LIST OF PLANNING APPLICATIONS ON REPORT TO COMMITTEE -

11 JULY 2006

1.	Strategic Overview Report regarding two major planning applications for East Cowes as submitted by SEEDA and English Partnerships and Barratt (Southampton) Limited		Page 3
2	P/00027/06 TCP/27465	East Cowes	Conditional Permission
	Venture Quays/Trinity House Depot & Wharf/former North Works/land to west of Sylvan Avenue, Red Funnel Marshalling Yards/Public Conveniences/Well Road Car Park/located in vicinity of, Castle Street, East Cowes, PO32 Demolition of Venture Quays, Trinity House Depot, Red Funnel ticket office, Public Conveniences and Camelia; outline for a mix of uses including employment, retail, health facility, community facilities, marine heritage experience, events space, hotels, residential and ferry marshalling facilities, together with associated highway and junction improvements to include new road from Church Path to Old Road; public transport interchange, car parking and servicing, open space and landscaping, flood defence measures and site remediation works; full permission for land reclamation works to the west of Venture Quays (plots 7A, 7C & 8B part)		Page 8
3.	P/00563/06 TCP/18291/D	East Cowes	Conditional Permission
	land bounded by Kingston Fm Lane/Cadets Walk/Kingslea Park/Beatrice Ave, E Cowes power station/agricultural land/south of E Cowes Vics football ground inc land off, Whippingham Road, East Cowes, PO32 Outline consent for 9.9 hectares of residential development; 9.9 hectares of employment development; managed woodland; nature conservation areas; proposed access road junction with Whippingham Road & Beatrice Avenue; network of public footpaths/cycleways; public transport link only to Kingston Road		Page 56

1.	STRATEGIC OVERVIEW OF TWO MAJOR PLANNING APPLICATIONS FOR EAST COWES AS SUBMITTED BY SEEDA & ENGLISH PARTNERSHIPS AND BARRATT (SOUTHAMPTON) LTD

1. Purpose

1.1 The purpose of this report is to outline the wider strategic planning considerations as part of the determination of two major outline planning applications proposed for East Cowes namely:

P/00027/06 – TCP/27465 Demolition of Venture Quays, Trinity House Depot, Red Funnel ticket office, Public Conveniences and Camelia; outline for a mix of uses including employment, retail, health facility, community facilities, marine heritage experience, events space, hotels, residential and ferry marshalling facilities, together with associated highway and junction improvements to include new road from Church Path to Old Road; public transport interchange, car parking and servicing, open space and landscaping, flood defence measures and site remediation works; full permission for land reclamation works to the west of Venture Quays (plots 7A, 7C & 8B part) at Venture Quays/Trinity House Depot & Wharf/former North Works/land to west of Sylvan Avenue, Red Funnel Marshalling Yards/Public Conveniences/Well Road Car Park/located in vicinity of, Castle Street, East Cowes, PO32

P/00563/06 – TCP/18291/D Outline consent for 9.9 hectares of residential development; 9.9 hectares of employment development; managed woodland; nature conservation areas; proposed access road junction with Whippingham Road & Beatrice Avenue; network of public footpaths/cycleways; public transport link only to Kingston Road at land bounded by Kingston Fm Lane/Cadets Walk/Kingslea Park/Beatrice Ave, E Cowes power station/agricultural land/south of E Cowes Vics football ground inc land off, Whippingham Road, East Cowes, PO32

1.2 Report identifies the key areas where the planning issues and impacts are common to both applications, including strategic policy. As such, elements of both proposals require an integrated approach for their determination.

Recommendation: That Development Control Sub-Committee note the strategic issues and policy context outlined in this report in the consideration of the two major planning applications for East Cowes.

2. Background

2.1 Members considered the Barratt outline planning application for housing and employment uses at Kingston in January of 2006 and resolved to refuse it on the grounds that there was insufficient affordable housing, that the proposals represented greenfield development in an area where there were brownfield opportunities, and for issues of lack of access to community facilities. This application has now been resubmitted. Barratt, the applicants, are now seeking to address the reasons for refusal by amending contributions as part of a proposed section 106 agreement. These include the increasing of the proportion of affordable housing to a full 30%, the re-phasing of a new proposed link road now to be completed as part of phase 1, and an increased contribution towards the provision of a public transport link. The details of the proposals are outlined in the attached report addressing the planning application.

2.2 English Partnership’s and SEEDA’s proposals for the regeneration of East Cowes was submitted on 3 January 2006 and represents the culmination of 2½ years of joint working and consultation with the East Cowes community, the Isle of Wight Council and the Economic Partnership to develop a regeneration masterplan. This is now reflected in the outline application that broadly seeks permission for a major mixed use regeneration scheme that includes housing, employment uses, retail, town square, health centre, commercial activities and a new ferry marshalling yard.

2.3 Both planning applications seek permission for in excess of over 500 residential units together with significant provision of industrial, commercial and other employment uses and major infrastructure to serve them. The potential strategic gains for the Island are considerable. Similarly the impacts on East Cowes itself are significant and require careful consideration. Whilst Members will decide whether planning permission should be granted for each separate application, they must also have regard to the wider strategic considerations.

3. Islandwide Strategic Issues

3.1 Housing

3.1.1 The Island’s current housing need reflects the requirement for 520 residential units to be developed per annum up to the year 2011. The review of housing issues as part of the preparation of the new Island Plan has identified a need for the same annual completion rate of 520 residential units per year to 2026. An update of the Council’s urban capacity study published in November 2005, illustrated that the number of brownfield opportunities has declined since 2001/02 but that the average size and yield of sites has increased, assuming higher densities. Moreover, it also concluded that there is insufficient brownfield land available to meet housing needs through until 2026 and that greenfield allocations contained within the UDP will still be required, even though it may be over a longer timeframe than originally identified in the Unitary Development Plan.

3.1.2 The Island Plan Core Strategy submitted to GOSE in June 2006) clearly identifies a phased approach to regeneration with the focus being the Medina Valley through until 2015. This means ensuring that enough employment and residential opportunities are made available within the area to enable regeneration.

3.1.2 Members will be aware that a significant proportion of the allocated sites will not come forward for development for some time. These include land at Ashey Road, Ryde for which planning permission was refused in February 2006 and both the Newport expansion at Pan, which the Isle of Wight Council are currently considering how to take forward, and land at Worsley Road, Newport. Should both the SEEDA and Barratt schemes be approved, this would provide only 40% of the Island’s housing need up to the year 2011.

3.1.3 In addition to contributing to the required growth of the general Island housing stock, each significantly proposes to provide the full 30% proportion of affordable housing. The Isle of Wight was recently successful in receiving substantial grant funding from the Housing Corporation for the provision of affordable housing. £2,900,000 is committed to the provision of affordable units at both the Kingston site and the SEEDA scheme for the regeneration of East Cowes. The funding from the Housing Corporation is subject to both applicants commencing development on site within a given timeframe. A major concern is should either or both schemes be delayed, Housing Corporation funding could be lost with potential repercussions for future bids.

3.2 Employment

3.2.1 The SEEDA regeneration scheme proposes new upgraded employment floorspace. The Barratt scheme for Kingston proposes 9.9 hectares of new additional employment land. Together both schemes represent a significant opportunity for the creation of a wide range of employment sites to serve and maintain the Island economy. The projected growth in ‘Gross Value Added’ on the Island as identified by the Experian report on the Island Economy October 2005, as part of the Island Plan process, suggests a continued need for a wide range of employment sites.

3.3 Emergency Planning

3.3.1 Emergency Planning current contingency plans for interruption to cross Solent services look at alternative holding sites for ferry traffic and consider the issues to be primarily traffic management problems in the remit of highways and police/emergency services. Additional highway routes associated with new development offer the possibility of providing alternative routes should parts of the existing network become blocked. The Fire Service have confirmed verbally that in emergency there would be alternative means of access to East Cowes.

3.4 Highways

3.4.1 The Council commissioned Mott MacDonald to review the Transport Assessment (TA) that accompanied the SEEDA / English Partnerships application for East Cowes. As part of their brief they were asked to include a review of the Kingston Development and comment on the combined impact of the two developments upon the highway infrastructure of East Cowes.

3.4.2 The traffic model covers East Cowes urban area and the A3021 as far as the A3054, Newport/Ryde Road and The methodology for forecasting traffic is appropriate.

3.4.3 The estimates of traffic generated by the Kingston Development are considered robust and assume that all residents will travel outside the development to work rather than travel internally to the employment area within the development. Thus the calculation of traffic flows associated with the development is likely to be an overestimation. Similarly the SEEDA East Cowes Development has identified that employment in East Cowes will attract trips from the Kingston development and vice versa thus resulting in duplication of traffic generated.

3.4.4 The approach taken in assigning the Kingston traffic to the network in conjunction with the East Cowes generated traffic appears reasonable and although there are minor differences in assumptions these differences would not alter the conclusion reached that the combined development traffic can be accommodated by the highway network.

3.4.5 In strategic highway network terms, officers are satisfied that the proposed layouts provide sufficient capacity to accommodate the proposed development and provide some relief to the congestion currently encountered in East Cowes as a result of Red Funnel’s activities. They cannot however be expected to resolve all the historic traffic problems of East Cowes.

3.5 Cowes Waterfront Supplementary Planning Guidance

3.5.1 Supplementary Planning Guidance was published following public consultation in 2003 that provides the regeneration framework for the whole Cowes area and the rest of the Medina Valley. It sets out a strategy for the comprehensive redevelopment and strengthening of East Cowes town centre, including the relocation of the Red Funnel terminal, new mixed use development and residential development. The SPG also provides for the development of new marine based employment areas, a new link road and enabling housing development, all of which are accommodated in the Barratt outline planning application.

3.6 The Island Plan Submitted Core Strategy

3.6.1 The new emerging Local Development Framework, ‘The Island Plan’, has reached a stage where the preferred option for the core strategy has been submitted to the Secretary of State. The preferred option identifies East Cowes as a ‘Major Settlement and Growth Area’ (together with Cowes, Ryde, Sandown, Shanklin, and Newport). The key issues for East Cowes include encouraging new development to use brownfield sites, and to ensure that any larger housing developments on urban extensions offer a high quality, mixed-use environment that integrates them into surrounding neighbourhoods. The core strategy maintains economic regeneration and growth at the heart of the Isle of Wight’s future objectives. Strategies include the identification of a range of employment generating sites and premises that offer up to 70 hectares of employment land between 2006 and 2026.

4. Conclusions

4.1 There is a strong strategic case for the approval of both outline applications. This is based on housing need, provision of affordable housing, the meeting of economic regeneration objectives and the new strategy of the emerging Island Plan. Members will, however, need to be satisfied that the details of each application have sufficient merit to warrant approval of planning permission.

5. Background Papers

5.1 South East Plan

5.2 Unitary Development Plan

5.3 Cowes Waterfront SPG

5.4 Other technical papers

Reference Number: P/00027/06 - TCP/27465

Parish/Name: East Cowes - Ward/Name: East Cowes North

Registration Date: 05/01/2006 - Outline Planning Permission

Officer: Mr P Salmon Tel: (01983) 823552

Applicant: South East England Development Agency and English Partnerships

Demolition of Venture Quays, Trinity House Depot, Red Funnel ticket office, Public Conveniences and Camelia; outline for a mix of uses including employment, retail, health facility, community facilities, marine heritage experience, events space, hotels, residential and ferry marshalling facilities, together with associated highway and junction improvements to include new road from Church Path to Old Road; public transport interchange, car parking and servicing, open space and landscaping, flood defence measures and site remediation works; full permission for land reclamation works to the west of Venture Quays (plots 7A, 7C & 8B part)

Venture Quays/Trinity House Depot & Wharf/former North Works/land to west of Sylvan Avenue, Red Funnel Marshalling Yards/Public Conveniences/Well Road Car Park/located in vicinity of, Castle Street, East Cowes, PO32

The application is recommended for Conditional Permission subject to a s106 Agreement (and referral to Government Office for the South East as a departure to the Unitary Development Plan)

This Report should be read in conjunction with the Overview Report which considers the wider strategic planning considerations which are common to both the planning application submitted by SEEDA and that made by Barratts.

REASON FOR COMMITTEE CONSIDERATION

This is a major hybrid application of strategic significance.

This report to the Development Control Sub Committee has been prepared by Helen Ashworth of Urban Vision for Phil Salmon, Development Team Manager on behalf of the Isle of Wight Council.

1. Details of Application

1.1 This application forms part of the East Cowes Project proposed by the South East of England Development Agency (SEEDA) and English Partnerships (EP) and is part of the Cowes Waterfront Initiative, which seeks holistic regeneration in the Medina Valley.

1.2 This is a hybrid application, with outline permission sought for the majority of the 13 hectare site. All matters are reserved, with the exception of a vehicular access link between Church Path and Old Road. Full planning permission is sought for land reclamation works and the ferry marshalling facilities.

1.3 The application is accompanied by an Environmental Statement (ES), which considers the potential significant environmental effects and includes an assessment of sustainable development; social and community issues; ecology and nature conservation; archaeology and cultural heritage; landscape and visual effects; marine ecology; noise and vibration; air quality; hydrology, drainage and flooding; soil conditions, groundwater and contamination; and waste management. In addition, the application is supported by a Planning Statement; Design Statement; Retail Assessment; Transport Assessment; Community, Leisure and Sports Facilities Audit; Flood Risk Assessment; Infrastructure Services Report; and a draft woodland management plan for Sylvan Avenue.

1.4 A number of plans have been submitted as part of the planning application including a location plan, tree survey and schedule, ground and upper floor land use plans, residential access road plan, plans showing building heights and the proposed development footprint for land adjacent to Sylvan Avenue and plans showing the proposed Venture Quays reclamation. The application is also accompanied by illustrative plans which do not form part of the planning application, including a Masterplan, and floorspace schedule and plans illustrating the road hierarchy, foot and cycle routes, residential densities, phasing, public transport proposals, cross-water traffic, open space strategy, ground raising, car parking and plots and parcels.

1.5 The proposals have been the subject of extensive public consultation. Since 2004, there have been six newsletters distributed, in addition to a number of stakeholder consultation events, public consultation events, public meetings and a pre-application exhibition held over two days in November 2005.

1.6 The development details are as follows:

1.6.1 Ferry Marshalling Proposals

Full planning permission is sought for the ferry marshalling facilities which involves a change of use of the land and engineering operations. The extent of this area has been indicated on a plan. The primary use of the land is to provide queuing lanes for vehicles waiting to board the ferry. A small building is proposed which is likely to include a reception area kiosks for the sale of tickets and associated customer facilities such as toilets.

1.6.2 Land Reclamation Proposals

Full planning permission is also sought for the reclamation of two areas of land, totaling 0.29ha, to the north and south of the Venture Quays apron extension which was recently granted planning permission. The proposals would consume 0.13ha and 0.16ha of existing tidal and subtidal areas respectively. There is a requirement for some sheet piling at the southern tie-in end of the reclamation due to the proximity of the Red Funnel berth. The reclaimed areas will be infilled with limestone rock, with a concrete deck finish. The levels and deck would tie in with the previously approved Venture Quays apron extension. It is not proposed to undertake any works to the existing seawalls beyond the proposed reclamation areas,

1.6.3 The Masterplan

The planning application is supported by an illustrative Masterplan which will guide future development on the site. There are four main elements to the Masterplan:

· The revitalisation of East Cowes town centre (including a new foodstore, health facility, community facilities, car parking, town square and links to other part of proposed development).

· The creation of marine quarter on the waterfront (incorporating marine employment facilities, a maritime heritage experience, hotels, events space and public realm).

· Relocated and enhanced ferry marshalling facilities (in order to reduce the current impact and harm to the town centre).

· Residential development (linking with residential areas to north and east and mixed use within town centre), to create population to help sustain the new town centre facilities.

The Masterplan indicates ground floor and upper floor land uses. The distribution of uses is illustrated on an indicative plot diagram and an indication of building heights is also provided.

The essential components of the Masterplan are marine related employment (providing between 500 and 700 jobs); mixed uses such as shops, cafes, restaurants and bars; a 2000sq m foodstore with 100 parking spaces; a health facility and community facility fronting a new town square; two hotels; up to 550 dwellings (including affordable housing); a new ferry marshalling yard closer to the existing ferry docking area; new public open spaces and waterfront pedestrian walkways; a multi-storey car park on ferry road; and a maritime heritage experience.

1.6.4 Floorspace

The ES has been assessed on the following parameters of maximum floorspace:

Employment (B1, B2, B8) - 10, 488 sq m

Retail (A1 – A5) - 4, 495 sq m

Health (D1) - 910 sq m

Community (D1) - 1, 065 sq m

Hotels (C1) - 7, 620 sq m

Residential (C3) - 40, 990 sq m (550 units)

1.6.5 Design Statement

The Design Statement provides an analysis of the site and its context and sets out the urban design principles for the proposed development. The document sets out three options that were considered prior to the decision to submit the application in its current format. The Design Statement discusses the rationale behind the proposed maximum building heights. The tallest buildings would be residential/mixed use buildings of up to 18m at ridge height. An illustrative plan indicates the road hierarchy. The two main routes are York Road and Ferry Road serving the chain ferry to the south and Well Road and upper Castle Street serving the car ferry to the north. A network of pedestrian and cycle routes and shared surfaces are also illustrated. Public transport arrangements will be negotiated with the operators, but the principle for a public transport interchange adjoining the ferry terminal is illustrated. Three bands of residential density are indicated: low density (35-50 dwellings per hectare), medium density (50-100 dwellings per hectare) and high density (100+ dwellings per hectare).

The Design Statement also provides illustrative proposals including sketch elevations, axonometric drawings and sections for aspects of the proposals within the town centre area, employment areas, housing areas, public realm, public art and the wider landscape setting.

1.6.6 Phasing

The development would be implemented in phases. A phasing plan has been submitted to support the planning application and inform the environmental impact assessment. It is envisaged that the proposals will come forward over a ten year timeframe. The phasing is summarised as follows:

Phase 1: Land adjacent to Sylvan Avenue and adjacent housing.

Phase 2: Town square, food store, health and community facilities.

Phase 3: Marshalling yard and housing across eastern part of the site.

Phase 4: Trinity Wharf residential development, town centre hotel and multi- storey car park

Phase 5: Housing and employment units east of Castle Street

Phase 6: Maresfield Road residential site and hotel/serviced apartments.

1.6.7 Flood Defence Measures

A Flood Risk Assessment has been produced by the applicant to outline strategic proposals to deal with flood risk mitigation. The assessment considers the tidal and fluvial flood risk for both the existing and post development situation. In terms of the sequential test proposed in Planning Policy Guidance Note 25: Development and Flood Risk, the site is currently in flood risk category 3 or lower (an area with a high risk of flooding).

Two alternative strategies are proposed by the applicant:

1) Ground raising, with some limited use of walls and gates. As individual plots come forward, the ground level would be raised (generally between 0.5m and 1m). The applicant states that this would provide sufficient protection for the next 100 years. To provide protection in the lower areas, some limited raising of roads is required and there may be need for a wall between Ferry Road and Clarence Road. The viability of this option is uncertain.

2) The use of flood walls only. Further work is being undertaken on this option.

1.6.8 Traffic and Transport

A detailed Transport Assessment report has been submitted in parallel to the ES to consider traffic and transportation issues. The assessment indicates that East Cowes currently suffers from a number of localised transport problems, primarily traffic congestion in the town centre at approaches and exits to the car and chain link ferries. The proposals include a new east-west road between Church Path and Old Road; new roads within the proposed residential areas which encourage walking and cycling; a public transport interchange; dedicated access to the car ferry and chain link ferry; new and replacement pedestrian crossings; new car park close to the proposed town square; formal and informal cycle routes; routing of bus services through the town centre and additional bus stops.

Revised highway options have been received from the applicant as part of the Transport Assessment. These proposals identify possible road and junction layouts and enable Traffic Impact Assessments and Road Safety Audits to be undertaken.

1.6.9 Retail Assessment

A retail assessment has been prepared to meet the requirements of PPS6: Planning for Town Centres and Policy R4 of the UDP. The assessment seeks to demonstrate the need for retail development; that such development is of an appropriate scale; that there are no more central sites for the retail development; that there are no unacceptable effects on existing town centres; and that the location is accessible. The assessment is consistent with the island-wide retail study prepared by Driver Jonas in June 2005. The assessment concludes that the retail facilities in East Cowes are extremely poor and that it serves more of a local rather than district centre function. The current deficiency will increase as a result of the anticipated population growth as a result of this application and the proposed development at Kingston. A fundamental part of the proposals is to strengthen and enhance East Cowes town centre. The assessment shows that there is a clear qualitative and quantitative need for significant enhancement of retail facilities, including a 2,000 sq m foodstore.

1.6.10 Infrastructure/ Services Report

The report outlines the primary service supplies to be constructed for the development. With regards to surface water, Southern Water has advised that the existing combined network is currently running at capacity and that there needs to be a reduction in load on the network. A new storm-water sewer network is to be constructed to serve the storm drainage needs and it is envisaged that this will discharge to the watercourse and culvert or a new collector sewer on Castle Street. The network will discharge into the Medina Estuary via the existing culverted watercourse and the outfalls will be tide-locked to some degree. The only areas draining directly into the estuary are between Castle Street and the Medina. An overflow arrangement in the form of a booster pumping station is to be accommodated within the site adjacent to the outfall – this would operate when the culvert outfall is tide-locked. Following the redirection of surface flows away from the combined network, Southern Water has advised the applicant that the existing combined network has the capacity to serve the development’s requirements for foul water discharges.

The report also considers mains water supply, telecommunications supply, gas and electricity supplies.

It is proposed that services works will be phased as part of the redevelopment process and would not all be provided up front.

1.7 Environmental Statement (ES) - Applicant’s Findings

The findings of the ES are summarised as follows:

1.7.1 Sustainable Development

The sustainability of the scheme has been assessed using the four key objectives identified in the Government’s sustainable development strategy: social progress which recognises the needs of everyone; effective protection of the environment; prudent uses of natural resources; and maintenance of high and stable levels of economic growth and employment. The results indicate that the development would be very beneficial in social and economic terms, offering increases in short and long term employment, economic stability, improved facilities and services to the community and visitors (including health, retail and tourist facilities) and will facilitate local business development.

Adverse sustainability impacts would result from the consumption of energy and building materials. Recommendations are made to ensure that design, construction and operations are carried out in accordance with recognised best practice, to minimise impacts.

1.7.2 Social And Community Issues

The proposals offer a number of benefits to the East Cowes community by providing a mixed use area comprising residential, employment, retail, community and visitor developments to meet current demand and kick-start the regeneration of East Cowes.

Nuisance from construction activities will represent a slight adverse impact during the construction period, but it is concluded that this will be outweighed by the number of large beneficial social and community gains following implementation which include enhanced opportunities for local business, increased new housing stock and affordable housing and enhanced public access and movement.

1.7.3 Ecology And Nature Conservation

A number of detailed surveys were undertaken during 2004 and 2005 and the development of the Masterplan has been closely guided by the findings of these surveys, which include protected species such as red squirrels, bats, slow worms and breeding birds. The assessment conforms that there are no statutory terrestrial wildlife designations that the development would have impact on.

Whilst there are no plants on the site listed under Schedule 8 of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1971, there are a number of trees within the woodland that are over 200 years old and support red squirrels, bat roosts and invertebrates – these trees will be protected during development. Overall, the ES concludes an adverse impact of slight to moderate significance to existing flora. This will be partially compensated by diverse replanting to provide high energy food sources favoured by red squirrels and ornamental planting elsewhere.

A bat roost has been identified within the Barracks Building and a number of roosts and 11 species of bats have been observed within the Sylvan Avenue woodland area. The development has been designed to keep any adverse impacts to bats to a minimum and there will be full protection of bat roosts. Having regard to the high sensitivity of bats to disturbance, there will be a slight adverse impact.

A population of slow-worms exists within the confines of a temporary holding area established in 2004, when they were moved from an area of the site which was being demolished. The slow-worms cannot be maintained on the site and arrangements are being made for the population to be translocated to a suitable habitat at Lynbottom landfill. Subject to the translocation, a neutral impact is expected.

The site supports interesting but unexceptional invertebrates. An uncommon species of cranefly is found within one particular veteran tree, which is to be retained. With the implementation of the proposed mitigation and enhancement measures, there will be a neutral to slight beneficial impact on invertebrate habitats.

No protected bird species have been observed at the site, but the Sylvan Avenue woodland provides a useful habitat and supports a number of breeding birds. There will be an adverse impact of moderate impact due to disturbance during the construction period and habit loss.

There is a thriving population of red squirrels within the Sylvan Avenue woodland and 12 active drays have been identified. Mitigation measures have been identified to avoid all drays and areas of shelter, plant high energy species and retain and enhance aerial linkages. After mitigation, the impact of the development will be moderate adverse.

The site is not currently used by badgers and there is no evidence of dormice.

The proposed development has been scaled down significantly to exclude the central and northern parts of the Sylvan Avenue woodland. A long-term woodland management plan is proposed to protect bats and red squirrels and to provide specific woodland planting enhancement.

1.7.4 Archaeology And Cultural Heritage

A desk based archaeological assessment has been undertaken to identify features of local, regional and national importance. The assessment suggests an uncertain potential for the presence of pre-medieval archaeology and a high potential for well preserved post-medieval archaeology. The nature, depth and survival of these features is uncertain. A pre-determination field evaluation strategy has therefore been implemented as the basis for a mitigation strategy agreed with the Council in advance of any work commencing. The mitigation strategy includes: mitigation of impact on potential remains through sensitive construction design; mitigation of impact on significant archaeology by detailed investigation and recording; mitigation of impact on significant archaeology by means of a watching brief on construction; and mitigation of impact on significant archaeological remains by preservation in situ.

There are a number of Grade II Listed buildings and structures within the site – the Church of St. James; the wall and gate piers along Church Path to the Church of St. James; and Clare Lallow’s Grid Iron Yard (south of the current Red Funnel marshalling yard). The Coastguard Cottages (outside the application site boundary, on Albany Road) are Grade II Listed.

The residual risk is considered to be reduced to a level of slight adverse impact and the loss of the Columbine and Sea Holme represent a moderate adverse impact on the cultural heritage of East Cowes.

1.7.5 Landscape And Visual Effects

An assessment of the impact of the proposed development on the landscape, townscape and seascape has been made. The scale of the proposals is such that the landscape and visual impacts are unlikely to be fully mitigated during the 10 year construction period, during which there would be significant impacts. The assessment indicates that the residual construction impacts are relatively short term and are likely to be outweighed by the long term benefits of the proposals, with the exception of two specific viewpoints. Firstly, views from St James Church would be impacted by the creation of a new secondary thoroughfare to access the proposed health facility and residential areas to the eastern part of the development. Secondly, there will be some loss of visual amenity associated with the replacement of a section of the Sylvan Avenue woodland with housing.

The assessment concludes that the overwhelming majority of long term visual impacts will be beneficial as the former GKN works site is regenerated.

1.7.6 Marine Ecology

The development requires two areas of land reclamation, to the north and south of the Venture Quays apron. Planning permission was recently approved for an extension to this area, which was supported by an Appropriate Assessment. Information assessing the impacts of the proposals on the marine environment, including a report by ABPMer, has been assembled by the applicant to facilitate an Appropriate Assessment. The applicant concludes that the Solent Maritime Special Area of Conservation would not be adversely affected.

The assessment concludes that the marine works are not expected to adversely affect the protected marine ecological features of the Medina River and Estuary.

1.7.7 Noise And Vibration

The potential noise and vibration impacts of construction activities on residential properties surrounding the site has been assessed. During construction the loudest activities will often be intermittent and confined to relatively short periods, however, nearby residential properties are likely to experience some increase in noise and vibration levels. A moderate adverse impact is expected.

A small increase in noise and vibration levels will result from increased traffic flows. Of the main thoroughfares, only Well Road is predicted to experience a perceptible increase in roadside noise. In the Ferry Road area, a slight reduction in noise and vibration levels is predicted as a result in changes to traffic circulation.

Overall, noise and vibration levels during the operational phases are predicted to result in a neutral impact, although a slight to neutral impact is predicted for properties adjacent to Well Road by 2015.

1.7.8 Air Quality

Minor additional traffic congestion during the construction phase may cause a slight adverse impact on residents in the vicinity of the works. Localised deterioration in air quality is likely as a result of dust, vehicle and plant emissions. Overall, properties within close proximity may experience a moderate adverse impact during the construction phase.

Proposals to reduce traffic speeds within the application site will result in a neutral to slightly adverse impact overall. The assessment also demonstrates that between now and 2015 air quality will not exceed national standards.

1.7.9 Hydrology, Drainage and Flooding

The centre of East Cowes is currently at risk of flooding from tidal inundation from the Medina estuary, a small watercourse flowing along the southern edge of the site and from the existing sewerage infrastructure. The Environment Agency currently considers parts of the site to be at high risk of flooding. The development will incorporate effective defences against the existing flooding problems and the impact will therefore be beneficial. Existing deficiencies in the fluvial and sewerage system will be improved and new facilities provided to improve the discharge of storm flows that may exacerbate tidal flooding, which represents a beneficial impact.

1.7.10 Soil Conditions, Groundwater and Contamination

A detailed ground investigation study has been undertaken to assess the likely environmental concerns associated with the development in relation to existing ground conditions and localised areas of contamination left from previous industrial uses. A remediation strategy has been drawn up and various mitigation measures identified. The main mitigation measure is to ensure that the future development is designed to avoid known contaminant pathways. Other mitigation measures include excavation of localised pollution sources and measures to minimise future infiltration. The reduction of current and future health risk is likely to represent a slight to moderate beneficial impact.

1.7.11 Waste Management

The development would increase the amount of waste going to landfill or the Island’s Resource Recovery Facility, which would both result in indirect impacts on the environment from air pollution, water pollution, noise, dust, litter, mud and pests. Mitigation is proposed at the design, construction and operation stages to include re-use and recycling of waste products during construction; implementation of waste management plans during construction; assisting the Council to implement its strategies and plans to ensure waste management is taken up on new developments; and the incorporation of waste management facilities within the development at design stage.

2. Location and Site Characteristics

2.1 The application site is located within East Cowes. The majority of the site comprises the former GKN North Works, in addition to the Red Funnel marshalling yards, Trinity House Depot and Wharf, the public car park on Well Road and a previously undeveloped area of land to the west of Sylvan Avenue.

2.2 There are numerous existing uses and activities taking place within the application site boundary, the main uses are summarised as follows:

· Land to the west of Sylvan Avenue, incorporating an area of woodland

· Red Funnel ferry terminal and marshalling yard

· Buildings at Trinity Wharf

· Site of the now demolished GKN North development to the east of Castle Street and Maresfield Road

· Former GKN development to the west of Castle Street and Maresfield Road, now renamed Venture Quays (formerly Albany Works, the Barracks, Columbine, Medina and Redux buildings) and leased on a short-term basis.

· Two bungalows (Perivale – now demolished and Cornelia – awaiting demolition) between Well Road and Church Road

· Council car park to the north of Well Road

· Former GKN sports facilities including bowling green and tennis courts

· A small area of open space between Albany Road and the Esplanade where there are public toilets and a pumping station.

· Former Barracks building and curtilage

2.3 The Esplanade area, to the north of the application site, falls within the recently approved East Cowes Esplanade Conservation Area. The Conservation Area boundary runs along Albany Road and kinks out to incorporate part of the application site, namely the former Barracks and public convenience buildings.

2.4 There are a number of Grade II Listed buildings and structures within the site – the Church of St. James; the wall and gate piers along Church Path to the Church of St. James; and Clare Lallow’s Grid Iron Yard (south of the current Red Funnel marshalling yard). The Coastguard Cottages (outside the application site boundary, on Albany Road) are Grade II Listed.

2.5 The site is level to the west, between Castle Street and the River Medina and rises to the east of Castle Street in a north-easterly direction.

2.6 There are two rights of way at the site at Church Path (CS28 and CS27).

2.7 Trees within the woodland area adjacent to Sylvan Avenue are afforded protection by TPO/1951/2.

2.8 The application site is located 1.4km from the Solent and Southampton Water Special Protection Area (SPA) and within and adjacent to the Solent Maritime Special Area of Conservation (SAC).

3. Relevant History

3.1 There are three recent, relevant planning applications:

Red Jet – Permission was granted in March 2004 to amend the existing ferry pontoon to enable the Red Jet high speed passenger service to use it. The permission does not include any associated car parking or public transport facilities. This permission has not yet been implemented.
Trailer Park – Permission was granted in March 2005 for a temporary trailer park at the junction of Castle Street and Well Road. This permission has been implemented and the temporary permission expires in March 2010. The current planning application would address the limitations that necessitated this facility.
Venture Quays Apron Extension – Permission was approved in October 2005. This involves the demolition of the existing apron and suspended deck structure and replacement with a larger apron including a hoist dock, concrete crane pad, decking and pontoons. The purpose of the proposals is to meet the needs of the occupiers of Venture Quays to dispatch wind turbine blades. The development is currently under construction.

4. Development Plan Policy

4.1 National Planning Guidance

Particular regard should be had to the guidance contained within the following: Planning Policy Statement (PPS) 1: Delivering Sustainable Development; Planning Policy Guidance Note (PPG) 3: Housing; PPS6: Planning for Town Centres; PPS9: Biodiversity and Geological Conservation; PPG13: Transport; PPG24: Planning and Noise; and Planning Policy Guidance 25: Development and Flood Risk. Regard should also be had to PPS3: Draft Consultation paper for Housing.

4.2 PPS 1 – Delivering Sustainable Development, sets out the overarching -planning policies on the delivery of sustainable development through the planning system. PPS1 states that planning should facilitate and promote sustainable and inclusive patterns of urban and rural development by making suitable land available for development in line with economic, social and environmental objectives to improve people's quality of life; by contributing to sustainable economic development; by protecting and enhancing the natural and historic environment, the quality and character of the countryside, and existing communities; by ensuring high quality development through good and inclusive design, and the efficient use of resources; and by ensuring that development supports existing communities and contributes to the creation of safe, sustainable, liveable and mixed communities with good access to jobs and key services for all members of the community.

4.3 PPS6 – Planning for Town Centres, stipulates that local planning authorities should require applicants to demonstrate the need for the development; that the development is of an appropriate scale; that there are no more central sites for the development; that there are no unacceptable impacts on existing centres; and that locations are accessible. PPS6 requires that ‘need’ must be demonstrated for any application for a ‘main town centre’ use which would be in an edge-of-centre or out-of-centre location and which is not in accordance with an up-to- date development plan document strategy. Main town centre uses are defined in the guidance as retail (including warehouse clubs and factory outlet centres); leisure, entertainment facilities, and the more intensive sport and recreation uses (including cinemas, restaurants, drive-through restaurants, bars and pubs, night-clubs, casinos, health and fitness centres, indoor bowling centres, and bingo halls); offices, both commercial and those of public bodies; and arts, culture and tourism (theatres, museums, galleries and concert halls, hotels, and conference facilities).

4.4 PPS 9 – Biodiversity and Geological Conservation, replaces Planning Policy Guidance Note 9 (PPG9) on Nature Conservation published in 1994. The guidance states that the aim of planning decisions should be to prevent harm to biodiversity and geological conservation interests and that where granting planning permission would result in significant harm to those interests, local planning authorities will need to be satisfied that the development cannot reasonably be located on any alternative sites that would result in less or no harm. In the absence of any such alternatives, local planning authorities should ensure that, before planning permission is granted, adequate mitigation measures are put in place. Where a planning decision would result in significant harm to biodiversity and geological interests which cannot be prevented or adequately mitigated against, appropriate compensation measures should be sought. If that significant harm cannot be prevented, adequately mitigated against, or compensated for, then planning permission should be refused.

4.5 PPG13 – Transport, emphasises the need to integrate planning and transport at the national, regional, strategic and local level to promote more sustainable transport choices for both people and for moving freight; to promote accessibility to jobs, shopping, leisure facilities and services by public transport, walking and cycling, and to reduce the need to travel, especially by car.

4.6 PPG24 - Planning and Noise, advises that the impact of noise can be a material planning consideration. It recognises that it is hard to reconcile some land uses with housing and some other activities which generate high levels of noise but stresses that wherever practicable noise generating development are separated from major sources of noise. Development involving noisy activities should if possible be sited away from noise sensitive uses. Where this is not possible there is a need to consider what can practically be controlled to reduce noise levels or mitigate noise through conditions and planning obligations.

4.7 PPG25 Flood Risk, advises that local planning authorities should address the problems which flooding can cause by undertaking a number of actions which include recognising that the susceptibility of land to flooding is a material planning consideration; by giving appropriate weight to information on flood-risk and how it might be affected by climate change in considering individual proposals for development; by consulting the Environment Agency, which has the lead role in providing advice on flood issues in relation to planning applications; and by recognising that engineered flood reduction measures may not always be the appropriate solution, since they can have economic and environmental costs and impacts on the natural and built environment, need maintenance and replacement and cannot eliminate all risk of flooding.

The Government expects local planning authorities to apply a risk-based approach to their decisions on development control through a sequential test. Developers seeking sites for housing and other development should also have regard to this test. The guidance requires local planning authorities to give priority to permitting sites for development in descending order to the flood zones set out in PPG25 and that when deciding applications for development at any particular location, those responsible for the decision would be expected to demonstrate that there are no reasonable options available in a lower-risk category, consistent with other sustainable development objectives.

The guidance confirms that applicants for planning permission should assess the risk posed by the development. They should consider the specific risk of flooding to the development being proposed over its currently expected lifetime and its possible effects on flood risks elsewhere in terms of its effects on flood flows and flood storage capacity and the run-off implications. The guidance sets out a sequential test which may, in some circumstances, result in development being permitted that requires the provision of flood defence and mitigation works. Such provision, generally funded by the developer, is only acceptable provided it is consistent with the relevant flood-risk management policies and does not have a significant adverse impact on flood flows or storage.

4.8 Planning Policy Guidance Note 3 (PPG3) - Housing sets out National guidance on range of issues relating to the provision of housing. The issues of particular relevance are summarised as follows:

· Ensure new homes are provided in the right place at the right time and that there is a choice of sites which are both suitable and available for house building.

· There should be a regular review of housing requirements through the mechanism of a local housing needs assessment.

· In providing sufficient housing land, priorities should be given to reusing previously developed land within urban areas in preference to the development of green field sites.

· Provide a wider housing opportunity and choice, better mix and size, type and location of housing.

· Local plan policies should seek to achieve as an element of housing scheme appropriate level of affordable housing having identified through the housing needs survey what the Authority considers to be affordable in the local planned area. It should be related to lower income levels and house prices or rents for different types of households.

· The amount and types of affordable housing to be provided should reflect local housing need and individual sites suitability and be a matter for agreement between the parties.

· Planning authorities should ensure maintenance of supply of housing by:

Ø Concentrating most additional housing development within urban areas.

Ø Making more efficient use of land, particularly previously developed land.

Ø Assessing the capacity of urban areas to accommodate more housing.

Ø Adopting a sequential approach to the allocation of land for housing development.

Ø Managing the release of housing land.

Ø Reviewing existing allocations of housing land in plans.

· Criteria for allocation should be based on:

Ø The amount and types of affordable housing to be provided should reflect local housing need and individual sites suitability and be a matter for agreement between the parties.

Ø Availability of previously developed sites.

Ø Location and accessibility

Ø Capacity of existing and potential infrastructure

Ø Ability to build communities

Ø Physical and environmental constraints on the development of land.

4.9 Draft PPS3 indicates that the Government is seeking to ensure that there is a wide choice of housing types available, for both affordable and market housing, to meet the needs of all members of the community; to deliver a better balance between housing demand and supply in every housing market and to improve affordability where necessary; and to create sustainable, inclusive, mixed communities in all areas. There is an emphasis on attractive, safe and well designed developments which should be located in areas with good access to jobs, key services and infrastructure. In terms of density, PPS3 proposes densities of over 75 dwellings per hectare for city centres; 40 to 75 dwellings per hectare for urban areas and 35 to 55 dwellings per hectare for suburban areas. PPS advises that density should be informed by an assessment of the characteristics of an area, including the mix of uses; the location and level of public transport accessibility; the need to use land efficiently; the importance of promoting high quality design; the broader spatial strategy and vision for the future development of their area, in particular the need for housing and the housing plans and policies; the level of service provision and public spaces; and resource efficiency and the minimisation of environmental impacts.

4.10 Members are advised that a housing need survey was carried out in 2001 which sought to identify the extent, distribution and type of housing needed over and above homelessness. The main findings of the survey were that there is a chronic shortage of affordable housing across the whole Island; there is an increasing demand for smaller one and two bedroom housing units that is not currently being met by the housing market; that the principal areas of housing need both in affordability and demand are the main towns of Newport, Ryde, Shanklin and Sandown followed by Cowes/East Cowes.

For Members information, over the Unitary Development Plan Period (1996-2011) there is a development potential for approximately 8,000 units, which assumes that the development of allocated sites will make a contribution. In terms of regional policies in respect of the south and south east, the targets for the Isle of Wight are in the region of 500+ units a year which up to the present time is being achieved on a year by year basis. Obviously these figures may be revisited during the local development framework process however; the Unitary Development Plan is the statutory policy document which should apply to this application. Finally in terms of housing policies, Members are advised that the above calculations are based on an average density figure of 30 dwellings per hectare.

4.11 Regional Planning Guidance

Regional Planning Guidance for the South East is contained within RPG9. There are a number of relevant policies including Policy Q1 which states that urban areas should be the prime focus for new development and for redevelopment and Policy Q2 states that quality of life in urban areas, should be raised through significant improvement to the urban environment, making urban areas more attractive places in which to live, work, shop, spend leisure time and invest, thus helping to counter trends to more dispersed patterns of residence and travel. Policy E1 requires priority to be given to protecting areas designated at international or national level for their intrinsic nature conservation value. Policy RE5, states that better use should be made of existing employment land resources. Sites for industry and commerce should be developed particularly in urban areas and in places which are accessible by environmentally friendly modes of transport. Precedence should be given to the re-use of developed land over the release of new land and wherever possible the intensification of use on existing sites should be encouraged. Policy H4 states that a range of dwelling types and sizes should be provided, including alternative forms of tenure, in order to meet the needs of all sectors of the community and to plan for balanced communities. Affordable housing should be provided to meet locally assessed need. Policy RE4 states that business should be encouraged in adopting the principles of sustainable development.

4.12 The following Site Specific Policies within the Unitary Development Plan are applicable:

· H3(64) – Allocation of Residential Development Sites ( Land off Sylvan Avenue, East Cowes)

· W5 – Waste Water Treatment

· R1 – Existing Town Centres

· L4 – Protection of Open Spaces, Village Greens and Allotments

4.13 The following Strategic Policies within the Unitary Development Plan are applicable:

· S1 - New development will be concentrated within existing urban areas

· S2 – Development will be encouraged on land which has previously been developed.

· S3 – New developments of a large scale will be expected to be located in or adjacent to the defined development envelopes of the main island towns

· S7 – Provision of at least 8,000 housing units on the Isle of Wight over the plan period

· S11 – Land use policies and proposals to reduce the impact of and reliance on the private car will be adopted and the Council will aim to encourage development of an effective, efficient and integrated transport network.

· S14 – New retail development will be expected to locate within existing town centres.

4.14 Other local Unitary Development Plan policies are itemised as follows:

· G1 – Development Envelopes for Towns and Villages

· G4 – General Locational Criteria for Development

· G6 – Development in Areas Liable to Flooding

· G10 – Potential Conflict Between Proposed Development and Existing Surrounding Uses

· D1 – Standards of Design

· D2 – Standards for Development Within the Site

· D13 – Energy Conservation

· D14 – Light Spillage

· B2 - Settings of Listed Buildings

· B6 – Protection and Enhancement of Conservation Areas

· B7 - Demolition of non-listed buildings in Conservation Areas

· B9 – Protection of Archaeological Heritage

· H1 – Major New Residential Developments to be Located Within the Main Island Towns.

· H2 – Ensure that Large Residential Developments Contain a Variety of House Sizes and Types

· H4 – Unallocated Residential Development

· H14 – Locally Affordable Housing as an Element of Housing Schemes

· T1 – Promotion of Tourism and the Extension of the Season

· T2 – Tourism Related Development (other than accommodation)

· E1 – Promote Suitably Located New Employment Uses

· E3 – Resist the Development of Allocated Employment Land for Other Uses

· E7 – Employment Sites with Deep Water Frontage

· E9 – Employment Development Anywhere Within Settlements

· C5 – Coastal Protection Works – Developed Coastline

· C8 – Nature Conservation as a Material Consideration

· C9 – Sites of International Importance for Nature Conservation

· C12 – Development Affecting Trees and Woodland

· P1 – Pollution and Development

· P5 – Reducing the Impact of Noise

· TR1 – Integrated Transport Network

· TR3 – Locating Development to Minimise the Need to Travel

· TR4 – Transport Statements Required for Major Development

· TR6 – Cycling and Walking

· TR7 – Highway Considerations for New Development

· TR8 –The Environmental Impact of New Infrastructure Systems

· TR10 – Cross-Solent Ferry Links

· TR11 – Traffic Management Schemes for Ferry Terminals

· TR16 – Parking Policies and Guidelines

· TR17 – Public Rights of Way

· R2 – New Retail Development

· R4 – Development on Unidentified Sites

· U1 – Location of Health, Social, Community, Religious and Education Services

· U2 – Ensuring Adequate Educational, Social and Community Facilities for the Future Population.

· U3 – Appropriate Location of Education, Community, Social, Health and Welfare Facilities.

· U11 – Infrastructure and Services Provision

· L10 – Open Space in Housing Development

4.15 Appendix G of the UDP sets out the Council’s parking guidelines. The majority of the site falls within Zone 2 of the Council’s parking policy which requires 0-50% of maximum non-operational vehicle parking provision allowed on site. Part of the proposed residential area to the west of Sylvan Avenue falls within Zone 3, thus requiring parking provision that shall not exceed 0-75% of parking guidelines. A small area of the town centre falls within Zone 1 which stipulates that there will be no on-site parking allowed.

4.16 Supplementary Planning Guidance (SPG)

· Members’ attention is also drawn to SPG in respect of affordable housing which now seeks a 30% contribution from developers on those qualifying sites; the Phasing Report for the Managed Release of Housing Sites, which constitutes SPG; and Urban Capacity Study, which also constitutes SPG.

· Regard must also be had to the Cowes Waterfront SPG: A Vision for the Medina Valley (July 2003). It is about developing a new vision for the area and putting in place a Strategic Development Framework to guide new investment and development opportunities. The aim is to attract new investment to provide the opportunities, facilities and attractions that both local people and visitors can enjoy. This investment will enable the growth of local businesses and the attraction of new businesses.

· The Strategic Development Framework sets out the vision for Project Cowes and a detailed programme of new projects. It focuses on a number of key priorities, identified by local people during the consultation process, including: the creation of new employment opportunities and the release of suitable employment sites, responding to existing and future demand; an improvement in the perceptions of Cowes and East Cowes as two of the main gateways to the Island and world-class visitor destinations; capitalising on and strengthening Cowes’ status as an international centre of yachting excellence and as the “home” of UK sailing; ensuring that key waterfront sites are made available for those uses which genuinely require a waterfront location, and that the most appropriate uses are located on the limited number of sites that benefit from deep-water access; strengthening and capitalising on other growth areas in the Island’s economy, such as the manufacture of composite materials, and renewable energy related industries; increasing the Medina Valley’s contribution to the role of tourism in the wider economy of the Island and ensuring that the Island benefits from its large number of visitors; supporting and strengthening the existing communities and town centres in the Medina Valley; providing where appropriate additional residential accommodation, having particular regard to ensuring a suitable mix and adequate supply of affordable housing for local residents; maintaining and enhancing the substantial unique environmental resources of the Medina Valley; and improving linkages with the mainland, and cross-Medina links.

5. Consultee and Third Party Comments

5.1 Internal Consultees

Environmental Health Department - The Council’s Environmental Health Officer recommends conditions for a site investigation and to deal with extended duration of the construction phase. Post Construction, there is concern that new housing built next to the marshalling yard is likely to result in noise complaints. With regards to the air quality assessment, more work is required to determine the impact at façades of new houses. Noise from ferries has not been assessed in terms of impact on proposed flats adjacent to the terminal. There is potential for conflict between commercial and industrial parts of the development and residential areas which needs to be controlled.

Conservation Officer – The Council’s Conservation Officer has made the following comments. The site abuts / slightly overlaps the East Cowes conservation area, and affects a small number of listed buildings and their settings. During the design and consultation process the masterplanners have taken these constraints into account and the Conservation Officer is satisfied that for the purposes of the outline application, there will be no harm caused to them. When the detail stage is reached – subject of course to outline approval being granted – then proposals will be examined in detail and comment made accordingly. The Conservation Officer has some reservations in relation to the indicative height of the some of the town centre blocks.

· Archaeological Officer – This application is within an area of significant archaeological potential. Following the results of the pre-determination archaeological investigation, the applicant has now supplied enough information on which to base an outline planning decision. The results of the Desk Based Assessment and Trial Trenching have confirmed that the development envelope has the potential to sustain archaeological deposits across site. The percentage sampled is below recommended industry levels to determine the presence or absence of archaeological remains as much of the proposed development remains in use at the time of application. It is therefore advised that a further program of archaeological intervention is required across site in order to arrive at an adequate mitigation strategy. It is understood that this development will be a phased approach across a number of years and therefore it is vital that a robust, ongoing program of archaeological investigation and mitigation is agreed prior to an application being received by the LPA for detailed planning permission. It is advised that outline permission can be granted subject to a condition which follows the guidance given in Ministerial Circular DOE 11/95 and in PPG 16, requiring that no development takes place until the applicant has secured the implementation of a programme of archaeological works in accordance with a written scheme of investigation which has been submitted to and approved by the planning authority in writing.

· Arboricultural Officer - The Council’s Arboricultural Officer has examined the submitted Tree Report and agrees with most of its findings. The area of highest amenity on the site is as shown in the report the woodland situated near Sylvan Avenue. This wooded area when assessed collectively using the quality assessment recommended in Bs 5837 (2005) “Trees in relation to construction” can be classified as a B2. This being a wood or group of trees that individually may not be considered of good form or high amenity, but collectively for a distinct landscape feature. The retention of a sizable part of this area is important not only to retain the character and the amenity it already contributes to the surrounding area, but to help the assimilation of any new development to that area. It has been shown that a sizable part of this woodland is to be retained and replanting in close vicinity to it is intended. This is a far better solution to the problem of trees on site than originally proposed. It is important however that the positioning of the houses is not going to have any impact on the retained trees, which if done incorrectly could further diminish the amount that are to be retained. This can be over come by carrying out a full survey to Bs 5837 (2005) “Trees in relation to construction” recommended standard showing Root Protection Areas, Shade cast patterns etc, which could then highlight any problems. The rest of the site is to have the majority of its trees cleared under the recommendation of the Report, which can be seen as necessary due to their condition and low amenity. However this will leave the area denuded of any arboreal character and leaves it barren. It is important that the layout for the site leaves space in which trees could be planted of at least heavy standard size, so they could quickly establish themselves to help overcome this problem. It would be also important that there is a heavy replant of medium size trees to mitigate and compensate for the loss of those that are to be removed. This could be detailed in a landscape plan, but should be considered during the design of the layout for the site to ensure there is space for this to be carried to its full potential. It is acknowledged that the proposed plans as they stand at the present time are considering the arboreal impact adequately, but the future impact must be considered as the site develops.

· Ecological Officer - The Council’s Ecological Officer has made detailed comments in respect of the proposals. The proposals have a range of environmental and ecological impacts, including some reclamation of the foreshore, which has the potential to impact upon the Medina Estuary, an SSSI and a component of the Solent & Southampton Water SPA/SAC/Ramsar site; and housing development which will impact upon an area of woodland and scrub identified, through survey, as being important for a range of protected species.

Coastal impacts - The current proposals would create two additional small areas of reclamation and English Nature have advised that this work would constitute a ’likely significant effect’ upon the European designated site and consequently an Appropriate Assessment is required. This has been undertaken, in agreement with English Nature, and concludes that the works are very small within the context of the estuary as a whole and are unlikely to give rise to adverse effects on the SAC / SPA / Ramsar features either on its own or ‘in combination’ with other plans and projects. However, it is recognised that the plan contributes, albeit in a small way, to the on-going incremental loss of low-grade SAC habitat and subtle changes to the tidal prism. If, and when, a suitable scheme is brought forward, opportunities for mitigation and enhancement should be sought to add confidence to any judgments made by this and further Appropriate Assessments, so as to have a net positive result on the designated sites and sediment budget of the estuary.

Woodland impacts – The woodland supports a small breeding population of red squirrels and a remarkably rich bat fauna. The proposals recognise the importance of the woodland and its protected species and the need to protect as much of it as possible. Through negotiation, the potential overall loss of woodland has been reduced to 17%. An outline woodland management plan has been submitted, which has particular emphasis on the conservation of red squirrels and bats. Details of how English Partnerships will ensure the long-term management of the woodland are being finalised. £120,000 has been dedicated for implementation of the woodland plan. Mechanisms are being investigated to allocate some finances to employ a ranger in the general area. English Nature considers that it would be very beneficial to have someone on the ground to act as a community liaison point.

Protected Species – Bats: There are bat roosts in some of the trees. It is not proposed that any of these trees will be removed or subject to surgery, therefore there is no requirement for a DEFRA licence. Controlling light spillage within the vicinity of the woodland is important. It is recommended that a mitigation strategy for bats using buildings be submitted as a condition of approval. Red Squirrels: It is not proposed to fell or prune any trees containing squirrel dreys. The retention of the woodland, together with other measures put in place through an agreed management plan should help to ensure that the woodland is still suitable for use by red squirrels during development and after completion. The extent of natural food resources is a limiting factor for red squirrels in this site and the population is maintained and enhanced by artificial feeding by local people. This is likely to continue, but it is not considered that a mechanism of formal supplementary feeding should be introduced as a nature conservation tool. However, the provision of a range of natural food sources by planting of a selection of appropriate native tree and shrub species is beneficial. It is also beneficial to ensure that new planting is well established and yielding crops prior to the development of the proposed residential units within the currently wooded area of the Sylvan Avenue area for a five year period from outline planning permission.

Slow worms - The derelict former factory site has been identified as supporting a population of slow worms. These have now been successfully translocated to a suitable receptor area, thereby discharging this obligation.

Nesting Birds - No scrub clearance should take place during the bird nesting season (March to July inclusive).

BAP habitats - The Environment Agency have raised concerns at the loss of estuarine BAP habitat resulting from this scheme. This is a degraded habitat at the mouth of the estuary which has been affected by the construction of jetties and slipways, historic dumping, extensive boat movements, and capital and maintenance dredging. Both Mudflats and Sheltered Muddy Gravels are UK Priority BAP habitats. The Isle of Wight Biodiversity Action Plan has an action to seek to safeguard all estuarine habitats from development through forward planning and development control. However, a benthic survey of 71 sites in the outer Medina Estuary within and in the vicinity of the proposed works has found no samples which conform to either Mudflats or Sheltered Muddy Gravels UK Priority BAP habitats. Consequently, it is concluded that Priority BAP estuarine habitats will not be affected by these proposals.

In order to ensure that the woodland is retained and managed into the future and that the development will maintain and enhance the favourable conservation status of the protected species known to be present, the following obligations, which need to be secured prior to the reserved matters stage, are recommended: 1) A woodland management plan to be agreed with the local planning authority, to cover the long-term management of the woodland, new planting schemes and the location and design of the footpath; 2) Confirmation that development of residential units within the currently wooded area of Sylvan Avenue will be withheld for a five year period from outline permission; 3) A monitoring scheme for red squirrels and bats to be agreed with the local planning authority in order to provide confidence that the development will maintain the favourable conservation status of these protected species; 4) A mitigation strategy to be agreed with the local planning authority to provide for bats which may be affected by building demolition; 5) Details of lighting to minimise spillage to be agreed with the local planning authority; 6) No scrub clearance should take place during the bird nesting season (March to July inclusive).

In order for the woodland to continue to serve as a suitable area for red squirrels and a range of bat species into the future, it is necessary that green corridors remain. This requires retention of tree corridors out with the application site. There is a need to continue to work with English Partnerships and the local authority to maintain and enhance green corridors within the area, to secure the long term viability of the woodland as a sanctuary for protected species.

· Highway Engineer – As part of the formal planning submission a Transport Assessment was submitted as a supporting document. Throughout the development of this project a number of meetings between highways officers and the applicant’s consultant were held to agree the methodology to be used to assess the transport and highway impacts of the project. Detailed discussions on potential highway layouts have continued throughout the project and indeed have continued subsequent to the submission of the formal planning application. Key topics for consideration for the Transport Assessment were the provision of a transport infrastructure robust enough to meet the demands of the proposed regeneration; the road hierarchy; proposed levels of parking provision; traffic generation; negating any detrimental impacts on the residents and businesses of East Cowes; and exploring opportunities to reduce the impact of Red Funnel ferry traffic upon the town. In order to assist the Council in it’s evaluation of the Transport Assessment, consultants Mott MacDonald were asked to review the document, in addition they were asked to take a strategic overview of the proposed development at Kingston and the possible combined impacts of both developments.

The Mott MacDonald review summarises a number of findings, many of which are more appropriately dealt with at a detailed stage and would be included in any subsequent Section 278 agreement. In terms of this outline, the following comments are made:

· Traffic generation estimates are considered reasonable with the exception of the overall employment rate which is low, if a relatively high proportion of B1 development were implemented there could be an underestimate of traffic impact, however this is unlikely to be significant in terms of overall network capacity

· The traffic distribution methodology is accepted as appropriate.

· At peak times of ferry use the operation of traffic signals at Dover Road may result in vehicles leaving the ferry being delayed, resulting in delays to ferry departures.

· Given the low levels of congestion in East Cowes during the modelled periods (0700-0800) & (1700-1800), it is unlikely that junction delays are an important factor in determining route choice.

· A Stage 1 Safety Audit to a satisfactory standard.

In strategic highway network terms the Council’s Highway Engineer is satisfied that the proposed layouts provide sufficient capacity to accommodate the proposed development and provide some relief to the congestion currently encountered in East Cowes as a result of Red Funnel’s activities, they cannot however be expected to resolve all the historic traffic problems of East Cowes. There is a need to formalise revised layout details that have been discussed with the applicants but have yet to be formally submitted. In the light of this, if Members were minded to grant approval then this should be conditional on the following:

· That the detailed layouts and traffic management arrangements contained in Plans 14926/002/061-68 are amended to the satisfaction of the Local Planning Authority.

· That proposals to address the issues raised in the Stage 1 Safety Audit are prepared and approved by the Local Planning Authority.

· That further modelling work should be undertaken to assess the impact of maximum ferry loadings on the local road network and junction operation. That work should include an assessment of the problems with the existing marshalling arrangements and a justification for a 300 bay marshalling yard.

5.2 External Consultees

Environment Agency – Objects as the application fails to satisfy a statutory requirement of the Habitat Regulations as well as local and national planning policy concerned with the protection and enhancement of nature conservation interests. It will result in significant adverse impact on coastal habitats of considerable nature conservation importance requiring protection at a local, national and European level. It will result in loss of priority BAP Mudflat habitat. Other concerns have also been raised, but these could be met by appropriate conditions and include: surface water regulation system; appropriate flood defence to protect against 1 in 200 year extreme tidal event and 1 in 100 year fluvial event; prevention of flooding during the construction phase; no new residential development implemented until adequate flood defence in place; scheme to deal with site contamination; no infiltration of surface water drainage; no piling without express consent of the LPA; details of all surface water drainage; method of working to be agreed. A range of Informatives are advised. Advice is given on the impact on intertidal habitat - implications for the Solent Maritime SAC, Sea Trout, and enhancement opportunities.

With regards to flood risk, there is no objection to the outline application on flood risk grounds on basis that the sequential test produced by the applicant is acceptable and accords with PPG25. Concern is, however, expressed that the applicant has not chosen a final solution. It is Environment Agency policy that traditional raised defences should only be considered once other alternatives have been exhausted and determined not to be viable and as such, recommend the land raising option as the most sustainable. It is accepted that subsequent reserved matters can incorporate their associated land raising details, which will have to be done to the appropriate level. This will be achieved through individual flood risk assessments. But this can only be acceptable if it includes a wave wall. Environment Agency would be willing to be a party to the 106 agreement to secure the arrangement for the proposed flood defences on the site. The agreement will look to secure the detailed design, construction, long term maintenance and renewal.

Queries remain to be addressed regarding groundwater. There must be no detriment to water quality in the Medina Estuary and the Solent. The application makes no mention of water efficiency.

The Applicant has responded to the issues raised by the Environment Agency and the Agency’s response to this has been sought.

English Nature - The Phase 1 Reclamation works adjacent to Venture Quays are partially located within the Solent Maritime SAC therefore an Appropriate Assessment needs to be undertaken. The assessment should also consider opportunities for mitigation and enhancement in order to ensure it will not have a negative impact, add confidence to any judgements and where possible have a net positive result. Concerns highlighted regarding impact on estuarine fish and the loss of maritime habitats in the Medina Estuary.

Bats: Eleven species of bats are present in the woodland area and potential roosts within several buildings. Advise that all bats and their roosts are protected and a Defra licence may be required. The site is demonstrable a breeding site or resting place for bats and the proposed activity is reasonably likely to result in an offence hence the need for a licence. Whilst it is not proposed to remove or directly affect bat roosts in the woodland area, there are some concerns in relation to the proposed housing development in the area. The opening up of the area increasing public access direct loss of habitat and fragmentation of the woodland may affect its long term viability to continue to support the bat species and population present. Recommend measures put in place to ensure conditions surrounding tree roosts are not affected. Agree that the woodland planting proposals will go some way to mitigating the concerns. The footpath should be kept as informal as possible and lighting only used where necessary. Concern that increase in domestic animals in and around the woodland which may increase predation of bats.

Red Squirrels: The survey has identified a good population of red squirrels, with at least 12 drays. Support the proposed retention of drays and links between them but suspect more are present. There is a need to protect the food supply, so English Nature are concerned at the loss of 24% of the woodland, which has not been adequately mitigated, which in turn will result in the decline of the squirrel population. The replacement woodland will take time to become viable mitigation. Do not agree with supplementary feeding as mitigation. Similar concerns that the number of domestic animals are controlled. Overall object to the housing allocation within the woodland area due the loss of habitat for red squirrels, the potential increase disturbance and pressure on this small woodland and therefore the long term viability of the site to support the population of red squirrels. The additional planting and enhancement of the woodland may be suitable to mitigate for certain losses.

Common reptiles: the survey is acceptable, but English Nature advise that translocation is a last resort with in situ conservation preferred.

Breeding Birds: Advice is given on the appropriate time to clear trees and shrubs (avoiding March to August).

Flood Risk: English Nature would not expect to see this development result in an increase in demand for future coastal protection works in the area, which may have an impact on designated sites.

A second letter has been received from English Nature (16 May 2006) confirming that they may withdraw their objection to the application with regards to protected species if certain matters can be guaranteed at the reserved matters stage. They would expect the use of a planning obligation rather than conditions, which should include a management plan for the future long-term management of the area and details of monitoring for squirrels and bats.

English Heritage – Have some concerns not only on the likely impact on the historic fabric and the topography of the townscape but on the need to create a cohesive contextual recognisable character for East Cowes. Some proposals impact not just on the proposed conservation area but also on a wider setting as a whole archaeology and marine archaeology and Osborne House and its estate. Four main areas are identified: spatial layout, quantum, height and topography of the proposals; relationship and variety of uses proposed including plans for existing historic fabric; assessment impact and mitigation on archaeology; design/character of development including suggested/future elevational form and public realm-design coding. Assurances are required regarding: the archaeological matters; further information and clarity is needed on the proposed intentions for the topography of the townscape including height variation and intended landmarks; the development adjacent to the Barracks and coastguard cottages and clarity of the extent and scope of the envisaged Design Coding, including public realm proposals.

Ramblers Association - Great opportunity to enhance footpath provision along the waterfront is being lost. Plans are too vague. Specific routes need to be shown. Connections to housing and recreational areas will be important and whilst references are made no specific routes are shown. Need to resolve conflicts between pedestrians and cyclists and make sure routes are carefully designed to avoid unlit corners and poor visibility.

Southern Water – The exact position of the public sewers must be determined on site by the applicant before the layout of the proposed development is finalised. There shall be no development or new tree planting located within 3 metres either side of the centreline of the public sewer and all existing infrastructure should be protected during the course of construction works. In order to protect drainage apparatus, a condition is requested requiring the developer to advise the local authority (in consultation with Southern Water) of the measures which will be undertaken to protect the public sewers.

Following initial investigations, there is currently inadequate capacity in the local network to provide foul sewage disposal to service the proposed development. The proposed development would increase flows to the public sewerage system, and existing properties and land may be subject to a greater risk of flooding as a result. However, it is possible that by removing some of the existing surface water entering the sewer, additional foul flows could be accommodated, i.e. no net increase in flows. The applicant will be required to provide Southern Water with a topographical site survey and/or a CCTV survey. As an alternative, additional off-site sewers, or improvements to existing sewers can be provided to service the development. Southern Water requires a formal application for a connection to the public sewer. Request that a condition is attached requiring details of the proposed means of foul sewerage and surface water disposal to be submitted and agreed.

Following initial investigations, Southern Water can provide a water supply to the site. Southern Water requires a formal application for connection and on-site mains to be made by the applicant or developer. An informative is recommended.

Cowes Harbour Commissioners - No comments received

Countryside Agency – No comments received.

Scottish and Southern Energy - No comments received

South East England Regional Assembly - No comments received

5.3 Town or Parish Council Comments

· East Cowes Town Council – Without an improved traffic system the project would not prove beneficial to the town. The project and the associated Barratt housing site will lead to daily gridlock.

· Isle of Wight Society – Pleased that some points have been addressed but some concerns remain: Timing of community buildings – should be constructed before any houses, these are needed to support the additional population. Maritime Heritage Experience will be a major block on views of and from East Cowes, there should be public access around it particularly on its northern side and the building should house a restaurant at 1^st and 2^nd floor with separate access; Plot 8H – the pumping station will be lost. Understand toilets will be incorporated elsewhere but opportunity to return open views would be beneficial. Where will cars park while waiting for the floating bridge if Ferry Road is two-way? Parking for St James’s Church-is it that proposed opposite? Church Path: concern over vulnerability of pedestrians, the church walls and the bridge over the stream. Would like access to the new houses here to be carefully considered-what about traffic lights? Need reassurance over the flood prevention slopes. Are there enough? What about surcharges through manholes?

5.4 Neighbours

In total, 20 letters of representation have been received from local residents, Holy Cross Primary School and St. James Church. The issues raised are considered below. Representations from other interested parties are detailed in section 5.5 of this Report.

Highway Issues

· Concerns over new road linking with Church Path. All parking facilities have been abolished from Church Path which will cause problems for weddings and funeral cortege – for parking and the narrow road width will cause congestion with two way traffic. The road is too narrow to take extra traffic

· The development of Church Path into a through road will be detrimental to the existing amenities of residents and also raises safety issues. It is dangerous where the road bends between the church wall and adjacent properties and the road will become a rat-run. Will be a danger to pedestrians using the path connecting the Springfield estate to the town centre. Holy Cross Primary School has expressed concern for the safety of children walking to school because the proposals will result in significant additional traffic on Old Road. There are concerns regarding a lack of adequate pavements on Old Road and poor visibility at Cambridge Road, St Thomas Road, Hefford Road and Millfield Avenue. Request measures to ensure safe pedestrian routes, slowing traffic down and improving visibility.

· Concern that proposed traffic layout will result in chaos, exacerbating existing problems.

· The need for traffic lights at the fire station is questioned, in particular, how residents will get out of their properties

· Concerns regarding traffic coming out of Osborne Road and making Lower York Avenue two-way.

· Concerns regarding lorries turning right into Ferry Road

· chaos in town centre from ferry queues. Will there have to be traffic lights at the ferry terminal, if so who will have priority?

· Concerns around Dover Road roundabout and Church Path. There will be more strain on Old Road. If the ferry traffic uses Well Road, traffic would be able to go straight into the town centre.

· Trailer-Sail facility - parking for vehicles with trailers and room for manoeuvring is needed.

· Wider pavements should be provided at the lower end of Old Road to improve safety for pedestrians - currently pedestrians have to walk in the road.

· Why change the present traffic route on leaving the floating bridge by making Ferry Road and York Avenue two-way with the loss of parking on York Avenue and Ferry Road?

· Conversion of York Avenue to two-way flow will lead to serious consequences for the fire station with the proposals for traffic lights at York Avenue and Well Road junction.

Parking

· Parking levels are inadequate to serve the new residential and commercial development.

· Existing shortage of parking and other recent developments have made parking difficult for shopping and visiting the medical centre.

· Medical centre needs specific parking provision and close access is needed for the elderly and young families.

· There is not enough parking for the Red Funnel Ferry to cater for future expansion. Marshalling yard should be made bigger by moving Castle Street further east.

· The public car parking needs to be increased to cater for the influx of commuters. Parking for the ferries already occurs on York Avenue.

· The loss of Well Road car park and change in status of York Avenue will result in loss of parking overall.

· Object to making Link Road two- way and subsequent loss of short term shoppers car parking

· Turning Ferry Road back into a two-way road will mean no more parking on it. Parking will have to take place further away and this will affect local businesses.

· No details shown of how access is obtained to car park between Link Road Ferry Road and Castle Street.

Residential/Visual Amenity Issues

· Concerns that proposed multi-storey apartment blocks fronting Old Road would be in front of the building line. Suggest that the former buildings (now demolished) on the site were set well back.

· The apartment blocks fronting Old Road will result in loss of light, overlooking and loss of privacy to existing dwellings and gardens

· The apartment blocks fronting Old Road are out of keeping with other properties in the area. Three to four story blocks is unacceptable. They should be two storey houses or bungalows.

· The building at the corner of Link Road and Ferry Road is too high and would reduce the privacy and day/sunlight to 13/15 York Avenue. The building’s appearance is out of character.

· Houses are shown as 9m to the eaves - too many tall buildings clearly visible from the sea will not be in keeping.

· Residents at 17 Old Road are particularly concerned about blocks 6D (opposite) and 8D (to the rear). Block should be moved back to building line given by 28 Old Road and higher end storeys should be removed. Concerns about distance from Old Road frontage excessive height, over dense, will spoil setting of 17 Old Road which is Grade 2 listed; result in loss of privacy; loss of daylight and sunlight;

· New access and increased traffic will increase noise and disturbance; old houses cannot take the subsequent vibrations from more use of Old Road.

· Design of apartments would be overwhelming and not in keeping; there is no attempt at landscaping; building heights will affect TV reception.

· A private lane between 17 and 27 Old Road will be used by pedestrians to the new development or as short cut by cars creating noise and disturbance.

Other Issues

· Object to the demolition of the historical wall in Church Path, this ancient wall associated with John Nash’s castle is an important feature of the town and should be retained and enhanced.

· The proposed town square is in the wrong place as the town centre is Lower York Avenue. To create a new square cut off from the town by an extremely busy road would be foolish.

· Objection to positioning of the Heritage Centre and Museum - will be an intrusive eyesore on the waterfront and an unacceptable partition between the SEEDA development and the East Cowes seafront. The proposals will be out of character in an environmentally sensitive area.

· The demolition of the toilets should not be allowed.

· There is conflict with the way the Event Space is described – it appears to be closed off and not part of the public realm although a footpath is shown across it. The footpath should run around the seaward perimeter of the Venture Quays Site and connect to the Open Space.

· Full-length seafront access for the public should be a condition of any permission.

· The report on community leisure and sports facilities suggests that some land based activities for the local community like swimming are not justified.

· Loss of Grid Iron Yard, which acts as a boat yard for local rowing clubs adjacent to the White Hart Slip.

· The tennis court used as a boat compound should revert to a tennis court.

Something must be included to improve the situation for local small boat owners with decent slipways, storage and other facilities.

· Connection with the Columbine building should be kept and name should not be changed to ‘Venture Quays’.

· Objection to loss of Columbine hangar. This is a historical part of Cowes waterfront and should be listed and converted.

· Over predominance of residential development to the loss of businesses and jobs.

· The scheme needs to meet the needs of the community and not the developer.

· Loss of Red Funnel ticket office.

· The new supermarket is outside the primary shopping area. Pedestrian access to it and the town centre would involve crossing a busy arterial route, which is dangerous.

· More sports and recreational facilities are required given increase in population

· Concerns about the contaminated nature of the site and that such concerns should be addressed before any work is carried out.

· East Cowes is being subject to long term disruptions with derelict sites and too much hasty demolition taking place. Some of the promised amenities should be delivered sooner.

· Cumulative impact of the overall development will change the character of the town making it feel oppressive.

Following the submission of revised highway options by the applicant, residents have been re-notified and additional letters have been received from two residents who raise the following issues:

· There is still insufficient evidence of a satisfactory level of parking provision for the health centre, new homes and visitors using the ferry terminal.

· SEEDA have still not given proper consideration to highway matters. Concerns are raised specifically with regards to the fire station and ferry marshalling proposals. Concern also expressed regarding inadequate parking on Church Path.

· Applicant should be asked to supply further evidence regarding future water supply.

· Hangers should be retained and re-used for either industrial or recreation use.

5.5 Others

Andrew Turner MP - Two letters have been received. Welcomes consultation that has taken place but makes a number of suggestions. Use feet/number of storeys instead of metres when showing building heights. If want to create a landmark building, why not retain Seaholme and Columbine Yard - should be kept for marine industry or maritime heritage. Objects to loss of old wall, which runs alongside Church Path and other sections of walling. The submission does not record which existing views are lost, this should be made clear and views from public places including between buildings should be protected or replaced. A lot of land is wasted with a number of surface car parks. The town centre needs easy access for shoppers, users of the ferry and visitors alike. Should consider a multi storey development and make better use of the land. It is not acceptable that heavy streams of traffic in Castle Road will cut people off from the waterfront between Well Road and Old Road. There is poor integration between the new and old shopping areas. More traffic will use Well Road and divide the two areas. Various suggestions are given. The supermarket must fill a niche, which the whole Island needs. The Red Jet is too far from the car parking and car and bus drop off points. Conflict between cars and pedestrians accessing and disembarking from the ferry. The community hall has no clear function-what is it? There are no plans to improve the Esplanade which needs improved maintenance given heavier usage. Sports facilities lost when Westlands closed will not be replaced. The Design Statement is helpful but most of the local architecture is small scale and intimate buildings and not large buildings and public spaces. Many views will be lost if new buildings are too high. Residential parking should be resolved either parking is provided or that no parking and occupiers cannot keep a car. Old Road should retain its character- this needs to be conditioned. The design brief is critical to the success of the scheme and it should be guided by a clear plan/vision and not developed in isolation.

Councillor Lloyd – Agrees in principal to outline planning permission being granted as East Cowes needs the development to proceed for its survival. However, it is important that the height, mass and density are compatible with surrounding areas and does not appear over-developed. Development should be of a high standard of design and existing trees, hedgerows and streams retained. Red Funnel marshalling yard may not be large enough – has multi-storey been considered? There should also be a proper ferry interchange with facilities for buses, taxis and pedestrians and pick up and drop off points.

· Isle of Wight Local Access Forum - Recommend refusal until due consideration has taken place to provide a waterside public footpath on as much of the development as possible. Make reference to policy TR17-feel a waterside public footpath would be a valuable addition to the few public footpaths in the area including one around the maritime heritage experience.

· Red Funnel Group – Overall, register strong support for the SEEDA initiative to revitalise and rejuvenate East Cowes centre and in particular agreement in principle to the key objectives set out in the East Cowes Project Castle St East Cowes Planning Statement Jan 2006. However consider need to raise concerns at this stage which if not addressed would prejudice the satisfactory relocation and future operation of the marshalling yard.

Key issues: a) Safety: is fundamental and conflict between pedestrians and vehicle movements must be kept to a minimum. Need to segregate or better control such movements. The proposals do not achieve this. b) Efficiency: important to ensure a rapid turnaround of the ferries to satisfy timetabling and avoid congestion in the town. The proposals have not addressed this. c) Capacity: need to address future potential growth in traffic as the current yard runs at or beyond capacity at peak times and traffic queues through the town. The proposals do not address his issue fully. d) Environment: Potential conflict with the reconfigured marshalling yard and adjacent residential properties, which will be difficult to mitigate. Need to know what is required now to be sure of the overall capacity of the yard. e) Permanence: Suggestion that the proposal is a short term solution. Red Funnel seeks a permanent and long-term solution. f) Other Issues: Clarification over proposals to accommodate the ticket office, which could result in further reduction of the marshalling space. The plans inaccurately show the ferry head configuration and therefore misrepresent how tight manoeuvres will be out of the proposed marshalling yard. Clarification over the location of a pumping station is required. Overall it is accepted that the application is to test principle and not detail and there may be some latitude for subsequent detailed proposals. It is vital that no conditions are imposed to make development accord with the master plan as Red Funnel has serious concerns that elements of the 5 basic criteria for the operation of a safe and efficient service cannot be met as a result of the deficiencies in the submitted planning application and that there will be subsequently insufficient scope for a satisfactory scheme to evolve from this.

· GKN - GKN Aerospace Services is located off Ferry Road and is a significant and important local employer and there are plans to expand. Initial comments require extra time to consider all the documentation; the current access and egress arrangements are insufficient given the current level of employment at Falcon Yard; the interrelationship between pedestrians the floating bridge vehicle queue park cars and large transportation to and from the site is insufficient; what consideration has been given to allow the Company expansion in future years? The traffic flows patterns do not give adequate consideration to articulated lorries and other vehicles. Insufficient turning room for such vehicles.

· Ryde Rowing Club –Object to demolition of the Grid Iron Boathouse in Castle Street. The building has over the past 20 years provided a leisure and recreational facility for the Island. No plans are evident for its replacement. The loss of the Boathouse and the public slipway (White Hart) provides vital boat storage and launching facility. It would mean transportation of boats and coaching safety launch from Ryde every time the Club wanted to use the River. The Boathouse is a listed building and should be retained.

· Shanklin Sandown Boating Club - The demolition of the Grid Iron Yard will result in the loss of boat storage with no alternative provision planned. Phase 2 of the scheme must provide improved facilities for local recreational users.

· East Cowes Sailing Club - Redevelopment of plots 7A and 8H will result in the loss of historic facilities that have been used by the Club for many years. In particular Plot 7A - loss of public steps used to access moored boats and the beach at low tide. Plot 8H - loss of public landing which is used by the Club Members to moor their boats and alight onto the area around the public toilets. SEEDA should include a new public slipway in the scheme. The existing one on the Esplanade and close to the Club’s dingy park is generally unusable. Optimum position would be immediately to the north of the main breakwater or adjacent to the Kiosk. Other site on bend of Albany Rd and Esplanade could be constructed

· Barratt (Southampton) - Principle supported. There is a need for more housing and jobs on the island. The refusal of the Kingston development eliminates the possibility of alternative employment land being provided to compensate for the loss of town centre employment land. The UDP and Cowes Waterfront SPG both make it clear that the development at Kingston is an integral part of the overall development strategy for the town with the development at Kingston for employment purposes supported by SEEDA and consistent with Regional Strategy. The UDP has a presumption against the loss of allocated or established employment land (Policy E3). If the Council do not approve Kingston then it may not be possible to meet the criteria of E3

6. Evaluation

The most important material considerations in respect of this proposal are whether the principal of the development is acceptable; whether the vehicular access link between Church Path and Old Road is acceptable; whether the impacts of the development on ecology and nature conservation are acceptable; the impacts of the development on visual amenity and local residential amenity and the extent to which the development is in accord with national and regional planning guidance and the policies and proposals of the adopted UDP.

6.1 Principle of the Development

6.1.1 Policy

Under the Planning Acts all applications should be determined on the basis of statutory policies unless other material considerations suggest otherwise. In determining this application, regard must be had to national policies, in particular PPS1, PPG3, PPS6 and PPG25 in addition to Unitary Development Plan policies.
There are a number of site specific UDP allocations within the application site boundary: policies H3(64), W5, R1 and L4.

6.1.2 Residential Development and Affordable Housing

· Policy H3 (64) allocates a 1.6 hectare site adjacent to Sylvan Avenue for residential development. The policy states that the site has potential for some low density residential development, providing that the existing pedestrian route across the site, the main landscape features and some open amenity space can be retained. An adjoining 0.9 hectare site is also considered suitable for residential development, subject to car parking provision being retained and relocated. The other parts of the application site where residential development is proposed are not allocated for residential development within the UDP, they are, however, considered to be brownfield sites.

· Policy S2 encourages development on land which has previously been developed (brownfield sites) rather than undeveloped (greenfield sites). Consideration must also be given to the Council’s Supplementary Planning Guidance (SPG), in particular, the Phasing Report for the Managed Release of Housing Sites and the Urban Capacity Study. Policy S7 of the UDP indicates that there is a need to provide for the development of at least 8,000 housing units over the plan period. The Urban Capacity Study identifies the need for both identified brownfield and greenfield sites and windfall sites to come forward in order for these housing requirements to be met.

· While siting and therefore density is not a matter for Members to determine at this stage, consideration has to be given to whether or not controls need to be put in place to limit the numbers of residential units provided on this site. The ES has been prepared on the basis of a maximum number of 550 dwellings being built throughout the site. Three bands of residential density are indicated: low density (35-50 dwellings per hectare), medium density (50-100 dwellings per hectare) and high density (100+ dwellings per hectare).

· UDP policy H6 relates to high density residential development and for the purposes of this policy, high density is defined as development of about 40 dwellings per hectare. This policy states that applications for high density residential development will be permitted in appropriate areas within the development envelope where the development is close to public transport services and local/town centre facilities, where the amenity of surrounding areas will not be unduly affected, where open space and other requirements are not compromised and where the density and design is acceptable and appropriate to the historic character and layout of the settlement.

· Paragraph 58 of PPG3 states that local planning authorities should avoid developments which make inefficient use of land (those of less than 30 dwellings per hectare net), should encourage housing development which makes more efficient use of land (between 30 and 50 dwellings per hectare net); and should seek greater intensity of development at places with good public transport accessibility such as city, town, district and local centres or around major nodes along good quality public transport corridors.

· Regard should also be had to the density bands detailed in Draft PPS3. The proposed residential developments would be located adjacent to the town centre and in an area where there are good public transport links. Given that the proposal has been assessed against the parameters outlined in the submitted Environmental Impact Assessment and traffic assessment, it is considered that any material alteration from such assessments may have an impact which has not been subject to proper consideration against the relevant planning policies and as such would be undesirable. For this reason, it is recommended that the number of units is restricted by condition. The actual number of dwellings proposed and the density is not being applied for at this stage. Density on specific parcels of the application site would be given further consideration at the reserved matters stage.

· With regards to Policy H14 of the UDP, the size of the site is such that there is scope to provide a significant level of affordable housing for which there is a clear and recognised demand, with that demand being difficult to satisfy through the development of the much smaller brownfield sites which in many cases do not generate any affordable housing whatsoever. The applicant has indicated that 30% of the dwellings provided would represent affordable housing. The proposed split would be 60% social rented and 40% shared ownership. This level of affordable housing would be secured by means of a s106 legal agreement.

With reference to Policy L10, a condition is recommended to ensure that an adequate level of open space provision is made available within the proposed residential areas.

6.1.3 Sites for Waste Water Treatment and Protection of Open Spaces

· A small part of the application site located adjacent to Albany Road, is allocated in the UDP as a site for waste water treatment. Policy W5 seeks to safeguard this site for possible future development for the transfer and improvement of wastewater treatment or the handling and treatment of sewage sludge and that applications which would prevent or prejudice such development will be refused.

· The Masterplan and Planning Statement indicate that the open nature of this area would be maintained, but that it would become part of the improved public realm in this area. Given that waste water treatment facilities are usually underground and that no buildings are proposed on this site, I do not consider that the proposals would prejudice the use of this site for waste water treatment, should it be required in the future. Southern Water has made no objections in this respect.

· Adjacent to this site is an area of land on the Esplanade allocated by UDP policy L4 as open land. Policy L4 states that planning applications for development resulting in the loss of such land will only be approved in exceptional circumstances where the development for community purposes would be of greater benefit than retaining the open space and where suitable alternative provision is provided prior to the development taking place. As per the waste water treatment allocation, this area of open land would be retained and enhanced and as such, the proposals would not be in conflict with this policy.

6.1.4 Proposed Employment Uses and Loss of Existing Employment Uses

· The proposed employment developments are in accordance with policy E1 of the UDP, which states that the Council will promote and encourage the development of new and existing employment uses in appropriate locations which should be easily accessible by public transport, on foot, or by cycle.

· Policy E3 states that the development of existing employment land and premises for other uses will not be permitted, except where there is an identified need for the proposed use and no other suitable site is available, or where alternative equivalent floorspace is found in the area, or the loss of the site would not prejudice the ability of the area to meet local employment needs, or the development involves the relocation of a non-conforming use, or finally if the proposal is for the overall development of the site and involves an acceptable mix of uses. The closure of the GKN North works has resulted in a significant area of the application site becoming vacant. The Cowes Waterfront SPG, adopted in 2003, sought to put a Strategic Development Framework in place to guide new investment and development opportunities. One of the key priorities identified is the creation of new employment opportunities and the release of suitable employment sites, responding to existing and future demand. The application site is located within Zone 1 of the SPG, the diagram indicates an emphasis on mixed use developments and marine related employment on the areas formerly occupied by GKN. Some of the key opportunities listed in the SPG relate to the provision of new mixed use developments and the opportunity to create waterfront access. The SPG was produced having specific regard to a number of policies, including policy E3. On balance, it is considered that the overall redevelopment proposals for this site would provide an acceptable mix of uses, which will meet the aims of the Strategic Development Framework in supporting and strengthening the town centre and enhancing the image of East Cowes as a main gateway to the Island. The proposals also include new employment opportunities, including marine related uses. Overall, the proposals are therefore considered to be in accordance with policy E3.

· The development contains proposals for Trinity Wharf, which is an area of deep water frontage and as such, consideration must be given to policy E7 of the UDP. Policy E7 states that applications to develop existing employment or industrial sites which have a deep water frontage will only be approved where this type of location is essential to the proposed marine related employment use. It is proposed to develop this site for predominantly residential purposes with uses within A1/5 use class, which is at odds with policy E7. In their Planning Statement, the applicant puts forward four reasons of justification for the loss of this deep water frontage site. Firstly, the strong tidal current in this area and its close proximity to the floating bridge and the Red Funnel ferry terminal reduces the value of the site for wharfage purposes; secondly, the redevelopment of the Venture Quays site will result in the creation of a new deep water frontage, which will offset the loss; thirdly that the redevelopment of Trinity Wharf will assist in creating an area of waterfront public realm; and fourthly, it will help assist the viability of the proposed mixed use development. The proposals for the deep water frontage at the Venture Quays part of the application site provide a preferable deep water frontage because the there is greater room for manoeuvring, the frontage enables the inclusion of a boat hoist and a much larger area of land will be available for marine employment uses. For these reasons, a justification for an exception to policy E7 is considered acceptable.

6.1.5 Ferry Marshalling Facilities

· Policy TR10 states that development which will improve cross-Solent links will be approved, subject to the development being in an appropriate location and of a scale and design that is in keeping with the area; there would be no adverse impact on the environment and adequate access can be achieved to the existing transport network, including pedestrian, cycle and public transport links. Furthermore, policy TR11 states that the Council will approve appropriate land use proposals or traffic management schemes which would help to address the traffic and marshalling problems associated with the Island’s cross-Solent ferry terminals, subject to the scheme being in keeping with its surroundings; being an appropriate scale and operation for the location proposed and subject to there being no unacceptable detrimental or adverse environmental impact on the wider area in general.

· Existing problems are experienced in relation to ferry traffic and marshalling yard capacity in East Cowes. The existing yard only provides sufficient space to accommodate vehicles for the next ferry, which results in vehicles arriving early being turned away and forced to park elsewhere within the town. The existing yard is also split in two by a public highway and its location results in part of the waterfront being inaccessible to members of the public. The proposals have been designed in an attempt to address these existing problems.

· The potential impacts of the proposed marshalling yard on residential amenity are considered in section 6.4 below.

· Conditions are recommended to require details of the proposed ticket office building, detailed site layout, surfacing, lighting, boundary treatments and landscaping to be submitted for approval.

6.1.6 Retail Uses

Policy R1 requires that planning proposals that protect and maintain and/or enhance the retail function of defined town centres as a whole will be acceptable in principle. Parts of the application site are located immediately adjacent to the town centre boundary defined by policy R1 on the UDP proposals map. The proposed sites for A1-A5 uses and the proposed supermarket are located outside the town centre as defined by policy R1.

Policy R2 states that planning proposals for new retail developments will be acceptable in principle provided that they take place within defined town centre shopping areas. Outside of the defined shopping areas, planning applications for small shops will be approved. Policy R4 indicates that where no suitable town centre sites are available to meet an identified need, sites on the edge of town centres may be considered where it can be clearly demonstrated that no other sites with better access to a town centre are available or likely to become available; there is an overriding need for the scheme, the scheme does not have an unacceptable impact on the vitality and viability of existing centres and the overall proposal accords with the Council’s overall strategy for sustainable development, in particular in respect of the use of means of transport other than the car. In addition Policy R4 states that proposals will only be permitted when they will not result in the loss of identified employment land; do not have an unacceptable detrimental impact on the historic character of the town; provide appropriate parking and highway elements which contribute to the effective management of the town in accordance with the Council’s overall strategy for sustainable development.

The applicant’s Retail Assessment demonstrates that there is a clear and quantitative need for a significant enhancement in retail facilities, which includes the proposals for the foodstore and that the propose locations for such developments meets the sequential approach for retail development required by PPS6.

The Council’s Policy Officer agrees with the robustness of retail assessment and its findings.

6.1.7 Community and Leisure Uses and Open Space Provision

· The proposals include provisions for a health facility and community facility located adjacent to the proposed town square, at close proximity to the existing town centre boundary. The proposals to provide new health and community facilities within the development envelope and to meet the needs of the community they are to serve, are in accordance with policies U1 and U3 of the UDP.

· Policy U2 of the UDP requires that before granting planning permission for residential development, the Council shall be satisfied that adequate social, community, open space, play space, health, emergency and educational facilities will be available in the locality to meet the needs of future occupants, without detriment to existing users of those facilities. Where a likely shortfall in provision is identified as being the direct result of the development, the Council will require developers to provide additional facilities in parallel with additional housing development. The applicant has submitted an Audit of Community, Leisure and Sports Facilities. This indicates that the Astroturf facility at Osborne Middle School has largely satisfied the local need for outdoor recreation facilities. The Audit indicates that there is a lack of indoor recreation facilities, but that the proposed developments would not be of sufficient magnitude to justify new provision. A deficiency in library facilities has been identified and it is therefore proposed to include a community building within the development, which could accommodate a new library and/or youth facility.

· A section 106 agreement would require contributions to be made towards education, open space and community facilities.

· With regards to policies L10 and U2, open space and play area provision would be provided within the areas of residential development and a condition is recommended in this respect.

6.1.8 Tourism Related Uses

The proposals for hotels and the Maritime Heritage Experience are, in principal, in accordance with policy T1 of the UDP which states that planning proposals which promote and support tourism and/or seek to extend the tourist season will be acceptable in principle provided they minimise any detrimental or adverse impact and also policy T2 which indicates that planning applications for tourism facilities will be approved, provided that design, access, parking and landscaping are satisfactory.

Hotels and museums are referred to in PPS6 as town centre uses. The applicant has been asked to prepare a supplementary assessment, which is currently being prepared and will be made available before the committee report. The Strategic Development Framework of the Cowes Waterfront SPG includes the application site within Zone 1 "Town Centres, Leisure and Events" and the land uses shown include an extension of the town centre towards the waterfront and a visitor centre and hotel in that location.

6.1.9 Land Reclamation Works

· The proposals for land reclamation would provide extensions to the north and south of the previously approved Venture Quays Apron Extension which was estimated to result in a net loss of 0.5ha of sub-tidal SAC habitat. The current proposals would create two additional small areas of reclamation totalling approximately 0.29ha of land to the north and south of the extended apron area. Policy C9 of the UDP states that development will be permitted where the Council can ensure the protection of features of international importance which have been identified by the designation. The Environment Agency and English Nature have submitted holding objections in relation to potential impacts on the Solent Maritime SAC and the Solent and Southampton Water SPA. There are concerns that the proposal, ‘in combination’ with other plans or projects, is moving the estuary further away from an ideal stable state, and there are also concerns regarding the net loss of sub-tidal SAC estuarine habitat. In view of the likely impacts on the SAC/SPA, an Appropriate Assessment has been undertaken, as required by Regulation 48 of the Habitats Regulations 1994.

· The Appropriate Assessment evaluates the overall impact of the proposal on the European features of nature conservation interest and considers whether the proposal would result in an adverse effect on the integrity of the Solent & Southampton Waters SAC / SPA / Ramsar sites. The Appropriate Assessment is based upon information contained within the Environmental Statement. The Appropriate Assessment considers that in the medium to longer term, reclamations at East and West Cowes, around the mouth of the estuary, have the potential to have some indirect impacts resulting form sea-level rise. Intertidal losses at the mouth of the estuary have the potential to exacerbate coastal squeeze of sensitive habitats up-estuary of the floating bridge. Consequently, small intertidal losses which have negligible impacts currently could lead to greater impacts in the longer term. Nevertheless, any impacts from this plan would be so small as to be undetectable, therefore it is not considered appropriate to recommend any mitigation or monitoring with these proposals. It is therefore considered that the plan is unlikely to contribute to any adverse effects ‘in combination’ with other plans and projects. It is considered that the Phase 1 Marine Works plan is very small within the context of the estuary as a whole and is unlikely to give rise to adverse effects on the SAC / SPA / Ramsar features on its own.

· English Nature has agreed with the findings of the Appropriate Assessment.

· The Cowes Harbour Commissioner has not submitted any comments in respect of the proposals for land reclamation and its impact on, for example, navigation. Red Funnel’s comments make no specific reference to impact on the manoeuvring of ferries. Given that planning permission has already been granted for the Venture Quays apron extension and that these two small areas in comparison and do not project significantly further out than what has already been approved, it is unlikely that there would be any significant impact on navigation.

6.1.10 Flood Risk

Policy G6 states that the Council will not permit development in areas liable to flooding, or inundation from the sea, or where such problems could arise as a result of the proposed scheme, and will seek to keep such areas free from development. Where, in exceptional circumstances, planning permission is granted for development, the Council shall be satisfied that adequate precautions and measures have been taken to minimise the risk to life and property; adverse effects on adjoining or associated areas will not be exacerbated; and there is no increased risk of flooding elsewhere as a result. This policy also indicates that development in areas liable to flooding will not be permitted if either the development or the precautionary measures will have an adverse affect on the ecology of the watercourses and adjoining land associated with them. Policy C5 states that proposals for coastal protection works and flood prevention should be limited to areas of the built-up coastline and that new development which will increase the pressure for coastal defence or flood prevention measures will not be permitted.

The applicant has submitted a Flood Risk Assessment which outlines strategic proposals to deal with flood risk mitigation and considers the tidal and fluvial flood risk for both the existing and post development situation. In terms of the sequential test proposed in PPG25, the site is currently within flood risk category 3 or lower.

The Environment Agency has confirmed that the sequential test produced by the applicant is in accordance with PPG25 and does not object to the outline application on flood risk grounds. In terms of the two options put forward by the applicant for flood defences, the Agency advises that the land-raising option is their preferred approach. The Agency advises that each application submitted at the reserved matters stage must provide a detailed flood risk assessment. Appropriate conditions are recommended regarding flood risk and the provision of flood defence measures. There is a need to identify which elements of the development constitute flood defences and make provision for their long term maintenance and retention.

6.1.11 Phasing

· An indicative phasing plan has been submitted by the applicant which indicates that the development would be constructed within six broad phases over a ten year period. A condition is recommended to require full details of the proposed phasing to be submitted for subsequent approval.

6.2 Highways, Parking and Circulation

Policy TR3 states that planning proposals for development which minimise the need to travel, especially by car, will be acceptable in principle. The Council will therefore seek to locate new developments which will create significant travel demand, within existing defined settlements which are easily accessible by public transport, bicycle and on foot. Developments which include the opportunity for cycling and walking as alternatives are encouraged by policy TR6. Conditions are recommended in this regard.

Policy TR7 states that planning applications for new development will be approved where highway safety is taken into account.

· Concerns have been raised regarding the loss of parking facilities in Church Path. The highway proposals, however, indicate that car parking will be provided here.

· With regards to concerns raised regarding a lack of adequate pavements along Old Road, it is proposed that new footpaths would be provided, however, pavements, visibility and traffic calming would be considered at the detailed design stage.

A number of objections have been received with regards to loss of car parking and insufficient parking. On-street parking is proposed on York Avenue and the upper part of Castle Street, with drop off bays and taxi parking proposed on the lower part of Castle Street. A new surface car park and multi-storey car park are also proposed within the central area. The parking requirements for each element of the development will be considered at the reserved matters stage. The ES provides details which indicate that parking for each use will be in accordance with the Council’s parking guidelines and in accordance with Government guidance contained within PPG13. A condition is recommended to that ensure parking levels are in accordance with the Council’s guidelines.

There are two rights of way at Church Path. The applicant has indicated that there is no intention to obstruct the rights of way, but that it may be necessary to divert Church Path through the proposed town square. A note to applicant is attached regarding any possible future diversion.

In strategic highway network terms the Council’s Highway Engineer is satisfied that the proposed highway layouts provide sufficient capacity to accommodate the proposed development and provide some relief to the congestion currently encountered in East Cowes as a result of Red Funnel’s activities. Further modelling work is currently being undertaken to assess the impact of maximum ferry loadings on the local road network and junction operation.

6.3 Ecology and Nature Conservation

UDP policy C8 relates to the significance of nature conservation as a material consideration. In addition to the impacts upon statutory conservation areas discussed in the flood defence section above, the proposals also have wider biodiversity impacts, in particular, there are a number of issues relating to protected species at the site and existing trees and woodland. The woodland supports a small breeding population of red squirrels and a remarkably rich bat fauna. The proposals recognise the importance of the woodland and its protected species and the need to protect as much of it as possible. Through negotiation, the potential overall loss of woodland has been reduced to 17%. An outline woodland management plan has been submitted, which has particular emphasis on the conservation of red squirrels and bats. The plan essentially comprises the following elements: i) Enhancement of the existing woodland by diversifying woodland structure and composition; ii) Managing the public use of the woodland to minimize impacts, particularly to the veteran oaks; iii) Additional planting to reinforce linkages. This will be by using semi-mature stock, including thorny species to deter access, and withholding the development of the proposed residential units within the currently wooded area of the Sylvan Avenue area for a five year period from outline planning permission; iv) Developing a community sense of ownership.

With reference to protected species, there are bat roosts in some of the trees, but it is not proposed that any of these trees will be removed or subject to surgery. The Council’s Ecological Officer has advised that controlling light spillage within the vicinity of the woodland is important if this area is to remain suitable for use by woodland bats. A condition is recommended in this respect. The majority of buildings proposed for demolition show no evidence of use by bats, however, the survey has shown evidence of bat use of the Barracks Complex and some buildings have not been surveyed. A condition is therefore recommended requiring a mitigation strategy for bats using buildings be submitted.
With regards to red squirrels, it is not proposed to fell or prune any trees containing squirrel dreys. The retention of the woodland, together with other measures put in place through an agreed management plan will help to ensure that the woodland is still suitable for use by red squirrels during development and after completion. The extent of natural food resources is a limiting factor for red squirrels in this site and the population is maintained and enhanced by artificial feeding by local people. This is likely to continue, but the Council’s Ecological Officer does not consider that a mechanism of formal supplementary feeding should be introduced as a nature conservation tool. However, the provision of a range of natural food sources by planting of a selection of appropriate native tree and shrub species will be beneficial. It is also beneficial to ensure that new planting is well established and yielding crops prior to the development of the proposed residential units within the currently wooded area of the Sylvan Avenue area for a five year period from outline planning permission. The applicant has agreed to restrict the development of this area for this period.

Policy C12 of the UDP relates to development which would result in the loss or damage to trees or woodland of which contribute to the character or amenity of and states that development will not be approved, unless the Council is satisfied that there is an overriding need for the development and appropriate replacement planting is undertaken on the site. The area of highest amenity on the site is the woodland area situated near Sylvan Avenue. The proposals allow for the retention of a sizable part of this area, which will retain the character and amenity it already contributes to the surrounding area and will also assist the assimilation of any new development to that area. The siting of the development is a Reserved Matter and as such, the impact that the positioning of the proposed dwellings on the retained trees will be considered at the detailed planning stage, when the submission of a detailed survey will be required to consider root protection and shading. The majority of trees throughout the rest of the site will be removed. The Council’s Arboricultural Officer is satisfied that this is necessary due to the poor condition and low amenity value of these trees, but advises that the layout for this part of the site should include adequate space in which heavy standard trees could be planted to enhance the amenity of the area.

6.4 Residential Amenity and Visual Amenity

· In consideration of policies D1 and D2, objections have been raised from existing residents in relation to loss of light, loss of privacy and overbearing. Such matters would be given full consideration when the siting and design of the proposed buildings is considered as part of subsequent reserved matters applications. With regards to concerns raised by residents on Old Road, the applicant has provided illustrative sections to show the relationship between the existing and proposed buildings, in addition to sections showing the relationship between existing dwellings and the former buildings within the application site that have since been demolished. These illustrate that the maximum height of the proposed buildings would be of a similar height to the buildings which they would replace.

Policy G10 requires that before granting planning permission for development, in particular residential development, account will be taken of the potential for conflict between existing adjoining or surrounding development and activities. The developer has undertaken a noise assessment and noise, vibration and air quality will be given further consideration at the reserved matters stage when detailed applications for residential development in the areas closest to the employment and ferry marshalling uses are considered. A condition is recommended to require further assessment and appropriate mitigation measures to be undertaken as required.

Objections have been received regarding the proposed apartment buildings on Old Road, in particular, in relation to their design, height and the loss of the existing building line. The building heights plan sets out the maximum parameters on which the assessments within the ES are based, however, details of the siting, height, scale, massing and design will be considered at the Reserved Matters stage.

· Concern has been raised regarding the height of the proposed buildings and the subsequent impact on TV reception. This matter cannot be properly assessed at this stage as approval for the siting and height of buildings is not sought. It is therefore recommended that a condition is attached requiring the developer to undertake assessments for submission and consideration alongside subsequent reserved matters applications.

6.5 Archaeology and Cultural Heritage

Policy B2 of the UDP states that proposals that adversely affect the appearance, setting and/or the curtilage of a Listed Building will not be permitted. Policy B6 relates to the protection and enhancement of Conservation Areas. English Heritage has expressed a number of concerns with respect to the site abuts and slightly overlaps the East Cowes conservation area, and also affects a small number of listed buildings and their settings. During the design and consultation process the applicant has taken these constraints into account and the Council’s Conservation Officer is satisfied that for the purposes of the outline application, there will be no harm caused to them. Further consideration will be given to such matters as part of the subsequent reserved matters applications. The Council’s Conservation Officer has some reservations in relation to the indicative height of the some of the town centre blocks, again, this would be given detailed consideration at the reserved matters stage.

With regards to concerns raised in relation to the loss of the wall at Church Path, the section of the wall, including the gates, which forms part of the curtilage of the church is listed in its own right (Grade II) and is intended to be retained. Any works to this wall would require listed building consent and this would be considered in detail at that time. The further length of the wall is not Listed, but is recognised as a significant local feature. This matter will be taken into consideration when dealing with proposals at the reserved matters stage and developers will be encouraged to incorporate as much of the wall as possible into their schemes either by incorporating it into their structures or by using it within the surrounding spaces.

English Heritage have raised a number of concerns in relation to visual amenity, site layout, heights of buildings, topography, relationship to the existing historic fabric and proposed elevational form. The eaves height of the Columbine building is 12metres and some of the large buildings on Clarence Road equate to modern four storey buildings. The building heights plan and the parameters set in the ES, in conjunction with the Design Statement, indicate that there is the potential for taller buildings of up to 15m to eaves height to be provided, for example at Trinity Wharf. The development would include a mixture of maximum building heights across the application site ranging from 5m at eaves to 15m at eaves. In the area between Old Road and the Sylvan Avenue woodland, residential heights are restricted to 9 metres at eaves. The applicant is undertaking an ongoing design coding exercise which will consider street frontages and general treatment of the public realm.

· With regards to the loss of Seaholme and the Columbine building, these are not Listed buildings, but they do have some historic importance. The Columbine building has a limited life expectancy and is not suitable to meet the requirements of current marine related business.

· Policy B9 relates to the protection of archaeological heritage. The Council’s Archaeological Officer has advised that the site is located within an area of significant archaeological potential and that the development envelope has the potential to sustain archaeological deposits across site. A further program of archaeological intervention is required across site in order to arrive at an adequate mitigation strategy. A condition is recommended requiring that no development takes place until the applicant has secured the implementation of a programme of archaeological works in accordance with a written scheme of investigation.

6.6 Consideration of Other Issues Raised

· With regards to foul and surface water drainage, the Environment Agency has made a number of comments and recommendations. Appropriate conditions have been attached requiring detailed schemes to be prepared and submitted for approval.

· Objections have been raised in relation to the loss of slipways for boats and the loss of boatyard at the Grid Iron building. The Medina and White Hart slipways will be retained and the boathouse is to be retained. With regards to the objections in relation to the public slipway adjoining the Red Funnel linkspan, there are no proposals to close or remove this facility. Facilities for launching boast would be enhanced by the incorporation of a boat hoist into the Venture Quays proposals.

· Concern has also been raised regarding the loss of the public toilets. This is a matter that requires consideration to be given at a strategic level.

6.7 Section 106 Agreement Issues

Members are advised that officers have been undertaking negotiations regarding the Section 106 benefits which can be reasonably achieved from development of this site. Heads of terms have been discussed and a draft agreement has been prepared. Members are also advised that the various departmental recipients of contribution have been involved.

7.Conclusion and Justification for Recommendation

7.1 Overall, it is evident that the scheme will deliver a significant number of benefits to East Cowes and the wider area, principally through the regeneration of an area which has suffered since the closure of the GKN North Works. The proposals would also alleviate existing traffic problems experienced in the area by the relocation and enhancement of the ferry marshalling facilities. The scheme would result in benefits for the community through the provision of community and health facilities, new retail facilities, and new residential accommodation. There would also be economic and tourism benefits through the provision of the Maritime Heritage Experience and hotel accommodation. It is considered that appropriate weight to all material considerations referred to in the Report has been given and that the brownfield site is appropriate for mixed use development, subject to the conditions suggested and the Section 106 agreement and therefore approval is recommended.

7.2 Should Members be minded to approve this application then it will have to be referred to GOSE (Government Office South East) under the Town and Country Planning (Departure) Regulations.

8. Recommendation

Approval subject to reference to GOSE; and subject to the applicant entering into a s278 agreement with the local highway authority and subject to the completion of a Section 106 Agreement covering the following:

· Provision of 30% affordable housing (60% social rented and 40% shared ownership)

· Education contribution: £2,145 per private residential unit of 2+ bedrooms

· Open space and community facilities: £250,000

· Ecological and open-space management and maintenance plans

· Public realm enhancements and Public Art: a Design Code will be funded up to £50,000

· Transport enhancements to the value of £100,000

· Flood Defences - detailed design, construction, long term maintenance and renewal.

Failure on the part of the applicant to sign the s106 obligation within 3 months of the date of the first draft being sent out will render the application liable to being reconsidered by the LPA based on a refusal of the applicant to enter into this legal agreement.

Conditions/Reasons:

The development of the ferry marshalling facilities (as shown on Drawing No. XXXX received xxxx 2006) and land reclamation works (as shown on Drawing No. SK/01/C received 5th January 2006) hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of 5 years from the date of this permission.

Reason: In recognition of the scale of the project proposals and the wider regeneration benefits.

No development of the ferry marshalling facilities (as shown on Drawing No. XXXX received xxxx 2006) shall be commenced unless and until a scheme detailing its layout and surfacing, the position, design, height and materials of any boundary treatments and full landscaping details for this area have been submitted to and agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall proceed in strict accordance with the approved details and maintained as such thereafter.

Reason: In the interests of the amenities of the area and to comply with policy D1 (Standards of Design) of the IW Unitary Development Plan.

No development of the ferry marshalling facilities (as shown on Drawing No. XXXX received xxxx 2006) shall be commenced unless and until a scheme detailing the arrangements for HGV waiting and parking between the hours of 2000 and 0800 has been submitted for the written approval of the Local Planning Authority. The scheme shall include details of the areas of the marshalling yard that will be used for HGV waiting and parking outside the specified hours; the means by which HGV’s will be restricted to waiting and parking outside the specified hours to the specified areas; and noise attenuation measures (which may include mobile barriers) that will be implemented. Following written approval by the Local Planning Authority the operation and management of the ferry marshalling yard shall proceed in strict accordance with the approved details unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: To safeguard the amenity of existing and future residents, in accordance with policy P5 of the IW Unitary Development Plan

No development of the ferry marshalling facilities (as shown on Drawing No. XXXX received xxxx 2006) shall be commenced unless and until full details of the size, siting, height, access details, design and external appearance of the ferry ticket office building have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall proceed in strict accordance with the approved details.

Reason: In the interests of the amenities of the area and to comply with policy D1 (Standards of Design) of the IW Unitary Development Plan.

No development of the ferry marshalling facilities (as shown on Drawing No. XXXX received xxxx 2006) shall be commenced unless and until a scheme detailing the proposed artificial lighting for that part of the application site has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Such scheme shall demonstrate through the use of a lux diagram the intensity of light within the marshaling yard and the adjacent existing and proposed uses of land and any proposals to mitigate any unacceptable light spillage. The development shall be carried out in strict accordance with the approved lighting scheme and maintained as such thereafter.

Reason: In the interests of maintaining the amenity value of the area and to comply with policy D4 (Light Spillage) of the IW Unitary Development Plan.

No development of the ferry marshalling facilities (as shown on Drawing No. XXXX received xxxx 2006) shall be commenced unless and until a site investigation report (the Report) has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The site investigation shall address the nature, degree and distribution of ground contamination and ground gases on that part of the site and shall include an identification and assessment of the risk to receptors as defined under the Environmental Protection Act 1990, Part IIA, focusing primarily on risks to human health and controlled waters. The site investigation shall also address the implications of ground conditions on the health and safety of site workers, on nearby occupied building structures, on services and landscaping schemes and on wider environmental receptors including ecological systems and property. The site investigation shall include a risk assessment an options appraisal and details of remedial works and a timescale/programme for their implementation.

No development on that part of the site shall be commenced unless and until the methodology for the risk assessment and the sampling and analytical strategy has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The site investigation shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.

The development on that part of the site shall be carried out in accordance with the approved Report including its recommendations, remedial works and the timescale for implementation.

Prior to discharge of the Contaminated Land Condition, a Site Completion Report for that part of the site shall be submitted to the Local Planning Authority for approval. The Site Completion Report shall validate that all works and their timing undertaken on site were completed in accordance with those agreed by the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: To protect the environment and prevent harm to human health by ensuring that where necessary the land is remediated to an appropriate standard in order to comply with Part IIA of the Environmental Protection Act 1990, in accordance with policy P3 of the IW Unitary Development Plan

No development associated with the land reclamation works (as shown on Drawing No. SK/01/C received 5th January 2006) shall be commenced until full details of the materials and finishes to be used in the construction of the external surfaces of the land reclamation works hereby permitted have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.

Reason: In the interests of the amenities of the area and to comply with policy D1 (Standards of Design) of the IW Unitary Development Plan.

No development associated with the land reclamation works (as shown on Drawing No. SK/01/C received 5th January 2006) shall be commenced until full details of the methods to be used in the construction of the land reclamation works, including hours of operation have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the agreed methods and hours of operation.

Reason: In the interests of the amenities and character of the area and to comply Policies C1 (Standards of Design), C8 (Nature Conservation as a Material Consideration) and C9 (Sites of International Importance for Nature Conservation) of the IW Unitary Development Plan.

Proposed Conditions Relating to Whole Application Site

Applications for approval of reserved matters must be made not later than the expiration of three years 5 years beginning with the date of this permission and the development must be begun not later than the expiration of two years from the final approval of the reserved matters, or, in the case of approval on different dates, the final approval of the last such matter to be approved.

Reason: To comply with Section 92 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.

No development shall be started until full details of the following reserved matters have been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority:

- the layout of the site, including the disposition of buildings and roads and provision for parking and servicing;

- plans and elevations showing the design of all buildings and other structures;

- the colour and type of facing materials to be used for all external walls and roofs;

- a landscape scheme for the site which shall include details of trees and shrubs to be planted, any existing trees to be retained, or felled indicating the spread of the branches and trunk positions, walls, fences, boundary and surface treatment.

Reason: In order to secure a satisfactory development and be in accordance with policies S6 (Standards of Design), D1 (Standards of Design), D2 (Standards of Development Within the Site), D3 (Landscaping), TR7 (Highway Consideration for New Development) of the IW Unitary Development Plan.

The development on this site shall be carried out in substantial accordance with the zoned areas illustrating locations for buildings and the ground and upper floor uses (as shown on Drawing Nos. 1953/05/1202A and 1203 received 5^th January 2006) and the maximum heights of buildings within these areas (as shown on amended Drawing No. 1953/05/1204A received by e-mail 20^th June 2006).

Reason: In order to secure a satisfactory development that is in compliance with the Environmental Statement and in accordance with policies S5 and S10 of the IW Unitary Development Plan.

The development on this site shall be carried out in substantial accordance with the circulation, movement and highway improvements (as shown on Drawing Nos. XXXXXXXXXXXXXX received XXXXXX 2006)

Reason: In order to secure a satisfactory development in compliance with the Environmental Statement and in the interests of highway safety in accordance with policy TR7 (Highway Considerations) of the IW Unitary Development Plan

No more than 10, 488 sq m total floorspace of B1, B2 and B8 (Employment) uses; 4, 495 sq m total floorspace of A1, A2, A3, A4 and A5 (Retail) uses; 910 sq m total floorspace of D1 (Health) uses; 1, 065 sq m total floorspace of D1 (Community) uses; 7, 620 sq m total floorspace of C1 (Hotels) uses; and 550 units of C3 (Residential Dwellings) shall be constructed within the application site.

Reason: In accordance with the submitted Environmental Impact Assessment and traffic assessment against which the application has been assessed. Any material alteration from such assessments may have an impact which has not been subject to proper consideration against the relevant planning policies.

All uses, construction of buildings and operations associated with the development hereby permitted shall be carried out in a manner that falls within the parameters of the Environment Statement (as amended) including all of the relevant mitigation measures, unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: To keep to a minimum the impacts associated with the development in the interests of the designated sites and the amenities of the area and nearby residential occupiers and to comply with the strategic policy S10 (Designated and Defined Areas) and policies G4 (General Locational Criteria for Development), G10 (Potential Conflict Between Proposed Development and Existing Surrounding Uses), C1 (Protection of Landscape Character), C8 (Nature Conservation as a Material Consideration) and C9 (Sites of International Importance for Nature Conservation) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.

A detailed phasing programme for the development shall be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority in writing before any operations are commenced. The programme shall include the withholding of residential development adjacent to the Sylvan Avenue area (as shown on plan ref: 1953/05/1210 ) for a five year period from the date of this permission. The development shall proceed in accordance with the approved phasing programme, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: To ensure the development is carried out in a properly phased manner in compliance with policy G4 (General Locational Criteria for Development); to protect the nature conservation and bio-diversity of the site in accordance with policy C8 (Nature Conservation) and in accordance with D2 (Standards for Development within the Site) of the IW Unitary Development Plan.

Applications for the approval of Reserved Matters shall be accompanied by full details of the location and layout of the site compound (s) for that part of the site. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.

Reason: In the interests of maintaining the amenity value of the area and maintaining the amenity of existing residents, in accordance with policies C1 (Protection of Landscape Character), D1 (Standards of Design) and D2 (Standards for Development Within the Site) of the IW Unitary Development Plan.

Applications for the approval of Reserved Matters that incorporate residential uses at plots 4A, 4B and 7C (as shown on plan ref: 1953/05/1206) shall be accompanied by a report incorporating detailed noise and vibration and air quality assessments in respect of the impact of ferry movements and the marshalling yard activities and shall include a mitigation strategy. The report shall include details of specific design features to protect future residents against low-frequency noise and vibration. The development shall be carried out in strict accordance with the approved details and the agreed design features shall thereafter be retained.

Reason: To safeguard the amenity of existing and future residents, in accordance with policy P5 of the IW Unitary Development Plan.

Applications for the approval of Reserved Matters that incorporate residential development at plots 1A, 1B, 1C and 1D (as shown on plan ref: 1953/05/1206) shall be accompanied by a full arboricultural survey and report. The report shall include a detailed assessment of root protection zones and shade casting. The development shall be carried out in strict accordance with the approved details and incorporate any mitigation measures identified.

Reason: To allow the proper consideration of the impact of the proposed development on the amenity value of the existing site and to comply with policies D3 (Landscaping) and C12 (Development affecting Trees and Woodland) of the IW Unitary Development Plan.

Applications for the approval of Reserved Matters shall be accompanied by a site investigation report. The site investigation shall address the nature, degree and distribution of ground contamination and ground gases on that part of the site and shall include an identification and assessment of the risk to receptors as defined under the Environmental Protection Act 1990, Part IIA, focusing primarily on risks to human health and controlled waters. The site investigation shall also address the implications of ground conditions on the health and safety of site workers, on nearby occupied building structures, on services and landscaping schemes and on wider environmental receptors including ecological systems and property. The site investigation shall include a risk assessment an options appraisal and details of remedial works and a timescale/programme for their implementation.

The development on that part of the site shall be carried out in accordance with the approved Report including its recommendations, remedial works and the timescale for implementation.

Applications for the approval of Reserved Matters for buildings shall be accompanied by full details of the arrangements for the storage and collection of refuse and recycling facilities. The details shall include the location, design and screening of such facilities. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details and thereafter maintained.

Reason: To ensure that adequate provision is made for the provision of bin and recycling facilities and collection of waste in accordance with Policy W1 of the IW Unitary Development Plan.

Applications for approval of Reserved Matters submitted pursuant to this permission relating to the design of new buildings and to the landscaping of the public realm shall be accompanied by a design statement which explains the underlying approach of the design.

Reason: In order to secure a satisfactory development and be in accordance with policies S6 (Standards of Design), D1 (Standards of Design), D2 (Standards of Development Within the Site).

Applications for the approval of Reserved Matters in respect of buildings shall be accompanied by a scheme demonstrating the incorporation of energy efficiency measures into the design and operation of the buildings. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved scheme.

Reason: In the interests of making more efficient uses of existing resources and renewable energy, in accordance with policy D13 (Energy Conservation) of the IW Unitary Development Plan.

Applications for the approval of Reserved Matters in respect of buildings shall be accompanied by a scheme demonstrating the incorporation of renewable energy options to be used in the design and operation of the buildings. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved scheme.

Reason: In the interests of making more efficient uses of existing resources and renewable energy, in accordance with policy D13 (Energy Conservation) of the IW Unitary Development Plan.

Applications for the approval of Reserved Matters shall be accompanied by a scheme detailing the proposals for artificial lighting. The development shall be carried out in strict accordance with the approved lighting scheme.

Reason: In the interests of maintaining the amenity value of the area to comply with policy D4 (Light Spillage) and to protect the nature conservation and bio-diversity of the site in accordance with policy C8 (Nature Conservation) of the IW Unitary Development Plan.

Applications for the approval of Reserved Matters shall be accompanied by full details of the existing and proposed ground levels for that part of the site. The development shall be constructed and completed in accordance with the approved details.

Reason: In the interests of maintaining the amenity value of the area and maintaining the visual amenity of existing residents, in accordance with policies C1 (Protection of Landscape Character), D1 (Standards of Design) and D2 (Standards for Development Within the Site) of the IW Unitary Development Plan.

No construction traffic shall enter the public highway during the site development unless their wheels and chassis have been cleaned to prevent material being deposited on the highway.

Reason: In the interests of highway safety and to comply with policy TR7 (Highway Considerations) of the IW Unitary Development Plan.

All construction traffic related to the approved development will deliver, load and un-load on a route and at times approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: In the interests of highway safety and to comply with policy TR7 (Highway Considerations) of the IW Unitary Development Plan.

The development shall proceed in accordance with the maximum car parking, cycle parking and lorry parking standards detailed in Table 7.6 of the Transport Assessment. Applications for approval of Reserved Matters shall be accompanied by full details of the level of parking provision and its location and in the case of cycle parking, details of the storage facilities and location. Details of disabled persons car parking provision shall also be submitted. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.

Reason: In compliance with policy TR16 (Parking Policies and Guidelines) of the IW Unitary Development Plan.

Piling or any other foundation designs using penetrative methods will not be permitted other than with the express written consent of the Local Planning Authority, which may be given for those parts of the site where it has been demonstrated that there is no resultant risk to groundwater.

Reason: To prevent pollution of the water environment to comply with Policy U19 of the IW Unitary Development Plan.

Prior to the commencement of any phase of development including site clearance and preparation a Noise Management Scheme shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The Scheme shall detail the works involved for various stages of the development and shall detail the impact of noise and vibration from the proposed works on neighbouring noise sensitive properties including existing dwellings and future residents of the proposed development. The Scheme shall detail any mitigation measures which are required to minimise the impact of noise and vibration from the construction phase of the development on the neighbouring noise sensitive properties. The construction phases of the development shall be carried out in strict accordance with the approved Scheme and associated mitigation measures unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: To safeguard the amenity of existing and future residents, in accordance with policy P5 of the IW Unitary Development Plan.

Prior to the commencement of any phase of development including site clearance and preparation a Dust Management Plan for the site clearance/site remodelling and construction phases shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The Plan shall examine all aspects of the site preparation and construction phases where the generation of dust is feasible and further identify control measures to mitigate the generation of dust. The Dust Management Plan shall contain recommendations for measures to adequately control the generation of dust on the site including the access and egress of vehicles on and off the site. The development shall be carried out in strict accordance with the approved Plan unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: To safeguard the amenity of existing and future residents, in accordance with policy P5 of the IW Unitary Development Plan.

Construction works should not occur before 08.00hrs or after 18.00hrs Monday to Fridays inclusive and Saturdays 08.00 to 13.00hrs and there should be no working or deliveries to the site outside those hours.

Reason: To safeguard the amenity of existing and future residents, in accordance with policy P5 of the IW Unitary Development Plan.

No scrub clearance should take place between the months of March to July inclusive.

Reason: In order to prevent disturbance to wildlife and habitats in accordance with policy C8 (Nature Conservation) of the IW Unitary Development Plan.

Any buildings on the site which are to be removed and which have the potential to provide bat roosts shall be surveyed by a competent specialist one month prior to their removal. If the presence of bats is recorded mitigation measures shall be first submitted to and agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The removal of such buildings shall be carried out in accordance with the approved mitigation measures.

Reason: In order to prevent disturbance to wildlife and habitats in accordance with policy C8 (Nature Conservation) of the IW Unitary Development Plan.

Notwithstanding the details contained within the ES, no development shall be commenced unless and until a detailed pedestrian and cyclist access strategy including timescales for its implementation has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The strategy shall include full details of the network of paths and links to existing routes. The strategy shall include full details of path standards including their dimensions, construction and surface materials. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved strategy.

Reason: To ensure an adequate level and standard of provision in appropriate locations, in accordance with policies TR17 (Public Rights of Way) and TR6 (Cycling and Walking) of the IW Unitary Development Plan.

No development shall take place on site until a scheme for the disposal of foul and storm water/surface water has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Thereafter the development shall not be occupied until the agreed scheme of foul and storm/surface water disposal has been implemented and is operational to the reasonable satisfaction of the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: To ensure that surface water run-off is satisfactorily accommodated and to comply with policies G6 (Development in Areas Liable to Flooding) and G7 (Development on Unstable Land) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan and to minimise the risk of pollution and to comply with policy P1 (Pollution and Development) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.

No development shall be commenced unless and until a scheme outlining the overall provisions for open space within or adjacent to the proposed residential development sites and including a landscape management plan, detailing long-term design objectives, management responsibilities and maintenance schedules for all landscaped areas, other than privately owned domestic gardens has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The open space provision and landscape management shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details

Reason: To ensure a satisfactory level of amenity for future residents and to ensure the provision of long-term maintenance at the site, in accordance with Policies L10 (Open Space in Housing Development) and D3 (Landscaping) of the IW Unitary Development Plan.

No development shall be commenced within the application site until the applicant has secured the implementation of a programme of archaeological works in accordance with a written scheme of investigation which shall have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development of the site shall be carried out in accordance with the approved scheme of investigation.

Reason: To preserve by record archaeological remains of local and regional importance in compliance with in Ministerial Circular DOE 11/95 and in PPG 16 and Policy B9 of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.

The proposed development must provide appropriate flood defence measures to protect against the 1 in 200 year extreme tidal event for the year 2015 and the 1 in 100 year fluvial event. Applications for approval of Reserved Matters for buildings within the flood plain shall be accompanied by a detailed flood risk assessment demonstrating protection against the 1 in 200 year tidal and 1 in 100 year fluvial events. The assessment shall include details of the design, construction, long term maintenance and renewal of defences. The development shall proceed in accordance with the approved flood defence measures.

Reason: To ensure the provision of adequate flood defences to the required standard, in accordance with PPG25 and policies G6 (Development in Areas Liable to Flooding) and C5 (Coastal Protection Works – Developed Coastline) of the IW Unitary Development Plan.

The proposed development must not increase flood risk during the construction phase and therefore no new residential development must be implemented unless adequate flood defence measures are in place.

Reason: To reduce flood risk to the site during construction in accordance with PPG25 and policies G6 (Development in Areas Liable to Flooding) and C5 (Coastal Protection Works – Developed Coastline) of the IW Unitary Development Plan.

No infiltration of surface water drainage into the ground is permitted other than with the express written consent of the Local Planning Authority, which may be given for those parts of the site where it has been demonstrated that there is no resultant risk to controlled waters.

Reason: To prevent pollution of the water environment, with policy P1 (Pollution and Development) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.

Informatives:

This development is subject to the planning obligation entered into by the applicant under Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, prior to the granting of planning permission.

This grant of planning permission does not authorise the closure or diversion of any public right of way until the appropriate order has been made.

The applicant is advised that the requirements of all the conditions precedent must be satisfied prior to the commencement of the development. Failure to satisfy the conditions precedent renders all development unauthorised and unlawful and appropriate action may be taken by the Council.

The applicant’s attention is drawn to the following design guides produced by the Council:

www.iow.gov.uk/living_here/planning/images/open_space.pdf; www.iow.gov.uk/living_here/planning/images/Affordable_Housing.pdf;and www.iow.gov.uk/living_here/planning/images/Communitysafety.pdf.

The applicant's attention is drawn to the contents of the attached letter from the Environment Agency.

The applicant's attention is drawn to the contents of the attached letter from Southern Water.

A formal application for connection to the water supply is required in order to service this development. Please contact Southern Water’s Network Development Team (Water) based in Chatham, Kent.

The developer must advise the local authority (in consultation with Southern Water) of the measures which will be undertaken to protect the public sewers, prior to the commencement of the development.

It is recommended that anybody involved with inspecting or carrying out work on trees at the site is made aware of the possible presence of bat roosts in and to proceed with caution. If bats are discovered at any time, work must cease and advice sought from a licensed bat worker.

Your attention is drawn to the provisions of the Building Regulations, and related legislation which must be complied with.

The applicant’s attention is drawn to the need to comply with the requirements of the Control of Pollution Act 1974 concerning construction site noise and in this respect you are advised to contact the Council’s Environmental Health Division.

The applicant is advised that this permission does not authorise the display of advertisements at the premises and separate consent may be required from the Local Planning Authority under the Town and Country Planning (Control of Advertisements) Regulations 1992.

The following policies from the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan were considered relevant in determining this application: H3(64), W5, R1, L4, S1, S2, S3, S7, S11, S14, G1, G4, G6, G10, D1, D2 D13, D14, B2, B6, B7 ,B9, H1, H2, H4, H14, T1, T2, E1, E3, E7, E9, C5, C8, C9, C12, P1, P5, TR1, TR3, TR4, TR6, TR7, TR8 , TR10, TR11, TR16, TR17, TR2, R4, U1, U2, U3, U11 and L10.

Reference Number: P/00563/06 – TCP/18291/D

Parish/Name: East Cowes – Ward/Name: Osborne

Registration Date: 03/03/2006 - Outline Planning Permission

Officer: Mr P Salmon Tel: (01983) 823552

Applicant: Barratt (Southampton) Ltd

Outline consent for 9.9 hectares of residential development; 9.9 hectares of employment development; managed woodland; nature conservation areas; proposed access road junction with Whippingham Road & Beatrice Avenue; network of public footpaths/cycleways; public transport link only to Kingston Road

land bounded by Kingston Fm Lane/Cadets Walk/Kingslea Park/Beatrice Ave, E Cowes power station/agricultural land/south of E Cowes Vics football ground inc land off, Whippingham Road, East Cowes, PO32

The application is recommended for Conditional Permission subject to a s106 Agreement and reference to GOSE under the Town and Country Planning (Residential Development on Greenfield Land) (England) Directions 2000) as the site is likely to generate in excess of 150 units.

REASON FOR COMMITTEE CONSIDERATION

This is a major application of strategic significance relating to a site allocated for both residential and employment uses in the Unitary Development Plan.

This report to the Development Control Sub Committee has been prepared by Helen Ashworth of Urban Vision for Phil Salmon, Development Team Manager on behalf of the Isle of Wight Council.

4. Introduction

1.1 This application represents a resubmission of a planning application submitted by the applicant in September 2005. Members will recall that the previous application, which had an officer recommendation for approval, was considered by Members and refused at the Committee in January 2006. There were three reasons for the refusal of the application, as follows:

1) The site is a Greenfield location in an area that has alternative brownfield opportunities and will create a development that is not adequately linked to or integrated with the adjacent urban area and encourages reliance upon the car to access facilities and as such is contrary to guidance provided by Planning Policy Statement (PPS) 1 – Delivering Sustainable Development and PPS7 – Development in the Countryside, and is contrary to policies S1 (Development to be Concentrated Within Existing Urban Areas), S2 (Development to be Encouraged on Brownfield Sites) and S11 (Reduction of the Impact and Reliance on the Car) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.

2) The proposals fail to make adequate provision for locally affordable housing depriving the whole community access to housing and is contrary to guidance provided by Planning Policy Guidance Note 3(PPG3) Housing and to policy H14 (Locally Affordable Housing as an Element of Housing Schemes) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.

3) The proposals would represent an over-development of the site at an excessive density, in an area that is not close to local facilities and would be out of character with the prevailing pattern of development of the surrounding area and is contrary to policy H6 (High Density Residential Development) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.

1.2 This application is essentially the same as that previously submitted, but the applicant has attempted to address the reasons for refusal, following meetings with Council officers and Members. The applicant has made amendments to the phasing of the proposed development (the provision of the access road in one phase, rather than linked to the release of housing, to allow the employment land to developed at an early stage and to enable traffic to be diverted away from Kingston Road and existing residential uses and the establishment of a bus route at an earlier stage), has increased the provision of affordable housing within the development (from 25% to 30% across the site and 36% of these would be provided within the first phase) and has reduced the number of dwellings proposed (by six). The applicant has also submitted details with regards to brownfield versus greenfield issues, site sustainability issues and a property market report, which considers housing market demand in the area.

2. Details of Application

4.7 This is an outline application for residential and employment development on a 20ha site with means of access only to be considered. All other matters, including siting, design, external appearance and landscaping, are reserved for subsequent approval. The application site boundary also incorporates 25ha of land which will be covered by a long term ecological management plan and will include areas of ecological mitigation.

2.2 The application is accompanied by an Environmental Statement (ES), which considers the potential significant environmental effects and includes an assessment of air quality, community and social effects, cultural heritage, ground conditions, land use, landscape and visual effects, natural heritage, noise, traffic and transport and water quality and hydrology. There are also separate transport assessments and drainage flood risk assessment and services report.

2.3 The application is also accompanied by an illustrative Masterplan, indicative siting plan, a planning and design statement and a surface water and foul drainage strategy.

2.4 In summary, the proposal comprises 10ha of residential development to the north-east of the site, 10ha of employment development to the north-west of the site, a new vehicular access from Whippingham Road, footpaths and cycleways, open space provision and children’s play areas and an ecological buffer.

2.5 The development details are as follows:

2.5.1 The Masterplan

The Masterplan provides the framework for the development proposals. In addition, plans for the design of the landscape buffer, drainage strategy and illustrative siting of buildings are also provided. The Masterplan provides an indication of proposed land uses and maximum heights of buildings. Residential development of a maximum height of 15m (4 storey) is proposed in the eastern part of the site. An area of open space is proposed to the south-west corner of the residential site, which connects to Beatrice Avenue at the north-east corner of the site via a pedestrian boulevard link. The proposed employment area would be situated within the western part of the site. The Masterplan identifies maximum heights of buildings within three broad areas of the employment site. Adjacent to Kingston Copse and the proposed residential development, building heights would be a maximum of 12m. In the central part of the employment site, adjacent to the existing dwellings at Kingslea Park and the south-western part of the site, building heights would be a maximum of 15m. In the western part of the employment site, adjacent to the power station and the closest part of the development to the River, building heights would be a maximum of 17m. The proposed access road from Whippingham Road is positioned to the south of the existing track that leads to the former sewage works. The fields to the south of the access road will remain for habitat creation and enhancement. This will include ecological mitigation works comprising a wetland area, Wader roosting area and grassland scrub for reptiles will be undertaken in this area. An ecological buffer zone is proposed to separate the development site from the River. Balancing ponds are proposed to the west of Kingston Copse.

2.5.2 Access and Movement

The access road would be taken from Whippingham Road via a new roundabout and would be 7.3m wide with a 2m wide footway to the northern side. The existing streetlighting may need to be upgraded in this location. A staggered junction would be created where the road crosses Beatrice Avenue. Two alternatives were considered for the proposed access road within the development site – to enter the site to the north of the hedge, cutting through Kingston Copse, which was rejected due to loss of ecological habitat and disturbance; and as currently proposed, to enter the site south of the hedge, cutting through the hedge to access the residential area (midway between Kingston Copse and Beatrice Avenue) and with access to the employment area to the west of Kingston Copse. No direct access is proposed from Beatrice Avenue, except for emergency vehicles. The northern end of the access road will terminate close to the power station gates and the junction of Kingston Road/Cadets Walk. A closure is proposed to prevent vehicular access to and from Kingston Road and the site, with the exception of buses – access will be controlled by the introduction of a ‘bus gate’.

Access for pedestrians, cycles and emergency vehicles is proposed between Beatrice Avenue and the residential development. Footpaths are proposed within/around Kingston Copse and adjacent to the hedge to the west of Beatrice Avenue, linking with the footpath at St. Mildred’s Church.

2.5.3 Residential Development

The ES is based on the assumption of a maximum of 557 dwellings on 10ha, giving a maximum density of 55 dwellings per hectare. The ES also assumes the following mix of sizes: 8.5% one bedroom, 47.5% two bedroom, 37% three bedroom and 7% four bedroom. The ES also assumes a maximum height of four-storey or 15m. 25% of the dwellings will be affordable. In a covering letter in respect of this resubmitted planning application, the applicant has confirmed that the actual number of dwellings now proposed is 551 (a reduction of 6 from the original proposals).

2.5.4 Employment Development

In order to assess worst case traffic generation, the ES is based on the assumption that the site is split into 4.1ha of 50:50 mix of B1 (business) and marine related B2 (general industrial) /B8 (storage and distribution) uses in the northern part of the site and 5.9ha of marine related B2/B8 uses in the southern part of the site. The maximum heights of buildings are as described in section 1.5.1 of this report. The maximum floorspaces are:

7, 620m² of I uses; 10, 422m² of mixed I/ I/ B8 uses and 31, 732m² of I/B8 uses.

2.5.5 Landscape Buffer

A 50m wide buffer is proposed adjacent to the River Medina, comprising a 25m wide planted, 3m high bund and a 25m wide wetland strip. The southern end of the bund will end at the edge of the built development, but the buffer area will be extended a further 150m to the south.

2.5.6 Public Open Space

Kingston Copse will remain and will be publicly accessible. An area of public open space is proposed to the south-west of the residential area. Two children’s play areas are proposed within the residential area, one in the north and one in the centre.

2.5.7 Phasing

The development will commence with the construction of the access road from Whippingham Road to enable all construction traffic to access the site without affecting any local distributor roads. It is now intended to complete the access road within 18 months of the commencement of development. Under the previous application, the completion of the access road was to be linked to the construction of the first 220 dwellings, however, the applicant has now confirmed that this would be provided in one phase. Dwellings will be constructed at a rate of approximately 55 per year over a 10 year period. The employment uses will be developed over a period of five years from the completion of the access road, although this will be dependant upon demand. The landscape buffer will be created during the site preparation of the residential area and prior to commencement of construction activities.

2.5.8 Service Provision

Surface water will be dealt with by a sustainable urban drainage system (SUDS). Two balancing ponds will be created to the west of Kingston Copse which will discharge into the existing ditch that crosses the site. A foul pumping station is required at the lower end of the site, in addition, parts of the sewer network will require upsizing. An additional transformer will be provided at the power station to accommodate the electricity supply. It is not anticipated that the overhead cables will need to be grounded. No reinforcement is proposed for the drinking water supply. Gas and telecommunications will be supplied to the site.

2.5.9 Construction

Construction compounds are proposed which will include car parking, temporary buildings and secure storage. In the region of 200 construction jobs will be created. Hours of working proposed are 0730 to 1730 Mondays to Fridays and 0730 to 1300 on Saturdays, with no working on Sundays or bank Holidays.

2.5.10 Post Construction

It is estimated that the development would increase the population of East Cowes by 1, 337 people. Assuming this, there are likely to be 255 primary school children, 204 middle school children and 102 secondary school children. An estimated 400 to 600 job opportunities will arise from the employment development.

3. Location and Site Characteristics

3.1 The application site is located at the southern edge of East Cowes. The site is bounded by the River Medina to the west and Beatrice Avenue to the east. Beyond Beatrice Avenue is Osborne Middle School, sports pitches and the Osborne Works industrial area. To the south of the site are fields and St. Mildred’s Church and the Victoria and Albert Almshouses. To the north of the site is the Cowes power station and residential properties which include Kingston Farm and dwellings on Greenlands Road, Kingslea Park and Harvey Close.

3.2 This is a Greenfield site and the predominant use is arable farmland, with fields typically bounded by hedgerows. There is a significant area of woodland, Kingston Copse, to the centre of the site. Immediately to the south of the woodland is the site of a former sewage works.

3.3 The arable farmland has been cultivated for crops such as cereals, beans and oil seed rape. The farmland is classified as Grade 3 (moderate to good) quality agricultural land. To the north of the site and east of the power station is an area of uncultivated land, which has been overgrown and has been used for fly tipping. Kingston Copse is an area of dense woodland, the southern part comprising relatively recent woodland. A track runs from east to west through the copse and there is a footpath along the eastern edge running north to south and then east towards Beatrice Avenue.

3.4 The site slopes from east to west from approximately 50m AOD at a gradient of approximately 1:12. Overhead power lines from the power station run from north to south across the western part of the site.

3.5 The River Medina to the west of the site forms part of the Medina Estuary Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI), the Solent Maritime Special Area of Conservation (SAC) and the Solent and Southampton Water Special Protection Area (SPA) and RAMSAR site, which form part of the Solent European Marine Site.

3.6 The main views into the site are from the River Medina, the western bank of the River, Beatrice Avenue and the residential area to the north of the site.

4. Findings of the Environmental Statement (ES)

The findings of the ES are summarised as follows:

4.7 Air Quality

· The main source contributing to effects on future air quality is considered by the applicant to be vehicle emissions. The location of the site, adjacent to Dominion Oils petroleum storage depot, Cowes power station and within relatively close proximity to the East Cowes Ferry Terminal, meant that the scope of the assessment was broadened further to include nitrogen dioxide, fine particulate matter, benzene, sulphur dioxide and fugitive dust. During the construction phase of the proposal, there is likely to be an increase in heavy vehicle traffic servicing the site. The requirement for earth moving plant on-site indicates that there will be possible dust during the construction phase. Site-specific mitigation measures for construction practices and dust suppression are proposed and are considered to adequately mitigate this potential effect to surrounding land use receptors to negligible significance.

· The modelling undertaken to predict post-construction emissions shows that the national air quality strategy objective limits for the pollutants included in the assessment are unlikely to be exceeded for any of the pollutants modelled. It is concluded that there will not be any significant effects on sensitive receptors resulting from the proposed development in terms of air quality.

4.2 Community and Social Effects

· The provision of housing and employment uses is likely to have effects on the local community and services. An assessment of the current conditions in East Cowes, Osborne and on the Isle of Wight as a whole, have been analysed. A need for increased affordable housing provision is identified. Unemployment in Osborne and the Island is above the national average, although East Cowes is similar to the national average. The Island experiences a seasonal cycle in unemployment due to the role of the tourism industry. It has higher proportions of the workforce employed in tourism and public services than the national average, and lower proportions in the financial and communications industries. Businesses in East Cowes are focused on meeting the needs of the local community, rather than catering for tourists or shoppers from other areas. All the schools in East Cowes, and the high school in Cowes, have some spare capacity. The GP surgery has an average list size of 1,684 patients per doctor and the NHS dental practice is not accepting new NHS patients. No dental surgeries on the Island are currently registering new adult patients for NHS treatment, although two are registering children. There is currently uncertainty regarding the scale of care provision in the long-term at St Mary’s hospital.

· There will be a small, short-term increase in employment as the proposed development is constructed, which will be a beneficial effect of moderate significance. There will be a long-term small to medium increase in population when the site is occupied, although this will build gradually over the ten-year development period, and this will be an effect of moderate significance. The increase in population is likely to lead to increased trade for local businesses, which will be of moderate significance. The proposals will lead to a small increase in the provision of affordable housing on the Island, which will also be of moderate significance. There will be a medium increase in employment as a result of the proposed development, which will be of substantial beneficial significance. The proposals will lead to an increase in pressure on local schools. However, appropriate contributions to address these issues will be agreed with the Council. The increase in population over ten years associated with the proposals will lead to a small increase in pressure on GP services and NHS dental services, which is considered to be of moderate significance.

4.3 Cultural Heritage

· An archaeological desk-based assessment was carried out in 2004 to ascertain the likelihood of the site containing significant archaeological remains. The Sites and Monuments Record database lists a number of prehistoric finds in the intertidal zone of the River Medina. Some limited finds were listed from the Romano-British period, but little else was known about the history and development of this site, which has been arable and pasture land associated with Kingston Farm since cartographic records began. While development took place in the vicinity during the 20^th century, very little change has occurred to the site itself for nearly 200 years.

· The Council requested further assessment and evaluation before submission of the planning application to categorically prove/disprove the site’s antiquity. Three forms of archaeological investigation were employed at the site; a fieldwalking survey, geophysical survey and an intrusive trench evaluation. The latter was the only method that produced some (limited) archaeological results. The other two methods proved inconclusive. An agreed sample of the 20 ha area proposed for development was tested by archaeological trenching. Some 73 trenches were investigated. Only two trenches produced positive archaeological results. Both contained the remains of a pond and an associated stone wall. These have been dated to the 19^th century and are shown on the 1841 Tithe map for the site. They have been interpreted as a sheep dip area, of local importance. Several samples were recovered from trenches to allow an environmental analysis of the deposits. No significant or noteworthy samples were identified anywhere on the site. Given the absence of known archaeological features at the proposals site, and the low potential for discovery of currently unknown features or remains, the proposals will result in no change to the archaeology of the site, giving no significant effects.

· The historic environment of the immediate area of the proposals site shows evidence of long established patterns of occupation and use and, from the mid 19^th century, the dominating influence of one factor in the common origin of the many buildings associated with the royal household at Osborne estate. Several buildings and areas are therefore designated at national or local level in recognition of their historic interest. Any effects of these features as a result of the proposals, either directly or indirectly, have been assessed. Kingston Farmhouse, immediately adjoining the proposals site, is of some local interest although it is not statutorily Listed. The village of Whippingham to the south is designated as a Conservation Area in recognition of the coherence and quality of the group of buildings. These include the Grade-I church of St Mildred and a terrace of Almshouses built to house former royal servants. The buildings at Whippingham are closely associated with the estate at Osborne that was the home of Queen Victoria from 1845. Whippingham Road is the western boundary of the 240-hectare landscape park at Osborne which is included in the register of historic parks and gardens at Grade II. In addition to Osborne House, which is Grade I listed, many other structures within the park and on its boundary with East Cowes are of national importance.

· The assessment concluded that the proposed development could have several effects on the historic environment. Kingston Farmhouse will experience the greatest change, being surrounded by new development and divorced from its previous agricultural setting. The potential impacts of the development on the groups of nationally important buildings and landscapes at Whippingham and Osborne derive from the effects on their settings of the visual change due to the new built form and the new access and spine road. These changes are identified as being of small magnitude, resulting in a moderate impact on features of high and medium importance.

· The southern part of the site is to remain undeveloped, with built development only to the north of the new spine road through the site from the A3021 Whippingham Road. There are no views of the built development from the Conservation Area at Whippingham because of the landform and existing trees which will be reinforced by new planting. There are some views from the approach roads and paths. The development will not be visible from Osborne House, although there will be some views of rooftops from the western entrance drive. The strong boundary of trees along the western boundary of the landscape park provides a screen for development at Kingston. The new roundabout and access road for the development on Whippingham Road are directly on the boundary of the historic park at Osborne. The effects of the new junction and the potentially alien features of the roundabout and the spine road with its earth bunds and new tree planting are reduced by the existing development at the Westland works and the effective screening of the trees of Boundary Plantation.

4.4 Ground Conditions

· The desk-top study for the contaminated land assessment identified a number of potential sources of contamination: former landfill tip to the south-east of the site – leachate and landfill gas; aircraft works to the south-east and north-east of the site; former landfill tip at Cowes Power Station – leachate and landfill gas; former sewage works on site – heavy metals and organic and inorganic chemicals; former sheep dip at Kingston Farm; contaminants introduced by the River Medina. A source-pathway-receptor assessment was undertaken to identify plausible linkages for these sources of contamination, and intrusive site investigations were undertaken.

· The intrusive investigations found concentrations of arsenic in excess of its Soil Guideline Value in three of the trial pits in the eastern half of the site. Four of the five soil samples from the western half of the site that were tested for Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons (TPH) contained concentrations in exceedence of the Environmental Quality Standard (EQS). No groundwater samples contained levels of contaminants exceeding the EQSs. The results of the biogas monitoring indicate that methane is not present on site. However, carbon dioxide was found at elevated concentrations and oxygen concentrations were slightly depleted in all boreholes. Gas flows are negligible.

· A range of mitigation measures are proposed to ensure that there are no adverse effects on the health of site operatives and future occupants, water quality or building materials from the contaminants identified above. These include capping the arsenic-contaminated soils with certified clean soil and topsoil, and stripping and stockpiling the soils containing TPH prior to construction. Service trenches will be over-excavated and backfilled with certified clean material and site operatives will wear protective clothing and dust masks as appropriate. The site will be kept damp during dry weather and when construction activities generate dust, and will be securely fenced at all times. Gas protection measures for carbon dioxide, such as ventilation of confined spaces within buildings, well-constructed ground slabs and low permeability gas membranes will be incorporated into the development.

4.7 Land Use

· Existing and potential land uses on and surrounding the site were established from a field survey and a review of maps and local authority documents. At present, the site is predominantly used for arable farming and is of Grade 3 quality. Kingston Copse is situated in the centre and there is a disused sewage works immediately to the South of the copse. There are no public rights of way on site. There is a range of land uses in the areas adjacent to the site, including residential, agricultural and industrial.

· The proposed changes in land use will result in the removal of the northern half of the site, and 5.25 ha of the southern half of the site, from agricultural use. This is considered by the applicant to be of negligible significance in the context of agricultural resources on the Island as a whole. The applicant considers that the provision of housing and employment on the site will contribute towards meeting UDP objectives and will be a beneficial effect of substantial significance. New footpaths are proposed, which will link into the existing public right of way network. This is considered by the applicant to be a beneficial effect of slight to moderate significance.

4.7 Landscape and Visual Effects

· Both desk and field studies were used to evaluate the landscape in and around the site and to identify potential views and visual receptors. A number were selected to present typical views from various locations and to provide a representative selection of views from all directions.

· The application site falls within the Medina Valley landscape character area, which consists of farmland with clusters of farm buildings, churches, small housing developments and light industry. The fields in this area are generally irregular and broken up by a patchwork of copses. In the wider landscape context, the main elements of the built environment consist of the urban edge of East Cowes. The proposals will result in the partial loss of key landscape elements and the introduction of prominent built elements. However, the applicant considers that these are not uncharacteristic when set against the urban edge of East Cowes, and that there will be an overall impact on landscape character of moderate significance.

· The potential impacts on the landscape and visual resources were a significant consideration in the evolution of the Masterplan. The Masterplan proposes maximum height that places the tallest buildings on the lowest ground and in the area screened by the power station, in order to minimise the visual impact. The existing copse and hedges will be retained and will help to screen the development. This will be reinforced by the introduction of buffer planting and scrub along the western boundary and around the copse.

· The proposed housing and employment development will lead to changes in the views from several of the viewpoints, including residential properties in close proximity to the site, Osborne Middle School, the allotments to the north, a public footpath to the west of the site and a church and museum to the south-west of the site. Additional information in the form of sections and sketches has been submitted by the developer.

4.7 Natural Heritage

· The application site lies adjacent to the River Medina, which forms part of the internationally designated Solent and Southampton Water RAMSAR Site, the Solent Maritime Special Area of Conservation and the Solent and Southampton Water Special Protection Area. The area was designated because it supports internationally important populations of wintering waterfowl and intertidal habitats. A number of protected species were recorded on site during specialist surveys. Signs of dormouse activity were recorded from the copse and hedgerow network and small numbers of slow-worm and common lizard were recorded within the area proposed for built development. The assessment found that no birds associated with the Medina are roosting on the fields within the area proposed for built development or the adjacent fields to the south. The latter have been used occasionally by foraging gulls.

· There is an important high tide roost area within the overall application site, but this is at the far southern end and over 250m away from the nearest part proposed built development. This roosting area is of high importance because it is apparent that, on occasion, large numbers of some species wintering in the Medina (oystercatcher and curlew) are roosting in the area during the highest high tides. There is a more important high tide roost area at Pinkmead on the western shore of the river, which is used on a regular basis.

· A range of mitigation measures has been developed to minimise the potential for adverse impacts on natural heritage and to ensure that there are no adverse impacts on the habitats and species for which the Medina is designated. These measures include an ecological buffer area and habitat creation and additional measures to mitigate potential impacts from habitat loss, disturbance and pollution, including buffer planting and management of copse and hedges; creation of a footpath network to manage access to the copse and discourage use of the intertidal zone; implementation of drainage strategy to prevent pollution of the intertidal zone; restricting construction activities to outside sensitive periods; introduction of a rope bridge across one of the roads to reduce habitat fragmentation for dormice; and translocation of reptiles prior to construction.

· As a result of the above mitigation, the applicant predicts no significant adverse impacts on important habitats, birds and reptiles. Potential for a slight impact on dormice is identified, depending on the success of the rope bridge. The assessment concludes that habitat creation will lead to significant beneficial impacts on Kingston Copse, the hedgerows and bird populations.

4.8 Noise

· Noise was determined to be a secondary issue in the EIA scoping process and no vibration effects were considered likely, due to the nature of the proposals and the construction techniques that will be used. A number of noise sensitive receptors in the vicinity of the proposed development site, including housing along the site’s northern boundary; a middle school located on the site’s eastern boundary; ecologically sensitive wetland habitat on the intertidal zone of the River Medina, which forms the site’s western boundary; and a bird roost and open land along the site’s southern boundary.

· A baseline noise survey was undertaken during the daytime and early morning period. The survey established that road traffic noise and activities in the aggregates depot on the western bank of the river were the principal noise sources during the daytime. In the early morning, noise from the large flour silos located on the western bank of the river dominates and gives rise to noise levels greater than would typically be expected in this semi-rural environment. Aside from this, the baseline noise environment was considered typical of such an area and subjectively judged to be ‘good’.

· The construction phase of the proposed development will include the construction of a 3 m high earth bund along the western boundary of the site to screen the sensitive intertidal habitat. Birds use the habitat primarily during the winter period; conversely, earthworks are generally undertaken during the drier summer months. Therefore, it was concluded that there would be no significant effects on the habitat during the construction of the bund.

· Once operational the principal source of noise from the development proposals will arise from the additional road traffic generated. In consideration of the traffic data contained in the Traffic Assessment, the applicant concludes that the increase in traffic volume is not sufficient to give rise to a perceptible change in the road traffic noise levels that will arise in the future in the absence of the proposed development. Particular attention was paid to the potential effect of the proposed new link road from the site to Whippingham Road. The assessment found that the noise levels in the school’s netball pitch would remain below those recommended in Government guidance. Overall, the conclusion of the noise assessment was that there would be no significant effects on any of the identified sensitive receptors.

4.9 Traffic and Transport

· The traffic and transport assessment deals with the effect of the increased traffic associated with the proposals on traffic patterns and sensitive receptors in the vicinity of the site. It focuses on the community as a sensitive receptor and addresses the traffic and transport effects in terms of the severance and changes in people’s perception that may result from increases in traffic volumes in close proximity to sensitive receptors, such as schools, residences and churches. The assessment found that the increase in traffic flows and associated severance effects will be negligible for the majority of the sensitive receptors identified. There is the potential for a small increase in severance at Osborne Middle School, but this will be mitigated by the introduction of traffic calming and a 20 mph school zone and there will be no significant effect. There is likely to be a small increase in severance at Whippingham Primary School, however, which will be of moderate significance.

· A network of new pedestrian and cycle routes will be provided that will link the proposed development to the existing services of East Cowes and the existing public right of way network. This increase in provision is considered by the applicant to be a beneficial effect of slight significance. The potential for the provision of a bus gate in the north-west or north-east corner of the development would also be beneficial.

4.10 Water Quality and Hydrology

· The water quality and hydrology assessment focused on the quality of surface water and groundwater bodies and on potential impacts on surface water flows. The main issues addressed included potential contamination of surface water and groundwater during construction and the need for a drainage system that could address the potential for pollution of sensitive waterbodies post-construction, particularly from the employment area, and the potential for changes to run-off rates. The key sensitive receptors identified were the River Medina, ditches on site and groundwater. The drainage strategy has been devised to fully manage the run-off from the proposals and to control both the quality and rate of discharge to the River Medina. As a result, the applicant predicts that there will be no significant post-construction impacts on water quality and hydrology. A range of additional mitigation measures will be put in place both during and after construction to ensure that there will be no adverse impacts on water quality as a result of the proposals.

5. Relevant History

5.1 The site has been allocated for housing and employment in the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan, and previously part allocated for housing and employment development in the Cowes Local Plan 1988.

5.2 Planning permission (P/01885/05 & TCP/18291/C) was refused for broadly the same development at a Committee meeting in January 2006. The three reasons for refusal are detailed in the introduction to this report. In summary, the reasons relate to the development of a Greenfield site in an area with Brownfield opportunities that is not adequately linked or integrated with the adjacent urban area and encourages reliance on the car; inadequate provision for locally affordable housing; and that the proposals represented an over-development of the site at an excessive density in a location not close to local facilities and out of character with the prevailing character of development.

6. Development Plan Policy

6.1 Planning Policy Statement (PPS) 1 – Delivering Sustainable Development, sets out the overarching planning policies on the delivery of sustainable development through the planning system. PPS1 states that planning should facilitate and promote sustainable and inclusive patterns of urban and rural development by making suitable land available for development in line with economic, social and environmental objectives to improve people's quality of life; by contributing to sustainable economic development; by protecting and enhancing the natural and historic environment, the quality and character of the countryside, and existing communities; by ensuring high quality development through good and inclusive design, and the efficient use of resources; and by ensuring that development supports existing communities and contributes to the creation of safe, sustainable, liveable and mixed communities with good access to jobs and key services for all members of the community.

6.2 Planning Policy Guidance Note 3 (PPG3) - Housing sets out National guidance on range of issues relating to the provision of housing. The issues of particular relevance are summarised as follows:

· Ensure new homes are provided in the right place at the right time and that there is a choice of sites which are both suitable and available for house building.

· There should be a regular review of housing requirements through the mechanism of a local housing needs assessment.

· In providing sufficient housing land, priorities should be given to reusing previously developed land within urban areas in preference to the development of green field sites.

· Provide a wider housing opportunity and choice, better mix and size, type and location of housing.

· The amount and types of affordable housing to be provided should reflect local housing need and individual sites suitability and be a matter for agreement between the parties.

· Planning authorities should ensure maintenance of supply of housing by:

· Concentrating most additional housing development within urban areas.

· Making more efficient use of land, particularly previously developed land.

· Assessing the capacity of urban areas to accommodate more housing.

· Adopting a sequential approach to the allocation of land for housing development.

· Managing the release of housing land.

· Reviewing existing allocations of housing land in plans.

· Criteria for allocation should be based on:

· The amount and types of affordable housing to be provided should reflect local housing need and individual sites suitability and be a matter for agreement between the parties.

· Availability of previously developed sites.

· Location and accessibility

· Capacity of existing and potential infrastructure

· Ability to build communities

· Physical and environmental constraints on the development of land.

Draft PPS3 indicates that the Government is seeking to ensure that there is a wide choice of housing types available, for both affordable and market housing, to meet the needs of all members of the community; to deliver a better balance between housing demand and supply in every housing market and to improve affordability where necessary; and to create sustainable, inclusive, mixed communities in all areas. There is an emphasis on attractive, safe and well designed developments which should be located in areas with good access to jobs, key services and infrastructure. In terms of density, PPS3 proposes densities of over 75 dwellings per hectare for city centres; 40 to 75 dwellings per hectare for urban areas and 35 to 55 dwellings per hectare for suburban areas. PPS advises that density should be informed by an assessment of the characteristics of an area, including the mix of uses; the location and level of public transport accessibility; the need to use land efficiently; the importance of promoting high quality design; the broader spatial strategy and vision for the future development of their area, in particular the need for housing and the housing plans and policies; the level of service provision and public spaces; and resource efficiency and the minimisation of environmental impacts.

Members are advised that a housing need survey was carried out in 2001 which sought to identify the extent, distribution and type of housing needed over and above homelessness. The main findings of the survey were that there is a chronic shortage of affordable housing across the whole Island; there is an increasing demand for smaller one and two bedroom housing units that is not currently being met by the housing market; that the principal areas of housing need both in affordability and demand are the main towns of Newport, Ryde, Shanklin and Sandown followed by Cowes/East Cowes.

6.3 PPS7 sets out the national guidance on sustainable development in rural areas, including largely undeveloped countryside up to the fringes of larger urban areas. The guidance seeks to promote more sustainable patterns of development in a number of different ways including by focusing most development in, or next to, existing towns and villages; by preventing urban sprawl; by discouraging the development of 'greenfield' land, and, where such land must be used, ensuring it is not used wastefully and by promoting a range of uses to maximise the potential benefits of the countryside fringing urban areas.

6.4 PPS 9 – Biodiversity and Geological Conservation, replaces Planning Policy Guidance Note 9 (PPG9) on Nature Conservation published in 1994. The guidance states that the aim of planning decisions should be to prevent harm to biodiversity and geological conservation interests and that where granting planning permission would result in significant harm to those interests, local planning authorities will need to be satisfied that the development cannot reasonably be located on any alternative sites that would result in less or no harm. In the absence of any such alternatives, local planning authorities should ensure that, before planning permission is granted, adequate mitigation measures are put in place. Where a planning decision would result in significant harm to biodiversity and geological interests which cannot be prevented or adequately mitigated against, appropriate compensation measures should be sought. If that significant harm cannot be prevented, adequately mitigated against, or compensated for, then planning permission should be refused.

6.5 PPG13 – Transport, emphasises the need to integrate planning and transport at the national, regional, strategic and local level to promote more sustainable transport choices for both people and for moving freight; to promote accessibility to jobs, shopping, leisure facilities and services by public transport, walking and cycling, and to reduce the need to travel, especially by car.

6.6 PPG24 – Planning and Noise advises that the impact of noise can be a material planning consideration. It recognises that it is hard to reconcile some land uses with housing and some other activities which generate high levels of noise but stresses that wherever practicable noise generating development are separated from major sources of noise. Development involving noisy activities should if possible be sited away from noise sensitive uses. Where this is not possible there is a need to consider what can practically be controlled to reduce noise levels or mitigate noise through conditions and planning obligations.

6.7 Regional Planning Guidance for the South East is contained within RPG9. There are a number of relevant policies including Policy E1 which requires priority to be given to protecting areas designated at international or national level either for their intrinsic nature conservation value, their landscape quality or their cultural importance. Policy RE5, states that better use should be made of existing employment land resources. Sites for industry and commerce should be developed particularly in urban areas and in places which are accessible by environmentally friendly modes of transport. Precedence should be given to the re-use of developed land over the release of new land and wherever possible the intensification of use on existing sites should be encouraged. Policy H4 states that a range of dwelling types and sizes should be provided, including alternative forms of tenure, in order to meet the needs of all sectors of the community and to plan for balanced communities. Affordable housing should be provided to meet locally assessed need. Policy RE4 states that business should be encouraged in adopting the principles of sustainable development.

6.8 The part of the site identified for residential development is within the development envelope boundary, with that boundary forming part of the western boundary and the southern boundary of the area of the site to be developed for housing. The site is specifically allocated for housing development within the Unitary Development Plan, under policy H3 (69). Policy H3 – Allocation of Residential Development Sites states that planning proposals for residential development will be acceptable in principle on the sites listed in Appendix A, subject to any specific guidance as detailed. The guidance for policy H3 (69) states:

“An area of some 10.5ha south of Kingston Farm Lane and west of Beatrice Avenue is allocated for residential development. This area is to be served off, and developed in conjunction with, a new access road to the area from Whippingham Road which will also serve proposed and existing employment uses to the south of East Cowes. The proposals for a mix of development at Kingston south of East Cowes have been considered following the demise of the Medina Bridge crossing proposals. Proposed land uses have been re-arranged to provide a better relationship between existing and proposed uses, particularly the existing middle and proposed primary schools while retaining the ability to improve access and infrastructure for the whole area.”

6.9 Other relevant housing policies within the Unitary Development Plan are as follows:

§ H1 – Major New Residential Developments to be Located Within the Main Island Towns.

§ H2 – Ensure that Large Residential Developments Contain a Variety of House Sizes and Types.

§ H14 – Locally Affordable Housing as an Element of Housing Schemes.

§ H6 – High Density Residential Development

For Members information over the Unitary Development Plan Period (1996-2011) there is a development potential for approximately 8,000 units which assumes that the development of allocated sites which will make a contribution. In terms of regional policies for the south-east, the targets for the Isle of Wight are in the region of 500+ units a year which up to the present time is being achieved on a year by year basis. Obviously these figures may be revisited during the local development framework process however; the Unitary Development Plan is the statutory policy document which should apply to this site. Finally, in terms of housing policies Members are advised that the above calculations are based on an average density figure of 30 dwellings per hectare.

6.10 The part of the site identified for employment development is within the development envelope boundary, with that boundary forming part of the eastern boundary and the southern boundary of the area of the site to be developed for employment uses. The site is specifically allocated for employment development within the Unitary Development Plan, under policy E5 (13). Policy E5 – Allocation of Employment Land states that planning proposals for employment development will be considered in principle on employment sites allocated on the Proposals Map and set out in Appendix B.

The guidance for policy E5 (13) states:

“Areas of land totalling 12.2ha to the south of Kingston, East Cowes is allocated for B1, B2 or B8 uses. Made up of three distinct areas, the development of this land will necessitate the upgrading of road access and a comprehensive approach to infrastructure provision along with housing allocations in this location. The site can be subdivided into three sections:

· the northernmost 1.8ha has a long-standing planning approval where initial site works for access road have been carried out

· central position of site, previously the site of a number of agricultural buildings, is also considered suitable for a full range of employment uses, 3.1ha

· the 8.1ha area adjoining the waterside, is considered vital to provide for future expansion or relocation of marine related employment uses, and will be reserved for uses which require a coastal location. Access to the area shall be primarily from Whippingham Road to the south of Osborne School and East Cowes Old Vics Football Ground and will also serve the major residential allocation to the west of Beatrice Avenue. It is intended eventually that this road shall link to Kingston Road, where it will also improve access for the wharfage facilities at Kingston”

6.11 Other relevant employment policies within the Unitary Development Plan are as follows:

· E1 – Promote Suitably Located New Employment Uses

· E9 – Employment Development Anywhere Within Settlements

· E10 – Warehouse and Storage Uses

6.12 Other local Unitary Development Plan policies are itemised as follows:

· G1 – Development Envelopes for Towns and Villages

· G4 – General Locational Criteria for Development

· G6 – Development in Areas Liable to Flooding

· B2 - Settings of Listed Buildings

· B6 – Protection and Enhancement of Conservation Areas

· B9 – Protection of Archaeological Heritage

· B10 Park, Gardens and Landscapes of Historic Interest

· C7 – River Corridors and Estuaries

· C8 – Nature Conservation as a material consideration

· C9 – Sites of International Importance for Nature Conservation

· C12 – Development Affecting Trees and Woodland

· C13 – Hedgerows

· C14 – Safeguarding Best Agricultural Land

· P1 – Pollution and Development

· P5 – Reducing the Impact of Noise

· TR4 – Transport Statements Required for Major Development

· TR6 – Cycling and Walking

· TR7 – Highway Considerations for New Development

· TR8 –The Environmental Impact of New Infrastructure Systems

· TR16 – Parking Policies and Guidelines

· TR17 – Public Rights of Way

· U2 – Ensuring Adequate Educational, Social and Community Facilities for the Future Population.

· U11 – Infrastructure and Services Provision

· U16 – Development Near High Voltage Overhead Power Lines

· L10 – Open Space in Housing Development

6.13 The majority of the site where employment and residential development is proposed is within Zone 3 of the Council’s parking policy thus requiring parking provision that shall not exceed 0-75% of parking guidelines. Part of the residential site falls within Zone 4, which allows a higher level of off-street parking (0% - 100%), where public access is poorer and the development would help maintain the rural economy.

6.14 Relevant strategic policies within the Unitary Development Plan are listed as follows:

· S1 – New Development will be concentrated within existing urban areas.

· S2 – Development will be encouraged on land which has previously been developed (brownfield sites) rather than undeveloped (greenfield sites). Greenfield sites will only be allocated for development where they are extensions to urban areas and where no suitable alternative brownfield site exists.

· S3 – New developments of a large scale will be expected to be located in or adjacent to the defined development envelopes of the main island towns of Cowes/East Cowes/ Newport/ Ryde/ Sandown/ Shanklin.

· S7 – There is a need to provide for the development of at least 8,000 housing units over the plan period. While a large proportion of this development will occur on sites with existing allocations or planning approvals, or on currently on unidentified sites, enough new land will be allocated to enable this target to be met and to provide a range of choice and affordability.

· S8 – At least 60 hectares of employment land will be allocated within, or adjacent to the main Island towns in areas well served by public transport.

· S10 – In areas of designated or defined scientific, nature conservation, archaeological, historic or landscape value, development will be permitted only if it will conserve or enhance the features of special character of these areas.

· S15 – Important natural resources, including water and the best agricultural land will be safeguarded.

6.15 Members attention is also drawn to Supplementary Planning Guidance (SPG) in respect of affordable housing which now seeks a 30% contribution from developers on those qualifying sites; the Phasing Report for the Managed Release of Housing Sites, which constitutes SPG; and Urban Capacity Study, which also constitutes SPG.

6.16 Regard must also be had to the Cowes Waterfront SPG: A Vision for the Medina Valley (July 2003). It is about developing a new vision for the area and putting in place a Strategic Development Framework to guide new investment and development opportunities. The aim is to attract new investment to provide the opportunities, facilities and attractions that both local people and visitors can enjoy. This investment will enable the growth of local businesses and the attraction of new businesses.

The Strategic Development Framework sets out the vision for Project Cowes and a detailed programme of new projects. It focuses on a number of key priorities, identified by local people during the consultation process, including: the creation of new employment opportunities and the release of suitable employment sites, responding to existing and future demand; an improvement in the perceptions of Cowes and East Cowes as two of the main gateways to the Island and world-class visitor destinations; capitalising on and strengthening Cowes’ status as an international centre of yachting excellence and as the “home” of UK sailing; ensuring that key waterfront sites are made available for those uses which genuinely require a waterfront location, and that the most appropriate uses are located on the limited number of sites that benefit from deep-water access; strengthening and capitalising on other growth areas in the Island’s economy, such as the manufacture of composite materials, and renewable energy related industries; increasing the Medina Valley’s contribution to the role of tourism in the wider economy of the Island and ensuring that the Island benefits from its large number of visitors; supporting and strengthening the existing communities and town centres in the Medina Valley; providing where appropriate additional residential accommodation, having particular regard to ensuring a suitable mix and adequate supply of affordable housing for local residents; maintaining and enhancing the substantial unique environmental resources of the Medina Valley; and improving linkages with the mainland, and cross-Medina links.

The Strategic Development Framework identifies five key activity zones in the Medina Valley, reflecting both the existing roles of each zone and the potential for these roles to be enhanced. This application site is included within Zone 3: Commercial Shipping. This zone comprises PD Wharf and the Kingston power station and the adjacent marine related employment land allocation and is a focus for commercial shipping activity within the Medina Valley. Opportunities for enabling residential development and for employment that does not require waterfront access are identified.

7. Consultee and Third Party Comments

7.1 Internal Consultees

· The Council’s Environmental Health Department has recommended a site investigation condition.

· The Council’s Ecological Officer has made no comments in respect of this current application. The principles of the development are the same, therefore, the recommendations and conditions made on the previous application have been carried over. The Council’s Ecological officer had previously advised that the part of the site proposed for development has a comparatively low nature conservation value apart from the woodland (Kingston Copse) and some of the hedgerows. The Environmental Statement proposes a suite of measures to enhance habitats within the application site and these will be the subject of an ecological management plan, the details to be agreed with the planning authority. The proposals put forward are considered to be a pragmatic and helpful mechanism to protect and enhance the nature conservation / biodiversity of the site and the public enjoyment of this resource. A number of conditions are recommended.

· The Council’s Arboricultural Officer has made no comments in respect of this current application. The principles of the development are the same, therefore, the recommendations and conditions made on the previous application have been carried over. Previously, concerns were raised that the proposed development could potentially have a great detrimental impact on the trees and woodland around the site if not dealt with in the correct manner and that any loss of trees would result in a detrimental impact on visual amenity. The damage could be prevented by having a tree survey made prior to detailing the actual positioning of the development and from this tree survey detail, a Tree Constraints Plan should be drawn up showing root protection areas, future and present crown spread, future and present heights and potential shading issues, so the layout and design of the site could then take these details into consideration. An Arboricultural Assessment should therefore be carried out to ensure that the site is optimised for development, whilst maintaining the high amenity trees and woodland areas. From the plans submitted, two areas of potential conflict are identified – the linear group of Ash and Turkey Oak alongside the access track from Beatrice Avenue to the southern perimeter of the site and the area of woodland east of the field adjacent to this track. A buffer zone should be maintained between these trees and the proposed development to ensure that there is no damage to the trees.

· The Councils AONB Officer has no objection to the proposals and has made the following comments. The Isle of Wight AONB Partnership declined to comment on this application when first submitted as it is considered that the development would not be seen or have an impact on any areas of the Isle of Wight AONB. The Countryside Agency’s request for visual assessments in order to illustrate the visual impact of this development on the AONB is considered unnecessary. The nearest area of AONB is the Osborne Estate, this is heavily wooded, not open to the public and has no public rights of way through it. There would be no visual impact from the development in this area. Taking into account the distance and topography from the development and any views afforded from within other parts of the Island’s AONB it is considered that there would be no negative visual impact. In conclusion, whilst it is good practice for major development proposals, we do not consider it necessary in this instance for the applicant to provide visual impact assessments for this development in relation to its impact on the AONB.

· Following consideration of the site evaluation, the Council’s Archaeological Officer is satisfied that no further investigation is required.

· The Council’s Highway Engineer has made the following comments:

The revised Kingston application has been submitted to and reviewed by the principal highways development control officer. Additional information and revised drawings have been submitted following detailed consultations with the traffic section of the Isle of Wight Council and Escher Silverman the highway consultants working for Barratt.

A stage road safety audit has been carried out by MB Projects on behalf of Barratt dated June 2006. The highways design consultant acting for Barratts have submitted their designer’s response acknowledging the issues raised and agreeing to address the issues at detail design stage.

An Auto track analysis of the Beatrice Avenue junction has been produced and areas of vehicle over-run identified, the detailed scheme drawings will be amended to comply with the requirements of Department for Transport Standards within Design Manual for Road and Bridges.

The new highways work on Beatrice Avenue, Kingston Road and Whippingham Road will be subject to Section 278 Agreement. The link road and internal residential highway, street lighting and drainage proposed to be adopted, will be covered by Section 38 Agreement and a 106 Agreement for commuted sums to cover the cost of future maintenance.

Details of the proposed bus gate have been submitted with the application showing an automatic telescopic bollard. This is the system recommended by the Traffic section of the Isle of Wight Council. All traffic from the existing and new employment area will be diverted onto the new access road and out onto Whippingham Road, removing the industrial traffic that now uses Minerva Road and Victoria Grove.

All construction details will be in accordance with the Isle of Wight Council, Engineering sections standard details and will be in compliant with current Department for Transport requirements. All details will be approved in writing before any works commence on site, and the construction works will be inspected by Isle of Wight Council staff. The costs of site inspections and design checking will be covered by fees paid by the applicant, the fees are required as part of the section 278/38.

The Development Team Highways Officer recommends this application for outline approval.

7.2 External Consultees

· Health and Safety Executive – has made no comments in respect of this current application. The principles of the development are the same as the previous application. On the previous application, the HSE did not advise, on safety grounds, against the granting of planning permission in this case.

· Environment Agency – The Agency has advised that they have no further comments following on from the letter submitted for the last application where they had no objection in principal to the proposal, but requested that a number of issues to be taken into consideration. Conditions are recommended for the provision of a site investigation; to ensure no infiltration of surface water into the ground without written consent; no piling or foundation designs using penetrative methods without written consent; a scheme for the provision of a surface water regulation system; only native species to be planted at the site. The long-term ecological management plan for the area should be covered under an s106 agreement, to ensure that the actions are carried out. Detailed advice is provided to the Council and Applicant with regards to surface water drainage, water resources, contamination and water efficiency. The Agency also encourages watercourses to be incorporated within the overall Masterplan as green corridors across the site.

· Scottish and Southern Energy – No comments received. Verbal comments on the earlier application indicated that there are no particular concerns at this outline application stage.

· English Nature - Has confirmed that the changes do not have substantial implications for impacts on nature conservation interests. It will be necessary to ensure that any reduction in the rate of supply of new housing does not prevent the funding of environmental mitigation and enhancement measures. In view of the above English Nature would advise that the assessment made in the Appropriate Assessment for the former application can apply to the re-application. Given the agreed conditions and S106 agreement that will be applied English Nature would concur with the findings of the Appropriate Assessment that the application will not have an adverse effect on the

integrity of the European site.

· DEFRA – No comments received to date

· Southern Water have not yet responded to the resubmitted application. They previously raised no objection to the original application having provisionally agreed with the developer to provide suitable foul drainage under S98 sewer requisition procedure. Southern Water were content for a condition covering foul and surface water drainage to be applied.

· Countryside Agency – Did not comment on the original application, however, has now raised a number of concerns. It is highly recommend that further information is sought. The key concerns relate to the potential impact on the AONB and its setting, including views, peace and tranquillity and dark skies. There are concerns regarding quality and completeness of the Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment (LVIA) submitted. There is a lack of information on the AONB and its importance and impacts on its setting, an absence of key viewpoints from within the AONB and a lack of photomontages. No consideration has been made of lighting impacts. Detailed comments are provided on the LVIA and it is concluded that it is difficult to form an objective view without the viewpoints/photomontages requested. Do not consider that the importance of the landscape character of the AONB has been taken into consideration. Other concerns are that no details of tree/plant species are given - required to assess accordance with the existing landscape character for the area; further details are required on building design and materials. There are concerns that this is a Greenfield site. There are inconsistencies between Planning & Design Statement and the ES regarding heights of buildings.

· SEEDA’s regional planner has objected on grounds of lack of affordable housing and potential adverse impact on the regeneration of Cowes.

7.3 Town or Parish Council comments

· East Cowes Town Council – Together with the SEEDA scheme, roads will be gridlocked.

7.4 Neighbours

Nine responses from neighbouring occupants and residents have been received. Their comments are summarised as follows:

· East Cowes cannot sustain its populous; there is a lack of medical facilities, dentists, shops, facilities for children to play at the moment and it is therefore ridiculous to build more homes before the present situation is attended to.

· East Cowes infrastructure (schools, doctors, one hospital, dentists, employment, shops, leisure) barely provides for the current residents. Current infrastructure must be determined first in a robust and sustainable manner, with detailed and widespread consultation.

· Strongly object to proposals for an additional 500 homes over and above the SEEDA plans

· Problems are compounded by SEEDA development

· Object strongly to this application being allowed to proceed before the SEEDA project for the town centre has been decided.

· Loss of countryside

· Loss and disturbance of wildlife habitat

· Loss of uninterrupted views over the River Medina and surrounding areas.

· Concern that this is a very sensitive area of natural wildlife habitat e.g. there are regularly sky larks.

· Development would ruin the environment

· Infrastructure is insufficient/inadequate to cater for additional vehicles and water supply demands.

· Is the development solely for the Island or can anyone from the mainland needing low cost housing buy a property here?

· Beatrice Avenue will become much busier. There is no footpath, so people will have to walk in the road which will be hazardous – will hedgerows be destroyed to widen the road and put footpaths along the lane?

· Many visitors from UK and abroad come to visit Osborne House and to see St. Mildred’s Church and the Listed Victoria & Albert cottages – all have strong royal connections and are historically very important – proposed large housing estate will have total disregard to their importance to the nation.

· There are already lots of housing developments (Osborne Heights, Medina complex, Marlborough Park, Ryde) – do we need to keep building these homes when the property page of the local paper is full of homes for sale?

· Tourists come to Island for its beauty and wildlife (squirrels, bats, owls etc)

· There will not be sufficient jobs for an extra 1000 householders.

· SEEDA has already taken over the majority of the town and it is becoming a concrete jungle.

· Would be a good if this development was publicised and detailed consultation with locals was provided.

· Increase in noise levels for residents

7.5 Others

· King Sturge (on behalf of SEEDA and English Partnerships) – objection submitted. Is not an ‘in-principal’ objection, but it is essential that the advice contained within PPG3 and PPS1 is met to give priority to the East Cowes Project proposals. Also refer to the PPS3 consultation paper issued in December 2005, in particular, it is emphasised that priority to Brownfield development remains. They do not consider that the current planning application addresses their objections to the previous proposal and is likely to prejudice the implementation of the proposals for the regeneration of East Cowes. They consider that planning permission should be refused for a number of reasons:

1) Priority to brownfield development – although the site was allocated in the UDP, the UDP was prepared prior to the closure of the GKN North Works and the land coming forward in East Cowes; the UDP was prepared prior to PPG3 which emphasises the reuse of previously developed sites and maximising the potential of land with good access to jobs, shops and services by other means than the car; the Government’s presumption that previously developed sites should be developed before Greenfield sites; concern is expressed that the Council’s Urban Capacity Study and Phasing Report did not consider the potential of GKN site to provide a significant amount of capacity for residential development as it was still an operational site; concerned that Barratt pay insufficient regard to market considerations and don’t consider take up if permission is granted for both schemes. Concerned that if both schemes are approved then, at best, it will result in the proposals for East Cowes town centre taking place over a much longer period or at worst, developers will favour the development at Kingston where constraints of development are less. As a minimum, they consider that the Kingston proposals should be co-ordinated with East Cowes regeneration proposals. In the event of both applications being approved, they suggest that Barratts provide more information on the consequences for residential land take up.

2) Integration With Urban Area - The supporting information submitted does not appear to have regard to the cumulative effect of the Kingston and East Cowes proposals, for example, traffic impact, public transport, drainage and services. The applicant suggests that the Kingston facility will rely heavily on the community facilities and shops of East Cowes town centre – this approach is acknowledged, but there needs to be a financial contribution provided.

3) Affordable Housing - Barratts propose 25% affordable housing rather than 30% to meet the requirements of the UDP SPG (adopted 2004). Do not consider that Barratts have provided adequate justification for this. Whilst Barratts may have negotiated this with the landowners prior to this date, they do not own all the land and there is an opportunity to renegotiate; if Barratt are relying on exceptional development costs to justify the lower level, then an ‘open book’ approach should be adopted; suggestion that 30% target is a starting point is incorrect as the SPG confirms that the Council will seek to achieve at least 30% of units to be provided as affordable housing. A common approach for the Kingston and East Cowes proposals should be adopted.

4) Industrial Land Issues – Barratt has suggested that if permission is not approved then it eliminates opportunity for providing 10ha of suitable alternative employment land to compensate for the loss of town centre employment land. SEEDA does not consider that there is any policy or other justification for alternative employment land to be provided to offset the loss of the land within the East Cowes town centre site formerly used for employment uses. There is no suggestion that the provision of SEEDAs mixed use development is subject to other employment land coming forward at Kingston.

· Solent Protection Society – No comments received.

· Ramblers Association – No comments received.

· Vectis Road Allotments Association – No comments received.

· Isle of Wight Society – There is a lack of risk assessment by the Council into overall community safety. The total impact will be an increase in population of East Cowes of several thousand residents and considerable increase in people travelling into area for employment. Concerned will increase ‘statistical chance’ of a major accident occurring, especially in the Alverstone Road/Folly Lane area. Whilst plans for movement of emergency vehicles into site is shown, there is no study of the town as a whole. Application should not be considered until complete study of the risks to the community is undertaken. Proposals create an imbalanced community environment – opposite end of town from retail outlets and community amenities. Consider should be inclusion within the site for such amenities.

· Isle of Wight Society (East Cowes Group) – Dispute the need for employment floorspace - 150,000 sq ft of industrial units are empty on the Island. GKN relocated to Osborne Works freeing space in town centre, 25% of Whites industrial estate is unoccupied, no account made of SARO site. No land within site is allocated for amenities/shops. There has been no overall risk assessment for the East Cowes peninsular. Don’t like the phasing which will result in the site being a building site for 10 years, but support amendment for construction of road in first phase. 2.5 storey properties should not be built on the skyline, but lower on the site.

8. Evaluation

8.1 The most important material considerations in respect of this proposal are whether the three reasons for refusal of the previous application have been overcome. Consideration is also required regarding whether the principal of the development is acceptable, whether the means of access to the site is acceptable, the impact of the development on natural heritage, the impacts of the development on visual amenity and local residential amenity and the extent to which the development is in accord with national and regional planning guidance and the policies and proposals of the adopted UDP.

8.2 Principal of Development

· Policy Position

Under the Planning Acts all applications should be determined on the basis of statutory policies unless other material considerations suggest otherwise. In determining this application, regard must be had to national policies, in particular PPS1 and PPG3 , in addition to Unitary Development Plan policies. Consideration should also be given to Draft PPS3,

The areas of the site where residential and employment uses are proposed are allocated in the adopted UDP for both residential development, under Policy H3 (69) and employment use under policy E5 (13). Objection has been raised in relation to the suitability of East Cowes as a strategic location for housing development. This issue has been debated extensively through the UDP inquiry. There is no justification to revisit the strategic decisions that were debated and accepted by the Inspector at the UDP inquiry.

The proposal must also be assessed against the relevant strategic policies of the UDP. The proposed residential and employment development is located within the development envelope for East Cowes as defined on the UDP proposals map and as such, is in accordance with Policy S3 of the UDP.

Policy S2 encourages development on land which has previously been developed (brownfield sites) rather than undeveloped (greenfield sites) and states that Greenfield sites will only be allocated for development where they are extensions to urban areas and where no suitable alternative brownfield site exists. Objections have been received which imply that the UDP does not properly comply with PPG3. The Inspector’s decision letter (August 2000) on the UDP Inquiry refers to the March 2000 version of PPG3 and states that policy S2 is ‘broadly in conformity’ with the advice contained within PPG3, but an insertion restricting Greenfield development to urban extensions was recommended. The Inspector concluded that restricting Greenfield development until Brownfield opportunities are exhausted could potentially lead to shortages of housing land. The Inspector also considered that policies for phasing and release of housing should be considered by the Council.

The Council has therefore produced Supplementary Planning Guidance (SPG), a Phasing Report for the Managed Release of Housing Sites and an Urban Capacity Study, which must be taken into account in considering this application. With regards to the above policies and the SPG, whilst this is a Greenfield site its status as allocated land within the development envelope makes it appropriate for it to come forward at this time to meet housing requirements as set out in the UDP and, more importantly, as identified in the Urban Capacity Study. Policy S7 of the UDP indicates that there is a need to provide for the development of at least 8,000 housing units over the plan period. The Urban Capacity Study identifies the need for both identified brownfield and greenfield sites and windfall sites to come forward in order for these housing requirements to be met.

The Phasing Report and the Urban Capacity Study were produced prior to the closure of the GKN North Works and the subsequent proposals by SEEDA for a development including up to 550 dwellings. An update to the Urban Capacity Study was produced in November 2005. This considered both the Kingston and East Cowes town centre sites and concluded that although some large urban capacity sites had been identified, these sites were restricted in number and the Council would still need the release of Greenfield allocations to meet its requirements for affordable housing. The study concluded that the large urban capacity sites along with existing allocations would still be required to come forward in the UDP period and that additional sites would be needed to fulfil the housing requirement over the period 2012-2026.

The proposed rate of development at the site is 75 units per year. The applicant has confirmed that this figure does not relate to the anticipated market demand for housing (which is in excess of this), but is related to the company’s capacity and resources to construct the development. In consideration of the concerns raised by King Sturge, on behalf of SEEDA and English partnerships, the applicant has submitted a ‘Property Market Report’ in support of the application which demonstrates that there is more than sufficient market demand for both developments in East Cowes and that the market segments that are likely to be attracted to each development are very different. The report suggests that the number of units proposed to be built per annum for both schemes is only a small proportion of the overall Island housing requirement and will be easily marketed. The report concludes that it is not considered that approval of this application would impact on the take up of dwellings on the SEEDA site and therefore be detrimental to the regeneration proposals in East Cowes town centre. The Report has been made available to SEEDA and their response has now been received. In their response to Barratt’s report, SEEDA suggest that a) there is no evidence that the immediate release of the Barratts land is required to meet housing targets on the island. There is sufficient land with consent to meet housing targets for the next 3 years and thus by ruling the Barratts scheme to be premature, the ability of the Island to meet its regional housing targets will not be compromised; b) the amount of brownfield land in the pipeline is sufficient at the present time such that a ‘plan, monitor, manage’ approach would imply that Greenfield land should not be released at this stage in the planning period; c) the early release of the Barratts land is not in accordance with the national or the local policy framework to prioritise brownfield land, regeneration in East Cowes and balanced residential development across the island; and d) There is no evidence that the East Cowes market could absorb 100 new dwellings per year for a 10 year period on the assumption that they would be for local need rather than to meet ‘mainlander’ desires for second homes or buy to let.

a) Whilst we may only have to specifically provide for 3-5 years, we clearly have a duty to show that we are capable of providing the 520 pa through to 2026 in the Core Strategy and it remains clear from the figures in the residential monitoring report and accompanying urban capacity study that this will need to be made up of existing allocations and extant permissions and UCS sites, plus additional sites.

b) The plan, monitor and manage approach is not only aimed at releasing 520 units, but ensuring that there is an appropriate mix of sites released. There are other issues, the main one of which is the provision of affordable housing, whish is key to this development. The Council will require these sites, not only to provide for its housing supply but more importantly to provide for its housing need.

c) The release of the Greenfield site at Kingston is not contrary to the UDP, or its supplementary planning guidance (Phasing report). Kingston is an allocated site and was actually phased to come on line earlier than it is currently doing so.

d) There is clearly a link with both applications in terms of the provision of employment opportunities through redevelopment and new opportunities. The Council’s approach to new housing, outlined in the submitted Core Strategy is that new housing should link to the provision of employment opportunities.

Given the size of the site and scale of the residential element of the proposed development, it is considered desirable to control the rate of its release to restrict development over a number of years. The Urban Capacity Study and Phasing Report would allow major sites to “trickle feed” new housing into the marketplace as opposed to one site being dependent on another site being built out. This should also sustain competition between housing developers and impact on house prices. A condition is recommended requiring a phasing programme to be submitted in order to enable the Planning Authority to exercise appropriate controls.

· Affordable Housing

With regards to Policy H14 of the UDP, the size of the site is such that there is scope to provide a significant level of affordable housing for which there is a clear and recognised demand, with that demand being difficult to satisfy through the development of the much smaller brownfield sites which in many cases don’t generate any affordable housing whatever. Without significant levels of housing provision on major sites, the potential provision of affordable housing will be restricted. Current figures suggest that the average delivery of affordable housing is falling short of targets.

Members will note that under Supplementary Planning Guidance affordable housing provision has increased from 20% to 30%.

Following further discussions, the applicant has now agreed an approach which will allow for the provision of 30% affordable housing provision across the site. This equates to 167 dwellings, of which 86 will be rented units and 81 homebuy units. There will also be substantial frontloading, with 79 of the 218 (36%) dwellings in Phase 1 being affordable dwellings. This is considered to be in accordance with Council policies for the delivery of affordable homes. The applicant also has a partner Registered Social Landlord (RSL) signed up to the scheme. The Isle of Wight was recently successful in receiving grant funding from the Housing Corporation of a total of £7,926,899 for the provision of affordable housing. £2,942,899 is committed to the provision of affordable units at both the Kingston site and the SEEDA scheme for the regeneration of East Cowes. The funding from the Housing Corporation is subject to both applicants commencing development on site within a given timeframe. A major concern is should either or both schemes be delayed, Housing Corporation funding could be lost with potential repercussions for future bids.

· Density and Site Sustainability

The third reason for the refusal of the previous application was because the scheme represented an overdevelopment of the site at an excessive density.

While siting and therefore density is not a matter for Members to determine at this stage, consideration has to be given to whether or not controls need to be put in place to limit numbers of units on this site. The ES has been prepared on the basis of a maximum number of 557 dwellings being built on the 10ha site. The applicant has since reduced the number of units by six to 551 dwellings. This would still equate to a density of 55 dwellings per hectare. Paragraph 58 of PPG3 states that local planning authorities should avoid developments which make inefficient use of land (those of less than 30 dwellings per hectare net), should encourage housing development which makes more efficient use of land (between 30 and 50 dwellings per hectare net); and should seek greater intensity of development at places with good public transport accessibility such as city, town, district and local centres or around major nodes along good quality public transport corridors. More recently, Draft PPS3 proposes densities of between 35 and 55 dwellings per hectare for suburban areas. UDP policy H6 relates to high density residential development and for the purposes of this policy, high density is defined as development of about 40 dwellings per hectare. Whilst PPS3 is only in draft form, it suggests that high density is above 70 dwellings per hectare. Policy H6 states that applications for high density residential development will be permitted in appropriate areas within the development envelope where the development is close to public transport services and local/town centre facilities, where the amenity of surrounding areas will not be unduly affected, where open space and other requirements are not compromised and where the density and design is acceptable and appropriate to the historic character and layout of the settlement.

With regards to the proposed density of the development in comparison to adjacent housing developments, the density of neighbouring areas to the north of the site average 40 dwellings per hectare and the Kingslea Park estate is approximately 50 dwellings per hectare. Whilst the surrounding sites demonstrate a lower density, it is considered that the proposed density is in accordance with Government guidance and that to reduce density would represent a less efficient use of land. In order to ensure a high quality of development that is complementary to existing developments, a condition is recommended requiring the applicant to submit a comprehensive Design Statement for the development.

With reference to concerns raised regarding sustainability of the site’s location, the developer has submitted a further evidence to demonstrate the relationship of the proposed development to local services and infrastructure. The site is linked to the urban area by the proposed development access road, cycleways and footpaths. The early completion of the proposed access road will enable the earlier provision of bus services within the development and will also take commercial traffic off existing residential roads. The development of the site for both residential and employment uses will also encourage residents who are employed within the new employment site to walk to work. In terms of local facilities, the nearest primary school is approximately 1km from the site and there is a site allocated for a new primary school should this be required in the future next to the middle school which adjoins the site to the east. The developer will also make contributions to education through a section 106 legal agreement. In terms of shops, the town centre is approximately 1 mile away and there is a small local shop near the site. Government guidance contained within PPS6 encourages new retail development to be focussed within existing centres. With regards to concerns raised about water provision, I have received no objections from the utilities consultees.

Whilst the development is located at the edge of East Cowes, the site is well located for other local services and schools and would be served by buses. Given that the proposal has been assessed against the parameters outlined in the submitted Environmental Impact Assessment and traffic assessment, it is considered that any material alteration from such assessments may have an impact which has not been subject to proper consideration against the relevant planning policies and as such would be undesirable. For this reason, it is recommended that a density limit condition is attached to the approval.

· Employment Use

With regards to the employment element of the development, in addition to the site specific allocation, strategic Policy S8 of the UDP requires that at least 60 hectares of employment land will be allocated within, or adjacent to the main Island towns in areas well served by public transport. The development of this site will make a significant contribution to the provision of land for employment purposes on the Island. The proposal indicates that marine related uses are proposed, which is in accordance with the UDP allocation which considers the area adjoining the waterside vital in providing for the future expansion or relocation of marine related employment uses. While direct access to the water has not been proposed due to consideration of environmental impacts, the new access road will, subject to agreement, enable the use of facilities at the Power Station, Kingston Quay or the Harbour Commissioners boat hoist facilities.

· Agricultural Land

Consideration must also be given to Policy C14 of the UDP which seeks to ensure that the best agricultural land is safeguarded. In addition to being a Greenfield site, the site is currently in use as agricultural land, specifically arable farming. The proposal to develop part of the site for residential and employment uses will inevitably result in the loss of a significant amount of agricultural land. The land has been identified as Grade 3b (moderate) and as such is not considered to be of a high quality agricultural land. DEFRA have made no comments on the application.

8.3 Highways and Access Issues

· Policy H3 (69) of the UDP states that the residential area is to be served off, and developed in conjunction with, a new access road from Whippingham Road which will also serve proposed and existing employment uses to the south of East Cowes. The access is also referred to by policy E5 (13) which states that access to the employment area shall be primarily from Whippingham Road to the south of Osborne School and East Cowes Vics Football Ground. The UDP proposals map indicates that the route of the road would be further north, to the north of the access track to the former sewage works, than the route proposed by this application.

· The UDP is not prescriptive with regards to the route that the access road should take. The ES considered an alternative route to the north of the hedge and passing through Kingston Copse, which was discounted due to ecological and habitat concerns. The route that has been selected enables heavy goods vehicles and commercial traffic to be properly excluded from the future residential areas, in addition to minimising any potential adverse impacts on Kingston Copse. Lorry movements from the aggregate and petroleum landings at Kingston Wharf to the rest of the Island currently have to pass through residential areas of the town. The proposal will allow this traffic to directly access Whippingham Road leading to significant environmental benefits.

Concern has been expressed in the third party representations that the Island road infrastructure cannot accommodate this level of development. As indicated above, policy S7 of the UDP states that there is a need to provide for the development of at least 8,000 housing units over the plan period. This level of residential development is therefore likely to take place in any case. The provision of infrastructure is a strategic issue for the Council and not an issue that is specific to this site. With reference to the concerns raised regarding risks of an accident blocking the road to East Cowes, this is an existing possibility and the likelihood of such an event should not be significantly increased by this proposal, furthermore, the road has the capacity to service this scale of development. Further advice is being sought from Emergency Planning in this respect.

· Users of the allotments to the north of the site have previously expressed concern that their access and parking would be restricted. Whilst the application site boundary does include part of Cadets Walk, the applicant has confirmed that this has been included on the basis that the road closure may be required by the Council to prevent commercial traffic using this as a short-cut. Part of Kingston Road has been included in the application site boundary for the same reason. Parking and turning facilities on Cadets Walk and access to the allotments would therefore not be affected by this proposal.

· The proposals indicate that Beatrice Avenue will remain as an alternative access to East Cowes, there would, however, be amendments to Beatrice Avenue at its junction with the new access road to the development. In terms of coach access, coaches will still be able to access Beatrice Avenue, although they would inevitably need to cross the new access road by means of the proposed staggered junction.

· GKN were previously concerned that the proposals will interfere with legal rights belonging to them to gain access to the sewage works from Beatrice Avenue. The sewage works are now a redundant facility, however, maintenance access will be provided from the main spur road at the south-east corner of the residential part of the site. A condition has been attached to ensure this access is provided.

· A resident of Kingslea Park previously expressed concern regarding access to the rear of their dwelling. The applicant has stated that there is no right of access at present from these properties to the land forming part of the application site and that if the detailed application shows a footpath immediately adjacent to the rear of these properties it may be practical to permit some form of permissive access provided that this did not create a permanent right. This matter would be given consideration at the detailed planning stage.

· With regards to the proposed footpaths, the proposed location of the north-south footpath conflicts with the position shown on the UDP proposals map. The Ramblers Association previously commented that a footpath in this position is required. This matter has, however, been the subject of pre-application discussion with English Nature and it was concluded that the footpath would be better located at a greater distance from the estuary in order to discourage public access and dogs from this sensitive area. There are some outstanding concerns regarding footpaths in the Kingston copse area. A condition has therefore been recommended requiring full details of the proposed footpath network and its links to be submitted for subsequent approval.

8.4 Ecological and Natural Heritage Issues

· UDP policies C8, C9 and C10 relate to the significance of nature conservation as a material consideration.

· English Nature has confirmed that the changes to the application following the earlier refusal do not have substantial implications for impacts on nature conservation interests. English Nature has advised that the assessment made in the Appropriate Assessment for the former application can apply to the re-application. Given the agreed conditions and S106 agreement that will be applied English Nature would concur with the findings of the Appropriate Assessment that the application will not have an adverse effect on the integrity of the European site.

· The part of the site proposed for development has comparatively low nature conservation value apart from the woodland (Kingston Copse) and some of the hedgerows. The ES proposes a suite a measures to enhance habitats within the application site and these will be the subject of an ecological management plan, the details to be agreed with the planning authority.

· There are a number of issues regarding to protected species at the site. The ES considers that the site is of negligible importance for bats. Kingston Copse is, however, likely to provide roosting potential for several different bat species. A condition is therefore recommended requiring that works to any mature trees should be first assessed for the potential to support bat roosts. The ES confirms that dormice are present on site and puts forward a number of proposals for mitigation. Such measures must be implemented and will be required to be a component of the ecological management plan.

· The ES states that no evidence of badgers has been found. Badgers are, however, known to be in the immediate vicinity and as such, immediately prior to development, a survey should be carried out to determine the presence or otherwise of badgers on site. Evidence of red squirrels in Kingston Copse is reported in the ES. Providing that no trees containing dreys are felled, no specific actions are required. In order to avoid disturbance to nesting birds, a condition is recommended requiring that no tree or scrub clearance is carried out between the months of March to July inclusive.

· The ES reports the presence of Slow-worm and Common Lizard species and the proposal is to remove these, under Licence, and translocate them to a receptor area in the south east corner of the application site. A condition is required to ensure a mitigation plan for the translocation of reptiles is agreed.

· With regards to policy C12 which relates to development affecting trees and woodland and policy C13 relating to the protection of hedgerows, the Council’s Arboricultural Officer is concerned that the proposed development could potentially have a detrimental impact on the trees and woodland around the site. As siting of buildings is not a consideration at this stage, conditions have been recommended to ensure the submission of a full arboricultural survey and to require the developer to submit details of measures to protect and safeguard the hedgerows. This information will be taken into account when siting is considered. There will inevitably be some impact on hedgerows due to the construction of access roads and paths. Of the five individual hedgerows considered to be of ecological value under the Hedgerow Evaluation and Grading System, three are considered important under the Hedgerow Regulations (1997). The extent of habitat loss would be small and mitigation measures proposed including planting new hedgerows, enhancing existing hedgerows and hedge management.

8.5 Landscape and Visual Impact

· The Countryside Agency has raised a number of concerns, in particular, in relation to the potential impact on the AONB and its setting, including views, peace and tranquillity and dark skies. The nearest area of AONB is the Osborne Estate, this is heavily wooded, not open to the public and has no public rights of way through it. The AONB Officer has confirmed that there would be no visual impact from the development in this area. Taking into account the distance and topography from the development and any views afforded from within other parts of the Island’s AONB it is considered that there would be no negative visual impact.

· In addition to the assessments undertaken for the ES, the applicant has provided further information to assist in the assessment of the landscape and visual impacts of the development, which includes sections to show heights of buildings and sketches and photomontages. As already established above, the sites are allocated in the UDP for both employment and residential development. It has therefore already been established that there will be some form of ‘urbanising’ development on this site. The main consideration is therefore the impact that the proposed heights and density of development will have on landscape and visual amenity. Consideration must also be given to the topography of the site and the location of sensitive receptors in the vicinity of the site, in particular, the River Medina, the Conservation Area at Whippingham, a number of Listed Buildings at the Osborne Estate and in Whippingham and the Osborne estate which is on the Register of Historic Parks and Gardens.

· The Masterplan indicates that the highest buildings would be located on the lower contours to reduce visual impact. The residential development to the Beatrice Avenue and the southern part of the residential development adjacent to the spinal access road would be restricted to development of no more than 2.5 storey, again in order to minimise visual impact. The spinal access road itself would be constructed in a cutting with mounding to either side to reduce its visual impact from viewpoints to the south of the site. The Conservation Area and Listed Buildings within it are located a significant distance (500m) to the south of the proposed development and although there would be no impact on their setting, elements of the development would be visible. Consideration has been given to the construction of the access road at its junction with Whippingham Road and potential visual impacts on the Osborne Estate and Barton Lodges. There will be no visual impact from the development on Osborne House itself is due to a number of factors including the distance, existing buildings and existing trees. Woodland on the edge of the Estate would effectively screen any views of the proposed access road from within the Estate.

· With regards to the proposed employment uses, this part of the site will be separated from the River by a 50m wide buffer, comprising a 25m wide planted strip, a 3m high bund and a 25m wide wetland strip. The buffer area will ensure that no development can take place within the 50m strip, which would bring the development in line with the existing power station chimneys and set further back than the storage tanks. Adjacent to the River, the proposed buildings would be a maximum height of 17m, with the southern area being a maximum height of 15m. As the level of the land raises away from the River, towards Kingston Copse, the height of the units would reduce from 17m to 15m to 12m adjacent to the proposed residential area and Kingston Copse. Views from the River towards the proposed residential area would be substantially obscured by the employment development and Kingston Copse. Views from the opposite bank of the River, in particular from existing dwellings and a public footpath towards the employment part of the site would change substantially, however, this would be the case regardless of the height of the units.

8.6 Foul and Surface Water Drainage

· The Environment Agency has made comments and recommendations regarding foul and surface drainage. Appropriate conditions have been attached requiring detailed schemes to be prepared and submitted for approval.

8.7 Slope Stability and Geotechnics

· Ground stability is a material consideration, with the test being whether or not the site is capable of supporting the development proposed. In this case the ground conditions will need to be taken into account when designing the foundation details, for those ground conditions vary even within the site. I am satisfied that this is essentially a Building Control matter, with the Building Regulations providing the legislation to control this issue.

8.8 Noise and Residential Amenity

· Appropriate conditions are recommended to protect existing and future residents from potential disturbance from noise and vibration during both the construction period and eventual operation of the employment uses.

8.9 Cumulative Impact

· With regards to the issue of cumulative impact of both the Barratt’s scheme and SEEDA’s proposed regeneration of East Cowes, officers have taken into account both schemes both in highways terms and on impacts to community facilities in and around East Cowes. Officers have been negotiating an appropriate contribution from the Barratt scheme towards community facilities and infrastructure through a Section 106 Legal Agreement.

8.10 Section 106 Agreement Issues

· Members are advised that officers have been undertaking negotiations regarding the Section 106 benefits which can be reasonably achieved from development of this site. Heads of terms have been discussed and a draft agreement has been prepared. Members are also advised that the various departmental recipients of contribution have been involved.

· The contribution, which is considered to be reasonable in this case, are as follows:

· Following consultation with the Council’s Education Officer a sum of £2,154 (based on 2+ bed dwellings) has been negotiated.

· Open Space and habitat Maintenance contributions

· Community facility contribution of £250,000

· Provision of neighbourhood equipped area of play

· Provision of a public transport contribution of £100,000 to initially fund bus service through the site

· Included in the 106 Agreement will be a requirement to provide this level of affordable housing in conjunction with a registered social landlord (Housing Association) with the method of provision being either to sell to a registered social landlord. Such affordable housing will be provided in phases to link in with any overall phasing of development on the site, with 79 (36%) of the 218 dwellings to be built in Phase 1 to be affordable.

8.11 Other s106 Issues

· Other issues which are included in the legal agreement are the need to ensure that a management company is set up to guarantee the future management of maintenance of the attenuation ponds and ecological management of southern part of the site.

· In summary, it is considered that the benefits and contributions which have been negotiated have been set at a level which takes due account of the circumstances of the site.

9. Conclusion and Justification for Recommendation

9.1 It is considered that the applicant has effectively demonstrated how the three reasons for refusal have been overcome. It is considered that whilst this is a Greenfield site, the development of part of the site for residential purposes would not be contrary to the guidance contained within PPG3, Draft PPS3, the Council’s UDP policies and the Urban Capacity and Phasing Reports which constitute SPG. The maximum density of the proposed development is also in accordance with the aforementioned policies. The applicant has now increased the level of affordable housing provision, which is in accordance with national, regional and UDP policies.

9.2 It is considered that appropriate weight to all material considerations referred to in the Report has been given and that the site is appropriate for both employment development and residential development subject to the conditions suggested and the Section 106 agreement and therefore approval is recommended.

9.3 Should Members be minded to approve this application then it will have to be referred to GOSE (Government Office South East) under the Town and Country Planning (Residential Development on Greenfield Land) (England) Directions 2000. This is required to enable the Secretary of State to ensure that the national policies are being complied with, with particular reference to those policies within PPG3 – Housing.

10. Recommendation

10.1 Approval, subject to reference to GOSE under the Town and Country Planning (Residential Development on Greenfield Land) (England) Directions 2000) as the site is likely to generate in excess of 150 units; and subject to the applicant entering into a s278 agreement with the local highway authority and subject to the completion of a Section 106 Agreement covering the following:

· Provision of 30% affordable housing to be transferred to a registered social landlord.

· Public transport contribution of £100,000

· An education contribution.

· Open space maintenance contribution.

· Community facilities contribution

· Setting up of a registered management company to adopt and maintain the two balancing ponds and retained ditches.

· Long term ecological management and maintenance plan

Conditions/Reasons:

1	Application for approval of reserved matters must be made not later than the expiration of three years beginning with the date of this permission and the development must be begun not later than the expiration of two years from the final approval of the reserved matters, or, in the case of approval on different dates, the final approval of the last such matter to be approved. Reason: To comply with Section 92 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.
2	No development shall be started until full details of the following reserved matters have been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority: · finished floor levels and/or contours and floor levels of buildings · the layout of the site, including the disposition of buildings and roads and provision for parking and servicing; · plans and elevations showing the design of all buildings and other structures; · the colour and type of facing materials to be used for all external walls and roofs; · a landscape scheme for the site which shall include details of trees and shrubs to be planted, any existing trees to be retained, or felled indicating the spread of the branches and trunk positions, walls, fences, boundary and surface treatment. Reason: In order to secure a satisfactory development and be in accordance with policies S6 (Standards of Design), D1 (Standards of Design), D2 (Standards of Development Within the Site), D3 (Landscaping), TR7 (Highway Consideration for New Development) of the IW Unitary Development Plan.
3	No development of the employment site shall commence until an overall Masterplan for that area has been submitted for the written approval of the Local Planning Authority. Such Masterplan shall include the following: An element of development that fronts onto Kingston Copse for the purposes of surveillance and public safety The locations and split of B1c, B2 and B8 uses within the employment area, with particular attention to the location of B2 marine uses in locations accessible to the River and B1 uses in areas adjacent to existing and future residential properties A scheme to indicate how the means of access to the waterfront for the B2 marine uses will be secured, which will consider the options of using the Wharf at the Kingston Works site, Cowes Harbour Commissions launch/recovery facilities, and/or access through the Kingston power station site Internal road layout of the employment site, which shall accord with the advice contained with Design Bulletin 32 Overall strategy for car parking, disabled persons parking, HGV parking and cycle parking Overall strategy for landscaping and boundary treatments An overall artificial lighting strategy for the site A phasing programme for the development of the site Such Masterplan shall be approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority and development on the employment site shall take place in accordance with such principals, unless otherwise agreed in writing with the local Planning Authority. Reason: To ensure that development is carried out in accordance with an overall design strategy in accordance with policy G4 (General Locational Criteria) and D2 (Standards for Development Within the site) of the IW Unitary Development Plan.
4	The development on this site shall be carried out in substantial accordance with the zoned areas relating to the mix of residential and employment uses and the maximum heights of buildings within these areas, as identified by the colour-coding on the illustrative Masterplan drawing no. D18/1111/SMP/A101 Rev K received 23^rd June 2006 and indicated in Sections XXX and XXX as shown on drawing no. D18/1111/SKSS/01. Reason: In order to secure a satisfactory development and be in accordance with policies S5 and S10 of the IW Unitary Development Plan.
5	A phasing programme for the residential development shall be submitted to the Local Planning Authority for written approval before any operations are commenced. The development shall proceed in accordance with the approved phasing programme. Reason: To ensure the development is carried out in a properly phased manner in compliance with policy G4 (General Locational Criteria for Development) and D2 (Standards for Development within the Site) of the IW Unitary Development Plan.
6	The density of development on this site shall be between 30 dwellings per hectare and 55 dwellings per hectare and shall contain a variety of house-types and size of units. Reason: In compliance with policy H2 (To ensure that large residential developments contain a variety of house sizes and types) of the IW Unitary Development Plan.
7	Prior to the commencement of the development, the developer shall submit a site investigation report for the approval of the Local Planning Authority. The investigation shall address the nature, degree and distribution of ground contamination and ground gases on site and shall include an identification and assessment of the risk to receptors as defined under the Environmental Protection Act 1990, Part IIA, focusing primarily on risks to human health and controlled waters. The investigation shall also address the implications of ground conditions on the health and safety of site workers, on nearby occupied building structures, on services and landscaping schemes and on wider environmental receptors including ecological systems and property. The sampling and analytical strategy shall be approved by the Local Planning Authority prior to the start of the site investigation survey. Recommendations and remedial works contained within the approved report shall be implemented by the developer prior to occupation of the site. Prior to discharge of the Contaminated Land Condition, a Site Completion Report shall be submitted to the Local Planning Authority for approval. The Site Completion Report shall validate that all works undertaken on site were completed in accordance with those agreed by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To protect the environment and prevent harm to human health by ensuring that where necessary the land is remediated to an appropriate standard in order to comply with Part IIA of the Environmental Protection Act 1990, in accordance with policy P3 of the IW Unitary Development Plan
8	Prior to the commencement of any development including site clearance and preparation a Noise Management Scheme shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The Scheme shall detail the works involved for various stages of the development and shall detail the impact of noise and vibration from the proposed works on the neighbouring noise sensitive properties along the northern aspects of the site including dwellings on Kingslea Park, Greenlands Road, Harvey Close and Kingston Farmhouse and future residents of the proposed development. The Scheme shall detail any mitigation measures which are required to minimise the impact of noise and vibration from the construction phase of the development on the neighbouring noise sensitive properties. The construction phases of the development shall be carried out in strict accordance with the approved Scheme and associated mitigation measures unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To safeguard the amenity of existing and future residents, in accordance with policy P5 of the IW Unitary Development Plan
9	The combined noise level from all fixed plant and machinery associated with the proposed development shall not exceed 27.0 dB LAeq.1hr(freefield)at the proposed dwellings and existing dwellings. Reason: To safeguard the amenity of existing and future residents, in accordance with policy P5 of the IW Unitary Development Plan
10	Prior to the commencement of any development including site clearance and preparation a Dust Management Plan for the site clearance/site remodelling and construction phases shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The Plan shall examine all aspects of the site preparation and construction phases where the generation of dust is feasible and further identify control measures to mitigate the generation of dust. The Dust Management Plan shall contain recommendations for measures to adequately control the generation of dust on the site including the access and egress of vehicles on and off the site. The development shall be carried out in strict accordance with the approved Plan unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To safeguard the amenity of existing and future residents, in accordance with policy P5 of the IW Unitary Development Plan
11	Construction works shall not occur before 08.00hrs or after 18.00hrs Monday to Fridays inclusive and Saturdays 08.00 to 13.00hrs and there should be no working or deliveries to the site outside those hours. Reason: To safeguard the amenity of existing and future residents, in accordance with policy P5 of the IW Unitary Development Plan
12	On completion of the spinal access road, the surfaces of the spinal access road and other internal access roads shall be maintained in good state of repair and kept clean and free of mud and other debris at all times during construction works and until completion of construction works. Reason: In the interests of highway safety and safeguarding the local environment, in accordance with policy P1 of the IW Unitary Development Plan
13	No construction vehicle shall enter the public highway unless their wheels and chassis have been cleaned to prevent material being deposited on the highway. Reason: In the interests of highway safety and to prevent mud and dust getting on the highway, in accordance with policy P1 of the IW Unitary Development Plan
14	Prior to the submission of any reserved matters application a full arboricultural survey shall be submitted for the written approval of the Local Planning Authority and shall include the following: a plan showing the location of, and allocating a reference number to, each existing tree on the site which has a stem with a diameter, measured over the bark at a point 1.5 metres above ground level, exceeding 75mm, showing the species, girth or stem diameter, height, crown spread, state of health and stability of each tree, together with details of those trees that are to be retained and details of any proposed topping or lopping; details of any proposed topping or lopping of any tree on land adjacent to the site; a plan showing existing ground levels and details of any proposed alterations thereto and of any proposed excavations; a plan showing the location, spread, height, species and state of health of all existing hedgerows, hedges and other areas of vegetation on the site, together with details of those that are to be retained and details of any that are proposed to be cut back or removed, wholly or partially. No development shall be started until all the trees within (or overhanging) the site, with the exception of those trees clearly shown to be felled on the submitted plan, have been surrounded by substantial fences which shall extend to the extreme circumference of the spread of the branches of the trees (or such positions as may be agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority). Such fences shall be erected in accordance with a specification to be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority and shall remain until all development is completed and no work, including any form of drainage or storage of materials, earth or topsoil shall take place within the perimeter of such fencing. Development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved plans, particulars and details pursuant to this condition. Reason: To allow the proper consideration of the impact of the proposed development on the amenity value of the existing site and to comply with policies D3 (Landscaping) and C12 (Development affecting Trees and Woodland) of the IW Unitary Development Plan.
15	No development shall be commenced unless and until details of measures to protect and safeguard the hedgerows within the application site, have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Such measures as may be agreed shall be implemented prior to the commencement of site works and remain for the duration of the construction phase In this condition "retained hedge or hedgerow" means an existing hedge or hedgerow which is to be retained in accordance with the approved plans and particulars. No retained hedge or hedgerow shall be cut down, uprooted or destroyed, nor shall any retained hedge or hedgerow be reduced in height other than in accordance with the approved plans and particulars, without the written approval of the Local Planning Authority. If within a period of 5 years from the completion of the development the whole or any part of any retained hedge or hedgerow is removed, uprooted, is destroyed or dies, another hedge or hedgerow shall be planted at the same place and that hedge or hedgerow shall be of such size and species, and shall be planted at such time, as may be specified in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The erection of fencing for the protection of any retained hedge or hedgerow shall be undertaken in accordance with the approved plans and particulars before any equipment, machinery or materials are brought onto the site for the purposes of the development, and shall be maintained until all equipment, machinery and surplus materials have been removed from the site. Nothing shall be stored or placed in any fenced area in accordance with this condition and the ground levels within those areas shall not be altered nor shall any excavation be made or fire be lit, without the written consent of the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To ensure the continuity of amenity afforded by existing hedges or hedgerows and to comply with policies D1 (Standards of Design) and C13 (Hedgerows) of the IW Unitary Development Plan.
16	This permission shall authorise to the use of the site identified on the plan attached to and forming part of this decision notice for Classes B1c, B2 and B8 of the Town and Country Planning (Use Classes) Order 2005 and the development and in total combination shall not exceed a maximum gross floorspace of 49,774m² and individually shall not exceed 12,831m² B1c uses and 36,943m² B2/B8 uses. Reason: In accordance with the stated intentions of the applicant and the submitted Environmental Impact Assessment and traffic assessment against which the application has been assessed. Any material alteration from such assessments may have an impact which has not been subject to proper consideration against the relevant planning policies.
17	No development of the employment site shall be commenced unless and until a scheme detailing the proposed artificial lighting for that part of the application site has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall be carried out in strict accordance with the approved lighting scheme unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority and maintained as such thereafter. Reason: In the interests of maintaining the amenity value of the area and to comply with policy D4 (Light Spillage) of the IW Unitary Development Plan
18	Within a period of one month of the occupation of each unit within the employment area of the site, the occupier/tenant/landlord of each unit shall undertake a travel survey and this data will form part of a Travel Plan. Within a period of 6 months from the first date of occupation of each unit, a Travel Plan shall be submitted for the written approval of the Local Planning Authority. The Travel Plan shall as a minimum include the broad areas of actions, objectives and timescales for review and monitoring. Within a period of twelve months of the occupation of the building, the tenant/landlord shall undertake a monitoring survey. Within twelve months of occupation of each unit, a Travel Plan shall be submitted for the written approval of the Local Planning Authority, which shall include a review of targets, measures and staff survey data. Annually from the occupation of the building, a Travel Plan shall be submitted for the written approval of the Local Planning Authority for a period of 5 years and then at a time agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To ensure sustainable modes of travel are used in accordance with policy of the E1 (Promotion of New Employment Uses) and TR3 (Locating Development to Minimize the Need to Travel) of the IW Unitary Development Plan.
19	Overall parking provision on the residential area of the site shall ensure minimum 1 parking space per unit and shall not exceed an average of 1.5 parking spaces per unit. No dwelling shall be occupied until the associated provision for off street parking has been completed and made available for the use of that dwelling to the satisfaction of the Local Planning Authority. Such spaces shall be available at all times for the parking of a private motor vehicle. Reason: In compliance with policy TR16 (Parking Policies and Guidelines) of the IW Unitary Development Plan and advice contained in PPG3 - Housing.
20	No development shall be commenced on the residential part of the site unless and until a scheme detailing the locations of and level of provision for disabled persons car parking has been submitted for the written approval of the Local Planning Authority. Such approved parking provision shall be completed in accordance with the approved details and made available for use prior to the first occupation of the associated dwellings. The parking provision shall be retained and kept available for use thereafter. Reason: To ensure an adequate level of provision for disabled persons car parking, in accordance with policy TR16 (Parking Policies and Guidelines) of the IW Unitary Development Plan
21	No development shall be commenced on the residential part of the site unless and until a scheme detailing the design, locations and level of provision for cycle parking has been submitted for the written approval of the Local Planning Authority. The scheme shall provide for a minimum level of provision of 1 space per flat and 1 space for each dwellinghouse without curtilage or garage. Such approved cycle parking provision shall be completed in accordance with the approved details and made available for use prior to the first occupation of the associated dwellings. The cycle parking provision shall be retained and kept available for use thereafter. Reason: To ensure an adequate level of provision for cycle parking, in accordance with policy TR16 (Parking Policies and Guidelines) of the IW Unitary Development Plan
22	Vehicular access to the North of the site connecting to Kingston Road shall not be used other than as a route for the arrival and departure of buses, cycles, pedestrians and emergency vehicles. Details of how such use is to be restricted and maintained including physical and management controls (the measures) shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority prior to the first use of the new road. The approved measures shall be implemented, retained and maintained thereafter. Reason: In the interests of highway safety in accordance with policy TR7 (Highway Considerations) of the IW Unitary Development Plan and in accordance with the requirements of policyE5 (13) (Allocation of Employment Sites – Kingston) of the IW Unitary Development Plan
23	Notwithstanding the details contained within the ES and shown on the Masterplan D18/1111/SMP/A101 dated 18 April 2005, no development shall be commenced unless and until a detailed pedestrian access strategy including timescales for its implementation has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The strategy shall include full details of the network of paths in and around Kingston Copse; within the southern area of the application site; and within the area where residential development and the links with the internal networks to the footpath networks outside the application site. The strategy shall include full details of path standards including their dimensions, construction and surface materials. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved strategy. Reason: To ensure an adequate level and standard of provision in appropriate locations and to prevent disturbance to wildlife and sensitive areas, in accordance with policies C8 (Nature Conservation), TR17 (Public Rights of Way) and TR6 (Cycling and Walking) of the IW Unitary Development Plan.
24	No development pursuant to this planning permission shall commence unless and until the developer has submitted the following full design and construction details of the required improvements to the access with Beatrice Avenue and such details have been first agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority, in consultation with the local highway authorities and shown in outline in Drawing XXXX dated XXXX. Development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details. Reason: In the interests of highway safety and to comply with policy TR7 (Highway Considerations) of the IW Unitary Development Plan.
25	Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995 (or any Order revoking and re-enacting that Order with or without modification), no means of access shall be provided between the development hereby approved and Beatrice Avenue other than that expressly authorised by this permission. Reason: In the interests of highway safety and to comply with policy TR7 (Highway Considerations) of the IW Unitary Development Plan.
26	Prior to the commencement of development on the residential area of the site, the developer shall submit a traffic calming and street lighting scheme for that part of the development and for Beatrice Avenue for the written approval of the Local Planning Authority. The approved scheme shall be implemented prior to the 25% occupation of the dwellings (the remainder to be implemented concurrently with the continuing occupation) and shall be retained and maintained thereafter. Reason: In the interests of highway safety and to comply with policy TR7 (Highway Considerations) of the IW Unitary Development Plan.
27	Within 18 months of the commencement of development, the spinal access road as indicated on the Masterplan D18/1111/MPOL/A001 dated 29 November 2005 (received by the Council 3^rd March 2006) shall be provided and completed in its entirety to its junction with Kingston Road, in accordance with detailed drawings (which shall include full details of levels, construction details, surfacing, drainage, bund positions and construction, verge planting and sectional drawings) to be first submitted for the written approval of the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To ensure an adequate standard of highway access and drainage for the proposed dwellings and employment land and to comply with policy TR7 (Highway Considerations) of the IW Unitary Development Plan.
28	The development shall proceed in accordance with an Urban Design Report which explains the underlying urban design principles. The Report shall be submitted for the written approval of the local planning authority, prior to the first submission of any Reserved Matters application. The development shall be designed in accordance with the approved principles. Reason: In order to secure a satisfactory development and be in accordance with policies S6 (Standards of Design), D1 (Standards of Design), D2 (Standards of Development Within the Site) of the IW Unitary Development Plan.
29	Prior to the commencement of any development including site clearance and preparation, a scheme detailing the provision of maintenance access to the former sewage works site shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The scheme shall indicate how access to the former sewage works will be provided and maintained and shall include levels, surfacing, drainage and construction details and how the means of restricting its use to maintenance vehicles will be achieved. Development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details and shall be retained and maintained thereafter. Reason: To ensure that an adequate means of access is provided to the former sewage works site, in accordance with policies TR7 (Highway Considerations) and C12 (Development affecting Trees and Woodland) of the IW Unitary Development Plan.
30	No development approved by this permission shall be commenced until schemes for the disposal of foul and surface waters have been approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The scheme for the surface water regulatory system shall be designed and implemented to the satisfaction of the Local Planning Authority and shall be supported by detailed calculations. The surface water regulatory system scheme shall include a maintenance programme and shall establish ownership of the storage system for the future. The formulation of a scheme for the disposal of surface waters shall investigate the potential for such a scheme to be delivered in a sustainable form (SuDS). Should such an approach prove not to be feasible or viable the developer shall demonstrate in writing the reasons why. The development shall be constructed, completed and maintained in accordance with the approved schemes unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. No dwelling or employment unit shall be first occupied until the associated infrastructure for the disposal of foul and surface waters has been completed. Reason: To ensure that the disposal of foul waters and surface water run-off is satisfactorily accommodated and to comply with policies C8 (Nature Conservation), G6 (Development in Areas Liable to Flooding) and U11 (Infrastructure and Services Provision) of the IW Unitary Development Plan.
31	Prior to being discharged into any watercourse, surface water sewer or soakaway system, all surface water drainage from parking areas and hardstanding shall be passed through an oil interceptor that has been constructed in accordance with details submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Roof water shall not be permitted to pass through the interceptor. Reason: To minimise the risk of pollution and to comply with policy P1 (Pollution and Development) of the IW Unitary Development Plan.
32	Prior to the commencement of any development including site clearance and preparation and between the months of March and September inclusive, engineering works associated with the creation of an ecological bund and buffer area adjacent to the River Medina shall be undertaken in accordance with a detailed scheme to be first submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The scheme shall also include full details of planting for the ecological buffer area which shall be undertaken in the first available planting season following the completion of the engineering works associated with the construction of the bund. If within a period of 5 years from the completion of the ecological bund and buffer area any planting is removed, uprooted, is destroyed or dies, replacement planting shall be provided in locations and of a size and species and timing, as shall be specified in writing to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Development of the ecological bund and buffer area shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details and shall be retained and maintained thereafter. Reason: In order to prevent disturbance to wildlife and habitats in accordance with policies C8 (Nature Conservation), C7 (River Corridors and Estuaries) and C9 (Sites of International Importance for Nature Conservation) of the IW Unitary Development Plan.
33	Prior to the commencement of any development including site clearance and preparation, the landscape buffer zone and land to the south of the areas of the site identified for employment and residential development shall be fenced in accordance with a scheme to be first submitted and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Such scheme shall include the locations of fencing, its height and design. The approved fencing shall be erected, retained and maintained thereafter. Reason: In order to prevent disturbance to wildlife and habitats in accordance with policies C8 (Nature Conservation), C7 (River Corridors and Estuaries) and C9 (Sites of International Importance for Nature Conservation) of the IW Unitary Development Plan
34	No site clearance, ground remodelling or other preparatory works including the removal of trees, shrubs and grassland vegetation shall be carried out between the months of March to July inclusive. Reason: In order to prevent disturbance to wildlife and habitats in accordance with policies C8 (Nature Conservation) and C9 (Sites of International Importance for Nature Conservation) of the IW Unitary Development Plan.
35	Any trees or buildings on the site which are to be felled/removed and which have the potential to provide bat roosts shall be surveyed by a competent specialist one month prior to their felling/removal. If the presence of bats is recorded mitigation measures shall be first submitted to and agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The felling/removal of such trees/buildings shall be carried out in accordance with the approved mitigation measures. Reason: In order to prevent disturbance to wildlife and habitats in accordance with policy C8 (Nature Conservation) of the IW Unitary Development Plan.
36	No development shall be commenced unless and until an ecological mitigation strategy has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The strategy shall include full details of measures for habitat creation and enhancement and mitigation planting throughout the application site and details of its management and maintenance. The strategy shall also include details of measures for the management of maintenance of retained features including hedgerows and Kingston Copse. The strategy shall also include details to demonstrate how the wildlife on adjacent sites is to be protected during the construction period. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved strategy. Reason: In order to protect and enhance the nature conservation and bio-diversity of the site in accordance with policies C8 (Nature Conservation), C7 (River Corridors and Estuaries) and C9 (Sites of International Importance for Nature Conservation) of the IW Unitary Development Plan.
37	Piling, or any other foundation design using penetrative methods, will not be permitted on any part of the site between the months of October to March inclusive. Reason: In order to prevent disturbance to wildlife and habitats in accordance with policies C8 (Nature Conservation) and C9 (Sites of International Importance for Nature Conservation) of the IW Unitary Development Plan.
38	Immediately prior to development, a survey should be carried out to determine the presence or otherwise of badgers on site. The results of the survey should be submitted to the planning authority. Reason: In order to prevent disturbance to wildlife and habitats in accordance with policy C8 (Nature Conservation) of the IW Unitary Development Plan.
39	A mitigation plan for the translocation of reptiles shall be agreed with the Local Planning Authority and implemented in full, prior to development of those parts of site where reptiles are known to be present. Reason: In order to prevent disturbance to wildlife and habitats in accordance with policy C8 (Nature Conservation) of the IW Unitary Development Plan.
40	No development shall be commenced within the application site until the applicant has secured the implementation of a programme of archaeological work in accordance with a written scheme of investigation which shall have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development of the site shall be carried out in accordance with the approved scheme of investigation. Reason: In order to ensure that provision is made for the provision of a programme of archaeological recording, in accordance with policy B9 of the IW Unitary Development Plan.
41	No development on the residential part of the site approved by this permission shall be commenced until full details of the existing and proposed ground levels for that part of the site have been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall be constructed and completed in accordance with the approved details. Reason: In the interests of maintaining the amenity value of the area and maintaining the visual amenity of existing residents, in accordance with policies C1 (Protection of Landscape Character), D1 (Standards of Design) and D2 (Standards for Development Within the Site) of the IW Unitary Development Plan.
42	No development on the employment part of the site approved by this permission shall be commenced until full details of the existing and proposed ground levels for that part of the site have been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall be constructed and completed in accordance with the approved details. Reason: In the interests of maintaining the amenity value of the area and maintaining the visual amenity of existing residents, in accordance with policies C1 (Protection of Landscape Character), D1 (Standards of Design) and D2 (Standards for Development Within the Site) of the IW Unitary Development Plan.
43	No development shall be commenced on the employment part of the site unless and until a scheme demonstrating the incorporation of energy efficiency measures into the design and operation of the buildings have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved particulars. Reason: In the interests of making more efficient uses of existing resources and renewable energy, in accordance with policy D13 (Energy Conservation) of the IW Unitary Development Plan.
44	No development shall commence on the employment part of the site unless and until a scheme demonstrating the incorporation of renewable energy options to be used in the design and operation of the buildings have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved scheme. Reason: In the interests of making more efficient uses of existing resources and renewable energy, in accordance with policy D13 (Energy Conservation) of the IW Unitary Development Plan.
45	No development shall be commenced on the residential part of the site unless and until a scheme demonstrating the incorporation of energy efficiency measures into the design and operation of the buildings have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved particulars. Reason: In the interests of making more efficient uses of existing resources and renewable energy, in accordance with policy D13 (Energy Conservation) of the IW Unitary Development Plan.
46	No development shall commence on the residential part of the site unless and until a scheme demonstrating the incorporation of renewable energy options to be used in the design and operation of the buildings have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved scheme. Reason: In the interests of making more efficient uses of existing resources and renewable energy, in accordance with policy D13 (Energy Conservation) of the IW Unitary Development Plan.
47	No development shall commence on the residential part of the site unless and until details of the location and layout of the site compound (s) for that part of the site have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details. Reason: In the interests of maintaining the amenity value of the area and maintaining the amenity of existing residents, in accordance with policies C1 (Protection of Landscape Character), D1 (Standards of Design) and D2 (Standards for Development Within the Site) of the IW Unitary Development Plan.
48	No development shall commence on the employment part of the site unless and until details of the location and layout of the site compound (s) for that part of the site have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details. Reason: In the interests of maintaining the amenity value of the area and maintaining the amenity of existing residents, in accordance with policies C1 (Protection of Landscape Character), D1 (Standards of Design) and D2 (Standards for Development Within the Site) of the IW Unitary Development Plan.
49	Prior to the first occupation of the development, a landscape management plan, including long-term design objectives, management responsibilities and maintenance schedules for all landscaped areas, other than privately owned domestic gardens, shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The landscape management plan shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details. Reason: To ensure the provision of long-term maintenance at the site, in accordance with policy D3 (Landscaping) of the IW Unitary Development Plan.
50	Prior to the commencement of any development a scheme outlining the provisions of open space within the proposed housing development shall be submitted to and agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: In order to reduce pressures on sensitive nature conservation areas and to receive a satisfactory development and be in accordance with Policy L10 (Open Space in Housing Development) of the IW Unitary Development Plan.
51	Prior to the commencement of any development a scheme detailing the boundary treatment between the development site and any mitigation land shall be submitted to and agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority. Reason: In order to protect nature conservation interests and be in accordance with Policy C8 (Nature Conservation) of the IW Unitary Development Plan.
52	Prior to the commencement of any development a scheme outlining the management of public parking within industrial area shall be submitted to and agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: In order to reduce the likelihood of public access to the waterfront and to protect nature conservation interests and be in accordance with Policy C8 (Nature Conservation of the IW Unitary Development Plan.
53	All mitigation proposals for the protection of nature conservation interests shall be overseen by an appropriately qualified ecologist. Reason: In order to secure the appropriate implementation of any mitigation measures in order to protect nature conservation interests and be in accordance with Policy C8 (Nature Conservation) of the IW Unitary Development Plan.
54	Prior to the commencement of any development a scheme outlining public access controls shall be submitted to and agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: In order to protect nature conservation interests and be in accordance with Policy C8 (Nature Conservation) of the IW Unitary Development Plan.
55	All uses, construction and operations associated with the development hereby permitted shall be carried out in a manner that falls within the parameters of the Environment Statement (as amended) including all of the relevant mitigation measures, unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To keep to a minimum the impacts associated with the development in the interests of the designated sites and the amenities of the area and nearby residential occupiers and to comply with the strategic policy S10 (Designated and Defined Areas) and policies G4 (General Locational Criteria for Development), G10 (Potential Conflict Between Proposed Development and Existing Surrounding Uses), C1 (Protection of Landscape Character), C8 (Nature Conservation as a Material Consideration) and C9 (Sites of International Importance for Nature Conservation) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.

Informatives:

· This development is subject to the planning obligation entered into by the applicant under Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, prior to the granting of planning permission.

· This grant of planning permission does not authorise the closure or diversion of the public right of way as indicated on the approved plan, until the appropriate order has been made.

· The applicant is advised that the requirements of all the conditions precedent must be satisfied prior to the commencement of the development. Failure to satisfy the conditions precedent renders all development unauthorised and unlawful and appropriate action may be taken by the Council.

· The applicant is advised that any works which could impact upon dormice will require a DEFRA licence before works can commence

· The applicant’s attention is drawn to the following design guides produced by the Council:

www.iow.gov.uk/living_here/planning/images/open_space.pdf; www.iow.gov.uk/living_here/planning/images/Affordable_Housing.pdf;and www.iow.gov.uk/living_here/planning/images/Communitysafety.pdf.

· The applicant is advised that the landscape proposals shall include the planting of native species only.

· The applicant is advised of the potential conflict between the indicative siting shown on the plans and existing trees at the site, namely, the linear group of Ash and Turkey Oak alongside the access track from Beatrice Avenue to the southern perimeter of the site and the area of woodland east of the field adjacent to this track. A buffer zone should be maintained between these trees and the proposed development to ensure that there is no damage to the trees. The development proposals shall reflect this advice.

· The applicant's attention is drawn to the contents of the attached letter from the Environment Agency.

· It is recommended that anybody involved with inspecting or carrying out work on trees at the site is made aware of the possible presence of bat roosts in and to proceed with caution. If bats are discovered at any time, work must cease and advice sought from a licensed bat worker.

· Your attention is drawn to the provisions of the Building Regulations, and related legislation which must be complied with.

· The applicant’s attention is drawn to the need to comply with the requirements of the Control of Pollution Act 1974 concerning construction site noise and in this respect you are advised to contact the Council’s Environmental Health Division.

· The applicant is advised that this permission does not authorise the display of advertisements at the premises and separate consent may be required from the Local Planning Authority under the Town and Country Planning (Control of Advertisements) Regulations 1992.

· The following policies from the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan were considered relevant in determining this application: S1, S2, S3, S7, S8, S10, S11, S15, G1, G4, G6, D1, D2, D3, D10, D11, D12, D13, D14, B2, B6, B9, B10, C7, C8, C9, C12, C14, P1, P5, TR4 , TR6, TR7, TR8, TR16 , TR17 , U2, U11, U16 , L10

Derek Rowell

STRATEGIC DIRECTOR FOR

ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT & REGENERATION

PAPER B

ISLE OF WIGHT COUNCIL DEVELOPMENT CONTROL SUB COMMITTEE -

TUESDAY 11 JULY 2006

REPORT OF THE HEAD OF PLANNING SERVICES

WARNING

Background Papers

1.

STRATEGIC OVERVIEW OF TWO MAJOR PLANNING APPLICATIONS FOR EAST COWES AS SUBMITTED BY SEEDA & ENGLISH PARTNERSHIPS AND BARRATT (SOUTHAMPTON) LTD

1. Purpose

2. Background

3. Islandwide Strategic Issues

3.2 Employment

3.3 Emergency Planning

3.4 Highways

3.5 Cowes Waterfront Supplementary Planning Guidance

5. Background Papers

REASON FOR COMMITTEE CONSIDERATION

4. Introduction

3. Location and Site Characteristics

5. Relevant History

6. Development Plan Policy

7. Consultee and Third Party Comments

8. Evaluation

9. Conclusion and Justification for Recommendation

10. Recommendation