A controversial Infrastructure Department scheme to erect railings along a stretch of the sea wall at La Haule – that has faced several Planning rejections over the last five years – may now be proving that there’s a time and a place for the old “if at first you don’t succeed” adage…

Infrastructure Minister Andy Jehan has said there is not “sufficient community or political support” for the plans, which were resubmitted again towards the end of last year.

Pictured: The Minister’s decision recommends “alternative mitigations”.

Despite several attempts to repackage the scheme since the initial application was rejected in 2020, it has faced a barrage of public criticism – including concerns that the railings would be “a waste of public money” and negatively impact views across the bay.

It emerged last year that the Infrastructure Department had spent £7,270 on failed planning applications for the project, in a bid to make the area safer.

But a recently-published ministerial decision by Constable Jehan has instead recommended that “alternative mitigations” be “progressively” implemented along the sea front between La Haule slipway and Le Mielle.

This would include:

  • Painting a solid white line along the edge of the asphalt path adjacent to the sea
    wall.
  • Extending the physical segregation between the cycle and pedestrian paths at the
    north-eastern end.
  • Installing additional warning signage.

A report accompanying the Minister’s decision stated that he “was not aware of the last
planning application to install edge protection (railings)” and that he “recognises that there is not sufficient community or political support at present for this particular mitigation”.

“Having visited the site, the Minister believes that alternative mitigations should be used,” the report explained.

“These measures are not a substitute for physical edge protection but would raise user
awareness and improve delineation along the path.”

Pictured: Infrastructure Minister Andy Jehan.

The report described the proposed measures as “a practical and pragmatic compromise”.

“To avoid increased urban clutter, it is proposed that the measures could be introduced
progressively, with their effectiveness and user acceptability assessed overtime, in terms of balancing the need to improve safety and minimise visual impact,” it continued.

“This would also help inform whether further future intervention would be required to ensure public safety.”