The Riverside Market: Showing ‘temporary’ plywood fascias

PEMBROKESHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL has been criticised over its handling of Haverfordwest Library’s relocation to the Riverside Market after it has been suggested that the projected cost of the move could be wildly inaccurate.

According to the data used to calculate the cost of relocating the library to a number of locations, the Riverside option was the cheapest in a central location. The projected total cost of works, including abnormal, came to £1,019,810.97, giving a total cost per square metre of £946.90. This compared favourably with the former site of Ocky White’s, which had a larger area, although concerns were raised about the layout. The estimated costs for work on that site came to £1,676.58 per m2.

The cost of locating the building in the North Wing of County Hall, a larger site, came out at £598.57 per m2, but it was thought that locating the library ‘out of the town centre’ at County Hall would reduce footfall in the town centre. This also applied to the Dew Street Library. A brief visit to Google Street Maps shows that County Hall is 0.3 miles from the centre of Bridge Street, with an estimated walking time of five minutes. The Library on Dew Street is also a five minute walk, though this may not take the hill into account.

It was pointed out when these figures were discussed that they were subject to further surveying work. However, The Herald has learned that a survey of the Riverside Market was in fact carried out some five years ago, when the market traders were told that thebuildingneeded £1.3m of necessary works carried out, in addition to £1.7m worth of desirable works.

Bearing in mind that this survey is five years old, and that no major works have taken place in this time, it would be reasonable to assume that the fabric of the building has deteriorated further, meaning the costs could be even higher. Our reporter was told that the structural steel over the river was meant to be painted every five years. This task had been carried out once, around 20 years ago. When the fascias were removed for the steel to be painted some years ago, the metal was said to be in too poor a condition to paint. A temporary plywood cladding was installed, and remains to this day. Our reporter was shown a number of sites where the roof was leaking – apparently an ongoing problem.

In a meeting held with traders a week before the library relocation was discussed by the cabinet, Michael Cavanagh of the Cultural Services Department is said to have told representatives of the market committee that the actual cost of the works would be double what was quoted.

If we assume that all of the £1.7m of ‘desirable’ work would have been undertaken with the idea of improving the Riverside as a retail venue – by no means a given – and therefore does not apply to the redevelopment of the venue as a library, then this still leaves £1.3m of ‘necessary’ work. This generous assessment, when added to the original estimate, would lead to a figure of £2,319, 810.97, or £2,153 per m2. It is possible that some of the work could be counted twice, though as it was explicitly pointed out that further surveying was needed when the report was presented in January, this seems unlikely.

When the Herald asked Pembrokeshire County Council about this, we were told that the previous survey was ‘historic’, and ‘was not prepared for the same purpose or on the same basis. It was undertaken in the context of a major redevelopment proposal for the town centre’.

Regarding the projected costs a council spokesman said: “ As part of the options appraisal work that led to the Riverside Market being identified as the best location for a new County Library and Information Centre, external Quantity Surveyors provided an estimate of £1,019,810.97. However, this did not include some costs that we anticipate may be required as part of the development, such as replacement of the roof. It also did not include costs associated with relocating the market traders. The full costs of the scheme cannot be identified until the project brief has been finalised, and this work is currently underway as stated in the recent Cabinet report.”

We were also told that the Cultural Services Department had been aware for some time that the costs would by far exceed this figure, and had been told that £2.3m was available for the project.

The earlier assertion that the Riverside Market had not received any major works in recent years was based on talks with many of the traders, who expressed their dissatisfaction with the council’s management of the market, especially in the last 18 months since the plans for relocating the library were first discussed.

It was claimed by more than one person that the council’s treatment of the market over that period amounted to a managed decline, or ‘death by a thousand cuts,’ as one stallholder memorably put it. Half of the market has been empty for some time. Another stallholder said that reports in local media claiming that the market’s closing was only a matter of time when the issue was first raised had meant that people were unwilling to take on any of the vacant units. They added that no particular effort seemed to have been made by the council to fill any of the vacant units. These have now been blocked off by barricading one of the walkways.

This perceived mismanagement has affected the businesses of all the traders we talked to. The Herald was informed that eighteen months ago, when the relocation plans were first discussed, the market had 95% occupancy, which compared very favourably to Haverfordwest town centre as a whole. This has nosedived since – apparently as a result of traders moving elsewhere due to uncertainty about the market’s future, and new traders being unwilling to move in because the council was unwilling to give long-term assurances. The large number of vacant premises and the appearance of the market have both undoubtedly contributed to significantly reduced footfall.

The council has said that help will be given to traders looking to relocate, including two years of business rates relief. This does not take into account the paucity of ‘like for like’ premises in the town centre, which would mean that established businesses would have to move away from their client bases. Apparently, businesses moving to larger premises would receive less assistance. It can be assumed that this would be classified as business expansion rather than the lack of a more suitable property.

The Council was keen to clarify this issue: “The relocation package is on a like-for-like basis so if a trader elects to take a larger unit, the Council will provide support based on a similar-sized unit. This is not a reduced level of financial assistance, it is an apportioned level of assistance.”

Traders expressed their concerns about suitable properties available, and the lack of communication from the council. One trader told us that a ‘mini market’ had been considered for Bridge Street, and that four properties had been viewed. However, no further details had been made available, leading some of the businesses to accuse the council of not answering basic questions pertaining to their future.

As has been pointed out, the uncertainty surrounding the market has led to decreased trade. This has meant that some businesses have found themselves in rent arrears. The council has told businesses in arrears that they face eviction if the money is not paid soon, and that they will not be entitled to any assistance with relocation. Whether or not the council has been honouring the terms of the rental agreement by allowing the market to deteriorate is another question.