Regeneration News

                     Home Back Site Index Photographs Information Page Diary Dates Local Traders Places To Stay Cornwall Attractions Places To Visit King Arthur Sir Francis Drake Stories Old & New WeatherTideSurfMap Tintagel Parish Council Forum and Chat Room Links & Web Sites Boscastle Tour Camelford Town Property For Sale
                                     TINTAGEL REGENERATION 


                               Report On Regeneration AGM
On Thursday 4th April 2003 the AGM was held at the Social Hall. Officers elected were Chairman
Garvin Reynolds, Vice Chairman Bob Flower, Secretary/Treasurer Bill Dixon.
All Committee members were re-elected enbloc with the addition of David Flower,
Denzil Flew & Max Francis.
 At the Exhibition at the Visitor centre recently some 160 Public Consultation forms  were returned.
From these returns, which have not yet been fully analysed, it appears that some on road
 parking was required, loading bays were unpopular, speed bumps were not wanted,
 concern about narrowing the roads & concern about who was to police the residents parking
in Fry's car park. Pavement widths need to be looked into further & concern about the bus
stop in the Visitor centre. The mini roundabout at the top of Molesworth Street was
controversial & pavement on one side of the roads was wanted by most people & not both sides.
 Some of the ideas put forward on the night were very controversial, like moving the Tintagel
War Memorial from the Church to the Village Centre. There were also a crazy idea that firms
 should not deliver to the village between 10am and 4pm.
Apparently this is done in the TOWN of Wadebridge but it is about time that it is remembered
 that Tintagel is a VILLAGE!!!. We would get NO deliveries!!!!.
There was mention of noisy lorry airbrakes at midnight but I am not sure where that would
 lead us or what could be done about it!.
Also a view that Skateboarders should not be allowed to use the pavements but surely
they shouldn't anyway. Then came a mention of dog mess & even a mention of our bus services.!
I must admit that some of these things brought a smile to my lips but then it was an AGM!!
In future Tintagelweb has been promised that information on meeting dates & other
 relevant details of the Regeneration of Tintagel will be given to us
David Flower  Webmaster

                                                             March 2003
 I went along to the Visitor Centre on Friday March 8th & found the Project Team very helpful
& unlike Tintagel Forum, reasonable & sympathetic to local peoples desires!!.
The positive ideas are: Whilst the roads are to be narrowed (Tintagel Forum ALWAYS said
they were not NOT going to narrowed!) the pavements will not be raised and in fact will be
10mm high in many places. This will enable coaches, caravans, big lorries & cars to pass each other!.
It will also mean that cars will be able to pull off the road if necessary. There was to be only
 one delivery bay but there will now be at least four.
 The Daily bus services will use the NCDC car park with a bus shelter. This means that the
stops outside the Methodist Church & the old TV shop will be removed.
There will be parking for six cars in the NCDC car park for the Post Office. My Referendum
 Committee put forward MANY of these ideas & whilst the Forum dismissed them, it is
 gratifying & good for locals that our ideas have been thought about by those who matter!!.
There are of course more outstanding matters & again thanks to my committee these are being considered.

                                                                          Article by David Flower
                               Tintagel Gets Its O
bjective One Cash
The 2.4 million pound required for the Regeneration of Tintagel has got the go ahead.
The work will be spread over a couple of years. Most of the Regeneration ideas are excellent
but there is great concern about the narrowing of the roads & the on road parking being removed.
 The battle for a Referendum on this issue was won by the rules but in his ultimate wisdom???
Chief Ex David Brown, North Cornwall District Council, refused permission despite nearly
 half of the village wanting a referendum.
However, the committee pushing for the Referendum hope now that compromise will be the
 name of the game. We await developments with interest.

                                                   Tintagel Regeneration Forum
                               List of Forum Members with the backing they gave for
                                 NARROW ROADS & NO ON STREET PARKING
FOR: Sonia Tremain, Bob Flower, Mike Francis, Garvin Reynolds, Christine Saville,
 Richard Alexander, Terry Dangar, Suzy Soutter, Glenton Brown, Kelly Palmer, Bill Dixon,
Rob Orton & Mary Dyer.



What chance did local villagers have of putting their views across. At the the meeting
 I attended on 6th February 2003 one of the Forum members asked  'What right did I have to speak"!.

Since the shock decision by David Brown,Chief Executive of the North Cornwall  District Council,
 not to allow a Referendum on certain aspects of the Tintagel Regeneration, it was decided
 that four members of the committee formed to fight some of the proposals, would attend
a meeting of the Regeneration Committee.
Generally it was a very affable meeting & all those who wished to speak could do so.
My committee were advised that if the money was forthcoming for the Regeneration programme
 then certain aspects could be looked at again.
Chairman Gandalph Strutt stated that 'Nothing Was Set In Stone'
I pointed out that we were certainly NOT against the Regeneration of Tintagel but were
 unhappy about some of the parking & road changes. The Regeneration committee have
 taken these worries on board & have agreed that some on street parking will remain &
they will listen to our other ideas at the appropriate time.
It does seem that the matter can now be discussed in a reasonable manner with give & take
on both sides & the village's Regeneration can then satisfy most residents.
I must again emphasise that my committee have NEVER been against Regeneration but we
 wanted Regeneration to suit ALL residents & not just a certain few.
This page will keep you informed of developments.
David Flower

                           REPORT OF REFERENDUM MEETING ON 21ST MARCH 2002

The meeting was held at a packed Social Hall in Tintagel on March 21st 2002. Chairman David Cook
 opened the meeting & introduced David Flower, who along with five other residents of the village had
demanded a Referendum on the issue.

'Do you want the roads narrowed in Tintagel and no parking outside the local shops as planned in
 the Tintagel Regeneration'

                                                My remarks are as detailed below:  
Tonight’s meeting is held solely for local residents to decide whether or not they want a Referendum
on the question
“Do you want the roads narrowed in Tintagel & no parking outside the local shops as
planned in the Tintagel Regeneration”
                      My sole concern is for the village in which I have lived for 60 years
     When we received a Questionnaire from Mr Charlie David of the NCDC we eagerly filled it in and at
that time were led to believe we would eventually get a vote on the final Regeneration Scheme but this
was not to be.
     The first question was ‘Do you Want Regeneration’,  499 answered Yes & 108 No, but it turned out
 to be the final decision on the whole project. Some had read the Questionnaire more carefully than others
 & realised they were saying YES to every thing. In fact it said if you didn’t accept everything you would
 get nothing.
A blackmail letter in reality.
     Since that Questionnaire which I personally said NO to, I have campaigned on behalf of local residents
to get what they wanted. I believe the majority of locals do not want their quality of life ruined.
     A letter from the Forum Chairman saying, & I quote, “The streets will not be narrowed”, leads me
to wonder where the extra pavement space will come from in that case!.  At the moment there are
three carriage widths in most places & this is being reduced to two carriage widths from the
Social Hall to the Country Club.
     I have received an E Mail from a company  which manufactures coaches  stating the average coach
width including wing mirrors is 10’5”. The maximum width of the road is to be 19’6”  so two coaches
can not pass each other!!!.  Tractors, trailers, agricultural machinery, large delivery lorries, removal vans,
caravans and refuse lorries, will all experience difficulties & what about ambulances, fire engines or coastguards ??.  
       Why take away the on street parking ?. No one will be able to stop outside a shop to pick up that
bag of potatoes or coal or any heavy shopping.  Local residents & nearby villagers travel to Tintagel
 because they can park outside the shops. If you agree to these crazy plans you sound the death knell for local shops.
     Do you seriously think those people from Camelford, Delabole or Boscastle are going to pay a £1
car park fee when they pay nothing at the large Supermarkets.
       I have always requested that the streets of Tintagel were not altered, just a little bit of pavement here & there. This would avoid the character of our village being destroyed, after all that is what visitors want & not a new modern Tintagel. On my web site I have been deluged with support from locals & visitors from all over the world deploring the  narrowing of the roads & no parking outside the shops.
      In England at this time we still have Democracy & the right to request a Referendum on something that is going to radically change our village. My reason along with the other five signatories for a Referendum Meeting is that villagers on the electoral list should have the final say. Remember this is your last chance for Democracy because as I was told at the recent Forum AGM a petition signed by nearly 300 people against the road plans was NOT relevant,  Not relevant…well that shows that this Forum does not listen to local people.
     Narrow roads will cause traffic chaos all year round & no parking outside our local shops will be bad news for shopkeepers, bad news for the elderly of which there are many in Tintagel & bad news for the locals who dash out in the lashing rain & gale force winds to pick up that desperately needed item. Sadly the Forum has not listened & now I hope you will make them listen
   Vote tonight for a Referendum on the issue of “Do you want the roads narrowed in Tintagel & no parking outside the local shops as planned in the Tintagel Regeneration”.         LET  THE  PEOPLE  DECIDE     (David Flower)

Gandalph Strutt, Chairman of the Forum, then gave his statement. He did not have a written statement but followed the lines as follows
                                                                     TINTAGEL REGENERATION
                                                          CHAIRMAN'S STATEMENT 18th March 2002

There has been over the past months a number of misunderstandings surrounding the Tintagel Regeneration, this has led to a great deal of anxiety to residents in the Parish. This is now being exasperated by the misunderstandings being turned into hard fact, in part by people who have not attended public meetings and by some who have. So 1 would like to go on record to put right some of these misconceptions.
               [11 The forum is not entirely made up from shopkeepers, there are people who are not in business and represent other aspects of the community, in fact at the outset every branch of the community was approached. Sad to say only a few bothered to get involved, in part due to the great deal of time that can be taken up in a project such as this.
            [21 The streets of Tintagel are not being narrowed; it is proposed that the carriageway be wide enough to allow two lorries and or two coaches to pass each other with safety, and in one area it will be wider then it is currently.
          [3] With regards to pavements it is proposed that extra pavements be placed where there are none at this time, this being for public safety.
          [41 It is proposed that some of the current parking be removed. This 1 know is hotly debated. And I must say that whatever happens it is not going to please everyone. There are currently, and 1 am talking about legal parking, some 22 spaces. In the new plan on the new site this would increase to 32 including disabled, plus another 12 at the top of the village serving the Post Office, Hardware shop and Londis, plus the other establishments in that area. Londis also has parking for a number of cars. And there could be room for a limited number of vehicles at the main shops, that being the Chemist, Butchers and Newspaper shop.
[5] Other benefits that will come from this is a Village Square with seating, New Toilets including disabled. The eradication of Knot weed, Steps down to the cove, safer track way leading to the castle. Tintagel's first gardened area for people to sit in, away from the street. Traffic slowed down to make it safer for people to walk around and better crossing of roads for the disabled, the elderly and the young. Safer speed limits up by the school and work on the continuing problems of Fosters Lane. New and better street lighting plus of course the cables under the ground.
The great majority of people in the Tintagel Parish rely directly or indirectly on tourism, the whole idea for regeneration was brought about by continued bad press both here and overseas the latest reported from the far east news paper. These include tacky, horrible, drab, dreary, a rip off and more this is all in papers that are read by potential visitors. Add to that the fall off in coaches and there are more that are going to do so this year. It was felt by a great majority of people that there was a need to do something to redress the situation and carry Tintagel forward for a few more centuries for the people of the world to come and see.
           In closing, this is not a perfect world and as such we are not going to please every one no matter what we do or do not do. Change is not always easy, but it's benefits are there for all                                                                                                       
 Gandalph Strutt
(Whilst I do not agree with some parts of the statement above, it is in the true spirit of DEMOCRACY that the statement in full is printed above.......David Flower)

    There were many questions from the floor & then the vote was taken on the Referendum question. It resulted in 64 in favour of the Referendum & 73 against. Because the vote for a Referendum was more than the one third necessary this was carried. At the end of the meeting David Flower, on behalf of his group, announced that the Referendum would be held on a date to be announced        

      LATEST NEWS   10th April 2002   

Unbelievably Mr David Brown, the Chief Executive of North Cornwall District Council, has
refused to allow residents of Tintagel their right, by the rules of the Local Government Act of 1972, to have a Referendum vote on the Road narrowing & no parking issue.  He thinks he alone should make the decision rather than the people who live in the village. The group behind the right for a Referendum issue have been in touch with the Local Government Ombudsman to query Mr Brown's reasons behind his dubious decision.
                               Mr Brown does not live in Tintagel by the way!!!                                                 

                       REPORT ON TINTAGEL FORUM AGM 21ST FEBRUARY 2002
A very poorly attended meeting with only 24 people bothering to turn up, meant that there was not a Quorum to hold an AGM.  There was general discussion on the moves made over the past 12 months by the Forum. It was a very difficult meeting which the Forum Chairman Gandalf Strutt handled very well.
The North Cornwall District Council representative advised that the Objective One committee were not  happy with the economic improvements it would make to the village economy. A financial expert was to look into this matter. He said that a decision on whether the Tintagel Regeneration project would receive the funding would be   made by April 2002. There was concern about how the parking arrangements for locals at Fry's Car park would be organised. The reply stated this had not been decided yet.  Asked if the petition with nearly 300 votes against the road narrowing & no on street parking had been looked at by the Forum there was an outburst from a Parish Councillor & the Chairman agreed saying "This petition was not worth considering!!!!!!.
Towards the close of the meeting David Flower presented a petition under the Local Government Act 1972 which had been signed by six  parishioners as required stating:

       We call for a Referendum to decide on the question
 " Do you want the roads narrowed in Tintagel & no parking outside the local shops as planned in the Tintagel Regeneration"             Yes or No
We require a Parish Meeting to decide whether the residents want a Referendum & the meeting should be published locally.                    

                                                 MORE E MAILS !!!
                                                           March 21st 2002

Dear Sir,
    After tonight's meeting I feel I should express my feelings of dismay for your misguided "crusade" to prevent the proposed much needed regeneration of the village. I felt that you deliberately mislead the audience about the narrowing of the streets the actual road width will be unaffected it is only the removal of the parking to allow much needed wider pavements. In a village which has more parking than allot of towns the issue of not being able to park outside the shops is really irrelevant. I understand parking will be made available to locals at Frys garage which will actually be more convenient as it is often impossible to find on road parking. Most people just seem to park on the double yellow lines. As for your point that this would cause the closure of local shops it seems the majority of local shop keepers and businesses are in favour of the plans. If this village does not regenerate and attract increasing visitors it this which will cause businesses to close. With Cornwall enjoying a resurgence of interest with the Eden project and new cheap flights from London to Newquay beginning it would be churlish to lose the opportunity of vastly improving the village while funds are available. Perhaps you do not agree with the funding coming from Europe a view you are entitled to, but as someone hoping to raise a family here in the future I would like to see the very best outcome for Tintagel which must be regeneration. I do not expect to see this message posted on your website as it does not seem to be an open forum, but from talking to allot of the younger members of the community I know my view is shared by the vast majority.      (Name supplied)
(The statement that this site is not an open forum is completely untrue. I have ALWAYS published any E Mails relevant to Regeneration. This is the very first E Mail in agreement with the crazy street plans!!. I have NEVER been against Regeneration & all the Referendum does is to allow the residents of Tintagel a VOTE on their villages future...DEMOCRACY!!)

                                               February 25th 2002

Dear David
As a reasonably regular visitor - every other year - I'm dismayed to hear of this project.  I've always joked that one day I will retire to Tintagel - but who knows!  The main appeal is the surrounding beauty of the area and that things change very slowly.  It's one of the few places I feel you can return to. 
I haven't voted in the poll because I find the question conflicting.  Yes, especially during the busy season I can see the attraction of not allowing cars to park on the street - providing there is a reasonable alternative (and I have no problem parking out away's and walking in) - but I do not see why that means the main street should be narrowed.  I despair that the street should be altered at all. 
I'll should be down again this September and am looking forward to it.  I hope I can continue to do so in years to come.  I have marked your site as a favourite and recommend it to anyone and everyone.    (Name supplied)


                                                                            February 24th 2002
Dear David,
I am emailing about the plans for Tintagel which I can't believe. My dad's family are from Tintagel, (Parsons and Cann) he was born and brought up in the village and my parents regularly visit and stay in the village. We love the nature of it, the quaintness and the village life.  If you narrow the roads, stop parking, make "better" changes, where is the essence of the village. I, for one, like to come to Tintagel because of what it has got, not what it might have in the future if people don't stand up for their village. I will be showing my parents this web site when they come to visit this week and I know they will want me to have sent this email.  GOOD LUCK.
I will be revisiting the site to see how things DON'T progress!     (Name supplied)

February 22nd 2002
Dear David
Regarding the "Regeneration Project". I agree with the points made in the Email you received from Australia. Unfortunately I have seen this type of thing before. It is why I moved to Cornwall. The village in which I was born is now a London suburb and the town where I lived in Kent is now a concrete eyesore. We saw the same happening in Wiltshire shortly before we moved here. Following our business studies this year I now have a much clearer view of the way these things work. As you know, Cornwall is one of few counties receiving Objective One money. There is a large amount of money easily available to businesses and councils now. That together with the very bad adherence to existing planning laws we have seen in Cornwall spells disaster for small towns like Tintagel. I wish you the very best of luck with your fight David but please do not let it get to you. There is very little you can do against these giants. They will ultimately do whatever they want and care little about the peoples voice. I would suggest that you contact some of the European environmental organisations with a view to getting some legal backing. I feel that this may be the only way to stop the Cornish "wrecker" attitude turning on its own people. If there is any way we can help then please contact us.      (Name supplied)


                                                             February 19th 2002
Dear David,
                     As to the possible changes for Tintagel main street I feel that the character of the village would be altered for the worse. It seems to be change for the sake of change and will benefit  very few in the
community. Over the years many people return to Tintagel time after time for their holidays  these people like
the village as it is however these very same people could be lost if there are too many changes made to the place
they know and love. How long before Tintagel becomes just another in the increasingly long line of tasteless bland and tacky resorts without character or soul. Good luck with your campaign I hope you succeed in retaining the
character of the village for locals and visitors past present and future.
Best wishes, keep up the good work.

                                                          FEBRUARY 5th 2002
Dear David
I am horrified to read about the regeneration project. It reeks of high level
money mongering and is typical of the socialist approach to the workers and the
elite, the workers being the folks who have made Tintagel their home, and the
elite being those who can afford to visit it during those 2-3 months a year. The
locals are of course being compromised for the sake of the profit of the few
traitor local businessmen, as is usual in almost all fundamental change.
I laughed when I read that this kind of funding is probably only ever going to
be available now and we should take advantage of it because of this fact. Does
that justify anything - if a change is bad, why make it because money is
available?..  Well, because we need to appeal to peoples sense of greed to get
them to let things be changed I guess.
While I lived there, the village was not untouched by progress, but even to this
day, when I visit I still see a lot of the character that existed during those
12 years. I am still shocked every time I see that daft information hut in
Tremaine's old car park near Dads house. It is so visually and positionaly out
of context, but is obviously part of uniform change applied blindly.
Here in Australia we have legislation that puts protection on houses that have
heritage value (about anything that is over 100 years old I think!) to keep the
character of the house and area and retain some historic feel. But there is
nothing worse than seeing an old building in the middle of a modernised area,
completely out of context, and this is essentially where Tintagel is headed.
People like the 'feel' of the village, it is raw and maybe difficult to get
around, but then that is part of its charm, and what people do come down to see.
People do like to be somewhere different on holiday not in their comfortable
suburban style area with a few relics to look at out of the bus window.
I guess really the whole debate surrounds the differing beliefs that
1. The village area is a relic for visitors (local trade business view)
2. The village area is a home (the rest)
and the more you focus or invest in one, the more the other will diminish.
I hope this all works out for all concerned. I also hope that the community will
find this an opportunity to find a common voice, and to stand up for their
community rights.
What would be interesting to see is a profit loss statement for the trade in the
village over the last few years - it is supposed to be diminishing is it not? -
didn't look that way when I was there last year..
I would also like to see a local percentage figure for how many locals own
businesses as opposed to how many businesses are remotely owned
Anyhow - I'd better stop rambling on now - work to do !
Best of luck with your 'campaign'

Sadly the Forum have not listened to nearly 300 people who signed a petition & don't want THIS Regeneration. Some of the ideas are very good but we DO NOT want NARROW STREETS and NO PARKING outside the shops!!. 
Have they ever travelled as far as Bude, Bodmin, Wadebridge or Launceston---ALL TOWNS, where you can park outside the shops but in the small village of Tintagel these Forum members are trying to foist NO PARKING in our main street!!!!. !!!.
The Forum is sadly very biased to the concerns of visitors & their own interests & to hell with local wishes. They are intent to destroy the economic viability of our ALL YEAR ROUND businesses for the sake of the summer traders.
 If they don't listen to the people of  Tintagel then with your help these plans for the destruction of Tintagel must be defeated when the vote comes to accept these crazy ideas. All most  people want in Tintagel is 'under grounding' the cables & olde world street lights. I personally have been lied to by a leading member of the Tintagel Parish Council who assured me that the streets would not be narrowed. Presumably widening the pavements does not have the same effect!!!!. 
For the sake of the elderly population of our village & local businesses defeat these crackpot plans!.

Please E mail me with your support to fight this Forum

Dear Tintagel Resident
You will be aware I hope of the moves afoot to undertake a range of environmental improvements within the main part of the village and to provide for better access to the castle area from the village and to provide access to the beach. These proposals have been developed to provide Tintagel with a stronger position as a visitor destination and an opportunity to improve it's image thus encouraging more sustainable growth for the future. Tourism affects a majority of businesses in the parish, providing local jobs. Tintagel needs to remain competitive as a visitor destination and the proposals set out in the Regeneration Project will help maintain Tintagel as an important place for visitors in the future. The dreadful effects of the Foot & Mouth epidemic earlier in the year dramatically underlined the importance of places which provide good quality facilities in a good quality environment. The fact that many public agencies are willing to invest substantial amounts into Tintagel exhibits considerable levels of support and recognition of Tintagel being one of the most important places in Cornwall. 
A number of public meetings have been held during a several year development period to try & keep locals people informed as to how the plans have been developing and to provide an opportunity for people to feed the process. The development process has been steered by a Village Forum made up of residents representing community organisations in the main, particularly the Parish Council. A list of the Forum members was circulated with the letter sent to you inviting you to the last public meeting held on the 25th January 2001 at which there were over 200 people attending. Notes taken of that meeting are available on request.
You may also recall that prior to the meeting on the 25th a questionnaire was circulated to all those on the electoral role. There was 44% return from the 1400 sent out. The detail was published at the meeting, with over 80% supporting the broad thrust of the proposals. There were also included in many of the replies some very useful comments which we tried to address on the night. I apologise if we did not answer to all individual enquires.
The public meeting provided for a very useful debate and stemming from the comments made at meeting adjustments have been made to the proposals that now broadly involve:
* Improving the pedestrian access along Bossiney Road from Foster's Lane along Fore Street as far as the entrance to the Car park at the country Club. this involves better quality and wider paving, traffic managements (20mph limit, including down Foster's Lane and along Molesworth Street and out to the Camelot Castle Hotel and day time parking restrictions allied to the provision of a free 30 space, parishioners (by permit) only car park in the centre of the village managed by the Parish Council for access to the local shops
* Under grounding overhead wires
* Attractive street furniture provision such as seating, lighting, planting areas
* Provision of a "Shop Front Improvement Grant" scheme which provides an opportunity for business to apply for funds to enhance the frontage to their businesses.

*Provision of a village square half way down Fore Street (by means of land purchase), where there will be seating provided, some public artwork, provision for posting information and the provision of a village clock
* A better quality replacement of the poor quality toilets currently in Mr. Dangar's car park
* Improved access from the village down the castle track by divorcing pedestrians and vehicular access
* Provision of a new set of steps onto the haven beach
* Improved visitor facilities at the castle site
* A programme of small-scale environmental improvement works throughout the Parish including an eradication programme of the Japanese knotweed on all land where owners would be willing to co-operate
The plans have now reached a critical stage. There funding package for the scheme, currently standing at 2.8 million, is now almost complete; the major source of the funding being from Europe through the objective 1 programme, the South West Regional Development Agency, English Heritage, Cornwall County Council, the District and Parish Council and the National Trust.
At this stage the Village Forum feels that it would be the right thing to do to call another Public Meeting so that people can find out about how the plans have developed from nine months ago, what has been incorporated from the discussion held at that meeting and what else there is still to do

For these reasons I am inviting you to a meeting at SOCIAL HALL on the evening of November 22nd 2001 starting at 7.30pm. Apart from members of the Village Forum being present, there will also be officers from the District & County Councils, who have been instrumental in putting the funding packages together and who have provide assistance with the liaison between the various authorities
who have needed to be involved 
Gandalph Strutt
Chairman, Tintagel Village Forum
(Please Note: The webmaster has corrected a couple of errors in the letter)

  Back To Top Of Page

6th March 2001

Clerk to Tintagel Parish Council
Cherry Trees Cottage
Atlantic View Estate

Dear Mr Francis
Could you please read out to Councillors the following letter at your meeting on Wednesday.

                                                          TINTAGEL REGENERATION

Following the heavily biased letter from Mr. David of North Cornwall District Council, many voters of Tintagel Parish were ‘fooled’ into answering YES to the first question of six. Mr. David took this result to mean that villagers were in favour of ALL the suggestions. However as the letter was ‘ill conceived’ many people said Yes when they did not agree to all the proposals. Surely everyone is happy with some Tintagel Regeneration (cables underground & new street lighting) but only to the benefit of local people…not just some visitors, summer traders, National Trust & English Heritage.
I have attended many of the meetings and pointed out that the roads; pavements and definitely parking should remain as today. This ill-conceived regeneration is masterminded by the District Council who drew up the plans & the Forum and I would imagine very few members of the Parish Council could agree with ALL of it?????????.
This letter is to simply ask a question to avoid unnecessary costs to our Parish.
When this Forum has come up with its final plans will there be a vote for ALL households & its occupants over 16 (not electoral list), to decide whether they want the plans to go ahead. There should be one question
‘Do you accept in full the proposed changes to YOUR village? A list of these changes should be made…i.e. No on street parking, changes to the unique character of the village, no deliveries between11.30 and 3pm etc:’
 No comment  from Mr David, just a YES or NO. 
I have a petition running in the village and whilst not much effort has been put into its distribution, nearly 200 (350 at 13th April), villagers have said they don’t want the road, pavement or parking changes.
If you assure me that there will be a sensible YES/NO vote then it will avoid the Referendum that will be demanded at the ratepayer’s expense.
I have the names of ten people who will put their name to the Referendum.
I await your answer.
Yours Faithfully
David Flower

                                            THE REPLY TO MY LETTER APRIL 2001

                             TINTAGEL VILLAGE FORUM

 Chairman:                Secretary:
Gandalf Strutt                        Bill Dixon
Dragons Breath                     King Arthur Bookshop
Fore Street     
                       1 Castle Hill
Tintagel                                 Tintagel

D Flower Esq.,
The Old Forge
PL34 OAY                             9th April 2001

Dear David
Having to seek employment outside the village may well mean more shops closing, adding yet again to the overall poor impression our visitors take with them. The Forum believe that the plans will considerably improve the village centre for visitors and residents alike. .
The scheme also considered the safety aspects, Fore Street in both Summer and Winter is not pedestrian friendly and to reduce the likelihood of accidents vehicle speed reduction and calming methods are needed, along with obvious crossing points.
The Forum, which is made up of persons representing many facets of village life not just traders, is aware of much concern within the village regarding the suggestion of general withdrawing of on street parking. Many different aspects are under consideration and it is hoped that a satisfactory conclusion can be found for the majority. In altering road and pavements it is planned that local materials can be used so blending with some of the old buildings within the village.
The Forum welcomes constructive criticism and would ask you to join it so that you can share, in detail, your worries over our currently unfinalised plans. 
I would also ask you to publish this reply to your letter on your Tintagel Website.

Yours sincerely
Gandalf Strutt

Answer To The Reply From The Forum Dated 4th August 2001

Just a thought, after looking at the regeneration news.  The Forum's reply (9/4/01) to your letter states that 'to reduce the likelihood of accidents vehicle speed reduction and calming methods are needed'.  Having been a resident of Tintagel for 25 years, I have never known of any serious accidents in the main street involving pedestrians or cars.  Perhaps vehicle calming measures would be more effective on approaches into Tintagel, such as the ridiculous parking on the roads at Trewarmett and Bossiney which form visitors first impressions of the village, but perhaps this is not of interest to the forum who trade mainly in the centre of Tintagel.

(Name Supplied By A Local Resident)

               Statement made at the  AGM of Tintagel Parish Council on Thursday 12th April 2001


Whether you agree with my feelings or not one thing you can be sure of is I am passionate about my village, our village, and love Tintagel. When I was a member of the Parish Council from 1968 to 1981, four years as chairman, the most important part of the council's efforts were to improve Tintagel for it's residents. We were unanimous against certain changes in the village but regrettably the District Council overruled us, to our disadvantage. However, the Parish Council are very much involved with the Tintagel Regeneration & will have the final say in the matter Sadly many members of the forum are interested in only themselves I mention English Heritage, who should NOT be involved in the Regeneration. They should foot their own bill or get grants themselves to tidy up the Castle road & beach. It is quite disgusting that despite the massive profits made at King Arthur's Castle, that the Castle Beach has been closed for nearly 15 years I know the Parish Council have pushed English Heritage to repair the steps. The National Trust have always shown self interest and they are another member of the forum The NCDC are heavily involved with Charlie David master minding. Others are interested in summer visitors only and have no concern for the people who live in the village. Our village should be managed by the Parish Council for the good of villagers, present & future. We want the streets to remain the same with cables underground, new street lighting, a small amount of new pavements in the necessary places. We want parking places as today not yet another car park. If Fry's is purchased this should be made into a pleasant village centre where events can be held, people can sit etc. How about a pull in by the NCDC car park for buses to ease congestion, a village clock & make the village shops tidy themselves up, get rid of those hideous boards & Coca Cola machines In fact summer traders tidy up your act don't destroy the uniqueness of our lovely village. Most people know I have a web site and despite saying I would print any feelings on the proposed village changes not one person has spoken in favour of the original changes except Gandolph. 
Think hard & long before you back proposals hated by a lot of villagers ...this council will always be remembered ...let's hope for the right reasons......David Flower


          The Regeneration Project   January 2001

NOTE: The cleverly worded questionnaire meant that many people said
(1) 'YES' they supported
the regenerationon (They did not know they were voting to accept 
ALL of the proposed changes)
 We  ALL support PARTS of it but I could only answer NO because I certainly did not support ALL of it!)..

(2)Question 2 tied in the Castle Access with changing pavements, footpaths & road widths.!!!
(3) Free parking for about six people in the centre of the village by the shops (Mayfair car park)!!!
(No mention of this!!)
(4)Agreed a  speed limit is essential in villages
(5) No deliveries between 11.30 and 3pm. Too ridiculous to even comment on!!!
(6)This scheme should NOT include paying for some of Prince Charles's expenses....he is the owner of the Tintagel Castle & land. English Heritage are his agents who maintain, look after and rake in the profits!
 Was it 200,000 visitors to King Arthur's Castle last year?!. English Heritage should pay for this themselves!!

Tintagel Regeneration
      Questionnaire Return Analysis

Question 1 Do you support the Tintagel Regeneration Project scheme?
  Yes No Don't know     Total
  Numbers Responding 499 108 7     614
Percentage 81 18 1     100
Question 2 Improvements to the street scene of part of Bossiney Road, Fore Street and part of Atlantic Road is one part of a comprehensive and integrated scheme also involving improvements to the access to the castle. What is your overall opinion on the proposals to improve the street scene and as described in the accompanying information?
  Strongly Approve Approve Disapprove Strongly Disapprove    
  Numbers Responding 236 260 33 42   571
Percentage 41 46 6 7   100
Combined % 87 13   100
Question 3 Provision of alternatives to the current on-street parking will need to be a key feature of the scheme if it is to proceed. Would you support the provision of free parking for residents of Tintagel Parish in selected car parks as an alternative to the current situation and as described in the accompanying information?
Numbers Responding 235 225 43 63   566
  Percentage 42 40 8 11   100
Combined % 81 19   100
Question 4 Control of traffic speed will also be important if pedestrians are to feel more comfortable using the newly refurbished street scene. Would you support a proposal which would seek to have a new 20mph speed limit between Foster's Lane and the Tintagel Country Club.
  Support Speed Limit   Not Support Speed Limit      
  Numbers Responding 546   34     580
Percentage 94   6     100
Question 5 Delivery of goods to shops will need to be managed to avoid traffic congestion. Would you support a proposal that would seek to avoid any deliveries to the village between 10.30am and 3.00pm?
  Approve delivery time limit   Don't approve delivery time limit      
  Numbers Responding 354   182     536
Percentage 66   34     100
Question 6 Improvements to the access to Tintagel Castle is the other part of a comprehensive and integrated scheme also involving improvements to the street scene of part of Bossiney Road, Fore Street and part of Atlantic Road. What is your overall opinion on the proposals to improve the access to, and facilities around, the castle as described in the accompanying information?
  Strongly Approve Approve Disapprove Strongly Disapprove    
  Numbers Responding 231 258 26 14   529
Percentage 44 49 5 3   100
Combine % 92 8   100
Spoiled 1
Unmarked 11
Returns No. sent out Percentage Return
626 1400 45

                                                                          Back To Top Of Page

Below is the
FINAL LETTER setting out the For's and Against the Regeneration at Tintagel. You had a simple choice---you have to accept the plan in FULL or say NO to the Regeneration Project. There are of course many good aspects of the plan but personally there is simply NO WAY I would have voted YES to the whole plan.  It had to be NO because the needs of local people have just been thrown in the dustbin. There are many elderly and infirm people in Tintagel who need to park right outside the shop they need to visit. Parking in a Car Park is NOT what they want or should be forced to do. There will NO return to parking on the main street if this plan goes ahead. This is a Charter for Summer Traders, National Trust, English Heritage and Councils. This is NOT for the good of the residents of TINTAGEL OR VISITORS!!!!.  
Remember there will be NO parking on the roads between the Social Hall and the Country Club.
I am proud to have voted  NO to this desecration.   David Flower

REMEMBER: As Sir Winston Churchill Said: This is not the end, it is not even the beginning of the end, it is just the end of the beginning. I will be pressing for a Referendum on this issue so all ratepayers vote and not the selected few.  Just 10 names were needed and I already have these, and the Parish Council will be forced to have a real view of the villagers of Tintagel. They are trying to rush these ridiculous plans through, the project is due to start this November!!!!!!!

Please let me have your E Mails, FOR & AGAINST and I promise to put them all on the web site

E Mail 16th August 2000
 Having just read your piece on the web-site about the changes at Tonkin's Garage over the
 years, I am prompted to write to you about the proposed regeneration project.
Is this not just another way for a few people to alter the history and heritage of the village in a
way that suits them and their businesses? I have lived very happily in Tintagel all my life, and
find it very disappointing that such a large scale project is being considered without more
in-depth consultation of the people who live but do not necessarily work in the village. I work
away from the village purely out of necessity, however, I am made to feel that, because I do not
spend more time here, my feelings about the village are not as important.
Another aspect that concerns me is the provision for traffic passing through the village beyond
the proposed pedestrian area. How will businesses which are located at the far end of the
village (ie;beyond The Cornishman) deal with essential deliveries in the busy and congested
summer months? 
These are just the matters that concern me about the project as a whole.             (E Mail address supplied)

E MAIL !!!! 16th January 2001

Dear Mr. Flower,
As a regular visitor to Tintagel I welcome any improvements that will increase the prosperity of all members of the village. Your plans seems to lack one or two facilities. 1) Access to the western end of the village for Campers, Caravaners, B&B residents and users of the King Arthur's Hotel Coaching Holidays.
2) How do the disabled visit the village if they cannot park IN the village and close to the amenities?
Could you please explain
Pete Stenning


1. Business people are VERY concerned about the access to the areas you mention. It seems that every thing is thrown overboard for the sake of wider pavements. There will be serious problems if the Regeneration Plans are accepted by villagers.
2. Another concern is about the elderly and disabled being unable to park outside the chemist, butchers, grocers etc. it will be very detrimental to local businesses which open all year round.

                                                                           Back To Top Of Page

                                                                      E MAIL 20th January 2001
I have taken the time to inspect the plans for Tintagel, even to the extent of printing a copy and coming into the village to look on the ground. I have to say this is one of those hair brained schemes dreamed up to satisfy the few at the expense of the many.
I understood that the parish of Tintagel was to be improved by this idea. I fail to see where the improvement lies. I see a scheme that will only be of benefit to a very few trades people, and a few visitors, I see a scheme that will take away from the local population the old traditional Tintagel. Once again the heart of a country village ripped out to accommodate a few holiday makers. The people come here to see Tintagel, as it is, turning it into another made over seaside resort will destroy the old Tintagel. The people who live and work in Tintagel village, and the surrounding parishes will suffer with the loss of the traditional village. The local population will be pushed aside, their views suppressed, so as to accommodate the grand ideas of a few people who have no idea what this will do to our village. Where will the disabled, elderly, mums and kids, the sick visiting the chemist etc, park throughout the year to gain entry to the local shops you know, the people who live here all year, not visitors. This has been tried in many south and east coast villages and towns, any one who would take the time to go and look will see that they are now paying dearly for their ignorance in trusting the few.  Dead villages, no shops, yellow lines every where, no facilities, and an overall loss of visitors. Housing only for the rich out of town, also, the local governments are now filling the unused guest houses, hotels, b&b, with immigrants waiting for their asylum cases to be heard.
I put it to this way, the people who visit Tintagel do so because it is an historic and untouched village, not destroyed (yet) by the silly touristy ideas of a few greedy people. If you cast your eyes around the Parish of Tintagel and have a good look, this vast pot of money could be spent to much better advantage of ALL the residents, not just a few. There is, I am sure, no objections to overhead lines being placed below ground, or lamp posts being changed for better looking ones in keeping with the history. Some of the off street parking needs greatly improving, and better public facilities are needed, but the rest of the scheme is way, way too much of a change, and not to our advantage, the local people.
I also put to you the following. If this money was used to improve and revamp the roads leading into the village, it would have an enormous benefit to the local residents. Reduce the speed limit from Delabole to Tintagel down to 30mph, carry out road schemes to slow the traffic from Trebarwith Strand junction to Tintagel, this would make it safer for all of us, children, disabled, elderly and others, making our community a safer place. Reduce the speed limit throughout the whole of the Tintagel parish villages to 20mph, would make it safer for all the users and animals alike. and enforce them with Police presence, if you can get the police to visit us, and speed traps, even to employing our own village policeman, like others have.
In closing I would urge all the good people to start asking questions. How will this help us, who is behind this scheme, what are the true intentions of the Committee, who appointed them to represent us, also where is the copy of this plan sent to all the rate payers?.  I have not seen one, have you?. I believe that all the residents of the postal areas PL32/33/34/35, should receive a referendum form clearly explaining these proposals and to be asked to vote on them. The voice of the many would then be heard, and I believe would say a resounding NO. This scheme in its present form is not the way forward for our TINTAGEL.

resident of Tintagel Parish
name and address supplied

                                  E MAIL January 24th 2001 From a Visitor To Our Lovely Village


I have been happily browsing your TINTAGEL website and I thought that I would drop you a line. I have to say that I was HORRIFIED when I read of the plans for the REGENERATION of Tintagel. My Wife and I have been regular visitors to Tintagel for the last 11 years, indeed we stay just up the road in Trenale at Trenale Court. We come to Cornwall, and Tintagel in particular because we love how it is. The proposed REGENERATION would just create another carbuncle on the face of Cornwall. As a "Tourist" I have never liked the messes they have made of other places around Cornwall by feeling that they have to "pretty them up" to attract tourism. Surely tourists would want to see a village as it is, not as some plastic pretend village. In my eyes there is no need for such a scheme, I think that Tintagel should be left alone as it is beautiful as it is, I certainly do not feel any need for widened footpaths or any of the other proposals. I think it would probably drive away many of the people who come to Tintagel and love it for what it is, rather than attract people. With Tintagel what you see is what you get, and I for one love it!!


Hello Mr. Flower,

I used to knock around with your son Robin. My name is Ian Holding and I left the village in 1977 with my family and have missed it ever since !.In two years I plan to return and bring my business that I have built up with me. Please, please do your best to save Tintagel from the rot that has befallen Newquay. I live now in London and if you Cornish don't stick together like I know you can, then you'll have all of the political correctness crap, legions of Asylum seekers like we Londoners have experienced. I'll fill out any opposition forms that you care to send me to keep Tintagel the same and not go on a downward spiral !

                                                   Another E Mail Since That Ridiculous Result


Just checked the site again and was amazed that 81% of people voted YES!! Are they stupid or what?!! Is there
anything I can sign, as a visitor to Tintagel, to put forward my point of view to stop this ridiculous plan.

Name & Address Supplied

                                    And Another...The E Mails Flood In...Take Note Summer Traders!!!
How ANYONE could possibly believe that this is what tourists want is obviously lacking any 
common sense or intelligence. The only thing to do with such people is put them against a wall 
and shoot them. A bit strong, I know, but then I think it's the least they deserve for coming up 
with this sly, disgusting scheme to wreck a beautiful village and turn it into a plastic tourist
trap. I understand your anger.

Name & Address Supplied

One More E mail Hating The Changes
Browsed through the planned changes at Tintagel. What genius thought this up? Does it mean one will no longer be able to drive up to the Church, or is that still possible( could not make it out in the plan) Bet you could get the archdiocese involved if that were so.
Over the thirty years I have not lived in Tintagel there have been some pretty horrific changes, but this does indeed take the cake. Incidentally, who were the 500 odd folk who got to vote?
Name & Address Supplied...From Oregon, America!!



            The plan below is made up of two sections.
 To see each clearly you need to click individually on each picture

Plan 1Plan 2

 Following is the letter which accompanied the plan.

Dear Sir/Madam,                                                                                                                      9 January 2001


First of all I apologise for this rather long-winded letter, but it contains some important information which may have a fundamental effect on the village of Tintagel (Trevena) in the future. I have also attached a diagram and descriptive text that identifies the main proposals which are acceptable to the funding organisations. They have indicated strongly that they see the improvements to pedestrian access along Fore Street and access to the castle as fundamental. Our designs have reflected this. This will mean that the current on-street parking will be removed BUT we are making provision for free car parking in most of the car parks in Atlantic Road, Fore Street and Bossiney Road. This will enable residents of the Tintagel Parish, featuring on the electoral role, to apply to the Parish Council for a permit to use these free parking spaces which will be limited to 30 minutes at a time. 
The spaces offered by the owners of the relevant car parks will add up to approximately 30 spaces. Currently there are approximately 22 on-street car-parking spaces. I appreciate that this element may be perceived by some, at least initially, as not being as convenient as the current  situation. However I must stress that, in my opinion and in the opinion of my colleagues in the County Council, who are assisting in the presentation of the proposals and who have day to day contact with these funding bodies, if the  pedestrian access and street scene is not shown to have been substantially improved from the current situation, the funding bodies will be unlikely to invest in the scheme as a whole. We will not be able to complete any part of the scheme.
As an officer of the North Cornwall District Council 1 have been asked to assist with the development of the scheme and to prepare the various bids which will need to be submitted for grant aid. To do this 1 have been able to enlist the assistance of relevant and experienced County Council personnel.
There are two integrated elements to the Tintagel Regeneration Scheme. One part provides better and safer access to the castle and to the beach. The other deals with improving the environment of the village making it more pedestrian friendly. Neither part can easily stand‑alone for the purposes of developing a successful funding package.
By completing both aims it is hoped that Tintagel will be a more attractive place for people to visit and an even better place to live in. More fundamentally the work outlined should result in the stimulation of the local economy, which has been in long‑term decline, and thus safeguard or increase the jobs that go with it.
The cost of the scheme as outlined is considerable - approximately £1.5 million. The opportunity that the Objective 1 status given to Cornwall by Europe brings has to be grasped now. It is highly unlikely that there will ever be another chance to access this level of funding for such schemes.
Whilst the Objective 1 programme can deliver 50% of the funding other sources can be tapped into to make up the other 50%. All of the organisations who will potentially provide the match funding, as well as the Objective 1 programme itself, will need to see specific benefits from the investment they may make. They have criteria that we must follow when developing proposals for the Tintagel Regeneration Scheme if we are to be successful with funding applications.
One of the most important criteria for any of the funding organisations is that we must demonstrate local support for the project. We have already held two public meetings, advertised throughout the village, and have had an exhibition in the Tintagel Visitor Centre illustrating the proposals for the physical works to the village. Response forms have been made available and to date some 36 forms have been returned many of which are joint responses. Of the 36, 30 have indicated that they approve or strongly approve of the scheme and have added useful comments to qualify their support. 6 have indicated that they disapprove or strongly disapprove of the scheme.
There are some issues that 1 am aware of which were raised at previous public meetings mainly relating to on-street car parking.
Yours sincerely
Charlie David

Coast & Countryside Office


Another meeting was held at the King Arthur's Castle Hotel (Camelot Hotel) on Monday December 13th at 7.30pm. This meeting was packed and it was obvious that it should not have been held in a private building as many could not hear the speakers. Gandalf Strutt, took the chair and Charlie David ( NCDC) and two members of the body who drew up the proposed plans were also in attendance. Charlie David explained the situation as it stood with grants etc and the proposed alterations. It was pretty obvious that NO consideration had been given to local residents, especially the old & infirm, who would not be able to park their cars in the street to collect medicines, groceries, newspapers and other essentials. I said it was purely a summer traders plan which was biased in their favour and to the visitor. However, I am pleased others backed me and now they are going to look at parking spaces remaining as they are today. There was to be only six spaces from the Social Hall to the Country Club...absolutely ridiculous!!. There are many attractive parts of the scheme, underground cabling being the MOST important, more friendly street lighting, crossing places for pedestrians and an attempt to slow down traffic. One idea is to have a 20mph speed limit in the village. Who will check this I have no idea as policeman are very conspicuous by their absence in our village!. I am not very happy about the narrowing of our streets to just six metres width,( in ENGLISH nineteen and a half feet), which I believe will cause traffic chaos in the peak season. If a vehicle breaks down in the street or there is a fire or ambulance emergency I fear the worst. There is a suggestion that delivery vehicles will not be allowed to make deliveries between11.30am to 3pm each day. This is utter nonsense. It should be realised that there will more and more deliveries in future years as the big stores deliver to many more homes. It is my belief that locals must take an interest in what is possibly going to happen to 'their village' or  may regret some of the ideas that will be imposed on them.

Remember this is YOUR village and the changes envisaged are very dramatic. I feel personally that the feelings of villagers, who after all pay the rates of the village, MUST be a priority over visitor concerns. Whatever your feelings let them be known to your Parish Councillors. 

There are many excellent features of the project and we should all back those who have worked so very hard to get this far. However some aspects are of a more controversial nature and these must be looked at very carefully.                                 These are my personal views of the plans for my village and I will be very happy to accept the ultimate decision of ALL villagers
David Flower 

                                                  TINTAGEL REGENERATION PROJECT 

To improve visitor perception of Tintagel To increase length of visitor stay To develop better economic environment and reduce the turnover of businesses, i.e. some businesses tend to be ephemeral in Tintagel To more clearly market Tintagel as a Visitor destination To improve the village environment and encourage a greater sense of local distinctiveness. To improve physical access to the castle site from the village.


1. Enhance the street scene by; widening and resurfacing existing and providing new pavements reducing traffic speeds lowering kerbs
2. Improve the visual appearance of the village by; undergrounding obtrusive overhead wires introducing landscaping features such as planters, benches, better street lighting and a well designed resurfacing of road and pavements reducing clutter of commercial and directional signing
3. Encourage a better economic base by;
provide a better identity through careful marketing
*                       providing advice and identify assistance to new and existing traders
encourage the reestablishment of a Traders Association
promote a longer season by encouraging businesses to stay open for the shoulder months                                                     encouraging better value for money using the Visitor centres, Castle, National Trust as 
                         examples of good quality facilities
4. Promote the wider interests of the village by; improving the access from the village to the castle and the English                          Heritage Centre

*                       replacing the ruined access to the beach providing and disseminating information about the village                          and its environs

*                       Improve interpretation of and access to the castle site from the English Heritage Centre

*                       Creating themes walks to encourage access to and appreciation of the surrounding area 


                        The costs of the project have been identified from the feasibility study as;





Site clearance



Pedestrian improvements & traffic management












Street furniture






Community involvement/Art



New footpath works to the castle



Mainland steps to castle



Improvement to English Heritage Centre



Steps to the beach



15% fees

( 149,500 )

       Total                                                                                                                       1,145,500 

                                                         The funding package currently looks like this:



Objective 1



































*Tintagel Parish












*National Trust






















































*Other Sources










- - -----------------------

       Total                                                                                                                                                       1,145,500

                              *Committed or have indicated that they would wish to contribute).
 These funding sources are currently being pursued and have indicted their willingness to contribute as identified.


Back To Top Of Page
 Return To News & Sport Page
              E Mail me on

Copyright©  David Flower 2012

Disclaimer: No part of this website may be reproduced, stored on a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise, without the written consent of (David Flower). You may however, download on to a personal computer owned or controlled by yourself and you may make a single copy of any part of this publication, for your private use or study. are not liable for any direct, indirect or consequential loss arising from the use of information or material contained in the site or from your access to the web sites of customers or other material on the internet obtained via links from this site.