And with millions of pounds at stake in the office development market, the project’s proponents and objectors have not held back in airing their views about the six-block Esplanade development.
The pace of the debate quickened last month as submissions from interested parties were published online by the Corporate Services Scrutiny Panel, with a variety of claims about the scheme’s benefits and risks.
Today the JEP publishes a range of views on the project from those behind the scheme, those who say there is no need for the work to be carried out and the Island authorities who will play a key role.
Lee Henry – managing director of the Jersey Development Company, which is developing the site
‘The Jersey Development Company maintains that the Jersey International Finance Centre development will generate a net return (in land value and profit) in excess of £50 million.
‘By undertaking property development directly, the States, and taxpayers, receive a much greater financial return. By illustration, taking the land price Dandara recently paid for its development at 66-72 Esplanade on a permitted net internal area basis (£62.19 per sq foot) and applying this to the JIFC site, the site would have a value in the order of £29 million. When the net cost of the JIFC’s underground public car park and public realm are taken into account, the net land receipt would be in the order of £12 million. By the JDC developing the site directly, the return to the States and people of Jersey increases to a figure in excess of £50 million.
‘To date the JDC has invested £5 million advancing plans in accordance with its remit and the masterplan, which will be fully recovered on the delivery of the office buildings.’
Treasury Minister Alan Maclean, who is the States’ representative shareholder in the JDC on behalf of taxpayers
‘The States debated and agreed the establishment of the Jersey Development Company (JDC), its remit and also the Esplanade Quarter Masterplan. To be clear the States set up the JDC to extract greater value and higher returns from States assets for the benefit of the public of the Island who wholly own those assets and of course the JDC.
‘The previous Corporate Services Scrutiny Panel decided not to further scrutinise the project in 2014 after reviewing all the financial assumptions and commercially confidential data relating to the project. We must now move forwards instead of continually re-examining previous decisions.
‘The criticism by rival land owners, developers, their surveyors and supporters is hardly surprising as their own development schemes could be impacted by the success of the JIFC in its premium location.
‘The JIFC will provide the Island with an identifiable district from which to promote not only our vitally important financial services industry, but other high-value inward investment businesses.
‘It has been proven in similar districts around the world that such developments are positive attractors of new business, create job opportunities and drive economic growth, all of which the Island desperately needs as we seek to balance our income and expenditure.’
Chris Daniels – consultant to BNP Paribas Real Estate (Jersey) Limited, the letting agent for the JIFC
‘It is important to dispel the misconception that St Helier is full of empty office space. The vacancy rate in St Helier is actually very low, standing at circa six per cent of total stock. Much of the vacant space is functionally or locationally obsolete and trends indicate conversion to residential use.
‘The availability of prime, grade A office space is very limited and it is vital to have a supply of space to meet current occupier requirements, where we see robust demand over the forthcoming five to ten years. Larger organisations are preferring to consolidate into modern, purpose built office space in the Esplanade area of town and its immediate environs.
‘The Jersey International Finance Centre is almost unique in so far as it provides a clear site where, subject to the requisite pre-lettings, development could commence immediately. The site is not compromised by existing structures or other residual leasehold interests. The proposed buildings provide uniform floor plates with natural light on all four elevations allowing high efficiency and amenity for occupiers. This is almost unique locally, particularly in comparison to many other developments which are constructed on long linear sites with poor or limited natural light.’
The Planning Department
‘The Environment Department (and its planning authority) controls development on the site through the planning process and appraises each application received against the masterplan. In approving an application, the planning authority can require the developer to deliver elements of public gain (eg a public square), where it is reasonable and proportionate to do so. Any developer wishing to build on a site, States-owned or otherwise, follows the same planning process and is expected to adhere to the masterplan guidance.
‘The planning authority has no powers to force any landowner to submit a planning application or to insist that an approved application is implemented. Its role is to ensure, as far as possible, that any development accords with the wishes of the States as set out in the Esplanade Quarter Masterplan.
‘The development of the first phase of the plan would not preclude the second phase of development, including the sinking of Route de la Libération.
Deputy John Le Fondré – the chairman of the Corporate Services Scrutiny Panel, which is reviewing the plans for the development
‘It is our job as a Scrutiny panel to undertake reviews on behalf of the States Assembly and, crucially, the public of Jersey into matters of public interest and executive policy, amongst other areas. We do so in an impartial and objective manner, something that is brought into particular focus during a review of this nature where opinions are strongly held and, at times, emotions can run high.
‘At the heart of the review process is evidence, and it is from this body of information and views that we will draw our conclusions and present our findings and recommendations in a report published at the end of the review.
‘Indeed, public and media interest generated by this opening phase of evidence gathering has been clear to see. Following the recent close of the written submission phase of evidence gathering, the panel will begin to hold a series of public hearings, beginning with the Environment Minister on Friday 20 March.’
Ben Shenton – former Senator who served as chairman of the Public Accounts Committee, the States spending watchdog
‘Let’s salvage something from this mess. The States pass laws and public bodies seem to believe that they apply to everyone else but them. The private sector does not believe that the pre-cash masterplan is feasible in 2015, and nor do I. Bring back a holistic masterplan for St Helier. Make sure that it is not too prescriptive so that it can be varied to adapt to changing market conditions.
‘Forget about sinking the road, a winter garden, and office capacity levels based on pre-crash occupancy calculations. Listen to the Islanders, keep them informed and stop pretending that over-development and years of disruption is in their best interests. Let Jersey architects have a say in a more realistic and greener masterplan – lead by example and deliver the deliverable.’
Ben Ludlam – chartered surveyor with developers C Le Masurier Ltd, who have raised concerns about whether the project is needed
‘Everybody knows the masterplan road will never be sunk because it is impossible to build without massive disruption to St Helier. It’s not viable at a current cost of £66.5 million, which could be spent on schools/hospital instead, and most importantly the public never wanted it in the first place. But their objections were ignored by politicians, including some existing members of the Council of Ministers, which has promised an architectural masterpiece, a vibrant mixed use scheme and a guaranteed £50 million return.
‘The road won’t be sunk, any return is only paid in 2025 if at all, and the public gets nothing that they were promised, and their land at the Esplanade, worth £50 million, has been given away to the JDC for £1. The JDC’s “independent valuation” upon which they are relying, is over a year old and shows the land is free. Therefore do the JDC only make a £5 million return?
‘If the JDC are sure the scheme is deliverable and viable, when will they present it openly to States Members and the public ?’
Dandara
Developers Dandara, who have also raised concerns about the project, declined to comment, but have previously stated in a submission to the Corporate Services Scrutiny Panel’s review that the scheme, as it stands, could lose up to £73 million, claiming the project’s build cost outstrips the finance centre’s overall sale value.
