Object to removal of anti-tank wall

Despite all the public anger, meetings and various committees all opposing this plan, E&I have continued to ignore everyone’s opinion but their own. This topic has been a subject of discussion for months and the vast majority are against removing it, so E&I are very much out of touch with public feeling, but is anyone really surprised by that? You only have to look at recent public consultations to see they don’t really give a damn about your views, although we still get the propaganda rubbish that your views and input count.

Erosion has become more of a problem over the last few decades and will continue to be so.

Although this wall may have been built as an anti-tank wall it has done a pretty good job protecting this low-lying area for over 70 years, despite being neglected for many years with minimal maintenance costs like so many other areas of this island – the bathing pools and the Fermain sea wall just a couple of examples. At the same time millions of pounds have been spent and will be spent in the future on vanity projects, so the response we often get that they don’t have the funds does not really ring true.

The wall does represent a dark period in our history, but it is part of our long and rich historic heritage like so many other historic sites and should be maintained, not removed.

Sea levels rising and erosion is taking place in many exposed areas of this island at a rapid pace. Most of our coastline was once open with no sea walls but over time sea walls have been built in many locations around this island which no one would now suggest removing, so why this one because someone has this idyllic dream of rolling dunes like yesteryear? Even the consultant brought in on this project can only estimate on the encroachment and the erosion of the common once the section of wall is removed. Use of old photographs of the bay cannot guarantee that the new bay will revert to its old location, especially when you consider the rises in sea levels.

The ironic thing is they are emphasising how the bay previously looked before the war and that is how they wish it to return to, but they are not actually doing this as they are only removing one section of wall. If the whole of the bay walls were being removed (God forbid) then this statement would be true, but they are not. Anyone who has taken the time to view the visualisation of the ‘new look’ bay will simply see it as a sea wall with a massive breach in it. I don’t see the same picturesque bay with rolling dunes that some dreamers seem to see. And how will the planners view it? Will this breach be seen as keeping the character and visual amenity of the surrounding area? Have they viewed the video, because I have and sorry, but the future image does not look good.

If a planning application has to be submitted then this leaves the general public in a position to register their objection to the application.

It has been mentioned that E&I held three meetings where over 90% of those who attended were against removing the wall.

The Commons Council are against its removal and stated that 87% of those who attended their AGM were in favour of repairing and retaining the anti-tank wall.

The Golf Club Committee and Festung Guernsey have all voiced objections against this proposal.

Add to this the hundreds of people who either attended the demonstration or signed a petition along with a large majority of the general public who also oppose this plan.

Taking this all into account when the application is submitted, I would encourage everyone who is against this proposal to send in an objection to the Planning Department. You are doing nothing wrong in doing this but using your rights within the planning process and a few hundred objections just may have some effect, in fact the more the better so swamp the system.

As is often sadly the case we may not get the correct and right outcome, but we must take this opportunity to try and stop this absurd proposal. If enough people oppose this then maybe a spark of common sense will appear and this project will be stopped, but this is Guernsey so I know the chances are very slim.

People live busy, hectic lives and often things like these are low down in their priorities.

We do have a serious problem of apathy that exists in this island but if you really care about this island, when the time comes then please find some time to write and object.

G. J. DOWN,

Trelawney,

Upper St Jacques,

St Peter Port.