A row erupted last autumn over plans to build a clos of 10 houses in a garden and adjacent agricultural land off Rue des Barras, a Vale lane.
La Societe, the National Trust of Guernsey and the Nature Commission used the application on the half-acre site to raise concerns that only lip service was being paid to Guernsey’s Strategy for Nature.
New plans submitted contained far more information on biodiversity plans, but increased homes on the site from 10 to 14.
Farmers Jason Brache and Fiona Pollock own the neighbouring farm, which has been in Mr Brache’s family for four generations. They said the plans for the garden of Fairfield, which is now being called Habitat by developers, had gone from ‘bad to outrageously ridiculous’ and would impact their livelihood.
‘With the objections they had last time it seems very odd to then increase the amount of housing by 40% – how does that help with biodiversity?’ said Mr Brache.
‘Don’t planning understand this is a rural location, it’s not Town.’
Along with other neighbours they said they were unhappy that a biodiversity report on the site was a desk-based survey done by Jersey-based Sangan Island Conservation and that a letter from the Nature Commission had been included as a supporting document.
‘The survey carried out on the site itself was very questionable and lacking method, done by drone alone, no surprise it concluded there was nothing of importance on site,’ said Miss Pollock.
‘If they did that in the surrounding fields they would conclude the same, however we have survey evidence of rare plants on site and it is a haven for wildlife. No one has spoken to us about the data we have on the surrounding area.’
The fields adjacent to the site are currently used by La Societe’s Conservation Herd and the couple said this had increased the site’s biodiversity even further.
Neighbours said their objections were to the scale, aspect, height and design of the buildings, which are all three stories high with balcony roof gardens, many of which overlook the farm.
Miss Pollock said the impact on the biodiversity of their own land would be irreversible.
‘We do not feel it will be suitable to have animals here due to the closeness of obtrusive human encroachment, noise, motion, light pollution and the threat of litter being blown down and consumed,’ she said.
‘We have previously held agricultural shows here and wanted to also hold farm to fork nights – where we eat food produced on the farm – but this will not be possible with 14 families overhead.
‘All of this goes against the Strategy for Nature. A few native bushes and a bug hotel will not offset what is lost, and the character of this historical old Guernsey corner will be ruined.’
Neighbour Geoff Howe agreed.
‘Overnight they will double the population of the area,’ he said.
‘You see Nature Commission and Sangan Island Conservation in the application and you think it has their backing. They have attempted to show biodiversity has been taken into account, but a few wild flowers and native trees won’t replace what will be lost.’
Desktop biodiversity report ‘wholly unsatisfactory’
La Societe’s president said that relying on photographs and drone footage for an ecological survey was wholly unsatisfactory.
La Societe, which objected to the original plans for the Fairfield site, said they had reviewed the new submission, and did have some concerns.
‘While we recognise them as much improved on the original, we were disappointed to see that the ecologist’s report was a desktop exercise relying solely on photographs and drone footage,’ said president Trevor Bourgaize.
‘We consider this to be wholly unsatisfactory and feel that a site visit should have been a prerequisite; we do not see how the assumption that “sufficient habitat data for the site has been gleaned via a remote survey effort” can be made.’
The biodiversity report on the Fairfield site was written by a Jersey-based director of the Nature Commission, and one of the residents objecting to the plans for the site said they had written to the commission to ask if this was a conflict of interest.
Peter Crosland, who lives close by, said he believed his own objections had been undermined by the actions of the Nature Commission as a letter from the commission has been included by the developers in their new application. He said he had written to the commission asking them to write to planning to say they did not support the plans.
‘Significant damage has been done,’ he wrote.
‘I find it astounding that, in its role, the Nature Commission should prejudge a planning application.’
Nature Commission CEO Jessi Jennings said the commission’s limited involvement was to encourage decision-making to be evidence-based.
‘I was aware that the Nature Commission letter had been included in the planning application following the application being made available online,’ she said.
‘Although I wasn’t specifically aware that it would be included, I’m not necessarily surprised that it was, as it contained recommendations that were then actioned by the applicants, namely the commissioning of a preliminary ecological assessment [Pea].’
She added that the purpose of a Pea was to assess the ecological features present, or potentially present, within a site and its surrounding area of influence.
‘This was reiterated in the Nature Commission letter provided to the applicants, along with additional information predominantly around the importance of native species. The Nature Commission does not hold the expertise to be able to carry out a Pea, and so information was given as to organisations that may be able to provide this service. One of these organisations was Sangan Island Conservation. The author of the Pea is a director on the board of the Nature Commission, however their involvement was in relation to their professional capacity with Sangan Island Conservation.’
Fairfield development applications
The original proposals from developer Hillstone for the Rue des Barras site were submitted last summer.
It involved a clos of 10 houses. They were proposed to be up to three storeys tall, with a mixture of two and three bedrooms.
Currently the land has polytunnels, a greenhouse and a shed. Historically it had glasshouses, but the land has never been developed.
The new application includes two nature reports, as well as a new site layout.
It is now proposed that 14 two-bed homes be created, divided into four terraces, with three or four houses each. The homes would still have three storeys.
Each home would have one parking space, while the estate would share two visitors spaces.
The application includes a letter from the Nature Commission, which praised some aspects such as the hedgehog tunnels and wild flower areas, but called for a preliminary ecological assessment.
‘This would identify further opportunities to promote biodiversity at the site and would consider the connectivity of the site with surrounding areas, enabling more site and area appropriate recommendations to be made,’ the commission stated.
The desk-based preliminary ecological appraisal report submitted by Jersey-based Sangan Island Conservation and written by Dr Amy Louise Hall said no further studies of the site were required. In her conclusions she wrote, ‘It is my professional opinion that sufficient habitat data for the site has been gleaned via remote survey effort.’
You need to be logged in to comment. If you had an account on our previous site, you can migrate your old account and comment profile to this site by visiting this page and entering the email address for your old account. We'll then send you an email with a link to follow to complete the process.