From 'Friends of Penzance Harbour' website http://www.friendsofpzharbour.org/
In March 2011 the Department for Transport refused funding for the Route Partnership’s Isles of Scilly Link Scheme, finally stopping the destructive 'Option A' plans for Penzance harbour and seafront that the community had been opposing since September 2008.
The campaign to stop Option A was a success for many reasons, not least the hard work and determination of the many local people that took part. A firm, consistent, honest and rational opposition supported by well thought out alternatives ensured that our message was heard.
However, the story is not over. Improvements to Penzance Harbour are on the way and we should engage positively with these initiatives to ensure that they deliver for Penzance.
To find out more subscribe to the enewsletter of the Penzance Seafront Forum http://penzanceseafront.com/
Objection from CBG Council / January 2011Application Number: 09-1118-P / South Pier, Penzance Harbour, Penzance
The Cornish Buildings Group would like to register their objection to and continued disquiet at the proposed development at South Pier Penzance.
Now that the building has been upgraded to II* by the Secretary of State, this places it in the top 2-3% of all listed buildings in the Country; it is truly of national significance. Similarly, the adjacent Battery has now been listed, and the proposed development will therefore not only directly, and adversely, affect the fabric of a major listed building, but also affect the setting of another, as well as other adjacent historic buildings and indeed the Penzance conservation area as a whole.
While it may well be that some form of works will be needed to protect the pier from the effects of climate change in the future, breaking through significant 18th century or earlier fabric, encasing medieval/post medieval structures in concrete, and facing up this imposing and important stone structure with, affectively, a crude industrial development, is inappropriate by any measurement. Added to this is the loss of a small but significant element of natural coastline, just about the only unaltered section within the conservation area, and an important part of the setting of the pier and the battery. It might be thought to be justified by the overriding economic or social benefit of the scheme, but while there remain, to our certain knowledge, alternative schemes still being pursued locally (e.g. Option PZ), we must agree with what we know to be English Heritage’s position that committing to this damaging, irreversible and, we believe, inappropriate scheme is not the best way forward.
Given that the circumstances at the Pier have changed, that the true significance of the structure and its setting has been revealed, that the statutory framework is thus revised, that National guidance, in the form of the new Planning Policy Statement 5, has been revised, and a more holistic approach to the management of the historic environment is promoted, it would be encouraging to think that Cornwall Council may also take a revised, more holistic approach that better reflects the qualities and character of this building and its setting, and refuse this current application.