Jobs & Growth

[mk1]

West Hartlepool was created to service the docks and the coal industry. The docks died in the 1960's. Look at the old maps  prior to 1875 West Hartlepool was all within the area from Binns to Mainsforth Terrace. By 1890 the town has expanded massively. Instant birth, 70 years of prosperity and now the slow lingering death.

[SRMoore]

West Hartlepool was created to service the docks and the coal industry.

And it is our deep water berths that still offer the potential to change our towns fortunes. The Tees is one of the busiest shipping ports in the country, yet Hartlepool has failed to capitalise on this and encourage more of that traffic to enter our port.

Admittedly the port will only go so far in turning our fortunes around but it is one asset Hartlepool has that should not be overlooked.

[craig finton]

Why would any ship come to Hartlepool when it can go to the Tees instead? We are merely thrown the crumbs that Teessport can't be bothered with - the docks are dead and no amount of nostalgia for years gone by will bring them back to life. The reason for them being there no longer exists.

[SRMoore]

Alright Negative Nancy! I'm glad JDR Cables and EDF Renewable Energy don't share your down beat view about the current and potential capabilities of our port.

[not4me]

Craig is right. Docks are about trade, the import and export of goods and materials. Being used as a short-term base for the wind turbine installation is not a replacement for what was once a thriving coal export trade and timber import trade. Neither is the odd use of the port to accommodate a cable-laying ship.

I think Craig's point is that Hartlepool is dead as a trading port - and it is.

[steveL]

West Hartlepool was created to service the docks and the coal industry.

And it is our deep water berths that still offer the potential to change our towns fortunes. The Tees is one of the busiest shipping ports in the country, yet Hartlepool has failed to capitalise on this and encourage more of that traffic to enter our port.

Admittedly the port will only go so far in turning our fortunes around but it is one asset Hartlepool has that should not be overlooked.

The only way to have encouraged more ships to use Hartlepool would have been to build the Tees Barrage at the mouth of the river.

[steveL]

Whilst it appears there are no jobs or growth in the town try driving around the town at peak times, where is every one going?
Also the number of high spec cars is unbelievable, plus who is buying all the new houses at Bishop Cuthbert, there not cheap,there is money in the town.

High spec cars there maybe but Hartlepool has one of the lowest car ownership rates in the country

[SRMoore]

Craig is right. Docks are about trade, the import and export of goods and materials. Being used as a short-term base for the wind turbine installation is not a replacement for what was once a thriving coal export trade and timber import trade. Neither is the odd use of the port to accommodate a cable-laying ship.

I think Craig's point is that Hartlepool is dead as a trading port - and it is.

Of course those industries will never replace the large scale export of coal & timber export, but they are but two examples. My point still stands that our port is still commercially viable and the new enterprise zone around it allows the potential for growth.

I'm not for one second suggesting that our port will be the sole economic driver for Hartlepool in the future but it certainly has an important part to play.

[for fawkes sake]

My own view is that this reluctance to accept reality is one of the main parts of the problem. As someone said, the reason for the dock's very existence is no longer there. The country is littered with once thriving, but now semi-derelict ports, still waiting for their moment of renaissance while reality has concentrated port facilities on a far fewer number of much larger locations where capital investment on container and other facilities can be focussed.

Hartlepool docks have already been waiting for some 40 years for its own 'renaissance moment'; almost two generations already.

How long do we wait?

The docks came with a large are of surrounding land and yes, the enterprise zone may result in some investment but there is no reason to assume that any of that investment, if it ever comes, will be port related.

[SRMoore]

There is a big difference between refusing to accept reality and being optimistic. If we all simply moaned about how the town has nothing left and constantly talk it down without even a hint of constructive criticism we might as well all pack up and move to the South East.

[mk1]

There is a big difference between refusing to accept reality and being optimistic. If we all simply moaned about how the town has nothing left and constantly talk it down without even a hint of constructive criticism we might as well all pack up and move to the South East.

A corpse is a corpse. No matter how much CPR you give it it stays dead.
The best  way forward is to bury it and move on rather than sit around working out how to bring it back to life.

[SRMoore]

I can assure you that our port is alive and well, I was there on Monday and witnessed the heartbeat with my own eyes.

[mk1]

I thought we were going to get a cruise ship terminal........

Yes and the sun the moon and the stars.

Just one of the many false dawns:



Hartlepool docks plan launched

Friday, 04 June 2004

Plans for one of the largest regeneration projects in the North-East were due to be submitted as Regeneration & Renewal went to press this week.

Landowners PD Ports, Logistics & Shipping is to submit an outline planning application for the £500 million redevelopment of Hartlepool's North Docks.

The masterplan aims to reverse the dock's declining fortunes, generating new uses for the site, while maintaining dock-related business and employment.

A key element of the scheme is a new swing bridge and pedestrian/cycle paths to make it easier for residents in Hartlepool's old town to travel to potential future jobs at the development and the nearby marina and town centre.

The development group's property director David Easson said the project was important to the wider region as well as Hartlepool.

"The challenge is creating a place where people will live and work and not just a dormitory town. There has to be a balance between the employment and residential areas to create a sustainable balance," said Easson.

The scheme could provide up to 3,500 homes, 13,935sq metres of retail warehousing and 92,900sq metres of office and retail uses, as well as opening up nearby beaches. The development could also create more than 1,000 jobs, according to the developer. The quays on the dock will remain open for shipping, with existing port activities relocated to the north of the site.

As well as the current port business, PD Ports hopes to attract new port users like cruise liners, the Royal Navy and tall ships.

The Victoria Harbour scheme has been adopted by the town's urban regeneration company as one of its five flagship projects. Tees Valley Regeneration project director Sarah Robson said it would be one of Hartlepool's biggest ever regeneration projects.

She said: "It is not just a residential development. It will create considerable employment land and community facilities for Hartlepool. The development could also attract people back to the town, not just from the sub-region, but the region and even around the country."

Hartlepool North Dock was once the UK's fourth busiest port, handling coal exports and timber imports.

However, the impact of containerisation and the increased use of PD Ports' nearby deep water and modern facilities at Teesport has reduced shipping at Hartlepool.

[steveL]

It could have worked....maybe....but it needed money and no Government of either colour has ever shown the willingness to even part fund such a development. They'd rather spend it on Crossrail or extra runways

[Vincent]

To try and answer Arc's original question, please see the blurb below cut and pasted from Hartlepool Economic Assessment Document - draft 3

The role of local authorities in the process is a key partner, but in a supporting or
enabling role, rather than driving the process of economic development forward. In
particular, their extensive powers over land use and estate management are
highlighted as important: for example, setting planning priorities and thereby
influencing investment decisions, or supporting local infrastructure development
(e.g. housing and transport) to enable business growth. They are seen as
providing a leadership role for economic development, setting out the broad
framework, enforcing regulations, co-ordinating across partners and managing
externalities and competing interests among stakeholders. They are responsible
for place marketing and promotion activities, and managing the supply of skills. In
addition, the White Paper indicates that local authorities will gain new borrowing
powers, allowing them to borrow against future additional uplift within their business
rates base, known as Tax Increment Financing (TIF). This borrowing can be used
to fund infrastructure and other capital projects – which will generate developments
leading to the additional business rates against which the Council is borrowing.
There are risks to this approach primarily that the new developments do not
generate the additional rates anticipated, and that development will take place in
those areas most likely to generate additional rates – i.e. the most prosperous,
rather than the most deprived. Full details of TIF proposals will be in the Local
Government Resource Review.
The forthcoming Localism Bill is intended to give local authorities a more general
power of competence in their locality, giving them greater freedom to act.

The partnership mentioned above is with the Regional Development Authority