In July 2012 Mike Badger of Tendring District Council wrote to beach hut owners at Holland Haven saying the sea wall, which had been assessed as “marginally stable” in 2011, had been inspected again in late June 2012 revealing “irregularities along the promenade in the vicinity of the sea wall“. Read more here Holland Haven Sea Wall – Will Tendring District Council Let The Sea Destroy It?
To say the wall was a marginally unstable in 2011 seems a bit of an understatement. Alan Underwood, who runs the shop on Toosey Beach (St Osyth for those not in the know), posted this picture at facebook.com/TendringBeaches.
If this is what happens when the wall is a marginally unstable I wonder what happens when the sea wall becomes completely unstable.
What’s happened or happening since July 2012?
In outline
- I wrote to TDC making FOI requests which they have failed to answer though they have offered a face to face meeting (Good Thing)
- TDC have appointed Mott MacDonald to produce a project appraisal (Good Thing)
- Douglas Carswell has written to me to say TDC is very much on the case, Holland-on-Sea residents and members of beach hut association have been regularly kept informed, so it is not helpful to imply the council is not on the case (????)
- Holland Residents Association and Clacton & Holland Beach Huts Association have meetings at the end of October. Douglas Carswell and TDC councillors are due to attend.
- TDC apparently have £3million in the coastal defence budget for 2012/13 Holland Residents Association and Clacton & Holland Beach Huts Association are campaigning to have this money spent on repairing groynes in 2012/13.
FOI Requests to Mike Badger and TDC
On 3 August I wrote to Mike Badger of TDC saying (among other things)
“Earlier this year I made a FOI request to find out how much money had been spent repairing groynes at Walton, Frinton and Holland. This showed no money had been spent on repairing groynes at Holland since 2009/10. Anyone walking by the beach can see the groynes are in a terrible state of repair, yet where there are some lateral boards these act to trap sand and shingle.
Comparing the groynes with those at Frinton it is easy to see the groynes at Holland are about 1/2 the length and further apart. Also the boards at Frinton and Walton are bolted on which is more secure than the “slot” method used at Holland and Clacton.
Rock groynes have been built at Seawick, Felixstowe and Southwold
so there is a known solution, it’s just a question of coming up with the money.
In the meantime the situation will get worse and TDC will have to continue to pay between £1million to £2million a year on repairing the sea wall at Holland. It has been estimated £16million is required to build rock groynes from the pier to Holland Haven 8 to 16 times the current annual spend.
I ask again is TDC really going to do nothing whilst the sea wall falls into the sea?“
On 16 August Mike Badger wrote back saying
“The coastal processes are complicated and just reinstating the groynes as you are suggesting will not create a beach and therefore I will attempt to briefly explain what has been happening over the last few years and the current position regarding the Holland frontage. The sea walls and groyne system across the Holland frontage were first constructed in the 1950’s and 60’s and there is a long history of falling beach levels.
One of the main reasons for this is that there is a ‘sediment divide’ at Holland with beach material being transported away from the frontage in both north east and south west directions. This is caused by the alignment of the coast at this location,
the tidal and wave conditions that dominate the frontage which produce tidal currents channelled long shore by the off shore sand banks. It is estimated that this wave driven transport results in the loss of about 25000m3 of sediment each year and that the beaches are now lowering at about 150mm per year.
Having said repairing the groynes will not create a beach Mike went on to say (in the same email)
“The conclusion of the consultants extensive study works is that beach recharge is needed to prevent the sea walls from being undermined.
1. With a gravel beach short groynes constructed of rock will work best to hold the beach in place.
2. With a sand beach large fishtailed groynes or off shore groynes, similar to those at Jaywick, is the best option for holding the beach in place against the seawall.”
Is it my imagination or having said groynes will not work did Mike go on to say the only 2 options considered are groynes?
In 2007 the sea wall near Queensway failed. John Ryan (then of TDC) published a report which had a picture of the spot in 2004 and in 2007. I took another picture in August 2012.
2004
2007
20012
Mike claims there is a long history of falling beach levels (at Holland). These photographs show otherwise. In 2004 the sand covers all the steps, but there is a small hole in the groyne. In 2007 the hole in the groyne is bigger and the sand level has dropped a bit (oh and the sea wall has failed)
Coincidence????
By August 2012 the groynes have effectively been destroyed and the level of the sand has dropped to below the steps (which were completely covered in 2004).
It is clear the drop in beach level is recent (within the last 8 years) and caused by the failure of TDC to repair the groynes.
What hope is there for the beach and sea wall?
All the guff about sediment divide stuck me as the sort of thing Environment Agency would say. So I made another FOI request
“As you go on to state
One of the main reasons for this is that there is a ‘sediment divide’ at Holland with beach material being transported away from the frontage in both north east and south west directions. This is caused by the alignment of the coast at this location, the tidal and wave conditions that dominate the frontage which produce tidal currents channelled long shore by the off shore sand banks. It is estimated that this wave driven transport results in the loss of about 25000m3 of sediment each year and that the beaches are now lowering at about 150mm per year.
I have a suspicion your information comes from DEFRA via EA would you please disclose the source of this information.”
The response was
“The sediment divide that you mention in your letter is dependant on (and driven by) the changing direction of wave approach. The sediment divide is not a typical divide where material moves either direction at a point along the coastline.”
Which clearly doesn’t answer the question.
It is entirely unclear to me why there should be special movement of sediment (sand and shingle to you and me) at Holland Haven compared to the rest of the Tendring Coast from the Naze to Seawick.
There seems a much simpler explanation. The groynes from Holland Haven to Clacton Pier
- Are too short
- Too far apart
- Too low (they are covered by sea at high tide in some places)
- Most important of all they have been allowed to almost completely disappear.
Here is a rock groyne at Toosey
The groynes have caused a band of dry sand (about 20 paces deep) to form in front of the sea wall – protecting it from erosion. Most of these groynes are about 98 paces apart.
In the background you can see Alan Underwood’s shop.
And here it is close up.
Alan’s shop is about 90 paces from the groyne to north east, time for another groyne. For whatever reason whoever built the groynes put a little reef here instead of a groyne. So here the groynes are 180 paces apart.
The net result is the sand is about 5 feet lower, there is a much thinner band of dry sand in front of the wall (8 paces instead of 20) and Alan’s shop is in danger of being washed away.
And if that was not enough the road to the beach car park is being severely eroded.
Whilst this is grim for Alan and Huntleys – it serves as a graphic illustration.
Mike Badger claimed repairing the groynes at Holland Have would not recreate a beach, recharge would be necessary.
Photographs clearly show groynes will trap sand and shingle, when they exist.
It is clear the sea has moved sand so it reaches almost to the top of the lateral boards by the sea wall. Surely if the lateral boards went all the way to the top of the vertical posts, then the sea would move more sand so it reached the new top.
However the sea will not move sand so it is ABOVE the lateral boards.
When most of the lateral boards are missing, even if there are one or two still by the sea wall, the groynes don’t work at all.
This blog has several posts with pictures of the state of disrepair of groynes, for example
Holland-On-Sea Beach then and now
Compares a view of the beach now with a few decades ago clearly showing how far the sand has fallen.
The Cost Of Not Maintaining Breakwaters At Holland-On-Sea
TDC has spent around £10million on coastal defense over the last 10 years, almost all of it at Holland. The annual spend seems to be between £1million and £2million.
Money Spent On Wooden Groynes At Holland Frinton and Walton
In contrast only around £40,000 has been spent at Holland repairing wooden groynes.
There have been no repairs since 2009/10. Given the state of groynes it is hard to see there have been any effective repairs at all.
Repaired Groynes At Holland-on-Sea
Apparently the replacement boards were washed away on the first high tide.
The slot and grove method used at Holland and Clacton is far inferior to bolting on boards as is done at Frinton and Walton. Given all beaches are now managed by TDC why continue with such a flawed system?
Groynes and Beaches At Walton Frinton and Holland-On-Sea
Just by pacing the length and separation of the groynes it is clear the groynes at Holland are half the length and further apart than the groynes at Frinton. Also they are in a terrible state of repair.
Is it any wonder this is no beach.
Broken Groynes Mean Poor Beach At Holland Even At Low Tide
A particularly low tide on the 9 May 2012 highlighted the difference between
- Walton and Clacton south of the pier, where there are good beaches.
- And Holland and Clacton north of the pier, where there are very poor beaches.
It also made me realise that it is not just length and spacing of the groynes which controls the beach. The height is crucially important too.
Richard Steward of the Blyth Estuary Group has been researching beaches, groynes and saltmarsh for many years. He has summarised his research in his BEGCritique. I particularly like the description of EA declaring the walls of River Blyth unsustainable, when asked to produce costings they didn’t as it was “unsustainable”!.
Richard has a rule of thumb that groynes need to be at least 1 meter higher than the level of Mean High Water Spring tide for at least 5 meters from sea wall.
Here are some pictures of groynes at high tide
South of Clacton Pier
North of Clacton Pier
By Flags Cafe in Holland-on-Sea
Holland Haven
South of the pier the groynes more or less met Richard’s criteria (as they do at Toosey). They are certainly higher than sea level at high tide.
North of the pier the groynes are completely submerged at high tide. This means they will not work.
At Holland Haven the vertical posts are above the sea level, so if the lateral boards were replaced so they reached near the top of the vertical posts there is a good chance some beach would be recreated (even though the groynes are 1/2 the length and further apart than those at Frinton).
Holland-on-sea near Flags Cafe has been hit by a double whammy.
- The groynes were never high enough
- The groynes have been allowed to completely fall to pieces.
This is more or less the case with the groynes south of the pier.
Survey of Beach Hut Owners
On the weekend of 11 and 12 August I walked along the promenade from Flags Cafe to Holland Have talking to those beach hut owners that were there and willing to talk with me.
They all said virtually the same thing.
- They were disgusted with the state of the beach
- They had complained either by phone and/or in writing to TDC
- They were disgusted with the way they had been treated by TDC, typical statements from TDC were:
- If you don’t like it move
- Just because you have a beach hut, doesn’t give you a right to access the beach, or to have steps to the beach.
In addition several people pointed out the sea has been moving the sand from underneath the rocks placed against the sea wall causing the rocks to drop down.
What To Do?
If you have any photographs or comments you can post them at facebook.com/TendringBeaches
In March 2012 TDC held a “cabinet” to discuss coastal defense. Please read the cabinet report. It’s very long and consists of a TDC wrapper around a report by EA which is a wrapper around a report by Royal Haskoning.
Beach hut owners in Holland should read pages 80 and 81 of the Royal Haskoning report (section 6.2.3). It states
“[this area] is furthest from the tourism focused area around the pier and there are limited establishment amenities in the area”
What about the beach huts??
Isn’t this statement a slap in the face for Flags and Pat’s cafes as well as the sailing club.
On page 81 the report talks about ‘Doing Minimum’ for 15 years then building short rock groynes AS THEY ARE CHEAPER THAN FISHTAILS.
When I talked to beach hut owners some of them pointed out as they are already quite old the chances are they will die before any improvement to the beach.
Other people very strongly voiced the opinion it was wrong for TDC to collect beach hut fees when there was no intention of improving the beach for the next 10 or 15 years. This view was particularly strongly expressed by those who live outside Tendring (e.g. Colchester) and are:
- Charged a higher fee.
- The fee increases at a faster rate than for Tendring residents.
It seems TDC have decided only the region near the pier is important to tourism, the rest (e.g. Holland) is irrelevant. In doing so TDC have abandoned those who live in Holland or who have beach huts there. I wonder why?
Holland Residents Association and Clacton and Holland Beach Hut Association are lobbying TDC to act now and not in 10 or 15 years time. Please support them.
2 Responses to Holland-on-Sea and Tendring Beaches September 2012