La Vallonerie, Rue de la Blinerie, 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While there is a presumption toward publication to support of transparency and accountability, detailed information may not be published if, for example, it would constitute a breach of data protection, or disclosure would prejudice commercial interest.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 (13.04.06) to grant planning permission for La Vallonerie, Rue de la Blinerie, St. Clement.

Subject:	La Vallonerie, La Rue de la Blinerie, St. Clement. Construct conservatory to the front elevation.
Decision Reference:	MD-PE-2006-0158	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/2005/2159
Written Report Title:	REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION of refusal of planning permission.	Written report – Author:		Kelly Johnson
Decision(s Grant Permission
Reason(s) for decision: The Minister, having visited the site, decided that the conservatory on the front elevation would not harm the character of the registered building.
Action required: Issue planning permission.
Signature: (Minister)			Date of Decision: 13.04.06

La Vallonerie, Rue de la Blinerie, St. Clement - grant permission

Application Number: P/2005/2159

Request for Reconsideration Report

Site Address	La Vallonerie, La Rue de la Blinerie, St. Clement.

Requested by	Mrs. CStansfeld-Huelin	Agent

Description	Construct conservatory to the front elevation. REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION of refusal of planning permission.

Type	Planning

Original Decision	REFUSED

Conditions
Reasons	1. The proposed extension would adversely affect the architectural interest, character and setting of this building included on the Minister for Planning and Environment’s ‘Register of Buildings and Sites of Architectural, Archaeological and Historical Importance in Jersey’ as a Building of Local Interest status on the register, contrary to Policy G13 (ii) of the Island Plan 2002.

Determined by	Delegated Refused

Date	13/01/2006

Zones	Building Of Local Interest Countryside Zone

Policies	G13 – Buildings and Places of Architectural and Historic Interest

Recommendation

Maintain Refusal

Comments on Case	The building subject of the application is located along La Rue de la Blinerie and falls within the Countryside Zone. The building is included on the Minister for Planning and Environment’s ‘Register of Buildings and Sites of Architectural, Archaeological and Historical Importance in Jersey’ as a Building of Local Interest (BLI). Policy G13 provides that permission will not normally be granted for extensions which would adversely affect the character and setting of a registered building. It is considered that the chacater and setting of this BLI is important to the quailty of the streetscape and as such, an extension to this elevation would detrimently impact on that character and setting. In particular the scale of the proposed extension would be harmful to the character of the principal elevation. The principal elevation is a modest granite cottage of one and a half storeys to the eaves with dormer windows. The applicant provides examples of other conservatories but these examples are not comparable to the size and scale of the subject property. The proposal is for a conservatory to the principal elevation. The principal elevation of this BLI is prominent to the street, being only 6 metres from the road reserve and with limited. Generally, it has been a consistent approach of the Department to resist extensions to the principal elevation of registered buildings, especially when the principal elevation is visible from public view. The visibility of the proposed extension from the public view is high and thus is resisted by the Department. The applicant argues that there was a vine house in the exact location of proposed consrvatory of a simlar size. Unfortunately, there is no documented evidence of the vine house on this elevation of this particular building. However, the Historic Buildings Officer advised that it would be common for a modest size cottage similar to the subject building to include a simple lean-to structure perhaps the width of a porch, but the size would reflect the modest nature of the building. The size that the proposed conservatory would need to be reduced to, to become sympathetic to the elevation, would not be large enough to be functional as a conservatory and thus is not considered satisfactory by the applicant. Whilst the condition of the BLI is not exceptional and the listing of the BLI is questionable, the reality is that the subject building is a listed building on the Minister’s Register. The applicant has been advised on the proper procedure required to challenge the listing of the BLI.

Recommendation	Maintain Refusal

Reasons	1. The proposed extension would adversely affect the architectural interest, character and setting of this building included on the Minister for Planning and Environment’s ‘Register of Buildings and Sites of Architectural, Archaeological and Historical Importance in Jersey’ as a Building of Local Interest status on the register, contrary to Policy G13 (ii) of the Island Plan 2002.

Background Papers	1:2500 Site Plan Letter from Mrs C. Stansford-Huelin dated 1 April 2006 Letter from Mrs C. Stansford-Huelin dated 30 January 2006.

Endorsed by

Date