To provide the best experiences, we use technologies like cookies to store and/or access device information. Consenting to these technologies will allow us to process data such as browsing behaviour or unique IDs on this site. Not consenting or withdrawing consent, may adversely affect certain features and functions.
The technical storage or access is strictly necessary for the legitimate purpose of enabling the use of a specific service explicitly requested by the subscriber or user, or for the sole purpose of carrying out the transmission of a communication over an electronic communications network.
The technical storage or access is necessary for the legitimate purpose of storing preferences that are not requested by the subscriber or user.
The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for statistical purposes.
The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for anonymous statistical purposes. Without a subpoena, voluntary compliance on the part of your Internet Service Provider, or additional records from a third party, information stored or retrieved for this purpose alone cannot usually be used to identify you.
The technical storage or access is required to create user profiles to send advertising, or to track the user on a website or across several websites for similar marketing purposes.
Glass office plans ‘cannot be serious’
Share this:
From Clifford Wilson.
MY personal response to Dandara’s recently announced plans for a six-storey glass office development on St Helier’s Esplanade, next to the Grand Hotel, is to quote the words of one iconic tennis champion – ‘you cannot be serious!’
Do Messrs Dandara seriously expect the public of this Island to believe that the obscenely ugly and inappropriately sited monstrosity that they are now proposing is really their true envisaged development for the Esplanade?
I would submit that this latest proposal is nothing more than a ploy, designed, as it is already doing, to engender from the populace a response of disbelief, shock and horror and to thus the better prepare the way later, for a subsequent development application to be applied for, of a more restrained architectural design.
This would thus meet with public relief and approval, receive favourable planning consideration and would no doubt ultimately result in a considerably enhanced bottom-line profit margin than would be the case, if the development for which the company already have planning consent, were constructed.
I consider that some of the Environment Minister’s reported comment, as quoted in your editorial 31 August, is vacuous in the extreme. Part of his comment, appears to present him as little less than an effective advocate for Dandara’s proposals – he is quoted in relation to their latest Esplanade proposal as saying ‘society as a whole has got to move forward’. This ‘supportive’ observation must indeed be music to the ears of Messrs Dandara.
What, pray, to my mind, has an excessively ugly, inappropriate and out of place development as is proposed, got remotely to do with progress?
It is I believe, well past time and in our collective best interests, that a line was drawn in the sand by our government on such inappropriate proposals as this, regardless as to the identity of the applicant developer.
.
Related