Save Our Shoreline Jersey have submitted a formal complaint to Environment Minister Steve Luce, saying that there has not been enough protection and consideration given to public health by the Jersey Development Company, which is building the first office block.
However, when asked about the issue during yesterday’s States sitting, Deputy Luce said the project was progressing in accordance with planning requirements.
He told the Assembly: ‘I receive regular correspondence about the Waterfront finance centre and have a weekly letter, almost, from people who write to me on the subject.
In its complaint Save Our Shoreline allege that the JDC is not following its construction environmental management plan – a document that sets out various measures to reduce the impact of building projects on the environment.
It also says that potentially contaminated water is leaking from the site and making its way out to sea via the Island’s sewerage network.
The group’s report to Deputy Luce says: ‘Our own complaint comes after several months of complaints received by our organisation from the public, as well as our own observations.
Save Our Shoreline has also made a detailed submission as part of the appeal process – launched by rival developers C Le Masurier Ltd – against the second building of the finance centre.
The environmental organisation says the States were misinformed about the project, that the then Planning Applications Panel was directed to ignore hundreds of objections to the project, failed to take into account information supplied by Save Our Shoreline and consequently reached an ‘unreasonable’ decision.
C Le Masurier Ltd have also formally submitted their grounds for appeal, which broadly state that the second finance centre building and the decision to approve it does not comply with Planning law, the Island Plan which sets planning policy, the masterplan for the Waterfront or Waterfront supplementary planning guidance from 2006.
Ben Ludlam, C Le Masurier’s director of property, said: ‘We await the appointment of the independent planning expert and hope public hearings are held into the masterplan debacle, so the public can contribute to the process of the masterplan review and planning procedural failings.’
