From Harry Read.
THERE have been two decisions taken recently by the planning applications panel that lead me to question whether there is such a thing as a level playing field in Jersey.

The first one, reported last week, involved a family trying to improve their living accommodation by demolishing an existing house and replacing it with a modern architect-designed house that was twice the size.

This proposal was on a substantial site. In fact, the recent addition of some land meant that the percentage of footprint to total area was reduced. The house was in its own grounds, did not have buildings alongside it that had clashing styles and was not visible from the road.

On top of this, the owner stated that the existing house was unfit for its purpose with a poor water supply, collapsing drains and a roof that needed replacing.

There were four objections registered, including one from the National Trust and another from the St Martin’s Conservation Trust.

The result was a unanimous rejection by the panel because of concerns about the size of the proposed house in an area where there should be the highest level of protection. One panel member thought the design was ‘totally out of character for the area’.

The second objection was heavily reported over the two years it took to get to the panel. That La Cotte at Ouaisné is a 1,000 sq ft bungalow on the main road into the bay and is in a conurbation consisting of granite cottages and the Smugglers Inn, which is black and white. It is alongside Ouaisné Common and is immediately visible from the slip as you exit the beach.

The proposal was for a modern two-storey dwelling consisting of 4,000 square foot above ground and a further 1,000 plus in an underground garage and basement. There were 15 objections, including the National Trust, and a petition of over 150 names.

After two meetings, the design was tweaked to lower the roof height and move the granite wall three feet from the road. The building will take up roughly 70% of the total site area when it is built, because the panel with two objections, but the full support of all other members, passed the plans for building.

No comments about massive developments, totally out of character or highest level of protection, despite every layman who has seen the plans making exactly those comments.
Finally, the site is now up for auction to the highest bidder with planning permission.

Why is it that certain parishes seem to be able to hold back developments while others, and we all know which they are, are constantly told to put up with more development?

Is there a case for the planning application panel, who obviously cannot remember their reasons for acceptance and rejection from one meeting to another, being disbanded and replaced with a professional panel?