La Fontaine, La Route de la Pulente, St Brelade: Appeal decision

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While there is a presumption toward publication to support of transparency and accountability, detailed information may not be published if, for example, it would constitute a breach of data protection, or disclosure would prejudice commercial interest.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 on 12 July 2019

Decision Reference: MD-PE-2019-0063			Application Reference: P/2018/1569
Decision Summary Title:	Appeal Decision – La Fontaine, La Route de la Pulente, St Brelade.		Date of Decision Summary:	04 July 2019
Decision Summary Author:	Principal Policy Planner – Strategic Policy, Performance & Population		Decision Summary: Public or Exempt?	Public
Type of Report: Oral or Written?	Written		Person Giving Oral Report:	n/a
Written Report Title :	Inspector’s Report- La Fontaine		Date of Written Report:	Undated
Written Report Author:	N McGurk BSc(Hons), MCD, MBA, MRTPI Planning Inspector		Written Report : Public or Exempt?	Public
Subject: Appeal under Article 108 of the Planning and Building (Jersey) Law 2002 against a decision to grant planning permission for; “Demolish existing site structures. Construct 2 No three bed units of tourist accommodation and 1 No four bed dwelling with associated parking and landscaping. Alter vehicular access onto La Route de la Pulente. AMENDED PLANS: Reduce scale of both new buildings. Alter vehicular access” at La Fontaine, La Route de la Pulente, St Brelade JE3 8HG
Decision: The Minister allowed the appeal and refused planning permission for the following reasons: 1. The site lies within the Coastal National Park as defined on the Proposals Map of the Island Plan 2011 (Revised 2014). The Coastal National Park enjoys the highest level of protection from development and there is the strongest presumption against all forms of development therein. a) The redevelopment of an existing dwelling, involving demolition and replacement, may only be considered to represent a permissible to Policy NE6 where the proposal would; -not be larger in terms of any gross floorspace, building footprint or visual impact than the building being replaced; -not facilitate a significant increase in occupancy; and, -give rise to demonstrable environmental gains, contributing to the repair and restoration of landscape character. The proposed new dwelling would have a larger gross floorspace and footprint and would be taller and more visible than the existing dwelling. Moreover, the scale and form of the proposed development would serve to harm the landscape character, rather than give rise to demonstrable environmental gains. Consequently, the proposed dwelling does not meet any of the specified exceptions stated in NE6 and the application, therefore, fails to satisfy the requirements of Policies SP1, GD1 and NE6 of the Island Plan 2011 (Revised 2014). b) The development of new tourist development (including accommodation) may only be considered to represent a permissible exception to Policy NE6 where the proposal would represent small-scale buildings or structures and where it; -supports the purposes of the Coastal National Park; -is appropriate relative to existing buildings and its landscape context; -does not harm landscape character. The proposed tourist accommodation would introduce a significantly greater scale of development than that which currently exists, with a resultant increase in visual impact and subsequent harm to the landscape character. Consequently, the proposed tourist accommodation does not meet any of the specified exceptions stated in NE6 and the application, therefore, fails to satisfy the requirements of Policies SP1, GD1, NE6 and EVE1 of the Island Plan 2011 (Revised 2014). 2. The proposed development by virtue of its close proximity and physical relationship to an existing dwelling, is likely to give rise to an unreasonable level of harm to the living conditions of nearby residents by virtue of loss of privacy. Occupiers of the proposed dwelling would also be subject to an unreasonable level of harm for similar reasons. The proposal, therefore, fails to satisfy the requirements of Policy GD1 of the Island Plan 2011 (Revised 2014).
Reason for Decision: The Minister agreed with the recommendation of the Inspector.
Resource Implications: None
Action required: Request the Judicial Greffe to inform interested parties of the decision.
Signature: Deputy John H Young		Position: Minister for the Environment
Date Signed:		Date of Decision (If different from Date Signed):