Proposed Submission Core Strategy

Character - "Distinct Town Centre and Old Town Areas"
Section 8.16 - suggests that the strength of Bexhill's character needs to be built up by strengthening, among other aspects, the distinctive architecture of the Old Town area.
This in general terms is entirely consistent with the aims of BOTPS. However it is unsound because:-
It is unclear how these will be preserved and strengthened.

In line with the objectives, the strategy should also look at improving the availability of jobs ...
It is unsound because:-
Although reference is made for potential 'hotel improvement' in 8.43, new leisure/swimming centre in BX1(ii); retail expansion in 8.38.
The focus is too broad - a bit here and there.
There are no specific provisions within the core strategy to attract investment in the Old Town to regenerate the empty shops and hotel (public house) or to assist the existing businesses.

This is unsound because:-
You are referring to change in the conservation areas, which by definition, should not happen in the Town's important heritage.
It is vague.
It is a matter of concern considering what has happened with 'Next Wave' and what happened to the Old Town in earlier road improvement schemes.
We believe that these should be taken as a prompt for the keenest supervision of the preservation of Old Town buildings insofar as RDC's policing of conservation rules shall allow.
In particular, the now empty Bell Hotel building is in a state of serious decay of roof and interior, including its 18th Century ballroom, behind its important façade that places it among the prominent buildings in the Old Town. In other streets there are ongoing issues of decay of historic property due to negligence of owners, which it is necessary to control.

v(b) 'Provision for a new railway station adjacent to Ravenside Retail Park':
It is unsound because:-
This proposal was included in the SEEDA document 'Forward - a masterplan for Hastings and Bexhill' which was published in November 2002. It was part of a 'metro' system which would also include a station at Bulverhythe, Marina (St Leonards), Ivy House and Wilting (Wilting has been shelved by Hastings BC)
- How might the land on the sea side of Ravenside support a station?
- There have been concerns about the instability of the earth there.
- Visitors to Ravenside tend to do so to purchase bulky goods or large quantities of shopping. Many seem to come from Hastings and St Leonards. It is difficult to imagine that there would be any relief to the congestion on the local road because of the provision of this station as car transport is more effective for this kind of door to door shopping.
There should be a co-ordinated approach with Hastings Borough Council to facilitate effective movement between the two towns (by rail, cycle and road). This would be in our long term best interests.
Bexhill can be both a 'dormitory area' for Hastings (and Eastbourne) commuters as well as a vibrant town in its own right with opportunities for people of all ages.

Policy BX3: Development Strategy
This is unsound because:
Recent building development has resulted in many empty flats in the town. If these are not purchased by independent buyers but are managed by housing associations, is this not a drain on the local authority?
If the link road to the north east is built and the proposed housing goes ahead, is there sufficient provision for utilities i.e. gas, electricity and particularly water?
How might the geology be affected?