llap Posted January 19, 2017 Share Posted January 19, 2017 The deep water cruise liner berth was discussed in a previous topic complete with mock up plans ,but I can't remember which one ? Could somebody please re-post the proposed plan showing the harbour and Douglas bay ? I just want to reinforce to myself how fucking stupid and costly this whole new fiasco is going to be if it ever gets the go ahead !! Link for more gloss Oh wow that's amazing. Are they going to blow up the tower of refuge and conister rock then? Looking at that picture, why would anyone want to spend money to visit such a boring place? It has no charm or artistic or cultural merit. It would be like visiting a warehouse allotment. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P.K. Posted January 19, 2017 Share Posted January 19, 2017 That's more sensible at 25-30 years, though starting off at 60,000 cruise ship passengers is daft, as is the £7 m per annum to the Orkney Islands used as a bench mark, as it's only recently hit that. In 2014 it was only £3 million. Orkney looks good at the minute because it's grown substantially as a cruise ship destination in the past 5 years so bear that in mind - it can easily disappear in that short span of time too. Thanks for posting however, cleared up a lot. Orkney has the incredible and unique Skara Brae you idiots.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Max Power Posted January 19, 2017 Share Posted January 19, 2017 The deep water cruise liner berth was discussed in a previous topic complete with mock up plans ,but I can't remember which one ? Could somebody please re-post the proposed plan showing the harbour and Douglas bay ? I just want to reinforce to myself how fucking stupid and costly this whole new fiasco is going to be if it ever gets the go ahead !! Link for more gloss Oh wow that's amazing. Are they going to blow up the tower of refuge and conister rock then? Looking at that picture, why would anyone want to spend money to visit such a boring place? It has no charm or artistic or cultural merit. It would be like visiting a warehouse allotment. I have to agree that this is a rather soul less looking development. But I am definitely coming down more and more in favour of the cruise ship berth driving a tourism revival. (I see a Premier Inn in the foreground though, at least we have aspirations) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kopek Posted January 19, 2017 Share Posted January 19, 2017 The above picture is NOT the proposed development berth. It would be under the lighthouse. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Albert Tatlock Posted January 19, 2017 Share Posted January 19, 2017 So what would they spend their money on here? Hotels? No they brought one with them? Nightlife? No, they'll have fooked off toward their next destination by then and tucking into... ...Food? No, they have an all in luxury food package on board. Booze? Unlikely in the daytime. So it's a £50m gamble on getting a few bus loads to MNH sites. Like what happens already with the 20 ships that visit here each year over 3 months, compared to a 10 month season in sunny Gibraltar that gets 20 a month visiting. This stupid idea needs nipping in the bud now and firmly fooked off to La La Land where it belongs. It will take 50 years before it even breaks even, not counting the time value of money and what £50m invested would be worth by then. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
finlo Posted January 19, 2017 Share Posted January 19, 2017 So, time for my interest to be declared. I am Treasurer for the Isle of Man Shipping Association and happy to share the below facts about the proposals from my direct personal involvement. Last Tuesday we invited two speakers to a networking event for our members (which was also open to non-members) to speak on the benefits the Cruise Sector has brought to their respective local. Angela Redhead (Head of Cruise Britain, and Director of Operations Liverpool Cruise Terminal) Michael Morrison (Business Development Manager, Marine Services, Orkney Islands Council) About 80/90 people attended. The same presentations were made to Tynwald earlier in the day. Let’s be absolutely clear, there are no hidden agendas here in terms of who stands to gain from this project, and no-one is being paid huge consultancy fees for these opinions. There is a wealth of maritime experience within our membership, and IOMSA wishes to work collaboratively with Government to share that experience for the benefit of the whole Island. IOMSA invited these guests to provide a flavour of what can be achieved given the right attitude and backing. Within 3 hours of being on the Island, Michael Morrison freely stated that our tourist offering in terms of attractions and day excursions is far superior to Orkney’s and that there is a fantastic opportunity to capitalise on the cruise industry for the Island. If Government wishes to take this opportunity, it cannot be done half-heartedly. IOMSA have been looking at the issue for a couple of years and have contributed to a feasibility study for a 350m floating deep water berth located outside of Alexandra Pier. Technically, we are being told it is entirely possible. Our waters are nowhere near as challenging as North Sea conditions in terms of wind/wave heights and there, oil/gas platforms don’t move in these conditions. To cater for the biggest cruise liners (currently 362m long and approx. 6,500 passengers, and 2,000crew, draft 10m), the only real possible location (prevailing weather and draft) and type of berth (floating, not fixed pier, and 350m length) is what we are proposing in Douglas. fbwposition.png This is our proposal for where a floating deep water cruise berth should be located based on the feasibility study from the engineers that designed the Monaco floating breakwater, which is similar in size, but moored in considerably deeper waters. architectvision.png In terms of the cruise berth, above picture is nonsense, drawn up by architects without any consideration of the practicalities or costs of putting a berth there. This is NOT what our proposal is. With regards to the projected cost £50m, this is an estimate of all associated costs of construction, linking to shore and landside ground/ infrastructure amendments (highway & remodelling). Let me be also clear, the press erroneously have picked up on a “5 year payback period” which clearly is also nonsense for a £50m project. As has been pointed out, private sector funding would be all over it if that was the case. We are talking more like 20-30 years. The 5 years, I think, was a quote from Angie in relation to the payback of the £16m Liverpool terminal. I do stand to be corrected on that though. Clearly the financing is an area that needs a lot more work in terms of the transference of risk to the private sector, so that the taxpayer doesn’t sit on the hook for the whole lot. We have mooted the possibility of an infrastructure bond as a method, but this would need to be addressed in much greater detail by producing a business case for the idea, once the political will to explore the project was there. For cost comparison, Orkney berth and supporting infrastructure cost a total of £29m (it was built 2002 then extended 2014). However, their berth is semi-sheltered, and has approx. 2m tidal range, where as ours is more like 7m. The current economic benefit to their local economy is estimated at £7m p.a. Our conservative projections for the project would be 60,000 cruise visitors per annum (this is 50% of current Orkney level, and 50% of an industry report commissioned by Government in 2014), and the industry standard calculation for economic benefit of a cruise passenger is £70 per head. Also please be clear, economic benefit is very difficult to quantify and cannot be taken as direct cash benefit. Again, these figures would be thrashed out in the business case. Our heritage sites and attractions are crying out for visitors to stem their losses, cruise is the only quick fix for that as they are ideal for day trips. Cruise is an international market and is big business, the opportunity is there, is the willingness and the business case? Let’s see. Go big or not at all. To build something that would not be able to cater for the biggest ships would be a waste of time, effort and money. It is a proposal, and one that the IOMSA believes should be looked at seriously, if we want to capitalise on the sector. Clearly if the business case doesn’t stack up, then it’s a non-starter, but we wanted to get the debate out there, and so far, feedback has been mostly positive. PM if you would like further information or have further feedback, don’t really want to get into a forum debate on the issue. <edit few typos/vessel parameters> Excuse my ignorance on the subject but why would a floating berth need to be the full length of the vessel? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Albert Tatlock Posted January 19, 2017 Share Posted January 19, 2017 It needs to tie up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Max Power Posted January 19, 2017 Share Posted January 19, 2017 The above picture is NOT the proposed development berth. It would be under the lighthouse. I realise that, it was just a comment on the drabness of the Douglas Master Plan. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
finlo Posted January 19, 2017 Share Posted January 19, 2017 It needs to tie up. I get that, but a 350 m floating pontoon just for the passengers to disembark? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slinkydevil Posted January 19, 2017 Share Posted January 19, 2017 It needs to tie up. I get that, but a 350 m floating pontoon just for the passengers to disembark? I presume you have to tie up the bow and stern, hence it needing to fit. You can't just tie it up with a poxy little rope to the bow and hope for the best. There are probably variants on disembarkation points on all the different ships too, some near the stern, some in the middle and some near the bow. I haven't got a clue really. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slinkydevil Posted January 19, 2017 Share Posted January 19, 2017 They're big! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slinkydevil Posted January 19, 2017 Share Posted January 19, 2017 This is the orkney berth on google maps: https://www.google.com/maps/place/Orkney,+UK/@58.9986789,-2.982207,1195m/data=!3m1!1e3!4m5!3m4!1s0x489b9f93ef41121f:0x30c681a0642b050!8m2!3d58.9809401!4d-2.9605206 Street View:https://www.google.com/maps/@58.9991483,-2.9719445,3a,75y,305.47h,75.39t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sxdV-X4MH_GTPQNBkK5j76g!2e0!7i13312!8i6656 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheTeapot Posted January 19, 2017 Share Posted January 19, 2017 Its pretty big, if we built one of them we could run the horse trams along it and take the off the prom! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manx Bean Posted January 19, 2017 Author Share Posted January 19, 2017 Fine, if you must do it - the private sector MUST fund it. I find it hilarious and also irritating that almost everyone (no matter how tenuously) connected to Tourism seems to think the taxpayer and Government should be responsible for doing everything for them! If I were to be running a hairdressers or say florist, would I be expecting Government to support me financially, advertise my business, produce websites and brochures for me, have MHKs discussing me in the House of Keys? No - they wouldn't give a flying shit about me. Quite frankly, when the Health Minister needs to come to Tynwald with her begging bowl (lets's face it, having to sort out her predecessors clusterfuck) to beg for another £11.1m to keep the hospital afloat, I think we have more significant things to focus our very limited resources on.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slinkydevil Posted January 19, 2017 Share Posted January 19, 2017 would I be expecting Government to support me financially, advertise my business, produce websites and brochures for me, have MHKs discussing me in the House of Keys? No - they wouldn't give a flying shit about me. You can have half of your website and brochure materials paid for if you apply for the right grant through DED. Even a florist or hairdresser. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.