Our new night shelter for the homeless will not cause you any trouble (From Echo)

They have had this historic building for a few years now years and haven’t maintained it. Just from looking at the image you can see many broken windows, there is normally a household sofa behind the front wall, the two houses either side are boarded up (I wonder why no one wants to live there!!!) and the alley has a lot of rubbish down it. Just walking passed the building this morning I noticed an old mattress blocking the entrance to the alley; this will probably be there for a month or so before being removed. How can they expect residents to have confidence in a new 24 centre when they treat the street like this?

Yet another historic building allowed to be demolished by our own great SBC. Opposition will build against this in the same way as it did against the drug abuse centre which they tried to locate at the end of Seaforth Road. Only by local residents joining force will these centres be stopped. Where do the people who run HARP live? Same area as 'our' local councillors no doubt.

The homeless need a play to stay, and HARP is catering to that need. However, we yet again see misinformation, presumably from HARP? The plan is for up to 32 people (29 rooms, with three able to accommodate two people. 29+3 makes 32 in my books). Ok, the figure of 30 is slightly closer than the number 29 which has been used by both HARP and the council, but it's still not accurate. And some of us have reason to believe that the number of objections was closer to 170.

Interesting to see that the smokers are now back on the street now that planning approval looks certain. Of course, they're not shown in the picture, and oh look... is that a parking space I see?

So currently they see 2000 people a year whilst having accomodation for 14, so lets assume that now they have double the bed space 3000 people could visit.Many of dubious character in a residential area utter madness.

£3000000 going to people of whom half have created their own situation.

Most of which despite however much is thrown at them will never add to the public purse only take from it.

That money without doubt would be better spent on more worthwhile causes on folk that deserve it and have worked and paid taxes all their lives.

When built it will obviously become a victim of it's own success it will be so popular others will come to the Seaside from the major cities which will not solve the problem of homeless it will make it worse.

Westcliff on Sea will become the promised Land and Hamlet Court area already a magnet for dossers will become the overspill annexe.

And anti Social behaviour already normal in that area will be improved and pigs will fly.

Homeless people need somewhere to get help so why not use and expand upon an existing facility? There is definitely a feeling of "not in my back yard" but where else would you suggest such a centre is set up? Everyone deserves a chance to change their lives and with organisations such as HARP one hopes the homeless who use the centre get the help they need.

myviewis wrote:
Homeless people need somewhere to get help so why not use and expand upon an existing facility? There is definitely a feeling of "not in my back yard" but where else would you suggest such a centre is set up? Everyone deserves a chance to change their lives and with organisations such as HARP one hopes the homeless who use the centre get the help they need.

They are knocking a very old building down which has facilities within it! How is that using or expanding on existing facilities? If they want to build this centre they need a plot of land and that's it, this building should not be sacrificed for two blocks to be squeezed into this residential area. There are lots of empty office blocks on Vic Ave that could be put to use along with other plots of lands in the borough that this would be better suited too.

Just an observation really on the situation earlier today. I walked up HCR. There, outside Londis, two vagrants, off their skulls, filthy dirty, sitting on the floor with cans of lager. One of them I've seen hanging around for the past 2 weeks. One night, he was propositioning a young girl on the HCR Bridge. Nasty.

30 minutes later, coming down Valkyrie Road, past HARP. Three guys blocking the pavement. See me coming, make no move to let me pass. So I decided to see how brave they really were and unleashed both my huskies.

Ever seen three vagrants run quicly in different directions?

The mattress is still stuffed down the alley, plus a pile of other nasty stuff. The houses either side have been derelict for some time - presume Hair & Son own them or have an inteerst in them and they will be included in some way in the proposed development?

Where do the vagrants go when the building comes down and the new block goes up?

How many deliveries each day will there be - traffic movements in planning terms. How many visiting professionals wiull there be? Probation officers, social workers, doctors, nurses. And are we right to assume this is part of a larger plan to shut down York Road; then rebuild on the Riley's site in Valkyrie Road and put a health centre there, with a Drug Addict Treatment Centre. Great - NOT!!

To all the bleeding heart Councillors - come and live in Westcliff instead of running off to Thorpe Bay or Chalkwell. Facew some of the reality we have to deal with every day.

make_westcliff_nice_
again wrote:

myviewis wrote: Homeless people need somewhere to get help so why not use and expand upon an existing facility? There is definitely a feeling of "not in my back yard" but where else would you suggest such a centre is set up? Everyone deserves a chance to change their lives and with organisations such as HARP one hopes the homeless who use the centre get the help they need.

They are knocking a very old building down which has facilities within it! How is that using or expanding on existing facilities? If they want to build this centre they need a plot of land and that's it, this building should not be sacrificed for two blocks to be squeezed into this residential area. There are lots of empty office blocks on Vic Ave that could be put to use along with other plots of lands in the borough that this would be better suited too.

maybe facility was the wrong word - I should have put location. Moving the centre to Vic Ave would give them the space they need.

myviewis wrote:
Homeless people need somewhere to get help so why not use and expand upon an existing facility? There is definitely a feeling of "not in my back yard" but where else would you suggest such a centre is set up? Everyone deserves a chance to change their lives and with organisations such as HARP one hopes the homeless who use the centre get the help they need.

I suggest then that you put them up in your backyard.

The people have Westcliff have had more anti social and non contributing people thrust upon them time and time again. People who have bought propery to bring up their families have seen the value of their properties dive because of what this council has done to them.

This council lets Westcliff down time and time again.

But oddly enough, these people do fight back and I'll bet a round of beers that they will fight this again and win.

Everytime the hard working tax payers of Westcliff turn around, another bunch of crap hits them in the face.

Why on earth should they have this shoved down their throats?

Since this is a historic building and from reading what I have read about the lack of proper work on the consultation process, I would suggest that the Milton group put an injunction against the council stopping this.

Kick em in the balls and let them know you are sick and tired of them chucking the dregs of society in your front and back gardens.

If the dog owners who want their beach can take their case to the court of human rights, I suggest that the people of Westcliff do the same.

As myviewis, you never did state where you live, I can only assume that you are some bleeding heart wannabe who does not live in the area.

I wonder if this was happening on your doorstep if you would feel the same way.

WE all can guess the answer to that.

westcliff willi wrote:
So currently they see 2000 people a year whilst having accomodation for 14, so lets assume that now they have double the bed space 3000 people could visit.Many of dubious character in a residential area utter madness.

NO double the space would be 4000.

I suggest if the council insists and this goes through, unless you all fight back, that you are supplied with burglar alarms and panic buttons paid for by HARP.

If they are so sure of themselves that you have nothung to worry about, get it in writing to each and everyone of you that any anti social behaviour will be dealt with within the hour.

Any rubish will be picked up, the place will be clean as a whistle at ALL TIMES.


I mean fair is fair..

Southend (a main city/town) is the appropriate place for this development...not a residential street. As was mentioned earlier in the time that Harp have had this building no effort has been made to make it less of an eyesore (broken panes of glass etc). It is just unacceptable this has been given the green light. As mentioned before I am sure most of the councillors who approved the development don't live anywhere near it. Its outrageous I am disgusted by this.

there is already trouble with deliveries just the other day the Harp van parked on the corner of Valkyrie road on double yellow lines for 35 minutes (Timed) and proceeded to unload the van into the centre,whilst 2 supposedley homeless men who supposedly need Harps help and appreciate what they do for them stood around the entrance watching the men unload without lifting a finger other than to pour more beer down their throats!!as for the filthy alley because the residents complained about the intimidation outside the building and the hundreds of dog ends the" Clients" were told to smoke out the back somewhere but now they have decided to go through to the alley smoke, vomit, shoot up,throw their empty cans and needles into the gardens backing onto the site lovely!!And we are supposed to believe there will not be more trouble with 30 of them hanging around with their drugged up mates turning up late at night causing trouble when they cant get in Yeah right.The beautiful listed building on the corner of Anerley road has had drunk and drugged "Clients" knocking on their door at 2 3 and 4 in the morning asking if it the homeless centre and can they have a bed for the night and using some very choice language when turned away.Thick leather gloves must always be worn when gardening as it not only their empty cans they throw over it is also theit dirty needles.SBC think this is the place for this centre then obviously all our tax bands will go down at least 2 notches so we should all start appealing now.As the council have already given Harp an intrest free loan to help buy the property whats to stop them giving them another one.SBC have totally lost the plot and all because they have to be seen to be helping the homeless and its easier to change planning rules to suit themselves instead of cleaning up council properties for these people.

As for the number of rejections it was over 170 Steve Adams and his wife spent days delivering letters of the plans and intentions and pro former letters for the residents to sign if they did not have the time to write theit own letters.I know 47 of those rejections were handed into the civic centre by hand all in seperate envelopes!!!so where they got 32 is a joke.more lies.Richard Hair being the chairman of Harp and being an estate agent as well knows all the councillors need I say more oh I forgot then he runs back home to Thorpe Bay.As do most of the people on the board at Harp or Chalkwell of course.Well if their clients are all so lovely why did they not look for a suitable propery in Thorpe Bay or Chalkwell? Oh yes NIMBY!

westcliffboy wrote:
Just an observation really on the situation earlier today. I walked up HCR. There, outside Londis, two vagrants, off their skulls, filthy dirty, sitting on the floor with cans of lager. One of them I've seen hanging around for the past 2 weeks. One night, he was propositioning a young girl on the HCR Bridge. Nasty.

30 minutes later, coming down Valkyrie Road, past HARP. Three guys blocking the pavement. See me coming, make no move to let me pass. So I decided to see how brave they really were and unleashed both my huskies.

Ever seen three vagrants run quicly in different directions?

The mattress is still stuffed down the alley, plus a pile of other nasty stuff. The houses either side have been derelict for some time - presume Hair & Son own them or have an inteerst in them and they will be included in some way in the proposed development?

Where do the vagrants go when the building comes down and the new block goes up?

How many deliveries each day will there be - traffic movements in planning terms. How many visiting professionals wiull there be? Probation officers, social workers, doctors, nurses. And are we right to assume this is part of a larger plan to shut down York Road; then rebuild on the Riley's site in Valkyrie Road and put a health centre there, with a Drug Addict Treatment Centre. Great - NOT!!

To all the bleeding heart Councillors - come and live in Westcliff instead of running off to Thorpe Bay or Chalkwell. Facew some of the reality we have to deal with every day.

So how brave are you then?

Why not print your name and address so that the police can have a chat with you about using your dogs as an offensive weapon?

It is people like you who destroy the arguments of the other residents who are objecting to this development by your immature aggressive behaviour.

Grow up!

As stated in this & the previous board on this subject, the lovcation chosen is unsuitable. There are empty office blocks in Victoria Avenue which could be utilised for this purpose, & the position (nearer the town centre, job centre, courts, police station & Civic Centre) is considerably better.

As I have said before, I live in this area, as do my parents (who are well past retirement age), & have to put up with the harssment from beggers, drunks etc in Hamlet Court Road, whilst actively avoiding Valkyrie Road. Just this morning, whilst walking home from my nightshift, there was a vagrant outside Londis, swigging beer or cider whilst talking on a state of the art mobile phone, which is quite usual, although I wasn't asked for change - a rarity.

SBC need to listen to the local community, & look at the alternatives, & I do not advocate Chalkwell or Thorpe Bay.

LocalBoy wrote:

westcliffboy wrote: Just an observation really on the situation earlier today. I walked up HCR. There, outside Londis, two vagrants, off their skulls, filthy dirty, sitting on the floor with cans of lager. One of them I've seen hanging around for the past 2 weeks. One night, he was propositioning a young girl on the HCR Bridge. Nasty. 30 minutes later, coming down Valkyrie Road, past HARP. Three guys blocking the pavement. See me coming, make no move to let me pass. So I decided to see how brave they really were and unleashed both my huskies. Ever seen three vagrants run quicly in different directions? The mattress is still stuffed down the alley, plus a pile of other nasty stuff. The houses either side have been derelict for some time - presume Hair & Son own them or have an inteerst in them and they will be included in some way in the proposed development? Where do the vagrants go when the building comes down and the new block goes up? How many deliveries each day will there be - traffic movements in planning terms. How many visiting professionals wiull there be? Probation officers, social workers, doctors, nurses. And are we right to assume this is part of a larger plan to shut down York Road; then rebuild on the Riley's site in Valkyrie Road and put a health centre there, with a Drug Addict Treatment Centre. Great - NOT!! To all the bleeding heart Councillors - come and live in Westcliff instead of running off to Thorpe Bay or Chalkwell. Facew some of the reality we have to deal with every day.

So how brave are you then? Why not print your name and address so that the police can have a chat with you about using your dogs as an offensive weapon? It is people like you who destroy the arguments of the other residents who are objecting to this development by your immature aggressive behaviour. Grow up!

No mention was made of whether the huskies actually went for the clients of this facility, merely that they moved away quickly when they were unleashed. Assuming the dogs are well-trained & the 3 people mentioned were not posing a threat to their owner, then the dogs would not have done anything. However, I can understand that huskies look intimidating, as do vagrants drinking & blocking the pavement in a residential area.

Thank you, Bosniavet.

Local Boy - stay in Hawkwell. We've enough undesireables in Westcliff as it is.

The dogs ran through the group, who were intent on pushing me into the road. It didn't happen because the dogs look fierce.

This morning, walking past - without the dogs! - there were two vagrants having a swearing competition, to see who could swear most in a minute. Charming.

It is any wonder many people are intimidated and walk the other side of the road?

Rubbish is still there. If the eco-workers - yep, those paragons who never use cars - cared a bit more about the neighbourhood, perhaps they would use one of their large vehicles to shift the rubbish - they could take the vagrants at the same time and dump them on Two Tree Island, except that's a nature reserve and the birds donlt deserve Westcliff rubbish.

How many of you actually live in Westcliff? I live in the area and I feel it is improving thanks to the residents associations etc BUT this Homeless shelter will set us back years!!! we need to unite to stop this!

While I am fiercely opposed to these plans, I am shocked by some of these comments. It should be the SBC and HARP we are attacking, not the homeless. Yes, they can be menacing, and yes, they may have drug and alcohol or other problems, but I suspect that few of them actively chose their lifestyles. Or if they did ‘choose’ to be homeless, it is probably because that was the most attractive or manageable option available to them. Yes, there are problems of crime and disorder linked to homelessness, but it must be remembered that the homeless are just as likely to be the victims of crime as the perpetrators.

That said, I think we – the local residents - have good reason to be disturbed by the plans, but feel we should direct our anger at SBC and HARP, not those who are already down. As some of you have pointed out, HARP doesn’t seem able to manage the existing, smaller day centre well, so why should we feel confident that they will manage something much more than double in size with only two more staff? We are right to be angry about the (non)consultation carried out by both HARP and SBC, angry about the way the council has over-ridden its own rules in its rush to give this planning permission, angry about the way HARP submitted a misleading application, and the way the council somehow failed to ‘see’ the holes in the application. And we should be angry about the council’s apparent deception about and dismissal of the very strong views of many of those in the neighbourhood. There were far more objectors than supporters, but the objector’s voices were not heard. OK, there’s a file full of letters, and three minutes given for one of us to speak. Maybe technically our voices were heard, but they were certainly not listened to.

And yes, I assume my property will go down in value if this development goes ahead (bought through Hair a while back – they didn’t tell me of their plans for the area then!). But it’s not the loss of value I’m worried about; it’s the loss of any feeling of security in my own street. It was bad enough in the day, but 24 hours a day and on a much larger scale – without adequate planning and security measures – that’s what worries me.