10

Geoff

Mark – your argument on the old bus depot does not fall down. For years many people have commented on the old bus depot being purchased by the States for a bus depot. I am sure Island Coachways would have made use of it as I am sure it is a bit crammed in their current location. If the States had any foresight they could have purchased this property even compulsory. Had no problems doing this for extra land for the airport. Problem is, as with many issues over here, the land was worth more for housing development than a bus depot and I am afraid money is king over here not the needs of the island.

Report abuse

12

Mark

Dave,

1) As a former resident of the Bouet I can state that the MAJORTIY of the properties were unfit for habitation, namely the three story buildings, which were unsafe. Indeed in the nineties a serious fire in one of them at Les Cottoniers demonstrated that. However, I disupte completely that the majority of the remainder were unfit, and you have NEVER come out and said WHY they were unfit, except to say they were built in the sixties.

2) Phil, yes a nice earner for the demolition firms. I am sure they did very well out of it.

But thats not the point here……..

3) Exactly Geoff, the ICW site on Les Banques is totally unsuitable for a bus garage. It may not be unsuitable for an operation the size of ICW prior to taking over the public bus service, but it definately was unsuitable post the taking over. The States absolutely should have considered the purchase of the Bouet garage, as you say even compulsory purchase of the site. It is simply not good enough to say “we weren’t offered” – quite simply Mr Jones – you [the States] don’t ask you don’t get. As it happens Mr Jones, you WERE offered it for the GHA were you not? Are you telling me that the houses you built on a perfectly good bus depot, could not have been built on the Bouet site that is now being considered? Does your right hand know what the left hand is doing?

Oh, and Mr Jones, Geoff is NOT saying that. He is saying money in Guernsey is now king, and people will bite their special bodily areas off to sell a piece of land for housing, as they know they will get paid manure loads for it. THIS is the real reason the Bouet site was sold for Housing, and was probably the reason you weren’t offered it.

In terms of the reason you were voted in. This was to serve the people was it not? I trust you will be speaking to the local business’ and house owners re: this possible development? Or, as a Vale Deputy, are you possibly of the opinion that ‘it’s not in my back yard’ so it doesn’t matter?

Your colleagues aren’t saying much are they?

Report abuse

14

Dave Jones

Mark

None of the homes on that site were fit to keep in Housings view and Treasury and the rest of the States agreed with us. They certainly did not measure up to modern construction standards. We wanted to build up to date well insulated homes suitable for the times we live in, with proper sound proofing, energy saving technology to help with ever increasing energy bills, modern kitchens and bathrooms, up to date wiring with enough sockets for the modern age, not patch up something that was rapidly thrown up in the sixties to meet an urgent need at that time.
The demolition work went out to tender and the GHA awarded the job to the cheapest contractor. You asked why the States did not compulsory purchase the old bus Garage at the time? Well compulsory purchase is a weapon of last resort, and the States have always considered that it should only be used when there is no other strategic alternative such as with the fields up at the airport. There are several alternatives for a new bus garage site and I have no doubt the problem will be resolved. The GHA put in an offer on the site that already had on it provisional planning permission for a data park, that proposed data park scheme fell through and it was then that a plan for social housing was submitted for the site which had the full support of Mr Walker who owned the site at that time. You keep saying it was a perfectly good bus garage. It was basically a garage that was in some considerable disrepair; it had no catchment interceptors for fuel or oil spillage, no proper extraction system for exhaust fumes and no decent facilities for the work force. It would most certainly not meet any of the environmental or safety requirements that a modern bus depot or garage would have to meet today. Your penultimate paragraph does not make any sense Mr Walker did offer the site for housing, after he made it clear at the time that his preference was that it went for SOCIAL housing. The GHA put 70 odd homes on that site including disabled flats with its own underground parking and some for partial ownership that has helped several couples on to the first rung of the housing ladder. Your last comment makes even less sense, I was voted in to do the best for the people of Guernsey, I have done my best, certainly to improve those who need social housing and in the contribution I have made to the States. In April next year people will decide whether I have succeeded in my task, as for not in my back yard I was one of the few deputies who voted for island wide voting in order that deputies would be subject to the votes of all those eligible to vote across the island, not just the electorate in their district or parish.
Geoff
I agree with you and I give as much time as I can to discuss any topic with islanders. I also think the island would benefit from a new bus depot and garage facilities built to modern standards.

Report abuse