Bakery plans raise fears

I recently viewed the plans at Sir Charles Frossard House and I am very concerned by the proposal and the impact they will have on the lives of the surrounding residents. In view of the height of the proposed buildings, all current residents living to the northeast of the site will have any privacy they currently enjoy, ruined. The properties I make reference to are currently completely surrounded to the front and the sides, leaving the back gardens as the only place owners are able to sit in private and enjoy the sunshine.

There is no question that if these proposed plans are approved, the resulting loss of privacy and light will substantially devalue any properties nearby. Local residents have worked very hard for a number of years to be able to own their own properties and it is very distressing to even think about them losing the ability to enjoy their gardens. Sandpiper CI's proposal would result in a substantial change in lifestyle for everyone involved and may remove the ability for them to sell their properties in the future.

In addition to the above, there are concerns over the heavy machinery which will be needed to demolish the bakery and the impact this may have on surrounding properties and infrastructure. The vibrations from the equipment being used, along with the dust and resulting pollution has potential to, again, disturb residents to an unacceptable degree. There are some large trees in the plans, which will no doubt impact the drainage of the site and potentially undermine the foundations in place.

Finally, while I appreciate that a specialist contractor will be used for the removal of any asbestos within the old bakery building, there is still potential for this to be a long-standing issue for residents and animals.

I understand that new properties are needed for families in the island, however, there is also a shortage of commercial business sites. As this site is currently registered for commercial use, it would make much more sense for the site to be upgraded and continued to be used for these purposes.

If it is proven the site is needed for residential property, rather than commercial use, might I suggest that plans are put forward for bungalows rather than three-storey properties? This is much more in keeping with the area and takes the needs and wants of current property owners into consideration, by ensuring their quality of living is not impacted too much.

I am very disappointed that a business local to the Channel Islands, with associated corporate responsibility, has disregarded the needs of the local community and the impact their decisions will have on it.

There is no doubting that Sandpiper CI is a very positive business for us to have in our islands and economy. They bring a lot of great services, which in turn provide jobs in the islands. However, I feel they are undoing all of the good work by treating local residents in this way. By not thinking about current residents and the years of hard work they have put into making their homes in this area, they are seriously damaging their reputation within the islands and local community.

It feels like local people are losing their right to enjoy the lifestyle they are used to, when a large organisation such as Sandpiper CI or Guernsey Housing Association are involved. This cannot be acceptable and should not be allowed to continue.

MRS C. LEWIS,

Address withheld.

Editor's footnote: A spokesperson for Sandpiper replies:

Sandpiper has been in contact with concerned neighbours and the relevant authorities to help achieve a residential scheme which will hopefully be seen as an asset to all concerned.

The application is still being considered and all views will obviously be taken into account during the planning application process. Sandpiper's architects have also been instructed to modify the scheme to help alleviate any lack of privacy which may be caused by the development.

Obviously all health, safety and noise issues will be handled in an appropriate way should the project go ahead.