Ms. Lamb in her September 9 letter (‘Comparisons with Bexhill just don’t hold water’) must have her head in the clouds with her view, from where she sits, of the seafront as a ‘beautiful and unchanging promenade’.
I didn’t so much compare as contrast the actions that Rother and Eastbourne councils are taking to keep their respective seafronts relevant in the 21st century.
To make sure my comments about the seafront were not unreasonable, I walked from the Redoubt to Holywell and back on Saturday, as I often do, and, viewed from the lowest promenade level, I maintain that ‘sad, unkempt and uncared for’ is a fair assessment.
I didn’t mention buildings, as Bexhill’s changes only affect the promenade itself.
One particular aspect of the Eastbourne promenade has been the deliberate removal by the council of much of the bench seating. In contrast, Bexhill now has considerably more seating along the revamped mile of seafront, all free!
Mr Clements (‘Seafront can’t continue to trade on past glories, Herald letters, September 9) commented that more attention is needed for facilities for children along the promenade. I agree.
This is a big aspect of the new Bexhill seafront. The council wants to attract more young families as visitors and it would seem sensible if they were catered for along the length of the seafront and not just at the eastern end, where residents west of the pier fear to tread.
The fact is that Bexhill have taken steps to find a solution – a planting mix that will thrive in the extreme coastal location to introduce biodiversity, create visual interest for as much of the year as possible and a scheme that will require minimal on-going maintenance.
I defy anyone to defend that the planting along the Eastbourne seafront as a whole meets the same criteria, especially the last one.
I understand that Ms Lamb doesn’t like change, but stubborn complacency doesn’t make Eastbourne the leading resort that the Borough council aspires the town to become.