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 2011: REVISED DRAFT REVISION – APPROVAL (P.37/2014) – ELEVENTH AMENDMENT
Lodged au Greffe on 6th May 2014
by the Minister for Economic Development
STATES GREFFE
2014 Price code: A P.37 Amd.(11)
ISLAND PLAN 2011: REVISED DRAFT REVISION – APPROVAL (P.37/2014) – ELEVENTH AMENDMENT
PAGE 2 –
After the words "the revised draft revision to the Island Plan 2011" insert the words "except that the amendments to Proposal 4a and Policies NE6 and NE7 (pages 73 to 102 of the draft Revision) shall be deleted".
MINISTER FOR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
REPORT
The Minister for Planning and Environment is seeking to alter the Coastal National Park (NE6) and Green Zone (NE7) Policies in the Island Plan, therefore affecting all properties in Jersey's countryside. The changes are considered to have as equally damaging implications as Policy H3 (affordable housing) would have had, had the Minister not agreed to withdraw it.
However, this time the damage will not just be on the construction industry and the inability to provide affordable housing for the less affluent citizens of the Island. Instead, the damage will be inflicted on Middle-Jersey'.
Reference to the Island Plan will show that circa 90% of the Island is either in the Coastal National Park, but mostly in the Green Zone, and within which a large proportion of the Island's population live. This therefore explains why the new policies will affect so many Islanders.
In short, the policies will restrict how much existing properties in the countryside (both residential and commercial) can be extended by, and will also prevent the development of a new house to replace an existing house (or other existing building) if it becomes larger.
This will have the following implications –
- Infringement on individuals' rights to improve and upgrade their property.
- Discourage the replacement of existing sub-standard buildings with more sustainably built buildings.
- Reduction in the value of property in the Coastal National Park and the Green Zone.
- Reduction in value of commercial property owing to a limited exit strategy, and resulting in poor financial leverage for existing businesses.
- Increase in the cost of land in the Built-up area, as being the only zone where property would be capable of being enlarged to any significant degree.
- Significant reduction in work for small to medium size building contractors and sub-contractors in the construction industry and, therefore, a rise in unemployment.
- Significant reduction in work for architects, engineers, quantity surveyors, interior designers, etc. and, therefore, a rise in unemployment.
- Inability to promote Jersey to high net-worth residents.
It is considered that the existing policies relating to the Coastal National Park and the Green Zone, with the presumptions set against all forms of new development, suitably protects the countryside, but giving sufficient flexibility to allow appropriate development.
Page - 3
P.37/2014 Amd.(11)
This is a case where policies might be approved under the radar without a full understanding of the severe implications they will have on Islanders' individual rights and the impact on the wider economy.
Indeed, it seems a particularly inappropriate time to inflict these policies on the Island when green shoots' are starting to appear in the Island's economy. These policies will only serve to set the construction industry back and cause unemployment within this important economic sector.
It then also seems inconsistent for these new policies to now prevent the redevelopment of redundant and derelict glasshouse sites, when the current Island Plan recognises them as the Island's only Brownfield sites and current Policy ERE7 allows for the sensitive redevelopment of these sites, resulting in substantial environmental improvements.
Financial and manpower implications
There are no financial or manpower implications for the States arising from this amendment.