The Central Planning Authority has approved a major development in Crystal Harbour, after the developers removed plans for a nine-storey hotel from their proposal.
The ‘Prisma’ development consists of 58 apartments, 20 townhouses, five duplexes, a restaurant, a two-storey parking garage and 20 pools, over 7.5 acres, and also involves a canal extension, according to the documents submitted to the Planning Department.
The developers of the project are Dale Crighton’s Land Ltd., which was the original developer of Crystal Harbour, and Mike Ryan’s Silverfin Development Ltd.
They removed the hotel part of the project in a revised plan that was discussed at a CPA meeting early last month.
Neighbours in the Crystal Harbour area in West Bay objecting to the project argue that, even without the hotel, the residential development is too large for the area and is not in keeping with the character of Crystal Harbour.
Conditions of approval
According to minutes of that meeting, which were recently released, the planning board granted permission for the amended plans on a number of conditions.
These include submitting a revised site plan showing the building walls of the townhouses and duplexes with a minimum 10-foot setback from the canal; detailed architectural plans for a pedestrian bridge; and a copy of the submission made to the Lands and Survey Department to combine three parcels of land.
The developers were also asked to provide proof that a stormwater management plan has been submitted to the National Roads Authority, and to submit a construction operations plan which shows how the development will be built without interfering with or obstructing adjacent roads, properties and fire lanes.
Regarding the canal, the board has ordered that, prior to filling or extending it, the developer must install a silt screen with a 4-foot minimum skirt depth that fully encloses the work area.
This silt screen “must remain in place throughout the period of construction and until the water contained in the screen has cleared to the same appearance as the water immediately outside of the screen. This screen must be maintained and should it prove not to be effective, work must cease until the screen is corrected,” the CPA stated.
The board, in its minutes, noted that following the removal of the hotel from the proposed development, any future hotel on the site would require a separate application for planning permission. The site where the hotel had been proposed will be landscaped, the board was told.
Canal setback
The CPA pointed out in its minutes that the proposed development does not comply with the minimum required canal setback, and disagreed with the applicant that the nearby Deck Houses and Diamond’s Edge have similar canal setbacks.
It agreed, however, that the required canal setback of 20 feet does impose a “noticeable limitation” to the Prisma development site having a usable central public space, and instead imposed a minimum canal setback of 10 feet.
The board, which also granted the developers permission to create surface parking and a two-storey parking garage, to which neighbours had objected, said no evidence had been provided to demonstrate that the parking spaces would cause a safety hazard.
It also did not agree with objections from neighbours that traffic from the development would be an issue, stating, “If this were to be the case, then no further development of vacant lots in any existing subdivision in a residential zone could ever be approved”.
The board also disagreed with objectors’ claims that the architecture of the proposed building would not be in keeping with the character of the area, saying, “The Authority is of the view that the building is consistent with the wide array of architectural styles situated within the Crystal Harbour subdivision.”
An objection had also been raised over the height of the four-storey apartment buildings, but the board stated that, as the area is zoned as ‘Hotel/Tourism and Low Density Residential’, buildings of up to 10 storeys are allowed under the current regulations.
Objectors had also raised concerns about parking, traffic and vehicle noises as well as fumes associated with the development’s restaurant, but the board said no evidence had been submitted to support these issues.
DoE concerns
The Department of Environment, in its submission on the planning application, had raised concerns about the expansion and deepening of the canal, the effect disturbed sediment would have the seagrass and marine organisms, and an increase in boat traffic on the canal leading to “boating-related pollution to further exacerbate poor water quality”.
It added, “Consequently, water-quality concerns associated with the extension to the existing canal and its impacts on water movement and flushing on the overall ecological health of the marine waters in the vicinity of the development should be addressed through the use of recognised flushing analysis models.”
The DoE had determined that an environmental impact assessment was not necessary to be carried out on the proposed development.
The CPA board responded to the DoE concerns saying that the use of silt screens was a condition of approval, and that the number of boats that use a private canal “is a matter outside of the remit of the Authority”.
The developers, in their response to the issues the DoE had raised, said only two boats owned by the strata would be allowed to moor along the central basin, and no other boats would be allowed to moor along the boardwalk or within the central basin.
It added, “With regards to the existing canals and proposed extension, it is important to note that the depth of all existing canals in Crystal Harbour vary from 12 feet to 14 feet. Developer will consult with a local Civil Engineer to review the options to address the DoE’s concerns and will present these options during the [Building Control Unit] permitting process. Additionally, Developer will consult with the DoE on the sequencing of the canal extension, and the construction of the boat slips.”
Related Videos
