Gregorys status

Hi colleagues, I really believe that this issue needs to be properly ventilated urgently with a view to obtaining clear guidelines having regards to the following:

1. Based on the literature over 25 years has past since the density policy referred below
was introduced. ince that ti!e significant changes to infrastructure, population and land use have occurred. 2. "e are at a #uncture where the $ % e!erging &rder is now up for discussion and I believe we should use this opportunity to do so. 3. 'here is great and increasing pressure for sub(urban lands and this is pushing the li!its of $ %s urban fence further into these peripheral areas. I believe that $ %, panish 'own and )ort!ore will soon *another +5(2, years- will beco!e one large conurbation due to increasing urban sprawl past the urban fence.shadow fuelled by a nu!ber of push.pull forces such as: a. 'he introduction of the Highway and continued e/pansion of !a#or roads *the Boulevard.)alisadoes-. b. 'he develop!ent and continued e/pansion of the transportation *car, bus, railand co!!unication syste!s. 0r. 1arl Baileys Gleaner article dated unday, 0arch +2, 2,++, entitled 3 Urban chaos amid residential expansion4 ce!ents this fact he postulated that: "The spread seems to be different along each access," Bailey said, identifying routes through Gordon Town, Stony Hill, Red Hills, and Harbour iew as the other access points! "or Red Hills and Stony Hill, it is more upscale residential, "dri#en by a push to lea#e the commercial area of $ingston by persons who can still afford to commute and then withdraw to the more salubrious rural li#ing"! 'he e/pansion of the water supply to $ % under the $ % "ater upply I!prove!ent )ro#ect a !a#or invest!ent effort. d. 5evelop!ent of oapberry treat!ent plant and the vision to centrali6e the collection and treat!ent of sewage. e. 'he continued growth of peripheral districts and sub urban satellite towns f. 'he slow but increasing conversion.frag!entation of large slots of agriculture.industrial *e.g. 7ay!anas, Inswood, Bernard 8odge etc- and increase construction hillside lands where faults and high landslide susceptible e/ists *Irish 'own, Bellevedere, terling 7astle etc- notwithstanding the fact that these are li!iting factors which currently opposes the rate of growth of sprawl . 2. 'he rising cost of providing affordable housing and scarcity of finding suitable non( agricultural develop!ent lands. 2. In regards to the !ar9et, the rising nu!ber of proposals for higher densities for various areas of $ % is signaling rising de!and for higher density housing fro! the !ar9et *4 H%GH&ST '() B&ST US& *R%(+%*,&4- .%s an offshoot there e/ist presently a large and growing rental !ar9et which is a recogni6ed for! of ho!e ownerships using !ulti( fa!ily *!any single fa!ily dwellings have been converted-. 'he significant increase of :estrictive 7ovenant applications received by the %gency annually of which a large portion is to allow !ulti(fa!ily *as opposed to single fa!ily dwelling- is also indicative of the needs of the !ar9et. 4. &ver the years there has been a gradually lowering of lot and house si6es which is in effect an increase in density. 'his is also indicative of the affordability and cost factor. 5. c.

I also believe that the discussion should also include the following ele!ents: +. :egeneration of blighted and decaying areas 2. ;rban :enewal )olicies 2. )olices to ste! rural to urban drift and decentrali6ation policies. <. 'he adoption of new urban design principles *s!art growth, new urbanis! etc- to allow for greater and efficient use of the land. 5. 'he introduction of =le/ible density.6oning principles. I a! neither supporting nor refuting anything. I believe that this is an issue that should be addressed. "e need to be able to clearly tell investors.developers what is the clear, una!biguous and prudent policy. G. Bennett