Budget transfer from Central Planning Vote to Department of the Environment: St. Helier Waterfront Masterplan Review

Information about the publication of Ministerial Decisions

A formal published “Ministerial Decision” is required as a record of the decision of a Minister (or an Assistant Minister where they have delegated authority) as they exercise their responsibilities and powers.

Ministers are elected by the States Assembly and have legal responsibilities and powers as “corporation sole” under the States of Jersey Law 2005 by virtue of their office and in their areas of responsibility, including entering into agreements, and under any legislation conferring on them powers.

An accurate record of “Ministerial Decisions” is vital to effective governance, including:

demonstrating that good governance, and clear lines of accountability and authority, are in place around decisions-making – including the reasons and basis on which a decision is made, and the action required to implement a decision
providing a record of decisions and actions that will be available for examination by States Members, and Panels and Committees of the States Assembly; the public, organisations, and the media; and as a historical record and point of reference for the conduct of public affairs

Ministers are individually accountable to the States Assembly, including for the actions of the departments and agencies which discharge their responsibilities.

The Freedom of Information Law (Jersey) Law 2011 is used as a guide when determining what information is be published. While there is a presumption toward publication to support of transparency and accountability, detailed information may not be published if, for example, it would constitute a breach of data protection, or disclosure would prejudice commercial interest.

A decision made 26 May 2017:

Decision Reference: MD-TR-2017-0053
Decision Summary Title :	Allocation from Central Planning Vote to Department of the Environment to fund the St Helier Waterfront Masterplan Review		Date of Decision Summary:	20th April 2017
Decision Summary Author:	Head of Decision Support		Decision Summary: Public or Exempt?	Public
Type of Report: Oral or Written?	Written		Person Giving Oral Report:	N/A
Written Report Title :	Allocation from Central Planning Vote to Department of the Environment to fund the St Helier Waterfront Masterplan Review		Date of Written Report:	20th April 2017
Written Report Author:	Head of Decision Support		Written Report : Public or Exempt?	Public
Subject: The allocation of a maximum of £150,000 from the Central Planning Vote to the Department of the Environment (DoE) Revenue Head of Expenditure to fund the St Helier Masterplan Review, to be drawn down as required during 2017 and 2018.
Decision(s): The Minister approved the allocation of a maximum of £150,000 from the Central Planning Vote to the DoE Revenue Head of Expenditure, to be drawn down as required during 2017 and 2018.
Reason(s) for Decision: In accordance with States of Jersey policy and the Public Finances (Jersey) Law 2005, funding for work to scope or access the feasibility of proposed capital projects that the States have agreed, in principle, will start in the future must be allocated from the Central Planning Vote. The Council of Ministers agreed on the 15th November 2012 that existing resources from the Central Planning Vote will be utilised to enable the Department of the Environment to bring forward important masterplans and/or Island Plan amendments which can deliver economic growth and confidence. The Council of Ministers’ comments and the debate on the second amendment to the MTFP 2013-2015 (P.069/2012 Amd(2)) included reference to alternative funding measures for Master Planning being delivered through the central planning vote. Article 10(3A) of the Public Finances (Jersey) 2005 states that a draft budget may seek the approval of the States, for the financial year to which it relates, to a capital head of expenditure (a “central planning vote”) to fund work to scope or assess the feasibility of proposed capital projects that the States have agreed, in principle, will start in the future. Article 18(1)(c) of the Public Finances (Jersey) 2005 states that all or any part of the amount appropriated by a head of expenditure may, with the approval of the Minister for Treasury and Resources, be used for the purposes of another head of expenditure.
Resource Implications: The DoE revenue head of expenditure will increase by up to £150,000, and the Central Planning Vote will decrease by the same amount, drawn down as required during 2017 and 2018.
Action required: The Head of Decision Support to advise the Finance Director for DoE when this decision has been approved.
Signature:		Position: Senator A J H Maclean, Minister for Treasury and Resources
Date Signed:		Date of Decision (If different from Date Signed):

Budget transfer from Central Planning Vote to Department of the Environment: St. Helier Waterfront Masterplan Review

Treasury and Resources

Ministerial Decision Report

Allocation from Central Planning Vote to Department of the Environment to fund the St Helier Waterfront Masterplan Review

Purpose of Report

To enable the Minister to approve the receipt of up to £150,000 from the Central Planning Vote to the DoE Revenue Head of Expenditure to be drawn down as required during 2017 and 2018.

Background

In November 2012, the Council of Ministers agreed that existing resources from the Central Planning Vote would be utilised to enable DoE to bring forward important masterplans and/or Island Plan amendments which can deliver economic growth and confidence.

There are some key issues that support the need to review the St Helier Masterplan: these were recently summarised and highlighted as a result of planning appeal in relation to the granting of planning permission for Building #5, where the relevance and weight to be ascribed to the existence of the Masterplan was reviewed and tested [1]. These can be summarised as follows:

First, economic circumstances have changed since the Masterplan was prepared and adopted over eight years ago: the assumptions about the need for different forms of development in the area ought to be tested and reviewed to ensure that assumptions about demand still remain sound.

There is also considered to be benefit in seeking to ensure that a revised masterplan is sufficiently flexible, resilient and adaptable to deal with future change in demand for land uses, relative to Island needs;

Second, the stated delivery mechanism, in the form of a development agreement with a single developer, has not been secured and it is clear that the delivery of the scheme is proceeding in a way that was different to that envisaged. This has planning implications in terms of seeking to secure how the public benefits of the Masterplan are to be delivered;
Third, the Masterplan is predicated on the lowering of La Route de la Liberation. Without the security of the intended development agreement with a single developer, there is no planning mechanism to secure its delivery. Linked to this, there is no certainty that it is financially viable to deliver this key part of the Masterplan and the financial viability of the delivery of significant components of public infrastructure requires review;
Fourth, since the Esplanade Quarter Masterplan was conceived, various elements of the wider St. Helier Waterfront have been delivered and the area is beginning to develop its own sense of community and identity, with a range of functions and land uses that are enjoyed by people who live and work in the area as well as other Islanders who visit the Waterfront.

The changed nature of use and movement to, from and around the Waterfront, relative to strategic movement corridors and the rest of the town, needs to be reviewed to see how best to connect it to the town, particularly in relation to pedestrians and cyclists;

Fifth, it is considered appropriate to review the design guidance for the Waterfront, having regard to the need to ensure the delivery of high quality public spaces and buildings that can make a positive contribution to the character and variety of the town’s built form. The requirement to undertake a review of design guidance will be informed by any proposed change to the strategy for movement and connectivity at the St. Helier Waterfront.

The requirement to review the Masterplan is also supported by the emergent work of the Corporate Services Scrutiny Panel on the viability of the Jersey International Finance Centre on the Esplanade Quarter.

The Capital Sub Group approved the allocation of £150,000 and requested that the States of Jersey Development Company (SOJDC) pay back the Central Planning Vote on the receipt of income from waterfront schemes. The mechanism for this repayment is to be finalised by the Treasury and Resources Department.

3. Recommendation

The Minister is recommended to approve the allocation of a maximum of £150,000 from the Central Planning Vote to the Department of the Environment (DoE) Revenue Head of Expenditure to fund the St Helier Masterplan Review, to be drawn down as required during 2017 and 2018.

4. Reason(s) for Decision

In accordance with States of Jersey policy and the Public Finances (Jersey) Law 2005, funding for work to scope or access the feasibility of proposed capital projects that the States have agreed, in principle, will start in the future must be allocated from the Central Planning Vote.

The Council of Ministers agreed on the 15th November 2012 that existing resources from the Central Planning Vote will be utilised to enable the Department of the Environment to bring forward important masterplans and/or Island Plan amendments which can deliver economic growth and confidence.

The Council of Ministers’ comments and the debate on the second amendment to the MTFP 2013-2015 (P.069/2012 Amd(2)) included reference to alternative funding measures for Master Planning being delivered through the central planning vote.

Article 10(3A) of the Public Finances (Jersey) 2005 states that a draft budget may seek the approval of the States, for the financial year to which it relates, to a capital head of expenditure (a “central planning vote”) to fund work to scope or assess the feasibility of proposed capital projects that the States have agreed, in principle, will start in the future.

Article 18(1)(c) of the Public Finances (Jersey) 2005 states that all or any part of the amount appropriated by a head of expenditure may, with the approval of the Minister for Treasury and Resources, be used for the purposes of another head of expenditure.

Resource Implications

The DoE revenue head of expenditure will increase by up to £150,000, and the Central Planning Vote will decrease by the same amount, drawn down as required during 2017 and 2018.

Report author : Head of Decision Support	Document date : 20th April 2017
Quality Assurance / Review : Director of Financial Planning and Performance	File name and path: L:\Treasury\Sections\Corporate Finance\Ministerial Decisions\DS, WR and SD\2017-00xx - Masterplanning Central Planning Vote £150k
MD sponsor: Director of Financial Planning and Performance