'Missed opportunities' highlighted in Vale Douzaine's response to Harbour Action Plan

The five-point parish reaction to the report follows its publication last month by the Development and Planning Authority (DPA) which it said sets out opportunities for change and enhancement along the island's east coast.

On behalf of the Douzaine, Senior Constable Richard Leale highlights their view that more could have been done with the plan, which has 18 policies on issues that include transport and parking, flood risks and creating an environment that is more people-friendly. 

In his comments to Planners, Mr Leale says:

The Constables and Douzaine would like to make the following comments on the draft Harbour Action Area of St Peter Port and St Sampson:-

1) It is a pity that the action area does not cover the whole of Leale’s Yard and only a portion of the Northside, excluding all of the power station site, along with Ronez’s block yard. It is a missed opportunity to have not included the Longue Hougue quarry as it is right in the centre of the industrial area.

2) As regards the improvement of street furniture, both the douzaines of the Vale and St Sampson's have attempted to do this on a number of occasions over a great period of time. Starting with the streetlights, a new design was even chosen, but without the support of Guernsey Electricity, who expected the parishes to pay out £250,000 to achieve this and then stopped talking to us, ignoring our request to not place galvanised pole lights on the Bridge.

3) Flood Defences – the report makes many mentions of flood risk for the St Sampson harbour action area and the risk to future development. The report states at the start that it is not favouring any one scheme, then goes on to actually do so, favouring the harbour mouth scheme. This scheme has been championed by the douzaine from the word go. Unfortunately, the relevant States Committee has consistently rubbished it in favour of a barrier along the centre of the Bridge and moveable barriers at each end. This scheme relies on the buildings on both the North and South Side to retain the water overtopping the harbour. Raising the wall on the harbour edge, we were told, is a non-starter because the present wall foundations are not strong enough to take the additional weight yet seem to cope with the heavy lorry movements without any difficulty.
We were very surprised by the cost estimate, once we had found them, but then realised that they were not comparing like for like. Without careful reading it is not obvious that the harbour mouth scheme includes a wall from the Vale Castle around the coast virtually to Richmond Corner. Though that is obviously the only solution that will protect the industrial area and large areas inland.

4) Whilst a new harbour at Longue Hougue South is desirable, the Vale Douzaine is of the opinion that this will never happen due to the cost involved.

5) Removal of the Power Station to the Longue Hougue has long been on our wish list, but once again the costs are enormous due to the amount of cabling that will need re-routing. Finally, the douzaine is relieved to see that there appears to be no intention to reclaim land directly in front of the Vale Castle.

In a release, the States said that the draft document deliberately did not recommend specific developments on specific sites to ensure flexibility to ensure that the right type of change and development can be considered. The 18 policies are categorised within six key themes:

1. Resilient harbours and infrastructure

2. Supporting the maritime sector to provide job and leisure opportunities

3. New and expanded uses and activities within the Harbour Action Areas

4. Culture, heritage, tourism and leisure

5. Making it safe, healthy, efficient and easy for people and goods to get around

6. Climate resilience and the nature environment.

More information can be found here

Pictured below are the development areas identified by the plan