Island Plan 2002, Policy H2 - Field 91, St. Clement

STATES OF JERSEY

r

ISLAND PLAN 2002, POLICY  H2: FIELD  91,

ST.  CLEMENT

Lodged au Greffe on 6th June 2006 by Deputy I.J. Gorst of St. Clement

STATES GREFFE

PROPOSITION

THE STATES are asked to decide whether they are of opinion

to r e fer to their Act dated 11th July 2002 in which they approved the revised draft Island Plan as a

Development Plan under Article 3 of the Island Planning (Jersey) Law 1964, as amended, and to request the Minister for Planning and Environment to –

A m  e n d t h e I sland Plan 2002 to provide that Field 91, La Grande Route de la Côte, St. Clement, be

designated as an important open space in accordance with Policy BE8 of the said Plan.

DEPUTY I.J. GORST OF ST. CLEMENT

REPORT

The effect of this proposition, if approved, would be to request that the Minister for Planning and Environment designate Field  91, St.  Clement as an important open space within the Buil-tUp Area.

Members can be in no doubt that residents of St.  Clement have become more and more distressed by the development that has occurred and is continuing to occur in the Parish, and also by the totally inappropriate style of some developments. La Rue du Jambart is a case in point, where a traditional country lane has been ruined by the imposition of urban standards on a rural community.

St.  Clement is Jersey's smallest Parish with a land area of only 4.2  km.², 50% less than, for example, St.  Mary, the second smallest, which covers 6.5  km.².

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, the population density of St.  Clement is second only to that of  St.  Helier.

Parish population and density

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

The problem of over-development is further highlighted by another table –

PLANNING APPROVALS, PENDING APPLICATIONS AND COMPLETION OF DWELLINGS SINCE 1 JANUARY 2005

Dwellings subject of

Dwellings granted current Planning Dwellings Planning Permission Applications Completed

GROUVILLE 99 46 33 ST. BRELADE 113 124 81 ST. CLEMENT 69 97 115 ST. HELIER 464 221 574 ST. JOHN 37 28 21 ST. LAWRENCE 58 162 97 ST. MARTIN 16 65 30 ST. MARY 12 7 24 ST. OUEN 66 17 65 ST. PETER 103 13 24 ST. SAVIOUR 97 62 22 TRINITY 22 3 20

TOTAL 1,156 845 1,106

Notes

Figures compiled by Planning and Environment Department for the period 01/01/05 to 26/05/06, inclusive.

115 dwellings were completed in St.  Clement between 1st January 2005 and 26th May 2006, this figure is second only to St.  Helier's. However, when the size of the parish is compared with the number of dwellings completed, then the numbers become alarming. St.  Clement has suffered 27.38 completed dwellings per km.² compared with St.  Lawrence in third position at 10.21 per km.² (i.e. St.  Clement has seen nearly three times as many dwellings completed per km.² ). Analysis of the number of dwellings granted planning permission and the number of dwellings subject to current planning applications reveals similar findings.

These statistics speak for themselves and highlight why Field  91 needs to be protected, not simply as a gesture and a symbol, but as a very real, important open space. It is 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. It is important. It is an oasis, a green lung' amongst surrounding over- development.

St.  Clement has more than played its part in alleviating the supply problem of both Category  A and socia housing; this site is not zoned for either of these categories of homes.

In the recent past, to the east of Field  91, a large family home was 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 73  newly-constructed mixed States rental homes are almost ready for occupation.

The whole nature of the neighbourhood has changed dramatically, and Field  91 remains the only important open space, the only physical reminder of what once was, and the only hope of maintaining the quality of life for the existing and yet to occupy residents. Therefore when deciding on whether or not to approve this proposition, Members  should  take  into  consideration  the  impact  of  any  future  potential  development  on  the  immediate neighbours in this particular part of the Vingtaine de Samarès.

The Island Plan (2002) policy on important open space is clear; below are extracts from the Island Plan for ease of reference.

Policy BE8 – Important Open Space

There will be a presumption against the loss of important open space as designated on the Island and Town Proposals Maps.

In order to better understand the function and role of open space, the links between spaces and to identify areas of need or shortfalls in space provision, the Planning & Environment Department will initiate the preparation of an open space strategy.

Important Open Space

53. Across the Island, there are areas of open space of varying size, form and quality that are considered important in terms of their role in the character and quality of the built environment.
54. Within the urban areas, open spaces help to soften and complement the surrounding built form and frame the setting of important buildings. Open spaces also have an important environmental role, as lungs' within a densely built-up area .
55. On the edges of the town, green spaces can help to form a barrier between two or more built-up areas, bringing countryside to the urban doorstep. In this context, open space may be agricultural land without public access, but it still performs an important visual and environmental function.

I suggest that Field 91 fulfils these criteria; indeed paragraph 6.53, 6.54 and 6.55 could have been written with Field  91 specifically in mind. By designating Field  91 as an important open space, the Minister would be ensuring that countryside is being retained within an ever creeping urbanisation of the Parish of St.  Clement.

Longer-standing Members will be aware that Senator Norman brought a similar proposition as an amendment to P.77/2005 last year and that this was narrowly defeated by only one vote.

The then Environment and Public Services Committee commented upon Senator Norman's proposition, the conclusion of which members might like to review (P.77/2005  Amd.(2) – Comments); I would suggest that this has proved to be overly optimistic.

It  is  now  becoming  widely  recognised  that  over-development  and  unit  sizes  within  developments  are  a contributing factor to growing social problems. By supporting this proposition, Members will be allowing the Minister to ensure that Field  91 remains an important open space, thereby limiting future social problems in this already developed area of the Parish.

There are no manpower implications arising from this proposition. There are no obvious financial implications arising from this proposition. Any other financial implications will depend upon the actions of the Minister for Planning and Environment following any States' request.