Planners reject shed at parish allotments site
Monday 17th January 2011, 1:00PM GMT.
James Littlewood, left, a director of GI Ltd, which owns the former vinery site, and Vale constable Laurie Queripel in front of the shed which Environment wants taken down or moved on what will become Vale’s parish allotments later this year. (Picture by Tom Tardif, 1078243)
VALE parishioners renting an allotment may not have anywhere to store their tools if the Environment Department gets its way.
GI Ltd, which owns Les Haute Landes Vinery, where the parish allotment scheme is being developed, has been refused retrospective planning permission for a 20ft by 20ft shed.
The department said that the site was not being used for horticulture or agriculture so the shed was not required.
But GI director James Littlewood said the department failed to understand that the site was being developed for parish allotments, despite the fact he had written to planning officers to explain.
- Read the full story in the Guernsey Press. See below for subscription details.
- To read Guernsey Press stories in full click here for subscription details. Individual editions are now available online.
Island Life
All about Guernsey
Ambassador of the Year 2011
History & Heritage
Visitor Information
Guernsey's government
Campaigns
Voice For Victims
Voice for Victims is a campaign aimed at promoting the rights of those affected by child sexual abuse.
This is Guernsey
Guernsey Press
Useful Links
Anyone who wants to erect a beanpole or a tomato cage on their allotment without planning permission better not try it.You have been warned!
Report abuse
All of the built environment here and in UK has been approved by planning authorities. We should be ever grateful to them as all we survey, in towns up and down the land is pretty, appropriate and in keeping…… or is it??
Report abuse
Environment Department, Retrospective, it’s those famous words again. As usual not rejecting a large glass building, a dozen huge industrial units or even a mass of offices but a shed. What I want to know is when will this idiotic Department be removed. Before they have fully trashed and ruined this island and its hard working trades people or after.
Report abuse
@Hello, not all the built environment has been approved by planners… Bit unlikely given that planning only became statutory in the UK in 1948 (not sure about Guernsey, but most likely later)!
Firestorm, why don’t you become a planner? You’re always posting on here telling us you know best regarding all things planning-related, so rather than being an anonymous armchair critic, why not try doing the job and putting yourself on the receiving end of some of the ill-founded judgements anonymous armchair critics make?
Report abuse
Firestorm I agree totally with most of your comments on threads ref E/D descisions.
DaveD, I agree that Firestorm should apply for planning, it sounds like he would be able to use more common sense on some planning issues as reading his comments on other threads implies that he does seem to know what he’s talking about.(either that or he’s very clever)! He appears to get his points across very well in fact Dave, maybe, like me, he comments on E/D issues often because he might be an ex planner, architect or has just been treated by the E/D unfairly which causes him interest on these issues. Maybe he should become a Deputy, (if not one already that is), because the way I read it he seems to care about Guernseys reputation and the locals feelings on how they wish to keep their Island’s traditions and charm at heart.
It is also Firestorms right to remain an anon “armchair critic” We are ALL armchair critics on this site when it boils down to it. (anon or not).
Report abuse
It does seem strange that a lot of retrospective planning descisions, (usually the ones sent in by the smaller local businesses and people who don’t have a lot of clout), get refused and for reasons that only the planning seem bothered about. They may say “we are only doing our job and following written policy” but if you read how “policy” is written it can be interpreted so many different ways to suit who ever!
I am unlucky enough to have been on the recieving end of having to sit through and listen to ludicrous reasons by two insinscere smug looking planners as to why i could not continue to trade in a part of a building that has always been used for the same purpose.
There have been planning stories of late in the paper BY the planning department which completely contradict what they told me. These stories appear to show that larger companies (who’s directors also appear listed on the Enviroment planning board according to a certain web site that i read recently), or ones with more “wonga” seem immune to the petty excuses that are apparently “written” into E/D’s book of rules and regulations!
I would hope that any Deputies reading this will also give these mere civil servants a good shake up on how they come across at meetings with people too because sitting there smirking while telling someone they are about to lose their business because of their descision, only fuels peoples opinion about their (E/D’s) incompetence of late.
Having said all that mind, I do have one positive thing to say about E/D; I read they have told a company that a historical and rather breathtaking view can not be blocked by a proposed building plan, and for that I say Good on you, a small step in the right direction, but now you need to work on getting Deputies to change these policies that are upsetting so many of the public. (I believe they are are 5 years out of date anyway)?.
Report abuse
Respect to the Environment Department.
Last week they demonstrated that they are vigilantly protecting Guernsey from criminal gate-widening activities. Now, just a few days later, they have bravely stood up to the allotment shed terrorists who are so blighting our society.
They know no fear.
Report abuse