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.
Coastal park offers strong protection against building
Share this:
Letter to the Editor from Mike Stentiford, Trinity.
PUTTING it rather aptly, the current controversy over two separate coastline planning applications could be likened to a few ripples short of a high tide.
Many of those public and political figures waging vociferous comment on the pros and cons of major building proposals at Bouley Bay and Grève de Lecq are, in my humble opinion, missing a valid point.
The elusive but valid point being that, exactly one decade ago, political agreement authorised the endorsement into the Island Plan of the Jersey Coastal National Park. Unsurprisingly, included in the protected areas of park coastline are Bouley Bay and Grève de Lecq.
This, according to the current Island Plan, offers both of these coastal areas the ‘highest presumption against inappropriate development’.
Fortunately, the sadly ill-conceived and confusing boundaries drawn up a decade ago are now up for review as part of the draft Bridging Island Plan.
The proposals put forward are to extend the park boundaries which, if agreed upon, would create a far more sensible understanding of our national park.
In other words, extensions to the boundaries would soundly confirm and increase a legally binding commitment towards future land and coastal protection.
It seems at peculiar odds with the environmentally sensitive times we live in, that it’s only when serious changes to the character of landscape hit the proverbial fan that coastal protection suddenly becomes an issue of concern.
When this happens, it should provide us with a timely reminder of the true protective value of Jersey having a national park.
The primary aims of such status are straight forward protection and respect for the Island’s coastline, its countryside and its biodiversity; a shared vision that is uppermost in the strategy of The National Trust for Jersey and its Coastline Campaign.
I fear that if those intent on carrying out radical coastline insensitivity fail to understand the fully rounded protective merit of the Jersey Coastal National Park, then an increase in coastline upsets and conflicts is, unfortunately, guaranteed to continue.
Related
Most read this week...
More from the JEP
Politicans back “transformational” smoking ban for future generations
Iran-related economic impact reflected in business health-check
Reform Jersey finalises 16-strong election roster
Islander died after struggling to breath for decades due to exposure to asbestos during his career, coroner rules