Hillside Cottage, Le Vier Mont, Grouville: Request for re-consideration by determined by Minister

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While there is a presumption toward publication to support of transparency and accountability, detailed information may not be published if, for example, it would constitute a breach of data protection, or disclosure would prejudice commercial interest.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 17 May 2013:

Decision Reference: MD-PE-2013-0050			Application Number: P/2012/1488 (If applicable)
Decision Summary Title :	Hillside Cottage, Le Vier Mont,Grouville, Jersey, JE3 9DS		Date of Decision Summary:		16 May 2013
Decision Summary Author:	Senior Planner – Appeals - J Gladwin		Decision Summary: Public or Exempt? (State clauses from Code of Practice booklet)		Public
Type of Report: Oral or Written?	Written		Person Giving Oral Report:
Written Report Title :	Request for Reconsideration Report		Date of Written Report:		03 April 2013
Written Report Author:	Senior Planner – Appeals - J Gladwin		Written Report : Public or Exempt? (State clauses from Code of Practice booklet)		Public
Subject: Hillside Cottage, Le Vier Mont, Grouville, Jersey, JE3 9DS Demolish existing dwelling. Construct 1 No. dwelling. REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION of refusal of planning permission.
Decision(s): The Minister maintained Refusal of Planning Permission. This Request for Reconsideration (RFR) was referred to the Minister following a tied decision at the Planning Applications Panel Meeting of 28 March 2013. The RFR was subsequently presented at the next available Ministerial Meeting of 19 April 2013. At this Ministerial Meeting the Agent and Applicant spoke in favour of the planning application and the Historic Environment officer spoke against the application. The Minister decided to defer the RFR application so as to undertake a site visit. This site visit was conducted on 10 May 2013 and representations were heard on site from the Agent, Applicant and Historic Environment Officer. On the 16 May 2013, having considered all of the representations received both verbally and in writing and having conducted a site visit, the Minister made his decision to Maintain the Refusal of planning permission for the same reason as originally refused (please see Reason for Decision below)
Reason(s) for Decision: 1. The proposed development would result in the unacceptable demolition of a building included on the Minister for the Environments Register of Buildings and Sites of Architectural, Archaeological and Historical Importance in Jersey as a Potential Listed Building, contrary to Policies SP4, HE1, GD1 and GD2 of the 2011 Island Plan.
Resource Implications: None
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):

Hillside Cottage, Le Vier Mont, Grouville: Request for re-consideration by determined by Minister

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

P/2012/1488

Request for Reconsideration Report

Update Report: 03 April 2013

This Request for Reconsideration application has been referred to the Minister for Planning and Environment following a tied decision at the Planning Applications Panel Meeting of 28 March 2013. At this Panel Meeting two members voted for Approval and two for Deferral. No further representations have been received.

Site Address	Hillside Cottage, Le Vier Mont, Grouville, JE3 9DS.

Requested by	Mr. P J Warren	Agent	David Cox

Description	Demolish existing dwelling. Construct 1 No. dwelling. REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION of refusal of planning permission.

Type	Major Application

Original Decision	REFUSED

Reasons	1. The proposed development would result in the unacceptable demolition of a building included on the Minister for the Environments Register of Buildings and Sites of Architectural, Archaeological and Historical Importance in Jersey as a Potential Listed Building, contrary to Policies SP4, HE 1, GD1 and GD2 of the 2011 Island Plan.

Determined by	Delegated Refused

Date	06/02/2013

Zones	Green Zone Eastern Cycle Route Corridor Potential Listed Building

Policies	The site is located within the Green Zone and therefore Policy NE7 is relevant. Within the Green Zone there is a high level of protection and a general presumption against development. Certain developments, such as in this application, a replacement dwelling will be permitted but only where the scale, location and design would not detract from or unreasonably harm the character of the area. Policy SP4 on Protecting the Natural and Historic Environment is also relevant. This Policy states that a high priority will be given to the protection of the Island’s natural and historic environment. Policy HE1 on Protecting Listed Buildings and Places expands on Policy SP4 and states that ‘There will be a presumption in favour of the preservation of the architectural and historic character and integrity of Listed Buildings and places and their settings. Proposals which do not preserve or enhance the special or particular interest of a listed building will not be approved. The Policy further clarifies that permission will not be granted for ‘the total or partial demolition of a Listed Building’. Policy GD1- General Development Considerations sets out certain criteria to be evaluated against including that the development contributes towards a more sustainable form of development including will not replace a building that is capable of being repaired or refurbished. The second part of Policy GD1 also states that the development should not seriously harm the Island’s Natural and Historic Environment. Policy GD2 on Demolition and Replacement of buildings is also relevant and states that demolition of a building will not be permitted unless it is not appropriate in sustainability terms to repair or refurbish and thirdly where the proposed development would have an unacceptable impact on a Listed Building. SPG Advice Note 6 Managing Change in Historic Buildings June 2008 is also relevant and gives some detailed advice on the issue of the demolition of a listed building. This advice includes the following passage regarding proposed demolition of a listed building: ‘The demolition of any protected buildings should be wholly exceptional and should require the strongest justification. Indeed, the Minister would not expect consent to be given for the total or substantial demolition of any protected building without clear and convincing evidence that all reasonable efforts have been made to sustain existing uses or find viable new uses, and these efforts have failed; that preservation in some form of charitable or community ownership is not possible or suitable; or that redevelopment would produce substantial benefits for the community which would excessively outweigh the loss resulting from demolition. The Minister would not expect consent for demolition to be given simply because redevelopment is economically more attractive to the developer than repair and re-use of a historic building, or because the developer acquired the building at a price that reflected the potential for redevelopment rather than the condition and constraints of the existing historic building’.

Recommendation

Refusal

Comments on Case	The Agent in letter dated 14 February 2013 states that the proposal to demolish the existing Listed Building and replace with a new dwelling is the only reasonable, practical and policy justified long term solution for the site. Considering that the Applicant has not raised any specific detailed arguments in response to this refusal, I attach with this RFR Report the original Delegated Department Report for your attention which sets out in detail the justification and reasons why this planning application was refused.

Recommendation	Refuse

Reasons	1. The proposed development would result in the unacceptable demolition of a building included on the Minister for the Environments Register of Buildings and Sites of Architectural, Archaeological and Historical Importance in Jersey as a Potential Listed Building, contrary to Policies SP4, HE 1, GD1 and GD2 of the 2011 Island Plan.

Background Papers	1:2500 Site Plan Costings report on behalf of Applicant Letters dated 31 January and 14 February 2013 from Agent Delegated Department Report: ‘Officer Assessment Sheet for General Development’ dated 05 February 2013 Design Statement Historic Environment Consultation response
Endorsed by		Date