DEPARTMENT OF THE ENVIRONMENT
Review of Jersey Architecture Commission
Purpose and context
The purpose of the report is to allow the Minister to review the value of the Jersey Architecture Commission (JAC), including its cost effectiveness, and its potential future role; and to review its membership.
This review is related to the Minister’s ongoing wider review of advisory groups (MD-PE-2012-004). It is brought separately to the wider review because of the need to determine whether the Commission is to continue relative to;
- the growing caseload of current planning applications and pre-application enquiries that may warrant architectural review by the Commission;
- the need to review the membership of the Commission in light of the imminent expiry of the terms of office of some members, and the need for arrangements to be made for meetings of the Commission during 2012, if it is to continue; and finally
- the need for the department to secure professional architectural advice following the resignation of the Department Architect.
Background
The JAC was established in March 2010 (see MD-PE-2009-0121 at appendix 1): its purpose was to provide an independent, informed design critique of major development schemes to assist the Minister and the Planning Applications Panel in decision-making, where the design and architecture of schemes was a material planning consideration. This was regarded as a critical element in securing the former Minister’s design objectives (as set out in the Jersey Design Guide (date 2008)) and an integral part of the former Minister’s design and architecture agenda.
The JAC was established by the work of the Department Architect, comprising a mix of eight local and UK-based practitioners, academics and professionals, with the Department Architect acting as Executive Commissioner, as follows and detailed at appendix 2:
- Marcus Binney (Chair)
- Professor David Watkin (UK-based)
- Andy Theobold (UK-based)
- George Ferguson (UK-based)
- Mike Waddington
- Stuart Fell
- Antony Gibb
- Sara Marsh
Since its inception, in March 2010, the JAC has met approximately once every two months reviewing, on average, four cases per meeting.
As part of any Design Review meeting, three commissioners attended as a minimum, the maximum attendance being set at four members.
In the first year of its operation, which only covered nine months, expenditure on the Commission amounted to just under £5,000, with approximately £11,000 being spent in 2011 (which included input of JAC into the judging of the Jersey Design Awards). Members are remunerated on the basis of their professional fees and reasonable travel expenses. A budget of £10,000 for the operation of the commission has been established in 2012.
The terms of reference for the JAC were established at the time of its inception, in March 2010, but this was followed with additional guidance to clarify its operation and procedures (see guidance at appendix 3), for the benefit of those architects, agents and developers engaging with it in the design review process.
Latterly, the JAC has also offered advice in relation to the preparation of site-specific development briefs that are being prepared under the auspices of policies and proposals for the development of States-owned land set out in the new Island Plan.
Discussion
Value of and requirement for architectural advice
The first question that requires consideration is what is the validity of design and architecture as a material consideration in the planning process, and consequently, what, if any, is the requirement for decision-makers to procure independent expert design advice.
Whilst it is clear that the establishment of the JAC took place under the auspices of the former Minister’s particular agenda to raise the standard of design and architecture in Jersey, there remains a clear planning framework – provided by the 2011 Island Plan and supplementary planning guidance including the Jersey Design Guide (2008) and Design Statements (December 2006) – that requires the consideration of architecture and design in the planning process. Whilst there may be a shift in emphasis in the prominence given to architectural considerations, relative to other legitimate planning factors, it is clear that there is a desire and a need to ensure that design standards are maintained and enhanced.
The department has taken the decision not to fill the post of Department Architect but to use some of the resource that is released to meet CSR savings and to provide further support to the availability of planning resources within the Development Control function.
The department has a depth of experience, knowledge and skills in the assessment of design and architecture that is held by the planning professionals within the department, and is well-placed and able to deal with matters of architecture and design presented by the majority of schemes. It is considered, however, that it is legitimate and appropriate to supplement the skills of the department’s planning professionals with specific architectural critiques for those major development schemes where their design will have significant implications: in this respect, it is considered appropriate to continue to engage the JAC to provide the design review function.
It is considered that UK-based members of the commission bring a broader international perspective which has enormously added to the progress and assessment of some of the schemes that they have considered. Their contribution has also been invaluable, particularly when some of the Jersey- based commissioners have been conflicted by their involvement in projects.
It is considered that the costs of the design review function of the commission, which is based on meeting the professional fees and expenses of commissioners, represents good value for money and that it is operated in an efficient and effective manner. As stated above, the department has already established a budget of £10,000 in 2012 to meet the costs of operating the JAC, from within existing resources.
Future role and operation
Whilst it is considered that the principal function of the JAC should continue to be the design review of major schemes, it is also considered legitimate and appropriate for the commission to support and be engaged in the work of the department in the development of masterplans, action areas and development briefs. The JAC has already had some limited involvement in this in relation to the preparation of development briefs for States-owned land.
The department is of the view that the majority of masterplanning work should be undertaken in-house, utilising the range of skills, experience and local knowledge held by professional staff within the department, rather than engaging external consultants, as has been done on several occasions in the past. To supplement this work, however, it is considered appropriate and more cost-effective, to engage the commission, as appropriate and necessary, to provide a specific perspective to this work as it progresses; this is considered to be available potential expansion of its role.
In the event that the role of the commission is continued, it is considered that greater efficiencies and effectiveness in the operation of the JAC and the provision of the advice it gives can be secured: the supplementary planning guidance related to the operation of the commission would be revised to reflect these changes.
The management and administration of the JAC can be managed through existing resources within the Department of the Environment, involving a Principal Planner from the Policy Team, with administrative support provided centrally.
Membership
It is considered that the commission, as constituted, provides a good range and mix of skills, drawn from both the UK and Jersey.
It is relevant to note that the first Department Architect (Sara Marsh) was invited to join the Commission after she left the department. It is considered potentially beneficial to extend a similar invitation to the recently departed Department Architect and former Executive Commissioner, David Cox, to join the commission to provide a valuable perspective based both his extensive UK experience and recent local engagement with design and architecture in Jersey, and to ensure that the number of commissioners is maintained at a level that can provide adequate representation for the design review meetings throughout the year.
Of the existing membership four commissioners’ terms of office are due to expire at the end of February 2012: this is applicable to Andy Theobold (UK-based); George Ferguson (UK-based), Antony Gibb and Stuart Fell. These members are willing and able to continue their work with the JAC and it is considered necessary and appropriate to renew their terms of office, for a further two years.
Recommendations
On the basis of the above, it is recommended that the Minister for Planning and Environment:
1. endorses the continuation of the Jersey Architecture Commission, in order to continue its role in the design review of significant schemes, as set out in guidance, and to have an input in the development of masterplans, action areas and development briefs, as appropriate and necessary;
2. endorses the re-appointment of the four commissioners whose term of office will expire at the end of February 2012 and extend for a further two years, as follows:
- George Ferguson
- Andy Theobold.
- Antony Gibb
- Stuart Fell
3. endorses the proposal to extend an invitation to David Cox, former Department Architect and Executive Commissioner, to act as a commissioner for a two year period;
4. endorses the review of supplementary planning guidance to refine the operation of the commission, to deliver greater efficiency and effectiveness in its output, which will be brought back to the Minister at a later date.
Reason for the recommendations
- The Minister is required to take into account all material considerations in determining planning applications and the design and architecture of major development schemes is such a consideration, as set out in the policy requirements of the 2011 Island Plan;
- To continue to maintain and enhance standards of design and architecture in Jersey, it is considered appropriate to secure informed, independent critical architectural advice through the Jersey Architecture Commission, as necessary;
- The use and operation of the JAC, in its current form, provides a cost-effective way of securing an appropriate input of informed, independent critical architectural advice into the planning process;
- The membership of the Commission provides a good range and mix of skills, drawn from both the UK and Jersey and that this should be maintained through the invitation of the former Department Architect to join the Commission;
- It is appropriate to refine the operation of the Commission, in light of the experience of its mode of operation since it began, to ensure greater efficiencies and to secure more effective outputs, relative to the adopted design objectives.
Legal and resource implications
There are no legal implications of the decisions set out above. There are no resource implications of the decisions set out above as the department has made provision for the continued operation of the JAC in its budgets, and its management and administration can be met from within existing resources.
Action Required
1. re-appoint the commissioners whose terms of office will shortly expire;
2. invite David Cox to become a commissioner;
3. review supplementary planning guidance to refine the operation of the commission, to deliver greater efficiency and effectiveness in its output, to be brought back to the Minister at a later date
Written by: | Kevin Pilley: Director (Policy and Projects) Richard Williamson: Principal Planner (Policy and Projects) |
Attachments:
Appendix 1: MD-PE-2009-0121 : establishment of JAC (March 2010)
Appendix 2: Membership of the JAC
Appendix 3: JAC: design review guidance
02/02/12
gov.je