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While there is a presumption toward publication to support of transparency and accountability, detailed information may not be published if, for example, it would constitute a breach of data protection, or disclosure would prejudice commercial interest.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 (23/11/2007) regarding: Barnwood, La Rue du Bocage, St. Peter - Request for Reconsideration of refusal of Planning Permission.

Decision Reference: MD-PE-2007-0298		Application Number: PP/2007/0831 (If applicable)
Decision Summary Title :	Barnwood, La Rue du Bocage, , St. Peter - Request for Reconsideration of refusal of Planning Permission	Date of Decision Summary:		27/11/07
Decision Summary Author:	Jonathan Gladwin	Decision Summary: Public or Exempt? (State clauses from Code of Practice booklet)		Public
Type of Report: Oral or Written?	Written and Oral	Person Giving Oral Report:		Jonathan Gladwin
Written Report Title :	Barnwood, La Rue du Bocage, , St. Peter - Request for Reconsideration of refusal of Planning Permission	Date of Written Report:		08/11/07
Written Report Author:	Jonathan Gladwin	Written Report : Public or Exempt? (State clauses from Code of Practice booklet)		Public
Subject: Barnwood, La Rue du Bocage, St. Peter, JE3 7AS Demolish existing garage. Construct 3 bed dormer bungalow. REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION of refusal of planning permission.
Decision(s): At a public meeting which took place on 23rd November 2007 the Minister decided to uphold the refusal of Planning Permission
Reason(s) for Decision: The decision to refuse was upheld for the same reason (s) for refusal as given on the Decision Notice. Namely that: 1. The proposed development would be an unacceptable overdevelopment of the site, resulting in a building that is cramped, has insufficient amenity space, is out of character with the surrounding area and pattern of development and harmful to the occupiers of neighbouring properties. The proposed development is therefore contrary to parts ii), iii), vii) and viii) of Policy H8, parts i), ii) and v) of Policy G2 and parts i), ii) of Policy G3 of the Jersey Island Plan 2002. 2. The proposed development does not provide adequate vehicular access and provides insufficient car parking spaces, contrary to the Planning and Environment Committee's Planning Policy Note No.3 'Parking Guidelines, 1988'.
Resource Implications: None
Action required: Notify Agent, Applicant and all other interested parties
Signature:			Position:
Date Signed:			Date of Decision (If different from Date Signed): 23 November 2007

Barnwood, La Rue du Bocage, St. Peter - Request for Reconsideration of refusal of Planning Permission.

Planning and Environment Department

Planning and Building Services

South Hill

St Helier, Jersey, JE2 4US

Tel: +44 (0)1534 445508

Fax: +44 (0)1534 445528

Application Number: PP/2007/0831

Request for Reconsideration Report

Site Address	Barnwood, La Rue du Bocage, St. Peter, JE3 7AS.

Requested by	Mr. C JRicketts	Agent

Description	Demolish existing garage. Construct 3 bed dormer bungalow. REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION of refusal of planning permission.

Type	Planning Principle

Original Decision	REFUSED

Conditions
Reasons	1. The proposed development would be an unacceptable overdevelopment of the site, resulting in a building that is cramped, has insufficient amenity space, is out of character with the surrounding area and pattern of development and harmful to the occupiers of neighbouring properties. The proposed development is therefore contrary to parts ii), iii), vii) and viii) of Policy H8, parts i), ii) and v) of Policy G2 and parts i), ii) of Policy G3 of the Jersey Island Plan 2002. 2. The proposed development does not provide adequate vehicular access and provides insufficient car parking spaces, contrary to the Planning and Environment Committee's Planning Policy Note No.3 'Parking Guidelines, 1988'.

Determined by	Delegated Refused

Date	18/07/2007

Zones	Built Up Area Water Pollution Safeguard Area

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

Recommendation

Maintain Refusal

Comments on Case	This is a Planning in Principle application for a new dwelling sited in the rear garden of ‘Barnwood’ and designed in an ‘L’ shape measuring 10m by between 6m and 9m. The applicant states that: There exists a wide range of building styles and ages in the area and would not be out of character. The intended finish of the proposed dwelling would be of granite and slate roof and would create a courtyard effect in harmony with what was a farming community. The vehicle access would be via existing access, no additional traffic. The windows of the proposed house would face the existing house and would have no effect on surrounding houses. Amenity space is more than adequate given the added outside space to the front of the existing property. The site was once at the extremity of the village but has now surrounded by houses and the site is therefore suited to a more intense development. The house size could be decreased in size if necessary. In response: Agreed that the area is reasonably varied in character. But no other directly comparable cases exist in the area of this type of backland development and it is considered that the loss of the existing rear garden, construction of a new dwelling, particularly with regard to the limited size of the plot, would be out of character with the surrounding area. The finish of the development is not considered at this stage, but would not make the development acceptable in view of the reasons for refusal specified. The development would be a cramped overdevelopment of the site and this ‘courtyard’ effect would not be suitable for this site. The existing access is of a poor standard and width and the Parish as highways authority have objections with the access, turning area and parking. Overlooking may occur to neighbouring houses, due to the siting of the house on a constrained site. Also it may be acceptable to the applicant to have overlooking to his dwelling, but if ownership changed of this main house, then the overlooking would be an unacceptable problem. The amenity space is inadequate, with a maximum amenity area of 35 sq m available to the proposed dwelling and a general cramped/non-private feel to the development. The site is within the Built Up Area, but due to the other concerns raised and in line with Policies G2 and H8 of the Island Plan does not mean that the development of this site can necessarily be intensified to this extent. Agreed, but unlikely to resolve the principle of this type of backland development.

Recommendation	Maintain Refusal

Reasons	See above

Background Papers	1:2500 Site Plan Letter dated 31 July 2007 from Applicant.

Endorsed by		Date