Sand has been eroded at Hutley gap, allowing the sea to erode the sea wall and potentially flood the holiday camp. Work aimed at preventing this has started
Rock groynes were built at Seawick around 1998. 5 groynes were placed about 90 paces apart and have good beaches, 1 groyne was 180 paces away with a reef at about 90 paces. The beach here has eroded.
Sadly it seems the plan is to build revetments (pile rocks against the sea wall) instead of replacing the reef with a groyne.
I strongly suspect this will not work.
Looking at the reef from Hutley gap.
Looking at Hutley gap from north.
Close up showing an earlier attempt with small rocks in cages which did not work.
A beach where the groynes are about 90 paces apart. You can see there is dry sand in front of the sea wall. This stops the sea from eroding the wall.
This photograph was taken within a minute of the one above. In the photo above the sea is at the sea wall, in the photo below the sea is tens of years from the sea wall. Yet only 1 groyne, a yard or 2 wide, separates these beaches.
Google images show how the sand has been eroded since the groynes were built, but only were the reef is.
31 December 2000
31 December 2005
6 Nov 2006
31 December 2009
4 April 2014
2020
This photo, from Mike Page around 2014, show the only place where the sand has been eroded (allowing the sea to attack sea wall) is at Hutley’s were the reef is.
Is it logical to think if there was a groyne here instead of a reef the erosion would have been reduced if not stopped?
You can read more (a lot) here
idox.tendringdc.gov.uk/online-applications/
enter 20/000580/FUL in the search box labelled
Enter a keyword, reference number, postcode or single line of an address.
then you can access the 67 documents filed for this application
This is what Environment Agency has to say.
EA has been monitoring and reporting on the coast for example
Coastal Morphology Report Harwich to Canvey Island 20April 2015
but doesn’t appear to notice the difference between where there are groynes and reefs.
