Kent context. This will be the case for the tourism product as a whole. Redevelopment of the pier alongside projects such as the Turner Centre in Margate and the reputation of Whitstable as a character destination will add to the critical mass and will help maintain the vitality of the area for visitors.

Strong commercial interest

• There is a strong level of commercial interest in developing on a new pier; however, the income from the private sector needs to be offset against the substantially increased costs of developing over water compared to developing on dry land.
• A casino would provide the main attraction on the commercial pier. It would be complemented by other uses to ensure a family friendly environment and all day/ year round interest.
• There is no certainty that a boat operation from the end of the pier would be commercially viable, so the rationale for providing a ¾ mile long pier must be questioned. Furthermore, any long pier option has a major cost which makes commercial viability impossible. Therefore, it is more beneficial to concentrate on short pier options.

The four main options arising

1. The two main options in the brief - a traditional pier and a modern, commercial pier - need to be seen in the context of two additional options: do nothing, and demolition.
2. "Do nothing" would mean that Herne Bay continues with the present pier and sports pavilion until both facilities, inevitably, decline to the extent that they are no longer functional or viable. At present this is costing the council £70,000 per year (£45,000 for the sports hall and £25,000 for pier maintenance) plus an additional £272,000 required in maintenance over four years just to keep the sports centre to its current standard (source: IPF condition survey).
3. If the pier were allowed to decay it would have a significant negative impact on the town. Furthermore, closure at the end of its life would force the issue of replacement in any case (with all the associated capital costs).
4. Demolition would avoid the problems that come with decay and dereliction (vandalism, public safety, blight, etc) but it would be a depressing and premature end to the pier. lt is not a way forward that we would recommend.

No self funding options

• Our analyses have shown that none of the options are self funding and all are likely to require some level of support from public grants, ranging from £0.6m to £12.8m. Clearly, options at the higher end of the scale are unlikely to be deliverable. There are a number of public sector grants available and the pier could make an attractive funding proposition based on its regenerative potential.
• To summarise, there is the potential to provide a new pier which would "help regenerate Herne Bay as a thriving seaside town with good employment opportunities for local people" but there would need to be considerable effort in securing external funding.

Recommendations

• This report is used as the basis for consultation with external funding organisations to clarify the level, likelihood and timing of additional funds.
• A regeneration strategy and masterplan for Herne Bay is prepared, setting the pier and other local initiatives in context, and ensuring that infrastructure improvements are not undertaken in isolation.
• Further public consultation takes place on the emerging options.
• There is a detailed feasibility study into the relocation of the sports centre.
• Further technical studies are undertaken into construction options in order to provide greater cost certainty, and to explore routes for cost reduction.