The Island Development Plan review planning inquiry, which began on Tuesday and continues into next week, discussed the controversial housing policy during the first afternoon session.
GP11, which required developments of 20 units or more to include a percentage of social or affordable housing, had been blamed by some for slowing the rate of new housing as developers argued it made sites financially unviable.
The policy was suspended by the States in 2024 until 2029, but Policy & Resources Committee president Lindsay de Sausmarez was one of a number of attendees to tell independent inspector Keith Holland, who is leading the inquiry, that it needed to stay in one form or another.
‘I believe, and I think the industry believes, that some contribution is reasonable,’ she said.
‘It needs to evolve to something that is workable, which still has a contribution. But the problem is, if the proposals, as they are currently, are supported, we lose the only mechanism that we’ve got, albeit imperfect, but it gives us at least a foot in the door to evolve to something workable.’
The meeting went on to discuss what a future GP11 could look like, with some favouring a tariff paid by developers per private house built that could be put towards social housing or enhancing biodiversity.
Two developers at the meeting – Paul Nobes from Infinity and Simon Holland from Hillstone – both spoke in favour of some kind of contribution system, and said a tariff had been previously discussed during the last States term.
‘An independent consultant came in and we suggested figures that would work for the industry in the current climate,’ said Mr Nobes.
‘This was canvassed among all the island’s developers.
‘It was put to them that for one-bed units there would be a contribution of around £5,000, £7,000 for two-bed units, and £12,000 for four-bed units.
‘The issue was that the consultant came back, with I believe, a figure of something like £100,000.’
Former DPA president Victoria Oliver, who attended part of the session, spoke from the audience.
‘It was immediately dropped 24 hours later to £50,000 per site,’ she said.
‘I think there was a lot of confusion about what the figure should be.
‘Because of time schedules, it just wasn’t possible to pursue this, because the margins were so different to each other. The previous committee decided that it should be looked at next term.’
Robert Plumley, co-owner of a controversially-approved housing site at Pointues Rocques, which could take 68 private homes and has been on sale since 2023, said he thought a tariff per square metre was fairer. This could be applied to all new developments, whether that be new homes, extensions or industrial.
Yesterday’s report on the IDP hearing and front page headline made reference to objections to building on disused vinery sites. We have been asked to clarify that many of the proposed sites for significant housing builds are redundant vinery sites, and the reference was in relation to other sites being mentioned at the hearing.