News Archive
Cash needed to turn tide for seaside towns
GOVERNMENT should do more to tackle deprivation in seaside towns, spend more on marketing and pay for buildings to be regenerated, according to experts.
The English Heritage study says there should be more investment to preserve historic seaside towns where assets like hotels, fishermen’s huts and harbours could be used as a catalyst for successful regeneration.
Simon Thurley, chief executive of English Heritage, said: “From fishing alleys to Victorian boulevards, from old docks and harbours to historic spas, we have lots of evidence to show that people and businesses flourish in places where local character and distinctiveness are being revived, often through physical renewal and reuse of historic buildings. It is clear that seaside towns need to adapt and evolve.”
The report also points out that high maintenance cost is among the many factors hindering physical renewal of historic architecture and threatening its survival.
New developments within historic coastal settings are also often a difficult issue. Many coastal towns contain some of Britain’s finest pieces of Georgian, Victorian and inter-war architecture and examples of planned townscapes. Local authorities have to make difficult judgments about developments and infrastructure projects which can bring economic benefits but may compromise the townscape or local distinctiveness and character.
The report adds: “Long-term decline in some areas has also created negative images of many coastal towns. These can be deeply entrenched in the public’s perception and challenging to reverse. Poor upkeep can leave the built heritage unappreciated by visitors, undervalued by investors and potentially seen as a burden by local authorities.”
n What do you think? Write to Nicola Hyde at 47 Church Street, Barnsley, South Yorkshire, S70 2AS or email nl@whpl.net.
GOVERNMENT should do more to tackle deprivation in seaside towns, spend more on marketing and pay for buildings to be regenerated, according to experts.
The English Heritage study says there should be more investment to preserve historic seaside towns where assets like hotels, fishermen’s huts and harbours could be used as a catalyst for successful regeneration.
Simon Thurley, chief executive of English Heritage, said: “From fishing alleys to Victorian boulevards, from old docks and harbours to historic spas, we have lots of evidence to show that people and businesses flourish in places where local character and distinctiveness are being revived, often through physical renewal and reuse of historic buildings. It is clear that seaside towns need to adapt and evolve.”
The report also points out that high maintenance cost is among the many factors hindering physical renewal of historic architecture and threatening its survival.
New developments within historic coastal settings are also often a difficult issue. Many coastal towns contain some of Britain’s finest pieces of Georgian, Victorian and inter-war architecture and examples of planned townscapes. Local authorities have to make difficult judgments about developments and infrastructure projects which can bring economic benefits but may compromise the townscape or local distinctiveness and character.
The report adds: “Long-term decline in some areas has also created negative images of many coastal towns. These can be deeply entrenched in the public’s perception and challenging to reverse. Poor upkeep can leave the built heritage unappreciated by visitors, undervalued by investors and potentially seen as a burden by local authorities.”
n What do you think? Write to Nicola Hyde at 47 Church Street, Barnsley, South Yorkshire, S70 2AS or email nl@whpl.net.
Creation addresses ‘significant’ problem
By Phil Davies
THE creation of VisitEngland is a move towards resolving one of the most significant problems facing the domestic tourism industry, according to experts.
The Tourism Alliance says the new initiative is needed to help with the co-ordinated development and promotion of England as a major domestic and international tourism destination.
Tourism Alliance board members Ros Pritchard and Bob Cotton will be observers on the VisitEngland board, giving a direct link from industry.
Pritchard, chairman of the Alliance, said: “The VisitEngland board has been given a clear and strong mandate to ensure the alignment of England marketing with regional and local marketing objectives and to oversee the Enjoy England marketing strategy.
“This means that the industry will regain the co-ordination required to ensure that it is competitive in the international market.”
The Tourism Alliance claims that the devolution of responsibility for tourism to regional development agencies, while helping regional investment and development, has “reduced cohesion” between the various bodies and led to “less co-ordinated” promotion of England as a destination.
By Phil Davies
THE creation of VisitEngland is a move towards resolving one of the most significant problems facing the domestic tourism industry, according to experts.
The Tourism Alliance says the new initiative is needed to help with the co-ordinated development and promotion of England as a major domestic and international tourism destination.
Tourism Alliance board members Ros Pritchard and Bob Cotton will be observers on the VisitEngland board, giving a direct link from industry.
Pritchard, chairman of the Alliance, said: “The VisitEngland board has been given a clear and strong mandate to ensure the alignment of England marketing with regional and local marketing objectives and to oversee the Enjoy England marketing strategy.
“This means that the industry will regain the co-ordination required to ensure that it is competitive in the international market.”
The Tourism Alliance claims that the devolution of responsibility for tourism to regional development agencies, while helping regional investment and development, has “reduced cohesion” between the various bodies and led to “less co-ordinated” promotion of England as a destination.
Airline fees hike threatens regional links
REGIONAL air links to Heathrow could be threatened by “inflation-busting” hikes in fees paid by airlines.
The warning came from Bmi, the second largest user of the airport, which reacted angrily to Competition Commission recommendations for higher than expected charges at Heathrow from next April.
The fees per departing passenger at Heathrow in 2007/08 is £18.55 but will almost double to £35.28 in 2012 under the CC recommendations, the airline calculated.
The suggested hike in charges every year over five years “threatens to put under further scrutiny the existence and viability of vital UK regional air links into Heathrow and has the potential of pricing them out of the market,” Bmi warned.
The Competition Commission’s recommended rise in charges is more than those considered by regulator the Civil Aviation Authority but is not binding.
Bmi deputy chief executive Tim Bye said: “We warned the CC that sanctioning inflation-busting price rises at Heathrow could have a devastating effect on vital regional services into Heathrow.
“The availability of routes from key UK regions to feed into a wide range of destinations through the world’s busiest international airport sustains the lifeblood and the economic growth of many of these regions. At a time when competition between airlines has demanded that they drive down their costs and generate higher levels of efficiency to survive, we have had to endure inflation-busting increases for the last five years for indifferent levels of service.
“We are now facing even higher increases over the next five years with limited improvements until the opening of the new Heathrow East terminal in 2012.”
REGIONAL air links to Heathrow could be threatened by “inflation-busting” hikes in fees paid by airlines.
The warning came from Bmi, the second largest user of the airport, which reacted angrily to Competition Commission recommendations for higher than expected charges at Heathrow from next April.
The fees per departing passenger at Heathrow in 2007/08 is £18.55 but will almost double to £35.28 in 2012 under the CC recommendations, the airline calculated.
The suggested hike in charges every year over five years “threatens to put under further scrutiny the existence and viability of vital UK regional air links into Heathrow and has the potential of pricing them out of the market,” Bmi warned.
The Competition Commission’s recommended rise in charges is more than those considered by regulator the Civil Aviation Authority but is not binding.
Bmi deputy chief executive Tim Bye said: “We warned the CC that sanctioning inflation-busting price rises at Heathrow could have a devastating effect on vital regional services into Heathrow.
“The availability of routes from key UK regions to feed into a wide range of destinations through the world’s busiest international airport sustains the lifeblood and the economic growth of many of these regions. At a time when competition between airlines has demanded that they drive down their costs and generate higher levels of efficiency to survive, we have had to endure inflation-busting increases for the last five years for indifferent levels of service.
“We are now facing even higher increases over the next five years with limited improvements until the opening of the new Heathrow East terminal in 2012.”
Artefacts damage warning
Exclusive by Nicola Hyde
HISTORICAL artefacts are being damaged because too many tourists are going to museums as part of a controversial free entry scheme.
The government’s aim to promote more culture and heritage led to entry fees being scrapped in museums and art galleries across the UK – but industry experts say it is doing more harm than good.
Sean Gaffaney, of the Museum of Science and Industry in Manchester, said since the government introduced the scheme visitor numbers had rocketed from 300,000 a year – to over 500,000.
He said: “We are now up to 500,000 visitors without any corresponding increase in revenue funding to do extra repair works or pay for staff.
“The Natural History Museum is packed every day and it’s nightmarish really because the facilities are not designed for so many people a year to go through them.
“We are just a science centre but bigger museums are struggling with this.
“They are getting two to three million visitors a year which is an enormous strain on resources.
“There is a vast disparity between what the government gives per visitor and what is actually needed. I fear it is one of those decisions that they just will not go back on.”
Colin Dawson, spokesman for the British Association of Leisure Parks, Piers and Attractions, added: “We have heard that revenue generation is far more difficult. Spending is down and its creating another problem because footfall is creating resource problems in upkeep and damage.
“Artefacts are getting damaged because of the increased numbers and places are finding it hard to keep up with that.”
What do you think? Write to Nicola Hyde, 47 Church Street, Barnsley, South Yorkshire, S70 2AS or email nl@whpl.net.
Exclusive by Nicola Hyde
HISTORICAL artefacts are being damaged because too many tourists are going to museums as part of a controversial free entry scheme.
The government’s aim to promote more culture and heritage led to entry fees being scrapped in museums and art galleries across the UK – but industry experts say it is doing more harm than good.
Sean Gaffaney, of the Museum of Science and Industry in Manchester, said since the government introduced the scheme visitor numbers had rocketed from 300,000 a year – to over 500,000.
He said: “We are now up to 500,000 visitors without any corresponding increase in revenue funding to do extra repair works or pay for staff.
“The Natural History Museum is packed every day and it’s nightmarish really because the facilities are not designed for so many people a year to go through them.
“We are just a science centre but bigger museums are struggling with this.
“They are getting two to three million visitors a year which is an enormous strain on resources.
“There is a vast disparity between what the government gives per visitor and what is actually needed. I fear it is one of those decisions that they just will not go back on.”
Colin Dawson, spokesman for the British Association of Leisure Parks, Piers and Attractions, added: “We have heard that revenue generation is far more difficult. Spending is down and its creating another problem because footfall is creating resource problems in upkeep and damage.
“Artefacts are getting damaged because of the increased numbers and places are finding it hard to keep up with that.”
What do you think? Write to Nicola Hyde, 47 Church Street, Barnsley, South Yorkshire, S70 2AS or email nl@whpl.net.
