The National Environment and Planning Agency (NEPA) wishes as a matter of record to refute reports in the media that there was any misrepresentation of the responses of residents in the Greenwich Park subdivision to a community survey conducted by the Agency relating to the change of use application for an existing residential building to be used for a doctor’s office and pharmacy.   

Further, the Agency wishes to advise that this matter was dealt with by the Town and Country Planning Authority (TCPA) in accordance with the provisions of the Town and Country Planning Act. After careful and full review was undertaken by NEPA, the TCPA in arriving at its decision took into consideration all the relevant factors. 

The Agency wishes to state that it followed established procedures and that at no time was any document or record falsified as was reported in the media. A community survey was conducted by NEPA on July 17, 2009. Thirty (30) responses were received with seventeen (17) respondents objecting to a medical office.  The responses were compiled and submitted for inclusion in the review process.  It must, however, be noted that a community survey is only one step in the process.  NEPA also relies on technical review, legislation and advice from support agencies.   

Consequently, the following facts must be noted: 

1. The Planning Technologist from the St. Ann Parish Council who carried out the site assessment concluded that the development was considered compatible with residential use and would not be considered a nuisance but an additional amenity to the residential community of Greenwich Park. This was communicated to the Director of Planning at the St. Ann Parish Council in a memo dated February 17, 2009. It should be further noted that the site is located on a service road that runs parallel to the North Coast Highway. This site fronts the highway and is opposite to RIU Mammee Bay Hotel.

2. A site inspection was carried out by NEPA on July 7, 2009.

3. The application was referred to the National Works Agency in a letter dated July 17, 2009. The submission was heard and additional conditions specified by the Authority.

4. The Chief Executive Officer of NEPA had a telephone conversation with a representative of the citizen’s association to ascertain the details of their objection on July 20, 2009.  Subsequently, the CEO contacted the Association’s Legal Counsel to ascertain the status of the legal matter which the citizens indicated was before the Court. However, the lawyer advised that it was for an adjoining lot and not the site in question.

 

The Agency recommended the change of use to the Board of the Natural Resources Conservation Authority/Town and Country Planning Authority at its meeting held on July 21, 2009. The Authority concurred with the recommendations for the change of use on the following grounds: 

1. The proposed development does not change the character of the area

2. The St Ann Parish Council supports the idea of the proposed change of use and is of the view that the site is somewhat located outside the community, notwithstanding that it is a part of the original residential subdivision. This is justified by the fact that it faces the highway and is accessed from a separate service road adjacent to the highway.  

3. The development of the highway has now reduced the setback of the proposed site making it closer to the highway and more susceptible to noise and other nuisances.

4. The development has been endorsed by the National Works Agency

5. The site is directly opposite and faces a bus stop and an emerging taxi-stand, which are likely to increase traffic stops within the vicinity.

 The Agency wishes to note that based on its investigations it is aware that there is a case presently before the courts with respect to commercial activities in the area specifically related to lot/s being used as stables for horses which serve the tourism industry. It should be noted that the case is NOT against the proposed change of use by the applicant as was suggested in the news report.

NEPA invites any other questions on these and other matters