Wood you want this?

Echo: Campaigners with the mock up seawall Campaigners with the mock up seawall

CAMPAIGNERS against plans for a controversial seawall put up their own version to show people how it could look.

The Friends of Shoebury Common built its own 7ft mock-up out of chipboard around Uncle Tom’s Cabin yesterday, to give a glimpse at how big the proposed wall might be.

Southend Council wants to build the seawall to protect 500 homes across Shoebury Common from flooding, despite more than 80 per cent of residents opposing the plan.

Critics claim the wall will block sea views and used the chipboard mock-up to demonstrate.

Peter Lovett, 67, a member of the friends group, of Leitrim Avenue, Shoebury, said: “From my point of view, even we have been shocked at how big it is.

“We have at last been able to show the public what this wall is actually going to look like.”

Fellow member Peter Grubb, who runs Uncle Tom’s Cabin, where the mock up was situated, said: “It’s to illustrate the visual impact of the wall.

“A lot of people come in to see the plans we have displayed, but they don’t know what they are looking at.”

Southend Council expects to submit a planning application for the seawall in the next fewweeks.

The wall will come within 4m of Uncle Tom’s Cabin and block views of nearby beach huts, but although made of steel, wood panelling will soften its apperance.

Pedestrians will be able to access the seafront via steps and a ramp to the east of Uncle Tom’s Cabin.

People at the seafront yesterday were against the wall being built.

Beach hut owner Ursula Ellis, 71, of Park Gardens, Hawkwell, said: “I thought this was supposed to be a democracy, 86 per cent of people were against it and the council still wants to go ahead.”

Fellow beach hut owner Ken Fosvery, 82, of Fortescue Chase, Thorpe Bay, said: “It’s just absolutelywasting council money.

"It’s just not needed.”

Southend Council said the seawall plan was likely to be decided on in the spring.

Comments (46)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

4:04pm Tue 11 Feb 14

You'dfeelbetterforknowingthat says...

Make a fantastic blank canvas for some modern works of art, well done.
Make a fantastic blank canvas for some modern works of art, well done. You'dfeelbetterforknowingthat
  • Score: 9

4:08pm Tue 11 Feb 14

John T Pharro says...

Think there are thousands of people on the Somerset levels and along the Thames near Chertsey would welcome something being done to prevent flooding. Trust all those objecting actually live in the area that is being protected by this, otherwise what is it to do with them?
Think there are thousands of people on the Somerset levels and along the Thames near Chertsey would welcome something being done to prevent flooding. Trust all those objecting actually live in the area that is being protected by this, otherwise what is it to do with them? John T Pharro
  • Score: 39

4:18pm Tue 11 Feb 14

Jack222 says...

I dont care how it looks; the relevant question is does it work?
I dont care how it looks; the relevant question is does it work? Jack222
  • Score: 32

4:22pm Tue 11 Feb 14

Bosniavet says...

If the seawall isn't built & homes/business are flooded as a result, it will be interesting tosee how many of those protesting now would be demanding that SBC do something to help them......
If the seawall isn't built & homes/business are flooded as a result, it will be interesting tosee how many of those protesting now would be demanding that SBC do something to help them...... Bosniavet
  • Score: 40

4:26pm Tue 11 Feb 14

shoeburyden says...

John T Pharro wrote:
Think there are thousands of people on the Somerset levels and along the Thames near Chertsey would welcome something being done to prevent flooding. Trust all those objecting actually live in the area that is being protected by this, otherwise what is it to do with them?
build it where it is needed
[quote][p][bold]John T Pharro[/bold] wrote: Think there are thousands of people on the Somerset levels and along the Thames near Chertsey would welcome something being done to prevent flooding. Trust all those objecting actually live in the area that is being protected by this, otherwise what is it to do with them?[/p][/quote]build it where it is needed shoeburyden
  • Score: 1

4:32pm Tue 11 Feb 14

Howard Cháse says...

Bosniavet wrote:
If the seawall isn't built & homes/business are flooded as a result, it will be interesting tosee how many of those protesting now would be demanding that SBC do something to help them......
That would be interesting.
[quote][p][bold]Bosniavet[/bold] wrote: If the seawall isn't built & homes/business are flooded as a result, it will be interesting tosee how many of those protesting now would be demanding that SBC do something to help them......[/p][/quote]That would be interesting. Howard Cháse
  • Score: 6

4:38pm Tue 11 Feb 14

Dougy161 says...

They're going to have a great view when their house becomes part of the estuary.
They're going to have a great view when their house becomes part of the estuary. Dougy161
  • Score: 18

4:39pm Tue 11 Feb 14

the25man says...

86% of which people don't want it. I wasn't asked how many others were asked.
If it's not built then it's not just those locally that get flooded.
Go to Canvey to see their sea defences and although it's there people still buy houses close by.
Yes it will alter the out look but after awhile people will accept it
86% of which people don't want it. I wasn't asked how many others were asked. If it's not built then it's not just those locally that get flooded. Go to Canvey to see their sea defences and although it's there people still buy houses close by. Yes it will alter the out look but after awhile people will accept it the25man
  • Score: 12

4:45pm Tue 11 Feb 14

angels,around says...

I'd rather a great big wall than have my house flooded like the people living in somerset. wonder if these people have thought long and hard what they prefer, sea views or a house that wont be flooded. i know what id choose. if i want to see the sea that badly id take a walk down there.
I'd rather a great big wall than have my house flooded like the people living in somerset. wonder if these people have thought long and hard what they prefer, sea views or a house that wont be flooded. i know what id choose. if i want to see the sea that badly id take a walk down there. angels,around
  • Score: 25

5:09pm Tue 11 Feb 14

Southend Andy says...

Let them flood & then we will see them all rant & rave about how SBC didn't do, enough to help them. We all know that's what they will do. Next question is did they get planing permission to build this wall, if .not I hope it gets taken down & the cost charged to the people who built it. The people who don't want this wall but want a different one never say there wall is more expensive & won't last as long.
Let them flood & then we will see them all rant & rave about how SBC didn't do, enough to help them. We all know that's what they will do. Next question is did they get planing permission to build this wall, if .not I hope it gets taken down & the cost charged to the people who built it. The people who don't want this wall but want a different one never say there wall is more expensive & won't last as long. Southend Andy
  • Score: 11

5:21pm Tue 11 Feb 14

Kursaal76 says...

if they get there way and don't build the sea wall i hope there homes flood
if they get there way and don't build the sea wall i hope there homes flood Kursaal76
  • Score: 0

5:34pm Tue 11 Feb 14

John Bull 40 says...

Was that 80% of the people in the borough? or 80% of the protesters?
Was that 80% of the people in the borough? or 80% of the protesters? John Bull 40
  • Score: 11

5:38pm Tue 11 Feb 14

angels,around says...

Southend Andy wrote:
Let them flood & then we will see them all rant & rave about how SBC didn't do, enough to help them. We all know that's what they will do. Next question is did they get planing permission to build this wall, if .not I hope it gets taken down & the cost charged to the people who built it. The people who don't want this wall but want a different one never say there wall is more expensive & won't last as long.
Thats true. Lets hope SBC think the same thing. Only thing is letting their houses flood will allow innocent peoples homes to be flooded in the process. If the wall doesnt go up I'll be sending my bill to them if i get flooded.
[quote][p][bold]Southend Andy[/bold] wrote: Let them flood & then we will see them all rant & rave about how SBC didn't do, enough to help them. We all know that's what they will do. Next question is did they get planing permission to build this wall, if .not I hope it gets taken down & the cost charged to the people who built it. The people who don't want this wall but want a different one never say there wall is more expensive & won't last as long.[/p][/quote]Thats true. Lets hope SBC think the same thing. Only thing is letting their houses flood will allow innocent peoples homes to be flooded in the process. If the wall doesnt go up I'll be sending my bill to them if i get flooded. angels,around
  • Score: 10

5:44pm Tue 11 Feb 14

You'dfeelbetterforknowingthat says...

Flood defences, will never be decided by a bunch of anoraks, with too little to do
Flood defences, will never be decided by a bunch of anoraks, with too little to do You'dfeelbetterforknowingthat
  • Score: 7

6:45pm Tue 11 Feb 14

Howard Cháse says...

That big gap at the bottom won't stop much.....
That big gap at the bottom won't stop much..... Howard Cháse
  • Score: 8

6:51pm Tue 11 Feb 14

Joe Clark says...

So did they get planning permission to put that wooden wall up?

Why did they only do that bit and why not the section that will be hidden behind a grass bank?

Why do they not ask those directly in danger of being flooded instead of anyone surely those who would be directly effected should be the first and most important people to ask if they want the wall, anyone outside the flood zone should not have a say as it is NOT them in danger, the only people effected by any loss of view will be those driving cars along the road surely they should be watching the road in front of them and NOT the view to the side.

What is more important, to save lives or save the view, you can't do both what would YOU choose.

Me I would rather save lives then the view from the road.
So did they get planning permission to put that wooden wall up? Why did they only do that bit and why not the section that will be hidden behind a grass bank? Why do they not ask those directly in danger of being flooded instead of anyone surely those who would be directly effected should be the first and most important people to ask if they want the wall, anyone outside the flood zone should not have a say as it is NOT them in danger, the only people effected by any loss of view will be those driving cars along the road surely they should be watching the road in front of them and NOT the view to the side. What is more important, to save lives or save the view, you can't do both what would YOU choose. Me I would rather save lives then the view from the road. Joe Clark
  • Score: 13

7:10pm Tue 11 Feb 14

Diannah says...

Maybe they would rather believe in the powers of King Canute!
Maybe they would rather believe in the powers of King Canute! Diannah
  • Score: 5

7:24pm Tue 11 Feb 14

MilesBond says...

I can see why they're not happy; that is a shambolic effort of a sea wall, clearly made out of timber and a huge gap at the bottom! It will rot in no time. They clearly need something far more substantial constructed from concrete.

And the ones saying it will spoil their view; I assume they are safely above the flood line? and happy to watch those less fortunate disappear under the sea. Nice!
I can see why they're not happy; that is a shambolic effort of a sea wall, clearly made out of timber and a huge gap at the bottom! It will rot in no time. They clearly need something far more substantial constructed from concrete. And the ones saying it will spoil their view; I assume they are safely above the flood line? and happy to watch those less fortunate disappear under the sea. Nice! MilesBond
  • Score: 9

7:27pm Tue 11 Feb 14

sensiblelos says...

Words fail me, if i could write expletives i would!

Have those NIMBYS not seen whats happening all around them! thousands of people in this country affected by floods and rain, lives and business destroyed, people homeless because of the lack of flood defences...

The pictures shows the area totally dry and these people are busy building fake chipboard walls , i wonder how those that have been devastated would feel looking at these pathetic people complaining about the lack of view! when those in the west country and Thames have lost their homes and businesses. They really have nothing to complain about do they sitting in their nice warm dry homes or businesses,.

If it was up to me i would forget building the wall for them, let them flood and spend the money where it deserves to be spent because these people do not deserve any assistance especially when it floods and it will ....

There are those who need help and deserve assistance-First on the environment agency/council list of people not to assist when it floods should be Mr Grubb get a life or move!
Words fail me, if i could write expletives i would! Have those NIMBYS not seen whats happening all around them! thousands of people in this country affected by floods and rain, lives and business destroyed, people homeless because of the lack of flood defences... The pictures shows the area totally dry and these people are busy building fake chipboard walls , i wonder how those that have been devastated would feel looking at these pathetic people complaining about the lack of view! when those in the west country and Thames have lost their homes and businesses. They really have nothing to complain about do they sitting in their nice warm dry homes or businesses,. If it was up to me i would forget building the wall for them, let them flood and spend the money where it deserves to be spent because these people do not deserve any assistance especially when it floods and it will .... There are those who need help and deserve assistance-First on the environment agency/council list of people not to assist when it floods should be Mr Grubb get a life or move! sensiblelos
  • Score: -4

8:13pm Tue 11 Feb 14

Bernard Fatsack says...

MilesBond wrote:
I can see why they're not happy; that is a shambolic effort of a sea wall, clearly made out of timber and a huge gap at the bottom! It will rot in no time. They clearly need something far more substantial constructed from concrete.

And the ones saying it will spoil their view; I assume they are safely above the flood line? and happy to watch those less fortunate disappear under the sea. Nice!
I agree what a shoddy effort. They obviously like living dangerously........I wouldnt want my home a wash with raw sewage and stools,soiled toilet paper and urine and tonnes of filthy water........poor sods in Somerset. I hope this government steps up at last and demonstrates some spine....
[quote][p][bold]MilesBond[/bold] wrote: I can see why they're not happy; that is a shambolic effort of a sea wall, clearly made out of timber and a huge gap at the bottom! It will rot in no time. They clearly need something far more substantial constructed from concrete. And the ones saying it will spoil their view; I assume they are safely above the flood line? and happy to watch those less fortunate disappear under the sea. Nice![/p][/quote]I agree what a shoddy effort. They obviously like living dangerously........I wouldnt want my home a wash with raw sewage and stools,soiled toilet paper and urine and tonnes of filthy water........poor sods in Somerset. I hope this government steps up at last and demonstrates some spine.... Bernard Fatsack
  • Score: 8

8:22pm Tue 11 Feb 14

MilesBond says...

Bernard Fatsack wrote:
MilesBond wrote:
I can see why they're not happy; that is a shambolic effort of a sea wall, clearly made out of timber and a huge gap at the bottom! It will rot in no time. They clearly need something far more substantial constructed from concrete.

And the ones saying it will spoil their view; I assume they are safely above the flood line? and happy to watch those less fortunate disappear under the sea. Nice!
I agree what a shoddy effort. They obviously like living dangerously........I wouldnt want my home a wash with raw sewage and stools,soiled toilet paper and urine and tonnes of filthy water........poor sods in Somerset. I hope this government steps up at last and demonstrates some spine....
You've paddled down at that beach I see lol
[quote][p][bold]Bernard Fatsack[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]MilesBond[/bold] wrote: I can see why they're not happy; that is a shambolic effort of a sea wall, clearly made out of timber and a huge gap at the bottom! It will rot in no time. They clearly need something far more substantial constructed from concrete. And the ones saying it will spoil their view; I assume they are safely above the flood line? and happy to watch those less fortunate disappear under the sea. Nice![/p][/quote]I agree what a shoddy effort. They obviously like living dangerously........I wouldnt want my home a wash with raw sewage and stools,soiled toilet paper and urine and tonnes of filthy water........poor sods in Somerset. I hope this government steps up at last and demonstrates some spine....[/p][/quote]You've paddled down at that beach I see lol MilesBond
  • Score: -1

8:39pm Tue 11 Feb 14

robb789 says...

Perfect - get the van round and get this up to South West London sharpish.
Perfect - get the van round and get this up to South West London sharpish. robb789
  • Score: 3

8:41pm Tue 11 Feb 14

DogsMessInLeigh says...

Jack222 wrote:
I dont care how it looks; the relevant question is does it work?
doubt it, when the water comes it will make the chipboard swell up and eventually it will break-up and the water will have a free rein.
[quote][p][bold]Jack222[/bold] wrote: I dont care how it looks; the relevant question is does it work?[/p][/quote]doubt it, when the water comes it will make the chipboard swell up and eventually it will break-up and the water will have a free rein. DogsMessInLeigh
  • Score: 0

9:51pm Tue 11 Feb 14

Nebs says...

MilesBond wrote:
Bernard Fatsack wrote:
MilesBond wrote:
I can see why they're not happy; that is a shambolic effort of a sea wall, clearly made out of timber and a huge gap at the bottom! It will rot in no time. They clearly need something far more substantial constructed from concrete.

And the ones saying it will spoil their view; I assume they are safely above the flood line? and happy to watch those less fortunate disappear under the sea. Nice!
I agree what a shoddy effort. They obviously like living dangerously........I wouldnt want my home a wash with raw sewage and stools,soiled toilet paper and urine and tonnes of filthy water........poor sods in Somerset. I hope this government steps up at last and demonstrates some spine....
You've paddled down at that beach I see lol
You don't paddle, you just go through the motions.
[quote][p][bold]MilesBond[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Bernard Fatsack[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]MilesBond[/bold] wrote: I can see why they're not happy; that is a shambolic effort of a sea wall, clearly made out of timber and a huge gap at the bottom! It will rot in no time. They clearly need something far more substantial constructed from concrete. And the ones saying it will spoil their view; I assume they are safely above the flood line? and happy to watch those less fortunate disappear under the sea. Nice![/p][/quote]I agree what a shoddy effort. They obviously like living dangerously........I wouldnt want my home a wash with raw sewage and stools,soiled toilet paper and urine and tonnes of filthy water........poor sods in Somerset. I hope this government steps up at last and demonstrates some spine....[/p][/quote]You've paddled down at that beach I see lol[/p][/quote]You don't paddle, you just go through the motions. Nebs
  • Score: 15

10:09pm Tue 11 Feb 14

jayman says...

It will only work if the entire sea wall defences are at the same hight and specification.

low lying areas of shoeburyness are just as at threat from the river roach/the middleway/potton creek as they are from the Thames estuary.

funny thing about sea water levels is that they are equal in hight to all areas, relative to the tide at that location, at that time.

In summery. This bit of sea wall is an expensive load of bo11ocks which has been dreamed up by Walter mitty types, semi-corrupt officials and a handful of part time politicians. I thought everyone would have understood by now that SBC have no one single clue as demonstrated when they dumped several tons of sand (as a sea defence!) on the foreshore several years ago. The consultant on that job must have taken the 'sand dynamics' spreadsheet with him along with all the cash he needed to deposit in the bank.
It will only work if the entire sea wall defences are at the same hight and specification. low lying areas of shoeburyness are just as at threat from the river roach/the middleway/potton creek as they are from the Thames estuary. funny thing about sea water levels is that they are equal in hight to all areas, relative to the tide at that location, at that time. In summery. This bit of sea wall is an expensive load of bo11ocks which has been dreamed up by Walter mitty types, semi-corrupt officials and a handful of part time politicians. I thought everyone would have understood by now that SBC have no one single clue as demonstrated when they dumped several tons of sand (as a sea defence!) on the foreshore several years ago. The consultant on that job must have taken the 'sand dynamics' spreadsheet with him along with all the cash he needed to deposit in the bank. jayman
  • Score: 2

11:15pm Tue 11 Feb 14

sensiblelos says...

jayman wrote:
It will only work if the entire sea wall defences are at the same hight and specification.

low lying areas of shoeburyness are just as at threat from the river roach/the middleway/potton creek as they are from the Thames estuary.

funny thing about sea water levels is that they are equal in hight to all areas, relative to the tide at that location, at that time.

In summery. This bit of sea wall is an expensive load of bo11ocks which has been dreamed up by Walter mitty types, semi-corrupt officials and a handful of part time politicians. I thought everyone would have understood by now that SBC have no one single clue as demonstrated when they dumped several tons of sand (as a sea defence!) on the foreshore several years ago. The consultant on that job must have taken the 'sand dynamics' spreadsheet with him along with all the cash he needed to deposit in the bank.
i say to the council/environment agency..dont build it let em flood......spend the money elsewhere where people will appreciate it.....
[quote][p][bold]jayman[/bold] wrote: It will only work if the entire sea wall defences are at the same hight and specification. low lying areas of shoeburyness are just as at threat from the river roach/the middleway/potton creek as they are from the Thames estuary. funny thing about sea water levels is that they are equal in hight to all areas, relative to the tide at that location, at that time. In summery. This bit of sea wall is an expensive load of bo11ocks which has been dreamed up by Walter mitty types, semi-corrupt officials and a handful of part time politicians. I thought everyone would have understood by now that SBC have no one single clue as demonstrated when they dumped several tons of sand (as a sea defence!) on the foreshore several years ago. The consultant on that job must have taken the 'sand dynamics' spreadsheet with him along with all the cash he needed to deposit in the bank.[/p][/quote]i say to the council/environment agency..dont build it let em flood......spend the money elsewhere where people will appreciate it..... sensiblelos
  • Score: -1

7:09am Wed 12 Feb 14

Happy Chickie says...

sensiblelos wrote:
Words fail me, if i could write expletives i would!

Have those NIMBYS not seen whats happening all around them! thousands of people in this country affected by floods and rain, lives and business destroyed, people homeless because of the lack of flood defences...

The pictures shows the area totally dry and these people are busy building fake chipboard walls , i wonder how those that have been devastated would feel looking at these pathetic people complaining about the lack of view! when those in the west country and Thames have lost their homes and businesses. They really have nothing to complain about do they sitting in their nice warm dry homes or businesses,.

If it was up to me i would forget building the wall for them, let them flood and spend the money where it deserves to be spent because these people do not deserve any assistance especially when it floods and it will ....

There are those who need help and deserve assistance-First on the environment agency/council list of people not to assist when it floods should be Mr Grubb get a life or move!
Exactly. These will be the first ones screaming their heads off wanting help if their homes flood.
[quote][p][bold]sensiblelos[/bold] wrote: Words fail me, if i could write expletives i would! Have those NIMBYS not seen whats happening all around them! thousands of people in this country affected by floods and rain, lives and business destroyed, people homeless because of the lack of flood defences... The pictures shows the area totally dry and these people are busy building fake chipboard walls , i wonder how those that have been devastated would feel looking at these pathetic people complaining about the lack of view! when those in the west country and Thames have lost their homes and businesses. They really have nothing to complain about do they sitting in their nice warm dry homes or businesses,. If it was up to me i would forget building the wall for them, let them flood and spend the money where it deserves to be spent because these people do not deserve any assistance especially when it floods and it will .... There are those who need help and deserve assistance-First on the environment agency/council list of people not to assist when it floods should be Mr Grubb get a life or move![/p][/quote]Exactly. These will be the first ones screaming their heads off wanting help if their homes flood. Happy Chickie
  • Score: 12

9:15am Wed 12 Feb 14

jayman says...

sensiblelos wrote:
jayman wrote:
It will only work if the entire sea wall defences are at the same hight and specification.

low lying areas of shoeburyness are just as at threat from the river roach/the middleway/potton creek as they are from the Thames estuary.

funny thing about sea water levels is that they are equal in hight to all areas, relative to the tide at that location, at that time.

In summery. This bit of sea wall is an expensive load of bo11ocks which has been dreamed up by Walter mitty types, semi-corrupt officials and a handful of part time politicians. I thought everyone would have understood by now that SBC have no one single clue as demonstrated when they dumped several tons of sand (as a sea defence!) on the foreshore several years ago. The consultant on that job must have taken the 'sand dynamics' spreadsheet with him along with all the cash he needed to deposit in the bank.
i say to the council/environment agency..dont build it let em flood......spend the money elsewhere where people will appreciate it.....
oh yes... would that be the same environment agency that didn't dredge the rivers of the Somerset levels? and would that be the same council that has spent a million pounds +/- on consultants to plan the proposed sea wall in the first place? despite the fact that there is already a state owned consultancy firm that is supposed to 'consult' on such matters AKA 'the environment agency'

on another note. I find it odd that the appropriate material to be used in sea wall construction is less the three meters below the terrain of south Essex, It's abundant, its been used thought history as a sea defence material and its cheep and easy to use. its called 'London clay'.
[quote][p][bold]sensiblelos[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]jayman[/bold] wrote: It will only work if the entire sea wall defences are at the same hight and specification. low lying areas of shoeburyness are just as at threat from the river roach/the middleway/potton creek as they are from the Thames estuary. funny thing about sea water levels is that they are equal in hight to all areas, relative to the tide at that location, at that time. In summery. This bit of sea wall is an expensive load of bo11ocks which has been dreamed up by Walter mitty types, semi-corrupt officials and a handful of part time politicians. I thought everyone would have understood by now that SBC have no one single clue as demonstrated when they dumped several tons of sand (as a sea defence!) on the foreshore several years ago. The consultant on that job must have taken the 'sand dynamics' spreadsheet with him along with all the cash he needed to deposit in the bank.[/p][/quote]i say to the council/environment agency..dont build it let em flood......spend the money elsewhere where people will appreciate it.....[/p][/quote]oh yes... would that be the same environment agency that didn't dredge the rivers of the Somerset levels? and would that be the same council that has spent a million pounds +/- on consultants to plan the proposed sea wall in the first place? despite the fact that there is already a state owned consultancy firm that is supposed to 'consult' on such matters AKA 'the environment agency' on another note. I find it odd that the appropriate material to be used in sea wall construction is less the three meters below the terrain of south Essex, It's abundant, its been used thought history as a sea defence material and its cheep and easy to use. its called 'London clay'. jayman
  • Score: 5

9:57am Wed 12 Feb 14

TheaWells says...

Bernard Fatsack wrote:
MilesBond wrote:
I can see why they're not happy; that is a shambolic effort of a sea wall, clearly made out of timber and a huge gap at the bottom! It will rot in no time. They clearly need something far more substantial constructed from concrete.

And the ones saying it will spoil their view; I assume they are safely above the flood line? and happy to watch those less fortunate disappear under the sea. Nice!
I agree what a shoddy effort. They obviously like living dangerously........I wouldnt want my home a wash with raw sewage and stools,soiled toilet paper and urine and tonnes of filthy water........poor sods in Somerset. I hope this government steps up at last and demonstrates some spine....
Seriously you two?

You think the image above shows the ACTUAL sea wall?

face/palm
[quote][p][bold]Bernard Fatsack[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]MilesBond[/bold] wrote: I can see why they're not happy; that is a shambolic effort of a sea wall, clearly made out of timber and a huge gap at the bottom! It will rot in no time. They clearly need something far more substantial constructed from concrete. And the ones saying it will spoil their view; I assume they are safely above the flood line? and happy to watch those less fortunate disappear under the sea. Nice![/p][/quote]I agree what a shoddy effort. They obviously like living dangerously........I wouldnt want my home a wash with raw sewage and stools,soiled toilet paper and urine and tonnes of filthy water........poor sods in Somerset. I hope this government steps up at last and demonstrates some spine....[/p][/quote]Seriously you two? You think the image above shows the ACTUAL sea wall? face/palm TheaWells
  • Score: 3

10:17am Wed 12 Feb 14

Shoebury Voice says...

I am fed up with reading about these protesters, most have beach huts or live on high ground in Leitrim Avenue. All they are concerned about is their sheds or the loss of view, never mind the poor sods who could be flooded out
I am fed up with reading about these protesters, most have beach huts or live on high ground in Leitrim Avenue. All they are concerned about is their sheds or the loss of view, never mind the poor sods who could be flooded out Shoebury Voice
  • Score: 22

10:21am Wed 12 Feb 14

TheaWells says...

"Southend Council wants to build the seawall to protect 500 homes across Shoebury Common from flooding, despite more than 80 per cent of residents opposing the plan. "

hang on.... 80% of the 500 oppose?

or is that 80% of people who have the proposed wall in their view from their homes or cafe seat? or 80% of Southend residents?

Who are the 80%? Surely it's up to the 500 to say yay or nay to protection... if in deed 80% of the 500 oppose then fair enough, don't erect the wall and mark their insurance accordingly.
"Southend Council wants to build the seawall to protect 500 homes across Shoebury Common from flooding, despite more than 80 per cent of residents opposing the plan. " hang on.... 80% of the 500 oppose? or is that 80% of people who have the proposed wall in their view from their homes or cafe seat? or 80% of Southend residents? Who are the 80%? Surely it's up to the 500 to say yay or nay to protection... if in deed 80% of the 500 oppose then fair enough, don't erect the wall and mark their insurance accordingly. TheaWells
  • Score: 7

11:27am Wed 12 Feb 14

Shoeburylass says...

Is there a map available of the areas that are liable to flooding if this wall isn't built? I imagine it must be the areas to the east of where the wall is proposed, as the houses on the Thorpe and Maplin estates appear to be on higher ground. Has anyone asked the people who will actually be potentially protected by the wall what they think, or is it just the residents of Thorpe Bay who don't want their sea views blocked?
Is there a map available of the areas that are liable to flooding if this wall isn't built? I imagine it must be the areas to the east of where the wall is proposed, as the houses on the Thorpe and Maplin estates appear to be on higher ground. Has anyone asked the people who will actually be potentially protected by the wall what they think, or is it just the residents of Thorpe Bay who don't want their sea views blocked? Shoeburylass
  • Score: 8

1:25pm Wed 12 Feb 14

Nelly99 says...

I,ve made this point before but if that area isn't flooded now after the worst rain for 300 years it ain't gonna! Also, there are no houses there. Thorpe Bay Gardens are the nearest and they are a good 30 feet higher than that construction.
I,ve made this point before but if that area isn't flooded now after the worst rain for 300 years it ain't gonna! Also, there are no houses there. Thorpe Bay Gardens are the nearest and they are a good 30 feet higher than that construction. Nelly99
  • Score: 2

1:35pm Wed 12 Feb 14

angels,around says...

TheaWells wrote:
Bernard Fatsack wrote:
MilesBond wrote:
I can see why they're not happy; that is a shambolic effort of a sea wall, clearly made out of timber and a huge gap at the bottom! It will rot in no time. They clearly need something far more substantial constructed from concrete.

And the ones saying it will spoil their view; I assume they are safely above the flood line? and happy to watch those less fortunate disappear under the sea. Nice!
I agree what a shoddy effort. They obviously like living dangerously........I wouldnt want my home a wash with raw sewage and stools,soiled toilet paper and urine and tonnes of filthy water........poor sods in Somerset. I hope this government steps up at last and demonstrates some spine....
Seriously you two?

You think the image above shows the ACTUAL sea wall?

face/palm
they are being sarcastic lol
[quote][p][bold]TheaWells[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Bernard Fatsack[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]MilesBond[/bold] wrote: I can see why they're not happy; that is a shambolic effort of a sea wall, clearly made out of timber and a huge gap at the bottom! It will rot in no time. They clearly need something far more substantial constructed from concrete. And the ones saying it will spoil their view; I assume they are safely above the flood line? and happy to watch those less fortunate disappear under the sea. Nice![/p][/quote]I agree what a shoddy effort. They obviously like living dangerously........I wouldnt want my home a wash with raw sewage and stools,soiled toilet paper and urine and tonnes of filthy water........poor sods in Somerset. I hope this government steps up at last and demonstrates some spine....[/p][/quote]Seriously you two? You think the image above shows the ACTUAL sea wall? face/palm[/p][/quote]they are being sarcastic lol angels,around
  • Score: 2

3:46pm Wed 12 Feb 14

TheaWells says...

oh! in that case I shall chuckle ... lol
oh! in that case I shall chuckle ... lol TheaWells
  • Score: 3

5:45pm Wed 12 Feb 14

Joe Clark says...

As I and others have said, survey the 500 households that are at risk, ask one simple question Do you want the new seawall to protect your home Yes or No.
Not one other person has a say if the majority say yes it gets built if they say no it does not get built.

Those outside the risk zone are safe those inside are not, why should a majority who are not at risk put the minority in danger.

Lives of Views what is kore important to you.
As I and others have said, survey the 500 households that are at risk, ask one simple question Do you want the new seawall to protect your home Yes or No. Not one other person has a say if the majority say yes it gets built if they say no it does not get built. Those outside the risk zone are safe those inside are not, why should a majority who are not at risk put the minority in danger. Lives of Views what is kore important to you. Joe Clark
  • Score: 0

7:13pm Wed 12 Feb 14

sensiblelos says...

jayman wrote:
sensiblelos wrote:
jayman wrote:
It will only work if the entire sea wall defences are at the same hight and specification.

low lying areas of shoeburyness are just as at threat from the river roach/the middleway/potton creek as they are from the Thames estuary.

funny thing about sea water levels is that they are equal in hight to all areas, relative to the tide at that location, at that time.

In summery. This bit of sea wall is an expensive load of bo11ocks which has been dreamed up by Walter mitty types, semi-corrupt officials and a handful of part time politicians. I thought everyone would have understood by now that SBC have no one single clue as demonstrated when they dumped several tons of sand (as a sea defence!) on the foreshore several years ago. The consultant on that job must have taken the 'sand dynamics' spreadsheet with him along with all the cash he needed to deposit in the bank.
i say to the council/environment agency..dont build it let em flood......spend the money elsewhere where people will appreciate it.....
oh yes... would that be the same environment agency that didn't dredge the rivers of the Somerset levels? and would that be the same council that has spent a million pounds +/- on consultants to plan the proposed sea wall in the first place? despite the fact that there is already a state owned consultancy firm that is supposed to 'consult' on such matters AKA 'the environment agency'

on another note. I find it odd that the appropriate material to be used in sea wall construction is less the three meters below the terrain of south Essex, It's abundant, its been used thought history as a sea defence material and its cheep and easy to use. its called 'London clay'.
jayaman....you're a serial winger nobody takes any notice of you, look at the big picture if you dare.... thousands of people affected and all you continue to talk loud but say nothing....PLEASE environment agency take notice of these wingers and the handful of people in the photo, dont build the sea wall save the taxpayers money and build a sea wall where it is wanted, then when these serial wingers complain about being flooded we can then just refer back to their idiotic complaints and we can say "i told you so"....
[quote][p][bold]jayman[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]sensiblelos[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]jayman[/bold] wrote: It will only work if the entire sea wall defences are at the same hight and specification. low lying areas of shoeburyness are just as at threat from the river roach/the middleway/potton creek as they are from the Thames estuary. funny thing about sea water levels is that they are equal in hight to all areas, relative to the tide at that location, at that time. In summery. This bit of sea wall is an expensive load of bo11ocks which has been dreamed up by Walter mitty types, semi-corrupt officials and a handful of part time politicians. I thought everyone would have understood by now that SBC have no one single clue as demonstrated when they dumped several tons of sand (as a sea defence!) on the foreshore several years ago. The consultant on that job must have taken the 'sand dynamics' spreadsheet with him along with all the cash he needed to deposit in the bank.[/p][/quote]i say to the council/environment agency..dont build it let em flood......spend the money elsewhere where people will appreciate it.....[/p][/quote]oh yes... would that be the same environment agency that didn't dredge the rivers of the Somerset levels? and would that be the same council that has spent a million pounds +/- on consultants to plan the proposed sea wall in the first place? despite the fact that there is already a state owned consultancy firm that is supposed to 'consult' on such matters AKA 'the environment agency' on another note. I find it odd that the appropriate material to be used in sea wall construction is less the three meters below the terrain of south Essex, It's abundant, its been used thought history as a sea defence material and its cheep and easy to use. its called 'London clay'.[/p][/quote]jayaman....you're a serial winger nobody takes any notice of you, look at the big picture if you dare.... thousands of people affected and all you continue to talk loud but say nothing....PLEASE environment agency take notice of these wingers and the handful of people in the photo, dont build the sea wall save the taxpayers money and build a sea wall where it is wanted, then when these serial wingers complain about being flooded we can then just refer back to their idiotic complaints and we can say "i told you so".... sensiblelos
  • Score: -5

7:15pm Wed 12 Feb 14

geriatric says...

well done Friends of Shoebury Common. At least you know what you are talking about!
well done Friends of Shoebury Common. At least you know what you are talking about! geriatric
  • Score: -1

9:03pm Wed 12 Feb 14

jayman says...

sensiblelos wrote:
jayman wrote:
sensiblelos wrote:
jayman wrote:
It will only work if the entire sea wall defences are at the same hight and specification.

low lying areas of shoeburyness are just as at threat from the river roach/the middleway/potton creek as they are from the Thames estuary.

funny thing about sea water levels is that they are equal in hight to all areas, relative to the tide at that location, at that time.

In summery. This bit of sea wall is an expensive load of bo11ocks which has been dreamed up by Walter mitty types, semi-corrupt officials and a handful of part time politicians. I thought everyone would have understood by now that SBC have no one single clue as demonstrated when they dumped several tons of sand (as a sea defence!) on the foreshore several years ago. The consultant on that job must have taken the 'sand dynamics' spreadsheet with him along with all the cash he needed to deposit in the bank.
i say to the council/environment agency..dont build it let em flood......spend the money elsewhere where people will appreciate it.....
oh yes... would that be the same environment agency that didn't dredge the rivers of the Somerset levels? and would that be the same council that has spent a million pounds +/- on consultants to plan the proposed sea wall in the first place? despite the fact that there is already a state owned consultancy firm that is supposed to 'consult' on such matters AKA 'the environment agency'

on another note. I find it odd that the appropriate material to be used in sea wall construction is less the three meters below the terrain of south Essex, It's abundant, its been used thought history as a sea defence material and its cheep and easy to use. its called 'London clay'.
jayaman....you're a serial winger nobody takes any notice of you, look at the big picture if you dare.... thousands of people affected and all you continue to talk loud but say nothing....PLEASE environment agency take notice of these wingers and the handful of people in the photo, dont build the sea wall save the taxpayers money and build a sea wall where it is wanted, then when these serial wingers complain about being flooded we can then just refer back to their idiotic complaints and we can say "i told you so"....
If you class the application of 'basic common sense', scientific observation and the noted occurrence of ill-advised/corrupt decision making and questionable allocation and spending of money from the public purse to date on sea deference projects. Allow me to fill you with the sense of pride that I hold at challenging the above.

I do enjoy your use of impuissant and weightless methods at diminishing the evidence in a simplistic way, but I do wish you would bring something to the party next time by way of highlighting any strengths that you, yourself posses that remain 'as yet' unnoticed, before you proceed to say someone is a 'winger'. might I suggest (in the interests of variety) that you use some 'evidence' in a well rounded and holistic way. alternatively you could

A, extract a small sample of my text and mount a singular argument based on out-of-context, counter argument misrepresentation

or

B, continue to use tactile and apathetic dismissal of someone else's opinion.

oh.. And the USE of angry CAPITAL LETTERS only furthers your argument in the same way as a toddler displays its displeasure to a calm parent..
[quote][p][bold]sensiblelos[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]jayman[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]sensiblelos[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]jayman[/bold] wrote: It will only work if the entire sea wall defences are at the same hight and specification. low lying areas of shoeburyness are just as at threat from the river roach/the middleway/potton creek as they are from the Thames estuary. funny thing about sea water levels is that they are equal in hight to all areas, relative to the tide at that location, at that time. In summery. This bit of sea wall is an expensive load of bo11ocks which has been dreamed up by Walter mitty types, semi-corrupt officials and a handful of part time politicians. I thought everyone would have understood by now that SBC have no one single clue as demonstrated when they dumped several tons of sand (as a sea defence!) on the foreshore several years ago. The consultant on that job must have taken the 'sand dynamics' spreadsheet with him along with all the cash he needed to deposit in the bank.[/p][/quote]i say to the council/environment agency..dont build it let em flood......spend the money elsewhere where people will appreciate it.....[/p][/quote]oh yes... would that be the same environment agency that didn't dredge the rivers of the Somerset levels? and would that be the same council that has spent a million pounds +/- on consultants to plan the proposed sea wall in the first place? despite the fact that there is already a state owned consultancy firm that is supposed to 'consult' on such matters AKA 'the environment agency' on another note. I find it odd that the appropriate material to be used in sea wall construction is less the three meters below the terrain of south Essex, It's abundant, its been used thought history as a sea defence material and its cheep and easy to use. its called 'London clay'.[/p][/quote]jayaman....you're a serial winger nobody takes any notice of you, look at the big picture if you dare.... thousands of people affected and all you continue to talk loud but say nothing....PLEASE environment agency take notice of these wingers and the handful of people in the photo, dont build the sea wall save the taxpayers money and build a sea wall where it is wanted, then when these serial wingers complain about being flooded we can then just refer back to their idiotic complaints and we can say "i told you so"....[/p][/quote]If you class the application of 'basic common sense', scientific observation and the noted occurrence of ill-advised/corrupt decision making and questionable allocation and spending of money from the public purse to date on sea deference projects. Allow me to fill you with the sense of pride that I hold at challenging the above. I do enjoy your use of impuissant and weightless methods at diminishing the evidence in a simplistic way, but I do wish you would bring something to the party next time by way of highlighting any strengths that you, yourself posses that remain 'as yet' unnoticed, before you proceed to say someone is a 'winger'. might I suggest (in the interests of variety) that you use some 'evidence' in a well rounded and holistic way. alternatively you could A, extract a small sample of my text and mount a singular argument based on out-of-context, counter argument misrepresentation or B, continue to use tactile and apathetic dismissal of someone else's opinion. oh.. And the USE of angry CAPITAL LETTERS only furthers your argument in the same way as a toddler displays its displeasure to a calm parent.. jayman
  • Score: 4

10:40pm Wed 12 Feb 14

sensiblelos says...

jayman wrote:
sensiblelos wrote:
jayman wrote:
sensiblelos wrote:
jayman wrote:
It will only work if the entire sea wall defences are at the same hight and specification.

low lying areas of shoeburyness are just as at threat from the river roach/the middleway/potton creek as they are from the Thames estuary.

funny thing about sea water levels is that they are equal in hight to all areas, relative to the tide at that location, at that time.

In summery. This bit of sea wall is an expensive load of bo11ocks which has been dreamed up by Walter mitty types, semi-corrupt officials and a handful of part time politicians. I thought everyone would have understood by now that SBC have no one single clue as demonstrated when they dumped several tons of sand (as a sea defence!) on the foreshore several years ago. The consultant on that job must have taken the 'sand dynamics' spreadsheet with him along with all the cash he needed to deposit in the bank.
i say to the council/environment agency..dont build it let em flood......spend the money elsewhere where people will appreciate it.....
oh yes... would that be the same environment agency that didn't dredge the rivers of the Somerset levels? and would that be the same council that has spent a million pounds +/- on consultants to plan the proposed sea wall in the first place? despite the fact that there is already a state owned consultancy firm that is supposed to 'consult' on such matters AKA 'the environment agency'

on another note. I find it odd that the appropriate material to be used in sea wall construction is less the three meters below the terrain of south Essex, It's abundant, its been used thought history as a sea defence material and its cheep and easy to use. its called 'London clay'.
jayaman....you're a serial winger nobody takes any notice of you, look at the big picture if you dare.... thousands of people affected and all you continue to talk loud but say nothing....PLEASE environment agency take notice of these wingers and the handful of people in the photo, dont build the sea wall save the taxpayers money and build a sea wall where it is wanted, then when these serial wingers complain about being flooded we can then just refer back to their idiotic complaints and we can say "i told you so"....
If you class the application of 'basic common sense', scientific observation and the noted occurrence of ill-advised/corrupt decision making and questionable allocation and spending of money from the public purse to date on sea deference projects. Allow me to fill you with the sense of pride that I hold at challenging the above.

I do enjoy your use of impuissant and weightless methods at diminishing the evidence in a simplistic way, but I do wish you would bring something to the party next time by way of highlighting any strengths that you, yourself posses that remain 'as yet' unnoticed, before you proceed to say someone is a 'winger'. might I suggest (in the interests of variety) that you use some 'evidence' in a well rounded and holistic way. alternatively you could

A, extract a small sample of my text and mount a singular argument based on out-of-context, counter argument misrepresentation

or

B, continue to use tactile and apathetic dismissal of someone else's opinion.

oh.. And the USE of angry CAPITAL LETTERS only furthers your argument in the same way as a toddler displays its displeasure to a calm parent..
talking loud saying nothing...as usual...

a picture tells a thousand words..

compare the evening echo photo above to serious news and photos of the BBC... http://www.bbc.co.uk
/news/in-pictures-26
152345

The real news highlights the plight of those devastated by the floods , indeed it is questionable why the environment/agency would spend any funds protecting these type of people if all they can do is complain....

Indeed its very SIMPLE...those people should count themselves lucky they have nothing to complain about in comparison, as the environment agency are prepared to spend tax payers money on defences...yet these NIMBYS continue to complain about a view...

Looks like these NIMBYS need their own PR consultant, own goal scored me thinks.the timing of this no news story is lousy...they should think how lucky they really are....but they prefer to complain....and continue and continue and continue.........
[quote][p][bold]jayman[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]sensiblelos[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]jayman[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]sensiblelos[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]jayman[/bold] wrote: It will only work if the entire sea wall defences are at the same hight and specification. low lying areas of shoeburyness are just as at threat from the river roach/the middleway/potton creek as they are from the Thames estuary. funny thing about sea water levels is that they are equal in hight to all areas, relative to the tide at that location, at that time. In summery. This bit of sea wall is an expensive load of bo11ocks which has been dreamed up by Walter mitty types, semi-corrupt officials and a handful of part time politicians. I thought everyone would have understood by now that SBC have no one single clue as demonstrated when they dumped several tons of sand (as a sea defence!) on the foreshore several years ago. The consultant on that job must have taken the 'sand dynamics' spreadsheet with him along with all the cash he needed to deposit in the bank.[/p][/quote]i say to the council/environment agency..dont build it let em flood......spend the money elsewhere where people will appreciate it.....[/p][/quote]oh yes... would that be the same environment agency that didn't dredge the rivers of the Somerset levels? and would that be the same council that has spent a million pounds +/- on consultants to plan the proposed sea wall in the first place? despite the fact that there is already a state owned consultancy firm that is supposed to 'consult' on such matters AKA 'the environment agency' on another note. I find it odd that the appropriate material to be used in sea wall construction is less the three meters below the terrain of south Essex, It's abundant, its been used thought history as a sea defence material and its cheep and easy to use. its called 'London clay'.[/p][/quote]jayaman....you're a serial winger nobody takes any notice of you, look at the big picture if you dare.... thousands of people affected and all you continue to talk loud but say nothing....PLEASE environment agency take notice of these wingers and the handful of people in the photo, dont build the sea wall save the taxpayers money and build a sea wall where it is wanted, then when these serial wingers complain about being flooded we can then just refer back to their idiotic complaints and we can say "i told you so"....[/p][/quote]If you class the application of 'basic common sense', scientific observation and the noted occurrence of ill-advised/corrupt decision making and questionable allocation and spending of money from the public purse to date on sea deference projects. Allow me to fill you with the sense of pride that I hold at challenging the above. I do enjoy your use of impuissant and weightless methods at diminishing the evidence in a simplistic way, but I do wish you would bring something to the party next time by way of highlighting any strengths that you, yourself posses that remain 'as yet' unnoticed, before you proceed to say someone is a 'winger'. might I suggest (in the interests of variety) that you use some 'evidence' in a well rounded and holistic way. alternatively you could A, extract a small sample of my text and mount a singular argument based on out-of-context, counter argument misrepresentation or B, continue to use tactile and apathetic dismissal of someone else's opinion. oh.. And the USE of angry CAPITAL LETTERS only furthers your argument in the same way as a toddler displays its displeasure to a calm parent..[/p][/quote]talking loud saying nothing...as usual... a picture tells a thousand words.. compare the evening echo photo above to serious news and photos of the BBC... http://www.bbc.co.uk /news/in-pictures-26 152345 The real news highlights the plight of those devastated by the floods , indeed it is questionable why the environment/agency would spend any funds protecting these type of people if all they can do is complain.... Indeed its very SIMPLE...those people should count themselves lucky they have nothing to complain about in comparison, as the environment agency are prepared to spend tax payers money on defences...yet these NIMBYS continue to complain about a view... Looks like these NIMBYS need their own PR consultant, own goal scored me thinks.the timing of this no news story is lousy...they should think how lucky they really are....but they prefer to complain....and continue and continue and continue......... sensiblelos
  • Score: -10

6:52am Thu 13 Feb 14

shoeburylad says...

geriatric wrote:
well done Friends of Shoebury Common. At least you know what you are talking about!
Do they? What costal defence qualifications do they have? They are just a bunch of winging beach hut owners who are prepared to inflict misery on hundreds of residents because they will not be able to park their car behind their beach hut when the defences are built.
[quote][p][bold]geriatric[/bold] wrote: well done Friends of Shoebury Common. At least you know what you are talking about![/p][/quote]Do they? What costal defence qualifications do they have? They are just a bunch of winging beach hut owners who are prepared to inflict misery on hundreds of residents because they will not be able to park their car behind their beach hut when the defences are built. shoeburylad
  • Score: 3

2:50pm Thu 13 Feb 14

CouldntThinkOfOne says...

Bosniavet wrote:
If the seawall isn't built & homes/business are flooded as a result, it will be interesting tosee how many of those protesting now would be demanding that SBC do something to help them......
Couldn't agree more. All of the people protesting will only be complaining and want compensation for SBC not building a wall when it does flood. Then who's faults that? surely it couldn't be theirs?!
[quote][p][bold]Bosniavet[/bold] wrote: If the seawall isn't built & homes/business are flooded as a result, it will be interesting tosee how many of those protesting now would be demanding that SBC do something to help them......[/p][/quote]Couldn't agree more. All of the people protesting will only be complaining and want compensation for SBC not building a wall when it does flood. Then who's faults that? surely it couldn't be theirs?! CouldntThinkOfOne
  • Score: 3

10:09pm Thu 13 Feb 14

Teetime says...

I think there is an easy solution. Do the experts recommend the work is done?
If yes and the 500 protesters don't think it is required, then don't build it and let the 500 be liable for any flood damage costs and compensation. Watch them scurry for the high ground then.
They must be a bit thick, to try to convince local people not to build flood defences on the day that just up stream the Thames broke its banks.
Perhaps the protester should take a day trip to some flooded areas and see the devastation, upset and worry of those affected. Maybe they won't be so quick to be so anti.
I think there is an easy solution. Do the experts recommend the work is done? If yes and the 500 protesters don't think it is required, then don't build it and let the 500 be liable for any flood damage costs and compensation. Watch them scurry for the high ground then. They must be a bit thick, to try to convince local people not to build flood defences on the day that just up stream the Thames broke its banks. Perhaps the protester should take a day trip to some flooded areas and see the devastation, upset and worry of those affected. Maybe they won't be so quick to be so anti. Teetime
  • Score: 0

10:12pm Thu 13 Feb 14

Teetime says...

Not that good a turn out for those so concerned, I count about 17 plus 2 children and a dog
Not that good a turn out for those so concerned, I count about 17 plus 2 children and a dog Teetime
  • Score: 0

10:15am Sat 15 Feb 14

openspace says...

Teetime wrote:
Not that good a turn out for those so concerned, I count about 17 plus 2 children and a dog
No. I think you are wrong there, are about 20 there, a much bigger protest than you thought. However, with a borough of over 160,000 people, not exactly impressive is it ???. Just grateful that 159,980, or whatever, ( and their dogs ), have more sense and place safety over appearance and convenience on occasion.
[quote][p][bold]Teetime[/bold] wrote: Not that good a turn out for those so concerned, I count about 17 plus 2 children and a dog[/p][/quote]No. I think you are wrong there, are about 20 there, a much bigger protest than you thought. However, with a borough of over 160,000 people, not exactly impressive is it ???. Just grateful that 159,980, or whatever, ( and their dogs ), have more sense and place safety over appearance and convenience on occasion. openspace
  • Score: 0

4:21pm Sat 15 Feb 14

ReverendLovejoy says...

Bunch of moany old people with nothing better to do in their lifes than moan when the council is actually being productive in protecting their homes for the future.

Sooner they get put in a home the better.
Bunch of moany old people with nothing better to do in their lifes than moan when the council is actually being productive in protecting their homes for the future. Sooner they get put in a home the better. ReverendLovejoy
  • Score: 5

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