Home. Archive Map. Archive A-G. Archive H-Z.

2008 Felixstowe’s Fate

Home | Search and Site Map

Come Hell of High Water Council Pet Building Plan to go Ahead...... Immediate  Expert Demolition

The phrase ‘Come Hell or High Water’ probably originates from the cattle drives in the west, when cattle were driven through desert conditions and then through swollen rivers on the way to sale yards. However a more literal form of the words could well take place at Felixstowe as the SCDC desperately wastes more money and time in demolishing buildings on the south Sea Front Land  so their pet scheme can go ahead.

3 March 2008 No sign of the Beach defence Work starting  but expert demolition by the council of the three empty cottages , (caused to be empty of course by the council)

Historically Sir Winston Churchill as well as Queen Victoria who were both involved in the Coastguard cottages  must be  turning into their graves. The Press release statement that;

"Demolishing these properties now will not only be a step forward in readying the site for redevelopment, but it will also prevent them becoming more of an eyesore and magnet for vandals.

Residents wonder, who are the real vandals ? With the loss of Felixstowe’s  lovely buildings such as the Herman De Stern

No further Parking on the land .

Council notice information on cars parked  on the land to those visiting  Felixstowe

Is it part of the usual ‘out of this world reality’ of organised  council traffic chaos to regenerate Felixstowe ? Watch this space.

Not further Parking on land

Cattle will Probably not be driven through Felixstowe South Seafront Land but high Water Might

The redevelopment refers to the scheme in which the council appeared to break all their own rules to get through planning procedure. It was rejected by residents and visitors alike, together with all the societies and preservation  groups.

The original area plan, was to use the land for  recreation and leisure and now is to become a glorified  building site.

What appeared to be mock”consultations” and PR exercises resulted  in  resounding NO from all concerned,

The council has a cosy arrangement the  the builder and land is to  given away the land at a real bargain price has been hotly debated over the years.

Government regulations and instructions have been cleverly sidestepped so that the project can be put into place.

Also cleverly the Government has been  blamed for all that has taken place in the delay in the sea defence  work although the council failed to submit the funding application in time.

The safest and best use of the land which is obvious to residents and visitors  is to use the land for its original  laid down purpose ‘leisure’  which would be far less expensive both now and for future maintenance costs  which will have to be paid for by the council tax payer.