Select a region
A major new development at Brelade's Bay, including a restaurant, surf shop and luxury accommodation, has been given the green light after an independent planning inspector set campaigners' concerns that it was too big and 'bunker-like' by the wayside.
The decision on the Wayside Café site was made by the Minister for the Environment after the developers successfully appealed a unanimous rejection by the Planning Committee.
It comes following a hard-fought campaign by members of local lobby group St. Brelade's Bay Association (SBBA) and islanders aggrieved by the fact that the new development will lead to the loss of jewellery-making cabin Fish 'N’ Beads.
Despite concerns, Jonathan King - the independent inspector who heard the appeal - felt that the development would "improve the site" rather than adversely affect it. He described Fish 'N' Beads as "a tiny, seasonal business lacking any vehicular access or basic infrastructure, whose practical contribution to the economy of the Island must be negligible", stating that islanders' fond feelings towards the business weren't reason enough to dismiss the planning application.
Pictured: Fish 'N' Beads will now have to find a new home.
"From the representations I have seen, it is a business clearly appreciated by a number of customers who would mourn its loss, but I consider it would be unreasonable to frustrate the Island Plan’s strategic approach to development in the Built-up Area by reference to it. It would accord to it disproportionate weight in the overall balance," he wrote in a report.
The proposed development, which neighbours slammed for its scale and apparent resemblance to a bunker, was originally refused because it was "significantly larger" than the current site. The Planning Committee noted that it was located in the Shoreline Zone, which prevents development proposals "where they would be larger in terms of any of gross floorspace, building footprint or visual impact than the building being replaced."
Conway Tower Properties Ltd, the developers, challenged the decision. During the appeal hearing, Mike Stein said the development fitted in with a number of planning policies, including boosting the economy, providing high specification houses and enabling greater access to an historic landmark which isn't currently available. They also said the Planning Committee had been unduly influenced by "unfounded and emotive allegations and misrepresentations made by objectors against the appellant (ie inaccuracy of plans, non-viability of restaurant, property ownership matters)."
Pictured: Independent Planning Inspector John King (centre) leading the appeal on the decision to reject the Wayside Café development.
In his report, submitted to the Minister for the Environment, Deputy Steve Luce, Mr King concluded the development did not breach the Shoreline Zone policy as it would not obstruct "significant public views to the foreshore and sea", but rather increase those views "particularly by encouraging the public to pass through the site to the waterfront." The inspector also noted: "The proposed development would also contribute to other aspirations of the policy. In particular it would create an area of public realm where presently there is none, and generally make the site appear welcoming through the quality and standard of its design."
One of the other reasons cited for refusal was that the proposed block in place would have an "unreasonable impact on the amenities of neighbouring residents" because of its overall scale, form and design.
Mr King admitted that the site would appear "far more intensively developed and more urban in character" than it currently is. He however added: "The present absence of development is not in itself a positive feature as, viewed through the access, the site presents a neglected and unattractive scene... The proposed development presents an opportunity to improve the visual quality of the frontage considerably."
Pictured: The proposed site of the development. (Google Maps)
The independent inspector wrote he had no reason to believe the development would be "out of character" when compared to other properties on the seafront, which he is said is "almost completely built up with buildings having little consistency of scale, style or use, and of very variable quality of design." He said: "In many respects, the development would improve the site; and, while undoubtedly modern, the design of the buildings appears to be innovative and of high quality."
"Simply being different, whether compared to what is presently there or to its surroundings, does not necessarily equate to it being harmful or unacceptable."
Mr King said Conway Tower, a Listed Napoleonic fort which has been converted to living accommodation, will remain the tallest feature on the site, while its immediate surroundings would be enhanced. He also concluded that the new buildings's scale and form would not cause any harm to the living conditions of local residents.
As part of the Planning Permission, the developers Conway Tower Properties Ltd, will have to create a new public footpath or pavement along the roadside frontage of the site and fund a new bus shelter.
Reacting to the decision, Moz Scott, Chairman of the SBBA, a campaign group that have led efforts against the development, commented: “Allowing a luxury residential development to be built in return for a public walkway and a restaurant that local restaurateurs have described as ‘designed to fail’ hardly is the type of tourist infrastructure that will support Visit Jersey’s plans to bring a million visitors to the Island. This is typical of the lack of vision and strategy reflected in the current Island Plan that is little more than a mishmash of conflicting policies."
Nonetheless, Michael Stein of MSPlanning, which worked on the scheme, said he was "delighted" by the news, describing the "exciting" development as one that would bring "significant public benefits."
Comments
Comments on this story express the views of the commentator only, not Bailiwick Publishing. We are unable to guarantee the accuracy of any of those comments.