Government of Jersey

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While there is a presumption toward publication to support of transparency and accountability, detailed information may not be published if, for example, it would constitute a breach of data protection, or disclosure would prejudice commercial interest.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 (23.08.06) to maintain refusal of planning permission for Les Nouettes Nurseries, Rue des Nouettes, St. Clement.

Subject:	Les Nouettes Nurseries, La Rue des Nouettes, St Clement Demolish existing glasshouse and construct 2 No. dwellings.
Decision Reference:	MD-PE-2006-0162	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/2006/0440
Written Report Title:	Demolish existing glasshouse and construct 2 No. dwellings. REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION of refusal of planning permission.	Written report – Author:		Kelly Johnson
Decision(s Maintain refusal of planning permission
Reason(s) for decision: The Minister considered that there were no exceptional circumstances in this instance to warrant the existing glasshouse’s redevelopment for non-agricultural purposes.
Action required: Send decision letter
Signature: (Minister)			Date of Decision: 23/8/06

Les Nouettes Nurseries - maintain refusal of planning permission

Application Number: P/2006/0440

Request for Reconsideration Report

Site Address	Les Nouettes Nurseries, La Rue des Nouettes, St. Clement.

Requested by	Mr & Mrs. AJeanne	Agent	PAR Architectural Services Limited

Description	Demolish existing glasshouse and construct 2 No. dwellings. REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION of refusal of planning permission.

Type	Planning

Original Decision	REFUSED


Reasons	1. The development proposed, because of its location and impact, would be harmful to the character of this part of the Countryside Zone, contrary to Policy C6 of the Island Plan 2002, which presumes against all forms of development for whatever purpose. 2. The proposed development involves the redevelopment of a glasshouse site that is not redundant or derelict and which would be harmful to the countryside character of the area, contrary to Policy C20 of the Island Plan 2002.

Determined by	Planning Application Panel 7th June 2006.

Date	07/06/2006

Zones	Countryside Zone

Policies	G2 – General Development Considerations C6 – Countryside Zone C20 – Redundant Glasshouses

Recommendation

Maintain Refusal

Comments on Case	Policy C6 presumes against all forms of development for whatever purpose, with the exception of certain defined types of development. This proposal to construct two dwellings on current agricultural land does not fall within any of those defined types of development that may be considered. Policy C20 presumes against the development of redundant glasshouses for non-agricultural purposes. This is because glasshouses are regarded as temporary structures related to the use of the land for agriculture, and not as a potential development site. IN any case, the policy refers to the redevelopment of ‘redundant’ glasshouses. The subject glasshouse, although in poor condition, is not redundant or derelict, and thus does not fall within the defined circumstances of the policy. However, Policy C20 does allow for the redevelopment of glasshouses ‘in exceptional circumstances’. The applicant argues that his situation is exceptional. The term ‘exceptional’ means that the situation is one-of-a-kind and that no other business could be in the same situation to gain a similar redevelopment. It is considered that there are many agricultural businesses that would welcome the redevelopment of part of their holding to generate capital for re-investment in their business, and as such this situation cannot be considered ‘exceptional’. The applicant, in writing to the Department to appeal the decision of the Planning Applications Panel of 7th June 2006, provides no new arguments than those that were considered by the Panel. Whilst it is understood that the applicant has heavily invested in the agriculture industry personally, this in itself is not a reason to permit new dwellings to be built in the Countryside Zone, against the policies of the Island Plan. Glasshouses are regarded as ‘temporary structures’ and as such there is a presumption against their redevelopment. It is considered that there are no exceptional circumstances in this instance to warrant the existing glasshouse’s redevelopment for non-agricultural purposes.

Recommendation	Maintain refusal.

Reasons	1. The development proposed, because of its location and impact, would be harmful to the character of this part of the Countryside Zone, contrary to Policy C6 of the Island Plan 2002, which presumes against all forms of development for whatever purpose. 2. The proposed development involves the redevelopment of a glasshouse site that is not redundant or derelict and which would be harmful to the countryside character of the area, contrary to Policy C20 of the Island Plan 2002.

Background Papers	1:2500 Site Plan Mr Jeanne’s letters of 17th March 2006, 18th April 2006, and 6th July 2006 Officer Report for the Planning Applications Panel 7th June 2006. Minutes of the Planning Applications Panel Meeting of 7th June 2006.

Endorsed by		Date