Surf Reef RSS Feed


'Reef has soaked up enough council tax'

6:00am Monday 19th July 2010 in


WARNINGS that the £3 million bill for Boscombe surf reef could rise further if its faults are going to be rectified have been blasted by a residents’ leader.

Parry Brooks from Boscombe Cliff Residents’ Association is now seeking assurances from Bournemouth council that no more council tax payers’ money will be splashed out on the tourist attraction.

He spoke out after a council cross-party panel was formed to consider “technical solutions” to improve the reef’s performance.

Panel members Cllr Basil Ratcliffe, Cllr Roger West, Cllr Ben Grower and Cllr Michael Everingham will liaise with the Boscombe Spa Village project board as well as surfing and business representatives before making their recommendations this autumn.

Mr Parry said: “There is still a huge amount of work to do in order to realise the original concept of the Local Plan for the regeneration of Boscombe as whole.

“This will require much investment over the next few years and we therefore cannot spend more money on the reef.

“Due to the overspend on Boscombe Spa and the lack of sales for the surf pods, in order to pay for it, there is already a large financial ‘black hole’ which the council tax payers are going to have to cover.”

Ward councillor Phil Stanley-Watts shared his sentiments. He said: “I definitely don’t want to see any more ratepayers’ money spent on the surf reef.

“What I do want is to see the reef completed – leaving it in its present state would be a disaster for Boscombe. Every avenue must be explored to find additional funding from other sources.”

Bournemouth council is withholding a £150,000 performance-based payment to New Zealand based contractors ASR until the reef has been rectified.

Work on improving the reef, which is failing to meet four out of its 11 objectives, is expected to start next April or May.

Comments(51)

McVICAR says...
9:09pm Sun 18 Jul 10

Why should any more of our money be wasted on this heap of c**p built mainly for the rich kids, most serious surfers go to Newquay where the surf is the best, the night life is great and you dont have to wait for months for the right weather to generate a wave, this thing shold never have been built and our money should never have been wasted by this council full of no brainers, stop trying to change nature, Cornwall was made for surfing Dorset is not, the sooner you realise that the better.

Report this post »    Register/Log In »

High Treason says...
9:28pm Sun 18 Jul 10

£3 million wasted and it will never work but simply rot away. Why doesen't the council ask tax payers first, after all they only have to print a form in that load of council propaganda BH Lies.

Report this post »    Register/Log In »

free wessex says...
10:03pm Sun 18 Jul 10

Thanks to the council, my home town because of this reef, is now a national laughing stock.
All of them should do the honourable thing and resign and fight an election now!

Report this post »    Register/Log In »

charley farley west parley says...
10:08pm Sun 18 Jul 10

It's a shame but i really wanted the surf reef to succeed. I believe the original intentions were good, but unfortunately as with any ambitious plan, there was always the danger of things not going to plan.
However, we have to make the most of a bad lot. We should start a huge advertising campaign trumpeting the fact that the Boscombe surf reef is the best performing surf reef in the whole of Europe, which, as it is the only surf reef in Europe is true!

Report this post »    Register/Log In »

Jim C-H says...
10:19pm Sun 18 Jul 10

Perhaps I'm speaking out of turn (being merely a BU student thus a non-tax paying, and practically non-Bournemouth resident), however I'm very interested in this story.

Every time I have been to Boscombe pier, the area has seemed very busy, even when the weather has been bleak. This leads me to believe that the rejuvenation of the area has so far been successful, and therefore to stop now wouldn't make sense.

Yes the reef itself doesn't appear to work, but it truly would be a waste to abandon it now. If this panel of councillors can figure out a way to improve the reef to a decent standard, shouldn't those corrections be made? Even if the reef is only improved a little, think of the vast amount of people who would rather use it than travel the extra few hours to
Cornwall. From my home in Surrey, I could easily visit Bournemouth many times a year for surfing (assuming I wasn't a student there anyway), but I wouldn't make the journey to Cornwall more than one a year; it's just too long and expensive. Furthermore, I could drive to Boscombe, spent the day there and drive back meaning I could come down for day trips every weekend or so.

The reef has potential. Obviously, if its never going to work then it shouldn't have been built in the first place, but what good does it do to whine about that? As I see it, every resident who's tax money has paid for this should be wishing for and supporting improvements. Maybe it will take a little more investment, but if it is improved then it will pay for itself.

Having said that, the reef is "failing to meet four out of its 11 objectives"? What exactly are the 7 that its managed to achieved?

Report this post »    Register/Log In »

Glashen says...
10:58pm Sun 18 Jul 10

Jim C-H wrote:
Perhaps I'm speaking out of turn (being merely a BU student thus a non-tax paying, and practically non-Bournemouth resident), however I'm very interested in this story.

Every time I have been to Boscombe pier, the area has seemed very busy, even when the weather has been bleak. This leads me to believe that the rejuvenation of the area has so far been successful, and therefore to stop now wouldn't make sense.

Yes the reef itself doesn't appear to work, but it truly would be a waste to abandon it now. If this panel of councillors can figure out a way to improve the reef to a decent standard, shouldn't those corrections be made? Even if the reef is only improved a little, think of the vast amount of people who would rather use it than travel the extra few hours to
Cornwall. From my home in Surrey, I could easily visit Bournemouth many times a year for surfing (assuming I wasn't a student there anyway), but I wouldn't make the journey to Cornwall more than one a year; it's just too long and expensive. Furthermore, I could drive to Boscombe, spent the day there and drive back meaning I could come down for day trips every weekend or so.

The reef has potential. Obviously, if its never going to work then it shouldn't have been built in the first place, but what good does it do to whine about that? As I see it, every resident who's tax money has paid for this should be wishing for and supporting improvements. Maybe it will take a little more investment, but if it is improved then it will pay for itself.

Having said that, the reef is "failing to meet four out of its 11 objectives"? What exactly are the 7 that its managed to achieved?
Very balanced resume of the situation. We were assured along the way that £150,000 retention would be sufficient to make good any shortfall in the reefs performance, that is looking less than certain now, but maybe we shouldn't jump to conclusions.
-
The comments on here from Peter Charon do give the impression that someone may actually be in charge of this project and the whole council, let's hope so. Regarding the 4 out of 11 objectives the story above, has it the wrong way round it has only met 4 of the 11 according to the report. http://www.bournemou
thecho.co.uk/resourc
es/files/9913

Report this post »    Register/Log In »

ta2 says...
11:05pm Sun 18 Jul 10

Sorry if I'm missing something, but why are we paying for something which doesn't live up to the agreed specification? Sue the crap out of the idiots who built it.

Report this post »    Register/Log In »

madfromdorset says...
11:40pm Sun 18 Jul 10

What most fail to understand it is not just the £3.6m that was paid out from public money to input the Surf Reef, but also the majority of the renovation project was paid in the same way. This cost totalled well over £12m, waiting for the Pods to be sold, and likewise witht the Barrett homes and flats. None of this came to fruiton, therefore it is obvious that the Council Tax payers of Bournemouth do not want to pay anymore. ASR will not return to fix it, they have been paid, so to hold back £150k is just like stopping someones pocket money. Like many projects in this town, the people are not consulted, they are never given a proper heads up, only on matters some 25 years ahead. I hope Mr. Charon puts his foot down on this, and stops any further cash being used, even if it means the Surf Reef loses out.

Report this post »    Register/Log In »

Xchurch-man says...
12:23am Mon 19 Jul 10

We are all expected, by Mr Cameron, to "take our share of the pain".
This stupid surf reef has already caused enough pain for the taxpayers of Bournemouth.
Enough is enough, cancel all further spending on this and protect valuable services.

Report this post »    Register/Log In »

beachcomber1 says...
1:03am Mon 19 Jul 10

McVICAR wrote:
Why should any more of our money be wasted on this heap of c**p built mainly for the rich kids, most serious surfers go to Newquay where the surf is the best, the night life is great and you dont have to wait for months for the right weather to generate a wave, this thing shold never have been built and our money should never have been wasted by this council full of no brainers, stop trying to change nature, Cornwall was made for surfing Dorset is not, the sooner you realise that the better.
Is the Newquay nightlife better than Bmouth???

Report this post »    Register/Log In »

Gastines says...
6:59am Mon 19 Jul 10

While the area in general has improved,along a very short stretch of the sea-front,Boscombe as a whole has not. The only news one hears about the area on Radio/T.V. and BBC web sites is about the underperforming reef.only meeting 4of the 11 criteria according to BBC,the unfinished pier,the surf-pods not selling etc.etc. It's a pity some cash wasn't spent on a Police force to rid the place of the drug dealers,hopefully the druggies would follow, some road sweepers who can get a broom around the main area and back streets instead of a motorised vehicle that whizzes by the parked cars.I think it would be fair to say that income to pay for the Reef won't come from surfers.Having lived in St.Clements Rd up till my teens, I despair at the state of the whole area now.

Report this post »    Register/Log In »

Dorset Mitch says...
7:01am Mon 19 Jul 10

beachcomber1 wrote:
McVICAR wrote: Why should any more of our money be wasted on this heap of c**p built mainly for the rich kids, most serious surfers go to Newquay where the surf is the best, the night life is great and you dont have to wait for months for the right weather to generate a wave, this thing shold never have been built and our money should never have been wasted by this council full of no brainers, stop trying to change nature, Cornwall was made for surfing Dorset is not, the sooner you realise that the better.
Is the Newquay nightlife better than Bmouth???
Nope, Newquay is full of 'wannabe' surfers down on holiday, the clubs are packed with holiday makers (and even more stag do's).

The true surfers head to where its best, that could be North Devon, north of Newquay or south of Newquay they even head North and into Wales.

Surfing is a big industry with a lot of people wanting to give it a go. I can see why Bournemouth Council wanted to get in on this but it is a flop.

Report this post »    Register/Log In »

tangogran says...
8:07am Mon 19 Jul 10

At risk of repeating myself (again), if we have bought something which is not suitable for the purpose for which it is intended we should be asking for our money back.

Report this post »    Register/Log In »

McVICAR says...
8:12am Mon 19 Jul 10

beachcomber1 wrote:
McVICAR wrote:
Why should any more of our money be wasted on this heap of c**p built mainly for the rich kids, most serious surfers go to Newquay where the surf is the best, the night life is great and you dont have to wait for months for the right weather to generate a wave, this thing shold never have been built and our money should never have been wasted by this council full of no brainers, stop trying to change nature, Cornwall was made for surfing Dorset is not, the sooner you realise that the better.
Is the Newquay nightlife better than Bmouth???
Yes, and not so much trouble either.

Report this post »    Register/Log In »

Was Charlie says...
8:25am Mon 19 Jul 10

Jim C-H wrote:
"I could drive to Boscombe, spent the day there and drive back meaning I could come down for day trips every weekend or so."
.......
So you'll be able to afford to park in Boscombe all day? Lucky you.
.........
The Atlantic hitting the west coast provides the right type of waves - Bournemouth isn't on the west Atlantic coast.
..........
Besides which, the sea bed moves, and because of that, in time, the bags of the reef will too, altering its profile and making it even more useless than it is now. Did ASR tell the council what they estimated the life of the reef to be? Bet they didn't, and it probably didn't occur to those on the council so eager to spend this money that it would have a finite life and they'd not only end up as laughing stocks, but damage the reputation of Bournemouth as well.

Report this post »    Register/Log In »

Mediclogan5 says...
8:26am Mon 19 Jul 10

What's so obscene about this Surf Reef Project and its regeneration of the area is the huge sums of tax payers money involved and that it was not designed for everybody. It is purely exclusive for those who have money, the High Rise flats and 'Pods' on the beach are priced way above mainstream families, as for surfing its probably the most expensive of all water sports, I use 'Animal' stores and the themed bars and resteraunts as examples. Boscombe is by no means an affluent neighbourhood, and to make this project as a way to making money and changing the face and Image of Boscombe Sea front at the expense of the local populations needs is in my opinion not only obscene but shows a lack of imagination to providing a facility that EVERYONE can use. £3 Million could have built an indoor sports complex or an indoor pool hey even an Ice Rink. This pandering to the affluent in a non affluent locality is just so wrong.

Report this post »    Register/Log In »

HughJarse says...
8:28am Mon 19 Jul 10

Has anyone from the council heard of the 'sale of goods act?'. This reef has been shown to be unfit for purpose. They have had ample opportunity to put things right and have failed. Lets draw a line under this and get our money back.

Report this post »    Register/Log In »

rainbowkisses says...
8:43am Mon 19 Jul 10

tangogran wrote:
At risk of repeating myself (again), if we have bought something which is not suitable for the purpose for which it is intended we should be asking for our money back.
Would that include all the back handers and other "incentives"? Can you really see this Council having the b***s to stand up to ASR? They will um and ahh for a bit, then go ahead and waste even more of OUR money. I agree that heads should roll over this huge waste of tax payers money, but it's not going to happen. We've already seen the "old boys" network in action, and I'm not holding my breath on anything changing. You better get a move on Mr Charon, you only have to May to convince us that you have got things under control and you are actually listening to our paymasters.

Report this post »    Register/Log In »

Adrian Fudge says...
8:48am Mon 19 Jul 10

I repeat my recent comments
When the cost went up to £3.2M we were told they had got better guarantees . Now there is no mention of this .
Also the additional expenditure was to be covered by the share of the increased sale price of the flats and the sale of the beach huts
It doesnt appear that either of these is happening so it does look like the extra costs will have to be met by the Capital Fund
The impact on Council tax will be either from the loss of earnings on the Capital used or if there is insufficient funding available a contribution to Capital from Revenue or the cost of borrowing

Report this post »    Register/Log In »

BmthNewshound says...
8:49am Mon 19 Jul 10

The consensus appears to be that enough is enough, no more money should be spent on the Surf Reef. Let’s hope that common sense prevails and that Councillors do the right thing and spend no more of the Councils scarce funds on this project.
.
My message to Cllr. Charon and his colleagues is simply, to spend more money on this project whilst at the same time cutting public services and jobs would be nothing short of political suicide.

Report this post »    Register/Log In »

Bob49 says...
9:43am Mon 19 Jul 10

"£3 million wasted"

.

Wrong, I'm afraid. Without the cover of the surf reef and all it's wondrous benefits the developers (and others) would not have been able to get their greedy hands on the sea front land. That was the real intention of this sham.


.


"It doesnt appear that either of these is happening so it does look like the extra costs will have to be met by the Capital Fund"


.


This is the major issue here. Not tosh about tweaking, it, but the fcat that we were told that it was to be self funding. IT IS NOT. The projection so far is that we will have to find anothe £3m to bail it out, with every likelihood that this will be a running sore of rising costs.


.


The saddest part of this fiasco is not the obvious flaws that were there from the start but the gutless attitude of the local taxpayers who failed to stop this buffoonery.


.

Something that is now taking shape in King's Park under the guise of an Ice Rink. A huge tract of open green space is going to built on to provide for a doomed financial venture but a mini golf an outdoor archery centre.


.


Has any thought been given to how often these latter two will be used, Mon-Fri from Sept - June ?

.

What will happen, as with the Imax and the reef, is that the developers will simply build what THEY want whilst the local populace will be indifferent till afterwards. The council will do it's usual handwringing 'Curate's egg' job and we will all, again, be that much poorer, both culturaly and financialy.

Report this post »    Register/Log In »

KLH says...
1:43pm Mon 19 Jul 10

I know how to make it not cost a single penny more - asking for people to volunteer their time and effort to remove it and put the area back to how it was before....

Think there will be a queue to Bournemouth Pier!!

Report this post »    Register/Log In »

madfromdorset says...
1:56pm Mon 19 Jul 10

Most talk of the £3m, £3.2m or £3.6m spend on the Surf Reef. What most fail to understand that this was the cost of the reef, regardless of what figure is used. However, the over all cost was in excess of £12m with the likes of Roger Brown, Beverley Dunlop and Co insuring us that the money would be recouped from the sale of the Pods, and again with the sale of the houses and flats, and finally from revenue from the Sea Front area. To date a handful of the cheaper Pods have been sold, the rest, including the larger ones remain unsold. Who wants to buy something you can not use after dark, ie, no sleepiing, no washing facilities, etc. Not only do you pay for a day accommodation, but then you have to pay extortionate fees to stay in a hotel over night. We must not lose sight of this fact that more money was used than the £3m plus for the Reef. Without the Reef, the rest would not have come to fruition. Finally, being in a tidal bay, I would imagine that the reef would last around ten years, but detiorating all the time from now. As for ASR, do they give a ****, NO.

Report this post »    Register/Log In »

boracay says...
2:13pm Mon 19 Jul 10

Well as I work myself in Construction I know myself if they do go ahead the bill will be another One Million Pounds and even then i realy doubt that this reaf will ever be Commercialy Viable, becouse of the cost they have payed out and continue to pay out. It should be all sold off to a Lesure Company to regain back the losses to the tax payer. No certanty that it will ever work right after another big pay out!!

Report this post »    Register/Log In »

Bob49 says...
3:33pm Mon 19 Jul 10

"It should be all sold off to a Lesure Company to regain back the losses to the tax payer2

.

eh ?


'

Why on earth would any leisure company want with a few sunken sandbags ? Besides the futilty of this hidden idiocy there is the hidden liability of future costs - open ended at that !

.

Given how it is already moving it is not unlikely that it will reach a stage where it will become a public danger. We are not told the cost to the council of their share of the RNLI 'lookout'. Something that will undoubtedly have to remain until the snadbags finally split and nature takes it's course.


.


And as far as cost goes perhaps somebody could tell us why, and at what cost the lights have been left on in at the surf pod buildng every night since last summer. As nobody is allowed to stay there after dark they serve no purpose, neither are they likely to attract any buyers at 3 am.

.

So lets have the council tell us how much this has cost and from what budget has it come from.


.


There

Report this post »    Register/Log In »

chris100 says...
4:10pm Mon 19 Jul 10

sack all the people who deciced to waste money on a pile of sand

Report this post »    Register/Log In »

reefwatching says...
4:44pm Mon 19 Jul 10

It could be worse - you could be a taxpayer in Borth, West Wales. It appears that they are ploughing ahead with their ASR-designed surf reef, despite all that has happened at Boscombe and in NZ. Barmy doesn't even begin to describe it. ASR must be laughing their heads off!

Report this post »    Register/Log In »

WIGGINSv says...
5:21pm Mon 19 Jul 10

tangogran wrote:
At risk of repeating myself (again), if we have bought something which is not suitable for the purpose for which it is intended we should be asking for our money back.
You can ask sport, but the answer will still be the same: "Naff orf !"

Report this post »    Register/Log In »

bourne free says...
5:33pm Mon 19 Jul 10

Why are you all so short sited , if the reef would not have been built boscombe sea front would still be an embarrassing hole where as now its quite nice to walk along that part now. If you want to bin it when its near the end you will be the first to complain that boscombe is again a dosser hole.

Report this post »    Register/Log In »

dribble says...
6:14pm Mon 19 Jul 10

@Bob49 - you mentioned the reef moving ...
..
Do you have evidence of this or can you point us in the direction of information about reef movement?
.. I'd be very interested in exactly how far it's moved, why and what the difference in the wave is because of that movement

Report this post »    Register/Log In »

Mediclogan5 says...
6:25pm Mon 19 Jul 10

bourne free wrote:
Why are you all so short sited , if the reef would not have been built boscombe sea front would still be an embarrassing hole where as now its quite nice to walk along that part now. If you want to bin it when its near the end you will be the first to complain that boscombe is again a dosser hole.
The Reef could have been something better for the use of all not just those who are rich enough to enjoy this facility..when it works. Its not a question of being short sighted as much as wanting our tax money to be used for every ones benefit. The beach area of Boscombe lacked development yes but improving it should not be to the amount of money that's been blatantly wasted.

Report this post »    Register/Log In »

Azphreal says...
7:19pm Mon 19 Jul 10

bourne free (Poole) have you ever been to Boscombe since the 'regeneration'? NOTHING has changed about the drugs and street walking, When wil the council realise that 'regeneration' is not just building expensive properties or things for tourists its about doing something for the people who LIVE in these areas.

Report this post »    Register/Log In »

Corrupto says...
7:37pm Mon 19 Jul 10

Time to name and shame those who so much wanted this for their own agenda. Witch Hunt? surely more a lesson. Let these Preditors pocket no more.

Report this post »    Register/Log In »

boracay says...
7:47pm Mon 19 Jul 10

Boscombe has alway's been a dosser's place even when i remember going back in my early teens over 30 years ago. No matter what they do in construction in this area it will remain the same as it's the people that make it that way. You have the same mindset people living their as when i was 19 walking through that area. People dont change that much in life, still the crime capital of Bournemouth.

Report this post »    Register/Log In »

bourne free says...
7:57pm Mon 19 Jul 10

mediclogin. a day at the beach is a very cheap days enjoyment compared to other days out ,your tax money is going on the areas benifits as 90% are on it. how much of this reef money has come from defra which is never mentioned ? if an expensive car fails its mot would you dump it and buy a bike?

Report this post »    Register/Log In »

Corrupto says...
8:00pm Mon 19 Jul 10

bourne free wrote:
mediclogin. a day at the beach is a very cheap days enjoyment compared to other days out ,your tax money is going on the areas benifits as 90% are on it. how much of this reef money has come from defra which is never mentioned ? if an expensive car fails its mot would you dump it and buy a bike?
if an expensive car fails its mot would you dump it and buy a bike?

err, fancy becoming a Councilor?

Report this post »    Register/Log In »

bourne free says...
8:30pm Mon 19 Jul 10

corrupto i think i would sooner be england football manager ,i could afford to by my own reef in the india ocean !!

Report this post »    Register/Log In »

mta says...
9:50pm Mon 19 Jul 10

Whenever the reef is refered to in the echo , someone brings up the DEFRA paying for it (bournefree this time) a wall of silence falls on this ? so its not bournemouth tax payers money its all tax payers money?

Report this post »    Register/Log In »

Bob49 says...
10:14pm Mon 19 Jul 10

"you mentioned the reef moving ....Do you have evidence of this"

.

"There’s been some uneven settlement, the reef is kind of lumpy.” Mr Weight, a leading member of the Wessex Surf Club, 16th January 2010

.

"...or can you point us in the direction of information about reef movement?"

.
.

Yes, turn left at Boscombe and walk about 200 yards. Best to go at low tide otherwise there is nothing to let you know where the reef is - ie waves, surfers etc. At low tide you can see the big gouge in the middle that is getting more noticable by the month (you may need a few visits to appreciate the movement)

.

"...and what the difference in the wave is because of that movement"

.

err, see above (there are NO waves)

'

Report this post »    Register/Log In »

marjorie01 says...
10:39pm Mon 19 Jul 10

Counsellor Sharon is now officially the Leader of the council and has put Cllr Beasley as Deputy. - Sorry Cllr Sharon, I am very disappointed in your choice.

I hope you do better with the many problems including the surf reef

Report this post »    Register/Log In »

marjorie01 says...
10:45pm Mon 19 Jul 10

And as a matter of interest I attended the full council meeting this evening as a visitor and it begain by two counsillors apologising for their behaviour - sending racialist text and getting drunk - the other councillors didnt seem at all interested. Good to know we have people like that making decisions for us. Oh yes and one was doing a crossword puzzle.
I would encourage more people to attend this council meetings - you would then really get to know how things are done.

Report this post »    Register/Log In »

psal says...
11:03pm Mon 19 Jul 10

3 million for something that doesn't work! The company who designed and put this thing in place should be forced to stay on the job until it produces the results they promised or give it back to them and get OUR money back. Yes our money, the council tax payers. Why didn't they simply dump a wrecked ship or a pile of rocks on the sea bed, this would have produced more waves than the so called reef. Pathetic.

Report this post »    Register/Log In »

Roginthesouth says...
7:57am Tue 20 Jul 10

tangogran wrote:
At risk of repeating myself (again), if we have bought something which is not suitable for the purpose for which it is intended we should be asking for our money back.
I don’t have any personal knowledge about surf reefs, but do concerning the processes relating to procurement, particularly when spending public money.
If only four of the eleven objectives have been achieved, then the contractual requirements (if correctly drafted) have not been met. The council should now ensure the contractors return at their cost until the agreed objectives have been met or as a last resort, sue for a complete recovery of costs, and return the area to its previous condition
I have also made similar comments previously, and the fact neither of these actions are yet in place, does seem to indicate deficiencies in the overall management and initial procurement processes relating to this project.

Report this post »    Register/Log In »

wonderway says...
8:34am Tue 20 Jul 10

will some one ask for full costings so far because still outstanding from audit commitee findings are £250,000 for shifting and sifting sand and £30,000 0f fuel which was to be recovered from ASR has it so why not please where is furniture and chatels that the council bought to furnish the flats the council sold these?

Report this post »    Register/Log In »

H2oHara says...
11:23am Tue 20 Jul 10

As I've said before ! Is there a possibility that the N.Zealand contractors can give a refund for something so costly and simply doesn't work ?!

Report this post »    Register/Log In »

time nor Tide says...
12:44pm Tue 20 Jul 10

dribble wrote:
@Bob49 - you mentioned the reef moving ... .. Do you have evidence of this or can you point us in the direction of information about reef movement? .. I'd be very interested in exactly how far it's moved, why and what the difference in the wave is because of that movement
@dibble if you look here you will also see for yourself
.
http://www.bbc.co.uk

/news/uk-england-106

33474

.
shows a dismaying picture of sandbags that have little resemblance to any form of order. When compared with the diagrams on this next link
.
http://news.bbc.co.u

k/2/hi/uk_news/engla

nd/dorset/8688693.st

m
.
one wonders if its the same thing at all? Something has gone terribly wrong between the plans as shown on the second link and the bulging bumps with huge gaps in between on the first link.

.
how can anyone have any faith in the person/persons responsible for the debacle depicted in the BBC photograph I just dont know?
.
I also think that anyone seeing these pictures would also have the same total loss of confidence

Report this post »    Register/Log In »

Bob49 says...
2:05pm Tue 20 Jul 10

Nevermind 'tweaking' the wretched thing, it must be closed off as quickly as possible so as to avoid any serious harm.

.

If it has broken up and moved within months or completion there is every likelihood that further detirioration will continue - now and after any tweaking.

.

With the schools holidays approaching it is most probable that we will have kids paddling out to climb onto it.

.

We can sort out who should be held negligent for this sham later. Any enquiry should not be set against the background of a tragic accident.


.

In the meantime set a very competitive and realistic day hire rate for the pods over the 6 week holiday period. Allow a few more quality traders around the pier selling ice cream and food so as to provide a bit of competition and generate some income for the council.


.


Make it into the fun, family place we were told it would be - not the gated community and over priced bar/cafe, with little all else, it is now.


.


Maybe a Punch and Judy show, featuring the council's inept attempts at regeneration " that's not the way to do it"

.

.

Report this post »    Register/Log In »

Bournefre says...
8:11pm Tue 20 Jul 10

It sounds like this surf reef was the biggest waste of money since the Imax.
Give it a couple of months and it will be time to give up on it, knock it down and build something equally as ambitious in it's place.
Why not a waterpark, but in the sea?

Report this post »    Register/Log In »

Norman Mead says...
12:03pm Wed 21 Jul 10

What is needed to make the reef work better is some bags of rubbish old posters. I can think of a few that could be put in a sack and held down with a lump of concrete. No one would miss them.

Report this post »    Register/Log In »

time nor Tide says...
7:46pm Wed 21 Jul 10

another shill?

Report this post »    Register/Log In »

time nor Tide says...
8:05am Thu 22 Jul 10

@norman meade
.
I think the people you harbor ill-will towards are not happy with some commercial interests and individuals wishing to continually suckle on the tit of the taxpayer -especially for them displaying "minimalist" results for being paid maximum rewards.
.
Do you really blame them when those same suppliers , partys and persons have yet to display any real cost/benefits for their invaluable products
.
I suppose its just human nature
to not want to let go of a straw into a honey/money pot, a milch cow or the taxpayers tit?

So you may feel infanticide or euthanasia suitable ways of solving your problems - but that so far out of the usual to be a bit of a worry actually?

Report this post »    Register/Log In »

More Surf Reef stories


'Reef has soaked up enough council tax' 'Reef has soaked up enough council tax'

Most popular







Local Information

Enter your postcode, town or place name

House prices »   Schools »   Crime »   Hospitals »

Local Businesses