IF I had not been otherwise been occupied a week ago Thursday I would have attended the public meeting held at Grouville Parish Hall to discuss a proposed 19-home development at Seymour.

Or would the entrance have been barred as the media were not permitted to attend?

As a commentator on Island life would my presence have been deemed undesirable and how exactly, if I had insisted on my democratic right as a parishioner to attend a public meeting at my parish hall, would I have been prevented crossing the threshold?

What an excellent headline that would have made in this esteemed publication as I was forcibly ejected or come, to that, if the Island media had attempted to cover the proceedings to find the doors closed and bolted.

How can a meeting be described as ‘public’ when only certain parties and individuals are invited to attend? Instead this was a closed meeting for residents of the immediate area and the proponents of the scheme to demolish three properties around Keppel Tower to make way for 19 – no doubt – luxury flats.

Apparently neither parties, the residents and the developer, Seaview Properties Limited, wanted the media to attend.

It may yet transpire – and I sincerely hope it does – that a proper public meeting is held to which the media and any member of the public will be allowed to attend. Why should a development in Grouville concern any burghers from the other parishes? Because this is not just a development around a historic monument, it also has the potential to alter the character of the coastline.

It is just over two years since more than 7,000 Islands stood side-by-side, along the sands of St Ouen’s Bay to show the groundswell of opinion against inappropriate development of the coastline. The Line in the Sand wasn’t just about protecting the remaining pristine shore of St Ouen’s Bay or the promontories of the north coast it was intended to send out a loud and clear message that enough was enough all around the Island.

The east coast may have long been ruined long ago by ribbon development hugging the shore and denying the public access to the beach, but that doesn’t mean things can’t be put right.

Proposing such a dense development in such a prominent coastal location is not to be treated lightly; nor should any discussion about it be held behind closed doors.

Once a planning application is published it is in the public domain and thank heavens the Planning Department takes every conceivable measure at its disposal to engage the public in the process. As the JEP is the vehicle used to publish planning applications it has, over the years, performed a worthy public service by running stories about developments which are deemed newsworthy.

Once applications are advertised any person who wishes to can view the plans and, if they want a more thorough explanation, arrange for a planning officer to explain them in greater detail.

In many cases, especially the more contentious applications in sensitive locations or where a proposed development is likely to make an impact on its surroundings, the applicant is willing to engage openly with the public. Such scenarios may not run smoothly and there is no guarantee that objectors will be won over, but at least efforts are made to be open and transparent and to get the facts into the public domain.

As plans are copyright no applicant can be compelled to do anymore than make them available to the Planning Department and for perusal at the appropriate parish hall for the required time. At least in the case of the Keppel Tower application the JEP was able to publish an artists’ impression of what the development will look like if it is approved.

I am the first to admit that the stretch of coastline between Seymour and Le Hurel slips is one of the least attractive along the east coast. Recent developments in the over–egged art deco style with stark white facades and expanses of glass encased in steel, have eroded what remained of any local character. This new proposal will simply complement such uniform blandness.

Keppel Tower is the second of five closely spaced towers constructed eastwards from La Rocque in the wake of the Battle of Jersey. Built as part of Islandwide coastal defences to repel invasion will it be able to stave off the relentless march of the ‘demolish and rebuild’ brigade who are doing more to change the face of this Island than any occupier or dominant incomers have ever done throughout the ages.
The clock can’t be turned back and the sand dunes that once made the east coast so similar to the sweep of St Ouen’s Bay have long been built over – including common land. If it were not for the Grouville Links preserving the remaining common coastal strip, the hotch-potch of development would extend all the way from Havre des Pas to Gorey.

Are the three properties proposed for demolition in danger of imminent collapse? Highly unlikely so the purpose here is, we can assume, to maximise the potential of the site by cramming in as many units as possible.

Perhaps it is time for a line in the sand of the Royal Bay of Grouville or at least from Seymour to Le Hurel.

The damage may have been already done but that doesn’t mean that the people shouldn’t make their voices heard.