“Disaster” development gets go-ahead from Planning

Friday 02 June 2017

A parish constable has hit out at a “disaster” development of 200 affordable homes approved yesterday, claiming that it will blight the area with significant traffic and cause flooding to gardens.

Jersey’s Planning Committee gave the go-ahead to a controversial Andium Homes development at Samarès Nurseries after having deferred a decision in April to investigate concerns over traffic levels due to other builds in the area.

The derelict horticultural site on La Grande Route de St Clement will now become home to 20 one-bedroom, 89 two-bedroom and 51 three-bedroom social rented houses and 40 three-bedroom houses for first time buyers.

Developers say that the planning application followed 18 months of careful consideration for residents’ worries about overdevelopment, traffic and drainage issues, but St Clement Constable Len Norman yesterday slammed their research for being “seriously flawed”.

Speaking against the proposal, he blasted a survey into the development’s traffic and transport implications for concluding that social housing tenants would own fewer motor vehicles despite having, “…no evidence, apart from that it is true in London.”

Constable Norman added that the development – alongside new builds in the areas of Le Squez and Le Hocq totalling nearly 200 homes – would aggravate pre-existing traffic issues which sometimes leads to “black spots” where motorists jump the traffic lights.

“The Grande Route de la Cote is the one that’s going to be affected mainly, but when you get to Plat Douet Road, you’ve got four roads joining. They won’t be able to cope, they can’t cope now,” he told Express.

Pictured: The Samarès Nurseries site set to make way for 200 new homes. (Source: Google Maps)

Overall plans include a financial contribution for additional extra bus services to offset the impact of more increased residency in the area, and an extension to the Eastern Cycle Route, but the Constable maintained that it, “…won’t make any difference.”

But the issues extend beyond transport – they could quite literally leak into nearby residents’ gardens, which could become water-logged as the new development replaces the former marshland.

“It’s happened already. Everyone knows it’s going to be a disaster. The more concrete you pour on a marsh, the water has to have somewhere to go,” the Constable explained.

Moreover, he claimed that the development should be rejected on the basis that permission had not been sought for a drainage system to be built under parish roads.

“My understanding is that under the highways law 1956, the private sewer under a road needs the permission of the Parish. They haven’t applied for that yet. They say they’re going to, but they haven’t yet,” Constable Norman commented.

The Committee, however, deemed this to be unnecessary, while architect Ian McDonald argued that all concerns had been “robustly assessed” using experts appointed by the Department for Infrastructure.

Although approved unanimously, Chair of the Panel Constable Juliette Gallichan commented that she still felt “uneasy” over transport issues, while Constable Philip Le Sueur gave his endorsement to the project, “…with a heavy heart.”

“There is a need for housing on the Island, and if it doesn’t go here, where else can it go to provide this level of development without creating similar problems elsewhere?”