"The people of Looe that will live with the consequences should have a say in how we want to protect our town." (Save Banjo Pier Group)

WSP's preferred option for the Looe Flood Defence Scheme involves a large outer harbour scheme, including a huge breakwater, doubling the length of our historically protected, internationally recognised Banjo Pier and large harbour flood gates. 

The large breakwater and pier extension will destroy areas of protected wildlife. The inner gates will destroy Nelson’s rock and Pennyland. 

This will significantly alter the landscape of our beloved town, destroy a large portion of the natural environment and change the harbour's feel and operation forever. 

As a result, the people of Looe are in a situation where most agree that a flood defence scheme is required, but very few people agree with the current proposal, and it has been difficult to express these concerns with WSP.

The whole town of Looe, along with the wider community, will be affected by this decision. If we don't speak up now, the default proposal will be an extension to the Banjo Pier, a huge breakwater harbour and a flood gate across the river. Time is running out to voice your opinion. This is the chance to put an alternative on the table.

To try to break the deadlock, a team of locals have engaged with the community and WSP to ensure that the scheme we receive is the best for the town and receives majority support. We have been working tirelessly and have created the template for an alternative solution. 

The Alternative Flood Defence Scheme:

• Meets the economic regeneration goals with further gains possible.
• ⅓ of the size of the WSP option and has no mechanical gate, minimising environmental damage.
• Leaves Banjo Pier untouched.
• Doesn't destroy Nelson's Rock or Pennyland (A flood gate would mean concreting over these places of historical significance)
• Allows the West Looe to Hannafore walkway to be built.
• Allows ferries to be landed and tripping and self-drive boats to be launched at all states of tide.
• Protects the harbour walls. 
• Has historically significant ties to Looe, following the works of Joseph Thomas, architect of the Banjo Pier.
• Doesn't increase the speed of the river.

Our alternative consists of:

• A Small Breakwater Pier from Whiterock, as designed by Joseph Thomas in 1875. This will limit wave action in storms and make the inner harbour solution simpler and smaller. This would have reduced the 2014 floods to very little damage.
• Low-level quay wall with removable access points along East & West Looe to prevent overtopping.
• West Looe pathway extension to the new Breakwater Pier and to Hannafore.
• Breakwater Pier Design 

Original Joseph Thomas design of the Breakwater Pier.

The Breakwater Pier terminates at White Rock and protects the river with a dog-leg design. 

Comparison of WSP Option 1 to Alternative Solution

WSP Proposed Option 1

 

The Alternative Flood Defence Scheme 

The development is approximately 1/3 of the size.

Low-Level Quay Walls

Using an image from WSP's 2m wall proposal, we have highlighted in green where the top of the Alternative Solutions walls may be. This largely retains the view of the quay and will prevent overtopping.

Similar walls at Polperro

Costs

The cost for this solution is in the same region as the other options already presented by WSP, and the cost-to-benefit ratio is about the same as the WSP preferred Option 1.

Support

To get this Alternative Solution on the table and ensure WSP understands that Option 1 is unacceptable, we need to prove that the town and the wider community support this being added to the discussion.

If we don't, WSP will proceed to their preferred option. 

• Our alternative proposal is much less damaging to the environment being 1/3 of the size.
• Our town's unique character and heritage will be protected and not concreted over.
• We must do everything we can to preserve it while still providing suitable flood protection to allow time for the town to adapt.

Please sign this petition if you agree that our proposed alternative solution for Looe's flood defence should be added as an alternative solution to be seriously considered.

We, the people that will live with the consequences, should have a say in how we want to protect our town.

Let us work together to protect our town's future while preserving its past.

Many thanks, Jamie Pearn

FAQs
Why are you against the WSP Option 1?

We favour a smaller development footprint as it’s more environmentally friendly. We favour less disruption to the town's residents, businesses and visitors. We favour a solution that protects the town with many less drawbacks.

Why aren’t the drains being considered? Surely this is the most obvious thing to work on first.

We agree and have been asking the same questions. The Environment Agency (EA) are responsible for managing the risk of flooding from the sea. Cornwall Council as the Lead Local Flood Authority (LLFA) are responsible for managing the risk of flooding from surface water, groundwater and ordinary watercourses.

Since this project was started to deal with rising sea levels and not rising river levels, we assume that this is why the drains aren't really being considered properly. We hope that Southwest Water and Cornwall Council will participate in discussions, as surface flooding is an important issue in the town.

Isn’t adaptation the most important part of this?

We agree that it is. In all proposals, the flood defence still requires adaptation of the town, and the flood defences are simply giving us time for this to happen.

Why are you only proposing this now?

This proposal only really came to light for most of Looe when the NDP was being voted on. Since then, we have been working hard behind the scenes to understand this and to come up with the best alternative we can, covering all issues arising from the schemes.

There have been a lot of factors and figures to consider. WSP has already decided that Option 1 is the scheme they wish to implement, but there is little support for this in the town. An alternative scheme the town can get behind is needed.

Those of us involved in creating this alternative scheme have all come together from different backgrounds, having differing views and have worked together to understand the benefits and drawbacks of each piece of this puzzle. We have learned that Joseph Thomas created the small breakwater plan for a reason, in the same way, he created the Banjo Pier for a reason - which was a huge success. 

Over time our opinions have changed, and we have been able to accept the idea of a small breakwater.

Originally, some of us wanted just a floodgate but have moved away from this idea after learning of its appearance and operation and having fears of the huge running and remedial costs going into the future. 

We now understand, after many discussions with WSP, that economic regeneration is a vital part of funding any solution and that it is important that any solution benefits the town economically. 

This led us to understand that the economic regeneration could be even greater with a Breakwater Pier landing onto West Looe.

Could large tanks be installed under the car parks to remove flood water and push it back out at low tide?

Yes they could, but this is a large proposition to put forward within just a few weeks. This is something SWW and Cornwall Council would need to get involved with as mentioned above. We are focusing on support for a smaller breakwater which will allow the discussion of this solution to take place with WSP.

What about the area upstream of the bridge?

The alternative solution doesn’t make recommendations for this. It’s accepted that adaptation and further walls might be required to protect some assets past the bridge. Further discussions can occur in the future when we have put the Alternative Solution on the table for public viewing.

Were all of the original monetary figures of damage caused and business growth to be gained accurate?

No, we believe the quoted figure of £39m of damage in a 5-year period is closer to £2m. However, the important thing is to put forward an alternative solution, and we hope that most of the town agrees with this. It's the least disruptive, it's achievable, and it will protect Looe for the coming years to allow us to adapt.

Is Looe the most frequently flooded town in the UK?

There is no data at all to confirm this. Residents of Looe will know that it occasionally floods at a high tide or with high rainfall. There have been some bad floods in the past. 

But the claim that it's the most frequently flooded town has to be counted as false without data to back it up. Many of us have spent hours trying to find this, and it seems to be a circular reference created and repeated endlessly.

Who are you?

We are a small group of people, including local business owners, residents, those with experience from the quay and people with young families who are looking to protect their town for the present and future generations.

Some have lived here their whole lives, others a few years, and we have ages ranging from 20s to 60s. We have formed from the Save Banjo Pier group and several other local residents offering their expertise and opinion. 

What about the environmental groups?

LMCGs position is that the ‘WSP Preferred Option 1’ with the large outer harbour and extension to the Banjo is not supported because the option would cause avoidable environmental damage. It is not clear if LMCG would support or oppose the alternative solution.

What material would the breakwater be built from?

We hope it’s in keeping with the look and feel of Looe. We believe this should be similar to the look of the Banjo Pier.

Could the harbour wall be used as seating/a walkway/crabbing area?

 Probably. We have considered that the harbour walls could be set back from the quay slightly, allowing for benches along the quay, making these defences into usable assets for the town. It’s too early to get into specifics of what this looks like.

Would the Breakwater Pier be usable or a pile of rocks?

Our plan would be for it to be usable from both sides, with possibly a small pontoon on the inside.

What are you trying to achieve?

We hope to get the Alternative Solution on the table and show that the public is in favour of this. This would suggest the public are against the WSP Option 1. After that, the town and its residents should have more say in how this project goes ahead.

What about Open Port Duty?

The Alternative Flood Defence Solution removes any concerns of Open Port Duty.

What do the Looe Town Council and the Harbour Commissioners think about this?

All we really know is what has been repeated many times by different town representatives. Many of them seem to favour a scheme that will protect Looe and provide economic regeneration, but they are non-commital on what scheme that is. 

How can I show support?

Thank you. Please sign the petition, and don’t forget to verify it by checking your email and following the link.

Banjo Pier

 

White Rock

In the foreground is White Rock. The rocks 30m in the background show the Option 1 location for the breakwater.