see also Connections and Regeneration?

Will Penlee ever revert to being a commercial working quarry again?

Short Answer: NO!

In many of our discussions with the developers, they have frequently threatened: "if you don't have a marina, then you will get a working quarry again instead" – it is recited like a mantra. The bitter memories of dust and blasting are ingrained on the psyche of many us and a return to quarrying is not a prospect that is met with relish. It is understandable why this fear allows the lesser of these two evils to be considered and we often hear the echo: “we’d better have a marina otherwise we’ll have a quarry again”. This is ironic because the unfortunate reality is that if we do allow a marina, Penlee WILL return to quarrying!

The threat of a return to (commercial) quarrying is based on an utterly false premise. It has been widely circulated by the developers to instil fear. As a result, it has ‘grown legs’ and has now become something of an urban myth within the community. However, this premise is utter nonsense! It is nothing more than an empty threat and we are not intimidated by cheap scare tactics. Let us assure you that you needn't be intimidated either...

Penlee Quarry has had a chequered history dating over one hundred years. Quarrying first started at Penlee nearer Mousehole in 1894 but the operations were transferred to the current site at the turn of the century becoming known as Gwavas Quarry. It had been the site of the old Wheal Henry/West Tolvaddon Mine, originally started as a mine for copper, zinc and rare minerals.  The full-scale aggregate operations ran throughout the century reaching peak output in the sixties and seventies when Penlee was in the co-ownership of ARC Aggregates. It was then transferred to the Multi-National company Rio-Tinto-Zinc (RTZ) around 1985 but finally ceased regular operations in 1989/90. Apart from a few isolated instances of small-scale single-contract operations until 1994, it lay dormant from then onwards until quite recently. The ownership was transferred to another multi-national company - Hanson PLC, during this period of dormancy.

Throughout most of its working life, Penlee has mainly supplied aggregate (crushed stone) but has also, on occasion, supplied rock armour (large chunks of stone) on an ad-hoc basis. The narrow gauge railway used for transporting aggregate from the quarry to the south pier, was replaced by a electrical conveyor system in 1973. Operations then slowed throughout the late 1970’s and the 1980’s eventually coming to an abrupt end when a German stone boat collided with the gantry and conveyor system. The operation never really recovered from this incident. The crushing and loading infrastructure was finally dismantled towards the end of that last decade. The reasons the quarry ceased working were numerous but were principally because:

• The remaining rock was becoming increasingly harder to remove safely and cost-effectively. The easy pickings had long-since gone.
• The costs of keeping the quarry up to the ever-tightening health and safety standards were becoming more difficult to meet.
• The market for hard aggregate was diminishing.
• There were other sources of aggregate that could supply the market more competitively.
• There were a growing number of complaints from the general public over the inconvenience caused by the regular blasting and the amount of dust created.

Penlee aggregate was last used for road construction in Germany but this ended when the stone did not meet the newly-introduced road safety requirements – the low PSV (polished stone value) meant that it became too slippery when wet.

Apart from a few isolated case of extraction, the quarry then fell into disuse for about thirteen years during which time the site gradually began to revert back to nature. A number of possible uses for the quarry were informally discussed during this period including that of a nature reserve, but no ideas were reached beyond the theoretical stage due to investment constraints and the intransigence of RTZ and Hanson to consider community-based schemes and/or subsidies.

The quarry was sold to Marina Developments Ltd (MDL) in after a lengthy period of negotiation that was instigated by a local man, Tony Jarman, who's idea it was to convert the site into a yacht marina. The transaction was coordinated by DeFacto Project Management, a 'project development company' based in Falmouth.The legal transfer finally took place in 2003. see: BBC article

In parallel with the on-going negotiations between Tony Jarman, MDL and Hanson, permission to quarry was reapplied for and obtained in 1999. There is now a licence to quarry until 2040. Although this permission is in place, it will not be legally possible to quarry stone until the requisite health and safety standards have been met, and it is this work that we have been seeing over the last two to three years. Incidentally, MDL are fond of telling us that there is further potential to remove another 22 millions tons of stone to a depth of 100metres but anyone with an ounce of common sense will realise that this is utterly impractical, if not, downright impossible – just more desperate, hollow threats in an attempt at intimidation.

MDL, are the new freeholders but they are covenanted to Hanson to build a marina as part and parcel of the sale. The mineral rights are retained by Hanson. MDL tell us they will be the ones selling the stone but they will have to pay Hanson a royalty for every tonne that is removed from the site. We are uncertain what percentage this royalty is set at but we understand from comments implied by Edward Iliffe that it is quite small. We are assured by MDL that the stone will be sold at "current market rates" for the various regeneration schemes but (and if this is indeed true), it will only have been made possible by virtue of the massive subsidies from the Objective 1 and other grant funding packages. Ostensibly, this money will have come from the public purse and this, in itself, casts the contractual ethics in a questionable light! There may well be legal ramifications as a result which we will be pursuing? N.B. We will be keen to see if the contract to supply the stone for the various regeneration schemes is put out to tender. We can assume that Dean quarry will be watching this situation closely too!


So is there a viable market for Penlee stone?

Long answer: No, No and No!

...unless you count the artificially created market for the 'regeneration schemes'. Otherwise, there is no outside commercial market given the various constraints and competitors - and there never will be – Fact!

(Please note: It is our contention that the W.S. Atkins report of 2001 and the Atlantic Consultants’ report of 2002 have the appearances of having been commissioned especially to 'cherry pick' the various projects that required the usage of armourstone (the removal of which, being the only way the Penlee marina scheme could ever be feasible). All the regeneration schemes and financial packages seem to have been spawned largely from these two reports. If they didn't exist they would need to be invented.) see: Connections

The crushing and loading facilities at Penlee have long-since been removed and would cost many £millions to replace. There are numerous alternative sources for aggregate, a few of them local: the nearest is at Dean Quarry on The Lizard. There are also several alternative sources for armourstone, one of these also being Dean Quarry which, incidentally, also has all the necessary loading facilities including sea access and a jetty. MDL have always maintained that Penlee is the only viable source for armourstone and that it would be much more expensive to ship it from abroad, (“the nearest source”, as they are so fond of telling us, “is in Norway"! This is patently untrue – see: Capita Symmonds' 'Aggregates in the South West' Study, April 2004 (sections A19-24). This report clearly states that the reason armourstone extraction is in decline in the South West is precisely because it is cheaper from abroad! So either MDL are flogging the armourstone off on the cheap and telling us they are selling it at market rates, or they're selling it at market rates when it could be obtained more-cheaply from abroad - something smells fishy!

Even if there were a profitable market, the only way to remove armourstone (or aggregate) from Penlee is now by road though Newlyn – an utterly unrealistic enterprise as there is no access for large lorries due to the narrowness of our Newlyn streets and congested junctions. Hanson will almost certainly have had their attention drawn to the growing public backlash that contributed to RTZ throwing in the towel back in the late ‘80’s.

Edward Iliffe, Director of MDL, has been in negotiation with us into possible alternative uses for the quarry should a marina scheme not be feasible (or should planning permission be turned down?). He has stated to us that it may be possible to 'get round the covenant' should something 'worthwhile' (e.g. profitable) materialise. Somehow, this doesn't ring true – a covenant is a covenant after all. If a marina is not built, the quarry is almost certainly going to revert to Hanson's ownership – possibly with MDL being compensated for the extensive work done to-date... but possibly not? We are, as yet, unable to verify if Tony Jarman has a share in the quarry freehold itself although we do know that he is the principle shareholder of Port Penlee Ltd – the company that will own the rights to all the non-marina-related development such as the housing, the hotel, the car park etc. see: Regeneration

For the last two years, MDL have been undertaking extensive work within the quarry to ready it for quarrying again. We believe they have spent about two million pounds: about a £million for the freehold rights and about a £million on bringing the quarry up to the required health and safety standards. This work includes improving the internal roadways, raising the edges of the ledges and benches, securing the loose rock faces and installing security fencing etc.

At the very heart of the entire set of regeneration schemes lies the fundamental pivot: that MDL need to remove a massive quantity of stone from Penlee to make the marina scheme work (see: connections); they need to be able to do so legally, and this has not been possible without the extensive preparatory work being done – hence the large and risky financial outlay (n.b. this could prove to be a very expensive gamble which they will hopefully lose!). The fact that MDL have spent such a massive amount of up-front money begs the awkward question of whether they know in advance that they will be successful in getting planning approval – a very awkward question indeed, and one that we will be vigorously pursuing. We might conjecture that word has been received ‘on the nod’.

In a recent document published by the developers, we learn of the anticipated budget for the infrastructure of the Sandy Cove scheme: £8.2m comprising £4.75m for 'Reclamation and Sea Defences' and £3.67m for 'Site Services and Surfacing'. This translates to: 'Rock Armour and Infill'. It would appear that MDL and Hanson are expecting to be more than compensated for their outlay of £2m of risk capital? – And out of the public purse no less!

In terms of a logistical timeline, we believe that the first phase of stone removal would involve extracting armourstone by lorry to facilitate the Sandy Cove scheme and South Pier extensions, meanwhile, the developers would be waiting for a 'Harbour Empowerment Order' (HEO) from the Dept. of Transport to allow them to create the link channel between the sea and the quarry basin. When (and if) they get the HEO, they would then be able to remove the stone from the link channel section and dump it off Penzance (using a sea barge). This unwanted stone will be: a) cunningly passed off as a pair of giant breakwaters supposedly to protect the 150 year old promenade, and b) the new Penzance harbour extension and reinforcement to facilitate the non-existent replacement for the Scillonian. It will all have been off-loaded on to an unsuspecting public and a complicit District Council, and paid for, ultimately, from the public purse at the full market rate: nice work if you can get it. If you think the whole thing seems as though it has been cleverly orchestrated, then you wouldn't be the only one.

Conclusion:

• There is no other market for Penlee stone other than that which has been artificially created e.g. the so-called 'regeneration' schemes. The main thing that will be regenerated will be Hanson's profitability of an otherwise defunct quarry! You can understand why they didn’t want it to become a nature reserve.
• If you want the regeneration without the marina you will still have to put up with the quarrying. If you want the marina without the regeneration – sorry, it can't be done. If you don't want any quarrying you'll have to stop both the Newlyn regeneration AND the marina.