Why the cul de sac at Clos du Feuvre at Maufant Village has been opened to allow access to Field 690A without ensuring parking provision for residents when will the re-instatement of the village’s footpaths and roads begin

2.11  The Deputy of St. Martin of the Minister for Treasury and Resources regarding Clos due Feuvre, St. Martin and access to Field 690A:

Would the Minister advise why the cul de sac at Clos du Feuvre at Maufant Village has been opened to allow access to Field 690A without ensuring that the promised parking provision for the residents is available and will he further advise when the promised re-instatement of the village's footpaths and roads will begin and indicate whether Property Holdings has sufficient revenue to cover the total cost of the re-instatement?

Senator T.A. Le Sueur (Minister for Treasury and Resources): Can I ask my Assistant Minister, Deputy Le Fondre, to deal with this?

Deputy J.A.N. Le Fondré of St. Lawrence (Assistant Minister, Treasury and Resources -

rapporteur):

I will try and deal with it in 2 parts effectively and just to clarify, Sir, when I visited the site yesterday morning, as of 9.30 a.m. the cul de sac had not been opened to allow access to take place but work is in progress to allow services to be installed and there is a distinction. The proposed parking provisions, the 12 parking spaces which are for the residents of Clos du Feuvre, are located immediately adjacent to the proposed new access but on Field 690A. So, as far as Property Holdings are concerned and aware, when the development is finished and the new access is in place, the promised car parking spaces will be made available for use. Therefore, access has not occurred yet and I understand that the parking provision will be available but I must emphasise that the provision of those parking spaces was not part of the contract for sale of the rights of access. It was a planning condition and, as such, any matters relating to future enforcement of that should be more properly addressed to the Minister for Planning and Environment. I am not trying to dodge the issue. It is just making it quite clear as to where the responsibilities fall. In relation to when; we would hope to be in a position to start work in the spring of 2008. As to how much; well, as the Deputy is aware, with the exception of certain private access routes, a lot of the footpaths and roads are publicly owned  but  the actual cost  of  maintaining those  is also  the responsibility of the householders. However, the background to all this is that the proceeds that were obtained from selling the right of access to the developer, which is a fairly substantial sum, has been put into a pot to go towards the repairs of that estate. As to whether there are sufficient funds available, I cannot give a precise answer at the moment and the reason I am phrasing it that way is because we are about to go out to tender.  I do not want to prejudice the tender process because we want to get the best price we can get on the deal. It is only when we receive and accept a tender that we will know the accurate position. Finally, if we were to find out that we did not have sufficient funds, then we would have to consider the best way forward and that would have to be, and I would certainly

commit to that, if that position arises, we would want to seek the views both of the Maufant Village Association and obviously the 2 parishes, the Connétable s and the Deputy . Thank you, Sir.

1. The Deputy of St. Martin :

I have got to accept, and I am sure the rapporteur will as well, that the rapporteur has found himself in a bit of a can of worms, been handed over something which really should have been sorted out way back before we even got Field 690 underway and if, indeed, had Planning not reneged on a promise that had been made by the Vice President about 3 years ago that nothing would happen until everything had been sorted out, we may not be in the mess we are now. Could I ask in the first supplementary, 2 parts to this question really, is that would the rapporteur accept that he has received a letter this morning, which I got this morning, which makes it quite clear that the road was supposed to be opened up on Thursday of last week and the reason it has not been opened up is probably because I have asked the question for today.

Deputy J.A.N. Le Fondré:

I was just looking at the letter. The letter says: "We expect to hand over these houses on Thursday, 29th November with access to these properties through Clos de Feuvre." But it also says that we have one remaining service connection to make and this will be undertaken during the week commencing 26th November and, therefore, the point is that the services can be put in with 14 days notice. The letter is dated 12th November. Work started 26th November. They complied with that part of the agreement. The access cannot take place until, as I understand it, Building Control sign off. However, Building Control only have to sign off on one house for the legal right of access to be granted. I am not aware as yet whether Building Control have done so. When that happens, then the right of access becomes available.

2. The Deputy of St. Martin :

On the other side of the question, has the rapporteur any idea at all about the cost of re-instatement because I gather initially we were looking at about £250,000 and there was going to be some money left over from the right of way. Has he any idea now, has the cost accelerated and, if so, by how much?

Deputy J.A.N. Le Fondré:

As of this stage, Sir, I have not been given any sums at all. I do know the sum of money in the pot is substantially more than the sum the Deputy just quoted but, as I said, I would like to keep reasonably quiet on the matter until we have had a tender because I hope we would get a decent price for it.