Pointes Lane £1.5m. build gets planning go-ahead

PLANNING permission for a new £1.5m. building to cover waste processing facilities at Pointes Lane has been granted.

Dan Hubert

PLANNING permission for a new £1.5m. building to cover waste processing facilities at Pointes Lane has been granted.

Environmental Health stated that the St Andrew’s Island Waste facility must have a roof to cover all its waste activities under the new law as a condition of the company’s operating licence.

Island Waste owner Dan Hubert, pictured, said the plans were only approved a week ago.

He is currently contacting engineers about the work and said there was no timescale about when the build would start or how long it would take.

Comments for: "Pointes Lane £1.5m. build gets planning go-ahead"

a voter

Who was on the Planning department when permission was granted to turn GREEN FIELDS that were there before into a waste sorting business?



I seem to remember that the site was used by a scaffolding company, then by a skip company before its current status as a waste recycling facility. Can't remember when it was green fields, but must have been something like 30years ago, maybe more?

The site has had 'industrial use' for a long time, so the current usage technically would probably fall into that category. Mr Hubert has often said he doesn't want to be there, he would far rather be at Longue Hougue, but until the Waste Strategy has been resolved, he can't move.

Basically he is caught between a rock and a hard place and has to comply with legislation if he wishes to continue with his operation, Planning is facilitating that by giving permission to Mr Hubert to build the necessary facilties to meet with the environmental criteria.

Dave Jones


You are right it was occupied by a company called Harbour Plant who did Skips and Scaffolding . It has always been an industrial site but I don't honk that is the neighbours complaint, as I understand it, it is the sheer volume of traffic the smell and the noise.

Dave Jones

That should read "think" that is".......



That's got to be one of the funniest typos ever


Your typo certainly made me smile Dave, but the point I was making to 'A Voter' was that the pre-existing use of the site as 'industrial' effectively tied the hands of the planning dept. I agree with you ref the neighbours' concerns, but at least the more modern 'approved' facilties should to some extent mitigate against the 'unsuitability' of the site for the some aspects of the work currently carried out there.

As I said, Mr Hubert is caught between a rock and a hard place.


The full printed story says that the building must be started by December 2015 or permission will lapse. That should please the neighbours !!??


Was I dreaming when the states told us that all waste processing would be stopped on this site in the future as it was in the wrong place, only less than five years ago?,

When did they decide to do a 180 on this?, or do they even remember what they had said previously?


Why don`t they just put a weight restriction on vehicles using the LANE? Smaller vehicles would make the site uneconomical and unacceptable for waste lorries. Easy Peasy.


Becks, your approach is a bit too simplistic, imagine a weight limit that would effectively stop skip lorries using the lane, would also prohibit any vehicle delivering oil, coal etc to the residents or supplies for the other businesses in the lane.

Also, restrictions are put in place due to the road structure/size not to put people out of business. Mr Hubert's site may be unwelcome in that area, but doing as you suggest would be hugely unfair to his business operation.

The solution is not as Easy Peasy as you suggest methinks.