Mon Plaisir Cottage, Rue de Samares, St. Clement

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While there is a presumption toward publication to support of transparency and accountability, detailed information may not be published if, for example, it would constitute a breach of data protection, or disclosure would prejudice commercial interest.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 (26.10.06) to maintain refusal of planning permission for Mon Plaisir Cottage, Rue de Samares, St. Clement.

Subject:	Mon Plaisir Cottage, La Rue de Samares, St. Clement Proposed 2 bedroom 2 storey dwelling.
Decision Reference:	MD-PE-2007-0132	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/2006/0913
Written Report Title:	Request for re-consideration of Refusal of Planning Permission	Written report – Author:		Anthony Farman
Decision(s Uphold the refusal of the planning application.
Reason(s) for decision: The proposed dwelling, by virtue of its scale, size, height, position on the site and its relationship with the neighbouring properties to the north, results in an unacceptable overbearing impact, harmful to the amenities of the occupiers of the neighbouring properties and is also harmful to the character and setting of the existing buildings to the north contrary to the policies of the Island Plan and no other material considerations outweighed the provisions of the Plan.
Action required: Notify agent of the decision and invite an application based on a dwelling that has a higher quality of design, more appropriate use of materials and a reduced impact on existing dwellings.
Signature: (Minister)			Date of Decision: 26.10.06

Mon Plaisir Cottage, Rue de Samares, St. Clement - maintain refusal

Application Number: P/2006/0913

Request for Reconsideration Report

Site Address	Mon Plaisir Cottage, La Rue de Samares, St. Clement.

Requested by	Chapman Hugo Developments	Agent	DYSON & BUESNEL ARCHITECTS

Description	Proposed 2 bedroom 2 storey dwelling. REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION of refusal of planning permssion.

Type	Planning

Original Decision	REFUSED

Conditions
Reasons	1. The proposed dwelling, by virtue of its size, height, position on the site and its relationship with the neighbouring properties to the north, results in an unacceptable overbearing impact, harmful to the amenities of the occupiers of the neighbouring properties contrary to Policy G2 ii and Policy H8 iii of the Jersey Island Plan, 2002. 2. The proposed detached dwelling, by virtue of its scale, siting and relationship with existing buildings is harmful to the character and setting of the existing buildings to the north, contrary to Policy G3 i, ii, iii and Policy H8 ii and vii of the Jersey Island Plan, 2002.

Determined by	Delegated Refused

Date	27/07/2006

Zones	Built Up Area

Policies	G2 – General Development Considerations G3 – Quality of Design H8 – Housing Development within the Built-Up Area

Recommendation

Maintain refusal

Comments on Case	The site is a separate plot formed within the Built-Up Area by the sub-division of site following approval of 2 No. units within Mon Plaisir Cottage. It is proposed to construct 1 No. 2-bed unit in this plot. Scale and impact on existing properties It is accepted that the layout of the dwelling in relation to the existing properties is similar to some traditional relationships that are found in La Rue de Samaras and La Rue du Hocq. However, the Minister for Planning and Environment has directed the Department to ensure that developments are “reasonably spacious”. The current application does not achieve adequate space between the existing and the proposed building. This, in connection with the requirements of Policy H8 (iii) to ensure that development “will not have an unreasonably impact on neighbouring uses and the local environment by reason of . . . amenity considerations” means that this application is being considered against materially different circumstances than most of the developments shown in Mr Stein’s letter dated 3rd May 2006. It is accepted, that without specific standards, the judgement as to whether a building causes overbearing is subjective to some extent. However, a building of this size (overall height of the dwelling 6.4m, 3.0 to eaves) sited 10.4m (at the closet point) and 13.4m (at the furthest point) from the existing frontages of the residential units; and only 2m - 4.4m from the gardens of the existing properties is harmful to the amenity of the neighbouring properties. Such a relationship may be acceptable to the north of existing garden and dwellings but the location to the south exacerbates the impact particularly for the existing roadside unit that will have the proposed dwelling running across its entire width. Detailed design The agent is correct to state that these matters were not addressed with him due to the nature of the other reason for refusal. The general form, design and use of materials are acceptable however the building requires a minor lowering of the eaves and a reduction in the size of the dormers in order to be acceptable.

Recommendation	Maintain refusal

Reasons	As above.

Background Papers	1:2500 Site Plan Letter from agent dated 14/08/06 Letter from MS Planning dated 03/05/06 Letters of representation dated 30/08/06, 31/08/06 and 31/08/06 4 letters of representation relating to original application.

Endorsed by		Date