Les Cascades, La Rue des Haies, Trinity: Determination of Planning Application

Information about the publication of Ministerial Decisions

A formal published “Ministerial Decision” is required as a record of the decision of a Minister (or an Assistant Minister where they have delegated authority) as they exercise their responsibilities and powers.

Ministers are elected by the States Assembly and have legal responsibilities and powers as “corporation sole” under the States of Jersey Law 2005 by virtue of their office and in their areas of responsibility, including entering into agreements, and under any legislation conferring on them powers.

An accurate record of “Ministerial Decisions” is vital to effective governance, including:

demonstrating that good governance, and clear lines of accountability and authority, are in place around decisions-making – including the reasons and basis on which a decision is made, and the action required to implement a decision
providing a record of decisions and actions that will be available for examination by States Members, and Panels and Committees of the States Assembly; the public, organisations, and the media; and as a historical record and point of reference for the conduct of public affairs

Ministers are individually accountable to the States Assembly, including for the actions of the departments and agencies which discharge their responsibilities.

The Freedom of Information Law (Jersey) Law 2011 is used as a guide when determining what information is be published. While there is a presumption toward publication to support of transparency and accountability, detailed information may not be published if, for example, it would constitute a breach of data protection, or disclosure would prejudice commercial interest.

A decision made 11 July 2011 regarding:

Decision Reference: MD-PE-2011-0064

Application Number: P/2010/1904

(If applicable)

Decision Summary Title :

Les Cascades, La Rue des Haies, Trinity

Date of Decision Summary:

06.07.2011

Decision Summary Author:

Senior Planner

- A Coates

Decision Summary:

Public or Exempt?

(State clauses from Code of Practice booklet)

Public

Type of Report:

Oral or Written?

Written

Person Giving

Oral Report:

N/A

Written Report

Title :

Les Cascades, La Rue des Haies, Trinity

Date of Written Report:

08.06.2011

Written Report Author:

Senior Planner

- A Coates

Written Report :

Public or Exempt?

(State clauses from Code of Practice booklet)

Public

Subject: Les Cascades, La Rue des Haies, Trinity

RETROSPECTIVE: Relocate existing storage shed and oil tanks. Erect 20 No. chicken arcs. Form new access track.

Decision(s):

To APPROVE the application for the following reason:

Reason(s) for Decision:

The Minister for Planning and Environment considered that the proposed relocation and retention of sheds to serve the applicant’s chicken breeding interests was a use appropriate to the countryside. The applicant’s interest is of international renown and has helped promote the rural economy of Jersey. The Minister was also mindful of the need to prevent cross-contamination of feedstuffs and bedding and accepted the case for a stand-alone shed away from the existing larger agricultural shed.

The Minister paid due regard to the personal medical circumstances of the applicant and took into account doctor’s advice that the applicant should not be subjected to any undue stress.

The Minister also took account of the consultation responses and representations received and of the provisions of the recently adopted Island Plan.

The proposal is considered to be justified in terms of its contribution to the rural economy and the fact that it will not result in the permanent loss of good agricultural land. The sheds are considered to be essential to the proper functioning of the holding and will not be likely to result in an unreasonable or significant adverse impact upon the amenities of nearby residents.

For these reasons, the Minister considered that the proposal complies with the provisions of Policies SP1, GD1, ERE1, ERE6 and NE7 of the Jersey Island Plan, 2011, but considered that a temporary consent of 3 years was prudent in order to monitor the development.

The following condition is considered to be appropriate:

1. The permission, hereby granted, shall enure for a period not exceeding 3 years, after which time, the sheds shall be removed in their entirety from Field 1327.

Reason

1. The sheds have been granted planning permission solely because of the personal circumstances of the occupier of the adjacent dwelling, Les Cascades.

Resource Implications:

There are no resource implications.

Action required:

Issue notification of the decision as appropriate.

Signature:

Senator F E Cohen

PLeg / PT Initials

Position:

Minister for Planning and Environment

Date Signed:

Date of Decision (If different from Date Signed):

Les Cascades, La Rue des Haies, Trinity: Determination of Planning Application

Department of the Environment

Planning and Building Services

South Hill

St Helier, Jersey, JE2 4US

Tel: +44 (0)1534 445508

Fax: +44 (0)1534 445528

(This is hidden text it will not print out. Use F11 to move to the next field. Shift -F11 to previous field.)Planning and Environment Department

Report

Application Number

P/2010/1904

Site Address	Les Cascades, La Rue des Haies, Trinity.

Applicant	ComProp (CI) Limited

Description	RETROSPECTIVE: Relocate / retain existing storage sheds and oil tanks.

Type	Planning

Date Validated	04/01/2011

Zones	Green Zone

Policies	SP1 – Spatial Strategy GD 1 – General Development Objectives ERE 1 - Safeguarding Agricultural Land ERE 6 – Agricultural Buildings, Extensions & Horticultural Structures NE7 – Green Zone

Reason for Referral	Nature of proposal.

Summary/

Conclusion

The proposal is for the relocation of an existing storage shed and for the retention of a recently constructed open-bay storage / tractor shed. Oil fuel tanks have also been placed adjacent the existing large agricultural shed and retrospective permission is sought for these.

Permission is also sought for 20 relatively small chicken arks within Field 1327 – these units are on wheels and designed to be moved around the field periodically. In this respect, the Department considers the arks to be ‘moveable structures’ and therefore exempt from planning control.

The application originally also made reference to the provision of a new access track through Field 1327. The track already exists and was marked on an approved landscape drawing attached to a previous planning permission for a large agricultural shed (P/2007/1713). It is also noted that the General Development Order makes specific provision for new means of access to a road from agricultural land, where its purpose is to be solely, or mainly, for agricultural use.

The proposed structures and oil tanks are fairly modest in scale and are located to minimise impact. While the Department would not object to the oil tanks, which are tucked out of site next to the existing large shed, it is considered that the new sheds are an excessive addition to the field, given the quantum of the existing, approved shed which is conditioned to remain for agricultural storage.

Officer

Recommendation

Refusal.

Site Description	Les Cascades is on the northern side of La Rue des Haies and constitutes a large dwelling with a range of outbuildings and agricultural land in the applicant’s control immediately to the north and west of the house.

Relevant Planning History	CU/1996/2249 – Change of use from agricultural land to domestic garden. Refused March 1996. P/2003/2289 – New car-parking yard, amended access, landscaping & walled garden. Approved December 2003. P/2004/1065 – Landscaping, new levels and walls. Approved July 2004. P/2004/1492 – Gardeners’ stores and do house. Approved August 2004. P/2007/1713 – Agricultural shed. Approved June 2009. P/2009/1723 - Alterations to vehicular access to include erection of walls and gate. Refused November 2009. P/2010/1893 – Retrospective: erection of dog kennels in Field 1327. Decision pending.

Existing use of Land/Buildings	Field / orchard.

Proposed use of Land/Buildings	Storage sheds for feed-stuff / seed and equipment.

Consultations	LC &ADS – Field 1327 is restricted under the Agricultural Land Law to agricultural / horticultural / equine purposes. The keeping and raising of chickens is considered to be a suitable activity for the field but is not actively supported because it is not a rural commercial venture. LC&ADS also question the requirement for additional storage sheds on the field and would not support the siting of the oil tanks unless for agricultural purposes. Historic Environment Team – no objections. Environmental Protection – make comment in relation to the requirement to site the chicken arks away from boreholes and streams. All consultations are attached with the background papers

Summary of Representations	Four letters of representation have been received, raising the following concerns:- - why are additional sheds required when the field already benefits from a large, agricultural shed? - loss of views. - potential for the sheds to be converted to housing. - inappropriate access track - the retrospective nature of the application - excessive noise from chickens. The National Trust for Jersey object to the existing access track and consider that the proposals represent the urbanisation of an agricultural field. All letters of representation and responses are attached with the background papers

Planning Issues	Policy Considerations (What are the presumptions) SP1 – Outside the Built-up Area, planning permission will only be given for development appropriate to the coast or countryside and, in the case of ‘greenfield’ sites, as an exception where the development is justified as supporting parish communities or rural economy and which meets an identified need. GD 1 – Outlines the material considerations against which all development proposals will be tested, including the need for the highest standard of design and construction. ERE 1 – Presumption against the permanent loss of good agricultural land. ERE 6 – Strong presumption against proposals for agricultural buildings unless it is demonstrated that the proposed development is essential to the proper function of the farm holding, will contribute to the viability of the Island’s agricultural industry and, cannot be met from the use of existing agricultural buildings elsewhere. NE7 – General presumption against all forms of development, but makes provision for new development on existing agricultural holdings where it is essential to the needs of agriculture. Land Use Implications The sheds are to be used in connection with the applicant’s chicken breeding activities and are, in principle appropriate for that use. However, the Department is mindful that the large purpose built agricultural shed granted in June 2009 has been used for the storage of the applicant’s cars and not used solely for agricultural purposes. This being the case, the Department would contend that there is easily sufficient capacity within that shed to hold chicken feed, bedding and tractor etc. In simplistic terms, there does not appear to be a clear essential need for the new sheds. Size, Scale & Siting Shed 1 = 12m x 6m (3 open bays, 1 closed bay), located adjacent the western boundary. Shed 2 = 8.4m x 3.6m located adjacent the western boundary, immediately north of Shed 1. Chicken arcs = 2.7m x 1.8m. scattered within Field 1327. Although the structures are not considered to be excessive in size the aggregate area of these together with the existing large shed does result in a substantial amount of building within the Countryside Zone Design & Use of Materials The sheds are of a relatively simple design as would be expected in this rural location. Construction materials would be timber walls with mineral felt / corrugated sheeting to the roofs. The structures are clearly utilitarian and not readily capable of being converted to other uses. Impact on Neighbours The keeping of chickens in Field 1327 does not require planning permission and any issue regarding noise nuisance is a matter for Environmental Health, not Planning. The issue of loss of views over someone else’s land is, also not a planning issue. The Department must conclude, therefore, that the proposal will not result in an unreasonable impact upon the amenities of nearby residents. Access, Car parking and Highway Considerations The existing field track and access do not require planning permission. Foul Sewage Disposal n/a Landscaping issues A landscaping scheme is not considered necessary. Other Material Considerations n/a (Percentage for Art ; Archaeology)

Officer Recommendation	Refusal

Conditions/ Reasons	1. The development represents the erection of a building on a greenfield site outside of the Built-up Area and the proposal has not been justified as supporting the rural economy. Accordingly, the proposal is considered to be contrary to the Spatial Strategy as outlined in Policy SP1 of the Jersey Island Plan, 2011. 2. Policy NE7 of the Island Plan presumes against all forms of development for whatever purpose but makes provision for new development on existing agricultural holdings where it is essential to the needs of agriculture. In this instance a compelling case has not been put forward to justify the proposal on grounds of essentiality and the application is, therefore, considered to be contrary to the provisions of Policies NE 7, ERE 6 and GD 1 of the Jersey Island Plan, 2011.

Background Papers	1:2500 Location Plan 3 Letters of representation Letter from National Trust Consultation responses from LC&ADS, Environmental Protection and Historic Environment Team. (Also include correspondence from Case Officer – Possibly [pre-application advice & any other relevant material)

Endorsed by:

Date: