£466m Hospital Plans Rejected

Plans for Jersey's new hospital have been rejected by the Environment Minister.

The £466 million development has been denied planning permission for the second time in 12 months.

It follows a second public inquiry and consultation with hospital staff and local residents.

The States has revealed £38,279,051 has already been spent pursuing the existing scheme.

Independent planning inspector, Philip Stadden, recommended the application be refused unless it was found to be in the public interest to build the hospital on the site, outweighing the clashes with the Island Plan.

Environment Minister, Deputy John Young, has backed those recommendations of the hospital planning inspector, who said the building would be too big for the site, harm neighbouring properties and impact on heritage.

The inspector also said there's not one 'stand out' alternative site, and that they'd all come with their own set of 'significant adverse environmental effects'.

Environment Minister, Deputy John Young, says it's not been an easy decision:

"This has been a very challenging decision and I have reluctantly refused this application. As concluded by the inspector, I believe this application site is not quite large enough to comfortably accommodate the proposed scheme. A different application may overcome these issues."

The Health Minister, Deputy Richard Renouf, says it is now up to politicians to decide whether to stick with the current Hospital site, or 'go back to square one'.

"We're really in a very complex situation now, where there seems to be no site in the island that would be acceptable in planning terms.

"The States have got to get together and we've got to work out where's the public interest in this? Because we've got to build it somewhere!

"What compromises do we have to accept to build ourselves a new hospital?"

Despite planning permission for the current site being rejected for a second time in 12 months, Deputy Renouf says it could still go here.

"From what I've read so far (of the planning inspector's report) it still remains the most sustainable option -  more so than other sites."