Island Plan 2011: approval (P.48/2011): thirty-fourth amendment

STATES OF JERSEY

r

ISLAND PLAN 2011: APPROVAL (P.48/2011): THIRTY-FOURTH AMENDMENT

Lodged au Greffe on 26th April 2011 by the Connétable of St. Mary

STATES GREFFE

2011   Price code: A  P.48 Amd.(34)

ISLAND PLAN 2011: APPROVAL (P.48/2011): THIRTY-FOURTH AMENDMENT

PAGE 2 –

After the words "the revised draft Island Plan 2011" insert the words "except that in the  Introduction,  on  page xvii,  after  the  words  "For  the  avoidance  of  doubt,  the following development plans and frameworks are superseded by the new Island Plan:" delete the words "1. St. Mary 's Village Development Plan (1994)" and renumber the list accordingly."

CONNÉTABLE OF ST. MARY

Page - 2

P.48/2011 Amd.(34)

REPORT

I am bringing this amendment to remove the reference to the St. Mary 's Village Development  Plan  (1994)  ("the  1994  Plan")  from  the  list  of  plans  which  are superseded by the new Island Plan, as a number of Parishioners have raised concerns over the loss of this 1994 Plan, which was produced after much consultation.

Discussions with the Planning Department have given a degree of reassurance that the core elements of the 1994 Plan will be preserved in the proposed new Plan. For example, important trees, views and vistas are protected by 2 new policies, and the draft Island Plan also proposes the designation of Conservation Areas. I understand from the Planning Department that they will be undertaking work in defining these Conservation Areas once the new Island Plan is adopted, and the area around the Parish Church has been informally identified as having some potential. By bringing this amendment, even if it is not successful, I will be able to put on record the Minister's  views  on  the  designation  of  this  important  part  of  the  Parish  as  a Conservation  Area  and  will  be  able  to  seek  his  assurance  that  the  Parish  and Parishioners themselves will be formally involved in the process.

The  draft  Island  Plan also  notes,  in  Proposal 14,  that  where  new  development is proposed to protect the vitality and viability of Jersey's smaller rural settlements, the Minister  for  Planning  and  Environment  will  require  the  parochial  authorities  to undertake and develop their own village study or plan.

There is no mention of how the development of these new plans will be funded, and I am concerned that unless the contents of the 1994 Plan are demonstrated to be either flawed  or  out-of-date,  it  would  simply  be  a  waste  of  resources  to  abandon  the 1994 Plan completely and face the possible need to produce an entirely new document in the future, perhaps unnecessarily. I would welcome the Minister's comments on this.

Financial and manpower implications

There are no financial or manpower implications for the States arising from this amendment.

Page - 3

P.48/2011 Amd.(34)