Shoebury seawall gets the go ahead

Southend Standard: Peter Lovett, Majzoub Ali, Graham Bailey, an unamed lady and Peter Grubb Peter Lovett, Majzoub Ali, Graham Bailey, an unamed lady and Peter Grubb

A CONTROVERSIAL 7ft seawall will be built across Shoebury Common despite massive opposition from residents.

About 100 anti-seawall campaigners packed into the Southend Council chamber and shouted “shame” as councillors approved the £5.18million scheme, designed to protect more than 350 homes and businesses in Shoebury from flooding, on Wednesday.

Peter Lovett, of anti-seawall campaign group the Friends of Shoebury Common, was disillusioned after a hard-fought two-year battle against the plan, which saw more than 2,200 sign letters objection.

The 67-year-old beach hut owner, of Leitrim Avenue, Shoebury, said: “I have been expecting it ever since I started the campaign, but I’m surprised at the way they have reached their conclusion. They have ignored the public and bullied it through.”

David Norman, chairman of the cross-party group that agreed the plans after a vote of ten to four, threatened to clear the public gallery, where there was standing room only, after a woman shouted out: “Are you going to build the Berlin Wall?”

Committee members of all parties grilled the council officers behind the divisive scheme, which was opposed by more than eight out of ten respondents in a public consultation last year, but council officers assured the elected members, the scheme was the best way to meet their obligation to protect the public.

The new 1,000-yard long seawall, between Ness Road and Thorpe Bay Gardens, will protect 237 homes and 58 businesses around Ness Road, Campfield Road, Admirals Walk, Freemantle, the Towerfield Road Industrial Estate and the Garrison from storms which happen on average every 200 years at current sea levels.

This will rise to 287 homes and 71 businesses by 2062 as climate change causes sea levels to rise.

Workmen could start work on the wall and a grassy embankment against its landward side, formed using 44,000 tonnes of earth from Southend Cliff Gardens, by the autumn.

Ron Woodley, Independent councillor for Thorpe, said: “It will financially destroy Shoebury Common and the job prospects of the whole area.”

Comments (13)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

8:39am Fri 11 Apr 14

morbeous says...

And if it wasn't built you would be the first to complain to the council that they didnt do enough when your homes get flooded by the sea. So shut up or move
And if it wasn't built you would be the first to complain to the council that they didnt do enough when your homes get flooded by the sea. So shut up or move morbeous
  • Score: 3

8:40am Fri 11 Apr 14

pembury53 says...

i'd be pretty p****d if i live there, knowing my nice southerly aspect was to become nothing more than a convenient dumping ground for 44000 tons of c**p...... the fact it comes from westcliff is quite funny though, house prices need some adjustment.......
i'd be pretty p****d if i live there, knowing my nice southerly aspect was to become nothing more than a convenient dumping ground for 44000 tons of c**p...... the fact it comes from westcliff is quite funny though, house prices need some adjustment....... pembury53
  • Score: 1

8:48am Fri 11 Apr 14

ShoeburyBlue says...

Towerfield Road Industrial estate is almost a mile away from the sea. Will have to be a monster feat of engineering if the water is going to head in that far.
Towerfield Road Industrial estate is almost a mile away from the sea. Will have to be a monster feat of engineering if the water is going to head in that far. ShoeburyBlue
  • Score: 5

8:59am Fri 11 Apr 14

InTheKnowOk says...

The residents won't be there forever, the seawall will be, there to protect flooding .. That's the important thing here ..
The residents won't be there forever, the seawall will be, there to protect flooding .. That's the important thing here .. InTheKnowOk
  • Score: -2

9:31am Fri 11 Apr 14

jack-the -lad says...

This was another example of a Tory council stitch up. I don't think they will be smiling at the end of May when they will see the first signs of a new type of flood. The tide of public feeling.
This was another example of a Tory council stitch up. I don't think they will be smiling at the end of May when they will see the first signs of a new type of flood. The tide of public feeling. jack-the -lad
  • Score: 4

10:03am Fri 11 Apr 14

Howard Cháse says...

At least they have got the spelling of 'stitch' right on this banner.....
At least they have got the spelling of 'stitch' right on this banner..... Howard Cháse
  • Score: -1

10:08am Fri 11 Apr 14

shoess3 says...

I really don't get it.; the houses here are raised higher than the sea wall will be anyway. I very much doubt building a grass embankment is going to make an ounce of difference to their prices, which are measured in the millions. It will however, increase prices in desirable areas like the Garrison, where prospective buyers might be nervous of flood risk (even though the walls built by the developer would be sufficient in most circumstances). In my opinion, the reason for their objection is because these NIMBYs won't see any benefit but will have their view ever-so-slightly spoiled.
I really don't get it.; the houses here are raised higher than the sea wall will be anyway. I very much doubt building a grass embankment is going to make an ounce of difference to their prices, which are measured in the millions. It will however, increase prices in desirable areas like the Garrison, where prospective buyers might be nervous of flood risk (even though the walls built by the developer would be sufficient in most circumstances). In my opinion, the reason for their objection is because these NIMBYs won't see any benefit but will have their view ever-so-slightly spoiled. shoess3
  • Score: 8

11:19am Fri 11 Apr 14

Shoebury Shrimper says...

How on earth can Coun. Woodley say that Shoebury Common will be destroyed financially? Sounds like the usual scaremongering from the anti sea wall group. There are plenty of car parking spaces in the area that will bring money into the Council's coffers. The only business on the Common is that of one of the protest leaders, and I am sure the nearby Shorehouse pub would not like to be flooded!. Despite the new flood defence visitors will always come to the area. 99% will of course be on the promenade and beach in front of the huts. The wall will not be in their view.
How on earth can Coun. Woodley say that Shoebury Common will be destroyed financially? Sounds like the usual scaremongering from the anti sea wall group. There are plenty of car parking spaces in the area that will bring money into the Council's coffers. The only business on the Common is that of one of the protest leaders, and I am sure the nearby Shorehouse pub would not like to be flooded!. Despite the new flood defence visitors will always come to the area. 99% will of course be on the promenade and beach in front of the huts. The wall will not be in their view. Shoebury Shrimper
  • Score: -1

11:25am Fri 11 Apr 14

carnmountyouknowitmakessense says...

Once the earthen wall has been built, it'll be a nice place to sit.
Once the earthen wall has been built, it'll be a nice place to sit. carnmountyouknowitmakessense
  • Score: -2

3:39pm Fri 11 Apr 14

Nowthatsworthknowing says...

That sign is wrong again...Lower case i, in with capitals, says it all, elderly folk again, with spare time....
That sign is wrong again...Lower case i, in with capitals, says it all, elderly folk again, with spare time.... Nowthatsworthknowing
  • Score: -1

4:11pm Fri 11 Apr 14

beppo1 says...

As usual...planning is always a foregone conclusion...can't win with this tory council ( and yet people still vote for them!!!)
As usual...planning is always a foregone conclusion...can't win with this tory council ( and yet people still vote for them!!!) beppo1
  • Score: 3

5:08pm Fri 11 Apr 14

Living the La Vida Legra says...

shoess3 wrote:
I really don't get it.; the houses here are raised higher than the sea wall will be anyway. I very much doubt building a grass embankment is going to make an ounce of difference to their prices, which are measured in the millions. It will however, increase prices in desirable areas like the Garrison, where prospective buyers might be nervous of flood risk (even though the walls built by the developer would be sufficient in most circumstances). In my opinion, the reason for their objection is because these NIMBYs won't see any benefit but will have their view ever-so-slightly spoiled.
Hit the nail on the head
[quote][p][bold]shoess3[/bold] wrote: I really don't get it.; the houses here are raised higher than the sea wall will be anyway. I very much doubt building a grass embankment is going to make an ounce of difference to their prices, which are measured in the millions. It will however, increase prices in desirable areas like the Garrison, where prospective buyers might be nervous of flood risk (even though the walls built by the developer would be sufficient in most circumstances). In my opinion, the reason for their objection is because these NIMBYs won't see any benefit but will have their view ever-so-slightly spoiled.[/p][/quote]Hit the nail on the head Living the La Vida Legra
  • Score: 1

8:15am Sat 12 Apr 14

rodgdodge says...

The new ` earth bank`, slopes down to Shoebury Common Road. This will receive ` even more` rain ` run-off`. See on U tube, the flooded road. Which will happen more often, because of climate change, causing more heavy rainfall events!!
The new ` earth bank`, slopes down to Shoebury Common Road. This will receive ` even more` rain ` run-off`. See on U tube, the flooded road. Which will happen more often, because of climate change, causing more heavy rainfall events!! rodgdodge
  • Score: -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