This content has been automatically generated from the original PDF and some formatting may have been lost. Let us know if you find any major problems.
Text in this format is not official and should not be relied upon to extract citations or propose amendments. Please see the PDF for the official version of the document.
STATES OF JERSEY
ISLAND PLAN 2022-25: APPROVAL (P.36/2021) – NINETENTH AMENDMENT (P.36/2021 AMD.(19)) – AMENDMENT
Lodged au Greffe on 12th July 2021 by Senator S. C. Ferguson
STATES GREFFE
2021 P.36/2021 Amd.(19)Amd
ISLAND PLAN 2021: APPROVAL (P.36/2021): NINETEENTH AMENDMENT (P.36/2021 AMD.(19)) – AMENDMENT
____________
PAGE 2 –
For the words "December 2023" substitute the words "May 2022".
SENATOR S. C. FERGUSON
Note: After this amendment, the amendment of Senator Pallett would read as follows –
After the words "the draft Island Plan 2022-25" insert the words "except that within Proposal 17 ( St. Brelade 's Bay Improvement Plan) after the words "improvement plan for St. Brelade's Bay" there should be inserted the words "by May 2022"".
After the amendment, if amended by this amendment, the main proposition would read as follows –
THE STATES are asked to decide whether they are of opinion
to approve, in accordance with Article 3(1) of the Planning and Building (Jersey) Law 2002, as amended by the Covid-19 (Island Plan) (Jersey) Regulations 2021, the draft Island Plan 2022-25, except that within Proposal 17 ( St. Brelade 's Bay Improvement Plan) after the words "improvement plan for St. Brelade 's Bay" there should be inserted the words "by May 2022".
Page - 2
P.36/2021 Amd.(19)Amd
REPORT
In 2014 the current Minister of the Environment brought an amendment to Revised Island Plan 2011 which resulted in the requirement that the St. Brelade 's Bay Improvement Plan should be prepared. This requirement was recommended by the Inspectors as a matter of urgency.
A working party was set up by the Parish, chaired by Moz Scott . However the then Environment Minister consider that Planning Matters in St. Helier were of more importance and St. Brelade was moved to the bottom of the pile.
The Bay area is subject to a number of planning conflicts. Currently, and subject to Policy GD9 (which discourages development on the Shoreline Zone that obstructs 'significant views to, or involve the loss of open spaces which provide views to, the shoreline and sea'), Policy SP2 encourages development that 'optimises the density of development'. The Minister's stated desire to avoid a Costa de St. Brelade ', the interests of the Island's community and its tourism industry are best served by discouraging the optimisation of density of development in the case of private residences in the Shoreline Zone so that tourist buildings are favoured in terms of expansion within the confines of Policies GD7 and GD9.
SP7
This proposed policy should be amended to address the overwhelming' concern identified in the public engagement in connection with the St. Brelade 's Bay character appraisal that the Bay 'should be for the local community and visitors, not an elite or exclusive residential domain for the ultra-rich as it is increasingly becoming' and the concern expressed by a majority of the Bay's businesses that 'the tourism offer needs to supported or tourism businesses will continue to decline.'
This Amendment to Senator Pallett's amendment to the Bridging Island Plan seeks to bring forward the work required and impose a shorter deadline on this necessary work.
Financial and manpower implications
This work will be completed within existing budgets as the work was included with the Draft Bridging plan by the Minister and this amendment simply imposes a timeframe.
Child Rights Impact Assessment implications
This amendment has been assessed in relation to the Bridging Island Plan CRIA. There are no adverse impacts to children implicated by this amendment, as it seeks to ensure the completion of work designed to protect and preserve green infrastructure.
Page - 3
P.36/2021 Amd.(19)Amd