Development of historic coastal building is rejected
Friday 19th March 2010, 2:56PM GMT.
The Chalet du Coleron in St Brelade’s Bay
CONTROVERSIAL plans to extend an 18th century building on the coastline have been unanimously rejected by the Planning applications panel.
David and Caroline Phillips wanted to renovate the Napoleonic magazine and guardhouse Chalet du Coleron, which overlooks St Brelade’s Bay. They had planned to add a three-storey glass extension and retire in the property.
But yesterday the Planning panel refused the scheme, designed by Naish Waddington Architects, because it has no car parking, no drainage and a lack of access.
They also rejected it on the grounds that the plans would have an impact on the listed buildings by linking them and because the area is in a zone of outstanding character where there is a strong presumption against development. The panel overturned the planning officer’s recommendation for approval.
The Queen's Diamond Jubilee
JEP Jubilee Editions
Saturday 2 June: Guide to Celebrations
Wednesday 6 June: Souvenir of Events
View The Queen in Jersey supplement
Travel
To, from and around the Island
Airport Arrivals/Departures
Harbours Arrivals/Departures
Bus Information/Timetables
This is Jersey
Jersey Evening Post
Useful links
YES!
Report abuse
Why on earth did planning allow an incinerator to be built on the coastline quite close to listed buildings at Havre-des-Pas – double standards indeed.
Report abuse
I feel I must praise the planning panel on this occasion, for allowing sanity and good taste to prevail.How utterly tasteless it would have been there…and also pray Freddie does not singlehandedly overule it.
Report abuse
why dont they just flatten the listed building and then they will get permission to build what they want – sounds obsurde but its been done before!
Report abuse
At least once sense prevails … BUT … unless i misunderstand things if the Planning panel disagree with the Planning officer such as in this case then the final decision lies with concrete-loving Cohen?!! This may not be over yet as all it would take is the developer to sweet-talk Cohen and he will roll over like a love-sick puppy!! I hope that doesnt happen but i am rapidly losing faith in those in power protecting our coastline!
Yes there has been many double standards concerning development and we are all totally confused as to what the Island Plan actually does!
I hope this is definitely rejected as a development but i will reserve my judgement until Cohen puts his two-pennies worth in!!
Report abuse
All very valid points. I personally like this bit “it has no car parking.” What about all the flats in town do they all have parking?
As far as I am concerned the first points given for turning it down are irrelevant so why even mention them?
By the way the report was composed it reads that if there had of been parking, drainage and access it may have been difficult to turn it down.
Indeed a correct decision by planning, at last, IMHO. Hopefully this isn’t a one off.
Report abuse
In Kimberley, South Africa, to save some of the threatened historical buildings, these were carefully demolished and rebuilt in a newly created ‘historic’ town around the Big Hole. This has become an interesting major tourist attraction of a dance hall, shops, small manufacturers and dwellings that have machinery and furnishings from those times. One can even wander through some of these, reliving the ambience of a by-gone age. How about doing something similar with the threatened Jersey sites to prevent what would otherwise be lost forever At the same time a new and interesting tourist attraction would be created.
Report abuse
I despair,on the one hand this is knocked back and quite rightly ,then the utter monstrosity at Wolf’s cave s gets the go ahead,surely the same crtteria would apply…it is unsightly ,wholly unsuitable to the area and the island as a whole,,,such disparity and dispaly of inconsistency of thinking confirms once and for all, that Cohen is totally aunsuited to the position and should go…and as for his schmooze on the separation of planning and environment..I truly hope someone with cajones picks up that baton and gets it sorted,..for you cannot be rulemaker and breaker at the same time
Report abuse
It is a shame you did not pray about the erection of a ghastly incinertor. However, I suspect it was not within the vacinity of your own abode.
Report abuse
Why do you all want to keep a fallen down building that serves no purpose what so ever. I assume you are the same people that are please the eyesore that is the old Odeon is now listed.
Thank God they didn’t have planning and stuck in the mud people when Gorey Castle was built or no doubt you would all say, no don’t ruin the coastline by putting a big castle on it.
Report abuse