Save L'Ancresse wall and kiosk

Questions were asked about the retention of the kiosk and toilets and we were told that was a different department to the Environment Department and it was likely the corner of the kiosk would be lost and that the kiosk would need to be re-sited at a cost of £300,000.

The loss of the kiosk would result in a delay while another consultation and committee vote took place which in practice would mean many months if not years of no facilities at this beach.

The cost would be in addition to the quoted price and would mean the option would then cost £2.1m.

The kiosk and toilets are vital at that end of the common. There is no point in saving the beach without them.

Turning to the middle of the beach where it is proposed that the wall will be taken down and a sub-beach allowed to form, has anyone asked what effect this will have on tidal currents affecting swimming and that this beach will be extremely close to the golf course with the hazard of wayward golf balls?

Guernsey States are guilty of negligence in not addressing the problem years ago. The island cannot afford the grandiose schemes the deputies are coming up with. We still have Fermain wall to repair and that is growing more urgent with each month it is ignored.

LIZ HEAUME,

Address withheld.

Editor's footnote:

Deputy Barry Brehaut responds:

Firstly there are no plans to spend £1.8m. on the L'Ancresse anti-tank wall; the preferred solution is costed at just over £1m.

I note you are in favour of repairing the wall. The costs associated with that are far in excess of the proposed solution in the long term. But I must stress, we have no desire to replace or repair a German anti-tank wall that was constructed in front of a natural existing sea defence.

As the tide sweeps across the bay from west to east the anti-tank wall prevents the tidal energy from dissipating on the dunes that were present before the war and the base of the anti-tank wall actually aids the erosion of the beach immediately below the wall.

The beach level has dropped by about 1.5 metres because of the positioning of the structure.

The wall has had many repairs over the years, to the toe in particular, but each time that element has been repaired it has resulted in further undermining of the structure above it.

The groynes are crucial in ensuring the beach returns to its pre-war condition. They are designed to capture sediment to allow a beach to form. Sand will settle both within the 130-metre bay the groynes have created and either side. So they will not be structures standing high above the beach, they will be the mechanism that builds the sand up to achieve a gentle slope at the top of the reinstated bay.

You may have seen the images we placed on display from 1933, 1936 and 1942. They show the beach before the Occupation. There was no flooding, the bay found its own level, and there was not the need for any man-made structure to hold back the tide.

A wall to keep out armoured vehicles and tanks is not a sea defence and removing it does not leave the land behind it more vulnerable or exposed.

Like you, I would like to see the kiosk remain. As yet no decision has been taken. The engineers are doing what they can to see if it can remain. That said, it only exists by virtue of the construction of the anti-tank wall.

It's estimated that a new facility could cost in the region of £300K. There is a balance to be had here. If the project incurred more costs in an effort to secure the kiosk in that place, then other options would have to be considered.

I would very much like the Guernsey Press to publish the pre-war pictures of the bay along with those images we have produced that give an impression of what the reinstated bay may look like. I will make the images available to them.