PAPER B1

ISLE OF WIGHT COUNCIL DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – TUESDAY 14 MARCH 2006

REPORT OF THE HEAD OF PLANNING SERVICES

WARNING

1. THE RECOMMENDATIONS CONTAINED IN THIS REPORT OTHER THAN PART 1 SCHEDULE AND DECISIONS ARE DISCLOSED FOR INFORMATION PURPOSES ONLY.

2. THE RECOMMENDATIONS WILL BE CONSIDERED ON THE DATE INDICATED ABOVE IN THE FIRST INSTANCE. (In some circumstances, consideration of an item may be deferred to a later meeting).

3. THE RECOMMENDATIONS MAY OR MAY NOT BE ACCEPTED BY THE DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE AND MAY BE SUBJECT TO ALTERATION IN THE LIGHT OF FURTHER INFORMATION RECEIVED BY THE OFFICERS AND PRESENTED TO MEMBERS AT MEETINGS.

4. YOU ARE ADVISED TO CHECK WITH THE DIRECTORATE OF ENVIRONMENT SERVICES (TEL: 821000) AS TO WHETHER OR NOT A DECISION HAS BEEN TAKEN ON ANY ITEM BEFORE YOU TAKE ANY ACTION ON ANY OF THE RECOMMENDATIONS CONTAINED IN THIS REPORT.

5. THE COUNCIL CANNOT ACCEPT ANY RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE CONSEQUENCES OF ANY ACTION TAKEN BY ANY PERSON ON ANY OF THE RECOMMENDATIONS.

Background Papers

The various documents, letters and other correspondence referred to in the Report in respect of each planning application or other item of business.

Members are advised that every application on this report has been considered against a background of the implications of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998 and, where necessary, consultations have taken place with the Crime and Disorder Facilitator and Architectural Liaison Officer. Any responses received prior to publication are featured in the report under the heading Representations.

Members are advised that every application on this report has been considered against a background of the implications of the Human Rights Act 1998 and, following advice from the Head of Legal and Democratic Services, in recognition of a duty to give reasons for a decision, each report will include a section explaining and giving a justification for the recommendation.

LIST OF PLANNING APPLICATIONS REPORT TO COMMITTEE – 14 MARCH 2006

1	P/00644/05 TCP/15805/E	Newport	Conditional Permission
	land between and including, 69a and 87, Gunville Road, Newport, PO30 Demolition of two dwellings (69a and 87); outline for residential development (Revised Scheme)(Re-advertised application)
2	P/02360/05 TCP/02505/G	Gurnard	Refusal
	24 and 25 and land adjacent, Princes Esplanade, Cowes, PO31 Demolition of bungalows; residential development of 6 houses & 8 apartments with parking; formation of vehicular access & landscaping, (revised scheme; revised layout)
3	P/02368/05 TCPL/17548/Y	Freshwater	Refusal
	adjacent Fort Albert, Monks Lane, Freshwater, PO40 9TB Demolition of outbuildings; 4/5 storey building to form 9 flats & 1 penthouse flat with parking at ground floor level; alterations to vehicular access
4	P/02369/05 LBC/17548/X	Freshwater	Refusal
	adjacent Fort Albert, Monks Lane, Freshwater, PO40 9TB LBC for demolition of outbuildings; 4/5 storey building to form 9 flats & 1 penthouse flat with parking at ground floor level; alterations to vehicular access
5	P/02476/05 TCP/02013/U	Bembridge	Conditional Permission
	Inver House, 55 Foreland Road, Bembridge, PO355UB Demolition of house & link; single storey & 1st floor extensions; construction of 11 special care apartments for residential care home
6	P/00086/06 TCP/22128/F	Newport	Conditional Permission
	land north of Newport C of E Primary School, Kitbridge Road and south of, Petticoat Lane, Newport, PO30 Residential development to provide a mix of 150 dwellings with access off Sylvan Drive including two access points on eastern boundary; proposed pedestrian footpath/cycleway between Hazel Close and Petticoat Lane; landscaping to include provision of open space and garages/parking (aorm)(revised scheme)
7	P/02428/05 TCP/19494/K	Sandown	Conditional Permission
	land adjacent Sandown Farm, Perowne Way, Sandown, PO36 Outline for 6 houses with car parking; alterations to vehicular access (revised scheme)
8	P/02455/05 TCP/22786/B	Newport	Conditional Permission
	land adjacent, 21 and 23, School Lane, Barton, Newport, PO30 Outline for two maisonettes (revised scheme)
9	P/02581/05 TCP/12331/A	Wootton	Refusal
	49 Station Road, Wootton Bridge, Ryde, PO334RA Change of use from dwelling to private doctors clinic
10	P/00037/06 TCP/23809/E	Bembridge	Conditional Permission
	site of derelict garage, south of 1-8 Bembridge House, Kings Road, Bembridge, PO35 Detached house with parking & alterations to vehicular access
11	P/00130/06 TCP/20250/B	East Cowes	Conditional Permission
	49 Cambridge Road, East Cowes, PO326AH Detached building providing four flats adjacent existing property; vehicular access and parking/turning area (revised scheme)
12	P/00164/06 TCP/27488	Newport	Conditional Permission
	8 Westmill Road, Newport, PO305RG Demolition of garage; proposed end of terrace house; vehicular access
13	P/00191/06 TCP/27119/A	Freshwater	Refusal
	Buzzard Marine International, Saltern Wood Quay, Gasworks Lane, Norton, Yarmouth, PO410SE Single storey extension to enlarge workshop; external covered work area; internal alterations to form office/showroom; construction of detached building to form garage workshop & MOT servicing bay (Mill Road Garage); proposed improvements to junction of Gas Works Lane and Main Road, (revised scheme)

01

Reference Number: P/00644/05 - TCP/15805/E Parish/Name: Newport - Ward/Name: Carisbrooke West Registration Date: 31/03/2005 - Outline Planning Permission Officer: Mr J Mackenzie Tel: (01983) 823552 Applicant: Messrs. Mew, Bull, Harding, Twistleton and Isaacs Demolition of two dwellings (69a and 87); outline for residential development (Revised Scheme) (Re-advertised application) land between and including, 69a and 87, Gunville Road, Newport, PO30 The application is recommended for Conditional Permission

REASON FOR COMMITTEE CONSIDERATION

This is a major application which has proved to be contentious.

1 Details of Application

1.1 This is an outline application for residential development with all matters except access to be reserved for future consideration.

1.2 The proposal comprises the assembly of several tracts of land presently comprising the extensive rear gardens of properties fronting Gunville Road, a combined area of approximately 0.9 hectares and comprising the intervening land between properties in Gunville Road and properties in Alvington Road.

1.3 The proposal involves the demolition of No. 87 Gunville Road and the formation of a vehicular access through that narrow tract of land left by the demolition to access the extensive area to the south west. The development also involves the demolition of an additional dwelling located towards the south eastern extent of the site.

1.4 Originally submitted in outline form the application was accompanied by a layout plan indicating a development of fifty-four properties of mixed description ranging from two-bedroom flats to four-bedroom houses. Whilst this plan was submitted purely for guidance purposes, it has been replaced with a concept plan indicating no layout but showing an approximate route of the access road leading to groups of properties ranging from 2 and 3-storey two-bedroom flats and maisonettes to 2 and 3-storey two and three-bedroom houses, 2-storey two, three and four-bedroom houses and amenity areas.

1.5 The layout also provides for a potential continuation of the access route through to land to the south east located between other properties fronting Gunville Road and properties fronting Alvington Road.

1.6 Layout also allows for an access off the new access road to serve some of the participant properties fronting Gunville Road with a rear access to their gardens.

2 Location and Site Characteristics

2.1 Site comprises approximately 0.9 hectares comprising parcels of largely undeveloped land presently forming the rear gardens of properties fronting Gunville Road.

2.2 No. 87 Gunville Road is a two-storey red brick house, elevated a little from the road and forms the last property on the left of a small group located on the south east side of the access to Gunville Pond, the fishing pond, and, in the intervening land lies an electric sub-station abutting the highway.

2.3 The existing properties between 71 and 85 Gunville Road comprise, in the main, long established properties of semi-detached and detached units of varying sizes but nos. 71, 73 and 73a form a comparatively modern terrace. These properties are elevated from the road and the land continues to rise to the south west until it adjoins the rear boundaries of the properties fronting Alvington Road.

2.4 Parts of the site are open and other parts are scrub and undergrowth but there are lines of established trees along the north western, western and south western boundaries.

2.5 To the north west of the site lies the access to the Gunville Pond, to the west open, undeveloped agricultural land whilst to the south west are those properties fronting Alvington Road, the dwellings being a distance of about 25 metres from the common boundary with the application site; to the south east extended rear gardens of residential properties fronting Gunville Road.

3 Relevant History

3.1 Outline for six houses, land rear of 83 to 87 Gunville Road was refused in January 2004 on the grounds that there was insufficient information in respect of drainage. This proposal envisaged the retention of no. 87 and the provision of an access road immediately adjoining the dwelling on its northern side, between the dwelling and the electric sub-station. The layout plan allowed for a new access road and for a possible extension into the land to the south (which is now included within the application currently under consideration).

4 Development Plan Policy

4.1 PPG3 – Housing /PPS3 (Draft) – Housing

4.2 UDP Policies

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

· S3 – New developments of large scale to be located in or adjacent to defined envelopes of main Island towns

· G1 – Development Envelopes for Towns and Villages

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

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

· H6 – High Density Residential Development

· H5 – Infill Development

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

· TR7 – Highway Considerations for New Development

4.3 The site is outside of any other designations such as AONB but is within the designated development envelope.

4.4 There are no Tree Preservation Orders nor is the site within the Conservation Area.

5 Consultee and Third Party Comments

5.1 Internal Consultees

· Highway Engineer recommends conditions if approved following examination of revised plans. Points out that a Stage 1 Road Safety Audit has not accompanied the application and that further works to the access may be necessary following the audit at detailed stage.

· County Ecologist has visited the site and can see no nature conservation reasons why, in principle, the land should not be developed. However, acknowledges that it is a large and complicated site where there are features present which have considerable biodiversity value including trees and shrubs along the perimeter boundaries and within the site and a pond. Acknowledges that objectors have reported red squirrels using the area and states that the frequency of hazel, with field maple, spindle and mature fruit trees on the parts of the site would provide ideal habitat for squirrels. Advises that any detailed layout should be informed by an assessment of the existing trees, shrubs and wildlife habitat and that there is a strong case for working with the features present on site to create an area of managed green space which becomes a feature for the development and is designed to ensure that the area continues to provide valuable biodiverse habitat for wildlife.

5.2 External Consultees

· Environment Agency raises no objection in principle but recommend conditions if approved. Points out that the Gunville stream has been significantly polluted as a consequence of urban drainage misconnections; that the present foul sewer on Gunville Road is already operating at full capacity and is unlikely to be upgraded and consider that the only feasible option is the installation of a sewage treatment plant to serve any new development with discharge to the Gunville stream but with limits.

· With regard to surface water, the Agency prefers surface water to be disposed of through infiltration techniques and that Gunville stream is at current capacity so attenuated surface water disposal would involve a significant distance to discharge in the Gunville stream, recommends that on-site disposal via a sustainable urban drainage system should be employed by infiltration trenches, water recycling and traditional soakaways, balancing ponds and wetland but raise concern about possible run-off causing flooding to properties at a lower level and the highway, pointing out that any balancing pond/attenuation facility should ideally be located at the lowest area of the site. Recommends the use of porous paving.

· Southern Water comments received as part of the planning application, part of pre-application negotiations by the applicant, points out that:

Foul Water

· Indicates insufficient capacity to accommodate any additional flows in the existing sewerage system.

· Off-site works will be required in order to deal with any proposed foul flow to the existing sewerage infrastructure.

· Nearest point where capacity is currently available is approximately 1300 metres east of the development site.

· Points at a scheme to resolve flooding issues within the areas currently being programmed but without timescale.

Surface Water

· Assume that developer will be seeking alternative means of surface water such as soakaways or local drainage water courses.

5.3 Town or Parish Council Comments – N/A

5.4 Neighbours

Six letters of objection from local residents on grounds of adverse effects on trees and ecology, loss of habitats for endangered species such as badgers, squirrels, etc, loss of trees, adverse effect on wildlife. Inadequate details submitted with the application regarding access, drainage, numbers of dwellings (density) and design, inadequate amenity space, loss of privacy. Lack of information regarding trees and absence of tree survey. Development likely to increase traffic flow significantly and adverse effects on road safety. Inadequate site size, inadequate infrastructure and undesirable infill development.

Petition signed by 13 signatories objecting to the development.

Revised details accompanied by six letters from adjoining residents supporting the proposal and the installation of a pavement in front of their properties.

6 Evaluation

6.1 The main issues relating to this application are:

· Policy and principle

· Drainage issues

· Access and Highway issues

· Trees and ecology

· Density and height

· Effect on adjoining properties

· Objections raised to the scheme

· Affordable housing implications and contributions

6.2 UDP Policy and the accompany proposals map shows the site to be within the designated development envelope and under no other annotation. Policies S1, S3 and H1 support development proposals which steer residential development to the main Island towns and within the designated development envelopes and therefore, in principle, there is no objection seen to the development of this site. Policies H5 and H6 relate to infill development within development envelopes, supporting such proposals which cannot unduly damage the amenity of neighbouring property will be supported and policy H6 specifically relates to high density development will be permitted where a development is close to public transport services and local/town centre amenities, 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 appropriate to the historic character and layout of the settlement. This is an outline application seeking the principle of development but with an indication of what could follow, suggesting a mix of dwelling types, consistent with policy H2 with the expectation that social housing would be included, consistent with policy H14.

6.3 The previous application, which was refused in January 2004, was rejected on the basis of insufficient information regarding drainage and in support of the application, further research has been carried out by a specialist on behalf of the agent who has ascertained that a direct connection to the sewerage system for foul water is not possible and that a sewage treatment plant would need to be installed as part of the resultant development and, so far as surface water is concerned attenuation of the surface water would need to be installed so that the run-off from the site did not exceed that of a greenfield site (7 litres per second per hectare) or that on-site disposal via soakaways or as part of a sustainable urban drainage system would need to be incorporated due to the inability of the local drainage regime to cope with an increased rate of run-off from the site.

6.4 No details of numbers of dwellings are being considered and no specific scheme of drainage has been put forward but it is clear that both the Environment Agency and Southern Water consider that such drainage schemes are possible. Any detailed or reserved matters application submitted would need to be accompanied by such details to prove schemes have been designed to cater for the development envisaged and such schemes would need to be implemented before any resultant development could be occupied.

6.5 Access to the site is the one matter which is proposed to be considered at this stage and it is clear from the application that the intention is to demolish no. 87 Gunville Road, the site of which would accommodate the access corridor leading to the land behind. The adjoining properties to the south from no. 85 to 77 would be affected to a greater or lesser degree in order to provide adequate visibility splays consistent with the Highway Engineer’s requirements. This would mean the remodelling of front boundary walls to suit.

6.6 The site is not annotated on the proposals map contained with the UDP and, except as mentioned above, to be within the designated development envelope, there are no other policy constraints. However, there are many trees within the application site, a site which is made up of several parcels of land in separate ownerships, some of the trees having some amenity value and some ecological value. However, the County Ecologist does not consider the value of the trees and the site to be of sufficient value to withhold permission for development in principle and as only principle of development is sought at this time, it would not be appropriate to require a full tree survey to accompany the application in principle.

6.7 This is a site of approximately 0.9 hectares and in terms of PPG3/PPS3 it would be anticipated that, with the area of land available for development between 27 and 45 dwellings (30-50 dwellings per hectare) would be an appropriate number but the concept plan submitted indicates the intention to include some flats and maisonettes within the scheme which would have the effect of increasing the numbers to perhaps 35-50+, dependent upon the spread of the mix of dwellings. Bearing in mind the silvicultural and ecological value inherent in the site with boundary trees and other specimen trees worthy of retention and perhaps incorporating into necessary amenity areas, this will also affect the subsequent density. The originally submitted plan showed a prospective layout of 54 dwellings, the plan being submitted for guidance purposes, but the concept plan also shows the suggestion to develop to three-storeys in height. This may impact on the existing properties both fronting Gunville Road and Alvington Road, possibly overlooking those properties, unless it can be demonstrated that the retained and augmented tree planting belt separating the properties in Alvington Road and the new, proposed screen along the north eastern boundary to the rear gardens of properties fronting Gunville Road is sufficiently dense and high so as to maintain adequate privacy. However, those details are not before Members to consider at this time, only the principle and the access point being proposed at this time.

6.8 In terms of effect on adjoining properties, the retention and augmentation of the tree screen in existence to the boundary with the properties fronting Alvington Road will be paramount in determining how close and how high such dwellings should be in order to maintain adequate privacy. At the closest point the distance from the common boundary to the nearest dwelling in Alvington Road is approximately 27 metres, a distance which is in excess of what would normally be required between the rear faces of dwellings. However, it is felt that the tree screen should be retained and augmented to maintain a substantial boundary between the resultant development and that existing.

6.9 The distance between the properties fronting Gunville Road and the site’s boundary is approximately 30 metres in the main, although the modern terrace of three dwellings at the south easternmost point is only approximately 13 metres but it is still felt that overlooking can be minimised if properly planned.

6.10 Turning to the objections raised, the primary objections are on grounds of inadequate information regarding drainage, trees, details of ecology interests, density and design and inadequate details of amenity space. This is an outline application seeking the principle plus the means of access only. It is not a Conservation Area neither is it in an Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty where outline applications for development would not be accepted. Details of the numbers of dwellings, their type, their design, the density, the landscaping, external appearance and materials are all matters which a subsequent application for approval of reserved matters would need to address.

6.11 It has been identified during the course of the preparation of the application and the processing that there is a potential difficulty with disposal of foul and storm water product. However, these issues have been investigated with the relevant authorities, the Environment Agency and Southern Water who consider that there is a possible solution as described above. Some of these works required to deal with those identified problems will need to be off-site and would need also to be the subject of a detailed scheme which would then be evaluated in consultation with the relevant bodies. Whilst the principle only of development of this site is being requested at this time, it would be inappropriate to require any more than the investigation that has already been undertaken which has established that solutions are possible. It would, however, be perfectly proper to impose conditions to require such detail to be submitted with the reserved matters application and to prohibit development in advance of a satisfactory scheme being implemented.

6.12 Any detailed or reserved matters application would need to be accompanied also by a full tree survey to ascertain the constraints that the trees impose on the site’s development and the layout and density would be dictated by those constraints.

6.13 The site and the proposed development are not of a size or description to require an Environmental Impact Assessment.

6.14 It is clear that the development of the site will exceed the threshold of 25 dwellings and therefore any consent granted would be subject to the provision of affordable housing as an element of the total number of dwellings eventually developed on site. Similarly as this is a major development, contributions would be applicable to be made towards the provision of education facilities and open space. In addition, in the event that planning permission is granted and the development enables a continuation of the access road into adjoining land, it is likely that any continuing development facilitated would also be liable to both social housing provision and contributions.

7 Conclusion and Justification for Recommendation

7.1 The proposed development seeks to establish the principle of residential development on a site within the development envelope with all matters except access to be reserved for a subsequent application. It is clear that there are potential difficulties with sewage and storm water disposal and the matter of vehicular access and associated visibility have also been explored carefully to find an appropriate solution. All of these matters will be the subject of an application for reserved matters and a survey of the trees on site and their value will influence the final layout, numbers of dwellings and their relationship with the adjoining development.

7.2 Access to the site will involve the formation of adequate visibility splays both in south easterly and north westerly directiosns. In a south easterly direction, the frontages of properties will need to be re-laid out to ensure a splay is provided and, in a north westerly direction, the electric sub-station will need to be removed and re-sited (at the developer’s expense) in an appropriate nearby location. The location of this sub-station has been shown on the plan a few metres to the south west with a new access off the proposed access road serving the development.

7.3 In principle, no objections are seen to the proposed residential development and approval is recommended accordingly.

8 Recommendation

This application is recommended for Conditional Permission.

Conditions/Reasons:

1	Application for approval of the reserved matters shall be made to the Local Planning Authority before the expiration of 3 years from the date of this planning permission. The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of 2 years from the date of approval of 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 (as amended) and to prevent the accumulation of unimplemented planning permissions.
2	Before any works or development hereby approved is commenced on site details relating to the siting, design, external appearance of buildings to be erected, the means of access thereto and the landscaping of the site shall be submitted to, and approved by the Local Planning Authority. These details shall comprise the ‘reserved matters’ and shall be submitted within the time constraints referred to in condition 1 above before any development is commenced. Reason: To enable the Local Planning Authority to control the development in detail and to comply with Section 92 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended).
3	Approval of the details of the siting, design and external appearance of the buildings, the means of access thereto and the landscaping of the site (hereinafter called "the reserved matters") shall be obtained from the Local Planning Authority in writing before any development is commenced. 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 Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.
4	The development permitted by this planning permission shall not be initiated by the undertaking of the material operation as defined in section 56 (4) (a) - (d) of the town and Country Planning Act 1990 in relation to the development, until a planning obligation pursuant to section 106 of the said Act relating to the land has been made and lodged with the Planning Authority and the Local Planning Authority has notified the person submitting same that it is to the Local Planning Authority's approval. The said Planning Obligation will provide for the provision of for an agreed proportion of the properties erected pursuant to this permission to be acquired by a registered social landlord at 50% of open market value and the said houses be retained for rental purposes by that registered social landlord. The agreement will also provide for contributions to the Local Planning Authority for the purpose of the provision of educational facilities for the provision and/or the maintenance of open space. Reason: To ensure the Council's long term objectives contained within Policy H14 identified to provide affordable housing to meet local needs are not compromised and to ensure that proposed development does not put undue pressure on the existing education facilities and open space provision in the area.
5	No development shall take place until a scheme for the disposal of storm water and surface water has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The scheme for the disposal of storm and surface water shall be via a sustainable urban drainage scheme which shall attenuate run off from the site to a volume not exceeding 7 litres per second per hectare and the agreed scheme shall be fully implemented and operational prior to the occupation of any of the dwellings on site. 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.
6	No development authorised by this permission shall take place on the site until a scheme for the disposal of foul sewage has been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning authority. No dwellings shall be occupied until the agreed scheme for the disposal of foul sewage has been implemented and is fully operational Reason: To minimise the risk of pollution and to comply with policy P1 (Pollution and Development) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.
7	Both the schemes for the disposal of foul sewage and for storm water and surface water drainage shall be submitted as part of the application for approval of reserved matters as required by Condition 3 above. 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 Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.
8	No development shall commence on site until a comprehensive ecological survey of the whole the site has been carried out by an appropriate competent person with particular reference to badgers, red squirrels, bats species and any other protected species. Any such survey shall include an assessment of the impact of the proposed development and any appropriate alleviation measures shall have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority concurrent with the submission of the site layout drawings. Reason: To enable proper consideration of the impact of the development and contribution of nature conservation interests of the amenity of the area and to comply with policy C8 (Nature Conservation as a Material Consideration) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.
9	No development shall take place until there have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority: (a) 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 75 mm, 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; (b) Details of any proposed topping or lopping of any tree on land adjacent to the site; (c) A plan showing existing ground levels and details of any proposed alterations thereto and of any proposed excavations; (d) 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; (e) A plan showing the location, levels and dimensions of all existing watercourses, drainage channels and other aquatic features on the site, together with details of those that are to be retained and details of any works proposed thereto; (f) Details of all existing boundary features and means of enclosure at the site, together with details of those that are to be retained and details of any works proposed thereto; (g) Details of all existing buildings, structures and services on the site, including hard surfaces, together with details of those that are to be retained and details of any works proposed thereto; (h) Details of the specification, position and programme of implementation of any measures to be taken before or during the course of development for the protection from damage of anything to be retained; (i) The erection of fencing for the protection of anything to be retained shall be maintained until all equipment, machinery and surplus materials have been removed from the site. Nothing shall be stored or placed in any area fenced in accordance with this condition and 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. Development shall be carried out in accordance with the plans, particulars and details approved 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 policy D3 (Landscaping) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.
10	No existing trees, groups of trees or hedgerows on the site shall be removed or be the subject of surgery work without the prior written consent of the Local Planning Authority and until compliance with conditions 8, 9 and 18 have taken place. Reason: To ensure the protection of trees and groups of trees and hedgerows to be retained in the interest of the amenities of the are in compliance with Policy C12 (Development Affecting Trees and Woodland of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.
11	No development shall take place on site until the electric sub station situated on the north side of the proposed access route has been re-sited in accordance with a scheme to be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority in writing. Reason: In the interests of highway safety and to comply with policy TR7 (Highway Considerations) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.
12	The layout of the site shall allow for the extension of the access road into the land to the south east to enable continuation of residential development. Reason: To enable the continuation of the development and in order not to prejudice the future development of adjoining land in compliance with policy G4 (General Locational Criteria) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.
13	Development shall not begin until details of the design, surfacing and construction of any new roads, footways, accesses and car parking areas, together with details of the means of disposal of surface water drainage therefrom 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: To ensure an adequate standard of highway access and drainage for the proposed dwellings and to comply with policy TR7 (Highway Considerations) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.
14	The development shall not be occupied until sight lines have been provided in accordance with the visibility splay shown on the approved plan (reference number 2028/P/6 rev A showing an X distance of 4.8m and a Y distance of 90m). Nothing that may cause an obstruction to visibility shall at any time be placed or be permitted to remain within that visibility splay. Reason: In the interests of highway safety and to comply with policy TR7 (Highway Considerations) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.
15	No dwelling shall be occupied until the parts of the service roads which provide access to it have been constructed, surfaced and drained in accordance with [the approved plans/details which have been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To ensure an adequate standard of highway and access for the proposed dwellings and to comply with policy TR7 (Highway Considerations) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.
16	No building shall be occupied until the means of access thereto for pedestrians and/or cyclists has been constructed in accordance with the approved plans. Reason: To ensure adequate safe provision of facilities for pedestrians and cyclists wishing to gain access to the site and to comply with policy TR6 (Cycling and Walking) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.
17	Any submitted layout plan shall ensure provision of open space/amenity land of an appropriate size and location and shall account of existing landscape features. Any such provision of open space/amenity land shall be provided prior to occupation of a maximum of 80% of the total development with any such open space/amenity area being retained and maintained thereafter. Reason: To ensure an adequate provision of amenity land in the interest of the amenities of the area and occupiers of the development in compliance with Policy L10 (Open Space in Housing Developments) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.
18	The details of the landscaping of the site required to be submitted shall include details of a scheme for the preservation or laying out of that part of the application site as amenity land and none of the building operations hereby permitted shall be carried out on that part of the application site. Reason: To ensure an adequate provision of amenity land, in the interests of the area and to comply with policies D1 (Standards of Design) and D3 (Landscaping) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.
19	The development erected pursuant to this permission shall include a mix of dwelling types and sizes details of which shall be submitted to the Local Planning Authority as a Reserved Matter and shall be set at a density commensurate with the site's location in relation to surrounding development. Reason: To ensure efficient use is made of urban land in compliance with policy H2 (To ensure that large residential developments contain the variety of house sizes and types), and H6 (High Density Residential Development) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan and policies contained within PPG3 - Housing, March 2000.

02

Reference Number: P/02360/05 - TCP/02505/G Parish/Name: Gurnard - Ward/Name: Gurnard Registration Date: 19/12/2005 - Full Planning Permission Officer: Mr D Long Tel: (01983) 823552 Applicant: Stephenson Developments (Gurnard) Ltd Demolition of bungalows; residential development of 6 houses & 8 apartments with parking; formation of vehicular access & landscaping, (revised scheme; revised layout) 24 and 25 and land adjacent, Princes Esplanade, Cowes, PO31 The application is recommended for Refusal

REASON FOR COMMITTEE CONSIDERATION

Due to the nature of the scheme, being a major application in a prominent location within the development envelope of Gurnard.

1. Details of Application

1.1 This is a full application.

1.2 The proposal comprises of the demolition of No. 24 and 25 Princes Esplanade and the residential development of 6 houses and 8 apartments with parking. This is a revised scheme and layout from the original plans of 8 houses and 6 apartments, which was at the applicant’s request.

1.3 The development is predominantly three storey in nature along the frontage of the Esplanade. Unit 1 in the south west corner of the site is two storey, scaling up from that of No. 23 Princes Esplanade. The development utilises a mixture of brick, hardy plank boarding, glass and slate in order to obtain a contemporary architectural form.

1.4 Unit 1 of the development accommodates a kitchen and living room, three bedrooms and two bathrooms. Units 1 to 6 have the same ground floor layout but due to the increase in storey height, accommodates either four or five bedrooms depending on the units. Units 3 and 5 at second floor level have an outside decking area with associated balcony. The remaining portion of the development will house 8 flats which are arranged in the north east corner of the site, predominantly being two bedroom units with associated kitchen and living room. Units 9a, b and c are found to the rear of the site and not along the frontage of the Esplanade.

1.5 The access to the site is between Units 5 and 6 of the development. Units 1 to 6 have two allocated parking spaces each, whereas the flatted units have one allocated parking space.

1.6 The land to the rear of the site is a proposed communal garden within a heavily wooded environment. The housing units spanning from 1 to 6 have small walled courtyards to the rear, forming private spaces for their use. The boundaries to the Esplanade will remain as an open frontage.

2. Location and Site Characteristics

2.1 This parcel of land is within the development envelope of Gurnard. This area of Gurnard is typified by a variety of architectural styles and characters ranging from large three storey detached premises to smaller bungalows and chalets. There have been a number of redevelopment projects along the Esplanade, being of a contemporary style and architecture. The houses along the Esplanade have no uniform pattern having an undulating flow in both height and footprint position from the road frontage.

2.2 The site currently accommodates two bungalows which are of small proportion and sit at a higher gradient to that of the Esplanade. No. 22, 23 and 23A are also bungalows which sit at the same level. No. 22 has planning permission to add an additional storey height to provide accommodation within the roof span.

2.3 The site is of an unlevel topography. The majority of slope runs in an easterly direction up from the Esplanade at a reasonable gradient. The rear of the site is heavily wooded by dense vegetation forming part of the local vernacular and characteristic of Gurnard. The site also slopes in a slight south west to north east direction down the Esplanade to the Cowes frontage.

2.4 Land to the north east of the site is protected, being a Site of Importance for Nature Conservation (SINC). This land is protected into perpetuity and forms the boundary of the development site. This area of land is known to contain a number of protected species. It also acts as a transitional zone between Gurnard and Cowes, creating a physical break in development.

2.5 Gurnard is known for land stability issues and is evident on the bungalows on site, whereby movement has occurred to the built structure. This is due to the clay stratum banded through the area.

2.6 The frontage of the site is lined by Princes Esplanade. This forms the boundary between land and sea, making this a prominent site.

3. Relevant History

3.1 P/02135/02 – The application was granted conditional permission on 20 January 2004 for two detached, three storey houses with integral garages (revised scheme), land adjacent 25 Princes Esplanade, Cowes.

3.2 P/02350/04 – Demolition of bungalow; construction of five storey building to provide 14 apartments with car parking; vehicular access; landscaping, land adjacent 25 Princes Esplanade, Cowes. The application was refused due to:

· The proposal by reason of its position, size and design and external appearance would be an intrusive development, out of scale and character with the prevailing pattern of development within the locality as well as having a serious and adverse effect on the amenities enjoyed by occupants of neighbouring properties.

· The proposal would represent an overdevelopment of the site at an excessive density.

· The proposal by reason of its density, scale and mass and design would be out of character with the locality to the detriment of the visual amenity, spatial characteristics and the current density.

· The access is unsatisfactorily to serve the proposed development by reason of unacceptable visibility.

· The information accompanying this application is inadequate and deficient in detail in respect of an extensive ecological survey, effecting the amenities of the Site of Importance for Nature Conservation.

· The proposal is likely to generate an unacceptable level of activity to the adjacent site of nature conservation contrary to Policy C11 of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.

· The information accompanying this application is inadequate and deficient in detail in respect of an adequate ground stability report in accordance with PPG14 (Development on Unstable Land).

4. Development Plan Policy

4.1 National Planning Policy Guidance Notes relevant to this determination are as follows:

· PPS1 (Delivering Sustainable Development) encourages the use of high standards of design appropriate to their environment.

· PPG3 (Housing) recommends that development should make efficient use of brownfield land.

· PPG24 (Flooding) indicates that development should have regard to potential flooding of sites,

· PPG14 (Development on Unstable Land) indicates that the Local Planning Authority should have regard to areas known for land stability, and should have a full geotechnical ground stability report in order to support the application.

4.2 The relevant Unitary Development Plan policies relevant to this determination are 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)

· S6 - All development will be expected to be of a high standard of design

· S7 - To meet the housing stock of the plan period

· S10 - Protection of defined scientific, nature conservation, archaeological, historic or landscape value will be conserved or enhanced

· G1 - Development envelopes

· G4 - General locational criteria

· G6 - Areas liable to flooding

· G7 - Unstable land

· G10 - Existing surrounding uses

· D1 - Standards of design

· D2 - Standards of development within the site

· D3 – Landscaping

· H1 - New development within main Island towns

· C8 - Nature conservation as a material consideration

· C11 - Sites of local importance for nature conservation

· C12 - Developments affecting trees and woodland

· P1 - Pollution and development

· TR7 - Highway considerations for new development

· TR16 - Parking policies and guidelines

· U11 - Infrastructure and services provision

5. Consultee and Third Party Comments

5.1 Internal Consultees

· The Highways Authority recommends refusal due to the site having inadequate visibility. Although the site can obtain a distance of 70 metres on the Y axis a traffic speed survey is required to prove a justified reduction in the Y axis 90 metres, in accordance with details contained within Design Bulletin 32.

· The Ecology Officer recommends refusal due to insufficient information on the impact to the SINC.

· The Council’s Geotechnical Consultant, recommends refusal due to inadequate and insufficient information with regard to a geotechnical ground stability report.

5.2 External Consultees

· The Environment Agency raises no objection to the application as this site will have no impact or risk of flooding. They do however raise concern over the lack of information to the impact on the SINC contrary to Section 74 of the Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000.

· English Nature is concerned due to the lack of information with regard to the SINC and associated protected species on site. They have concern over surface water pollution into the Solent Maritime. They also have concerns that the development may increase the net asset value of the area and therefore add weight to the case for grant funding for coastal protection work.

5.3 Parish Council Comments

Gurnard Parish Council objects to the application due to over development of the site, ground stability and highway concerns, impact to local road infrastructure, drainage and impact on neighbouring amenities.

5.4 Neighbours

The application has attracted seven letters of objection from third parties which can be summarised as follows:

· The development will create unwanted additional levels of traffic to the area.

· The ground is known for land stability issues and should be fully investigated.

· Over development of the site.

· The height and density is in excess outside the context of the local vernacular of Gurnard.

· There are no social housing units.

· The properties will not meet the needs of local people but will be earmarked as holiday homes.

· The proposal will change the identity of the village.

· There is inadequate drainage capacity.

5.5 Others

· The Health and Safety Executive raises no objection to the application.

· The Isle of Wight Society raises objection due to the size and intrusion into the rear scrubland which is popular with wildlife.

· The Campaign to Protect Rural England raises objection due to an over development of the site. Although being a significant improvement to the previous refusal the current application is still excessive in scale and mass and should be minimised to two storeys in height.

· The Solent Protection Society raises objection. The development is too dense for the site. It will set a precedent for adjoining properties within the area. The development should be restricted to two storeys in height at an appropriate density.

· The Wight Squirrel Project indicates that there is a red squirrel population within the area, and so the development should not disturb their habitat, dreys or any trees used as corridors as they are protected under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981.

6. Evaluation

6.1 The main issues relating to this application are:

· The principle of development

· The design and density

· Highway considerations

· Ecology implications

· Ground stability implications

· Drainage.

6.2 The land itself is within the development envelope of Gurnard and as Members will note that national and local policies will support development within such areas. This is a brownfield site, with an existing use which should be redeveloped and reused. The principle of redevelopment has been determined by the Committee in 2004 (reference P/02135/02) for the development of two detached three storey houses at 25 Princes Esplanade. This planning permission can still be implemented within the legislative framework. The previous application (P/02350/04) was refused due to the reasons outlined within Section 3.2 of this report. It was a gross over development of the site at an excessive density which did not respect the local vernacular, character or style of the area. Through the negotiation process with planning officers the proposal was greatly reduced in order to gain an appropriate scheme at a high standard of design. The principle of redevelopment of the site should be accepted due to the weight of planning policy and the previous planning history.

6.3 The Design and Density. The previous planning approval supports the principle of development on the corner to the adjoining SINC. This prominent but well designed set of buildings acts as a gateway when entering Gurnard. The current application has included the provision of No 24 Princes Esplanade, enabling a comprehensive scheme to occur which should always be encouraged to avoid piecemeal development.

6.4 As members will note, the density and scale of the development is higher (37 units p/ha) than that of the immediate vicinity. The scale of development does however significantly increase as you progress further into Gurnard, having tighter spatial breaks and increasing in storey height. Although not a planning consideration, as this scheme has to be treated on its own merits, members should note that the neighbouring bungalows are in a strong position for redevelopment, linking the whole frontage of Gurnard with comprehensive, well designed buildings. Gurnard has a local character which is distinctive. The architectural nature of the esplanade is changing, arguably for the better as the developments are making use of the site characteristics. The development although being terraced in form, breaking the prevailing pattern does reflect well to the changing character of Gurnard and its future potential.

6.5 The scheme is well designed, having a strong style and character. Seaside architecture is clearly seen with the design, making best possible use of the views into the Solent. The careful use of materials portrays the ‘beach hut’ approach albeit at a larger scale. The proposal is sensitively scaled up from No 23, having no reasonable impact to the amenities enjoyed by the residents. By reason of window placements, having principle views to the front and rear, there will be no loss of privacy or unreasonable levels of overlooking.

6.6 On balance the scheme is considered to be in accordance with Unitary Development Plan policies. Members should however consider the scale, mass and architecture and establish their own opinion as to whether they find it acceptable. Barring the technical issues detailed within the report which are recommended for refusal, this report is written for members on this basis.

6.7 Highways. Design Bulletin 32 indicates that a 30 mph road should have a minimum Y distance visibility of 90 metres. The Highway Engineer can consider a reduction of this visibility to 70 metres if the applicant can prove through a traffic survey that the speed of motor users is below 30 mph. The applicant has failed to submit any such information and so the Highway Engineer is recommending refusal due to unacceptable visibility at the junction of the site. This is the only highway implication with regard to this site as the parking, layout and turning facility is appropriate in design and supported by the Council’s Engineer.

6.8 Ecology. The approved application (P/02135/02) was supported by an adequate ecological statement for the scale and density of the development. The Ecology Officer indicated that this was sufficient not to cause any impact to the neighbouring SINC and so was recommended for conditional approval. This scheme included an 8 metre buffer strip between the houses and the land parcel in order to ensure the long term sustainability of it. The refused application (P/02350/04) submitted the same ecological survey to act as suitable evidence for protection of the SINC. The scale and mass of the proposal was deemed to have an adverse impact, creating conditions likely to affect the protected land parcel. Through pre-application discussions it was highlighted that this was an important issue that needed to be resolved before a planning application was submitted. Any ecological survey must be appropriate to the scale and size of development. The applicant failed to take officer advice and include an appropriate ecological survey. The ecology officer is advised by English Nature that the application should be accompanied by an up to date survey and mitigation strategy and without such information the current proposal is seen to have an adverse impact on the SINC. This is contrary to Section 74 of the Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000 and Regulation 48 of the Conservation (Natural Habitats) Regulations 1994.

6.9 Ground Stability. As within the last planning refusal the application has failed to resolve the issues of ground stability. It is indicated by the Council’s Geotechnical Engineer that the information is inadequate and deficient in detail to make a proper assessment under the guidance contained within Planning Policy Guidance Note 14 (Development on Unstable Land). The applicants consultant obtained a screening opinion from a competent person as defined by PPG14, who also suggested that additional information is necessary in order to make proper judgment upon such a proposal. The application is therefore recommended for refusal on that basis.

6.10 Drainage. The applicant has been asked on numerous occasions to submit information with regard to drainage of both foul and surface waters. Although indicated on plan that a rising main is acceptable to Southern Water there has been no confirmation to date of whether such a system will be acceptable. With regard to English Nature’s comments to the surface waters into the Solent Maritime it has been requested for further details which also have not been forthcoming. The application is therefore recommended for refusal on that basis.

6.11 It has been indicated by English Nature that the development would increase the net value of the land therefore putting pressure on grant funding for additional coastal protection works in the future. Although taking this into consideration, it is the Local Planning Authority’s opinion that the land parcel already commands a high value due to its prominence, view, position within the envelope and the extent of previous planning approval. This is a prime location which can command a high land value. Therefore this point is not to be taken with high regard within the determination process. Whether placing 1 or 14 units on a site there will still be need for coastal protection works within this location at a suitable standard to protect lives.

6.12 It is seen from the applicant’s submission that a public consultation exercise was undertaken before the planning application was submitted. It did generate a level of support for the development from many residents within the Gurnard area. The majority of objectors were actually from the Cowes area and not within the localized area of Gurnard.

7. Conclusion and Justification for Recommendation

7.1 Although accepted in principle, the development has a number of issues that are still outstanding which are vital to the determination process. As highlighted within Section 6.3 of the report, the design, scale and mass of the proposal is on balance, acceptable. The architecture is of a contemporary style that reflects well to the seaside location and is seen to improve and further help the regeneration of Gurnard esplanade. Although the proposal is of a higher density than that usually seen within this area, it is not totally out of context to the detriment of the visual amenities, character or setting within the area. The principle of development has been accepted by the Council for two three story town houses on number 25 Princes Esplanade. Although accepting the principle of development the applicant has failed to submit technical information. The applicant has been advised on numerous occasions to provide such information but has still failed to provide it in accordance with our recommendations. In light of the above I suggest that although the application in terms of design, footprint, scale and mass is acceptable the information accompanying this application in inadequate and deficient in detail to recommend approval upon the proposal. I therefore suggest to Members that the application is refused for the reasons outline below.

8. Recommendation

The application is recommended for Refusal.

Reasons:

1	The access is unsatisfactory to serve the proposed development by reason of unacceptable visibility and would therefore be contrary to policy TR7 (Highway Considerations for New Development) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.
2	The information accompanying this application is inadequate and deficient in detail in respect of an extensive ecological survey and mitigation strategy so that the Local Planning Authority is unable to consider fully the effects of the proposal on the amenities of the area and the Site of Importance for Nature Conservation and in the absence of further details it is considered that the proposal is contrary to policies S10 (Conserve and Enhance Protected Land), G4 (General Locational Criteria), D1 (Standards of Design), C8 (Nature Conservation as a Material Consideration) and C11 (Sites of Local Importance for Nature Conservation) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.
3	The proposal is likely to generate unacceptable level of activity to the adjacent Site of Importance for Nature Conservation, contrary to policy S10 (Conserve or Enhance Protected Land), C8 (Nature Conservation as a Material Consideration) and C11 (Sites of Local Importance for Nature Conservation) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.
4	The information accompanying this application is inadequate and deficient in detail in respect of an adequate ground stability report, information and impacts to adjacent land uses including ground water and drainage movements and a predictive study into climate change and future slope stability so that the Local Planning Authority is unable to consider fully the effects of the proposal on the amenities, safety and stability of the site and surrounding land uses and in the absence of further details it is considered that the proposal is contrary to policies G7 (Unstable Land), D1 (Standards of Design) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan and Planning Policy Guidance Note 14 (Development on Unstable Land).
5	The information accompanying this application is inadequate and deficient in detail in respect of both foul and surface water drainage so that the Local Planning Authority is unable to consider fully the effects of the proposal on the drainage capacity, and potential water movements within the area and in the absence of further details it is considered that the proposal is contrary to policies D1 (Standards of Design) and U11 (Infrastructure and Services Provision) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.

03 & 04

Reference Numbers: P/02368/05 - TCPL/17548/Y & P/02369/05 – LBC/17548/X Parish/Name: Freshwater - Ward/Name: Freshwater Norton Registration Date: 14/12/2005 - Full Planning Permission Officer: Miss S Wilkinson Tel: (01983) 823552 Applicant: Bellbrae Investments Ltd LBC for demolition of outbuildings; 4/5 storey building to form 9 flats & 1 penthouse flat with parking at ground floor level; alterations to vehicular access adjacent Fort Albert, Monks Lane, Freshwater, PO40 9TB These applications are recommended for Refusal

REASON FOR COMMITTEE CONSIDERATION

Site has a complex history and it is considered that any decision needs to be made at Committee level.

1. Details of Application

1.1 Application seeks full planning permission for the construction of a 4/5-storey building to form nine flats and one penthouse flat with eleven car parking spaces within the parking area at ground floor level.

1.2 The design is contemporary in principle with extensive glazed elevations attempting to contrast to the Fort while picking out some key features. The building line will sit within an alcove created by the demolition of the outbuildings as proposed. This siting will obscure part of the seaward elevations of the existing Fort.

2. Location and Site Characteristics

2.1 The application relates to a site immediately to the north of the existing building which is situated on a coastal platform immediately to the west of and below Cliff End Battery. The site is accessed via Monks Lane which is a narrow rural lane leading to various properties, including the holiday chalets at Brambles Chine. Access to the site itself is through the site of the holiday chalets leading to a steeply sloping concrete road which passes down the coastal slope onto the platform area to the east of the Fort.

2.2. The site is in a highly visually prominent location and although is only neighboured by the Fort has wider implications in respect of visual amenity. Directly opposite the site on the mainland is Hurst Castle Spit which extends a mile and a half from Milton on Sea. The end of the spit is only ¾ of a mile from the Island at which point Hurst Point Lighthouse and Hurst Castle are situated.

2.3 The site is adjacent to Fort Albert which is a Grade II* listed building formerly an ancient monument which status was removed when conversion was granted to residential as listing is considered to provide a more appropriate means of protection to occupied structures. The listing has been included as an addendum to this report.

2.4 The site is in an isolated location with the existing Fort being surrounded by water on three sides with the cliffs rising to the land behind. There is a significant variation in land levels from the top of the concrete access track and the level area of the proposed site. These land changes result in the development being most visually prominent from the coast and seaward site.

3. Relevant History

3.1 TCP/6009/J – an application for the conversion of existing Fort into residential accommodation was approved subject to conditions in March 1972.

3.2 TCP/6009/L – an application for the erection of an extension, and conversion to fifteen flats was approved subject to conditions in May 1973 (this consent was part revoked in 1980 due to a subsequent consent).

3.3 TCP/6009/X – an application for proposed extension to existing building to provide 10 no. flats on four floors and sub-division of existing penthouse to two flats including demolition of old torpedo shed was approved subject to conditions in September 1980.

3.4 TCPL/17548/P – P/1626/00 – application for five-storey block of ten flats including car parking at basement level and provision of balconies and roof terraces was approved subject to conditions in January 2001.

3.5 LBC/17548/R – P/1627/00 – an application for listed building consent for five-storey block of ten flats including car parking at basement level and provision of balconies and roof terraces was approved subject to conditions in January 2001.

4. Development Plan Policy

4.1 National Policy Guidance

· PPS1 – Delivering sustainable development.

· PPG – Housing and PPS – Consultation Paper 3 relating to housing are applicable.

· PPS7 – Sustainable development in rural areas.

· PPG15 – Planning and the Historic Environment.

4.2 The following strategic policies within the Unitary Development Plan are applicable.

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

· S4 – The countryside will be protected from inappropriate development.

· S6 – All development will be expected to be of a high standard of design.

· S7 – Provision of housing units on the Isle of Wight.

4.3 The following Unitary Development Plan policies are applicable.

· G4 – General Locational Criteria.

· G5 – Development Outside Defined Settlements.

· G6 – Areas Liable to Flooding.

· D1 – Standards of Design.

· D2 – Standards for Development Within The Site.

· B1 – Alterations and Extensions to Listed Building.

· B2 – Settings of Listed Buildings.

· B4 – Demolition of Listed Buildings.

· H4 – Unallocated Residential Development.

· H9 – Outside Development Boundaries.

· C1 – Protection of Landscape Character.

· C3 – Development of the Coast Outside of Development Envelopes.

· TR6 – Cycling and Walking.

· TR7 – Highway Considerations for New Development.

· TR16 – Parking Policies and Guidelines.

· U11 – Infrastructure and Service Provision.

4.4 The site is located outside of any defined development envelope.

5. Consultee and Third Party Comments

5.1 Internal Consultees

· Highway Engineer recommends refusal to the application.

· Public Rights of Way strongly recommend refusal for the planning application due to the conflict caused between vehicles and pedestrians using the access road.

· Copies of the application were sent to the Coastal Manager who confirms that they do not believe that the proposal will have an adverse impact on slope stability or coastal defence.

· The Environmental Health Department have requested conditions be attached to any approval.

5.2 External Consultees

· The Environment Agency originally raised a holding objection to the application on the grounds of flood risk. However, the applicants provided the necessary Flood Risk Assessment and the Environment Agency has now removed that objection.

· English Heritage have directed us to the letter sent in regard to the previous application in which they do not believe the development should have been approved and that any development today would be subject to guidance on enabling development. They suggest that the Authority should satisfy itself that the scheme is no worse than the development with extant consent and that there should be a Section 106 Agreement to attach the profits firmly to the repair and maintenance of the Fort.

· Town or Parish Council Comments

The Parish Council object to the application on the following grounds:

· Monks Lane is an unadopted road;

· there would be an increased use of this unadopted road;

· construction traffic would deteriorate the condition of Monks Lane;

· unsafe emergency access to dwellings due to bad state of road.

The Parish Council has agreed they would be prepared to review their decision if a 106 Agreement was in place which would upgrade and reinstate the access road and a twenty-year maintenance agreement for the upkeep of the road was in place.

5.4 Neighbours

5.5 Others

· Seven letters of objection have been received from various parties including Island Watch, Campaign for the Protection of Rural England and the Solent Protection Society.

· Objections from all parties can be summarised as follows:

o condition of Monks Lane;

o too much incremental building in Freshwater having an impact on infrastructure and the road network;

o need for affordable housing in the area;

o unsympathetic design;

o impact of development on listed building;

o site is outside any development envelope;

o impact of the development on Hurst Castle;

o Fort represents a gateway to the Solent;

o overdevelopment;

o development would obstruct views of the Fort from the sea.

6. Evaluation

6.1 The determining factors in considering this proposal are considered to be as follows:

· Is the development in compliance with policies contained within the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan and Government guidelines

· The site history

· Impact of the development on the listed Fort and wider area

· Is Monks Lane suitable to serve the development

6.2 The site is located outside of any defined development envelope however represents a Brownfield site. The development is contrary to policies G5 (Development Outside Defined Settlements) and H9 (Residential Development Outside Development Boundaries) in this respect. However, the site history is a material consideration to any decision.

6.3 The development must be considered in regards to changes in policy after 2001. Since this time we have seen the adoption of PPS 1: Delivering Sustainable Communities and PPS 7: Sustainable Development in Rural Areas. PPS1 deals with issues of design, which are of a subjective nature. However it gives some further guidance in regards to suitability.

6.4 PPS1 requires at paragraph 34 that design be appropriate to its context, and that it improves the character and quality of the area. At paragraph 35 it seeks high quality and inclusive design which addresses the needs of people and access to jobs and services and integrates into the existing urban form and natural and built environments. The scheme is contrary to the requirements of PPS1 in respect of these issues and thus cannot be considered to be of an acceptable design.

6.5 PPS 7 states “Priority should be given to the re-use of previously-development (‘brownfield’) sites in preference to the development of Greenfield sites, except in cases where there are no brownfield sites available, or those sites perform so poorly in terms of sustainability considerations (for example, in their remoteness from settlements and services)…” in this respect the sites access is not only poor in respect of construction but a distance from services with poor transportation links. PPS 7 also outlines that “Isolated new houses in the countryside will require special justification for planning permission to be granted.”

6.6 Consent was granted in 1980 for the subdivision of the penthouse within the Fort into two flats and an extension providing 10 additional flats. As the penthouse was subdivided this consent has been implemented and therefore extant consent exists for an extension to provide 10 flats. This extension however was granted with Ancient Monument Consent as the building is no longer an Ancient Monument it may be necessary for Listed Building Consent to be gained. Significant changes have occurred since 1980 including the setting up of English Heritage, due to this it is unlikely that Listed Building consent would be granted for these works. Therefore the extension may not be implementable.

6.7 In 2001 consent was granted for a detached building providing the 10 flats. It is this application that has now expired and has been resubmitted for re-consideration. This history must be considered as a material consideration. However the purpose of placing time limits on applications is to allow development to be reassessed in light of any changing circumstances.

6.8 The development as proposed would have a significant impact on the character of the Fort and would permanently alter the appearance of the coastline when viewed from land and sea. A building at this close proximity to the Fort would also have an impact on Hurst Castle and alter the historical gateway to the Solent. The application would have an unacceptable visual impact on the character of the Listed Fort as well as the wider area. The timing of this application gives Members the opportunity to re-assess the suitability of the proposal in light of the greater consideration that is now given to design through PPS1. The proposal has altered slightly from that previously approved with the introduction of UPVc windows. Although this appears a minor amendment as the elevations are heavily glazed this would have an impact of the design principle and appearance of the building in relation to the Fort. The location of the site requires careful consideration of materials in order that they can withstand the sea and weather conditions. However, the materials need my not be visually suitable in this prominent location.

6.9 Since 2001 the road to the site known as Monks Lane has continued to deteriorate as no single ownership has ever been identified and the necessity of works to be undertaken by private parties. Concerns have therefore been raised by our Highway Engineer that the placing of a condition requiring the submission of a condition survey before work commences and that any damage caused is made good would be unsuitable as any remedial works would not be easily undertaken as the number of pot holes could not be individually measured and repair to there previous size. Additionally concerns has not be raised purely due to the continued deterioration of the road but its use during the construction phase in its current condition as HGV would place an unacceptable pressure on the current road and would increase the risk of damaged vehicles entering the public highway. The current condition of the road and concern over its possible future maintenance would result in a need to consider that the approval of a further 10 units using this as an access would be unsuitable unless the road was bought within the application site and appropriate works undertaken to its repair to make it suitable for further development.

7. Conclusion and Justification for Recommendation

7.1 Having given due regard and appropriate weight to all material considerations referred to in this report, it is considered that the renewal of this application would lead to development that would have a detrimental impact on the character and appearance of the Fort when viewed from land and sea and fails to comply with consideration of sustainable locations. In this regard the proposal would not be suitable in light of the emerging guidance contained within Planning Policy Statements 1 and 7.

8. Recommendation – Refusal.

Reasons:

1	The proposed development by reason of scale, mass, design and proximity to the listed building fails to take account of the wider context and would detrimentally effect the setting of a Listed Building comprising its character and quality and would therefore be contrary to Policies B2 (Setting of Listed Building), D1 (Standards of Design) and D2 (Standards of Development Within the Site) of the IW Unitary Development Plan, as well as being contrary to design requirements contained within Planning Policy Statement 1: Delivering Sustainable Communities
2	Monks Lane is in a poor state of repair. The carriageway is not suitable to be used by construction traffic. The HGV usage associated with the demolition, clearance and construction will increase the deterioration of the existing road surface increasing the risk of damage to vehicle using this road and entering the public highway at the monks Lane / Colwell Rd Junction, and therefore be in contrary to Policy TR7 of the IW Unitary Development Plan.
3	The information accompanying this application is inadequate and deficient in detail in respect of a ground stability and investigation report so that the Local Planning Authority is unable to consider fully the effects of the proposals on the site and surrounding land and in the absence of further details it is considered that the proposal is contrary to Policies G7 (Development on Unstable Land)

P/02369/05 – LBC/17548/X

Reasons:

1

The information accompanying this application is inadequate and deficient in detail in respect of a justification of further demolition so that the Local Planning Authority is unable to consider fully the effects of the proposal on the Listed Building and in the absence of further details it is considered that the proposal is contrary to Policy B4 (Demolition of Listed Buildings) of the IW Unitary Development Plan.

05

Reference Number: P/02476/05 - TCP/02013/U Parish/Name: Bembridge - Ward/Name: Bembridge North Registration Date: 03/01/2006 - Full Planning Permission Officer: Mr J Mackenzie Tel: (01983) 823552 Applicant: Islecare 97 Ltd Demolition of house & link; single storey & 1st floor extensions; construction of 11 special care apartments for residential care home Inver House, 55 Foreland Road, Bembridge, PO355UB The application is recommended for Conditional Permission

REASON FOR COMMITTEE CONSIDERATION

This is a major application which has proved to be contentious due to potential impacts on adjoining properties.

1. Details of Application

1.1 This is a full application with all details to be considered at this time.

1.2 The proposal comprises the demolition of some part of the current establishment including the house to the north west of the main building, the link with the main building and the single and two-storey extensions to provide eleven special care apartments for the residential care home.

1.3 Following demolition of the existing dwelling which is part of the establishment, a new building is proposed to be erected on its site which is located just to the north west of the main building which, in turn, is situated approximately centrally in the site’s width. The proposed new building is detached, proposed to be constructed in a similar style to the existing main building, being finished in coloured render with a brick plinth with a roof clad in small clay tiles. Accommodation is proposed on three floors comprising ten one-bedroom/two person extra care apartments, each comprising lounge, kitchen, a single bedroom and shower room accessed via a central stairwell and also served by a lift.

1.4 The remainder of the site containing the extensions is to include a single-storey addition on the south eastern side forming an enclosed courtyard onto which the accommodation faces and, in the northernmost corner of the site, furthest from Foreland Road, is a single and two-storey block and, at the rear of the site, a first floor addition to the existing wing.

1.5 Again, the finishes proposed are rendered masonry on a brick plinth under a low pitched small plain tiled roof covering.

1.6 The enlarged rear wing virtually fills the width of the site with a distance of approximately 2.5 metres to the north western boundary and about 4 metres to the south eastern boundary. At the closest point the rear wing will be 6 metres from the (rear) north eastern boundary and, as the ground floor element is already in existence, it will be approximately 9 metres at its maximum.

1.7 The new “villa” which replaces the building to the north west of the main building occupies the same position but about 1.5 metres from the north western boundary.

2. Location and Site Characteristics

2.1 Site is located on the north east side of Foreland Road approximately 50 metres to the south east of the junction with Northclose Road. Inver House is 1/2/3-storey complex of buildings operating as a residential home currently providing 24 ground floor bedrooms, 9 at first floor and a further 4 bedrooms at second floor level; 37 in total. There are currently two vehicular accesses to the site off Foreland Road with parking areas at the front and the south eastern side. The remaining land around the single storey wing at the rear and linked to the main building is currently laid out as gardens.

2.2 To the north west of the site there is a large, 2/3-storey residential property occupying the corner location at the junction of Northclose Road with Foreland Road; beyond that property, fronting Northclose Road, is a large two-storey detached property with a single storey annex and the curtilage of that property wraps around the north west and north east sides of Inver House. Further residential properties exist to the north whilst to the south east, sited in a large plot is a single storey bungalow located towards the rear of its site, close to the boundary and close to the single storey wing at the rear of Inver House.

2.3 Opposite, on the south west side of Foreland Road, is the complex known as The Poplars and other residential properties with the Post Office located on the corner of the junction of Queens Road with Foreland Road. The area is almost exclusively residential.

2.4 The site is virtually flat and has an area of approximately 0.4 hectares. The north west and north eastern boundaries are marked by a 1.5 metre high brick wall, the south eastern boundary mostly by hedgerows.

3. Relevant History

3.1 Planning permission was granted for ground and first floor extension to provide additional accommodation for the residential home in February 2002. This comprised the first floor addition over the single storey link between the main building and the building to the north west providing an additional five bedrooms. This permission has not been implemented.

4. Development Plan Policy

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

· G1 – Development Envelopes

· D1 – Standards of Design

· D2 – Standards for Development Within the Site

· D3 – Landscaping

· TR7 – Highway Considerations for New Development

· U9 – Residential Care and Nursing Home Accommodation

5. Consultee and Third Party Comments

5.1 Internal Consultees

· Highway Engineer recommends conditions if approved.

· Conservation and Design Team consider form of proposal generally acceptable but raise some detailed criticism, especially side elevation of the new ‘Villa,’ created due to the depth of the building. Careful choice of materials/colour and detailing could reduce this.

5.2 External Consultees

· Southern Water has no adverse comment on the application.

5.3 Town or Parish Council Comments

· Bembridge Parish Council recommend refusal on grounds of overdevelopment of the site, loss of trees, insufficient parking for residents, staff and visitors as well as patients at the adjoining surgery which is likely to result in congestion in Foreland Road; adverse effect on the operation of doctors’ surgery and concerns over the special needs of the residents and likely noise nuisance generated by the increased number of residents.

5.4 Neighbours

· Letter from adjoining doctors’ surgery (shown within the application site) objecting to development involving their land.

· Six letters of objection from neighbouring and nearby properties on grounds of generation of congestion on the highway due to increased staff and residents, inadequate parking, unacceptable use in a residential area, development out of keeping, inadequate access and inadequate drainage and claiming that further building will lower the water table further. Also raises concern over the number of persons with dementia and worries over residents ‘wandering’. Raises concern over increased noise, loss of trees and bat habitats.

· Further letter from adjoining property owner (previous writer) suggests inaccurate plans and noise intrusion of residents in close proximity, loss of privacy and possible loss of a tree.

5.5 Others

· CPRE object on grounds of overdevelopment, the change of nature of the premises, becoming a more intensive health care establishment, inadequate sewerage and inadequate parking.

· Letter from MP suggesting lack of information.

6. Evaluation

6.1 The main issues relating to this application are:

· Policy and principle

· Design, footprint, mass, etc.

· Highways and parking

· Effect on adjoining properties

· Drainage

6.2 In terms of policy and principle, policy U9 states that the development of new or extensions to elderly persons accommodation, nursing homes and mental care homes will not be approved unless:-

· they are of a size which can be assimilated into the locality;

· reasonably level access is provided to and within the site;

· safe access for ambulances and cars is available;

· there is on-site provision for parking and turning of staff and visitor vehicles;

· there is easy access to public transport;

· the site is within easy walking distance of the amenities of the settlement;

· the building is fit for the purpose for the specified number of residents.

Therefore, in terms of policy and principle, as the establishment is already operational and is within a developed, residential area located within the designated development envelope and close to the village centre and amenities, it is considered that the proposal is consistent with policy.

6.3 The site has an area of 0.4 hectares (4,000 m²) and currently the footprint of the buildings on site occupies 1,010 m², approximately 25%. The increased site coverage totals 1,536 m² which is equivalent to 38% site coverage. Some of the existing building is to be demolished to make way for the new building. In the main this is where the replacement villa is proposed but the development does leave substantial areas of open space and space around the building.

6.4 In addition, a substantial proportion of the new works is only single storey and these single storey additions are those which are closest to the side boundaries, with the exception of the replacement villa to the north west of the main building. A first floor addition is proposed to the wing at the rear of the site and a small two storey element of the new extension in the northernmost corner.

6.5 In terms of design whilst significantly lower pitched roofs are proposed to the new works, similar materials and designed styling is used to reflect the character of the existing building and that of the new villa. The design is satisfactory.

6.6 In terms of massing of the resultant development, the new villa fronting Foreland Road, following demolition of the existing building and link to the main building, has created a substantial space between them and separates the mass satisfactorily. The mass of the new villa is similar to that of the main building and although of different design, the style is similar with continuity being achieved through proportions and materials.

6.7 Whilst a substantial mass of building is also included within the scheme by increasing the height of the rear wing to two storeys, a substantial distance between the two masses, linked by the single storey element, remains. The separation of the masses is considered satisfactory and bearing in mind the land to the north east of the rear wing is undeveloped, it is not felt that the mass towards the rear of the site will impact on any residential property.

6.8 Highways, access and parking factors involved in this development have been examined by the Highway Engineer and revised plans have reconfigured the car parking and access arrangements to include traffic management by an access and egress system to ensure a safer and freer flow of vehicles into and out of the site as necessary with the provision of 15 car parking spaces. Following receipt of the revised plans, the Highway Engineer is now satisfied with the operating system and recommends conditions if approval is granted.

6.9 In terms of the effect on adjoining properties, the proposed development will affect four properties to a degree. These properties are no. 51 Foreland Road, a very substantial 2/3 storey villa located on the corner of Foreland Road and Northclose Road but with a distance from the common boundary with the site of nearly 14 metres but, in that intervening land, is a very substantial garage which helps screen the development.

6.10 To the north of the site, adjoining the north western boundary is Mimosa House, a substantial detached residence fronting Northclose Road with a small annex attached on its north eastern side a distance from the main part of Mimosa House to the site boundary is 9 metres although there is a conservatory at the rear of Mimosa House which is considerably closer to the boundary than the main dwelling. Whilst the extension is approximately 2.7 metres from the boundary and (except for a conservatory) the dwelling is approximately 9 metres further on, a very substantial part of the extension in that location is only single storey with a low pitched roof and therefore the impact is considered to be kept to a minimum.

6.11 An objection has been received from the occupier of Mimosa House who considers the distance should be increased by the reduction of the scheme by two bedrooms citing that the mass of building in that location will diminish light and sunshine to this property. Bearing in mind the distances and the heights of the building involved, loss of light is not substantiated and a loss of direct sunshine to a property is not a sustainable reason to withhold permission.

6.12 The next nearest property is a property known as Newlands located to the north east of the site, a property which accesses from Northclose Road. The building is set well back in its plot but does not abut the boundary with Inver House, there being some intervening land associated with Mimosa House and the dwelling is over 20 metres from the boundary of Inver House and Mimosa House and the dwelling is approximately 28 metres from the proposed new building. This distance is considered to be substantial enough to retain adequate levels of privacy.

6.13 On the south east side of the site lies no. 57 Foreland Road, a bungalow set well back more than 40 metres from its frontage with Foreland Road. This property is set skewed in its site with its north westernmost corner about 2.5 metres from the boundary. The plans show there to be a distance of 4 metres from the boundary to the nearest part of the extensions to Inver House, the combined distance of 6.5 metres, but it should be remembered that, at this point, the extensions are restricted to single storey and the closest two storey element is 8.5 metres from the boundary and therefore 11 metres from the dwelling. It is felt that these distances are substantial and the impact on that property is unlikely to be sufficient to withhold permission. However, the plans indicate that there are five windows in the part of the wing which runs parallel to the common boundary, three of which are shown as French windows allowing access into the grounds immediately adjoining. Accordingly at ground level, boundary screening should be sufficient to prevent overlooking and the two storey gable end contains no window.

6.14 The adequacy of drainage has been questioned and although the application states that foul drainage would be via the existing mains system and that storm water drainage would be via the existing surface water system, no details have been submitted to prove there is adequate capacity. However, Southern Water has been consulted and confirmation of no adverse comments has been received.

7. Conclusion and Justification for Recommendation

7.1 This proposal seeks to increase the capacity of the care home from 39 bedrooms to 60, providing 11 of those bedrooms within self-contained extra care flats in the new villa and by increasing the site coverage with additional accommodation to provide the rest. Planning policy accepts care home development where they can be adequately and properly assimilated into the existing fabric of the settlement. This is an existing establishment comprising a form of residential use and the development would fulfil much needed capacity for elderly residents and those suffering from dementia.

7.2 The complex leaves sufficient grounds for amenity purposes and space around the buildings and the massing of the complex separates the masses effectively. The single storey elements are positioned to lessen any impact on adjoining properties and the access and parking arrangements will now seize the opportunity to rationalise and improve the vehicular access and egress via a one-way system. The resultant development is considered acceptable and recommended for approval.

8. Recommendation

This application is recommended for Conditional permission.

Conditions/Reasons:

1	The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of 3 years from date of this permission. Reason: To comply with Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.
2	Notwithstanding the details of materials shown in the application plans, no development shall take place until details of the materials and finishes, including mortar colour and the detailing of the finishes to be used in the construction of the external surfaces of the development 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 Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.
3	No development shall take place until details have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority of the positions, design, materials and type of boundary treatment to be erected. The boundary treatment shall be completed before the buildings hereby permitted are occupied. Development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details. Reason: In the interests of maintaining the amenity value of the area and to comply with policy D1 (Standards of Design) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.
4	No development shall take place until full details of both hard and soft landscape works have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority and these works shall be carried out as approved. These details shall include proposed finished levels or contours; means of enclosure; car parking layouts; other vehicle and pedestrian access and circulation areas; hard surfacing materials; minor artefacts and structures (e.g. furniture, refuse or other storage units, signs, lighting, etc); proposed and existing functional services above and below ground (e.g. drainage power, communications cables, pipelines, etc, indicating lines, manholes, supports, etc). Reason: To ensure the appearance of the development is satisfactory and to comply with policy D3 (Landscaping) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.
5	Steps, including the installation and use of wheel cleaning facilities in accordance with details to be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority, shall be taken to prevent material being deposited on the highway as a result of any operation on the site. Any deposit of material from the site on the highway shall be removed as soon as practicable by the site operator. Reason: In the interests of highway safety and to prevent mud and dust from getting on the highway and to comply with policies TR7 (Highway Considerations) and M2 (Defined Mineral Working) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.
6	No building hereby permitted shall be occupied until space has been laid out within the site and drained and surface in accordance with drawing number PL103 -B for 15 cars to be parked and for vehicles to turn so that they may enter and leave the site in forward gear. The space shall not thereafter be used for any purpose other than that approved in accordance with this condition. Reason: In the interests of highway safety and to comply with policy TR7 (Highway Considerations) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.
7	No building shall be occupied until the means of vehicular access thereto has been constructed in accordance with the approved plans. Reason: To ensure adequate access to the proposed development and to comply with policy D1 (Standards of Design) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.
8	No building shall be occupied until the means of access thereto for pedestrians and/or cyclists has been constructed in accordance with the approved plans. Reason: To ensure adequate safe provision of facilities for pedestrians and cyclists wishing to gain access to the site and to comply with policy TR6 (Cycling and Walking) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.
9	Before the development hereby permitted is commenced, a scheme indicating the provision to be made for disabled people to gain access to the buildings shall be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority in writing. The approved scheme shall be implemented before the development hereby permitted is brought into use. Reason: To ensure adequate access for disabled persons and to comply with policy D12 (Access for People with Disabilities) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.
10	The north westernmost vehicular access in the Foreland Road frontage shall be used only for ingress to the site and the south easternmost access shall be used as an exit only and signage shall be erected before the development hereby approved is brought into use and retained thereafter in accordance with a scheme to be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority in writing. Reason: In the interests of highway safety and to comply with policy TR7 (Highway Considerations) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.
11	The front boundary wall of the property shall be retained and maintained (or if necessary rebuilt) in its entirety in accordance with specification to be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority in writing. Reason: In the interest of the amenities of the area and in accordance with policy D1 (Standards of Design) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.
12	The new flats hereby approved shall be occupied only as special care apartments in connection with the existing operation of Inver House and shall not be occupied other than by residents of the establishment without the prior written consent of the Local Planning Authority. Reason: The development is in a form and a relationship with the existing premises known as Inver House without amenity area or car parking adequate to allow it to function separately in accordance with policies D1 (Standards of Design) and TR7 (Highway Considerations for New Development) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.
13	The bottom half of the kitchen windows in the north westernmost first floor flats in the new villa shall be glazed and thereafter maintained in obscured glass in accordance with a scheme to be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: In the interests of the amenities of the adjoining residential property and in accordance with policy D1 (Standards of Design) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.

06

Reference Number: P/00086/06 - TCP/22128/F Parish/Name: Newport - Ward/Name: Carisbrooke East Registration Date: 12/01/2006 - Reserved Matters Officer: Miss S Wilkinson Tel: (01983) 823552 Applicant: Kingsoak Southampton Residential development to provide a mix of 150 dwellings with access off Sylvan Drive including two access points on eastern boundary; proposed pedestrian footpath/cycleway between Hazel Close and Petticoat Lane; landscaping to include provision of open space and garages/parking (aorm)(revised scheme) land north of Newport C of E Primary School,, Kitbridge Road and south of, Petticoat Lane, Newport, PO30 The application is recommended for Conditional Permission

REASON FOR COMMITTEE CONSIDERATION

Application relates to an important residential allocated site which involves a number of complex issues needing Committee determination.

1. Details of Application

1.1 Approval of Reserved Matters consent is sought for a development of 150 units comprising a mix of development as follows:

· 29 two bedroomed houses

· 52 three bedroomed houses

· 3 four or more bedroomed houses

9 one bedroomed flats

· 56 two bedroomed flats

1.2 The design of the units includes a mix of three storey flatted development, three storey with accommodation in the roof and two storey terraces, two storey semi detached and two storey detached units. The design shows a mix of features including some bay windows, projecting gables and hipped roofs in order to provide a number of varied streetscenes.

1.3 There are approximately 232 formal parking spaces, including garages provided on site.

1.4 The access to the site would be gained via Snowberry Road currently a short spur road off Sylvan Drive, which terminates at the western boundary of the site directly adjacent the pond. Once within the application site the road turns southward and crosses the footpath and moving towards the east where it splits allowing for two spur roads into the neighbouring site in the top north-western corner and the bottom south-eastern corner in order to displace traffic generated by the development. This would provide an additional access road between any later developments of the neighbouring allocated site.

1.5 The layout of the site follows the general road and footpath layout with development facing onto the open space. The flatted development has been positioned at pivotal focal points around the site providing curved corner features and helping to provide a diverse townscape.

2. Location and Site Characteristics

2.1 The site comprises 3.03 hectares of land currently comprising a greenfield site, consisting of a mixture of grassland with areas of scrub and trees with overgrown pond adjacent the western boundary. The site is bisected by a wooded corridor (former railway track). There is a tread northern boundary abutting Petticoat Lane (FP211) which provides direct pedestrian access to western end of central Newport, linking directly to Mill Street and Sainsbury Supermarket. Petticoat Lane runs the entire length of the north boundary of the site with housing on the opposite side.

2.2 Development abutting the eastern boundary of the site combines a mix of uses being Unigate Dairies, former industrial land and a recent cul-de-sac development (Churnwood Close) off Westminster Lane. Much of which is allocated residential land and could be accessed via the development under consideration. The western boundary is also allocated residential development that is currently under construction known as Carisbrooke Meadows developed by Persimmon Homes.

2.3 Newport C of E Primary abuts the southern boundary of the site.

3. Relevant History

3.1 Although not referring to this specific site, TCP/22128/C – P/02191/03 – consent was granted for proposed mitigation receptor ponds and associated landscaping/fencing to translocate Great Crested Newts from the pond on the application site already discussed.

3.2 P/01117/02 – TCP/22128/B – outline consent was granted for residential development.

3.3 P/02015/05 – TCP/22128/E - application was withdrawn for residential development to provide a mix of 150 dwellings with access off Sylvan Drive including two access points on eastern boundary; proposed pedestrian footway/cycle way between Hazel Close and Petticoat Lane; landscaping to include provision of open space and garages/parking (AORM).

4. Development Plan Policy

4.1 National Policy Guidance

· PPG – Housing and PPS – consultation Paper 3 relating to Housing are applicable.

4.2 The following strategic policies within the Unitary Development Plan are applicable:

· S1 – New Development will be concentrated within existing Urban Areas

· S3 – New Development of a Large Scale will be Expected to be Located in or adjacent the Defined Development Envelopes of Main Island Towns

· S6 – All Development will be Expected to be of a High Standard of Design

· S7 – Provision of Housing Units on the Isle of Wight

4.3 The following Development Plan Policies are applicable:

· G1 – Development Envelopes for Towns and Villages

· G4 – General Locational Criteria for Development

· D1 – Standards of Design

· D2 – Standards for Development within the Site

· D3 – Landscaping

· H1 – New Development within main Island Towns

· H2 – To Ensure that Large Residential Development contains a Variety of House Size and Types

· H3 – Allocation of Residential Development Sites

· H6 – High Density Residential Development

· H14 – Locally Affordable Housing as an element of Housing Scheme

· TR6 – Cycling and Walking

· TR7 – Highway Considerations for New Development

· TR16 – Parking Policies and Guidelines

· L10 – Open Space and Housing Developments

· U11 – Infrastructure and Services Provision

· C8 – Nature Conservation as a Material Consideration

· C12 – Development Affecting Trees and Woodlands

4.4 Site is located within the development envelope of Newport and is an allocated housing site.

4.5 Reference is made to the recent housing needs survey, the main conclusions of which are as follows:

· Demand for rented accommodation

· Although there is a need in most Island settlements, the areas with the most need are Newport, Ryde, Shanklin/Lake, Sandown followed by Cowes.

· Large proportion of single person accommodation although there continues to be an on-going demand for two/three bedroomed homes to meet statutory homeless requirement.

5. Consultee and Third Party Comments

5.1 Internal Consultees

· Highway comments were not received at time of writing the report.

· Environmental Health Department have requested condition in respect of contaminated land be attached to any approval.

· Public Rights of Way have confirmed they have no objection to the plans as submitted.

5.2 External Consultees

· The Environment Agency request conditions be attached to any approval.

· Southern Water have confirmed that discussions have taken place between the developer and themselves but as not agreement has yet been made suggest conditions are placed on any approval.

5.3 Others

Four letters of objection were received, points raised can be summarised as follows:

· Implementation of translocation scheme for the newts.

· Contaminated land.

· Archaeology

· Over development

· Highway Safety

· Usability of the proposed open space

· Impact on medical and educational facilities in the area.

· Potential loss of trees

· Impact of development on any protected species on site.

· Need for additional street lighting.

A letter of objection was also received from the MP, points of which can be summarised as follows:

· Too many trees to be removed.

· Access points will put pressure on estate exits, specifically Hunny Cross lights and Wellington Road roundabout.

· Inadequate car parking provision.

6. Evaluation

6.1 The determining factors in considering this proposal are considered to be as follows:

· Is the development in compliance with policies contained within the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan and Government guidelines

· Does the proposal represent overdevelopment

· Impact of the development on highway safety and the surrounding road network

· Impact of the development on the amenities and character of the area.

6.2 The site is located within the development envelope of Newport and is within a larger housing allocation site. Although the site could be considered as a Greenfield site it is part of a wider holistic redevelopment connecting two housing developments on the outskirts of Newport in order to reduce the pressure on the highway. The principle of development of this site has been established both by the allocation and the outline approval on the site. Having regard for these factors, I do not considered there to be any objection to the principle of the development of this site. The development is in compliance with policies contained within the Unitary Development Plan and Government Guidance.

6.3 The location of the site makes it appropriate for high density development with particular reference to Policies H2 (To Ensure that Large Residential Development Contains a Variety of House Size and Types) and H6 (High Density Residential Development). The proposal would give rise to a density of approximately 50 units to the hectare, in line with the minimum density of 30-50 dwellings to the hectare. It should also be noted that although this is at the upper end of this recommendation new developments containing flats will always give a distorted impression of the density. In this instance it should be consider that the proposal is providing a mix of unit sizes and type of dwellings in accordance with Government and local recommendations.

6.4 Both Wellington Road and Sylvan Drive would serve the development once Sylvan Drive is adopted. The layout has also been designed to incorporate access points into land to be development on the eastern boundary to further displace the traffic that would be generated by the development.

6.5 The development will be served by the public footpath know as Petticoat Lane and has a footpath/cycleway bisecting the site in order to encourage alternative means of transport than the car, in accordance with Government objectives for sustainable development.

6.6 The access road to the site although considered suitable for some traffic generated by the development is not of sufficient visibility and width at the junction with Sylvan Drive to take all the traffic resulting from the development of 150 units and the associated construction traffic. Therefore we have recommended a condition be placed on any approval detailing that only 50 units can be constructed and occupied prior to a connecting road with the neighbouring site being in place. This would not only relieve the junction with Sylvan Drive but would help the dispersal of traffic through Newport taking pressure of the main junction points. This is a major allocated site within Newport centre and therefore must be considered within the wider highway network and the implication that the additional number of vehicle movement could have on the major junctions, such as Hunnycross lights. In this respect the phasing of the development will allow for alternative routes to be in place.

6.7 No development of this site can take place without the consideration of the pond along the western boundary that has been reported to contain Great Crested Newts, a protected species under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 and the European Habitat Directive. In this regard the development cannot be implemented until any Great Crested Newts have been transloctated in accordance with the report detailed in the Section 106 Agreement attached to the outline consent. Although in a report sent to DEFRA to obtain a licence of the works it states that no Newts now use this pond it has been suggested in a letter of representation that Great Crested Newts were using the pond in October. Additionally as this is a reserved matters application and the presence of Newts has been confirmed at outline stage, compliance with the mitigation report at essential.

6.8 The application has been accompanied by a number of reports examining the presence of protected species on the site. These reports have concluded that no such species with the exception of the Great Crested Newts discussed above will be affected by the development. The reports have been examined by the Council’s Ecology Officer who has concluded that but his comments were not received at the time of writing the report.

6.9 The proposal has been designed to incorporate a number of different designed buildings in order to give varied street scenes within the development. The application has been amended to improve the design of the street scene elevations that parallel the cycleway that dissects the site as these are considered as the primary to the visual appearance of the development as a whole. A mix of materials will add to the varied design but with linking features retain a feeling of place.

6.10 The houses provided on site have all got private amenity area of a size that would be expected within this location, close to the town centre. There has also been a provision for open space on the site for the flatted developments. Although I accept the issued raised by an objector in that this area could not be particularly usable in regards to balls games etc due to its depth and the location of the foot/cycle path. However, this area provides high visually amenity and open green space within the estate layout and could be used for some outdoor activities.

6.11 The site is almost surrounded by residential development and allocated land, the design and layout of the proposal sits comfortably into the established residential layout of the area and does not have a detrimental impact on the surrounding area.

7. Conclusion and Justification for Recommendation

7.1 Having due regard and appropriate weight to all material considerations referred to in this report, it is considered that the application site is of sufficient size to accommodate the density of development proposed without having a detrimental impact on the amenities of current of future occupiers. It is also considered that although the road is not suitable to serve the whole of the development, the construction of 50 would not have a detrimental impact on the surrounding road network and following this time the additional roads are in place the resultant traffic for the further 100 units could be adequately dispersed.

8. Recommendation - Approval.

Conditions/Reasons:

1	The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of 3 years from date of this permission. Reason: To comply with Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.
2	No development shall take place until [samples of materials/details of the materials and finishes, including mortar colour] to be used in the construction of the external surfaces of the development 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.
3	Before 6 months from the date when any of the buildings permitted are occupied the land shown on the approved plans as open space shall be laid out in accordance with that plan and shall be retained as such thereafter. Reason: In the interests of the amenity of the area and to comply with policies D1 (Standards of Design) and D3 (Landscaping) of the IW Unitary Development Plan.
4	No development shall take place until a scheme of landscape implementation and maintenance for a minimum period of 5 years has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. All hard and soft landscape works shall be carried out in accordance with the approved scheme. The works shall be carried out prior to the occupation of any part of the development or in accordance with the programme agreed with the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To ensure the provision, establishment and maintenance of a reasonable standard of landscape in accordance with the approved design and to comply with policy D3 (Landscaping) of the IW Unitary Development Plan.
5	No development shall take place until a drainage strategy has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development must thereafter be undertaken in accordance with the approved details. Reason: To minimise the risk of pollution and to comply with Policy P1 (Pollution and Development) of the IW Unitary Development Plan.
6	A landscape management plan including long term design objectives, management responsibilities and maintenance schedules for all landscape area other than privately owned domestic gardens, shall be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority prior to the occupation of any of the units hereby approved. The Landscape Management Plan shall be carried out as approved. Reason: To insure long term maintenance of hard and soft landscaped areas and to comply with Policies D1 (Standards of Design) and D3 (Landscaping) of the IW Unitary Development Plan.
7	No part of the development hereby permitted shall commence until there has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority: a) A desk-top study documenting all previous and existing land uses of the site and adjacent land in accordance with national guidance as set out in Contaminated Land Research Report Nos. 2 & 3 and BS10175: 2001; and, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority, b) a site investigation report documenting the ground conditions of the site and incorporating chemical and gas analysis identified as appropriate by the desk-top study in accordance with BS10175: 2001 – “Investigation of Potentially Contaminated Sites – Code of Practice”; and, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority, c) a remediation scheme to deal with any contaminant including an implementation timetable, monitoring proposals and a remediation verification methodology. The verification methodology shall include a sampling and analysis programme to confirm the adequacy of decontamination and an appropriately qualified person shall oversee the implementation of all remediation. The construction of buildings shall not commence until the investigator has provided a report, which shall include confirmation that all remediation measures have been carried out fully in accordance with the scheme. The report shall also include results of the verification programme of post-remediation sampling and monitoring in order to demonstrate that the required remediation has been fully met. Future monitoring proposals and reporting shall also be detailed in the report. 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.
8	Development hereby approved shall not commence until a Section 106 Agreement and a Section 38 Agreement are in place for the adoption of Sylvan Drive and Snowberry Road. Reason: To ensure that the road network is of a suitable construction for the development hereby approved and to comply with Policy TR7 (Highway Considerations for New Development) of the Unitary Development Plan.
9	Construction work shall be limited to the development and occupation of 50 units until an adjoining road is provided into the neighbouring site along the eastern boundary. Reason: The current road network accessing the site is inadequate to accommodate the full scale of the development and as such the road network needs to be in a place prior to further construction works being undertaken in compliance with Policy TR7 (Highway Considerations for New Development) of the IW Unitary Development Plan.
10	Prior to work commencing on site, an up to date tree survey shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To ensure that the trees within the site are adequately protected in accordance with Policy C12 ( Development Affecting Trees and Woodland) of the IW Unitary Development Plan.
11	No development including site clearance shall commence on the site until all trees, not previously agreed with the Local Planning Authority for removal, shall has been protected by fencing or other agreed barrier, Any fencing shall conform to the following specification: Barrier shall consist of a scaffold framework as shown in figure 2 of BS 5837 (2005). Comprising of vertical and horizontal framework braced to resist impact, with vertical tubes spaced at a maximum of 3 m intervals. Onto this weldmesh panels are to be securely fixed. Such fencing or barrier shall be maintained throughout the course of the works on the site, during which period the following restrictions shall apply: (a) No placement or storage of material; (b) No placement or storage of fuels or chemicals. (c) No placement or storage of excavated soil. (d) No lighting of bonfires. (e) No physical damage to bark or branches. (f) No changes to natural ground drainage in the area. (g) No changes in ground levels. (h) No digging of trenches for services, drains or sewers. (i) Any trenches required in close proximity shall be hand dug ensuring all major roots are left undamaged. Reason: To ensure that all general trees and shrubs and other natural features to be retained are adequately protected from damage to health and stability throughout the construction period in the interests of the amenity and to ensure the wooded southern boundary is retained as an important landscape feature which provides a valuable wildlife corridor, all in compliance with Policies D3 (Landscaping) and C12 (Development Affecting Trees and Woodland) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.
12	In this condition “retained tree” means an existing tree which is to be retained in accordance with the approved plans and particulars; and paragraphs (a) and (b) below shall have effect until the expiration of (1 year) from (the date of the occupation of the building for its permitted use). (a)No retained tree shall be cut down, uprooted or destroyed, nor shall any retained tree be topped or lopped other than in accordance with the approved plans and particulars, without the written approval of the Local Planning Authority. Any topping or lopping approved shall be carried out in accordance with British Standard 3998 (Tree Work); (b)lf any retained tree is removed, uprooted or destroyed or dies, a replacement tree shall be planted in the same place, or place to be agreed and that tree 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. Reason: To ensure the protection of the trees to be retained in the interests of the amenities of the area and in compliance with Policy D3 (Landscaping) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.
13	Development shall not begin until details of the design, surfacing and construction of any new roads, footways, cycleway, accesses and car parking areas, together with details of the means of disposal of surface water drainage therefrom 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: To ensure an adequate standard of highway access and drainage for the proposed dwellings and to comply with policy TR7 (Highway Considerations) of the IW Unitary Development Plan.
14	No building shall be occupied until the means of vehicular access thereto has been constructed in accordance with the approved plans. Reason: To ensure adequate access to the proposed development and to comply with policy D1 (Standards of Design) of the IW Unitary Development Plan.
15	No dwelling shall be occupied until the parts of the service roads which provide access to it have been constructed, surfaced and drained in accordance with any approved plans/details which have been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To ensure an adequate standard of highway and access for the proposed dwellings and to comply with policy TR7 (Highway Considerations) of the IW Unitary Development Plan.
16	Development shall not begin until details of traffic calming measures to restrict vehicle speeds and of a programme for their implementation have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details, and the measures shall be completed before the occupation of any part of the development or in accordance with the agreed programme. Reason: In the interests of highway safety and to comply with policy TR7 (Highway Considerations) of the IW Unitary Development Plan.
17	No building shall be occupied until the means of access thereto for pedestrians and cyclists has been constructed in accordance with the approved plans. Reason: To ensure adequate safe provision of facilities for pedestrians and cyclists wishing to gain access to the site and to comply with policy TR6 (Cycling and Walking) of the IW Unitary Development Plan.
18	No building hereby permitted shall be occupied until space has been laid out within the site and drained and surface in accordance with drawing number SO 749-038-A. The space shall not thereafter be used for any purpose other than that approved in accordance with this condition. Reason: In the interests of highway safety and to comply with policy TR7 (Highway Considerations) of the IW Unitary Development Plan.
19	Steps, including the installation and use of wheel cleaning facilities in accordance with details to be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority, shall be taken to prevent material being deposited on the highway as a result of any operation on the site. Any deposit of material from the site on the highway shall be removed as soon as practicable by the site operator. Reason: In the interests of highway safety and to prevent mud and dust from getting on the highway and to comply with policies TR7 (Highway Considerations) of the IW Unitary Development Plan.

07

Reference Number: P/02428/05 - TCP/19494/K Parish/Name: Sandown - Ward/Name: Sandown South Registration Date: 08/12/2005 - Outline Planning Permission Officer: Mr C Hougham Tel: (01983) 823552 Applicant: Mr K Preece & Mr M Preece Outline for 6 houses with car parking; alterations to vehicular access (revised scheme) land adjacent Sandown Farm, Perowne Way, Sandown, PO36 The application is recommended for Conditional Permission

REASON FOR COMMITTEE CONSIDERATION

Application has attracted a considerable number of local objections which conflict with the recommendation to grant conditional permission.

1. Details of Application

1.1 Outline application, with supporting illustrative material/detail, to develop the site with six dwellings comprising a terrace of four dwellinghouse and a pair of semi-detached properties. Vehicular/pedestrian access to the site from Perowne Way leading to a reduced parking area for three vehicles.

1.2 Matters of siting and means of access are to be dealt with at this outline stage with all other detailed matters reserved for subsequent approval.

2. Location and Site Characteristics

2.1 An irregularly shaped site with an area of 0.2 hectare off the north western side of Perowne Way approximately 130 metres from the junction with Morton Common in Sandown.

2.2 Due to apparent neglect the site has been densely overgrown and, in some parts, is virtually impenetrable. The agent, however, has submitted as part of the application a detailed survey of the site which identifies the precise position of two prominent trees on the forward part of the site in addition to various outbuildings and static caravans which would appear to be “grown in”.

2.3 The site has a narrow frontage onto Perowne Way and is flanked by a former farmhouse which has been converted to flats and a small residential cul de sac known as The Warren.

3. Relevant History

3.1 Application seeking renewal for bungalow was refused in September 2005 on grounds of piecemeal development at inappropriate density and insufficient information in respect of trees on site.

3.2 In September 2005 an outline application, with all detailed matters reserved for subsequent approval other than siting and means of access, was submitted to develop the site with six dwellings comprising a terrace block of four houses and a pair of semi-detached houses. The layout plan accompanying the application showed the two specimen trees on the forward part of the site to be retained with an access road off Perowne Way aligned accordingly to serve the proposed development towards the rear of the site. The application was refused permission on grounds which can be summarised in the following terms:

· Layout/means of access out of character with prevailing pattern of development in the locality, prejudicial to the Council’s ability to meet its housing requirements over the planned period.

· Unsatisfactory access due to inadequate visibility, contrary to Policy TR7.

· Formation and use of additional access at this point would be likely to result in a potential traffic hazard, contrary to Policy TR7.

3.3 The agent was advised that there was no objection in principle to the development of the site for residential purposes providing vehicular/pedestrian access is provided off The Warren and the layout reflects the pattern of development on that neighbouring site. There was no appeal against the decision to refuse permission.

4. Development Plan Policy

4.1 National Policy Guidance

· PPS1 stresses the need for good design to ensure that spaces and places are attractive, usable and durable for people. Designs which are inappropriate in their context and/or failing to improve the character and quality of an area should not be accepted. Good designs should be integrated into the existing urban form; optimise the potential for the site to accommodate development; respond to the local context and be visually attractive as a result of good architecture and appropriate landscaping.

4.2 PPG3 (Housing) stress the need to make efficient use of land, but states that this should not be at the expense of cramped development prejudicial to the surrounding environment. Whilst advocating higher densities, it is stressed that good design is key in order to create attractive, high quality living environments in which people would choose to live. It is suggestion that housing developments achieve between 30 and 50 dwellings per hectare, and where there are good links with public transport.

4.3 The relevant strategic policies contained in the Unitary Development Plan are:

· S1, S5, S6 and S7

4.4 The relevant local plan policies contained in the Unitary Development Plan are as follows:

· G4 – General Locational Criteria for Development

· D1 – Standards of Design

· D2 - Standards for Development within the site.

· H4 – Unallocated Residential Development to be restricted to defined settlements.

· H6 – High Density Residential Development

· C1 – Protection of Landscape Character

· C12 – Development Affecting Trees and Woodland

· TR3 – Locating Development to minimise the need to travel

· TR7 – Highway Considerations for New Development

· TR16 – Parking Policies and Guidelines

· U11 – Infrastructure and Services Provision.

4.5 In terms of Policy TR16 (Appendix G) this site is within zone 3 which requires the developer to provide a maximum of 0 to 75% of the maximum non-operational vehicle parking provision allowed on the site, which in practical terms in this particular case (6 x 2 bedroomed units) means on site provision of between 0 and 13 spaces.

5. Consultee and Third Party Comments

5.1 Internal Consultees

Area Highway Engineer has been involved with negotiations with the applicant’s agents since the decision to refuse the earlier application and is now recommending that this latest submission should be approved. However, he has made the following observation:

During these discussions I indicated that due to the nearby Request Bus Stops and the proximity of the town centre and its amenities a lesser parking scheme might be acceptable. Also, that due to previous approval on the site allowing an access in this location serving two units, that I would not be able to sustain my previous recommendation for refusal on the grounds of inadequate visibility, provided that only three cars were able to park.

Unfortunately the parking, access and turning layout is not what I had envisaged and does not succeed in limiting the parking available. However, as this application is in outline form I am happy to condition for an alternative layout.

While this information is not essential for the determination of the application for the reasons specified by the Area Highway engineer, his comments have been brought to the attention of the applicant’s agent in order for him to have opportunity to submit amended plans dealing with this point before the matter is considered by this Committee.

Council’s Tree Officer confirms that large Poplar tree at front of site is no longer subject to TPO and large Ash within site is not worthy of a TPO and is likely to be removed as it appears to be affecting adjoining property.

5.2 Third Parties

· Representations from seven owner/occupiers living in the immediate vicinity of the site have been received objecting to the application. The reasons for their opposition to the proposed development can be summarised in the following terms:

· Concern about use of soakaways

· Loss of wildlife habitat/increased urbanization

· Degradation of semi rural character of the area

· Dangerous access

· Likely increase in “on street” (Perowne Way) parking

· Over development of the site

· Insufficient “on site” parking facilities

· De-stabilisation of land due to removal of trees

· Loss of amenity.

Other issues have been raised which are not material planning consideration.

6. Evaluation

6.1 Determining issues in this particular case are reasonably easy to identify.

· Principle of development on this land.

· Current amenity value of the site

· Layout, number of units etc.

· Provision of limited number of “on site” parking spaces arising from concerns about the adequacy of the proposed vehicular access onto Perowne Way.

6.2 The site is a relatively small, over grown area of land in an otherwise built up area. It is within the development envelope boundary, and as such, there is no objection in principle to the development of the site for residential purposes. It is clear that in ideal circumstances this land should have been developed as part of neighbouring residential layouts.

6.3 Submitted drawings include a survey as existing identifying two larger specimen trees, one of which is the subject of a Tree Preservation Order, the relationship with neighbouring residential properties and the nature of the dense overgrowth throughout a large part of the site. It is important to take into account that this site is not designated open space as part of any previous approved scheme and is not a SSSI or a locally designated SINC (Site of Importance to Nature Conservation), as identified in the Unitary Development Plan. No evidence has been provided as to its value as a local habitat or an important amenity feature as the narrow frontage onto Perowne Way and the dense under growth mean that any degree of public accessibility is virtually impossible.

6.4 The development of the site with six dwellings is a relatively low density scheme which will mean that the two larger trees on the forward part of the site will be retained but also it will be possible to retain much of the boundary hedgerows and trees as an amenity feature and to ensure that owners/occupiers of neighbouring properties do not suffer any loss of amenity due to overlooking with associated loss of privacy and amenity from the proposed new dwellings; indeed, the success of the scheme will rely heavily on the landscaping measure undertaken by the eventual developer, if approved.

6.5 Having established that there is no objection in principle to the development of the site and in the absence of any conclusive evidence that the site should be retained in its present overgrown form as a natural habitat or amenity feature, it is apparent that the key determining factor relates to the adequacy of the access and the provision of a reduced parking scheme to serve the proposed development.

6.6 In terms of policy TR16 (Appendix G) it has been explained that this site falls within zone 3 where the principal characteristics of the area have been assessed in the following terms:

· On street parking is generally unrestricted (controls confined to main distributor roads) and is not currently a significant problem.

· Few public car parks in this zone. Those that do exist are not heavily used outside the holiday season.

· Reasonable access on foot or cycle to the local town centre, shops, schools and other community facilities.

· Reasonable access to bus services, but these may be less frequent than half hourly.

· Large number of car owning household and private parking spaces in this zone.

6.7 Quite clearly some if not all of these characteristics apply to this particular site in Perowne Way which is in a reasonably sustainable location in terms of the proximity of local facilities and access to public transport. Area Highway engineer has identified that there is an extant permission on this site which make it difficult for him to raise a sustainable objection against the formation and limited use of an access onto Perowne Way and has identified a scheme with reduced parking facilities as the most appropriate resolution to the problem. It is debatable whether this can be considered as adequate off street parking but it does seem likely that this will result in additional on street (Perowne Way) parking if the site were to be developed. Area Highway Engineer basis his recommendation for approval on the fact that even if there was an increase in on street parking, this would be unlikely to lead to traffic congestion significant to justify refusing permission.

6.8 Having assessed the relevant factors the view is taken that the proposed relatively low density development of this site is likely to comply with Policy G4 (General Locational Criteria for Development) and D1 (Standards of Design). In this context the explanatory paragraph supporting Policy G4 (Paras. 4.15 and 4.16) highlight the overarching objectives which can be applied to this particular application.

Development which does take place will be expected to maintain or positively contribute to the environment and to fit in with its surroundings. Access requirement and nature conservation interests will be expected to be taken into account.(paras. 4.15)

6.9 In similar terms it is clear that the earlier application, the decision to refuse permission and the subsequent negotiations have given due regard and appropriate weight to the relevant highway considerations (Policy TR7) and the issue of parking (Policy TR16).

6.10 It has already been indicated in the earlier part of this report that ideally this site should have been developed at an earlier stage as part of one of the neighbouring residential layouts. This did not occur and it would appear that the preferred method of developing the site is not an option. Although this may have been the preferred method in planning terms, it is likely that it would still have attracted some local opposition because of the increase in vehicular traffic using this residential cul de sac and, in any case, the fact that there may be a preferable solution is not sufficient reason to withhold permission. The application is recommend for conditional approval.

7. Conclusion and Justification for Recommendation

7.1 Having given due regard and appropriate weight to all materials considerations referred to in this report, it is considered that the proposed development of this site will provide six affordable homes in a sustainable location which would be in keeping with the established residential character of this particular locality. There are problems with the adequacy of the vehicular access onto Perowne Way and these have been addressed in a relatively innovative fashion which may lead to a modest increase in terms of “on street” parking but this is not considered to be sufficient to warrant refusing permission which may affectively sterilise the development of the site for residential purposes.

Recommendation

This application is recommended for Conditional Permission.

Conditions/Reasons:

1	Application for approval of the reserved matters shall be made to the Local Planning Authority before the expiration of 3 years from the date of this planning permission. The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of 2 years from the date of approval of 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 (as amended) and to prevent the accumulation of unimplemented planning permissions.
2	Before any works or development hereby approved is commenced on site details relating to the design, external appearance of any building(s) to be erected and the landscaping of the site shall be submitted to, and approved by the Local Planning Authority. These details shall comprise the ‘reserved matters’ and shall be submitted within the time constraints referred to in condition 1 above before any development is commenced. Reason: To enable the Local Planning Authority to control the development in detail and to comply with Section 92 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended).
3	Development shall not begin until details of the design, surfacing and construction of any new roads, footways, accesses and car parking areas, together with details of the means of disposal of surface water drainage therefrom 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: To ensure an adequate standard of highway access and drainage for the proposed dwellings and to comply with policy TR7 (Highway Considerations) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.
4	No dwelling shall be occupied until the parts of the service roads which provide access to it have been constructed, surfaced and drained in accordance with details which have been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To ensure an adequate standard of highway and access for the proposed dwellings and to comply with policy TR7 (Highway Considerations) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.
5	Development shall not begin until details of the junction between the proposed service road and the highway have been approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority; and the building shall not be occupied until that junction has been constructed in accordance with the approved details. Reason: To ensure adequate access to the proposed development and to comply with policy D1 (Standards of Design) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.
6	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 gates shall be erected [other than those expressly authorised by this permission/other than gates that are set back a minimum distance of 5 metres from the edge of the carriageway of the adjoining highway. Reason: In the interests of highway safety and to comply with policy TR7 (Highway Considerations) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.
7	No dwelling hereby permitted shall be occupied until space has been laid out within the site and drained and surfaced in accordance with details that have been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority in writing for a maximum of three cars to be parked and for vehicles to turn so that they may enter and leave the site in forward gear. The space shall not thereafter be used for any purpose other than that approved in accordance with this condition. Reason: In the interests of highway safety and to comply with policy TR7 (Highway Considerations) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.
8	Steps, including the installation and use of wheel cleaning facilities in accordance with details to be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority, shall be taken to prevent material being deposited on the highway as a result of any operation on the site. Any deposit of material from the site on the highway shall be removed as soon as practicable by the site operator. Reason: In the interests of highway safety and to prevent mud and dust from getting on the highway and to comply with policies TR7 (Highway Considerations) and M2 (Defined Mineral Working) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.
9	Development shall not begin until details of the sight lines to be provided at the junction between the access of the proposal and the highway have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority and the development shall not be occupied until those sight lines have been provided in accordance with the approved details. Nothing that may cause an obstruction to visibility shall at any time be placed or be permitted to remain within the visibility splay shown in the approved sight lines. Reason: In the interests of highway safety and to comply with policy TR7 (Highway Considerations) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.
10	No development shall take place until full details of both hard and soft landscaping works have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. No dwelling hereby permitted shall be occupied until these works have been carried out in accordance with the approved details and the work shall thereafter be maintained in accordance with the approved details. These details shall include provision to restrict parking on site to three car parking spaces appropriate private turning areas, hard and soft surfacing materials, extent of hard and soft landscaping. Reason: to ensure that parking provision within the site is restricted to three spaces and to comply with policies TR7 and TR16 of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.
11	No development shall take place until details have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority of the positions, design, materials and type of boundary treatment to be erected. The boundary treatment shall be completed before the building(s) hereby permitted are occupied. Development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details. Reason: In the interests of maintaining the amenity value of the area and to comply with policy D1 (Standards of Design) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.
12	No development shall take place until a schedule of landscape maintenance for a minimum period of five years has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The schedule shall include details of the arrangements for its implementation. Development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved schedule. Reason: To ensure satisfactory long-term maintenance of the landscaping of the [site/ development] and to comply with policy D3 (Landscaping) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.
13	No development shall take place until a scheme for the drainage and disposal of surface water from the development hereby approved has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The scheme as approved shall be completed before any [residential] unit hereby permitted is first occupied. 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.

08

Reference Number: P/02455/05 - TCP/22786/B Parish/Name: Newport - Ward/Name: Pan Registration Date: 12/12/2005 - Outline Planning Permission Officer: Miss S Gooch Tel: (01983) 823552 Applicant: Mr & Mrs S Dyer Outline for two maisonettes (revised scheme) land adjacent, 21 and 23, School Lane, Barton, Newport, PO30 The application is recommended for Conditional Permission

REASON FOR COMMITTEE CONSIDERATION

Local Member, Councillor G A Lumley has requested the application be determined by Committee for the following reasons:

1. Overcrowding and overdevelopment of the immediate built environment.

2. Loss of privacy for neighbouring properties on all sides.

3. Lack of reasonably accessible car parking for future occupants, likely to lead to congestion by existing garages.

4. Potential access problems for emergency vehicles due to parking congestion.

1. Details of Application

1.1 This application seeks outline consent for two maisonnettes with external appearance, siting, design and means of access to be considered at this time.

1.2 The proposed block reflects the general design characteristics of the surrounding buildings in terms of size, mass and appearance.

1.3 The application site includes the existing parking area which is shared by the applicant and three other properties accessed off School Lane. The development proposes zero car parking provision with the agent putting forward the following justification:

· Development falls within Zone 3 (0-75% parking)

· Bus stop directly opposite site

· Site is within walking distance of Newport town centre all local amenities and transport modes.

· There are no on-street parking restrictions in the immediate area.

· There is a public car park within 100m of the proposed development. This has 24 hour parking (car park at bottom of Royal Exchange/top of Barton Road adjacent to Barton Primary School).

· There is adequate provision for visitor car parking within the existing parking facilities.

2. Location and Site Characteristics

2.1 Application site relates to an open area of land between numbers 21 and 23 School Lane. Because of the existing layout, the new block would occupy the corner position.

2.2 There is a communal access path some 35 m in length which leads back to the existing parking area and garages.

3. Relevant History

3.1 TCP/22786/A – P/00451/05 – Outline consent sought for two maisonnettes with external appearance, siting, design and means of access to be considered was refused consent in May 2005. Reasons for refusal were standing vehicles in the highway, insufficient parking and first floor window arrangements on eastern elevation.

4. Development Plan Policy

4.1 PPS1 (Delivering Sustainable Development) stresses the need for good design to ensure that spaces and places are attractive, usable and durable for people. Designs which are inappropriate in their context and/or failing to improve the character and quality of an area should not be accepted. Good design should:

· Be integrated into the existing urban form and natural built environment.

· Optimise the potential for site to accommodate development.

· Respond to local context and create and enforce local distinctiveness.

· Be visually attractive as a result of good architecture and appropriate landscaping.

4.2 Planning Policy Guidance Note 3 – Housing.

4.3 In terms of local plan policies, site is within the development envelope as identified on the Newport insert map of the Unitary Development Plan (UDP). Relevant policies of the plan are considered to be as follows:

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

· S6 – All development will be expected to be of a high standard of design.

· S7 – Housing provision on the Isle of Wight.

· G1 – Development envelopes for towns and villages.

· G4 – General locational criteria for development.

· D1 – Standards of design.

· D2 – Standards for development within the site.

· H4 – Unallocated residential development to be restricted to defined settlements.

· H5 – Infill development.

· TR7 – Highway considerations for new development.

· TR16 – Parking policies and guidelines.

5. Consultee and Third Party Comments

5.1 Internal Consultees

The Highway Engineer states: This is a sustainable site with on street parking (Zone 3) an ideal car free site. Comfortable without parking. Recommend conditional approval.

5.2 Neighbours

Five letters have been received from local residents objecting on grounds which can be summarised as follows:

· Reduced parking with concerns relating to garage access and emergency vehicle access.

· Owners of new properties would use the communal path directly in front of existing properties causing more intrusion.

· Proposal is out of character from the existing buildings.

· Proposed maisonettes will block out natural light.

6. Evaluation

6.1 The determining factor with regards to this application is considered to be whether or not the resubmission has overcome the reasons for refusal which lead to the rejection of the identical scheme in May 2005. At that time the reasons for refusal related to concerns over standing vehicles in the highway, insufficient car parking and concerns relating to overlooking from the proposed first floor window in the eastern elevation.

6.2 The current scheme has been submitted following negotiations and discussions with officers. Members should note that on the basis the earlier decision did not raise any concerns with regards to design, style or appearance then it would not be appropriate to raise these matters now.

6.3 Regarding the concerns relating to overlooking, revised plans have now eliminated the first floor eastern window which is now located on the southern side. This is considered to overcome the reasons for refusal in terms of overlooking.

6.4 Concerning the car parking issue applicant has put forward a series of points which is considered to justify no additional parking provision associated with this development. These have been considered by the Highway Engineer who’s only comment is to recommend that a condition be imposed ensuring a pedestrian link to the site.

6.5 In support of the zero car parking provision, Members should note that a recent appeal decision adjacent No. 29 School Lane, for a three bedroomed house, does not carry any requirement for the provision of off road facilities.

6.6 Representations received have raised concerns in respect of proposal being out of character with the immediate locality however, I am of the opinion that the overall design reflects existing 70s style semi-detached properties and would not conflict with the character of the area.

6.7 Whilst objectors mention loss of light as a concern, this is unlikely to be significant owing to the relative positions of the existing and proposed buildings.

7. Conclusion and Justification for Recommendation

7.1 Having given due regard and appropriate weight to all material considerations referred to in this report, it is considered that the resubmission has addressed the reasons that resulted in the earlier refusal. In view of the above the proposal does not conflict with the policies contained within the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.

8. Recommendation

This application is recommended for Conditional Permission.

Conditions/Reasons:

1	The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of 3 years from date of this permission. Reason: To comply with Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.
2	No development shall take place until [samples of materials/details of the materials and finishes, including mortar colour] to be used in the construction of the external surfaces of the development 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 Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.
3	No development shall take place until details have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority of the positions, design, materials and type of boundary treatment to be erected. The boundary treatment shall be completed before the building hereby permitted is occupied. Development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details. Reason: In the interests of maintaining the amenity value of the area and to comply with policy D1 (Standards of Design) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.
4	All materials excavated as a result of general ground works including site levelling, installation of services or the digging of foundations, together with materials and debris from the demolition of the existing garages, shall not be disposed of within the area identified in red on the submitted plans. The materials shall be removed from the site within a timetable to be agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority before work commences. Reason: In the interests of the amenities of the area in general and adjoining residential properties in particular and to comply with policy D1 (Standards of Design) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.
5	The windows to be constructed in the first floor eastern elevation shall be non-opening and obscure glazed, and shall be retained as such thereafter. Reason: To protect the privacy of the neighbouring property and to comply with policy D1 (Standards of Design) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.
6	No building shall be occupied until the means of access thereto for pedestrians has been constructed in accordance with drawing number 1069-02A. Reason: To ensure adequate safe provision of facilities for pedestrians and cyclists wishing to gain access to the site and to comply with policy TR6 (Cycling and Walking) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.

09

Reference Number: P/02581/05 - TCP/12331/A Parish/Name: Wootton - Ward/Name: Wootton Registration Date: 22/12/2005 - Full Planning Permission Officer: Miss L Scovell Tel: (01983) 823552 Applicant: Dr & Mrs Juani Change of use from dwelling to private doctors clinic 49 Station Road, Wootton Bridge, Ryde, PO334RA The application is recommended for Refusal

REASON FOR COMMITTEE CONSIDERATION

Councillor Abraham has requested this application to go to DCSC as it may involve the loss of an Island business and the policy considerations are finely balanced.

1. Details of Application

1.1 This is a full application.

1.2 The proposal comprises a change of use from a dwelling to a private doctor’s clinic. The proposal envisages the use of the ground floor as three waiting rooms, kitchen and w.c. and the use of the first floor as two consultation rooms, office and w.c.

2. Location and Site Characteristics

2.1 The application site consists of a semi-detached three bedroom dwelling with associated parking located in a predominantly residential area within the development envelope of Wootton.

3. Relevant History

None

4. Development Plan Policy

4.1 National policy guidance PPG4: Industrial, Commercial Development and Small Firms states ‘It is now generally recognised that it may not be appropriate to separate industry and commerce-especially small-scale developments-from the residential communities for whom they are a source of employment and services. In areas which are primarily residential, development plan policies should not seek unreasonably to restrict commercial and industrial activities of an appropriate scale-particularly in existing buildings-which would not adversely affect residential amenity. Planning permission should normally be granted unless there are specific and significant objections, such as a relevant development plan policy, unacceptable noise, smell, safety, and health impacts or excessive traffic generation. The fact that an activity differs from the predominant land use in any locality is not sufficient reason, in itself, for refusing planning permission.’

4.2 Site is located within the development envelope of Wootton. Relevant Unitary Development Plan policies are as follows:

G4 – General Locational Criteria for Development

G10 – Existing Surrounding Uses

H8 – Loss of Dwellings – “Development which would lead to the loss of existing dwellings, especially those which are suitable for people not easily able to compete in the existing housing market, will not be permitted unless the new development is a specific proposal of this plan or is considered essential and where equivalent replacement housing will be provided elsewhere.

TR7 – Highway Considerations for New Development

TR16 – Parking Policies and Guidelines

4.3 SPG/SPD/AONB guidance, etc –

None

5. Consultee and Third Party Comments

5.1 Internal Consultees

· The Highways Engineer recommends refusal on the basis of increased traffic generation; unacceptable visibility and lack of turning facilities.

5.2 External Consultees

· None

5.3 Town or Parish Council Comments

· Raised no objections but have concerns over parking in Station Road.

5.4 Neighbours

· None received

6. Evaluation

6.1 The determining factor is policy consideration as to the loss of the existing residential unit. Policy H8 (Loss of Dwellings) is strict in terms of the loss of a dwelling which will be resisted unless replacement housing is provided elsewhere. The application as submitted does not provide for replacement housing or provide for the retention of part of the existing dwelling therefore is contrary to this policy as the result would be the loss of this residential unit. Although PPG4 encourages local planning authorities to support local businesses. It clearly states that consent should only be granted where there are no policy objections to the proposal, which in this case relates to the aforementioned policy, and as such cannot be supported on this basis.

6.2 Generally speaking small scale business use within residential property can be supported where it is of appropriate scale and does not conflict with Policy H8 in that proposal retains some residential accommodation within property. Uses such as chiropractors, physiotherapists and chiropodists can and often do operate within single room within property which allows principal residential use to remain. Such uses can also be important in serving local need within sustainable location.

6.3 Proposal under consideration involves entire loss of residential use incorporating three waiting rooms and kitchen at ground floor level with two consultation rooms and offices above. Furthermore, it is reasonable to assume that proposed use will not fulfil role of providing principally a local service and is likely to involve a wider catchment area.

6.4 Policy H8 advises that loss to the dwellings should be avoided as far as possible and only in exceptional circumstances where an essential development is proposed which is a proposal of the UDP will the loss of existing housing be acceptable. It is not considered that proposal is an essential development in this location which would allow policy consideration to be set aside.

6.5 With regards to highway considerations, gravelled area in front of property offers limited parking and when in use does not afford sufficient space for vehicles to turn thereby entering or leaving the highway in forward gear. In addition, adequate visibility splays cannot be achieved and will therefore have adverse impact on highway safety for traffic using Station Road itself. Finally, Highway Engineer is of the opinion that use of premises as proposed will lead to an increase use of the existing access itself and due to the inadequacy previously mentioned would add unduly to hazards of highway users. As a result the Highway Engineer cannot support proposal.

7. Conclusion and Justification for Recommendation

7.1 Having given due regard and appropriate weight to all material considerations the proposed development is unacceptable and contrary to policy H8 of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.

8. Recommendation

This application is recommended for Refusal.

Reasons:

1	The proposal will result in the loss of a residential unit contrary to policy H8 (Loss of dwellings) of the Isle of Wight adopted Unitary Development Plan.
2	The proposed development would be likely to lead to increased use of the existing access to the classified road – Station Road, Wootton and would add unduly to the hazards of highway users and would therefore be contrary to policy TR7 (Highway Considerations for New Development) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.
3	The access is unsatisfactory to serve the proposed development by reason of unacceptable visibility and would therefore be contrary to policy TR7 (Highway Considerations for New Development) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.
4	The proposal does not provide adequate facilities to enable vehicles to turn on the site and so enter and leave the highway in a forward gear and therefore the interests of road safety are compromised and would therefore be contrary to policy TR7 (Highway Considerations for New Development) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.

10

Reference Number: P/00037/06 - TCP/23809/E Parish/Name: Bembridge - Ward/Name: Bembridge North Registration Date: 06/01/2006 - Full Planning Permission Officer: Mr D Long Tel: (01983) 823552 Applicant: Mr K Gems Detached house with parking & alterations to vehicular access site of derelict garage, south of 1-8 Bembridge House, Kings Road, Bembridge, PO35 The application is recommended for Conditional Permission

REASON FOR COMMITTEE CONSIDERATION

The Local Member, Councillor Piggot has requested that the application go before the Development Control Committee as she is concerned that the site is on a dangerous bend which could cause a detrimental impact to highway safety. There is also concern that the site has insufficient space for a car to turn and leave the site in a forward gear.

1. Details of Application

1.1 This is a full application.

1.2 The proposal comprises a two storey detached dwelling, accommodating three bedrooms, lounge and kitchen. The house is set on a plot accommodating a turning area and landscaped garden, with access off Kings Road to the north.

2. Location and Site Characteristics

2.1 The site is set within the development envelope of Bembridge, accessed off Kings Road. The site is of an unlevel topography, sloping down to Embankment Road to north.

2.2 The site is currently a mixture of unmaintained ground and a concrete hardstanding which formally sited a workshop. There is a mature tree lined boundary to the south and east of the site which adjoins a larger housing development site known as ‘The Ruskins’ and the rear domestic curtilage belonging to a dwelling known as ‘Woodpecker’. The rear of the site slopes up to this domestic curtilage. The adjoining neighbour on the northern boundary is a commercial car dealer. This building is single storey in nature, having a blank wall on the northern elevation. Due to the topography of the site, this building is located at a lower gradient than the proposed house.

3. Relevant History

3.1 Three previous applications seeking residential development refused in 2001 and twice in 2002, principally on highway issues.

3.2 Reference P/02296/03 – Demolition of workshop; construction of detached house; alterations to vehicular access. Application was refused for the following reasons:

· The formation and use of additional access to the classified road would add unduly to highway users by virtue of alignment and limited forward visibility.

· The access is unsatisfactory to serve the proposed development by reason of inadequate visibility.

· The information accompanying this application is inadequate and deficient in detail in respect of the trees within the site and adjacent woodland.

4. Development Plan Policy

4.1 National Planning Policy Guidance notes relevant to this determination are as follows:

· PPG3 (Housing) – recommends that development should make efficient use of brownfield land.

4.2 The relevant Unitary Development Plan Policies relevant to this determination are as follows:

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

· S2 – Development will be encouraged on land which has been previously developed. (Brownfield sites)

· S6 – All development will be expected to be of a high standard of design

· S7 – Meeting the housing stock over the planned period.

· G1 – Development Envelopes

· G4 – General Locational Criteria

· D1 – Standards of Design

· D2 – Standards of Development with the Site

· H1 – New Development within main Island Towns

· C12 – Development Affecting Trees and Woodland

· TR7 – Highway Considerations for New Development

5. Consultee and Third Party Comments

5.1 Internal Consultees

· The Highways Authority recommend conditional approval.

· The Countryside Department raises no objection, as the siting of the dwelling and associated access will not have detrimental impact to the protected tree on the adjoining site. Scheme is considered to be an improvement on the current situation allowing improved filtration for roots.

· The Environmental Health Department recommend conditional approval, requiring a land contamination survey to include remediation measures.

5.2 External Consultees

· None relevant.

5.3 Parish Council Comments

· Bembridge Parish Council recommend refusal due to the dangerous access, being contrary to Policy TR7 of the Unitary Development Plan. The site is on a dangerous bend and has been refused on several occasions previously. The recent introduction of a ‘slow’ sign and yellow lines indicate the general concern of Highways.

5.4 Neighbours

There have been three letters of objection to this application. Their comments can be summarised as follows:

· The visibility on Kings Road is poor and is of concern. The access will create hazards to motorists and pedestrians.

· The parcel of land cannot accommodate any dwelling.

· The dwelling would cause adverse impacts with regards to noise.

· The boundary of the site contains a number of trees, which overhang the parcel of land. The applicant has failed to mention this within the application form.

· There will be a loss of visual amenity, being unsightly when entering Bembridge.

6. Evaluation

6.1 The main issues relating to this application are:

· The principle development

· Previous planning history

· The design and impact to surrounding amenities

· Highway considerations

· The impact on trees.

6.2 The parcel of land is within the development envelope. It is a brownfield site, having previous contained workshop building. Although representation from third parties has indicated that there is error with the description and the previous uses, this is not directly relevant to the determination process. Developing such sites is regarded to be of high importance at both national and local policy level, therefore the principle of development should be accepted.

6.3 As referred to in section 3.1, the application has already been refused on a number of issues. I must remind Members however that those issues did not question the principle of development on this site. The basis of that refusal was on highway and tree issues. The determination by Members should be on the basis of Section 6.5 and 6.6 of the report and not over the principle of the development.

6.4 The design of the dwelling is of a suitable standard to reflect that of the varying architectural styles and character within the area. The design will not affect the visual amenities or prevailing pattern of development within the area but will actually tidy the site. Property will be sited in such a position to respect neighbouring land uses. The principle windows have been placed at ground floor or face the road frontage. The rear of the property will face the curtilage of Woodpecker but the only windows facing into this curtilage will be a small bedroom and bathroom window. By reason of the distances involved and the arrangement of curtilage there will be no reasonable impact of overlooking or loss of privacy. The residential units to the north of the site have also been respected. There are no principle windows facing in this direction to cause a loss of privacy or overlooking. The amenity space for the prospective occupants is considered sufficient for a three bed dwelling.

6.5 It is apparent from planning history (reference P/02296/03) that the original access which was positioned further north of the current proposal was unacceptable due to a lack of visibility, detrimental to highway safety. Cars entering the site could be in danger from a rear end shunt from other highway users travelling along Kings Road. The current application has moved the access in a southerly direction in order to remove this highway problem. With regards to the current scheme the Highway Engineer is in a position to recommend conditional approval as the revision has overcome any highway safety concerns. Design Bulletin 32 contains a table of stopping distances in relation to vehicular speeds (figure 103 page 51). These distances are based on typical stopping distances found in the Highway Code but are not adjusted to allow for weather conditions or gradients. The Highway Code indicates that a 30 mph road should have clear visibility of 23 metres. The Highway Engineer has accounted for the gradient and adverse weather conditions and reviewed Design Bulletin 32. It is clear to see that on site there is over 70 metres visibility of any car stopping and entering into the site, being over the national standard by a significant amount. Photographic survey confirms acceptable visibility. This revision in plan is therefore accepted by the Highways Authority as being appropriate and safe for its use. The Local Member has also raised concern that the turning area is not sufficient for vehicles to enter and leave in a forward gear. The Highway Engineer confirms that the turning area is in line with standard design guidance and would allow for two vehicles to park and enter and leave the site in a forward gear.

6.6 The initial application was also refused due to insufficient information on the impact of trees. The house was positioned under the crown spread of a number of trees in the southern corner of the site. This would have resulted in the compaction of roots detrimental to the long term survival of the trees. The revision has moved the house into the northern corner of the site being well outside the crown spread of any trees. Comment from the Tree Officer has indicated that there will be no impact to the trees but will actually be an improvement in comparison to the existing situation, whereby the concrete slab will be removed and replaced by an element of soft landscaping. This will allow for greater filtration of water into the root system. There is an element of hardstanding for the cars but should Members decide to approve this application a condition will be applied through a hard and soft landscaping scheme to allow for permeable paviours to be used as a surface treatment. There is currently one standing tree within the site but this is of no visual merit and is proposed to be removed. The tree is not worthy of protection, no objection to its removal is raised by the Tree Officer.

7. Conclusion and Justification for Recommendation

7.1 It is clear from the planning history that the access was not acceptable and would cause adverse impact to highway safety. The application though did not dispute the principle of development on this brownfield site. The revision in plan has moved the access into a safe position and is fully supported by the Highway Engineer. The position, design, scale and mass of the dwelling is in a suitable position to protect the visual amenities, character and setting of the area and will also protect neighbouring amenities. There will also be no reasonable impact to trees, but will actually be an improvement to the current situation, thus ensuring the long term survival. It is the Local Planning Authority’s opinion that all the reasons detailed for refusal in the last planning application have been sufficiently overcome to recommend conditional approval. Having regard to all the material evidence it is the Local Planning Authority’s opinion that the application is in accordance with national and local policies contained within the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.

8. Recommendation

The application is recommended for Conditional Permission.

Conditions/Reasons:

1	The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of 3 years from date of this permission. Reason: To comply with Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.
2	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 development within Classes A to E of Part 1 of Schedule 2 to that Order shall be carried out [other than that expressly authorised by this permission]. Reason: To retain sufficient outside amenity space for perspective occupants and to comply with policies D1 (Standards of Design) and D2 (Standards of Development Within the Site) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.
3	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 windows/dormer windows (other than those expressly authorised by this permission) shall be constructed. Reason: In order to protect levels of privacy and overlooking to adjacent land users and to comply with policy D1 (Standards of Design) of Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.
4	No development shall take place until details of the materials and finishes, including mortar colour to be used in the construction of the external surfaces of the development 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 Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.
5	No development shall take place until details have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority of the positions, design, materials and type of boundary treatment to be erected. The boundary treatment shall be submitted before development commences on site and shall be erected before occupation. Development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details. Reason: In the interests of maintaining the amenity value of the area and to comply with policy D1 (Standards of Design) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.
6	No building shall be occupied until the means of vehicular access thereto has been constructed in accordance with the approved plans. Reason: To ensure adequate access to the proposed development and to comply with policy D1 (Standards of Design) and TR7 (Highway Considerations for New Development) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.
7	Notwithstanding the provisions of any Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development Order) Act 1995 (or any Order revoking or re-enacting that Order), no gates shall be erected without prior written approval of the Local Planning Authority. Reason: In the interests of highway safety and to comply with policy TR7 (Highway Considerations for New Development) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.
8	The dwelling hereby permitted shall not be occupied until space has been laid out within the site in accordance with drawing number 0113153A for 2 cars to be parked and for vehicles to turn so that they may enter and leave the site in forward gear. The space shall not thereafter be used for any purpose other than that approved in accordance with this condition. Reason: In the interests of highway safety and to comply with policy TR7 (Highway Considerations) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.
9	No development shall take place until full details of both hard and soft landscape works have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority and these works shall be carried out as approved. These details shall include proposed finished levels or contours; means of enclosure; car parking layouts and hard surfacing materials. Reason: To ensure the appearance of the development is satisfactory and to comply with policy D3 (Landscaping) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.
10	No part of the development hereby permitted shall commence until there has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority: a) A desk-top study documenting all previous and existing land uses of the site and adjacent land in accordance with national guidance as set out in Contaminated Land Research Report Nos. 2 & 3 and BS10175: 2001; and, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority, b) a site investigation report documenting the ground conditions of the site and incorporating chemical and gas analysis identified as appropriate by the desk-top study in accordance with BS10175: 2001 – “Investigation of Potentially Contaminated Sites – Code of Practice”; and, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority, c) a remediation scheme to deal with any contaminant including an implementation timetable, monitoring proposals and a remediation verification methodology. The verification methodology shall include a sampling and analysis programme to confirm the adequacy of decontamination and an appropriately qualified person shall oversee the implementation of all remediation.
11	The construction of buildings shall not commence until the investigator has provided a report, which shall include confirmation that all remediation measures have been carried out fully in accordance with the scheme. The report shall also include results of the verification programme of post-remediation sampling and monitoring in order to demonstrate that the required remediation has been fully met. Future monitoring proposals and reporting shall also be detailed in the report. 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.

11

Reference Number: P/00130/06 - TCP/20250/B Parish/Name: East Cowes - Ward/Name: East Cowes North Registration Date: 18/01/2006 - Full Planning Permission Officer: Mr A White Tel: (01983) 823552 Applicant: Cromwell Country Homes Ltd Detached building providing four flats adjacent existing property; vehicular access and parking/turning area (revised scheme) 49 Cambridge Road, East Cowes, PO326AH The application is recommended for Conditional Permission

REASON FOR COMMITTEE CONSIDERATION

This report has been requested by the Local Member, Councillor M Webster, as she is concerned about the cumulative impact of development in the area.

1. Details of Application

1.1 Full planning permission is sought for a block of four flats fronting onto Cambridge Road. The submitted plans indicate that the building would be three storey adjacent No. 49 Cambridge Road stepping down to 2.5 storey adjacent No. 47. The proposed building would step down to single storey to the rear, but with a bedroom incorporated within a steep pitched roof. Plans show a 3 metre wide gap between the development and No. 49, with this gap providing vehicular access to a communal parking area of eight spaces to the rear.

1.2 In terms of the level of accommodation proposed, three of the four flats would offer one bedroom and a study although in real terms the study could be utilised as a second bedroom. The fourth flat would be situated in the single storey wing to the rear and would comprise of one bedroom within the roofspace.

1.3 The proposed design is individual and does not seek to impose a particular architectural style or taste, although overall proportions can be related to the verticality of nearby Victorian architecture. The placement of windows and the proposed use of aluminium powder coated frames adds a contemporary twist to the proposed design.

1.4 A densely planted border and new 1.8m fence is to be installed along the rear of the three parking bays that back onto the boundary with No. 47 to reduce any impact on that property.

1.5 Whilst the 5.5m garden immediately behind the fourth flat is to be reserved for that occupant the land beyond the parking area is defined as a communal garden.

2. Location and Site Characteristics

2.1 Application site is rectangular in shape and currently comprises of an imposing three storey semi-detached Victorian house with a large side and rear garden. Site sits slightly higher than Cambridge Road and rises gently through to the rear boundary which is shared with Solent View Caravan Park.

2.2 The north west boundary is shared with No. 47 Cambridge Road and comprises of a 1.2 metre high hedge, with a 1.8 metre high panelled fence along the rear boundary.

2.3 The area is characterised by dwellings of varying ages, although there is a strong Victorian influence, and includes a number of three storey properties.

3. Relevant History

3.1 P/01747/05 – TCP/20250/A – Detached building providing four flats; alterations to vehicular access and formation of parking and turning area – refused December 2005 on following grounds:

· Overdevelopment creating conditions likely to give rise to loss of outlook whilst also being of an overbearing nature to the detriment of the amenities currently enjoyed by occupants of 47 Cambridge Road.

· Overall size and proportions would be an intrusive development out of scale and character with the prevailing pattern of development in the locality.

· The rear section comprising flat 1 would, by reason of excessive depth, height and position close to the northern boundary of the site, be an intrusive and un-neighbourly addition.

· The proposed parking area by reason of its likely level of use together with the position close to boundaries of the site would result in an unacceptable degree of disturbance to the detriment of amenities currently enjoyed by adjoining property occupiers.

4. Development Plan Policy

4.1 National Policy Guidance

PPS1 (Delivering Sustainable Development) emphasises the following:

· Good design to ensure attractive, usable and durable and adaptable places contributing positively to making places better for people.

· Good design should:

o Be integrated into the existing urban form and natural built environment.

o Optimise the potential of the site to accommodate development

o Respond to local context and create and enforce local distinctiveness.

o Be visually attractive as a result of good architecture and appropriate landscaping.

It is stressed that Local Planning Authorities should not attempt to impose architectural styles or particular tastes and should not stifle innovation, originality or initiative through unsubstantiated requirements to conform to certain developments or forms or styles.

PPG3 (Housing) emphasises the following:

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

· Give priority to reusing previously developed land in urban areas taking pressures off Greenfield sites.

· Create a more sustainable pattern of development ensuring accessibility to public transport, jobs, education etc.

· Make more efficient use of land by adopting appropriate densities with 30-50 units per hectare quoted as being the appropriate level of density.

· Emphasise the need for good quality design.

· New housing development should not be viewed in isolation but should have regard to immediate buildings in the wider locality.

4.2 Site is within the development envelope boundary for East Cowes as identified on the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan (UDP). The following policies of the UDP are considered to be relevant:

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

· S6 – All development will be expected to be of a high standard of design.

· G1 – Development Envelopes

· G4 – General Location Criteria

· D1 – Standards of Design

· D2 – Standards for Development within the site

· D3 – Landscaping

· H4 – Unallocated Residential Development

· H5 – Infill Development

· TR7 – Highway Considerations for New Development

· TR16 – Parking Policies and Guidelines

· U11 – Infrastructure and Services Provision

4.3 Reference is also made to the Housing Needs Survey which identifies, among other needs, a demand for smaller two and three bedroom homes.

4.4 The site is located within Parking Zone 2 of the UDP where parking provision is 0-50% of the non-operational requirement is applicable.

5. Consultee and Third Party Comments

5.1 Internal Consultees

Highway Engineer recommends conditional permission.

5.2 Others

Five letters received from local residents, including the owner of the adjoining property at 47 Cambridge Road, objecting on grounds which can be summarised as follows:

· Previous reasons for refusal have not been overcome.

· Inappropriate design – out of character

· Loss of light and privacy, particularly proposed flat 1 in relation to No 47 Cambridge Road.

· No need for flats – flats also inappropriate for Cambridge Road.

· Unsatisfactory garden would be retained by host property.

· Hazardous access.

· Extra burden on services including drainage.

· Soakaways are inappropriate.

· Impact on wildlife.

6. Evaluation

6.1 The determining factors in respect of this application are as follows:

· Principle

· Scale and mass

· Design

· Impact on neighbouring property occupiers.

· Access

· Drainage

6.2 Site is within the development envelope for East Cowes and is regarded as a brownfield site given its status as a residential garden. Accordingly, the principle of developing this site for residential purposes is considered to be acceptable, subject to it meeting other criteria. Similarly, there is no underlying policy reason why flats should not be permitted in this location. In this respect, attention is drawn to a recently allowed appeal for flats on the corner of Old Road and Cambridge Road as well as the Housing Needs Survey which confirms that the greatest need is for smaller residential units. The main consideration is whether the size of building required to accommodate four flats is acceptable in this context, both in terms of the likely impact on neighbours and within the established street scene. It is also necessary to consider whether the development would allow for sufficient amenity space and living conditions for its future occupants, without causing disamenity to other surrounding properties.

6.3 Application site comprises of a 12 metre wide gap between an imposing three storey Victorian residence (No. 49) and a two storey 1930s style detached house (No. 47). The eaves level of No. 49 is approximately 4 metres higher than No. 47. Taking due account of this difference in height has been challenging and the previous application failed to establish a suitable transition, hence one of the reasons for refusal. The revised scheme makes provision for a three storey element adjacent No. 49 with a gap of some 3.3 metres in between buildings and a step down of some 2 metres at eaves height; with a 2.5 storey element adjacent No. 47 with a 2.3 metre gap in between buildings and a step down at eaves level of approximately 1 metre which is more or less reflective of the change in gradient along Cambridge Road. It is considered that the reduction in height compared to the revised scheme (approximately 1.4 metres) coupled with the step down from 3 to 2.5 storey would result in a building that would not compete or be dwarfed by No. 49 whilst not appearing excessive in relation to No. 47. The roof of the three storey element is now shown to be hipped rather than gabled as refused, therefore reducing its prominence and overall mass in the street scene. Taking the above points into consideration, it is considered that the proposed development complies with criterion B and C of Policy D1 which state that new development must be sympathetic in scale and shall be of a height and mass which is compatible with surrounding buildings.

6.4 The design is neither a pastiche or overly contemporary, but does offer an individual and interesting solution to the challenge of achieving four flats on this brownfield site. Overall proportions are vertical and partly reflective of nearby Victorian buildings, whilst the limited use of timber boarding, glass blocks and corner windows add a contemporary twist to the design. Overall, it is considered that the proposal would fit comfortably into this mixed residential area and therefore complies with Policy D1.

6.5 Plans confirm that one of the proposed ground floor flats would have its own private amenity space, whilst the remaining three would share a communal garden to the rear. The existing house at No. 49 would be left with a 35 metre long garden, albeit partly severed by its proposed parking area. Three of the four flats would have a relatively open front aspect, whilst the fourth flat to the rear would face into its own rear garden area. Accordingly, it is considered that both the existing and proposed properties would enjoy an acceptable level of amenity.

6.6 In terms of the impact on neighbouring property occupiers, it is mainly the single storey element containing proposed flat 1 that would project beyond the rear wall of the objector at No. 47. The refused scheme indicated a long projection under a steep gabled roof, whereas the proposal shows a reduced length under a hipped roof. Such changes, coupled with the distance of some 2.5 metres between the single storey element and the common boundary with No. 47, lead your officers to the conclusion that the impact of this part of the development would not have an unduly over dominant affect on the occupier of No. 47. The only first floor window facing towards the rear garden of No. 47 is shown to serve a stairwell and therefore can be fitted with fixed shut obscure glass. The Proposed ground floor windows would be shielded from No. 47 by the newly erected boundary fencing. One other reason for refusing the previous application related to disturbance caused by vehicular activity in the proposed car park to the rear of No. 49 and the proposed development. The proposed layout now indicates a 1.8 metre high close boarded fence to be erected between the car park and the garden to No. 47 as well as an area of dense planting between such fencing and the car park. Such measures would help to reduce light pollution as well as reducing any noise created by vehicular activity. Accordingly, it is felt that the revised scheme has satisfactorily addressed previous reasons relating to the impact of this development on the occupants of adjoining properties.

6.7 In terms of highway implications, the Council’s Highway Engineer is satisfied that the site can be adequately accessed without adding to the hazards of other highway users. The proposed parking area makes provision for eight spaces to serve the proposed development and the existing property at No. 49 as well as allowing for a sufficient turning facility. Accordingly, the proposal is consistent with the requirements of Policy TR7. Proposed parking provision amounts to one parking space per flat plus a single visitor space and three spaces for the large Victorian property No. 49. Such parking provision is considered to be acceptable and compliant with Policy TR16.

6.8 In terms of drainage, the recently approved development on the corner of Cambridge Road and Old Road indicated that sufficient capacity does exist within the existing system. Furthermore, the applicant has approached Southern Water who confirm that the main drain within Cambridge Road is more than capable of accommodating four additional units on this site. Members may, however, wish to consider the imposition of a condition in this respect to ensure that appropriate measures are in place prior to work commencing on site. Concerns relating to the suitability of soakaways can be controlled under the Building Regulations. Accordingly, your officers are satisfied that adequate infrastructure exists in order to provide for this development meaning that Policy U11 is satisfied in this respect.

7. Conclusion and Justification for Recommendation

7.1 Having given due regard and appropriate weight to the material considerations outlined in this report, it is considered that the proposed development comprising of four flats would make efficient use of this brownfield site without resulting in cramped development in the street scene or impacting unacceptably on the amenities currently enjoyed by neighbouring property occupiers. The proposed design, subject to strict control over materials to be used, is considered to be in keeping within this mixed residential area. Accordingly, proposal complies with both national and local policies.

8. Recommendation

This application is recommended for Conditional Permission.

Conditions/Reasons:

1	The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of 3 years from date of this permission. Reason: To comply with Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.
2	No development shall take place until samples of materials and finishes to be used in the construction of the external surfaces of the development 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 Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.
3	No development shall take place until details have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority of the positions, design, materials and type of boundary treatment to be erected. The boundary treatment shall be completed before the flats hereby permitted are occupied in accordance with a timetable agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority. Development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details. Reason: In the interests of maintaining the amenity value of the area and to comply with policy D1 (Standards of Design) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.
4	No development shall take place until full details of both hard and soft landscape works have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority and these works shall be carried out as approved. These details shall include [proposed finished levels or contours; means of enclosure; car parking layouts; other vehicle and pedestrian access and circulation areas; hard surfacing materials; minor artefacts and structures (e.g. furniture, play equipment, refuse or other storage units, signs, lighting, etc); proposed and existing functional services above and below ground (e.g. drainage power, communications cables, pipelines, etc, indicating lines, manholes, supports, etc); retained historic landscape features and proposals for restoration, where relevant]. Reason: To ensure the appearance of the development is satisfactory and to comply with policy D3 (Landscaping) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.
5	No development shall take place until there has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority a scheme of landscaping, which shall include indications of all existing trees and hedgerows on the land, and details of any to be retained, together with measures for their protection in the course of development. Reason: To ensure the appearance of the development is satisfactory and to comply with policy D3 (Landscaping) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.
6	All planting, seeding or turfing comprised in the approved details of landscaping shall be carried out in the first planting and seeding seasons following the occupation of the buildings or the completion of the development, whichever is the sooner, and any trees or plants which within a period of 5 years from the completion of the development die, are removed or become seriously damaged or diseased shall be replaced in the next planting season with others of similar size and species, unless the Local Planning Authority gives written consent to any variation. Reason: To ensure the appearance of the development is satisfactory and to comply with policy D3 (Landscaping) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.
7	The window in the north elevation identified yellow on the submitted plan shall be fitted with obscure glass with a glass panel which has been rendered obscure as part of its manufacturing process to Pilkington Glass Classification 5 (or equivalent of glass if supplied by alternative manufacturer) and shall be retained to this specification as obscured glazed hereafter as well as being fixed shut at all times. Reason: In the interest of the amenities and privacy of neighbouring property occupiers and to comply with policy D1 (Standards of Design) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.
8	No later than one month after the day on which the flats hereby permitted are first occupied or the access hereby permitted is first used (whichever is the earlier) the existing access to the site from Cambridge Road shall be permanently closed in accordance with details which have been submitted to and 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 Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.
9	The flats hereby permitted shall not be occupied until four covered cycle spaces and a bin storage area have been provided in accordance with a scheme to be submitted to and agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Such facilities shall be retained thereafter. Reason: To promote alternative and sustainable modes of transport and in the interests of the amenities of future occupants of this development and to comply with policies D1 (Standards of Design), TR6 (Cycling and Walking) and TR16 (Parking Policies and Guidelines) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.
10	No flat hereby permitted shall be occupied until space has been laid out within the site and drained and surfaced in accordance with details that have been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority in writing for 8 cars to be parked and for vehicles to turn so that they may enter and leave the site in forward gear. The space shall not thereafter be used for any purpose other than that approved in accordance with this condition. Reason: In the interests of highway safety and to comply with policy TR7 (Highway Considerations) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.
11	Development shall not commence on the flats hereby permitted until details of the proposed finish floor level including a fixed point outside of the site have been submitted to and agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Development shall only proceed in accordance with the agreed details. Reason: In the interests of the amenities of the area and to comply with policy D1 (Standards of Design) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.

12

Reference Number: P/00164/06 - TCP/27488 Parish/Name: Newport - Ward/Name: Carisbrooke East Registration Date: 23/01/2006 - Full Planning Permission Officer: Miss S Gooch Tel: (01983) 823552 Applicant: Mr S Wratten Demolition of garage; proposed end of terrace house; vehicular access 8 Westmill Road, Newport, PO305RG The application is recommended for Conditional Permission

REASON FOR COMMITTEE CONSIDERATION

The Local Member, Councillor D Whitaker, has requested that this application is considered by the Development control Committee for the following reasons:

1. Development is out of character with the prevailing pattern of the area.

2. Inappropriate scale and mass of the resultant terrace.

3. Problems of surface water running off Carisbrooke Meadows, resulting in problems for proposed building.

1. Details of Application

1.1 Full planning permission is sought for the erection of a two storey end of terrace house, adjacent 8 Westmill Road. The proposed dwelling would have a depth of 7.5 metres a width of 5 metres with a hipped roof to a height of 6.8 metres. Internal accommodation would comprise of a lounge, kitchen and down stairs w.c. with three bedrooms and bathroom at first floor level.

1.2 The bulk, scale and massing of the proposed dwelling would mirror the existing semi-detached houses within Westmill Road, the only difference being a vertical rather than horizontal emphasis on the window arrangements.

1.3 To compensate for the loss of the garage and driveway parking, plans show creation of a new single space in the front garden of No 8. Plans show new dwelling to have space for two cars on its driveway.

1.4 Scheme also shows removal of Willow tree and hedge across frontage.

2. Location and Site Characteristics

2.1 The site lies within the built up area, at the eastern end of a pair of semi-detached dwellings. The immediate surroundings are characterised by generally semi-detached properties and bungalows whilst further west there are examples of terraced houses, all of which are built in different styles and periods. Many of the properties have single flat roofed garages located to the side linked to the neighbouring property’s garage. Some of the properties in this area have previously been extended.

2.2 Application site is situated in close proximity with the junction of Westmill Road and Kitbridge Road. The site is an irregular shaped piece of ground measuring 16.5 metres in length by 8.6 metres at its widest point at the front tapering down to a width of 4.5 metres at the rear. It is currently occupied by the garage to No 8 (which is to be demolished) and also encapsulates approximately half of the garden area.

2.3 North of application site is the newly developed Carisbrooke Meadows, Persimmon Homes.

3. Relevant History

3.1 There is no relevant planning history which relates to the application site.

4. Development Plan Policy

4.1 National Policy Guidance

PPG3 (Housing) stresses the need to make efficient use of land, but states that this should not be at the expense of cramped development, prejudicial to the surrounding environment. Whilst advocating high densities, it is stressed that good design is key in order to create alternative high quality living environments in which people choose to live and work.

4.2 The Isle of Wight Unitary Development (UDP) identifies the application site is being within the development envelope boundary for Newport, no other specific policy designation applies. Relevant UDP Policies are as follows:

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

· S6 – All development will be expected to be of a high standard of design.

· G1 – Development Envelopes for Towns and Villages.

· G4 – General Locational Criteria for Development

· D1 – Standards of Design

· D2 – Standards for Development within the Site

· D3 - Landscaping

· H4 – Unallocated Residential Development to be Restricted to Defined Settlements

· H5 – Infill Development

· TR7 – Highway Considerations for New Development

· TR16 – Infrastructure and Services Provision

· U11 – Infrastructure and Services

4.3 The application site is within parking zone 3 of the UDP where parking provision is 0-75% of the non-operational requirement. The maximum requirement in respect of residential development is one space per bedroom.

5. Consultee and Third Party Comments

5.1 Internal Consultees

· Highway Engineer recommends conditions if approved.

5.2 Third Party/Neighbours

· One letter of objection has been received. The points raised can be summarised as follows:

o Adverse impact on layout/density of the area and will be compromised in the compression of housing original design.

o Concern on available parking and due to its close proximity to the junction of Westmill Road and Kitbridge Road concerns on highway safety.

o Proposal in terms of design and appearance does not reflect other surrounding properties.

6. Evaluation

6.1 The application site is within the development envelope for Newport, therefore the principle of a new dwelling is considered acceptable providing the issues set out below are satisfied.

6.2 I am satisfied the site is of adequate size to accommodate development compatible with the surroundings without detracting from the amenities of the area or of neighbouring properties. In particular, site is of adequate width to accommodate building of similar proportions to the applicant’s property and whilst creating a terrace of three dwellings, this would not be out of keeping with the general pattern of development in the area.

6.3 When viewing properties along Westmill Road and Kitbridge Road, the character of the wider area is extremely varied in type, design and age of development. In this context, I do not consider that the creation of a terrace of three dwellings would conflict with the character of the area.

6.4 The proposed dwellinghouse would be virtually identical in terms of design to the existing semi-detached properties; the only difference in design would be the window proportions, which display a more vertical emphasis. Overall I am of the opinion that the design of the proposed dwelling is appropriate for its location and would be visually acceptable within the street scene.

6.5 Whilst I note the introduction of this end of terraced house would bring it closer to the site boundary, it would not be right on the boundary and I do not consider its siting would be harmful to the surroundings. Although there would be a more spacious feel on the west side of the terrace, I do not consider that there is any need in townscape terms for this to be replicated on the south side. In my opinion, there is a sufficient gap to the adjoining pair of semi-detached houses, which are sited away from the boundary, to avoid the dwellings appearing cramped.

6.6 In my opinion the proposed garden area would likely be adequate to cater for the needs and expectations of a family given its size and is consequently comparative to those in the locality.

6.7 In terms of impact on neighbouring properties, proposal is of sufficient distance away and set slightly forward to 6 Westmill Road. The first floor elevation window on the flank wall serves a stairwell and consequently raises no concern about overlooking of the neighbouring dwelling to the east.

6.8 The submitted plans show that the existing and proposed dwellings would each have a single parking space, driveways onto Westmill Road. This is an acceptable level of provision to the Highway Engineer.

6.9 Plans indicate the removal of a Willow tree and hedge along southern boundary however these are not protected and whilst of some little amenity value are not considered so significant that it would justify refusal on these grounds alone.

6.10 In terms of drainage, surface water will be disposed of in the form of soakaways and foul water will be connected to an existing sewer and therefore the proposal is consistent with the requirements of Policy U11. The reference to drainage concerns at Carisbrooke Park is noted and I am aware of concerns on part of the estate but not immediately adjacent this site.

7. Conclusion and Justification for Recommendation

7.1 Having given due regard and appropriate weight to all materials considerations outline in this report, it is considered that the application site is of sufficient size to accommodate an end of terrace dwelling without being detrimental to the amenities or privacy of neighbouring occupiers or the character and appearance of the area in general. The scale, mass and design of the proposed dwelling are considered to be appropriate for this residential area with no resultant hazards to other highway users. Accordingly, the proposal is consistent with the objectives of the UDP.

8. Recommendation

This application is recommended for Conditional Permission.

Conditions/Reasons:

1	The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of 3 years from date of this permission. Reason: To comply with Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.
2	Notwithstanding details submitted on Drawing No. 06-086-02 Rev. B. The materials to be used in the construction of the external surfaces of the dwelling hereby permitted shall match those of the adjoining property (No. 8 Westmill Road). Reason: In the interests of the amenities of the area and to comply with policy D1 (Standards of Design) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.
3	No development shall take place until details have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority of the positions, design, materials and type of boundary treatment to be erected. The boundary treatment shall be completed before the building hereby permitted is occupied. Development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details. Reason: In the interests of maintaining the amenity value of the area and to comply with policy D1 (Standards of Design) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.
4	No development shall take place until further details of both hard and soft landscape works have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. These works shall be carried out as approved prior to the occupation of the building hereby permitted. Such a scheme shall specify the position, species and size of any trees and shrubs to be planted along with the timing of such planting and shall include provision for their maintenance during the first five years from the date of planting. Reason: To ensure the appearance of the development is satisfactory and to comply with policy D3 (Landscaping) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.
5	All materials excavated as a result of general ground works, including site leveling, installation of services or the digging of foundations, shall not be disposed of within the area identified in red on the submitted plans. The materials shall be removed from the site prior to the construction of the building proceeding beyond damp proof course level or such other timescale to be agreed with the Local Planning Authority. Reason: In the interest of the amenities of the area and to comply with policy D1 (Standards of Design) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.
6	The dwelling hereby approved shall not be occupied until the means of vehicular access and parking facilities for both the existing property and the proposed dwelling have been constructed in accordance with the approved plan (No. 06-086-02 Rev. B) Reason: To ensure adequate access to the proposed development and to comply with policy D1 (Standards of Design) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.

13

Reference Number: P/00191/06 - TCP/27119/A Parish/Name: Freshwater - Ward/Name: Freshwater Norton Registration Date: 24/01/2006 - Full Planning Permission Officer: Mr S Wiltshire Tel: (01983) 823552 Applicant: Mr R Moore Single storey extension to enlarge workshop; external covered work area; internal alterations to form office/showroom; construction of detached building to form garage workshop & MOT servicing bay (Mill Road Garage); proposed improvements to junction of Gas Works Lane and Main Road, (revised scheme) Buzzard Marine International, Saltern Wood Quay, Gasworks Lane, Norton, Yarmouth, PO410SE The application is recommended for Refusal

REASON FOR COMMITTEE CONSIDERATION

Councillor Sutton has requested that this application is considered by the Development Control Committee due to the local employment issues which this application raises.

1. Details of Application

1.1 This planning application comprises two elements; a single storey extension, canopy and internal alterations to the Buzzard Marine workshop located on the north side of the access road, and the erection of a detached building to form a garage workshop and MOT servicing bay to be located on the south side of the access road.

1.2 The proposed extension would be located on the western side of the existing Buzzard Marine workshop building on an area of concrete hardstanding, currently used as an outside working area. The extension would have a depth of 7.8 metres, a width of 12.4 metres and incorporate a monopitch roof to a maximum height of 4.3 metres. The proposed canopy roof would provide a covered steel framed outside working area adjacent to the northern elevation of the building, and would have a depth of 5.0 metres and width of 10.8 metres, with a profiled metal sheet roof. The proposed extensions would allow internal alterations to be made to the building to provide an increased showroom area as well as a workshop/storage area. In addition, external alterations are proposed to provide additional windows to the showroom area and timber boarding to replace some of the existing concrete panels.

1.3 The proposed garage workshop comprises a 20.0 x 13.5 metre portal frame building with profiled metal sheet cladding on a 1.3 metre high brick plinth, and a monopitch roof to a ridge height of 5.8 metres. The proposed building would provide 2 service bays and an MOT bay to allow for the relocation of Mill Road Garage from their existing premises in Yarmouth.

1.4 A new parking area to serve both Buzzard Marine and the new garage workshop is shown to be located to the east of the Buzzard Marine unit. This would provide 7 car parking spaces and 2 spaces suitable for larger vehicles.

1.5 In support of the application agent has submitted supporting document twelve pages long which is divided up into a series of sections. The ten point summary in this report is attached as Appendix A.

1.6 A Flood Risk Analysis and the contamination reports submitted with the previous scheme have been brought forward onto this application at the request of the agent.

2. Location and Site Characteristics

2.1 The application site is located on land to the west of the Yar Estuary some 600 m down Gasworks Lane, an unmade road to the south of the A3054. The lane is also a public footpath for the first 500 m.

2.2 Buzzard Marine occupies an existing single storey concrete sectional building to the north of Gasworks Lane, with the site for the new building on vacant land on the opposite side of the lane currently used for storage of vehicles.

2.3 The area is characterised by a mixture of buildings serving marine related businesses associated with the adjacent Yar estuary. Quay Cottage, a detached dwellinghouse, is located to the south of the Buzzard Marine application site, and immediately to the west of the second site for the MOT building.

2.4 Submitted scheme shows intention to improve junction of Gasworks Lane and A3054 by combination of kerbing, relocating signage and cutting back hedgerow on western side.

3. Relevant History

3.1 An application for a similar development, reference number P/01224/05, was submitted in June 2006 and subsequently withdrawn by the applicant.

4. Development Plan Policy

4.1 The Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan (UDP) identifies the application site as being outside the development envelope boundary for Yarmouth, and within an area where the countryside policies of the UDP apply. The site is also within an Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB), and adjacent to a Site of Special Scientific Interest and a Site of Importance for Nature Conservation. The River Yar estuary is also designated as a Special Area of Conservation and a Special Protection Area under the Habitats Directive.

4.2 The relevant policies of the UDP are as follows;

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

· S4 - The Countryside will be protected from inappropriate development

· S6 - Development will be expected to be of a high standard of design

· S10 - Development will conserve or enhance the features of special character

· S11 - Reduce reliance on the car

· G1 - Development envelopes for towns and villages

· G4 - General Locational criteria

· G5 - Development outside defined settlements

· G6 - Areas liable to flood

· D1 - Standards of design

· D2 - Standards of development within site

· C1 - Protection of landscape character

· C2 - Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty

· C7 - River corridors and estuaries

· C8 - Nature conservation as a material consideration

· C9 - Sites of international importance for nature conservation

· C10 - Sites of national importance for nature conservation

· C11 - Sites of local importance for nature conservation

· E8 - Employment in the Countryside

· P1 - Pollution and development

· P3 - Restoration of contaminated land

· TR3 - Minimise the need to travel

· TR7 - Highway considerations for new development

4.3 Government guidance set out in Planning Policy Statement 1: Delivering Sustainable Development has a key objective of promoting sustainable economic development. Planning Policy Guidance Note 4: Industrial and Commercial Development and Small Firms promotes employment opportunities in appropriate locations. Planning Policy Statement 7 (Sustainable Development in Rural Areas) (PPS 7) seeks to promote sustainable patterns of development though focusing new development in, or next to, existing towns and villages whilst supporting Countryside based enterprises and activities which contribute to rural economies. In addition, Planning Policy Guidance Note 13 (Transport) (PPG13) advises that development should be located in locations which reduce the need to travel, especially by car.

5. Consultee and Third Party Comments

5.1 Internal Consultees

· Highways Engineer – Recommends refusal on grounds of the significant increase in traffic using a definitive right of way.

· Rights of Way Officer – supports the views of the Highway Engineer regarding safety concerns on a public right of way.

· Environmental Protection Officer (Ground Contamination Issues) – The Environmental Protection Officer has no objection to the proposal, subject to the imposition of a condition attached to any permission granted which relates to the submission of a report relating to ground conditions.

· The Senior Environmental Health Officer has no objection to the proposal in terms of noise and disturbance to Quay Cottage.

· AONB Planning Officer - does not object to this application.

5.2 External Consultees

· English Nature – do not object, subject to the imposition of conditions attached to any permission granted.

· Environment Agency – to be reported.

5.3 Town Council Comments

· Freshwater Parish Council has no objection to this application.

5.4 Neighbours

· One letter of objection has been received from a local resident, which raises concerns about the potential increase in traffic using Gasworks Lane.

6. Evaluation

6.1 The proposal is to relocate the existing Mill Road Garage merging this car related business with the marine related activities of Buzzard Marine at Saltern Wood Quay.

6.2 The application comprises 2 main elements; the extensions to the existing Buzzard Marine workshop, and the proposed new detached building. Some issues, such as highways matters and ecological implications, apply to both elements whilst other considerations are more applicable individually. Therefore, this report firstly deals with the issues common to both elements, and will then to focus upon the individual building proposals.

6.3 AONB - The site is within the Isle of Wight Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB), thus the visual impact of the proposal needs to be assessed against Policy C2 of the UDP. There is no public access along that section of Gasworks Lane which separates the two parts of the application site. Accordingly, the nearest vantage point from which to view the site and assess its visual impact is from the main road in the vicinity of the swing bridge approximately 500 m to the north and where possible from that section of Gasworks Lane which also provides a route for the public footpath before it strikes off through the woodland. In my view, any section of the buildings that could be seen would be viewed against the backdrop of the woodland and as such would not be as conspicuous in the landscape as might be imagined.

6.4 The AONB Officer has commented that the site lies within an area defined for commercial use within the Western Yar Estuary Management Plan, and the proposed buildings would not appear to be out of character with the existing workshop buildings on the site. In addition, the proposed parking area would be within a slight hollow and thus be screened by existing landscape features, particularly when viewed from the A3054 and bridge. As such the AONB Planning Officer does not object to the proposal, subject to the retention of natural screening on the site, and controls are made on signage and lighting.

6.5 Nature Conservation – The application site lies in close proximity to the Yar Estuary Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI), the Solent and Southampton Water Special Protection Area (SPA) / RAMSAR, and the Solent Maritime Special Area of Conservation (SAC).

6.6 English Nature have commented on this application and consider that it is unlikely to have a significant effect on the SAC/SPA/RAMSAR sites and therefore does not require an appropriate assessment under the Conservation (Natural Habitats) Regulations 1994. In addition, English Nature comment that the wider conservation interests of the SSSI are unlikely to be affected by the proposal, provided suitable conditions are attached to any planning permission granted. As such it is considered that the proposal is in accordance with the aims of Policies C8, C9, C10 and C11 of the UDP.

6.7 Highways – The Highways Engineer has recommended that the application should be refused planning permission on grounds that the proposed development would generate a significant increase in vehicular traffic using a definitive right of way, to the detriment of highway safety and would thus add unduly to the hazards of pedestrians. As such the proposal is considered to be contrary to Policy TR7 of the UDP.

6.8 Contaminated Land – The Environmental Protection Officer has no objection to the proposal, subject to the imposition of a condition attached to any permission granted, which relates to the submission of a report relating to ground conditions. Although the final comment from the Environment Agency which is also assessing the issue over contaminated land matters have not yet been received I note that in the previous application they sought the imposition of planning conditions and accordingly I do not anticipate them objecting to the current proposal. Nevertheless, their final comments will be reported to Members at the meeting.

6.9 Flood Risk Analysis – Applicant has submitted a document which concludes with an indication that fluvial flooding and loss of flood plain storage are not relevant. Furthermore, to the site and access route are above highest astronomical tide and the predicted 0.5 % probability extreme high tide for the year 2060. Accordingly, it concludes the development is not at risk from tidal flooding.

6.10 Proposed Extensions/Alterations to Buzzard Marine – The application proposes a single storey extension and covered work area to the Buzzard Maine unit, as well as alterations to the external appearance of the building. Policy E8 of the UDP allows for the extensions to an existing employment operation within the Countryside where the development is complementary to that use, and is of an appropriate scale and design for the location.

6.11 The proposed extensions to the Buzzard Marine building are compatible in scale and massing to the existing building and, with the other proposed alterations to the external elevations of the building, would visually enhance this site. Therefore, it is considered that the proposed alterations to this unit are in accordance with the aims of Policy E8.

6.12 Proposed new build garage workshop – This element in the application proposes a new garage workshop building as new premises for a relocation of Mill Road Garage. The current garage premises are located in a predominately residential area within the built-up area of Yarmouth. A supporting statement submitted with the application states that the existing building was constructed in the 1950’s and is currently in a poor state of repair, which requires continual maintenance, affecting the viability of the business.

6.13 The proposed new building is located outside the development envelope of Yarmouth and within an area where the Countryside policies of the UDP apply. Policy E8 allows for the employment related development within the Countryside where these businesses are appropriate to the Countryside and located in suitable buildings or within existing farm complexes. The existing land uses within the vicinity of the application site are characterised by marine related uses. The proposed car garage workshop does not have a specific requirement to be based in this location due to its proximity to a water frontage. It is considered that this is not a suitable location for a garage workshop use, which is likely to attract a large number of vehicles via a narrow made up track, which is also a public right of way. As such it is considered that the proposal is not in a location which is in accordance with the aims of Policy E8.

6.14 The proposed garage workshop would also be likely to generate a significant number of vehicular trips in a location which is not served by a choice of transport modes. As such the proposal is not in accordance with the aims of strategic policies S1 and S11 of the UDP, as well as Government guidance contained within PPG13, which seek to promote new development within existing urban areas and to reduce reliance on the car.

6.15 In addition to the AONB considerations set out within paragraph 6.2, Members should note that planning permission was granted in September 2003 for a replacement boat shed on land to the south of the application site (Application No. P/00201/00). The proposed building would be viewed against this proposed boat shed when viewed across the Yar estuary and open land to north. It is considered that the visual impact of the proposal on the AONB would be acceptable under the terms of Policy C2.

6.16 The Senior Environmental Health Officer has commented upon the potential for noise and disturbance arising from the proposed new garage activities on the application site for occupiers of the adjacent Quay Cottage. These comments conclude that since the property is currently surrounded by light industrial uses and that no openings are proposed in the elevation adjacent to Quay Cottage there is no objection to the proposal, subject to the imposition of conditions on any permission granted relating to the management of the site, in particular the hours of operation.

6.17 In conclusion the planning policy considerations need to weighed against the employment issues which are also raised by this application. The applicant has stated in their supporting submission if the business does not relocate then it will close with the loss of 6 jobs. The application has been submitted jointly with Buzzard Marine to allow these two businesses to combine, utilizing the money raised from the sale of the existing Mill Road site, allowing both to become financially viable. It is accepted that in certain respects the proposal does not conform with a number of the Council’s planning policies and that a number of concerns could be addressed through the imposition of planning conditions. However, it is the officers view that the Highway Engineers’ comments raise fundamental concerns over the appropriateness of locating a car showroom, service facility and MOT facility in what is effectively a poor location with regards to accessibility. In that context, Members should note that this location has no unique characteristics that would encourage a motor vehicle repair business to operate from here. This is in contrast to the other business in the area which are marine related and as such derive clear benefits from a location next to the river. It is also poorly located with regards to accessibility other than by car. In that context, a large number of vehicle movements are likely to be experienced along Gasworks Lane which for a large section also functions as a public footpath. Consequently, the development is not considered to meet the sustainability test as it is considered that it should be located within a built up area.

6.18 Taking the above factors into consideration and whilst noting the information put forward by the applicant officers consider that the policy objections should carry greater weight and as a consequence are unable to support this application.

7. Conclusion and Justification for Recommendation

7.1 Having given due regard and appropriate weight to all material considerations referred to in this report, it is considered that the approval of planning permission for the new building garage workshop is not in accordance with the strategic and local policies of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan which relate to the development of employment uses in the Countryside and the sustainability of new development. The potential loss of the existing business is not considered to be significant to outweigh the overriding policy objections.

8. Recommendation

This application is recommended for Refusal.

Reasons:

1

The application site is located well outside the Development Envelope for Yarmouth indicated in the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan. The proposed garage workshop is in an unsustainable location which would be likely to lead to a significant increase in journeys to and from the site by private car. As a consequence the proposed development is contrary to the aims of PPG13 (Transport) and policies S11 (Reduce reliance on the car) and TR3 (Minimise the need to travel) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.

2

The proposed development would generate a significant increase in vehicular traffic using a definitive right-of-way, to the detriment of highway safety and would thus add unduly to the hazards of pedestrians. In consequence the proposal would be contrary to policies D1 (Standards of design) and TR7 (Highway considerations for new development) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.

ANDREW ASHCROFT

Head of Planning Services