Dear Mr Hemsworth

Unfortunately I shall be away on the above date but would like to ensure the following points are made at the meeting (I have copied Mr Jamie Campbell).

Everyone concerned should be made fully aware of the potential impact on Gorleston Beach if the proposed Outer Harbour does indeed become a reality. The site is immediately north of the existing harbour mouth and it will have to be dredged to a depth of a least 9m in order to float ships of up to 8m draft (ref: Amion report). The approximate dimensions of the proposed port are some 320,000 square metres and the volume of material removed would be in the order of 1.4 to 1.6 million cubic metres. In addition to the actual harbour, there would also need to be a wide shipping channel of at least 10m (33ft) water depth dredged through Yarmouth Roads and out beyond Scroby and Holm sandbanks. Thus the total amount of initial spoil rermoved could well be increased to 3 million or more cubic metres. Many people are very concerned about the possible impact of offshore dredging to the shoreline in general and Gorleston beach in particular; so they should be equally, or perhaps very much more, concerned abouth this aspect of the Outer Harbour.

I have already made the point directly to the DfT that the impact and cost of both the surveying and dredging for the proposed Outer Harbour, and the approaches to it, have apparently not been included in the feasibility study ie the Amion report. We also now know (EDP) that the approval given for government funding has completely ignored all technical and financial advice and has been given purely on the grounds of hardship. The means that there is no understanding of peripheral issues and that the government could have approved the demolition of Gorleston beach without even realising it. I am now trying to obtain details of the Environmental Impact Assessment for the Outer Harbour in order to establish what it actually said about the impact on the surroundinf areas. I have some good reasons to suspect that the result of further investigations will show that there is a very real danger to the future of Gorleston beach from this source and it will therefore make complete nonesense of any attempts to monitor the beach configuration, as has been promised over the next five years.

It is obvious that all work to preserve and protect what is probably the very best amenity that Gorleston has to offer to both residents and visitors should be properly coordinated, evaluated and executed. I would therefore suggest that GYBC should form a formal sub-committee to examine, question and approve any and all proposals, which affect the Gorleston area and amenities. One such obvious, but largely ignored item is the East Reef project which is backed by the EEDA. If this interesting idea could be actively encouraged to take place in the southern part of Yarmouth Roads, it would
a) almost guarantee the continued existence of Gorleston beach in its present form
b) prevent all wave damage to the lower promenade
c) incorporate an Outer Harbour of radically different design to that proposed
d) provide the possibility for a great many leisure facilities at Gorleston and the surrounding area

Peter Johnson C.Eng., FRINA

Head of Environment and Health