[BBC News] Public in favour of saving pier

[slinkydevil]

Looks like it will be left to me and Skrappy to chain ourselves to the pier gates

 

 

You see, now you have a USP I'd go and visit the pier if you did that.

[Nitro]

Pier should be saved, the laxey wheel might not be visted often, but people do like to see it, they'd soon notice a gap when they look up to were the wheel was..

 

The pier is at the very least "functional", people can go for walks along it, people can fish off the end and also if there was a little cafe place at the end, they could sit with a cup of Tea/coffee and look at the view.

 

Plus you could do something like one of those telescope things on the end of the pier, costs 20p to view for about 1 minute!

[monasqueen]

About time they did something about it instead of talking about it, there have been so many surveys and consultations it's getting ridiculous.

 

Heritage Homes should chip in a lot, too - they have used the name Queens Pier for their new apartment block - a good name for the apartments if the pier was to be demolished. Makes me laugh when I hear their advert - "when I look out of my window, what do I see?" - answer - a rusting pier.

 

Re-open it, bring back the little train - that in itself would draw tourists (I visited it and used it when it was still open). Charge people for the right to fish off the end, have a shop and a cafe handy.

 

Just stop procrastinating.

[Skeddan]

When I heard about this I was all in favour of saving the pier. Then I read it would cost £4.5m. Given alternatives of how this money could be used, I'm not so sure any more. It's not like it's the Manx Eiffel Tower or anything, and if refurbished, what benefits will it bring and what will be the ongoing cost of maintenance and income it might generate? Does it help tourism? is it iconic? (like San Francisco's Golden Gate Bridge), is it an important part of the character of the place? As far as I can see it was simply a place for ships to berth to load and unload - it might be compared to a late 19th century railway freight siding and depot that's fallen into disuse - the history of the pier is about as exciting, and it is neither an engineering marvel nor an aesthetic wonder.

 

skrappey, I'm curious, what is it that you and others value so much about the pier, and why do you think that the money could not be better spent in other ways on what people feel is important about this? There is a lot about wanting to save the pier - but very little I can find as to the reasons why people want to save it. Maybe people feel strongly because they would like it to be functioning - e.g. to allow ferry services from Ramsey, or because it was good for fishing or made a nice walk (if so maybe rather than the pier there may be better alternatives - perhaps a new structure or other alternatives to meet these wants/needs). Maybe its about putting Ramsey more on the map - which might be done more effectively in other ways. Maybe there's a strong feeling about preserving the nautical heritage - again £4.5m might perhaps be better spent. Maybe its because people cherish it as a distinctive unique landmark - perhaps a bit like many people feel about Battersea Power Station in London. Maybe it's down to there being huge numbers of hitherto unrecognised 'pier-enthusiasts' who are passionate about all things to do with piers.

 

Perhaps a useful survey would be one to find out what it is about the pier that matters to the people who want to save it. I'm not saying its not important; it's obviously touched a nerve among many, but it's not clear why. Maybe more people with strong views about saving the pier might perhaps express why it matters to them a bit more fully on this thread.

[monasqueen]

it is neither an engineering marvel nor an aesthetic wonder.

Maybe it's down to there being huge numbers of hitherto unrecognised 'pier-enthusiasts' who are passionate about all things to do with piers.

 

http://www.piers.co.uk/index.html

 

Some people do care passionately about piers. This site lists the remaining ones. By unrecognised, do you mean people like John Betjeman?

 

See also

 

http://www.narrow-gauge.co.uk/gallery/131

[Skig]

Well pull the pier down, blow up laxey wheel, rip up the mountain railway, life will be so much better and cheaper!! Sure some statistician can work out how the TT f@cks the local economy and we get shot of that as well!!

 

Jeez don't stamp your feet. Other residents opinions are valid too.

 

I appreciate that - however people seem to sweep things aside so quickly now, dare I say if the pier was in Douglas the refurbishment would be well under way now (all said without stomping)

 

Wrong. The similar pier in Douglas (which went out from the bottom of Broadway) was demolished over 100 years ago. Obviously it was no longer needed which is the same as the one in Ramsey. I'm sure they could sell it for a nominal sum to a scrap dealer and save the tax payer a fortune.

[Skeddan]

Some people do care passionately about piers. This site lists the remaining ones. By unrecognised, do you mean people like John Betjeman?

 

Oops - thanks monasqueen - I phrased it badly - I meant the huge numbers being unrecognised - there is a serious interest and maybe this has grown into a huge following / lobby / (pier pressure group?)

[pamplemousse]

It's not like it's the Manx Eiffel Tower or anything, and if refurbished, what benefits will it bring and what will be the ongoing cost of maintenance and income it might generate? Does it help tourism? is it iconic? (like San Francisco's Golden Gate Bridge), is it an important part of the character of the place? As far as I can see it was simply a place for ships to berth to load and unload - it might be compared to a late 19th century railway freight siding and depot that's fallen into disuse - the history of the pier is about as exciting, and it is neither an engineering marvel nor an aesthetic wonder.

 

It's hardly fair to bring the Eiffel Tower and the Golden Gate Bridge into the equation, is it?

 

But proportionately speaking, the Laxey Wheel is to Laxey what the Eiffel Tower is to Paris and why shouldn't the Pier be the emblem of Ramsey? It has much less chance of being iconic if it's ripped down. While neither a 'marvel' nor a 'wonder', the Pier combines classic Victorian engineering AND aesthetics. Plus the Isle of Man has nothing else like it. Every coastal town in Britain which has kept its pier has seen it become not only a popular tourist attraction but the landmark by which the place is known.

 

As for the cost, I know it's not exactly as straightforward as this but when I think about the excessive millions that were spent on poshing up Govt Office, a glorified office building which neither visitors nor 99% of the population ever see the inside of, I can't help thinking the Pier is a worthy project.

 

What about half the cost coming from fundraising and the Govt matching it with the rest? Would that be feasible?

 

I've never understood the half-assed, piecemeal approach to heritage and conservation over here. We lose places like the Villiers and the Lido but they piddle around with the little wooden kiosk that is the Camera Obscura.

[Tugger]

What about half the cost coming from fundraising and the Govt matching it with the rest? Would that be feasible?

 

What about half the cost coming from the Ramsey ratepayer and the rest from fundraising? I could live with that.

[Cret]

Looks like it will be left to me and Skrappy to chain ourselves to the pier gates

 

I might join in too. I want it fixed up because I think it will be 'nice', and whilst I understand other people not wanting money spent as it's not commercially viable, what's the point. Yes there are probably plenty of more 'worthy' causes that the money could in fact be spent on, but it won't be. Things don't work like that and never will really.

 

Add to that the fact that if the money is left in the kitty the manx government will only waste it on stuff that's much much worse, like perhaps a gold plated aerial runway from Snaefel to the point of Ayre (could be fun, mind) and a replica of the Cisteen (sp?!) chapel built over Tynwald hill etc.

 

That said, if they do actually do it up, they'll probably ruin it by charging people £15 a time to set foot on it so no-one would bother and it'd then get left to go to ruin all over again.

 

Heritage Homes should chip in a lot, too

 

What a great idea. Except their idea of contributing would no doubt be to rebuild it from papier maché/plasterboard and paint the whole thing magnolia, then claim they own it & sell it back to the government for 5 times as much and succeed.

 

Seriously - I'm all for people who are interested in seeing it done up helping to lend a bit of elbow grease, like was down with the 'other' laxey wheel albeit on a much bigger scale. I doubt H&S stuff would make that easy though.

[Skeddan]

It's hardly fair to bring the Eiffel Tower and the Golden Gate Bridge into the equation, is it?

 

But proportionately speaking, the Laxey Wheel is to Laxey what the Eiffel Tower is to Paris and why shouldn't the Pier be the emblem of Ramsey? It has much less chance of being iconic if it's ripped down. While neither a 'marvel' nor a 'wonder', the Pier combines classic Victorian engineering AND aesthetics. Plus the Isle of Man has nothing else like it. Every coastal town in Britain which has kept its pier has seen it become not only a popular tourist attraction but the landmark by which the place is known.

...

 

What about half the cost coming from fundraising and the Govt matching it with the rest? Would that be feasible?

 

 

The questions I put were serious ones - does it help tourism? is it iconic? How important is it as an emblem or icon? Does it really draw tourists (are there other ways of spending £4.5m + ongoing costs that might deliver more?). There is the issue of conservation - yes it is Victorian engineering and does have aesthetic value - or had it in its prime. So do some old railway depots. I'm generally in favour of conservation, but given the disrepair is it worth keeping? How important an example is it of Victorian engineering? What makes this worth spending a lot of money on. Is being the last surviving pier in IoM a good enough reason? How about spending the money on a maritime museum at Ramsey, or a tall ship that could take tourists out for excursions, be used for sail training for kids, and make money from film-hire and corporate events (and be used for fishing and serving tea and coffee). A tall ship or replica revenue cutter in Ramsey could be much more of a tourist attraction (e.g. the Bounty replica in Sydney), engage people more with Manx history and nautical heritage, and would earn more than 20p for the telescope, and income from the tea-shop and the fishermen (just as an example off the top of my head). If there is sufficient pressure to be able to save the pier the same pressure should be enough to get the equivalent spending on a viable alternative instead.

 

I don't think the case for keeping it has yet been put as fully and strongly as maybe it should - perhaps it can, and perhaps the pier is an important emblem and link to the past that people do want to keep (like Battersea Power Station). Maybe it is one of the great piers of the British Isles, or even the world and for that reason alone might warrant preservation (I have no idea). If it is only world famous in IoM, or if it is just about tourism, or income, somewhere to walk, fish or have tea, perhaps there are better alternatives for £4.5m which would fill the gap felt by the loss of the pier.

 

What about putting it out to tender - see if anyone wants to buy it - who knows it may invite some creative entrepreneur to come up with a proposal for saving it. I don't think at the moment the tea shop and fishing license income would make it financially viable let alone attractive - but there may be some other opportunities which could help rescue it - e.g. maybe it could be used for tidal power?? There's an old steam line in Canada that nearly closed for being uneconomic when state-owned, but was sold off and is now doing very well and has been saved. Also there is the question of how much would it cost to demolish it (taking account of any income from the scrap metal). If that's going to cost £2m that's something that ought to be factored in. I don't think conservation decisons should be based on commercial considerations alone, but they can help to strengthen the case.

[homeoneday]

from my recollection - the cost of refurbishing was similar to the cost of scrapping, so whats the best way of spending that money? Clear it all away and have nothing to show, or refurbish it and try and generate some income from it, I feel that by the time a decision is finally made it will be beyond repair anyhow.

[Cret]

I doubt it'll ever make any money really, but if nothing else if the cost of the ongoing upkeep could be paid for (or at least partly) be paid for by some form of income from it then that would definitely be a plus.

 

Either way, I'm for it.

[Jesdo]

Trouble is that the "powers that be" are hopeless at making decisions. They don't understand that prevaricating costs money - in the meantime, the costs of both "do nothing" and "do something" both increase. This applies to soooo many issues that are discussed on these forums, but the pier is surely the epitome. I guess this attitude is encouraged by the electoral system - politicians defer difficult decisions at best until a rainy day and at worst until they've left office.

 

From what I can make out, the survey isn't worth the paper it's written on - ask someone if they want to save something at no cost to themselves and of course they'll say "yes". Skeddan is asking exactly the questions that a decent public consultation should start by addressing. The whole topic needs to be properly analysed, weighing up the positives and negatives and use this to arrive at a final decision. Not easy, but that's what we pay the Tynwald monkeys for.

[La_Dolce_Vita]

The questions I put were serious ones - does it help tourism? is it iconic? How important is it as an emblem or icon? Does it really draw tourists (are there other ways of spending £4.5m + ongoing costs that might deliver more?). There is the issue of conservation - yes it is Victorian engineering and does have aesthetic value - or had it in its prime. So do some old railway depots. I'm generally in favour of conservation, but given the disrepair is it worth keeping? How important an example is it of Victorian engineering? What makes this worth spending a lot of money on. Is being the last surviving pier in IoM a good enough reason? How about spending the money on a maritime museum at Ramsey, or a tall ship that could take tourists out for excursions, be used for sail training for kids, and make money from film-hire and corporate events (and be used for fishing and serving tea and coffee). A tall ship or replica revenue cutter in Ramsey could be much more of a tourist attraction (e.g. the Bounty replica in Sydney), engage people more with Manx history and nautical heritage, and would earn more than 20p for the telescope, and income from the tea-shop and the fishermen (just as an example off the top of my head).

 

It probably won't have much of an impact on tourism, but I think it has become iconic to a lot of people in Ramsey. In some the way that Peel has its castle, Castletown its castle and Port Erin has Milner's Tower.

 

I would rather it be repaired and open to the public simply because it is part of our history and I think it makes the shoreline looks pretty, even though it is a simple structure. I can't give better reasons than that. I very much like the idea of having it open to the public to walk out to and fish on. (And without the Pier the only one thing that makes Ramsey a little interesting would be gone!)

 

If there is sufficient pressure to be able to save the pier the same pressure should be enough to get the equivalent spending on a viable alternative instead.

 

It is a lot of money so when justifying the cost I think the argument should not be between the repairal of the Pier and other cultural endeavours (such as a museum, or a tall ship), but whether 4.5 million is better spent of a cultural item like the pier or in better public services, for example. I dont agree with the opinion that the pressure for preservation of the pier could be equated to spending on an alternative. I say this because of the fact that the reasons for preservation are not, or I believe they are not, based upon the need to increase tourism but are rather the result of people on the Island, and Ramsey especially, feeling that they will lose something important if it fell apart. These other alternatives could be money well spent but I do not believe that people would be willing to fund these.

 

I do think the money for this should largely come from fundraising, though that might be impossible. However, I would of course much rather see large amounts of money ploughed into something that most people on the Island want than on the white elephants that somebody referred to.

 

And it is not unprecedented for large amounts of money to be spent purely for aethetics.

 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/is...man/6923849.stm

 

I think if government money is to be spent on the Pier there should be a large amount of support for it.