Green Paper Consultaion Report V3
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
States of Jersey Planning & Environment Planning & Environment Department Summary of Responses GREEN PAPER ON ISLAND PLAN REVIEW: STRATEGIC OPTIONS Appendix 1 – Detailed Responses to Green Paper A total of 225 individuals responded to the paper, generating a total of over 7,500 responses to the questionnaire. All 79 of the questions have been analysed and summarised into pie charts for easy review, together with any comments that were made in association with the answers given. Please note that the percentages against each response have been rounded. Island Plan Review Page 1 of 327 Green paper – Consultation Report States of Jersey Planning & Environment Spatial Strategy Island Plan Review Page 2 of 327 Spatial Strategy States of Jersey Planning & Environment Question No 1: Urban containment Do you agree that the new spatial strategy for the Island Plan should be based mainly on the concentration of new development within the existing built-up area, with a particular focus on St Helier? e: Strongly Disagree d: Disagree c: Neither Agree or Disagree 5% 6% 8% a: Strongly Agree 41% 41% b: Agree a: Strongly Agree 80 41% b: Agree 81 41% c: Neither Agree or Disagree 15 8% d: Disagree 12 6% e: Strongly Disagree 9 5% Total: 197 100% Island Plan Review Page 3 of 327 Spatial Strategy States of Jersey Planning & Environment Question No 1: Urban containment a: Strongly Agree I am not in favour of any new development in the countryside spaces Between the exisiting Built up areas; therefore any extensions to the existing Built-up areas must receive most careful consideration. I am very much in favour of development for social need within existing Built-up areas particularly in wishing to see regeneration of the northern and rural villages where the Community initiative is the driving force to provide affordaBle homes for 1st Time Buyers comfortaBle retirement for the elderly with access to the existing infrastructure adequate shops an efficient puBlic transport system and the possiBility for employment and recreation. This development should Be on infill sites if availaBle or Brownfield sites. If there is a need to consider the extension of existing Built up areas if should Be made strictly with these development aims in mind and should Be with close consultation with the Parish ConnetaBles. I am strongly in favour of the regeneration of St Helier as a residential area But i would not wish to see all social housing concentrated in the town as this would lead to further social imBalance in the villages to the great detriment of the Parish communities. The rural parishes must not Be allowed to become solely dormitory areas for St Helier. Avoid building on greenfield and brownfield sites. It is important to maintain effective infrastructure of essential services ie water sewage etc regular maintenance and upgrading would Be more economical and effective thus reducing overall costs in running these supplies to a concentrated areas of land rather than sprawls of dwellings spread to wider areas.St. Helier is the capital full potential should Be made without expanding in to other parishbuilt up areas. Following the recent calamitous re-zoning in the Green Zone for over 55's Built up areas and brown field must be the first priority or the urban areas of St Saviour and St Clement. New development around village (on concentrations). In the outer parishes would spoil their charm. This is a small island no further encroaching on the countryside. Do not agree with higher density buildings. Build should also Be considered in the wildly un-developed areas such as in northern parts of the island - ie; St Ouen. This is considered aBsolutely critical due to the impact out-of-town development would have on the Island's infrastructure eg transport drainage highways etc But open amenity space must Be factored into development. This does not happen with the current system By which developments are only considered on their own merits and considered with the Developers and landowners Interests over and above all others. Based on (nil - + 50) net inward migration. Every proBlem and every issue affecting this Island and this 'Island Plan' has to do with trying to put a quart into a pint pot! Not good to anyone. Even if Town finishes up like Hong Kong the only hope for the pfrerservation iof our Blessed Island is 1) Cap the population 2) Maximise accomodation within Town. Island Plan Review Page 4 of 327 Spatial Strategy States of Jersey Planning & Environment But don't forget rural parish need. I would like to see a policy introduced that disallows any development in any area outside an existing Built-up area or in St Helier without other specific conditions Being met. The decision should not Be in the gift of the Planning Minister. The review of the 2002 Island Plan should not allow a line to Be drawn widely around the existing Built-up areas (as happened in the last review) so as to allow in-filling Because this excludes any provision for green-lungs no matter how small in existing semi-urbanised areas. Plenty of land within St. Helier is ripe for redevelopment and the overall environmental impact of new residential development in the town will likely Be less than that of green field development . However there is a limit to toleraBle density in town. One of my 2 kids wants an affordaBle place in St. Helier But they also want a little defensiBle amenity space. There's too much pressure already on land within the Countryside / Green Zones and this Island Plan needs to send out a positive signal that development in the countryside will Be more firmly restricted than it has Been . Can we please Be clear in this Island Plan and say either that we are going to confine all new residential development of any significance (i.e. more than the odd one or two houses here and there) to the existing Built up area or that we are going to have to Build on more land in the countryside / green zone to fulfill our housing need? At least then the puBlic will understand what the heart of the new plan will really mean and how it relates to population policy. Saying mainly...within the built-up area isn't really good enough. The numBer of exceptions and special cases over recent years has already contriButed to the deterioration in the quality of life and our environment. Consequently I would have preferred to see 'mainly' replaced with a more definitive word as the answer could otherwise Be interpreted to mean just 51%. Jersey Needs to preserve it's countryside and charm and develpoement in the non urBan areas will spoil this quality offering. Also non urban developement creates greater traffic problems By using existing Brownfield sites and other areas requiring redevelopment we should Be aBle to contain the majority of new infrastructure in and around St Helier and other urBan areas such as Les Quennevais without expanding into the rural environment. There is good infrastructure. The new Island Plan must Be crystal clear in its' definitions - any amBiguity is a gift to developers whose lawyers and consultants always seem to win any argument. The misinterpretation of Both the spirit and text of the 2002 Island Plan has led to much unnecessary development Both in the countryside and the 'small Built-up areas'. We have seen too much valuaBle open space replaced by ugly ribbon development. Builing (Rezone) green belt must be stopped. We must preserve our country environment at all costs. But provide flats/apartments that people want to live in that have a private space for the occupants i.e. a generous patio or Balcony . There are some excellent flats/apartments in town the flying freehold apartments at MillBrook are very popular States flats at Vincent Court phase 3 St. Helier. But see also John Le Quesne Close St. Clement - La Selliere Court St. Clement. Other good accommodation include Oak Tree Gardens with courtyard areas. Question No 1: Urban containment Island Plan Review Page 5 of 327 Spatial Strategy States of Jersey Planning & Environment b: Agree If the main thrust of new development is focused on St Helier and other existing Built-up areas this will provide the developmental structure for the new Island Plan descriBing a settlement's pattern of growth whether it is St Helier or other urBan / suBurBan areas placing Boundary constraints on expansion proposals for these areas. This will in effect give the necessary all important protection of the countryside and the small rural communities. Significant car parking and amenity space requirement amendments needed. Without highrise development (over 6 storeys) But should be led by housing need not in-migration. There is also a case for other urban areas such as Quennevais or St Saviour / St Clement. My view is that where possiBle the existing Built up area should Be used to provide additional accommodation however there is also a demand for first time Buyer homes in the more rural areas. Thought should Be given to what type of poperty is classed as a first time Buyer home and how such properties can Be included in the development of Brown field sites. Equally thought must Be given to minimum sizes as some of the new 1 and 2 Bed appartments are less than adequate and lack amenity space. The question needs to Be asked as to whether some office accomodation should be provided out of town in order to aleviate traffic congestion. This does not mean high-rise development though. There is much capacity for housing development in the town Fort Regent and the reclamation area.