iGO News – General – SGP response to brochure distributed by Natural Ouddorp

Ouddorp – All kinds of voting calls are made during election time. By the political parties themselves, of course, but also by all kinds of other organizations and individuals. SGP: “There is nothing wrong with that, of course. At least: if it is done honestly, if no mistakes are told. This is what was recently published about development on the coast, which was also placed as an advertisement in a newspaper newspaper.” Read more: SGP opposes further development of the Odorp coast >>

tracking

The post says a bit: The SGP will be in favor of building the coast with luxury apartments and hotels. At the same time exhibitions of nature conservation, farmland, openness of the landscape, Odorp culture and identity and Sunday break. Is this really? No, this is not true at all.

The SGP platform is clear: there is no longer room in Ouddorp to expand entertainment on a large scale. Building on the dunes, the beach, and the immediate vicinity is certainly not a problem as far as the SGP is concerned. The SGP also wants to place limits on the number of B&B sites. And the SGP wants to study the Residential Recreation Development Framework, because it sometimes seems that this policy leaves too much room for recreation in some respects.

SGP is committed to preserving the distinctive qualities of our island: coastline, tranquility, space and nature. Sunday rest is close to our hearts. It is such a great grace from God that He has given man a day of rest per week. Everyone benefits from that. Therefore, maintaining this group day of rest is a very important point for the SGP. We do not allow ourselves to be deceived by those who say that each individual must decide for himself if he/she has a day off and on what day he/she is.

We hope you agree with these opinions. But you might be wondering, “What about Ouddorp Bad Oost?” We’re very honest about it: it’s a tough file for a SGP. It’s not a completely new plan, so we can’t take a completely open position on it. In 2019, the city council unanimously approved the construction of homes and a hotel on this site. Then the Small Grants Party saw no room to vote against the plan. Since 2007, policy documents have repeatedly stated that buildings can be built on this site. It would be improper management to take over so suddenly after so many years that no building is allowed at all. In 2019, the SGP was able to arrange with an amendment stating that the number of homes on this site was limited and that the so-called “open room” remained unbuilt. After a judge canceled the plan due to uncertainty about nitrogen, the developer introduced new apps for this site. There are different ideas about this within the SGP group. On the one hand, again: After all these years, can we suddenly vote against building on this site? Is there scope (also legally) for this? On the other hand: Can we justify to residents that after three years we are still excluding this project from the Residential Leisure Development Framework? Can’t and shouldn’t we now follow the line that there is no other place for new vacation homes at the head of the island? These are complex questions. There are many interests involved. This is why the SGP does not want to take a final position until the council’s proposal on these applications has been submitted to the city council. At election time it might be attractive to come up with one party, but the Small Grants Party doesn’t want to be such a party. We must conduct a comprehensive and responsible assessment.