Conway Towers Properties Ltd, cited several grounds of appeal including alleged procedural shortcomings, insufficient weight given to certain policy matters or to the present character of the site and the Committee’s flawed assessment of the proposals. Conway Towers Properties Ltd noted in their appeal that the Committee had been “influenced by emotive and unfounded allegations and misrepresentations made by objectors.” They also said that Moz Scott, Chairman of the St. Brelade’s Bay Association (SBBA), had been allowed to speak twice, going against meetings’ guidelines which only allow for five minutes per person, whereas that the various allegations which were made against them could not be all answered in those five minutes.
Commenting on the appeal, Moz Scott, said: “The Department’s report supporting the application did not have the content recommended by the Planning Officers Society to the States of Jersey in 2013. Like so many planning officers’ reports seen by the SBBA, it failed to advise the Planning Committee how conflicting policies in the Island Plan should be interpreted and where the balance of conflicting interests lies.”
“Planning officers clearly are not being adequately equipped, trained or led to give sufficient professional support to the Planning Committee. This affects the quality of planning decisions. Despite this being a matter of public concern, the politicians and managers involved in the planning process do not appear interested in doing anything about this.”
Pictured: The SBBA are determined to fight the Wayside development (SBBA)
“The SBBA can only hope that local representation will improve after the May elections and that the new Chief Executive Officer for the States will address the shortcomings in Planning after his review of the management of States Departments.”
Following the decision in October, the SBBA had called for a reform of the Planning Process saying that contesting the application had been “way harder than it should have been.” Ms Scott also asked planning officers to highlight identified inaccuracies in information used to support planning applications.
The Planning Department however replied: “The planning process is open and one in which those affected by planning decisions are invited to participate and where the basis for decisions is transparent and open to scrutiny and challenge. The extent of this participation has been further facilitated by the introduction of a merits-based appeals process, where independent planning inspectors review decisions made against Island Plan policies.
“If a person is not satisfied with the Planning Committee’s decisions and lives or has an interest in land within 50m of the application site, and made a written statement about the application, they may have the right to appeal against the decision. Independent Inspectors consider appeals and make a recommendations to the Minister of the Environment, who makes a decision on the appeal.”