Government of Jersey

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While there is a presumption toward publication to support of transparency and accountability, detailed information may not be published if, for example, it would constitute a breach of data protection, or disclosure would prejudice commercial interest.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 (28.06.06) to remove Condition 2 of the planning permission for Okanagan, Rue du Hocq, St. Clement.

Subject:	Okanagan, La Rue du Hocq, St Clement Construct 3 No. dwellings
Decision Reference:	MD-PE-2006-0168	Exempt clause(s):		n/a
Type of Report (oral or written):	written	Person Giving Report (if oral):		n/a
Telephone or e-mail Meeting?	n/a	Report File ref:		P/2005/1335
Written Report Title:	Request removal of Condition No 3	Written report – Author:		Anthony Farman
Decision(s Agree to the removal of condition No: 3
Reason(s) for decision: It is not considered that the traffic generated by three dwellings would increase traffic levels to such a degree as to harm the amenity of the existing residents or would result in an unreasonable degradation of highway safety. A minimum width of only 3m is required (Road type A) to serve a development of 4 or less dwellings given that the access road is less than 50m long.
Action required: Inform applicant.
Signature: (Minister)			Date of Decision: 28.06.06

Okanagan, Rue du Hocq, St. Clement - removal of Condition 2

Application Number: P/2005/1335

Request for Reconsideration Report

Site Address	Okanagan, La Rue du Hocq, St. Clement.

Requested by	Okanagan Developments Limited	Agent	MS Planning

Description	Construct 3 No. dwellings. REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION of condition no. 3 (access width) of planning permit.

Type	Planning

Original Decision	APPROVED

Conditions	3. The development hereby permitted of the site shall not commence until the 4.8m width opening in the northern boundary wall and the access road shown on drawing no PG191-05 P2 (approved plan "L") has been constructed to serviceable standard. The opening and access of a minimum width of 4.8m shall thereafter be permanently maintained.
Reasons	3. In the interests of highway safety and the amenity of the area.

Determined by	Sub Committee Approval

Date	24/03/2006

Zones	Built-Up Area

Policies	G2 (vii) – Applicants need to demonstrate that the proposed development provides a satisfactory means of access, manoeuvring space within the site and adequate space for parking.

Recommendation

Remove condition 3.

Comments on Case	The Department recommended approval for the original scheme in the knowledge that the existing access met with the technical guidance of the Transport and Technical Services (as detailed below). The Panel, having viewed that access on-site, were concerned that the traffic generated by the three additional houses may lead to queuing on the private Broadlands Estate road. This, it was considered, would inconvenience the residents (two parking areas are adjacent) to a degree that it would be harmful to the amenity of the area and also raise highway safety concerns. The Panel agreed to two dwellings using the existing access but stipulated that the access would need to be widened if a third dwelling was to be constructed. This was agreed by the applicant. The residents of Broadlands estate maintained strong objection to the entire development but also specifically to the width of the access. This objection has continued on the grounds of highway safety and the built-up nature of La Rue du Hocq. However, it is not considered that the traffic generated by three dwellings would increase traffic levels to such a degree as to harm the amenity of the existing residents or would result in an unreasonable degradation of highway safety. This conclusion is reached on the basis of the provision of the passing area and because the area of road that would be used by the three new dwellings is already passed by the traffic of 17 units. Therefore, the proportional increase in traffic is only limited. Whether the access is 3.66m wide or 4.8m wide, it is not considered that the houses opposite would suffer such inconvenience, or concerns regarding safety, to prevent approval. Technical Guidance “Roads Serving Small Housing Development” The agent is correct to state that the Broadlands Estate road is essentially a Class C road, two way and capable of serving 25 dwellings. In this regard it is reasonable to argue that it is capable of sustaining the additional 3 dwellings (making a total of 24 using the road). Whilst parking by the existing residents does occur on the private road, the site is served by adequate car parking and it would not be reasonable to deny the access of 3.66m in width on the basis of this parking. The agent is correct to state that a minimum width of only 3m is required (Road type A) to serve a development of 4 or less dwellings given that the access road is less than 50m long. Furthermore, the scheme includes a passing place immediately inside the entrance which is not required to serve a development of this size. It should be noted that the private ownership and the costs of maintenance of the Broadlands Estate Road was not a material consideration of the determination of the application. In conclusion, it is considered unreasonable to maintain Condition 3 on the basis of the guidance of Transport and Technical Services and on the limited increase in the traffic on the effected part of the Broadlands estate road.

Recommendation	Remove condition 3.

Reasons	N/a

Background Papers	1:2500 Site Plan Letter form agent dated 4th May 2006. Letter from agent dated 30th May 2006. Letter of representation dated 19th May 2006 Letter from case officer dated 320206 Minute dated 22/02/06

Endorsed by		Date