Tuesday, February 26, 2008

Who's in Charge of Jamaica's Development

Who’s in charge? It’s an oft repeated but unanswered question regarding Jamaica’s physical development. We have two principal groups, the National Environment and Planning Agency (NEPA) and the local authority which is supposed to guide the planning and development process but there is often considerable overlap and information gaps leading to an effective breakdown of the processes involved.

NEPA is an Executive Agency and is said to be an amalgam of the Town Planning Department, the Natural Resources Conservation Authority (NRCA) and the Land Development and Utilization Commission. NEPA then is the agency under which the NRCA falls. The Kingston and St Andrew Corporation (KSAC) is the local authority for matters concerning the parishes of Kingston and St Andrew and has a critical role in the development process regarding building plans and subdivisions among other areas of the planning approval process. Both groupings are represented on the Town and Country Planning Authority with NEPA providing technical services to that body and hence cooperation of both bodies in terms of information flow is not only implied but a requirement in the quest for good governance and sustainable development.

A typical case in point is the growing controversy over the proposed LOJ development at Seymour Avenue. As at Thursday, February 21, 2008, the KSAC advised that it had no formal application relating to this project and there is no signage posted on or near the proposed site to indicate the nature of the project. Indeed the KSAC has a rule which dictates that signage must be posted at conspicuous places in the vicinity of the development no less than 3 days before an application is filed and no more than 7 days after. There have been a few snippets of information in the newspapers, at least since the acquisition of the property but nothing substantial.

For its part, NEPA has remained completely silent but in the interim the developers have cleared the site of the buildings that were previously there and have commenced construction on at least two perimeter walls. This would imply that the developer has at the very least received “preliminary site clearance” approval from NEPA. This is before any public meeting to even outline the nature of the project and listen to the concerns of the citizenry and might only serve to further undermine the requisite trust between the planning authorities and the citizenry. Indeed under the NEPA / NRCA guidelines, the proposed project will require a permit in accordance with section 9 of the NRCA Act and may require an EIA in accordance with section 10. This as it falls in the category which governs housing projects of 10 houses or more. Nevertheless, preparatory work continues apace with the citizenry remaining largely oblivious to the events at hand.

This can be construed to be mirroring the ongoing Hanover controversy, whereby approval for a cemetery in Ramble was approved and a permit given by NEPA to the applicant, prior to any EIA being conducted. Understandably, there are mounting concerns in the Golden Triangle regarding the new LOJ project; however, there is a similar but noticeable paucity of information. It is understood that the developer has requested a meeting with the citizens albeit with a mere two (2) days notice.

Who’s in charge? No one seemingly knows but with legal teams already being formed it seems that there are storm clouds on the horizon.

No comments:

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-No Derivative Works 3.0 United States License.