Still looking for a radical solution
INITIAL support for the concept of at least assessing the prospects for exploring the building of homes on the eyesores, island-wide, that are redundant greenhouse sites, appears to be evaporating as reality bites.
Grounds of radicalism and free-thinking are blocked by the desire to continue to progress development along the lines of proper spatial planning.
The National Trust of Guernsey has stepped in and, in this case, is onside with an apparent majority of deputies who are saying that the island’s land planning process is too important to lose simply on the grounds of chance and 'practicality' – quite aside from any thoughts of vinery owners taking their chances in a ‘dereliction lottery’.
The Trust has said the States must not ‘allow a regressive relaxation of planning policy to return us to the infill and ribbon development prevalent in the 20th century, which has already caused us to lose so much of our unique and precious rural character’.
Those keen on the idea will be disappointed at the reaction.
It does seem likely that somehow, primary efforts will be pursued to find a way to build where extant permissions exist.
But that leaves one wondering that when the chief minister calls for ‘radical thinking’ on housing, what might it take to bring about a suitable, ‘radical’ solution?