The weather forecast is predicting the likelihood of very strong winds and high tides tonight and tomorrow morning. This combination has caused problems in Thanet in the past the area around Ramsgate main sands being particularly vulnerable because the very large beach that built up on the WW2 defences and protected the harbour wall, Royal Victoria Pavilion and other buildings in this area was removed as building materials for Port Ramsgate.
I understand that the sluice on the North Thanet coast that protects the low lying ground between Thanet and Reculver from this sort of event is broken, so we may have some problems.
The video is of a moderate wind and spring tide at Ramsgate, you can click here to see some more videos of this. The picture is of the result of the only really big storm since the sand was removed.
I understand that the sluice on the North Thanet coast that protects the low lying ground between Thanet and Reculver from this sort of event is broken, so we may have some problems.
The video is of a moderate wind and spring tide at Ramsgate, you can click here to see some more videos of this. The picture is of the result of the only really big storm since the sand was removed.
Michael, at every turn there is more evidence that the council are barking mad. Sand from the beach was removed to build the port?
ReplyDeleteI have an email from a Ramsgate counciller, quoting "...the days when Ramsgate could exist as a seaside town only are long gone", I didn't realise they would take it as far as removing the beach.
How wrong could i be?
Steve compared to the plans for removing the sea defences on the north coast that was pretty much insignificant. This is a quote from the expert that appears to be advising them. “The important thing at that stage would be to protect the railway line and Thanet Way. It might be that Thanet Way would have to be rebuilt as a bridge to avoid travel problems.” They need to get someone who understands what tidal surge storms in this area can do to advise them and urgently.
ReplyDeleteI voted for the shoreline management plan at Council, because there is a strong arguement for TDC's continuing involvement as the plan develops. We will need to argue for funding.
ReplyDeleteHowever, I think there are serious problems with the plan that will need a lot of work in the future. Luckily, not in the next 20 years!
The first involves the sea wall at Reculver. If it will become too expensive to defend due to sea level rises and the "sinking" effect occuring across the south of England, then a detailed plan will be needed to defend the railway line and Thanet Way. Building a wall further back is not an option due to the cost of piling through the reclaimed marsh land to reach underlying rock. A sophisticated system of flood ponds and ditches will be needed to absorb the peak tidal events, whilst still maintaining most of the farmland.
The second concerns the decision to maintain the line over most of Thanet's coastline. This has to be right, certainly in the Urban areas, but if predictions are correct, it will become increasingly difficult and expensive. Planning needs to take account of this now, and not approve vulnerable buildings like Pleasurama and the Turner Centre unless there are overriding short term gains. Also regular maintenance of the cliffs and shore defences is vital. As we see in Ramsgate, failure to do so can be very expensive. The Tories shelved every proposed maintenance item in this year's budget. This cant go on.
The final concern is those bits of the coast that are planned to be left unprotected such as Epple Bay, Dumpton Gap ect. These could cause problems relatively quickly. Is this something Council Scrutiny could look at?
David is this plan available to see on the internet the only part I have read are the comments by Geologist Dr Alasdair Bruce.
ReplyDelete"It won't be that it is all flooded all of the time, but at high tides the water will be able to move into an area that is now agricultural land.”
"It is not necessarily a bad thing because the sea coming in will create little islands of nature reserves. Therefore it would be good for the environment and good for tourism because people could come and look at the landscape and nature.”
"The important thing at that stage would be to protect the railway line and Thanet Way. It might be that Thanet Way would have to be rebuilt as a bridge to avoid travel problems.”
"The plan is best understood as a shock absorber. The sea would come in at times and other areas would then be less likely to flood."
To me knowing this area as I do what he says doesn’t make sense if you have to put the Thanet Way on a bridge, what has happened to the railway that is on the sea side of the Thanet way?
If the sea is allowed beyond the Thanet Way as bridge suggests what is to prevent the wave action washing out the Monkton and Minster marshes and reinstating the Wantsum channel between Thanet and the rest of Kent.
The only logical explanation I can think of is that the tidal models that the experts have made show that if the sea is allowed to flow through the Wantsum channel again this would make London much less vulnerable in a tidal surge storm.
Certainly I can’t see how allowing the relatively small area of agricultural land north of the railway to flood would have much effect on flooding in other areas.
I very much hope my thoughts here are completely wrong and that I have missed something obvious, any reassurance out there would welcome.
Michael
ReplyDeleteThe link to the plan is here:
http://www.se-coastalgroup.org.uk/buildpage.php?id=126
I tend to agree with you about rubbish being talked. Perhaps Alasdair's comments are coloured by the attraction (to him) of an area of marsh land. What is done at Reculver can have little or no impact elsewhere along the coast, let alone London. You are right, the logic of the plan, if continued for long enough and if processes procede as predicted (two "if's")then it would restabish the Wantsum channel. Not in our or our children's lifetime though!
As I said, there are more pressing aspects of this plan.
David having just read the relevant part of the plan, thanks for the link, it seems to be saying the Wantsum would probably appear in less than 50 years, my youngest children are 6. My contention is that the experts called it to tell us about the sea in this area have already cost us millions over the misjudgement they made about the Turner Centre, the potential for a misjudgement in this case is the cost of billions.
ReplyDeleteI have looked at the plans for the new Turner Contemporary it is built on good high sea defences and should be safe for many years, it also has adequate escape for the people inside. Apart from the fact that it looks like heads of K9 without ears and I don’t think that the glass coating will work well in the salt sprayed air I think it relatively sane.
However the plans for Pleasurama, particularly when viewed in the light of this plan look to be totally insane.
Thank goodness we got around to Pleasurama at last! As soon as I heard about the storm coming I thought "I know a blog that'll link this to Pleasurama in the blink of an eye", and what do you know, there it is! Simon and Richard may be gone but some chestnuts just hang around getting older. The development may be barmy but it's an economically positive ray of sunshine among a world of otherwise grey, credit-crunched, short-termist barminess.
ReplyDeleteBy the way I love the blog and have recommended it to a lot of people many of whom have ended up in your shop. Keep up the good work.