GSD seeks answers on Coaling Island Scheme

By 11th November 2022 No Comments

GSD seeks answers on Coaling Island Scheme


The GSD has considered the planning statement filed in what is sometimes referred to as the Coaling Island temporary housing development.


The badly drafted planning statement talks about a ‘temporary housing building’ to ‘temporarily’ re-house the ‘populations from neighbourhoods subject to alteration and demolition foreseen in urban remodelling to be carried out and which will result in the need for housing units’. It further refers to a scheme which is also separately described as a ‘Temporary Housing Scheme’ which will ‘probably’ be ‘re-integrated’ on the Victoria Keys project.

The development will exclusively house small studio apartments of 50m2, with the Design Statement citing the client as ‘CIMC’, which the GSD understands refers to China International Marine Containers and ‘GBIC’, which has been described by Sir Joe Bossano as the joint venture company he has created with Chinese investors.

The application has, very oddly for this government, not been pre-announced with the usual fanfare and only been disclosed as part of the planning process. It is slim on detail and has all the hallmarks of producing a cheap, ‘shanty-townesque’ construction. Many will remember the USOC ‘temporary’ housing built by the Bossano administration which overstayed its welcome by becoming a permanent eye-sore until eventually demolished.

The GSD asks the following questions:

  1. (i)  who is being decanted there – is the proposed new housing being earmarked for cross-frontier workers in the case of a no-deal, as some are suggesting?
  2. (ii)  what properties are being demolished?
  3. (iii)  what is being built on the demolished areas by whom and on what commercial terms?
  4. (iv)  what plans does the government have to build further developments using Chinese containers?
  5. (v)  where are the current occupiers of the site going to be moved to?
  6. (vi)  what is the Temporary Housing Scheme referred to in the statement?
  7. (vii)  what planning and aesthetics considerations have been taken account of for what looks like an un- attractive building which will also be very close to a site which the government has earmarked for high- end residential living?

“Many are bewildered as to where this project has come from and what its purpose is. The whole thing has the air of being disjointed and rushed. We urge the government to provide clear and transparent replies to the questions raised. “ said Mr Damon Bossino, the shadow minister for housing and planning.