HB Exhibition at King’s Hall

There was commerce, campaigners, councillors and charities crammed into Herne Bay’s Kings Hall for the town’s annual business expo exhibition. It was opened by the Lord Mayor of Canterbury Ian Thomas on Wednesday. The city council’s senior projects manager, Patrick Rynne, who helped to arrange the event, said:

“There were 46 businesses and 22 projects represented in the hall, with more than 500 visitors at the exhibition. Herne Bay should feel justifiably proud of the interest the town is attracting. This really highlighted the success stories we are seeing.”

Herne Bay Pier Trust unveiled a multicoloured model of an extended pier. The trust’s deputy chairman, Andrea Leach, who works tirelessly to raise funds for the charity, said:

“We are very excited about the summer on the pier platform and have some good events lined up. It was great to see the public’s enthusiasm.”

Herne Bay Coastwatch members, who scour the seas from the Old Bathing Station at weekends, were among those scouting for volunteers. They need spare hands to man the station on Fridays as they prepare for the summer season.

But there were also awkward moments. Coplan Estates, which is managing the stalled Herne Bay Central Development regeneration plan, was placed opposite new group Beach Creative. Beach Creative is dedicated to turning Beach House into a thriving artists’ colony after the building – earmarked for demolition under the Coplan scheme – was given a reprieve.

The developer’s Colin McQueston admitted:

“Three months ago things looked like they were stuck but we are tweaking the proposal and are at last beginning to have some renewed interest.”

The artists looked on politely, wondering whether their new home will survive the summer.

thisiskent 30th Mar 2012

Herne Bay’s growth threatened by Canterbury’s greed

Herne Bay’s future centres on tourism – it’s a business model that is tried and trusted, it’s well-understood and it’s sustainable.

It makes sense to make the most of the most obvious quality Herne Bay has – the fact that it’s a nice little town by the seaside.

Tourism is not isolated from the rest of the local economy, quite the reverse. Our vistors – whether coming for a day trip, a weekend, or longer – generate business and spread wealth at every turn. B&B room tabs, restaurant bills, pub rounds, shop tills, even parking meters.

Money, time and effort spent encouraging tourism in Herne Bay is not expenditure, it’s investment.

But Canterbury City Council seems to think differently. Rather than investing in promoting Herne Bay’s tourist offering, they insist on charging people who want to promote our town and encourage tourism.

Any B&B or hotel owner who wants to promote their business on Canterbury’s tourism website has to pay £275, plus £10 per room, plus VAT to get the most basic entry – bare bones facts plus 25 words of text. Times are hard and margins are tight, so this is beyond the budget of most of these small businesses.

As a result, anyone looking at Canterbury’s tourism site could be forgiven for thinking that Herne Bay has just 2 B&Bs – one on Western Esplanade, and one in Herne. A stroll along the seafront will take you past many excellent B&Bs that don’t get a mention.

Canterbury seems to have forgotten that it is in everyone’s best interests to encourage tourism and foster a thriving local economy, rather than to grasp every chance to take yet more money from the local Council tax payers. Instead of acting as an agent of promotion, our Council has cast itself in the role of advertising agency.

Canterbury’s short-term greed could be the death of our town.

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

Herne getting famous for beating Tesco

The sleepy village that  triumphed over Tesco as people power forces chain to abandon pub conversion

The charming village of Herne seems an unlikely spot for an awesome display of people power. But the extraordinary resolve of its residents has just seen off the might of Tesco. Villagers won a David and Goliath battle with the store chain over what they saw as a threat to their way of life.

Heart of the village: The pub, with church next door, that Tesco aimed to convert

At the centre of the struggle was the Upper Red Lion, a recently closed pub next door to the handsome 14th century church of St Martin. Tesco wanted to turn it into a store – and the villagers were appalled. For one thing, it would have ruined the view at weddings. For another, it would spell doom for their Village Stores, Herne’s only shop, which is on the other side of the pub and has been keeping the community on the Kent coast in bread, milk and newspapers for more than a century.

Soon after word of the proposal for the Tesco Express leaked out, an emergency meeting was called by the parish council at the community hall in January. More than 500 turned up – too many to fit in the hall so the meeting had to be moved to the church.

Fightback: The campaign leaders. Villagers vowed to fight the plans and formed a campaign group

The parish council vowed to fight the plans and campaign group Herne Against Tesco – HAT – was created. When rumours spread that Tesco was thinking of extending the pub at the rear, residents put a spanner in the works by getting the pub listed. Then there was a protest when, despite a downpour, 700 men, women and children marched through the village on March 4.

Five days later, Tesco, which had not even got as far as putting in a planning application, abandoned the scheme. St Martin’s celebrated by ringing its bells. Vicar Elaine Richardson had feared the church would miss out on the 130 weddings, christenings and funerals it conducts a year if the store opened.

Tesco signs on the store would also ruin wedding pictures and the atmosphere. Reverend Richardson said:

‘There’s something about the big boys just thinking they can push their way into the High Street or a village like ours. It’s awful.’

Thiruvalluvar Kumanan, 45, who runs the Village Stores, which includes post office, said:

‘If it was something the village needed, then fine. But we felt they were just trying to bully their way in.’

Chairman of the HAT campaign Frank Holden, 55, said:

‘We were preparing for a long fight. It’s a victory for the small people.’

Tesco picked Herne – which is distinct from the nearby town of Herne Bay – as potential site after analysing data from its Clubcard scheme and consulting residents. Pubs are attractive because they are already licensed to sell food and alcohol so do not require an application for a change of use.

Tesco said it felt there was ‘a demand for a shopping choice in Herne’ but added that ‘highway constraints’ meant it would not pursue the pub conversion.

mailonline 24th Mar 2012

Thanet rejects Manston night flights

More than 2,000 residents air their views

More than 2,000 residents took the time to air their views as part of the council’s public consultation on proposals for regular night-time flying at Manston Airport. The majority were opposed to the implementation of regular night-time flying, with approximately 73% opposed, 26% in favour and 1% not clearly stating a position.

The main reasons given by those who were opposed were:

• the likely disturbance to sleep
• the effect on health and quality of life
• unacceptable noise levels
• the likely detrimental impact on the local economy
• overstating the potential economic benefits.

Those in favour stated the reasons for their support as including:

• jobs/employment opportunities
• regeneration of Thanet
• their desire for the airport to develop
• night flights needed to ensure the future viability of the airport
• Airport has been there for many years

The responses were also analysed by area to ensure that the council gathers the views of those who live under the identified flight path, those who live within Thanet and those from outside of Thanet.  The results were approximately as follows:

---

---

Leader of Thanet District Council, Cllr. Clive Hart, said:

“Firstly I’d like to thank everyone who took the time to take part in this consultation.  We know that it’s such an important issue for local people and that’s clearly reflected in the high level of response. The feedback from this consultation will now be considered by Councillors, alongside the findings of the Independent Assessment completed by Parsons Brinckerhoff and the proposed policy itself, to agree the council’s consultation response to Infratil.

I am sure every Councillor will be carefully analysing these results to see what residents have said, before we finalise our response.”

A report is due to be considered by members of the Airport Working Party on Wednesday 4th April. The report then goes to Scrutiny on Tuesday 24th April, Cabinet on Thursday 10th May and will then be considered at an Extraordinary meeting of Full Council on Thursday 24th May.

NHS Bill Risk Register

This document is floating around the Interweb, being described as the much sought after, but long undisclosed, Risk Register associated with the Government’s proposed NHS reforms.

It might be, it might not. Have a look and see what you think.

Visit to Belmont House and Gardens, Faversham

Belmont House

Price: £13.00 per person for the House (1hr 15/30min) and Gardens (at own pace). Cream tea is included, following the tour of the house.

The focus of Belmont is the elegant 18th century house (designed by Samuel Wyatt) commanding stunning views over the surrounding Estate and the rolling Kentish North Downs. Steeped in history, this unique house contains mementos of the family’s history and travels. The house was built in 1769 by Edward Wilks, store-keeper at the nearby Faversham Powder Mill. Extensive views and its elevated position gave Belmont its name.

The present layout of the grounds dates from the 1790s, though the planting has been altered over the past two centuries. The gardens consist of a walled garden, pinetum, wooded areas, formal lawns and a large kitchen garden.

The maximum number that can be accommodated on this visit is 30, so we will have to take members and guests on a first come basis, and establish a waiting list, in the case of members and/or guests dropping out.

Address: – Belmont, Belmont Park, Throwley, nr. Faversham, Kent, ME13 0HH. Belmont is tucked away down some very narrow country lanes, but the way is well signed from the A251.

Directions: – From Faversham / M2, exit junction 6. Turn onto the A251 heading South in the direction of Ashford. Pass successively through the villages of North Street (2 miles) and Sheldwich (3 miles), before reaching Badlesmere (4 miles), turn right and follow the brown tourist signs for Belmont; a further 1.5 miles.

Assemble in car park at 12.50 pm for a tour starting at 1pm.

Lunch is available at Belmont, but must be pre-booked by ringing Sandy the cook on 01795 890 202 at least one week prior to our visit.

To reserve a place please contact Tony Bendrey on 364321 or by email on bendrey@btinternet.com

HBHRS

Kings Hall Mystery Objects Competition – Answers

A. Wool Holder – holds a ball of wool and is slung over wrist while knitting.

B. Fossilised Sea Urchin – 160 million years old.

C. Skirt Lifter –
when attached to a length of ribbon it enabled women in long skirts to
raise the hems clear of the muddy 19th century streets (all transport
was horse powered, think about it.)

FoHBM

Consultation results

Well, the results are in for Canterbury district, and the answer is a clear “No” to night flights.

Of the 230 responses, 80% were against Manston’s proposals.

So, where are the results for Thanet?

Here they are!

Herne Bay rejects Manston night flights

As you probably know, Manston airport recently presented Thanet District Council with a proposal for scheduled night flights. TDC eventually organised a brief public consultation. Manston airport is obviously outside Canterbury’s feudal realm of control, but TDC agreed to let CCC have an input to the consultation…

The agreement was that CCC would be sent copies of all the submissions made to the consultation that came from the Canterbury district. CCC could then collate the replies, mull over the contents, and then base the Council’s response to TDC on what Canterbury residents had said.

230 people from the Canterbury district responded to the TDC consultation, and 80% of them opposed the night flight proposals. You can see the all the responses, or at least CCC’s brutal summaries of them, HERE. And this is CCC’s conclusion (you can find the full report HERE)…

Conclusion

Whilst in principle supporting the continued role that Manston Airport can provide in the economic well being of East Kent, the City Council considers that the potential for adverse impact on residents of this night-time flying proposal is not justified. The Council will therefore wish the method of operation to be kept to the current one and that further discussions are held regarding the monitoring of night-time flying activity.