BEACH EROSION

Evening Post, Volume CXVII, Issue 146, 22 June 1934, Page 3

BEACH EROSION

AT EASTBOUEXE

PREVENTION SCHEME

COUNCIL'S DECISION

The Eastbourne Borough Council decided last evening to put in hand immediately the cheaper of two schemes submitted by the borough engineer (Mr. W. J. Frcthey) dealing with projection from beach erosion. The matter has been discussed frequently at meetings of the council, and at- the previous meeting a special committee was set up to look into the question. Mr. Frcthey's report stated that in considering proposals.for the alleviation or prevention of the erosion problem on the Muritai Beach it was first of all necessary to arrive.at some definite conclusion regarding the cause, the examination of the effect being the most reasonable means of determinatioiu During the recent disturbances along the southern foreshore observations were made of the action taking place and the drift or erosion resulting. While no southerly storm had been experienced, a heavy swell ha 3 been apparent from the south, a fair wind and high tide accentuating the wave effect on the sea front. There had been S! marked prevalence of southerly winds for a considerable time, and an "alongshore" drift of sand and light shingle had taken place, resulting in the banking up of from two to six feet on the northern end of the bay adjacent to the Recreation Ground. At the sumo time the beach at the southern end from Nikau Street south had been robbed of the same material, and sand hills a little further north, near Puketea Street, had suffered erosion. It was noticeable that where heavier material such as six-inch boulders or" rotten rock had been deposited, erosion had been less intense, and this should prove1 a valuable aid to the solution of the problem of protection. ~ :- •■■■...■:■■• It was proposed to provide two schemes: one a proposal- to .deal with protection alone, !and the other n major work to incorporate a general seafront. improvement scheme for the formation of an esplanade. It was assumed that the preservation of a sandy beach was second only to the adequate protection of property bearing a valuable asset to the borough in the form of rates and general valuation. It was' generally recognised that unless steps were taken to assist unfortunate property owners in the maintaining of land.values, the indirect effect of devaluation to one part might spread to the whole. THE FIRST PROPOSAL The first proposal was to protect immediately the more vital; parts at which erosion has occurred,-namely, the sections fronting Puketea Street, by a low rubble wall extending both ways from the existing concrete wall built by Professor Boyd-Wilson and along a line suitable for xiTtirnate incorporation in the larger scheme. The concrete wall referred to had proved that an inexpensive wall might be erected to serve the purpose of protecting the toe of the sand banks, and while it was ; not perfect in that no "return in" ends had been provided, it was evidence enough to show its effectiveness. Large rock spraws were procurable from the coast rocks south of Burden's, and it was proposed to form a wall with those rocks' grouted together with light concrete. This wall would then provide an excellent protection for the base of the future concrete wall, and.at the same time it was hoped it would retain the sand and prevent erosion. The cost per 100 ft would be £32, and it was estimated that there would be approximately 750 feet required immediately, with a possible 4000 feet if the. major scheme could not be commenced. , The only additional cost to normal expenditure would be for cement, the total cost for this being £45. It "had to be born in mind that the wall was not intended to act as a prevention of the "along-shore" drift of sand, which was purely seasonal, as the prevalent southerly swell bared the shingle and boulder strata at the southern end to shift the sand northwards, while the north-westerly winds tended to bare the north end of the beach and bank up the southern end, both by wave and wind action. A BIG SCHEME. The second, a major proposal, was one that would involve greater expenditure and would have more far-reaching influence on the borough's future. It was intended to incorporate a retaining :wall for the formation of a road, a cantilevered ■footpath, and beach protection in the one scheme. As this would be of a- permanent nature, finances should be made secondary to utility and the enhancement of the foreshore. Owing to there being practically no possibility of further accretion and the consequent disposal of building sites it would seem advisable to take from the beach only that space that was entirely necessary as a road and to leave the maximum of area for recreation arid pleasure purposes. The cost per 100 ft would be £IS2, and the total of 4000 ft would bo approximately £;7300, plus supervision and contingencies of, say, 7* per cent., equalling . £..7850. The work would need to be undertaken as finances permitted arid, therefore, it was possible that relief labour would not be available. In "any case it would be advisable to have the work carried. out with subsidised labour and skilled men employed; consequently it was not'likely that a reduction in the cost could-be made. The formation, of the road and footpath, and filling had not been allowed for, as this would probably be provided for in other moneys. A rough estimate would be £2500 for a permanent way for 4000ftj but the other portion of Marine Parade would also be probably done-at the same time and would thus require greater expenditure. The council decided, after practically no' discussion, to puWhe cheaper scheme into effect, and work will probably start next week. ■' :