Foundations Found at Royal Sands Ramsgate Pleasurama. An Apology and Thanks from Me

It’s all too easy to publish to the internet, unless Conroy Maddox has been using your keyboard as I am sure all of the art lovers who attended the Turner Contemporary will understand.

Many thanks to the contractor Cardy Construction for chipping the chalk off of one of the foundations to a support pillar, that is part of the concrete structure of the arches, part of the Pleasurama cliff façade and sending me a picture.

I genuinely think that it is safe to walk on the cliff top footpath now, something I will be doing again.

Here is the picture and this is what they have to say about it.

“Dear Michael

As recently discussed please find the attached photograph of the exposed column foundation.  The location of concrete highlighted in red extending below the excavation level passed the dotted line would indicate the foundations are built as described within the historic drawings.  It would appear that the concrete was originally cast against chalk and not shuttered therefore causing the surface of the concrete to appear uneven.  We have washed the concrete off as much as possible and driven steel rods into the foundation which appears to be of sound construction.

Regards,
Michael”

This, like so many historical engineering puzzles, has a solution that probably involves practices that wouldn’t occur today.

What happened in this case was that having cut a slot about three feet wide and about three feet deep, going up the seventy foot high bare chalk cliff above, they got some poor chap to get in the bottom of the slot and dig a hole eight and a half feet deep in solid chalk.

I think this picture (I have put coloured lines on the original 1930s plan and sorry about the drawing of the bloke, my children are better at using MS Paint) explains what this is about.

Viewed from the side on.

The red line is the outline of the concrete pillar.

The green line the original line of the ground before the contractor dug out the ground next to the cliff about a fortnight ago.

The brown line about where they have dug the ground down to now.

The blue bit shows where the concrete block walls between the arches are.

Having solved one problem that is a mixture of industrial archaeology and civil engineering, like so many other things in life that leaves us with another problem and more questions.

Can anyone think of a way that they could have got the foundations in for the infill walls between the arches? The most they could be are nine inches thick, I think, not room enough for a man to get inside.

You can see from on the right hand side of Cardy’s photo that the virgin chalk seems to go right up to the bottom of the block wall.

Are there any foundations under the concrete block infills? If there are, do they extend down as far as the contractor has dug down? Are the concrete block infills tied to the pillars either side? In the simplest terms, is there a danger of block infill walls falling on the people working on the building site next to them?

I don’t know how far down you can dig a nine inch wide foundation trench in solid chalk with a shovel, but would doubt it is as far as the chalk has been dug down next to bottom of the block wall.

The pictures should all expand if you click on them.

Royal Sands Development, Pleasurama Site Ramsgate Cliff Safety Response From Thanet District Council.

I have received a response from the council which they have asked me to publish on this blog relating to my concerns about the foundations that support the cliff façade, the base of which has recently been partly exposed by the contractor.

I have also received a response from the contractor via Laura Sandys MP, who is the MP for this constituency.

First an explanation for anyone who either hasn’t been following this issue or hasn’t understood it properly.    

The two pictures above show the bottom of the concrete cliff façade support pillar marked with red dots and what appears to be virgin (undug) chalk below it. 


The picture should get bigger if you click on it and even bigger if you click on it again. 

This picture shows you where this is and I have drawn a red line around the area shown in the two first pictures.  

This is a detail from the original design plans for the pillar supplied to me under foi legislation from the HSE, it is a side on view of the pillar.

I have added coloured lines to it to help explain what is where. The red line shows where the front of the pillar should be. The green line the ground level before the contractor started excavating. The blue line is roughly where I think they have dug down to. The purple line roughly where the virgin chalk has been cut back to.

As I can’t work out how the foundation was put beneath the virgin chalk, without digging it up and the front of the pillar doesn’t follow the line shown in the design drawing I have concerns about the integrity of this structure.

I discovered this situation last Saturday and asked Kent Fire and Rescue if they would examine it and close the footpath above it while more detailed investigations were made.

Kent Fire and Rescue investigated the area, confirmed that they couldn’t find and sign of foundations but told me that as the council had told them that the cliff was safe, they were not able to close the footpath.

Below is the response I have received by email from the council’s engineer Mike Humber signed by the council’s Director of Regeneration services Brian White which they have asked me to publish here.   

"REGENERATION SERVICES

Michael.child@aol.com

15 April 2011

Our ref: BJW/BH

Your ref:

Dear Mr. Child

‘PLEASURAMA’ CLIFFSIDE, RAMSGATE

I am writing in response to your interest regarding the cliff wall to the rear of the Royal Sands

(formerly ‘Pleasurama’ site at Ramsgate. Your concern being that the cliff wall has no proper

foundations, and is therefore at risk. A site visit was made on Monday 11 April by Mr. Mike Humber,

the Council’s Engineer and myself. The ground has been excavated adjacent to the cliff wall in

recent weeks to enable work on the foundations to the Royal Sands development to proceed.

Consequently chalk is visible in places at a level beneath the cliff wall façade, and this has led you to

believe that there may be no foundations supporting the cliff wall itself.

However the point that you have missed on your inspections is that there are substantial concrete

foundations, to a minimum depth of two metres, beneath each of the main supporting columns to the

cliff wall. This was verified during our site inspection.

Records exist of the design of the original cliff wall dating from the early part of the 20th century in the

form of a construction drawing and I believe you already have a copy of this. The observations made

on site this week confirm that the foundation provision appears to be as described on the drawing. It

can be seen that the foundations and columns were both cast insitu with the columns exhibiting a

regular finish from timber formwork whilst the foundations were cast against the hand excavated face

of bare virgin chalk. I suggest that it is this interface between these two very different concrete

finishes that you have misinterpreted as the base of the concrete structure. Although recessed a

little, the foundation does continue well below this elevation as confirmed above.

I do trust that this letter draws your concern to a satisfactory conclusion. Thank you for your interest

in the subject. Perhaps you might post a copy of this letter on your blog.

Whilst writing, because of your interest also in the engineering history of Ramsgate Harbour I thought

I would draw your attention to the pending completion of a new floating concrete breakwater in the

Outer Harbour area. This is the single biggest investment the Council has made in the Harbour for

some 20 or so years. The new floating breakwater will not only protect the Eastern Marina, it will also

provide satisfactory berthing for work boats used in the construction and ongoing operation of the

London Array offshore windfarm. The Council is very pleased with the new structure, a large portion

of the funding was provided through European Union grant.

Yours sincerely

B White

Director of Regeneration Services

Email: brian.white@thanet.gov.uk

Tel: 01843 577007

cc. Cheryl Pendry

Mike Humber"

Below is my response to them 

"Dear Brian and Mike.

I have to admit the saga of this cliff wall is a bit of a difficult one, but as the wretched thing doesn’t conform to the design drawings I feel it best to err on the safe side. Most particularly as the previous two problems I reported to the council, the bulging panel and the 1860s balustrade both resulted in council action to repair the problem.

God alone knows how that 1860s balustrade is supposed to work, if it has foundations and how much water is getting in from behind. Did you know that when the railway extension from Herne Bay to Ramsgate was put in, in the 1860s the government inspector, Captain Rich condemned much of the civil engineering work including several of the bridges, which had to be rebuilt?

I am still concerned that I haven’t got any evidence that there is sound concrete all the way between the bottom of the visible concrete pier and the rough cast concrete that you have discovered at the at the bottom of the recent excavation.

Have you either exposed continuous concrete between the bottom of the pier and the bottom of the excavation, carried out a driven rod or bore test this in this area?

The reason I ask this is that the chalk at the bottom of the pillar doesn’t have the appearance of made ground and I can’t see how the back of a load spreading foundation or the bottom of the pillar could have been constructed without disturbing the chalk.

As we have discussed before the façade isn’t a load bearing structure and I am particularly concerned that heavy vehicles are accessing the cliff edge while below excavations are being made of foundations that don’t conform to exactly the design drawings i.e a uniformly cast liner pillar extending down to the foundations.

After the arched part of the façade (visibly the most sound and professionally constructed part) the contractor will presumably excavate in front the less linier portal part of the façade where both the pinning took place and the contractor has already discovered and documented one pillar with inadequate foundations sitting on made ground.

In short the risks of a normal building site appear to have been adequately addressed apart from the added problem of the proximity of the public footpath to the edge of the cliff.

I am not asking that this be permanently closed while the building work is in progress, something would I think be unnecessary and damaging to the town’s economy.

Just that the parts above excavation of any part of the base of the façade that doesn’t conform precisely to the design drawings is closed while investigations are made and of course some emergency signage warning people not to drive anywhere near the cliff edge.

Best regards Michael"

I have also had a response from Laura Sandys informing me that the contractor, Cardy Construction will “further expose a section of the foundation and provide Michael with photographic evidence of the existing foundation,”


I have added a link to a series of linked webpages showing some of the various technical reports on the cliff façade structure http://www.thanetonline.com/cliff 

Thanet District Council’s propaganda machine goes off the wall.

Of all of the bizarre press releases I have received from TDC this one has to take the biscuit see http://thanetpress.blogspot.com/2009/12/ramsgate-cliff-face.html this is a picture of the repair work that they say is due to start in the new year, it appears to have started before they released the press release.

This next picture is of the base of one of the facades support pillars resting not on the 2 metre thick foundations as I have been assured it should be, but on a pile of crumbling chalk.

Silly me thinking that I had investigated the problems with the cliff façade when the council told me that they weren’t going to until 2011 see http://thanetonline.blogspot.com/2009/11/royal-sands-development-how-dangerous.html

Oh yes here are this mornings pictures and a few from some other time that seem to have crept in somehow, loads of the Queens Head as I am doing a cover for a book on Thanet’s pubs today.

http://www.michaelsbookshop.com/blogpicts129/id6.htm

http://www.michaelsbookshop.com/blogpicts129/id9.htm

Royal Sands Development cliff façade bizarre twist from TDCs chief executive.

Some of you may remember back in November after expressing my concerns about the condition of the newly repaired cliff façade, I received a response from TDC that they weren’t going to inspect it until 2011.

At this point I decided as this was an issue of public safety to take measures into my own hands and inspect it myself and publicise the photographs of this inspection see http://thanetonline.blogspot.com/2009/11/royal-sands-development-how-dangerous.html

The most worrying thing that I found when I inspected the façade was the apparent lack of foundations where the bottom of the façade had been exposed.

Back at the beginning of last year I pointed out the apparent lack of foundations when the first bit of the base of the façade was exposed and was assured that this was only a small part and that it would be repaired.

Since May 2007 I have had an ongoing dialogue with the councils consulting engineers Jacobs Engineering about the cliff façade and other structures in Ramsgate that they manage, so I was somewhat surprised to get a rather bizarre email from them telling me that they were no longer prepared to communicate with, me unless the council gave its permission.

I immediately emailed TDCs chief executive asking him to contact them and give his permission for them to continue to discuss these issues with me.

I was further surprised to receive a point blank refusal from the chief executive of TDC, here is a quote from it: “You can speak to the council about these issues but not our contractors or advisers.” As far as I am aware this dialogue was mutually beneficial and I believe contributed considerably to getting the council to take any action about the state of the cliff façade. The picture above, taken today, shows progress of the repairs to the repaired cliff façade.

Here are the links to today’s pictures after this mornings walk I took the bus to Broadstairs and walked back to Ramsgate.

http://www.michaelsbookshop.com/laptop3/id5.htm

http://www.michaelsbookshop.com/laptop3/id3.htm

http://www.michaelsbookshop.com/laptop3/id4.htm

http://www.michaelsbookshop.com/laptop3/id6.htm

it may take a while for them all to appear.

Royal Sands Development Ramsgate securing the cliff face that had moved.

My recent posts about this development has meant that I have had various dialogues with several engineers that specialise in various aspects of chalk and problems related to different projects involving its stability.
One aspect of the report on the condition of the cliff façade that has generated particular interest is how the bit of it that was on the move had been dealt with, the following is a quote from the report.

“There is an area of the façade, which is severely cracked and has experienced outward displacement. This indicates that load resistance failure and requires a serious engineering solution possibly ground anchors. The drawings indicate that the façade was to be constructed to a minimum thickness of 310 mm, however inspection through the weepholes, show varying dimensions down to 230 mm.”

Obviously with the total lack of public consultation about this major project there is scant information about how this problem was addressed, or how successful the work done to this part of the cliff was.
I did take some pictures click on them to enlarge and there is this quote from Dave Green’s Eastcliff Matters blog:

“The area of cliff facade which has not yet received the specified anti-carbonation coating is awaiting stabilisation works which are currently being designed. Testing undertaken during the construction phase indicated that a section of cliff facade in this location is not sufficiently stable. The solution to this will involve the installation of a series of ground anchors which will tie the concrete facade to solid chalk several metres behind the face of the facade. A new reinforced concrete 'badge' will be cast over the existing facade in this location to allow the new anchors to be tensioned sufficiently to stabilise the existing structure. Once complete, the works will receive the same coloured coating as the rest of the facade to protect it from future chloride and carbonation attack. The design has taken longer than anticipated, and work was hoped to commence onsite in October. However, our consultant has been slightly delayed by the company who produced the geotechnical information but has now completed the design work and will produce contract drawings/documentation next week for pricing. I think we should now be in a position to return to site and commence these additional works at the beginning of December.”

For the non technical reading this it easiest to liken it to screwing the concrete wall in front of the chalk cliff to the chalk behind, to stop it from collapsing.

What really riles me though is the arrogance of the people involved in assuming that local people wouldn’t be interested in such a major civil engineering project, so they didn’t tell us what was going on, just as they haven’t told us why a lot more of the promenade has now been boarded off in the last week.