Skip to main content

New North Quay, St. Helier: erection of fencing

This content has been automatically generated from the original PDF and some formatting may have been lost. Let us know if you find any major problems.

Text in this format is not official and should not be relied upon to extract citations or propose amendments. Please see the PDF for the official version of the document.

NEW NORTH QUAY, ST. HELIER: ERECTION OF FENCING _______________

Lodged au Greffe on 21st May 2002

by Deputy G.C.L. Baudains of St. Clement

______________________________

STATES OF JERSEY

STATES GREFFE

150             2 0 0 2    P . 8 8          

Price code: A

PROPOSITION

THE STATES are asked to decide whether they are of opinion -

  to r e q u est the Harbours and Airport Committee to reconsider its decision to restrict access to parts of the New

North Quay, St.  Helier, through the erection of fencing, and to request the Committee to replace the fencing, if necessary, with fencing in a location that meets the needs of all port users including pleasure boat owners.

DEPUTY G.C.L. BAUDAINS OF ST. CLEMENT

Report

Part of the New North Quay has been fenced off on the grounds of security. This fencing is a major inconvenience to boat owners, whilst being of dubious security value. It makes access to the dinghy pontoons difficult and prevents access to the steps at the end of the quay and the parking spaces that hitherto were available to boat owners at weekends.

There was no consultation with boat owners or their associations prior to the installation, nor was there a delay in its erections when consultation finally took place.

There are several options for creating a secure area available to the Committee, but they have chosen to stick with the Department's choice.

Discussions I have had with the President lead me to believe it is accepted other options have merit and should have been explored, but there was a reluctance to stop the work once it had started.

It is my view that the inconvenience caused by the Department's option is unacceptable and the secure area should be redesigned.

This proposition has no implications for the manpower resources of the States and, as the Harbours and Airport Committee is a Trading Committee, there should be no additional cost to the taxpayer in relocating the fence as required.