Zanzibar, Le Mont Sohier, St. Brelade: Planning Application (P/2011/0348): Determination

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While there is a presumption toward publication to support of transparency and accountability, detailed information may not be published if, for example, it would constitute a breach of data protection, or disclosure would prejudice commercial interest.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 13 June 2012:

Decision Reference: MD-PE-2012-0061

Application Number: P/2011/0348

(If applicable)

Decision Summary Title :

Zanzibar, Le Mont Sohier, St. Brelade, ,JE3 8EA

Date of Decision Summary:

12/06/2012

Decision Summary Author:

Senior Planner

Alistair Coates

Decision Summary:

Public or Exempt?

(State clauses from Code of Practice booklet)

Public

Type of Report:

Oral or Written?

Written

Person Giving

Oral Report:

Senior Planner

Written Report

Title :

Planning Application P/2011/0348 -

Demolish existing restaurant. Construct 1 No. dwelling. Refurbish cottage. AMENDED PLANS RECEIVED: Revisions to the design, form, massing and landscaping. Details for the renovation of Villa Mimosa submitted.

Date of Written Reports:

24th May, 2011.

8th May 2012.

Written Report Author:

Senior Planner

Alistair Coates

Written Report :

Public or Exempt?

(State clauses from Code of Practice booklet)

Public

Subject: Zanzibar, Le Mont Sohier, St. Brelade, JE3 8EA

Planning Application P/2011/0348 - Demolish existing restaurant. Construct 1 No. dwelling. Refurbish cottage. AMENDED PLANS RECEIVED: Revisions to the design, form, massing and landscaping. Details for the renovation of Villa Mimosa submitted.

Decisions:

Following his Public Ministerial Meeting on 18th May 2012 and subsequent Site Visit on 23rd May, 2012, the Minister approved the application. In arriving at his decision, the Minister paid due respect to the case made out by the Applicant’s agent and to all consultation responses and representations received. Also given due consideration was the Royal Court Judgement dated 6th January 2011 (Ref:2011/281) the Officer’s reports and the relevant policies of the Jersey Island Plan, 2002 & 2011.

Reason(s) for Decision:

The Minister considered that the proposal complied with the Policies of the 2002 Island Plan, under which the planning application was originally submitted. During the course of the appeal to the Royal Court, the 2002 Island Plan was superseded in whole by the 2011 Island Plan. The principal difference in the terms of relevance to this planning application was the introduction of Policies E1 (Protection of Employment Land) and GD2 (Demolition and replacement of buildings).

In respect of Policy E1, the Minister accepts that the site is not currently operating as an employment generator and is not likely to so without a substantial re-development of the site, given the evident poor state of the existing Zanzibar buildings.

The loss of the site for employment use is not considered to be of significant concern as the relatively small scale restaurant facility would not have been a major employer of local staff. Moreover, a viable restaurant concern is likely to result in increased disturbance to nearby residents by virtue of noise and general disturbance, often at unsocial hours, and the Minister considers that the replacement of the Zanzibar with a residential use is likely to have far less impact on residential amenity. Moreover, the Minister is cognisant of the fact that St Brelade's Bay is amply catered for in respect of restaurants, cafes, hotels and leisure facilities and that the loss of the Zanzibar site as a facility for visitors and residents will not have a significant impact on the amenities of the area.

The loss of employment land is, therefore, not considered to be the determinative factor in this case.

In respect of Policy GD2, the policy requires that proposed new buildings serve to enhance the appearance of the site and surroundings and should be seen to replace a building that is not appropriate to repair or refurbish. The existing Zanzibar structures on site are of a relatively poor quality construction with little or no intrinsic merit and the Minister considers that the proposed replacement is of a higher quality, in terms design, sustainability and method of construction.

The proposal is not considered to be in unreasonable conflict with Policy GD2.

The Minister therefore grants planning permission subject to the imposition of the following conditions:-

1. The architect appointed in the development of the scheme hereby approved (Skidmore, Owings & Merrill Ltd) shall be retained throughout all the construction phase of the development. Prior to the occupation / use of each element of the development, the architect must give written confirmation to the Minister that he or she is satisfied that the building has been completed in accordance with the approved plans and that the quality of materials and workmanship is of the highest possible order.

2. A Landscape Architect, as may be approved in writing by the Minister, shall prepare a landscape scheme, to include for the proposed ‘green-wall’ system, for approval and shall, thereafter, be retained throughout all the landscape (both hard and soft) phase of the development. The landscape architect must give written confirmation to the Minister that he or she is satisfied that the landscaping has been completed in accordance with the approved plans and that the quality of materials, planting and workmanship is of the highest possible order.

3. Notwithstanding the provisions of the Planning and Building (General Development) (Jersey) Order, 2011 [as may be amended or superseded], no alterations, additions, extensions, windows, doors, fences, walls, sheds, or other structures shall be installed, affixed or erected on any part of the site or building therein without the prior written approval of the Department.

4. Details of all external lighting, including lighting of the buildings, driveway and security lighting shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Minister for Planning and Environment and such details shall include measures to prevent unecessary light pollution and of maintaining the dark night sky policy of the Department.

5. Prior to any works commencing on Mimosa Cottage, a schedule of proposed repair / refurbishment works to the Potential Listed Building shall be submitted to and approved by the Department and such statement shall be adhered to unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Department. Should such works go beyond a minor repair / refurbishment then the Department reserves the right to request the submission of a further planning application specifically for works to Mimosa Cottage.

Action required:

Notify Agent, Applicant and all other interested parties

Signature:

Deputy R C Duhamel

PLeg / AS Initials

Position:

Minister for Planning and Environment

Date Signed:

Date of Decision (If different from Date Signed):

Zanzibar, Le Mont Sohier, St. Brelade: Planning Application (P/2011/0348): Determination

Department of the Environment

Planning and Building Services

South Hill

St Helier, Jersey, JE2 4US

Tel: +44 (0)1534 445508

Fax: +44 (0)1534 445528

(This is hidden text it will not print out. Use F11 to move to the next field. Shift -F11 to previous field.)Planning and Environment Department

Report

Application Number

P/2011/0348

Site Address	Zanzibar, Le Mont Sohier, St. Brelade, JE3 8EA.

Applicant	Ruette Pinel Farm Ltd

Description	Demolish existing restaurant. Construct 1 No. dwelling. Refurbish cottage.

Type	Planning

Date Validated	15/03/2011

Zones	Built-Up Area Water Pollution Safeguard Area Potential Listed Building

Policies	G2 –General Development Considerations G3 – Quality of Design G13 - Buildings & Places of Architectural and Historic Interest G15 – Replacement Buildings BE10 – Green Backdrop Zone H8 – Provision of new homes within the Built-up Area. For the avoidance of doubt, it should be noted that the site does not lie within the designated Shoreline Zone.

Reason for Referral	(Delete as appropriate)Minister Call-in

Summary/

Conclusion

The architecture of the proposed dwelling is innovative and competent, maximising the potential for views out to sea while minimising the building’s impact when viewed from the road or promenade / beach. The bespoke nature of the proposal pays due regards to the amenities of neighbouring residents and should not result in an unreasonable degree of overlooking or general loss of privacy.

Although the overall structure remains relatively large, the majority of the building’s bulk is along its side flanks and not on the more visible northern and southern elevations.

The series of bold, rectangular volumes, set in a staggered pattern along the site axis, presents a strong, dominant form which was commended by the Architecture Commission.

No details have been submitted in connection with the refurbishment of the Registered structure and all such details would need to be fully reserved for detailed consideration. It is expected that such details would be the subject of a separate planning application.

Officer

Recommendation

Approval subject to conditions.

Site Description	The former Zanzibar restaurant is located just off the Promenade towards the eastern end of the Bay. The restaurant building is of no particular historic or architectural interest. Mimosa, however, is a single storey 19th Century cottage fronting the main road. It is a Building of Local Interest of a simple, but pleasant, style and currently in a poor state of repair. The total site area stands at just under 2,000sq.m (0.48 acres).

Relevant Planning History	P/2010/1377 - Demolish existing restaurant. Construct 1 No. dwelling. Re-furbish existing cottage. Refused permission for the following reasons:- 1. The proposal represents an over-development of the site with the size, bulk and layout within a restricted plot width being likely to unreasonably affect the character and amenity of the area contrary to the provisions of Policies G2, G3, G15 and H8 of the Jersey Island Plan, 2002. 2. The proposed development is likely to have an unreasonable impact on the amenities of nearby residents by virtue of overlooking and potential disturbance from the elevated roof terraces and by presenting an overbearing appearance. The proposal is, therefore, considered to be contrary to the provisions of Policies G2 and H8 of the Jersey Island Plan, 2002. 3. The proposed development is likley to result in the consolidation of built development over natural vegetation and prevention of substantial planting within the site. Accordingly, the proposal fails to comply with the provisions of Policy BE10 of the Jersey Island Plan, 2002. 4.The proposal does not contain sufficent information against which the impact on the fabric and appearance of the Rgistered structure, Mimosa, can be assessed and the proposal, therefore, fails to comply with the provisions of Policy G13 of the Jersey Island Plan, 2002.

Existing use of Land/Buildings	Restaurant and two dwellings.

Proposed use of Land/Buildings	New 7-bed dwelling with pools and landscaping and the retention / refurbishment of Mimosa.

Consultations	Architecture Commission (sitting 4/4/11) – The latest revised scheme was considered a good response to the refusal of the earlier scheme. The height has been reduced as well as the ground level, bedding the building more successfully into the landscape. The eaves and ridge;-lines of neighbouring houses had been taken as a guide and this produced a more acceptable design. The layout is a successful response to the tapering site. Structural frames should be masonry, not painted render. The retention of Mimosa Cottage in its own grounds was welcomed. T&TS (Highways) – Although the Department has no objection in principle, owing to the decrease in use of the site from restaurant to single dwelling, there are concerns over the existing access. Conditions are recommended in order to secure improvements to visibility splays. Historic Environment Team - Comment that there are no details submitted for the refurbishment of Mimosa Cottage. It would also be preferable to retain the rear garden of the cottage rather than it being subsumed into the grounds of the new dwelling as proposed. HET do not support the application. T&TS (Drainage) – No objections in principle. All consultations are attached with the background papers

Summary of Representations	6 letters of representation have been received raising the following concerns:- - Overdevelopment of the site with the mass and potential impact being too great. A scaffolding profile should be erected to assess this issue. - Out of context with the area. - Design is too modern with excessive glazing and flat roofs. - Loss of privacy and noise nuisance from residents using the proposed swimming pool. - The proposal goes against the requirements of a 1968 States Resolution that presumed against new residential development in St Brelades Bay [This has since been superseded by the 2002 Island Plan and Planning and Building Law 2002]. All letters of representation and responses are attached with the background papers

Planning Issues	Policy Considerations (What are the presumptions) G2 – General Development Considerations; among other things, the policy seeks to ensure that a proposed development would not have an unreasonable impact on the amenity of neighbouring residents. There is also a general presumption against developments that would unreasonably affect the character and amenity of an area. G3 – Requires a high quality of design that respects, conserves and contributes positively to the distinctiveness of the landscape and the built context. G13 – Presumes against works which would adversely affect the architectural or historic interest, character or setting of a Registered Building. G15 – Replacement Buildings; Presumption against replacement buildings unless the replacement would enhance the appearance of the site and its surroundings / replace a building that is not appropriate to refurbish or repair / not have an unreasonable impact on neighbouring uses etc / and where it would involve the loss of an existing building that is unsympathetic to the area. H8 - Presumes in favour of the provision of new homes within the Built-up Area, but only where the criteria contained within the policy can be met. BE10 – development will only be permitted where the natural landscape remains dominant, where existing vegetation is retained and new planting is satisfactory. Land Use Implications The site lies within the Built-up Area wherein there is a presumption in favour of allowing new homes, subject to other relevant criteria of the Island Plan policies being met. Size, Scale & Siting The proposed new dwelling would still be of a significant size with two sunken basement levels, but is considerably reduced in both size and scale, with a reduction in height from the previously approved scheme. The architects have created a bespoke solution to the tight site constraints and have integrated an imaginative landscaping scheme within the proposal. The Department is satisfied that the size, scale and siting of the proposed dwelling is acceptable. Design & Use of Materials The Architecture Commission has commended the design of the new dwelling and the Department Architect is satisfied that the design reaches the high standard required by Policy G3 of the Island Plan. Materials: The architect’s Design Statement comments that “…The materiality of the building has been influenced by a light and simple palette of materials that have been used throughout Jersey and are part of the historic vernacular context that produces a beautiful effect. Elevations are set out with a carefully selected combination of natural stone, inspired by Jersey’s granite shores and traditional rural farmhouses, and glazing panels recessed from the façade in stainless steel framing. The material palette takes its influence from the local tradition of stone masonry applied on walls and soffits to create a crisp monolithic look. The stone cladding consists of long thin-cut strips that lay on top of each other expressing a horizontal reading of the facades. The dry laid stone will give the appearance of the farmhouse and hedgerows of Jersey…” The Department is satisfied that both the design approach and choice of materials is appropriate to this site and its wider setting. Impact on Neighbours The internal layout and building envelope itself has been well designed in order to minimise any direct overlooking of neighbouring properties from windows. Principal windows and other glazed areas face out to the seaward side although the west and east elevations do feature glazed panels. These glazed panels are not intended as primary windows and are designed to let light into the mid areas of the new dwelling. Roof terraces shown on the previously refused scheme have been deleted from the proposal and more modest terraces are now proposed. The potential for overlooking and resultant loss of privacy to neighbouring residents is not considered to be significant. Access, Car parking and Highway Considerations The existing access arrangement has been used for some time to serve a fully functioning restaurant and dwelling. However, T&TS are recommending that visibility splays be provided, although to attain these splays, the small front garden of Mimosa would need to be partly incorporated into the splay. In this instance, the proposed visibility splay is likely to adversely affect the character and appearance of the registered Mimosa Cottage. Given the drastic reduction in intensity of use of the access, the Department does not consider that the splays should be insisted upon. The site can easily provide sufficient parking to serve the new dwelling as well as serve Mimosa. Notwithstanding the concerns of T&TS, the Department is satisfied that the reduction in use of the site will mitigate any highway safety issue. Foul Sewage Disposal To existing public foul sewer network. Landscaping issues The proposal includes plans to add substantial planting within the site, both around the new building and on parts of the flat roof structures. Given the constraints of the tight site boundaries, this planting is considered sufficient to comply with Policy BE10 which seeks to strengthen the character of the Green Backdrop Zone. Other Material Considerations n/a

Officer Recommendation	Approval

Conditions/ Reasons	1. The architect appointed in the development of the scheme hereby approved (Skidmore, Owings & Merrill Ltd) shall be retained throughout all the construction phase of the development. Prior to the occupation / use of each element of the development, the architect must give written confirmation to the Minister that he or she is satisfied that the building has been completed in accordance with the approved plans and that the quality of materials and workmanship is of the highest possible order. 2. A Landscape Architect, as may be approved in writing by the Minister, shall prepare a landscape scheme for approval and shall, thereafter, be retained throughout all the landscape (both hard and soft) phase of the development. The landscape architect must give written confirmation to the Minister that he or she is satisfied that the landscaping has been completed in accordance with the approved plans and that the quality of materials, planting and workmanship is of the highest possible order. 3. Notwithstanding the provisions of the Planning and Building (General Development) (Jersey) Order, 2008, no alterations, additions, extensions, windows, doors, fences, walls, sheds, illumination or other structures shall be installed, affixed or erected on any part of the site or building therein without the prior written approval of the Department. 4. Details of all external lighting, including lighting of the buildings, driveway and security lighting shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Minister for Planning and Environment and such details shall include measures to prevent unecessary light pollution and of maintaining the dark night sky policy of the Department.

Background Papers	1:2500 Location Plan Architect’s Design Statement Consultation responses from T&TS (Highways) + (Drainage), Historic Environment Team, Architecture Commission. 6 letters of representation. Consultaton responses from

Endorsed by:

Date: