Footprints on the Beach? - The Seafront Proposals

It has developed over time with no overall plan hence the need for a strategic design framework to bring it all together to ensure any improvements will both benefit residents and bring in much needed tourist revenue.

Had the economy not taken the down turn which it has, it is just possible that the argument, about the amount of money proposals will cost and whether the sum which Rother District Council proposes to use from reserves, would not have been as acute.

Liberal Democrat Councillors on Rother again last week endeavoured to bring a proper debate to this argument and let it be generally known that there is an alternative.

Their proposed amendment to the capital budget was made in response to the consultation on the 'Next Wave' proposals for the seafront. That consultation showed that there was a firm rejection of the 2,374,000 plan to excavate the Colonnade (Option1) and provide retail space. It also showed that residents were

concerned about the excessive cost of the whole seafront upgrading,

5,080,586. However, the proposals do not address long standing issues such as public toilets, visitor information services, the cycle track and the eastern parade is not even mentioned.

The Lib Dem proposal was that the Council put on hold the Next Wave project

and go ahead with Option 2 on the Colonnade. This option, not used in the

consultation for some reason, is the most sensible and cost effective. It

would require no excavation, would upgrade the existing space, provide

public toilets and complement the Edwardian style of the seafront at a

fraction of the cost.

Again, this is an agreement for the seafront needing some tender loving care and that

the surroundings of the De La Warr need improving and further that doing nothing is not an option.

I have no doubt that we can look forward to an improvement scheme being agreed in the very near future not least because Rother is keen to use the funding gained to date from CABE. There are however other concerns linked to this project which should be expressed. Consideration needs to be given to both economic and environmental costs. Materials and labour should be from sources as local as possible. This should be considered an opportunity to help the local labour market and to ensure that the ecological footprint is as small as possible. This will not be the case if large swathes of unnecessary paving are installed simply to make a grand statement.

Rother also needs to make careful consideration of whether funds could not be better used in, for example, schemes which will bring long term sustainable housing strategies with more thermally efficient homes which in turn make local housing more pocket friendly for those who run and maintain them.

If the current council is looking to leave its footprint on the sands of Bexhill let us hope, at least, that it will not be a large black one.