Frank Sound subdivision referred to conservation council

This aerial image shows the cleared land site in Frank Sound. - Photo: Planning document
This aerial image shows the cleared land site in Frank Sound. - Photo: Planning minutes

The Central Planning Authority has referred a planning application for a residential subdivision in Frank Sound, where land has already been cleared without authorisation, to the National Conservation Council.

According to the minutes of a 5 June planning meeting, released last month, as well as adjourning the matter to seek legal advice on the fees Cayman Development Group needs to pay, the planning board has sent the application to the conservation council to make a determination on potential adverse effects the development may have on the environment.

The developer’s legal representative, Samuel Jackson, told the planning board at the 5 June meeting that much of the land – on which it is proposed that a 99-lot residential subdivision be built – had been cleared by the previous owner and that a road had been created by a backhoe.

The 33-acre area of land in question is situated near the proposed extension of the East-West Arterial. In its submission on the application, the Department of Environment, speaking under delegated authority from the National Conservation Council, advised the Central Planning Authority to put off a decision on the matter until after the environmental impact assessment of the road extension was completed.

The Department of Environment noted that land clearing had been carried out and an access road had been built prior to the planning permission application being heard.

- Advertisement -

“The Authority notes that the Department of Environment made no mention of any possible adverse effects or any recommended conditions in their response to the consultation,” the minutes state.

The board also stated that it would be requiring the applicant to provide a written response to the issue of potential adverse effects of the proposed development.

Lawyer Selina Tibbetts, also representing the developer, according to the minutes, told the board that adjourning a decision on the application appeared to be “a delay to unnecessarily punish a developer”, and said it was tantamount to a refusal.

2 COMMENTS