L’Ancresse seawall needs defending, not pulling down

As regards the L’Ancresse wall:

n Firstly, the wall is at the bottom of the priority list so should be receiving minimum attention, filling of holes and voids with concrete as and when needed at fairly low cost would see it through many years to come.

• That low priority has been shown over the last 12 years by the amount expended by Environment & Infrastructure up to and including 2017. A total of £70,757 for the whole of the L’Ancresse wall – £5,896 per year.

• They then produce, out of a hat, this more than £1m. project that they had no intention of bringing to the States initially. It can only be described as a ‘vanity’ project and that £1m. is taken away from projects higher up the priority ladder. E&I were only forced into a debate by a requete brought by Deputy Inder.

• Their reason for this project was, one big expenditure, pulling the wall down and allowing the sea into the common, would stop or minimise any more maintenance on this area in the years to come. But even the consultants admitted that the encroachment onto and the erosion of the common was an unknown quantity.

• If the winter storms start eroding away more common than they expect, many millions may be required to line the eroded area with rock armour. Reasonable maintenance on our existing anti-tank/seawall is a far more sensible answer and far lower cost.

• The project included pulling 130 metres of the wall down and building two large rock armour groynes that would extend down the beach approx 30-35 metres from the existing wall

• To the detriment of:

1) Losing up to 4.5 vergees of common land.

2) Losing the current popular coastal path.

3) Losing the kiosk.

4) Losing the public toilets.

5) Losing 130 metres of the anti-tank/seawall, an historic part of Hitler’s Atlantic Wall and a part of Guernsey’s heritage.

6 ) Creating health and safety problems by having to realign the coastal path alongside the golf course’s 15th fairway.

7) The thousands of locals and visitors who use this area during the summer months.

8) Ruining the look of the beach with two large rock armour groynes.

9) If too much common is eroded millions of pounds may have to be expended on lining the crescent of the area eroded to protect the common.

• The policy letter, forced to the States by the requete, really only proposed the managed realignment of the wall, all other suggestions had carefully pre-prepared arguments against them. Although there were a few half-hearted options regarding the kiosk, just to keep the public happy.

• The States failed to pick up on the importance of retaining and maintaining the wall rather than waste £1m. pulling it down and no amendment was put forward to offer it as an alternative. The vote was 17-15 for E&I’s project, but not a satisfactory outcome for the island and the sursis to postpone the debate for more information should have been won.

• The public opinion had been ignored at three meetings held by E&I even though over 90 per cent at those meetings were against pulling the wall down.

• At the third meeting I managed to get a show of hands out of the 150 or so people there. At least 90 per cent wanted the wall retained and maintained.

• A petition was raised only at the kiosk so people had to travel there to sign. Even then, over 780 signed the petition.

• A public demonstration took place on L’Ancresse Bay. Around 350 people turned out against the wall being pulled down.

• The Commons Council were against the project.

• The Golf Club Committee were against the project.

• Festung Guernsey were against the project.

• The regular users of the area were against the project.

• Not a single bit of notice has been taken of those who oppose this piece of state vandalism. Four people on a committee have decided on the changes to a major area of our coastline, but have been unable so far to repair the Fermain wall.

• The committee will fall back on the consultant, Greg Guthrie, and the States are scared stiff to oppose any views from a consultant. But I will repeat that even he said the erosion that would take place could only be estimated and it would depend on a number of factors as to how much of the common was eroded.

While areas all around the UK are being eroded away and many would love to have the coastal defence we have at L’Ancresse and a coastal walk that takes us right along the edge of the bay, our States can only think of its destruction and allowing the sea once again to take away the common.

Please don’t waste over £1m. on pulling down a historic anti-tank wall that since the Occupation has acted as a seawall protecting the line of L’Ancresse Common, it doesn’t need pulling down. (An application has gone in to have the wall made an item of Guernsey Heritage).

The plans, at the time of this letter, have not yet been submitted by E&I to the Planning Authority and when they do they must be objected to.

GARY BLANCHFORD

gblanchford@cwgsy.net