What The Residents Want At Birling Gap

Why was the boulder barrier proposal unsuccessful?

The boulder revetment proposal was unsuccessful because sea defences cost a lot of money and there is not that many residents living there. The council does not want to spend money on sea defences because it would not be worth it. There are ten properties are being risked of erosion. This includes a hotel, a bed and breakfast, seven residential houses and a boathouse. Overall, combining the prices of these buildings the value is round about 380,000. The properties range from 4 to 30 metres from the cliff edge. The rate of the erosion is approximately 0.7m/year. Another reason why the proposal is unsuccessful is that it would effect the environment. This is mentioned by the English Nature and the Sussex downs conservation board. They believe that a coastal protection scheme may have an impact on the environment. They do not want the coastal protection scheme to wreck the visual landscape, geological features, and natural processes. It would also cover the lower part of the geological exposure and reduce the natural supply of flint to the beach. It would affect the use of the beach and safe access along it.

Why boulder revetment?

They want a boulder revetment as their coastal defence because:

* It's cheaper than most sea defences such as sea wall.

* It's a narrow beach and a boulder revetment would be suitable.

* It will protect the base of the cliff and stop the cliff retreating

Here is the exact price of the properties:

Managed Retreat

Loss of properties - 358,507

Loss of car park - 3,145

Relocation of steps - 15,109

Relocation of safety boathouse - 2,453

Total - 379,214

Cliff Stabilisation

Construction of coast

Protection works - 340,000

Loss of property

(1 Crangon Cottages) - 43,937

- 383 ,937

These figures show that protecting Birlin Gap from erosion will not be worth it for the council. If the council were going to protect Birlin Gap from erosion the council would have no benefits. It would cost money and they would get none in return because the properties will still be owned by the residents.