Newport Harbour Action Group secretary Chris Dodd says the facility should be receiving more from the surrounding ‘estate’. Picture by Jennifer Burton.
WIGHT LIVINGTAKE a stroll along Newport Harbour and it’s difficult not to be struck by how down-at-heel it has become.
The harbour walls are crumbling, piles are rusting away and the River Medina hasn’t been dredged for years. It’s not exactly an eyesore but years of neglect have clearly started to take their toll. Fears have been raised that, unless action is taken soon, this historically important and once commercially thriving quay will simply be abandoned to its fate, left to fall ever further into disrepair.
Responsibility for managing Newport Harbour lies with the IW Council, which has come under fire for failing to properly maintain and invest in the facility. Since the authority’s dedicated harbour management committee was scrapped 15 years ago, managing the harbour has been taken on by the council cabinet and, it’s fair to say, has somewhat dropped down the priority list.
It has also been suggested the council’s management of the harbour goes beyond casual neglect. Newport Harbour Action Group secretary Chris Dodd has researched harbour law in detail and believes Newport Harbour should benefit from any income derived from the surrounding 'harbour estate’, including the council-run car parks in the area.
He has also accused the authority of financial mismanagement and complained to the district auditor, who last year ordered the council to tighten up its accounting procedures and ensure any income surpluses were ring fenced for harbour maintenance.
"In the 1960s and ’70s, it was run as a commercial harbour and businesses maintained the area themselves but after the importing and exporting industries dwindled it was left idle. The council is totally negligent as far as managing the harbour is concerned — it’s surprising nothing has collapsed yet," said retired architect Mr Dodd, who lives in nearby Sea Street and walks his dog there most days. "As a community group, we want only one thing — for the council to establish a harbour management board made up of harbour users and stakeholders, with council and Newport Parish Council representation, to properly manage the harbour. It’s an ideal site for a thriving commercial marine industry and could be a fine facility for boat owners."
Transforming Newport Harbour into a 'fine facility’ could yet become a reality — but at what cost?
Although council chiefs have admitted the authority has no intention of forming a dedicated management committee, a report on the future of the facility is due to come before the cabinet by the end of the financial year, outlining options for its regeneration, while a second report is to address the ongoing dispute over the boundaries of the harbour estate.
Director for economy and environment Stuart Love said although the harbour could not legally be sold, options included outsourcing its management, or outsourcing the entire facility on a leasehold basis. The key point, he said, was to bring about regeneration through private sector investment.
"While we are not yet in a position to recommend an option, the key issue is having a way forward that seeks to regenerate and bring about investment in the harbour and its surrounds," he said.
"The council has met and continues to meet its duties in relation to the harbour. For a very long time it has not been a priority to invest in harbour improvements and, in the current economic climate, our ability to invest is even more limited and the harbour has to compete against all of the council’s other priorities. It is, therefore, unlikely we will be able to invest significant sums of public money in the harbour in the foreseeable future, other than to fulfil our statutory duties."
News the harbour could be leased wholesale to a developer and possibly revamped with waterfront apartments, cafes and a sparkly new marina, has raised concern among some harbour users.
John Russell and Robert Brown, both of whom pay the council around £500 a year to moor their yachts at Folly Moorings, said the facilities at Newport Harbour were not particularly impressive but they certainly were cheap — something that could change if the site was developed.
"The harbourmaster and his team do a fantastic job and the council does the bare minimum, like it does with most things. It’s true the harbour could do with a bit more being spent on it but it’s not exactly falling to bits," said Mr Russell, 70, a retired architect from Wootton.
"At the moment, it’s really cheap to keep a boat here — I can keep mine by the Riverside Centre for free during the winter and electricity only costs 20p. Not everyone can afford to spend thousands keeping a boat at Cowes or East Cowes, and I would rather pay less and keep the harbour as it is.
"I would certainly be against any development like the one at Gunwharf Quays, in Portsmouth, because it would mean a lot of people wouldn’t be able to afford to use the harbour any more.
"You only have to look around to see these aren’t rich people with expensive boats, they are just people who like to sail as a hobby."
Retired telecoms engineer Mr Brown, 59, of Cowes, agreed the standard of maintenance left a lot to be desired but said most harbour users would resist any significant change.
"The council hasn’t paid enough attention to maintaining the harbour, certainly. The swing moorings at The Folly are certainly in need of repair — my boat has drifted off a few times after its chain has snapped — and there are big lumps of mud in the river because it hasn’t been dredged. Unless something is done, it will just get worse," he said.
"I think most harbour users would be against a development, because developers are only interested in making money. It would push the prices up and we would lose a public amenity. But that doesn’t mean the harbour shouldn’t be maintained — it makes a profit and those profits should be reinvested."
Not everyone, however, is opposed to the idea of developing the harbour.
Houseboat resident and retired antiques dealer Dave Harris, 72, has lived at the harbour with his wife, Caroline, 66, for the past 12 years. The rent to moor their Danish fishing boat is around £2,000 a year.
"The way the harbour is managed is dreadful, the place has been totally neglected. They have tried to develop the harbour before and it hasn’t happened and I doubt anyone would want it, to be honest," he said.
"It would be nice to develop the harbour, as long as it was done sympathetically and we could stay, but I suspect they’d want to get rid of old wooden boats like ours and bring in white plastic boats instead. It would be such a shame if we couldn’t afford to stay here and had to move ashore — this is our home."
Although the council will always retain an element of control when it comes to setting rents, Mr Love indicated they could be raised to drive up profits.
"In an outsourced arrangement we are likely to retain control of, or at least have input into, setting rates. It is important to note any income generated goes back into the harbour and rents that are too low mean less opportunity to invest," he said.
But just how easy would it be to outsource the harbour to a private concern?
Let’s not forget previous schemes to develop the harbour have fallen by the wayside — plans to build homes at Blackhouse Quay, for example, were dropped a few years ago after the site was deemed a flood risk.
So, even if the council is desperate to offload Newport Harbour, would anyone want it?
Reporter: emilyp@iwcpmail.co.uk