Seawall group to petition Whitehall

Southend Standard: Heated – residents at the public meeting which decided to raise a petition against the seawall plan Heated – residents at the public meeting which decided to raise a petition against the seawall plan

CAMPAIGNERS say they are planning a direct appeal to the Government in a final effort to stop a seawall being built on Shoebury Common.

Campaign group, Friends of Shoebury Common, is planning to start a petition against Southend Council’s proposed £4.6million seawall.

Residents at public meeting at Shoeburyness High School agreed to start collecting signatures for the the petition.

The plan is to send it the Communities Secretary Eric Pickles when Southend Council puts in a formal planning application to build the seawall, using earth from the Southend cliffs slip.

Feelings ran high at the meeting with the council coming in for bitter criticism over the scheme and the way it has tried to get it agreed.

Peter Grubb, a member of Friends of Shoebury Common and owner of the Uncle Tom’s Cabin cafe at the common, compared the council’s proposal to the Iraq war.

He said: “All of you will remember the famous document, based on dodgy data, which resulted in us piling into Iraq.

“When things died down, we discovered that there were no weapons of mass destruction.

“Southend Council’s weapon of mass destruction has been set on its course, and the element which is going to be destroyed is Shoebury Common.

“It is a very difficult path we have to tread. The council is where it wants to be and the only way anybody can do anything is at the planning stage, when the documents are there for everybody to see.”

Peter Lovett, another Friends member, said: “We want the truth. Like Peter, I’m very passionate about this. I love Shoebury Common and I think what the council wants to do will ruin it.”

Thorpe Bay councillor and Burges Estate Resident’s Association chairman Ron Woodley said a solution was needed to protect homes without spoiling the area. He added: “The need for an improved sea defence is one of necessity. It’s a question of how much of a necessity, and what to do for the method.

“There should be nothing cheap about protecting people’s lives and property, and enhancing the environment of local people and the areas they hold dear to their hearts.

“Somewhere in this tangle of options, there is a method which fits all criteria, especially relating to residents’ concerns and the cost to the council.”

Comments (3)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

7:51am Thu 19 Dec 13

Southend Andy says...

It's simple get them to sign a contract to say if no wall is built & they get flooded its down to them & them only. I bet they would still blame sbc for not building it. If all these people have to complain about is a sea wall then they a very lucky people.
It's simple get them to sign a contract to say if no wall is built & they get flooded its down to them & them only. I bet they would still blame sbc for not building it. If all these people have to complain about is a sea wall then they a very lucky people. Southend Andy

8:46am Thu 19 Dec 13

Russ13 says...

I wish these NIMBYs would STFU and just let them get on and improve the flood defences in the area.

These people are so short-sighted it's unreal!

Firstly they believe because the area isn't currently a flood risk it will never be.... or more to the point, the majority of those opposed will be dead before the flood risk affects them.

Secondly there seems to be this conspiracy theory that the only reason the council want to do this is to "lose" the earth that's been moved from the cliffs to Gunners Park. If would be far cheaper to dispose of the earth elsewhere than to construct new, more robust flood defences.

I've lived in Shoebury for most of my life, I love the area, it's not perfrect but we are very lucky to have such a mix of rural and seaside areas on our doorstep and still only be an hour or so from London.

The proposed flood defences won't be particularly pretty but in time we'll get used to them, much like we take the current sea defences for granted as part of the scenary.
I wish these NIMBYs would STFU and just let them get on and improve the flood defences in the area. These people are so short-sighted it's unreal! Firstly they believe because the area isn't currently a flood risk it will never be.... or more to the point, the majority of those opposed will be dead before the flood risk affects them. Secondly there seems to be this conspiracy theory that the only reason the council want to do this is to "lose" the earth that's been moved from the cliffs to Gunners Park. If would be far cheaper to dispose of the earth elsewhere than to construct new, more robust flood defences. I've lived in Shoebury for most of my life, I love the area, it's not perfrect but we are very lucky to have such a mix of rural and seaside areas on our doorstep and still only be an hour or so from London. The proposed flood defences won't be particularly pretty but in time we'll get used to them, much like we take the current sea defences for granted as part of the scenary. Russ13

11:25pm Thu 19 Dec 13

restless 1 says...

It's a shame the area didn't flood a few weeks back, the protesters need to open their eyes, flooding is a serious threat.
It's a shame the area didn't flood a few weeks back, the protesters need to open their eyes, flooding is a serious threat. restless 1

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree