Island Plan 2002 - changes to Built-up Area boundary (P.77-2005) – 2nd amendment

STATES OF JERSEY

r

ISLAND PLAN 2002: CHANGES TO BUILT-UP AREA BOUNDARY (P.77/2005) – SECOND AMENDMENT

Lodged au Greffe on 3rd May 2005 by Senator L. Norman

STATES GREFFE

ISLAND PLAN 2002: CHANGES TO BUILT-UP AREA BOUNDARY (P.77/2005) – SECOND AMENDMENT

____________

In paragraph  (a),after sub-paragraph (xx), insert the following new sub-paragraph – "( x x i )  Field 91, Grande Route de la Côte, St.  Clement;"

SENATOR L. NORMAN

REPORT

The effect of this amendment, if approved, would be to designate Field  91, St.  Clement as an important open space within the Built-Up Area.

Members can be in no doubt that many residents of St. Clement are becoming more and more distressed by the development that is occurring in the Parish, and even more so by the totally inappropriate style of development that is being permitted in some cases. La Rue du Jambart is a very sad example of a traditional country lane being ruined by urban standards being imposed on a rural community.

St.  Clement is often spoken about these days as an urban Parish. Despite the excessive development that has taken place within its boundaries over the past years, it remains culturally and, in much of its area, physically rural. This proposition is designed to help to keep it that way.

It is often not realised that St.  Clement is Jersey's smallest Parish with a land area of only 4.2  km.², some 50% less than, for example, St.  Mary, the second smallest, which covers some 6.5  km².

On the other hand, St.  Clement is home to 9% of Jersey's people with a population of 8,196, giving a density of 1,951  persons per km.², compared with St. Mary, which has a population of 1,591 and a density of 245 persons per km.²

From the following table, taken from the 2001 Census, it can be seen that despite being the smallest Parish by some margin, the density level in St.  Clement is second only to St.  Helier.

Parish population and density

Population Percent Area Population Density Parish 2001 Census of total (km.2) (persons per km.2)

It is no wonder that St.  Clement wishes to resist any further significant development.

Field  91 needs to be protected, not simply as a gesture and a symbol, but as a very real, important and meaningful open space.

It is privately owned, and unless purchased by the Parish or the States it is unlikely that the public would ever have access to it. But the public do have access to the tradition and important "green lung" that it provides.

Extraordinarily it is not only the only field on the coast road from Grève d'Azette to Green Island; it is the only significant open space that exists from St. Clement's boundary with St. Saviour to the southern junction of Rue de Samarès. Yes, it is important.

When deciding on whether or not to approve this amendment, Members should be cognisant and take into consideration the impact of any future potential development on the immediate neighbours in this particular part of the Vingtaine de Samarès.

Few in St.  Clement, and certainly not I, have opposed any and all development in the Parish. But this area has now taken more than its fair share.

In the recent past, to the east of Field  91, we have seen a large family home demolished and replaced with 65 sheltered apartments plus a warden's flat. To the north and east 34 three-bedroom Category  A dwellings were completed in the summer of 2002 and construction of 73 mixed States rental homes commenced to the north in October of last year and continues currently.

The whole nature of the neighbourhood has changed dramatically, and Field  91 remains as the only meaningful open space and, perhaps most importantly, the only physical reminder of what once was and the only hope of maintaining the quality of life for the existing residents.

I seek the States' support for this modest and appropriate amendment to the Island Plan. There are no financial and manpower implications for the States arising from this amendment.