Redcar: by the sea?

[BoroBot]

Redcar: by the sea?
Not any more it isn’t
Redcar & Cleveland County Council leaders swore vengeance on those dastardly Coatham Common protestors.
Phase1 walled containment:
The new brick in the sea wall is designed to contain any more dissident actions.
Phase2: “we can now spy easier on you”:
The Hub construction is on target.
Phase3: ancillary containment:
Razor wire mines & enormous swirling bladed things offshore to deter escape attempts are planned for the near future.

A drive along the coast to see the sea takes on a whole new meaning at “Redcar by the walled out Sea”



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VZbM_MIz4RM

bill
Posts: 7
Joined: 06 Aug 2011
From the Better Middlesbrough (??) blog
much of the redevelopment in Redcar seems to attract criticism from many (myself included) for not taking into account its history as a seaside resort and the ensuing ‘concrete-ification’ of the Promenade. (Great idea to force visitors to use the tower, make the sea defences so high that it’s the only way to see the sea!)
More ill-informed rant from the master of ignorance. If he'd done his research he'd be aware that the promenade pavement is being raised.
I notice he uses the same MO when it comes to criticising the Boro. Hearsay, guesswork and supposition.
Still waiting to hear his ideas for a better Middlesbrough.
http://forum.thenorthernecho.co.uk/view ... 6&start=15

[BoroBot]

the classic are we there yet and we're off we're off in a motor car
50 bobbies are chasing us and we don't know where we are......
translation for R&CCC future visitors to Redcar will need to chase the view
Meanwhile down at….. “Redcar not by the sea”
The new vision is to provide visitors with deck chairs step ladders and or lifting devices
any visitors having difficulty getting down to the sea which used to be alongside “Redcar not by the sea”
R&CCC may provide lifting equipment to help out as shown on the video clip below
if further complaints are made about Redcar beach accessibility sand will be imported to raise the beach
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EKuYY9lJoUY





the final picture "New Vision" for Redcar not by the sea entitled “taking the piste”"



not only but also…. hobo’s getting a bashing how can the following be regarded as abuse

hobo
12:26 PM on 29/12/2011
This comment has been reported as abuse Show Details
I thought it was so tall so as to hide the wind farm they are going to build.
Read More http://www.gazettelive.co.uk/news/teess ... z1l1xWRpru

[BoroBot]

Phase3 starts the big swirly things are coming to "Redcar not by the sea"

Redcar: by the sea?
Not any more it isn’t
Redcar & Cleveland County Council leaders swore vengeance on those dastardly Coatham Common protestors.
Phase1 walled containment:
The new brick in the sea wall is designed to contain any more dissident actions.
Phase2: “we can now spy easier on you”:
The Hub construction is on target.
Phase3: ancillary containment:
Razor wire mines & enormous swirling bladed things offshore to deter escape attempts are planned for the near future.
A drive along the coast to see the sea takes on a whole new meaning at “Redcar by the walled out Sea”

WORK to install a controversial wind farm which will drastically change the sea view at Redcar is about to get under way. Read More http://www.gazettelive.co.uk/gazette-co ... -30255151/

hobo
12:38 PM on 3/2/2012
This comment has been reported as abuse Show DetailsHide Details
Spending millions doing up the sea front, building a vert/tower/pier, all to regenerate the sea front and hopefully attract more visitors. Then go and stick these monstrosities in the sea appears to be ludicruss. Where is the coordination long term planning. It would appear to me we are wastting are time/money doing up Redcar sea front. That money could have been spent else where where we would of got a better return on the investment. Does the right hand know what the left hand is doing come to mind.

[BoroBot]

finnsgran
7:01 PM on 3/2/2012
Could this be why the new wall on the promenade is too high to see over?
http://www.gazettelive.co.uk/gazette-co ... -30255151/

[BoroBot]

Wind Farms by the sea at Redcar "not by the sea"
Energy Secretary: speeding along to disaster all pi$$ puff wind and closets?

A total of 101 Tory MPs have written to the Prime Minister demanding that the £400 million-a-year subsidies paid to the “inefficient” onshore wind turbine industry are “dramatically cut”.
The backbenchers, joined by some MPs from other parties, have also called on Mr Cameron to tighten up planning laws so local people have a better chance of stopping new farms being developed and protecting the countryside.
The demands will be a headache for Ed Davey, the Liberal Democrat Energy Secretary, who joined the Cabinet on Friday when Chris Huhne resigned after being charged with perverting the course of justice.
Mr Huhne, who denies claims that he asked his ex-wife, Vicky Pryce, to accept speeding penalty points on his behalf, was an enthusiastic proponent of wind farms. There are currently more than 3,000 onshore wind turbines in Britain.
At least 4,500 more turbines are expected to go up as the Government’s drive to meet legally binding targets for cutting carbon emissions sparks a green energy boom.
Critics say wind farms are inefficient because the wind cannot be guaranteed to blow at times of greatest energy demand. They are also said to be unsightly, blighting the landscape.
Wind farms are also accused of forcing up energy bills while swallowing disproportionate amounts of taxpayer-funded subsidies.
The Tory MPs, including several of the party’s rising stars as well as former ministers, say it is wrong that hard-pressed consumers must pay for the expansion of onshore wind power.
In the letter sent to No 10 Downing Street last week, which has been seen by The Sunday Telegraph, the MPs say they have become “more and more concerned” about government “support for onshore wind energy production”.
“In these financially straitened times, we think it is unwise to make consumers pay, through taxpayer subsidy, for inefficient and intermittent energy production that typifies onshore wind turbines,” they say. The MPs want the savings spread between other “reliable” forms of renewable energy production.
They have also called on Mr Cameron to change the proposed National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) so that it gives local people who object to proposed wind farms a better chance of victory in the planning process. The framework has finished a public consultation process and is awaiting the green light from ministers.
The letter reads: “We also are worried that the new National Planning Policy Framework, in its current form, diminishes the chances of local people defeating onshore wind farm proposals through the planning system.”
The number of Tory signatories to the letter, organised by Chris Heaton-Harris, the Conservative backbencher, means that the controversy could be the biggest protest to hit Mr Cameron since the Coalition was formed. Last October, 81 Tory MPs defied him in a Commons vote on holding a referendum over Britain’s future in the European Union.
The letter’s backers claim that while other Conservatives who are ministers and parliamentary private secretaries are unable to sign because they are part of the government “payroll”, they too privately support the move against wind farms.
It is understood that there is also support from the Treasury. Among the signatories are former Conservative ministers including David Davis and Christopher Chope, as well as party grandees such as Bernard Jenkin and Nicholas Soames. They are joined by several rising stars including Matthew Hancock, Nadhim Zahawi and Steven Barclay.
Mr Hancock, who is close to the Chancellor, George Osborne, said last night: “I support renewable energy but we need to do it in a way that gives the most value for money and that does not destroy our natural environment.”
Another Tory MP who signed the letter, Tracey Crouch, said: “It is tragic that we blight our countryside with hideous electricity pylons and now we intend not only to do the same with onshore wind farms but also to subsidise them.
“I’d much rather see better planning regulations and greater investment in other sources of renewable energy, which will protect the beauty of our countryside for future generations.”
Latest figures from Ofgem, the energy regulator, showed that £1.1 billion in taxpayer subsidies was paid to the producers of renewable energy in 2009-10.
Of this, about £522 million was for wind power, with most going to onshore wind farms. Much of this cash ended up in the hands of energy companies and investment funds which are based abroad.
The highest-profile critic of the onshore wind industry is the Duke of Edinburgh. Last year it emerged that the Duke claimed farms were a “disgrace” and they would “never work”.
Mr Huhne, by contrast, has described turbines as “elegant” and “beautiful”. His successor, Mr Davey, is thought to be bringing a more pragmatic approach to the Department for Energy and Climate Change.
Mr Davey says he is committed to promoting a “green economy” but has also stated that he is “conscious” of the impact on households of high energy bills in tough economic times.
A Downing Street spokesman said: “We need a low carbon infrastructure and onshore wind is a cost effective and valuable part of the diverse energy mix.
“The Government has commissioned a review of subsidy levels and we are proposing a cut for onshore wind subsidies to take into account the fact that costs are coming down.
“We are committed to giving local communities the power to shape the spaces in which they live and are getting rid of regional targets introduced by the last government.”
Mr Huhne’s departure caused a limited reshuffle. The political comeback of David Laws has been delayed to allow the former Liberal Democrat Treasury minister to get a “big government job” within months.
Coalition sources said they expected Mr Laws to be a “major feature” of a wide reshuffle being planned by Mr Cameron for late spring or early summer.
Mr Laws resigned as treasury chief secretary in May 2010 after it emerged he had used taxpayer-funded allowances to pay some £40,000 in rent to his homosexual partner.
Read more http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politic ... farms.html

[BoroBot]

Redcar “not by the sea” weather forecast
Easterly precipitation from the wind farm is expected to bring hail sleet snow and rain

Wind farms can actually INCREASE climate change by raising temperatures and causing downpours, warn academics
• Temperatures can fall by up to 4C downwind of farms
• Tory MPs write to PM demanding dramatic subsidy cuts
By Chris Slack
Last updated at 6:35 PM on 5th February 2012
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... z1lZu5m3m8

They are 85 percent efficient. So a ten megawatt device will shed 1.5 megawatts in heat. So you are essentially turning the wind into heat, lots of heat. In fact, those wind mills have blowers installed to pull the heat out of them. This is what you get when you allow politicians to make decisions when they don't know the difference between a watt and a hole in the ground. So stick that in your warming pipe and smoke it!

[BoroBot]

norfolkboy14
5:18 PM on 17/2/2012
We need to get the Government onside, as well as local councils and others, if we are going to stop these wind turbines being built.
Are you disillusioned by rising electricity prices, over dependence on the "green" dream [especially uneconomical and inefficient wind farms] and the destruction of our countryside then please register your objection to the Government on
http://epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/22958
or by GOOGLING "E-PETITION 22958" and following the link.
Please pass this message on to Councillors, members of your community and anyone else you know to persuade them to sign up too. If you are really concerned about wind turbines please write a letter promoting this petition to your local Newsletter and to the Editors of your local newspapers.
Read More http://www.gazettelive.co.uk/gazette-co ... 9-30344979

[BoroBot]

Redcar Council: sand for brains?

Revealed: Council chiefs accepted unpopularity of Redcar Vertical Pier
by Sophie Barley, Evening Gazette Jun 7 2012

COUNCIL bosses secretly acknowledged the name of the Vertical Pier was unpopular with residents - and admitted locals would rather have a traditional structure.
The Gazette has obtained a restricted document detailing how Redcar and Cleveland Council planned to address the negative reaction to the controversial £1.6m tower’s name.
The briefing note - sent to Labour council leader George Dunning and cabinet member for economic development Mark Hannon - five months before work began states: “Local people have expressed concerns about the building being named a pier when it is not a functioning pier.”
A separate file note reveals a meeting the following day last May involved a discussion as to whether a Cabinet report was needed about the publicity push. It was decided by the two elected members that it was not.
The Vertical Pier has proved highly controversial since the idea of building a pier was first raised following a public consultation on regeneration four years ago.
The town has previously had two piers but - as the briefing note outlines - it was felt a new structure was neither viable nor affordable.
A competition was then held to design an “iconic” building for the struggling seafront - with a winning design from Smeeden Foreman Architects.
It was the Knaresborough-based firm which originally came up with “Vertical Pier” as a working name for the project. It was initially kept by the council.
But the briefing note from the authority’s director of regeneration services Ian Wardle - dated May 31 last year - shows that, although residents wanted a landmark structure, their preference was for a traditional pier.
The council looked into that but was put off by the price.
“The working name of the building - the Vertical Pier - has proved unpopular with local residents and businesses,” Mr Wardle reports. “Local people have expressed concerns about the building being named a pier when it is not a functioning pier.”

Despite that, funding had been secured and the council pushed ahead with the project.
It was for that reason that the trio opted to limit the controversy by organising a competition to rename the pier.
The contest was planned to involve the Gazette and local schools and aimed to “engage local people and businesses to encourage ownership and pride in the project”.
“I still think Vertical Pier is a good name for it,” Cllr Dunning told the Gazette this week. “I originally wanted to call it the Steel Tower, but that is a bit boring. I think Vertical Pier gets people interested.
“The name has caused controversy but that hasn’t been a bad thing. I think it is marvellous from a political perspective.”
The documents, released following a Freedom of Information request, showed a clear public preference for a traditional pier.
“Yes, that was the view, but the funds were just not there for it,” Cllr Dunning said. “But I think with the controversy and publicity the Vertical Pier has caused, we could get the best of both worlds as the Redcar Pier Association was recently set up campaigning for a traditional pier in addition to the vertical one.”
Cllr Dunning said officials found that it was younger people who tended to like the Vertical Pier.
“The people against it are now pushing for a traditional pier by joining the Redcar Pier Association so there is more publicity for that now,” he added. “I would love to see us get a traditional one also, and I am a member of the Redcar Pier Association. With the Vertical Pier at least we are getting something.”
Describing the decision not to get a cabinet report, Labour’s Cllr Dunning added: “We didn’t think it was necessary to spend £3,000 on reports. All members felt the same about letting the public have a say in naming it.”
Mark Smeedon, director of Smeedon Foreman Architects, confirmed the firm originally came up with the name.
“It did cause a bit of controversy, especially with people who want a horizontal pier,” he added. “But we came up with that name as the vertical pier functions in the same way as a horizontal pier.
“When you go to the top you can appreciate Redcar and the area around it.”
But Liberal Democrat group leader Cllr Glyn Nightingale said: “It was a mistake from the start and was just a way to fob off the public that this is a real pier.
“But people are not stupid. This is nothing like a pier.
“The council will have known full well that it would be unpopular with people.”

Vertical Pier: Story so far
2009
JULY: A £30m project to transform Redcar’s seafront is unveiled - with a 80ft high tower called the "Vertical Pier" named as its focal point;
NOVEMBER: A petition for a traditional pier is compiled by Redcar Liberal Democrats.
2010
JANUARY: Redcar and Cleveland Council’s Cabinet agrees to provide up to £5.1m for seafront work;

AUGUST: Councillors disagree over the proposed name. "Vertical Pier" comes under fire at a meeting in a question from resident Ken Bibby, who urges the authority to abandon it because of the "huge groundswell of public opinion" against the project;
NOVEMBER: Plans for the Vertical Pier are given planning consent.
2011
MAY: The leader of the council’s Liberal Democrat group, Cllr Chris Abbott, confirms that, if they were to win control in forthcoming elections, the Vertical Pier plan would be abandoned. Labour regains control and begins planning a PR offensive.
JUNE: The council launches a major competition, inviting people to submit their own ideas as to what the development should called;
JUNE: Cllr Valerie Halton, leader of the council’s Conservative Group, tells a Cabinet meeting the Pier will eventually win over its critics;
JULY: The Redcar Pier Association launches with the aim of campaigning for a traditional pier;
OCTOBER: Construction work begins on the Vertical Pier;
DECEMBER: Youngsters from Coatham Primary School in Redcar are among the first to get a tour.
2012
MAY: Independent councillor Steve Kay slams the council for spending almost £50,000 to employ a PR company to promote the Vtower. It emerges the decision was made by officers acting under delegated powers - meaning it did not go to councillors for approval.

Read More http://www.gazettelive.co.uk/news/teess ... -31132027/

[BoroBot]

disleydog
11:36 AM on 7/6/2012
"Listened to people" then they used " constitutional elected powers " to ignore everyone and push ahead with what they wanted .
So much for listening to the electorate !!

phud
12:01 PM on 7/6/2012
Well you had a party (Lib Dems) claiming they would scrap it, and the business as usual attitude "my grandad voted labour, my dad votes labour - i vote labour" attitude ensures nothing will ever change.
For the record - I realise the lib dems have a track record of untrustworthiness but what can you do?
Someone must be 'benefiting' from this - it will be interesting to see if that includes the residents of redcar!

Justback
12:06 PM on 7/6/2012
Does anyone know what the point of this monstrosity is?

WhoShotMcGyver
12:08 PM on 7/6/2012
the council spent plenty of our money asking us what we liked and disliked, then having found out exactly what it was we wanted from the re-generation of the sea front, they gave us something completely different. If they weren't going to take notice of what we wanted, then why spend the money 'asking' us.
Now Dunning has joined The Redcar Pier Association so he can look like he cares what we think, two faced leach!

minty010
12:15 PM on 7/6/2012
A pier is a horizontal structure over water. This eyesore is not keepin in step with redcar's seafront, its too modern and contemporary when the rest of it has original buildings etc. Instead of wastin money on this they should of spent it generatin new businesses as now there are more virtual shops than real ones. Redcar will be the laughin stock of the country.
And I live in Marske!!

daveyp
12:23 PM on 7/6/2012
Loks like a good old fashioned Helter Skelter to me

BoroPhil
12:26 PM on 7/6/2012
I think it looks great, it's different, why are people so scared of innovation?

They did make a massive mistake calling it a pier however, because then we get this ridiculous argument about whether we should have this or an actual pier, and as I understand it that choice was never available.

northeastwhite
12:31 PM on 7/6/2012
George Dunning you arrogant waste of space, the sooner the rest of the elctorate wake up and cast you and your cronies out of office the better.

constructor
12:40 PM on 7/6/2012
Build a traditional pier to go with it
Redcar needs a Horizontal Tower

smogsabout
12:50 PM on 7/6/2012
Oxford Dictionary definition of Pier.
noun
1a platform on pillars projecting from the shore into the sea, typically incorporating entertainment arcades and places to eat. a structure projecting from the shore into a river, lake, or the sea, used as a landing stage for boats. a breakwater or mole.
A pier this is definately NOT. vertical or otherwise
. They build the tallest tower in Europe in London and call it the Shard which is totally inkeeping with what it looks like. Let's not call it the Vertical Pier and let local Residents come up with a better name (no swear words please!)

bluepeter
12:51 PM on 7/6/2012
what a waste of money and now i see the council is advertising for a HEAD OF ECONOMIC GROWTH with a salary of £75,000 per annum, save the money and just give a old lady some care.

Billion
1:01 PM on 7/6/2012
Until the I have allways voted labour situation changes you will always get this attitude from Redcar and Cleveland council.Those labour councilors who disagreed with the tower dare not vote against it for fear of loosing privilaged positions on the council i.e. cabinet positions,chairs of commitees outside bodies etc.
Mr.Dunning knows that no matter what he does he will get elected again so why should he worry about what people think?

DLteessider
1:04 PM on 7/6/2012
i don't see what the problem is. people go from all over the country to see another vertical pair, blackpool tower......

wakeywakey
1:07 PM on 7/6/2012
This structure looks more like something built in the 60s or 70s. Strangers to the town will think it is a structure being dis-mantled rather just being constructed, and it is an embarassment to tell strangers that is a pier, when it obviously is not

bingobango
1:47 PM on 7/6/2012
Moan moan moan, give it a flipping chance its not even opened yet.
Come back in five years when theres proof its a failure and i'll listen.
The council may not have got it 100% correct, but I doubt the Gazettes panel of armchair experts could have either.

simply_boro
1:49 PM on 7/6/2012
to be fair, it looks decent, and could look brilliant once completed.....however, the weather is always terrible, hence why British people go to hot countries during the summer for holidays.....so the likely hood of this making any money in tourism is very low....however lets see, could surprise us, but needs security near and around the area.

tonyd
2:00 PM on 7/6/2012
Surely it's time to move on and support the regeneration of Redcar,the range of regeneration projects will bring additional visitors and support the local economy.The alternative is to do nothing and see Redcar in terminal decline,with falling house prices ,more boarded up shops and high unemployment .credit to the council for being bold and imaginative.Hopefully some of those who constantly criticise the regeneration schemes will be won round when the works are complete .I feel sure the confidence that the council has shown will attract further investment.What is clear is that constant negatives about Redcar will become a self fulfilling prophecy !!

stella1
2:09 PM on 7/6/2012
WhatCan I say Redcar and Cleveland councillors love spending money they don't have. They have had additiona works done to a centre on normanby road just for council meetings a waste of money , the helter skelter in fact Redcar as a whole has been a total waste of money . George get a grip and get out and take your mates with you give the locals some pride back.

eyeeye
2:23 PM on 7/6/2012
Last time I passed the monstrosity it was already starting to look very tatty. Aluminium foils at a seaside, don't they know what happens to this material in coastal areas. Dunning didn't say how many years it would take to achieve this 'extra' total of 1 million tourists to the town but imagine it will be many, many years.

SouthgateSympathiser
2:32 PM on 7/6/2012
he attitude of some people in Redcar stinks. The town has been rubbish since I was a kid and now finally there is some investment and a strong project to get the town going again but as always there are those that want Redcar to be the same as it always has been....rubbish!!
I appreciate that people might not like the design (I am not a massive fan of it particularly) but it SHOULD bring people to the town and get some jobs for the massses of unemployed that we have in Redcar.
Redcar, get a grip, embrace the project rather than calling it an eyesore and make the town somewhere to be proud of, which is something in my 31 years that I have never particularly felt.

northeastwhite
2:56 PM on 7/6/2012
Wont belong before its borderd up like the rest of the failing businesses and become a 'Virtual Vertical Pier'

denw123
3:18 PM on 7/6/2012
it may not be popular,but it has certainly got people talking and may get a lot of visitors even just for the curiosity side of it.

northerner
3:32 PM on 7/6/2012
This smacks of "The Public" who do they think they are?

popeye
3:40 PM on 7/6/2012
Can't see many fishing of this Pier....

tonymac
4:03 PM on 7/6/2012
i never go to redcar .... please tell me that they not ACTUALLY building that monstrosity????? Who on earth thought that would be good for the area????

Timetogetreal
4:46 PM on 7/6/2012
Too late now given that the monstrosity is almost finished. Just waiting for the signs that inform the visitor what the charge will be to go to the top to look at:

1. A filthy beach (you need to go up the tower to see it given the height of the new sea wall)
2. A run down high street with its wide range of empty shop
3. The steelworks with its filthy smoke pouring out over the town
4. The chemical works
5. The attractive vistas of Dormanstown, Grangetown, The Closes, South Bank etc

The excitement is building and I can't wait to give it a miss - give me Saltburn any time

Tiresias
5:11 PM on 7/6/2012
So call it "Redcar Tower" What's the fuss about? The "revelations" here are pointless. I think it's looking great and I'm dying to see it completed.

chez
5:30 PM on 7/6/2012
I've yet to meet anyone who actually wanted this obelisk/tower/fat lampost....call it what you will, it is not, and never will be a pier!

Baz
6:45 PM on 7/6/2012
What I would like to know is how much did it cost & who is paying for it. I have heard rumours that it is £40 million over budget.

jasper
8:02 PM on 7/6/2012
is anyone really surprised here,once these people have their little bit of power the people who put them there are just, well,nothing until the next election comes around,and all of the promises start again,bah bah bah.

Carolineofsmoggyland
8:39 PM on 7/6/2012
Does this mean that they also accept that the residents of Teesside think it's a joke?
Why don't they just call a spade a spade? In other words it is a Tower and NOT a Pier!

ebygumwerdown
9:30 PM on 7/6/2012
This is a prime example of how democracy works.No matter what colour badge they wear, they plead for your vote ,they get elected, then they do exactly the opposite as to what they promised and what the electorate asked for.
We call it democracy, yet if this had happened in another country we would call it dictatorship and would be having midnight, candle lit vigils at church praying for the end of the terrible tyranny.

Read More http://www.gazettelive.co.uk/news/teess ... 1132027/3/

[BoroBot]

Shih Tzu owner accused of allowing pet to defecate on beach cleared in just 10 minutes after magistrates' bizarre trip to the seaside
The £1,000 cost of prosecution - which included a trip to the seaside - has been branded 'ridiculous'
Shih Tzu owner and respectable pensioner Bob Hewling, 71, was cleared by a court of any wrongdoing
By Jill Reilly
PUBLISHED: 17:31, 12 June 2012 | UPDATED: 17:42, 12 June 2012
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... z1xgzORSUE

We are getting the equivalent of an eighty foot high pile of c**p on the sea front at Redcar, the council built vertical pier.
- E. Shepherd, Middlesbrough, N/Yorks, 13/6/2012 10:06

A Redcar and Cleveland Council spokesman declined to comment on the cost of the case.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... z1xgyueAR0

[BoroBot]

“If all goes to plan, the entire 2.7km wall -
supported by 900 steel piles in the beach bedrock -
will be fully open early next year and protect Redcar for the next century.”

After remedies are undertaken to repair/replace all the shoddy work

A CONCRETE block just lifted into place is much more than another brick in the Redcar seawall.
For it’s the final one of 1,555 -
and its insertion means the jigsaw of blocks which will protect Redcar from floods for the next century is complete.
The old seawall protected residents and businesses for many years, but the regular battering by the waves meant repairs were often needed.
Last May, work began on the town’s new £30m sea defences when the first block was swung into place.
Now the last one’s been installed, work can progress reinstating the promenade.
And if all goes to plan, the entire 2.7km wall - supported by 900 steel piles in the beach bedrock - will be fully open early next year.

Read More http://www.gazettelive.co.uk/news/teess ... -32019717/