 
| Archive of Monthly News Items As previously featured in the History Centre January - March 2020 |
| January 2020 | ||
Each time the council raise a proposal, TNA give them a few years to implement it. When that time is up and nothing has materialised, the council come up with a new proposal and are given another few years to implement that, and so on. Most of the proposals have found their way into the budget, only to be ignored. It is a practice that repeatedly postpones any TNA action. Westridge is the most recent proposal and calls for a capital expenditure of £4m, half of which is anticipated as coming from a grant. The early proposals included a new museum facility but that is no longer the case. Unfortunately any survey of Islanders' priorities in council expenditure puts heritage way down the list. Moreover, the number of people using the record office is extremely limited. It is unlikely the council will opt to spend £2m on such a measure in the midst of an austerity crisis that is causing genuine hardship. A reduction of just £0.6m over the previous failed proposal hardly seems enough to now make it viable. Equally unlikely is the prospect of getting some sort of grant for the £2m balance. A heritage grant for that amount will expect a substantial new benefit to the community. The Westridge plan is just a relocation of existing storage and administration facilities. There is no significant community benefit. The record office attracts a limited clientele who make their visit for specific research. There is no reason to assume numbers will increase through a change in location, particularly as the location will be less central than it is today. The benefit of retaining a particular section of the records may only impact on a small proportion of users. Even if some minor exhibition facilities were included, a limited attraction at a remote location would generate little interest. TNA's role in events is also worthy of examination. When they first threatened to remove records they mistakenly assumed the council would swiftly react and they would never have to implement their threat. Taking in of some of the records would be as disadvantageous to TNA as it would for the council. In spite of decades without progress, TNA have never made any serious arrangements for the records to be transferred. The council and TNA have been continuing a process that creates the impression they were seeking a solution, while quietly accepting that they were not going to do anything. It was recently suggested to TNA that they were compliant in such an arrangement and it is significant they never took the opportunity to deny it. Although the practice is rather pointless, it could be argued that there are no serious drawbacks, other than a lack of transparency. In reality, the problem with the Island's storage facilities is not as severe as is sometimes implied. TNA's objections are largely theoretical. There has been no evidence of a deterioration of Island records and no damage has been recorded. Doubtless there will have to be solution at some point but it seems unlikely there will be an innovation that faces financial reality until the council officers develop a conscience about misleading the public. | ||
| February 2020 | ||
Much of the interim period appears to have been taken up with the planning department arriving at set of obligations to which the developer would have to agree before planning permission can be formally passed. It is understood this protracted process has now been completed and the developer has recently signed the necessary legal agreement. This suggests they are now intending to apply for full planning permission for phase 4 and proceed with the development. The key heritage aspect of the site is the hammerhead crane. The developer's planning application was for a complete renovation but it was to be a static monument, much to the disappointment of Historic England and the crane's supporters, who were hoping to retain a degree of operation. At the time, Historic England were said to be still in discussions with the developer in an attempt to retain some movement of the jib. The need for the developer to include phase 4 in their plans is likely to concentrate minds, perhaps at the expense of any further discussions on the hammerhead crane. | ||
| March 2020 | ||
The area may include past developments and perhaps the most intriguing aspect is the question of where the Island's first hospital was located. It is generally accepted as being in the Gunville area but the exact location has never been established. It existed in the 13th century, in association with St. Augustine's Priory and run by the monks of St Mary's Priory. The then incumbent of Carisbrooke Castle, Isabella de Fortibus, made an annual contribution to its upkeep. It was referred to as a leper hospital but it probably treated a range of complaints. The County Archaeology Service think there could be remains within the planned site, although some local historians feel it was more to the east of the site. With two Roman villas, the Carisbrooke area was also an important centre of Roman activity. There is anecdotal evidence of an excavation within the planned site in the 1960s that was said to have exposed a Roman wall. Any Roman structure is likely to put the site on an entirely different level of archaeological importance. If the application is passed, it will almost certainly carry a condition requiring an archaeological survey before any development can begin. If a geophysical survey shows any hint of structure, test trenches will probably be required. For some reason the planning application is without a heritage statement, which is a requirement for even an outline application. Presumably it will be included in the full planning application. | ||
