Description of land inaccurate
REFERRING to the two letters in Wednesday's Press (Shocked at planning ruling and Planning Service response), I think the difficulty with planning rules is a major problem. Planners rely on an inaccurate description of land as agricultural irrespective of its position and possible use. The whole category of land described as agricultural should be reassessed to determine whether or not it can actually be used for the grazing of animals or for the production of saleable food crops, given that today farmers are weighed down by rules and regulations governing such activities.
Presently areas within urban developments are still being classified as agricultural land. This land is often owned by householders with no interest in managing animals or crops and therefore has to be left to become untended waste land. Surely a managed green area would be more attractive and should then be more accurately called greenbelt. This description would stop development until if and when it was desired and islanders would cease to laugh at stupid descriptions. If the present situation continues, the States and planners will lose all credibility and support.
JOHN TITMUSS,
St Martin's.
