De la Mare Nurseries, La Rue a Don, Grouville: Development Brief

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While there is a presumption toward publication to support of transparency and accountability, detailed information may not be published if, for example, it would constitute a breach of data protection, or disclosure would prejudice commercial interest.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 5 October 2015:

Decision Reference: MD-PE-2015-0057
Decision Summary Title :		DS-SPG- De La Mare Nurseries, La Rue a Don, Grouville. Development Brief.		Date of Decision Summary:	4 September, 2015
Decision Summary Author:		Principal Planner		Decision Summary: Public or Exempt?	Public
Type of Report: Oral or Written?		Written and oral		Person Giving Oral Report:	Principal Planner
Written Report Title :		SPG - De La Mare Nurseries, La Rue a Don, Grouville - Development Brief.		Date of Written Report:	4 September 2015
Written Report Author:		Principal Planner		Written Report : Public or Exempt?	Public
Subject: Development Brief - De La Mare Nurseries, La Rue a Don, Grouville.
Decision(s): The Minister noted and agreed the release of the development brief for De La Mare Nurseries, Grouville following a period of public consultation.
Reason(s) for Decision: The Minister noted the comments received in relation to the draft development brief and agreed to amend the contents of the draft Brief in response to some of the issues raised. The Minister had sight of a report which summarised the comments received and identified where changes had been made to the SPG. To enable the owners and potential developers to advance with their plans to develop the site for affordable housing in line with the States decision. (P.37/2014)
Resource Implications: None
Action required: Principal Planner to publicise and publish the development brief onto the States website and ; Principal Planner to write directly to the owners of the site and those with an interest in the development of the site to facilitate the commencement of development plans.
Signature:			Position: Minister for Planning & Environment
Date Signed:	Initials		Date of Decision (If different from Date Signed):

De la Mare Nurseries, La Rue a Don, Grouville: Development Brief

PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENT DEPARTMENT

PLANNING DEPARTMENT

PURPOSE OF THE REPORT

The purpose of the report is to request the Minister to approve and release the Development Brief for De la Mare Nurseries, Grouville to assist those involved in the planning and design of new development to ensure that that those planning issues which are relevant and necessary are taken into account in the design process.

BACKGROUND

The draft SPG was subject to a period of public consultation

between the 18 May / 18 June, 2015. Comments have been received from that exercise and are combined with comments made by Statutory Authorities in other discussions notably with the Parish of Grouville.

The States of Jersey Consultation Portal.

The comments have come from the Development Control section and a firm of landscape Architects. Where these are deemed to be relevant and appropriate they have resulted in change to the DB. They raise issues in areas where they consider the DB has not gone far enough.

- Amenity space requirements. (15% proposed)

- Landscape assessment required.

- Wildlife corridors necessary in conjunction with boundary planting.

- Make links to existing footpath and cycle track network.

- Estimated yield should be accurately defined prior to DB

- Reference specific policies in the DB

- Requirement for a digital model

Comment – It has been possible to incorporate virtually all the proposed changes to the DB. However the estimated yield could only be finessed by preparing a full site layout. The DB clearly indicates that the actual density will be driven by a design based scheme. The estimated yield as quoted is clearly signposted as an approximate figure only.

Statutory Consultees.

Comments from TTS in connection with infrastructure and highways issues have been included where it clarifies options regarding foul and surface water drainage. The costs for connection to the public sewer have not yet been fully costed but these are likely to be considerable. The contribution requested to the Eastern Cycle network TTS suggest be set at £250 k which represents £5 k per unit. Contributions from other residential development has, up to now, been set at £1 k per unit and this is deemed to be more consistent in the context of the development of this site. The calculation around the costs implicit in delivering the site for affordable housing will need to be set against the aspirations of delivering off- site improvements which may be desirable but where insistence on delivery might prejudice delivery. The use of an “open book” system whereby information on site development costs are shared would appear to be the most effective means of clearly understanding the implications of off- site work and their impact on deliverability.

The Environment Department have clearly expressed their concerns in relation to the possible detrimental impact upon Grouville Marsh without proper management and a regime of conditions. Changes have been made to the original draft to reflect those concerns and to set out some clear requirements that need to be addressed when an application is submitted.

Comment – The discussions with TTS have now clearly defined the options for how the site should connect to the foul sewer. The contribution to the Eastern Cycle Track will be a function of how the “open book” arrangement operates and the extent to which the development can contribute to off-site aspirations. It is considered that the established figure of £1 k per unit is an appropriate and consistent level of contribution.

The Parish of Grouville.

They have their own aspirations to provide homes for parishioners and question if the site might be capable of expansion into the derelict glass to the west to allow this to take place. Otherwise they look to see proper protection given to Grouville Marsh. The DB has been amended to address the protection of the Marsh. There is support for the creation of a “buffer” zone between the site and the marsh. This land is presently in the ownership of Roy Smith and has an irrigation pond and disused plastic tunnels. One of the key objectives of the DB is to remove these structures in addition to the derelict glass to the west of the site.

Comment – Discussions with the Parish in the course of this application has made it clear to them that their aspirations to extend housing for their parishioners on adjoining land must run separately from this development.

Recommendation

The consultation process has identified some substantial aspirations on and around the site. Some elements such as the connection to the public sewer and the careful disposal of surface water to protect the Marsh are key and non-negotiable. Another key priority is to see the removal of the derelict glass and plastic albeit these elements lie outside the boundary of the site. The DB has been amended to that effect. Their removal would play a significant part in improving the landscape setting and should be a high priority. The provision of a safe route to school for children should also be a priority. The use of an “open book “ approach to understand and balance costs against aspirations appears the best method for both parties to understand and take a view on what may be desirable then achievable. The suggested “list” of off-site objectives beyond the non-negotiable infrastructure requirements might be prioritised as follows-

- Remove derelict glass tunnels and pond and rehabilitate land.

- Put in place safe route to school strategy and changes.

- Provide bus shelter

- Provide for contribution to eastern cycle route

- Provide buffer to marsh. (Through purchase of land or by POA.)

The requirement for a percentage for art contribution will be assessed more fully through the “open book” system given that other aspirations may carry a higher priority.

It is recommended that the Minister approve the Development Brief.