ISLE OF WIGHT COUNCIL DEVELOPMENT
CONTROL SUB COMMITTEE
|
Reference Number: P/02172/04 - TCPL/24342/D &
P/02173/04 - LBC/24342/C Parish/Name: Newport -
Ward/Name: Mount Joy Registration Date:
01/11/2004 - Full Planning Permission Officer: Mr J Fletcher Tel: (01983) 823598
Applicant: Propan Properties
Ltd Demolition of
single storey buildings and extensions; conversion of buildings to form 62
apartments and office accommodation; construction of 42 apartments & 10
live/work units; landscaping and alterations to vehicular access (revised
layout/design, additional retained buildings, introduction of live/work
units) Whitecroft, Sandy Lane, Newport, PO303EB LBC /Conservation Area Consent for demolition of single storey
buildings & extensions; conversion of buildings to form 62 apartments
& office accommodation; construction of 42 apartments & 10 live/work
units; landscaping & alterations to vehicular access (revised
layout/design, additional retained buildings, introduction of live/work
units) Whitecroft, Sandy Lane, Newport, PO303EB These applications are recommended for Conditional Permission and
Listed Building/Conservation Area Consent. |
REASON FOR COMMITTEE CONSIDERATION
Both applications are recommended
for Conditional Permission subject to Section 106 Agreement.
These are major applications on a
unique site outside development boundary resulting in conflicting policy
implications and involving important land use, design, landscaping, ecology,
drainage and traffic issues which have given rise to a number of letters of
representation all resulting in a need for determination of the applications by
the Development Control Committee.
1. Details
of Application
1.1 These two applications are in the form of
detailed application and a Listed Building Consent Application for the
conversion into 62 apartments of the retained buildings (7 number) and
conversion of single storey buildings of the former Whitecroft complex.
1.2 In terms of the converted retained
buildings these are itemised as follows:
Building A (two storeys)
4
number one bedroomed apartments
4
number two bedroomed apartments
Total 8 apartments
Building B (two storeys)
1
number one bedroom apartment
1
number three bedroom apartment
7
number two bed apartments
Total 9 apartments
Building C (two storeys)
4
number three bedroom apartments
4
number two bedroom apartments
Total 8 apartments
Building D (two storeys)
8
number two bedroom apartments
1
number three bedroom apartments
Total 9
Building H (two storeys)
4
number four bedroom apartments
Building RT
7
number two bedroomed apartments
2
number three bedroomed apartments
Total 9
Building T (two storey with clock tower
Grade II Listed)
4
number two bedroomed apartments
3
number one bedroomed apartments
Total 7
116 square metres of office floor space.
1.3 Remaining eight units created by conversion
of those elements of the existing single storey buildings to the south west of
the clock tower which remain following partial demolition. The end result is
itemised as follows:
Block C - 1, two bedroomed single storey
flat
Block C - 2, 2 number two bedroomed flats with
bedrooms being within new mezzanine floor
1
number one bedroom single storey flat
Block C - 3, 2 number two bedroom flats
1
number three bedroom flats
Total 3
1.4 Second main element of the proposals relate
to the construction of new build apartment premises providing a total of 42
apartments.
1.5 In detail the new build element of the
proposal is itemised as follows:
N1 - 2 four bed and 2 three bed, 3 storey
terraced apartments
N2 - 3 four bed, 3 storey terraced
apartments
N3 - 4 four bed, 3 storey terraced
apartments
N4 - 4 four bed, 3 storey terraced
apartments
N5 - 4, 3 storey terraced apartments
N6 - 3 four bed, 3 storey terraced
apartments
N7 - 12 two bed flats in 3 storey block
N8 – 2 three bed 2 storey semi detached houses
N9 – 6 two bed flats in 3 storey block
Total – 42 units
1.6 Third elements relates to the construction
of 10 number live/work units in 5 semi-detached pairs (adjacent eastern
boundary) in split level form reflecting the gradient of the land in this area
of the site. Schedule of accommodation is itemized as follows:
Ground floor – 35 square metres of work are
with lounge/kitchen.
Lower ground floor plan – 2 number bedrooms.
1.7 New build units to be retained largely
within the area of the overall site which accommodates virtually all of the
former hospital buildings with the only exception being the 10 live/work units
which are located to the east of the main group of buildings and units N8 and
N9.
1.8 Demolition
Demolition restricted to in the main later
additional elements of existing buildings and includes the former nurse’s home
and chapel which are located to the south of the retained blocks and parkland.
It is also proposed to demolish later editions to the laundry building together
with its ancillary buildings. Applicants indicate that materials will be
salvaged where appropriate for use in the extensive repair work to those
retained existing buildings. Applicants indicate that the areas which formerly
accommodated the buildings south of the retained blocks in the park land will
in themselves be returned to open parkland along with the removal of car
parking areas in this location. Only new structure in this area will be
proposed tennis court.
1.9 Parking
Car parking is generally dispersed within
the vicinity of the converted and new build units being grouped around the
buildings to which they serve. Proposal provides for a total of 165 car parking
space which equates to an average of 1.5 spaces per unit. Parking for the offices
to be shared with the residential with applicants indicating that this is on
the basis that during office hour’s resident’s cars will be off site and will
only be on site outside office hours in the evenings and weekends.
1.10 Access Arrangements
Proposal retains the use of the main
entrance of Sandy Lane. Proposal also proposes to close the existing secondary
access from Sandy Lane for vehicular use but will maintain a pedestrian and
cycling access at this point. Within the site existing access routes will be
retained with additional accesses being provided where appropriate with
particular reference to servicing the work units. Finally it is proposed to
have a comprehensive footpath/cycle path system within the layout of the
proposed development.
1.11 Drainage
Proposal is accompanied by a specific
drainage plan which indicates that surface water will be separated from the
current combined system and will be dealt with by on site soakaways, the sizes
and capacities of which will be subject to Building Regulation control. Members
should note that the existing drainage system is a combined system that is
pumped from the site's own pumping station to the main sewer close to the
nearby convent.
1.12 Trees
Of
the 149 original individual preserved tress, 12 have been indicated to be
removed. Two of the recommendations related to the current condition of the
trees with the remainder being due to the proximity of the new build units and
the need to provide access to the live/work units. Proposal also indicates the
loss of at least five non-reserved trees one being because of its current
condition and the other four being because of proximity of new build unit.
1.13 Landscaping
Application accompanied by a landscape
master plan prepared by a landscape architect which indicates both retained
trees and proposed tree/shrub/ground cover and hedgerow planting. Trees to be
planted within the build element of the proposal will be mainly
ornamental/specimen types. Other planting within the adjoining parkland area
will be mostly native species designed to reinforce the existing tree cover.
Similarly with regard to shrub and hedge planting within the built up area of
the site will be in the form of ornamental shrubbery and hedging appropriate to
the build environment with other hedgerow planting within the parkland and
adjacent to the built area to be in the form of native species.
1.14 Ecology
· Red Squirrels: Ecology
Report indicates the use of the site by red squirrels. Report indicates the
following:
· Objective is to retain
all the Pine trees and shrub corridors, develop new planting areas of Pine and
Hazel where practicable in order to integrate with the existing vegetation
inside and outside the site.
· A badger report dated
August 2004 confirms presence of badgers and although inadequate in some
respect provides sufficient information to progress application.
· Dormice: Report indicates
no evidence although it accepts that dense hedgerows along the side of the
stream could be good habitat with Hazel trees growing within an area which has
a group TPO and which provides valuable food. None of the proposals affect the
hedgerows and grass banks along the stream area. Application indicates the
planting of new hedgerows of a native mix hopefully providing further habitat.
· Water Voles: No evidence
of water voles has been found although the stream and adjacent banks and scrub
would be a good habitat. Again proposals would not affect the stream, banks and
adjacent vegetation cover directly or indirectly.
· Bats: Latest survey
confirms the majority of the buildings at Whitecroft used by roosting bats
including long-eared bats probably brown species but this is unconfirmed and
common pipistrelle bats. Particular reference is made to Block T as the main
roost site other large lofts also occasionally used by smaller number of bats.
Report generally indicates that bat activity is taking place on the site to a
lesser or greater degree.
On this basis a DEFRA bat licence
will be required to allow demolition/conversion works to proceed at the site in
accordance with the legislation. Evidence will be required that appropriate
mitigation measure will be in place to minimise impacts on bats both in the
short and long term.
Mitigation Measures: That report
recommends a number of mitigation measures based on the bat survey where the
aim is to ensure retention of existing bat population at the site. That report
also indicates that additional survey work may provide further information to
assist in refining the detail of the final mitigation strategy.
· Barn Owls: Building works
may result in loss of roost site used by barn owls with report stating that the
use of the building as a nest site by barn owls appears unlikely at present but
cannot be ruled. Again the report suggests various mitigation measures.
· Birds: Where nesting
birds are present work will need to be avoided in that area until the young
have fledged to ensure compliance with relevant legislation.
1.15 Materials
Materials to be used in respect of the
new build units are itemised as follows:
· Buildings N1 to N5
inclusive: Walls to be finished in mixture of self colour off white or beige
render and sharp edged brick of colour to match existing buildings under
shallow single pitched weathered zinc roof finish of light or dark grey colour.
· Unit 6: To be finished in
sharp edged brick of colour to match existing under natural slated hipped
roofs.
· Unit 7: To be finished in
mainly sharp edge brick to match existing with small elements of render under
natural slated hipped roof.
· Unitary Development Plan
8: To be finished in self colour render in off white or beige colour with sharp
edged brick colour to match existing building under weathered zinc hipped roof.
· Unit 9: To be finished in
sharp edged brick of colour to match existing under natural slated hipped roof.
1.16 Transport
Application accompanied by transport assessment prepared by consultant the conclusions of which are summarised as follows:
· Development will increase traffic in the roads around Whitecroft compared with the site in its present run down site however vehicle movements arising from the development will be less than that which would arise from a resumption of the established hospital use or from any of the alternative uses suggested in the Council’s planning guidelines.
· Alterations to highway layout are considered unnecessary on traffic grounds and undesirable in terms of visual effect.
· Proposal will provide lighting improvements to the short section of Sandy Lane from Whitecombe Road.
· Acceptance that it would be practically impossible to prevent traffic using Sandy Lane with the closure of the secondary access will assist in discouraging such a use in this direction.
· There is a regular albeit infrequent bus service passing the site at Cox’s Corner. Consultant suggests that the applicant could cooperate with the Council and public transport operators to seek a higher standard of public transport provision to and from the site.
· Report makes reference to the existing bus shelter at Cox’s Corner.
· Newport is within easy cycling distance using Sandy Lane and either the Newport/Sandown cycleway or Marvel Lane/Watergate Road.
· Consultant makes reference to the possibility to designate Sandy Lane as a quiet lane under the provisions of the Transport Act 2000.
· Developer could include information about cycle opportunities within information packs given to perspective residents. Proposal should ensure secure and covered cycle parking facilities to be provided.
· Level of parking provision is considered appropriate for the proposed development.
· Consultant suggests that through the auspices of a Section 106 Agreement a detailed travel place be submitted and a financial contribution of £20,000 be made towards the cost of designating Sandy Lane as a quiet lane.
1.16 Members are advised that applicants will be required to obtain Conservation Area Consent for the demolition of non Listed Buildings in a Conservation Area. Applicants have been advised accordingly.
2. Location
and Site Characteristics
2.1 Members will be familiar with the location of
Whitecroft Hospital being approximately 2 kilometers to the south of Newport.
The main access to the site is off Sandy Lane with that access point being
approximately 80 metres north east of Cox’s Corner which is the junction of
Sandy Lane with Whitcombe Road.
2.2 Whitecroft
Hospital was constructed in the late 19th century having been
constructed under the 1890 Lunacy Act which then required every Local Authority
to provide and maintain an asylum or asylums for the accommodation for pauper
lunatics. It was designed as a basic block system and was to be self sufficient
with dairies, pig sties and vegetable plots etc. as indicated on the 1907
Ordnance Survey map.
2.3 At
its peak in 1961 Whitecroft housed 450 patients however, the last patients left
in April 1992 over thirteen years ago.
2.4 Site
consists of a serious of partly linked Victorian red brick buildings which
includes a clock tower and main hall building (Grade II Listed). The site is
divided into three main areas being:
a) The relatively level area adjacent to Sandy
Lane which was developed as the hospital.
b) The more sloping parkland/walking areas which
have been eaten into over the last 60 years with further additional hospital
development.
c) The woodland around the edge of the site which
is largely undeveloped.
2.5 Virtually all the buildings on the
site are now vacant apart from the former nurses’ home, block and chapel which
are occupied by the NHS Primary Care Trust.
2.6 There are a number of private residential
properties around the periphery of the site and in this regard I make specific
reference to properties known as The Pines, The Lodge and Sandy Hollow all of
which abut the northern boundary of the site and are accessed off Sandy Lane.
Also to the north of the site is Thompson House which is occupied by the
Council’s Education Department. Other adjacent property of significance is the
property Garden Cottage which abuts the southern boundary of the site but
significantly is accessed through the Whitecroft site. (The proposed closure
of the entrance adjacent to the Lodge remain subject to a Legal Agreement with
the owners of Garden Cottage however, this is a civil matter between the two
parties.)
2.7 Site itself is surrounded in the main by countryside
with the countryside area to the north and northwest being classified as an
Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. To the south east is a woodland wetland
area known as the Gatcombe withy bed and which is classified as a SINC (Site of
Important Nature Conservation).
2.8 Site is covered in substantial number of
trees which are either subject to individual tree preservation orders or group
orders.
3. Relevant
History
3.1 In August 2001 an application was received
for change of use of buildings and outline for retirement dwellings with
ancillary hydro-therapy, medical, leisure and social facilities,
convalescent/nursing facilities for over 50s; additional highways ecological
and landscape and drainage information;. This application was subject of a
significant level of consultation and negotiation with particular reference to
the request for further information from the applicants and as a result went
beyond the target period within which the application should have been
determined. The applicants therefore submitted a non-determination appeal in
February 2002 whilst at the same time submitting a duplicate application
received in March 2002. The appellants requested and enquiry with that being
scheduled for July 2002. At the same time a duplicate application was received
in March 2002.
In
April 2002 the Planning committee resolved that they would have refused the
planning permission for eleven reason had they been able to determine the
application. Five days prior to enquiry opening the appellants withdrew from
the appeal and the enquiry was cancelled. An application for an award of costs
in respect of the abortive work that was carried out up to that period was
partially awarded against the appellants.
3.2 The duplicate application was refused in
July 2002 for similar reasons to those identified in respect of
non-determination appeal proposal. These reason are summarised as follows:
·
Site is in the countryside outside defined development envelope and no
sequential analysis has been undertaken.
·
Residential development of the scale proposed was considered to be
inappropriate in respect of its location in the countryside outside the
development envelope boundary.
·
Proposal indicates residential development with ancillary facilities
involving construction of dwellings outside the area defined as suitable for
development in the planning brief.
·
Proposal makes no provision for affordable housing.
·
Proposal is likely to lead to significant amount of traffic being
attracted to the site which would have an unacceptable environmental impact on
the rural area.
·
Proposal would have had an adverse impact on the visual amenity and
character of the area.
·
Proposal would result in a significant area of residential development
in an isolated rural area thus increasing car journeys to and from the site.
·
Insufficient information in respect of the impact the new proposal will
have on the Grade II Listed Clock Tower,
·
Insufficient information the proposal will not adversely affect
protected or endangered species or their habitats.
·
Insufficient information regarding drainage capacity.
·
The proposal does not provide adequate health care provision for
specialist age group residents for which the scheme was proposed and therefore
cannot be assured that the proposal will complies with relevant policies.
4. Development
Plan Policy
4.1 National
Policies covered in PPS1 – Delivering Sustainable Development, PPG3 – Housing,
PPS7 – Sustainable Development in Rural Areas, PPG9 – Nature Conservation,
PPG13 – Transport and PPG15 – Planning and the Historic Environment.
4.2
PPS1 emphasises the following, as far as it
applies to this unique application:
·
Optimise the potential of the site to
accommodate development.
·
Respond to local contacts and create and
reinforce local and distinctiveness.
·
Be visually attractive as a result of good
architect and appropriate landscaping.
Document re-emphasises PPG1 policies in
respect of general advice.
·
Planning Authority should avoid unnecessary
prescription or detail.
·
Should concentrate on guiding the overall
scale massing, landscaping, lay out and access to the new development in
relation to neighbouring buildings and local areas more generally.
·
Should not attempt to impose architectural
styles or particular tastes.
·
Should not stifle innovation, originality or
initiative through unsubstantiated requirements to conform to certain
developments or forms or styles.
·
Should take full account of the needs of the
disabled.
4.3 Because
of the unique circumstances of this site, the appliance of PPG3 is limited despite
the fact that the proposal relates almost entirely to residential. Issues which
need to be taken into account are itemized as follows:
·
Amount and type of affordable housing to be
provided in respect of any proposal should reflect individual site suitability
and be a matter of agreement between parties.
·
Document makes reference to DETR Circular 6/98
– Planning and Affordable Housing which emphasizes that an element of
affordable housing should be provided in development of a site as part of the
proposed development and failure to apply such policy could justify a refusal.
Document also emphasizes the following:
o Any
site that may come forward not allocated for residential development should be
looked at in terms of its site size, suitability and the economics of provision
stating that “it would be inappropriate to seek any affordable housing on some
sites. In practice the policy should only be applied to suitable sites…”
·
Other relevant issues in respect of PPG3
relates to:
o Emphasises
the need for good quality design with particular reference to encouraging
developments to “think imaginatively about designs and layouts which make more
efficient use of land without compromising the quality of the environment.”
·
New housing development should not be viewed
in isolation but should have regard to the immediate buildings in the wider
locality.
·
More than 1.5 car parking spaces per dwelling
are unlikely to reflect Government’s emphasis on sustainable residential
developments.
·
Poor design should be rejected particularly
where such a decision is supported by policies including supplementary Planning
Guidance and applicants have f ailed to demonstrate that they have adhered to
good practice guidance in respect of layout and design.
4.4 PPS7
relates to developments in rural areas emphasizing the sustainability is the
core principle underpinning land use planning. Among a number of key principles
are:
·
Social inclusion recognizing the needs of
everyone
·
Effective protection and enhancement of the
environment
·
Accessibility should be key consideration with
any developments likely to generate large number of trips being located in or
next to towns or other service centres that are accessible to transport,
walking and cycling.
·
New building development in the open countryside
should be strictly controlled in the interests of retaining the character,
beauty, the diversity of the landscape, heritage and wildlife etc.
·
All developments in rural areas should be well
design in keeping and scale with its location and sensitive to the character of
the countryside and local distinctiveness.
4.5 PPG9
provides guidance on the conservation of the natural heritage and how that can
be reflected in land use planning emphasizing the need to conserve the
diversity of wildlife.
4.6 PPG13
emphasises the following:
o
Promotion of more sustainable transport
choices.
o
Promotion of accessibility to jobs, shopping,
leisure facilities, services by public transport, walking and cycling.
o
Reduce the need to travel especially by car.
o
Document also encourages the introduction of
maximum levels of parking in order to promote sustainable transport choices.
o
Applicants for development with transport
implications should show the measures they are taking to minimise the need for
parking.
4.7 PPG15
emphasises the following:
o Importance
of environmental stewardship in providing protection for all aspect of the
historical environment.
o Objectors
of planning process should be to recognise the need for economic growth with
the need to protect the natural and historic environment.
o Local
Authorities should ensure that they can call on sufficient specialist
conservation advice to inform their decision making and to assist owners and
other members of the public.
o Emphasis
on the need for pre application discussions.
o Need
to involve the expertise of English Heritage.
o Applicants
should be expected to provide written information and/or drawings indicating
their understanding of the context of the area.
o Document
makes specific reference to Section 73 of the Planning (Listed Building
Conservation) Act 1990 which requires special attention need, needs to be paid
to ensure preservation and enhancement of the character or appearance of
conservation areas.
4.8 Local
Plan Policies
Relevant
policies of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan 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 rather
than undeveloped Greenfield) sites. Greenfield sites will only be allocated for
development where they are extensions to urban areas and no suitable alterative
brownfield site exists.
S3 – New developments of large
scale will be expected to be located in or adjacent to the defined development
envelopes of the main Island towns.
S4 – The countryside will be
protected from inappropriate development.
S6 – All development will be
expected to be of a high standard of design.
S7 – There is a need to
provide for the development of at least 8,000 housing units
over
the planned period. While a large proportion of this development will occur on
sites
with existing allocations or planning approvals or on currently on unidentified
sites,
enough new land will be allocated to enable this target to be met and to
provide
a range of choice and
affordability.
S10
– In areas of designated or defined scientific nature conservation
archaeological
historic
or landscape value, development will be permitted only if it will conserve or
enhance
the features of special character or these areas.
S11
– Land use policies and proposals to reduce the impact and reliance on the
private car will be adopted the Council will aim to encourage the development
of an effective and efficient integrated transport network.
f
4.9 Relevant
Local Plan Policies are as follows:
·
G1 – Development Envelopes for Towns and
Villages
·
G2 – Consolidation and infilling of scattered
settlements outside development envelopes
·
G4 – Criteria for new development
·
G5 – Criteria for development outside defined
settlements
·
G10 – Potential conflict between proposed
development and existing surrounding uses.
·
D1 – Standards of Design.
·
D2 – Standards for Development within the
site.
·
D3 – Landscaping
·
D4 – External Building Works
·
D11 – Crime and Design
·
D12 – Access for People with Disabilities to
buildings that open to the public
·
D14 – Light Spillage
·
B1 – Alterations and Extensions to Listed
Buildings
·
B2 – Settings of Listed Buildings
·
B3 – Change of Use to Listed Buildings
·
B6 – Protection and Enhancement of
Conservation Areas
·
B7 – Demolition of non-Listed Buildings in
Conservation Areas
·
H2 – To ensure that large residential
developments contain a variety of house sizes and types.
·
H4 – Unallocated Residential Development to be
restricted to Defined Settlements
·
H9 – Residential Development Outside
Development Boundaries
·
H14 – Locally Affordable Housing as an Element
of Housing Schemes
·
C4 – Protection of Landscape Character
·
C8 – Nature Conservation as a material
consideration.
·
C17 – Conversion of Barns and Other Rural
Buildings
·
E8 –Employment in the Countryside
·
P4 – Restoration of Derelict Land and Removal
of Eyesore
·
TR3 – Locating Development to minimise the
need to travel.
·
TR4 – Transport Statement requirements for
major developments
·
TR6 – Cycling and Walking
·
TR7 – Highway Considerations for New
Developments
·
TR16 – Parking Policies and Guidelines
·
U2 – Ensuring adequate educational, social and
community facilities for the future population.
·
U11 – Infrastructure and Services Provision
·
U12 – Water Supply for firefighting purposes
·
L10 – Open Spaces and Housing Developments
4.10 The
Whitecroft complex and its cartilage was designated a Conservation Area on 25
August 2004. The reason for the designation was to ensure the preservation of
the unique character of the area with particular reference to the existing
buildings and their contribution to that character.
4.11 Site
is not within and Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty but the countryside to the
northwest of Sandy Lane is designated as such. To the south east of the site is
the Gatcombe Withy Bed SINC which is designated for its woodland, wetland and
species value.
4.12 A
detailed planning brief was prepared by the two former Borough Councils in 1988
and this has been carried through into the UDP being reconfirmed by the Isle of
Wight Council in June 2002. The document provides guideline. The main thrust of
the document is to encourage the use of the site for either singularly or as a
mix of uses ranging from institutional, business, holiday, sports facility,
assembly and leisure facilities, exhibition purposes and country park. The
document specifically refers to housing, retail and heavy industrial uses being
unacceptable. Document also encouraged a comprehensive scheme being essential
within the first instance use being made of the existing permanent buildings.
Floor space of any new and retained building should not exceed floor space of
permanent buildings within a specific area identified as being the existing
built up area. Height restrictions related to three storeys in height and
emphasise the need to respect existing landscape features. Document indicated
those buildings which should be demolished (2 number) and those which should be
retained including the clock tower. Finally and significantly, the document
suggests that access should be from the existing west corner of the site and
not via Sandy Lane from Blackwater.
4.13 Site
is within Zone 4 in respect of the Council’s parking policies which will
require the developer to provide a maximum of 0 – 100% of parking guidelines.
4.14 As
mentioned above site is the subject of 150 individual tree preservation orders
covering both deciduous and evergreen species. The site is also the subject of
a number of group orders.
5. Consultee
and Third Party Comments
5.1 Internal Consultees
Highway Engineer recommends condition
covering road construction details, timing of occupation, provision of
visibility, provision of pedestrian/cyclist access and closure of existing
secondary access to the north of the site.
Members
will note that there is reference to a quiet lane proposal for Sandy Lane. In
this regard Highway Engineer has commented as follows:
“Highway
Traffic Section accepted the generation figures supplied with the TIA
(Transport Impact Assessment) and have agreed to monitor the traffic generation
and the use of Sandy Lane. A number of options are available to the Traffic
Section, careful consideration of the character and use of the Lane by walkers,
equestrians, cyclists and motorists has to be balanced for this reason a
decision as to the form of appropriate traffic management will be made once the development has been
complete.”
Traffic
Engineer also makes reference to the closure of the NHS unit on site (former
nurses home) will remove approximately 40 car users from the site. 165 on site
parking spaces are to be provided; the removal of the NHS unit is equivalent to
25% of the new parking provision.
5.2 The Council’s Conservation and Design Team
Leader who has been heavily involved in the pre-application and post
application negotiations and has indicated her full support for the
architectural design approach, particularly in respect of the new build
properties stating that:
….contemporary scheme has been
proposed as this would allow blocks of an appropriate size to respond to the
existing strong built form whilst providing modern living and working space
which can easily comply with Building Regulations. Pastiche of another style
would be difficult to justify as the main buildings on site are consistent and
do not logically relate to another period in the past. Thus buildings of the 21st
century provide an honest solution.
Reference to her comments will be
made in the evaluation section.
5.3 Architects Panel have been consulted on this
matter with particular reference to the architectural design approach in
relation to the existing building and following discussions they make the
following comment:
·
The Panel was in favour of the fact that the design was purposely
contemporary and avoided pastiche. The liked the simple approach.
·
The Panel liked the house and the strong geometry of the site.
5.4 The Council’s Environmental Health Department
recommends appropriate conditions covering the need to vet the site for
potential contamination.
5.5 The Council’s Area Building Control Surveyor
has been requested to comment on the structural report and his views are
summarised as follows:
· General concern that the buildings have suffered from lack of maintenance during the period that they have been unoccupied with there being evidence of pocketing and spawning of external cavity brickwork with potential for corroded wall ties. Expressed particular concern regarding the water tower.
· He notes the proposal comprises material change of use under the provisions of the Building Regulations 2000. As such only certain parts of the regulations will be applicable however advice contained within PPG15 and BS7913 will be taken into consideration when the application is submitted.
· He is concerned that there is likely to be asbestos present although quantities are unknown.
· Drainage for the development should be considered at an early stage with particular reference to the need for perculation tests to be carried out in order to establish the suitability of soakaways.
· He is concerned of the likely presence of dry rot.
· Repairs to areas of brick would need to be carefully handled to avoid any serious visual impact on the building. Similarly with regard to repointing.
5.6 Ecology Officer has studied the ecology information and is broadly in agreement with their contents although obviously requires that necessary advice and conditions are applied to mitigate any harm to protected species with particular reference to bats and badgers. He does suggest the Badger report needs to be updated but information is sufficient and suggests appropriate condition. Similarly with regard to Bats, appropriate conditions being suggested to avoid direct disturbance to roosting bats. He also makes reference to need to obtain DEFRA licence before works commence.
5.7 The Council’s AONB Officer expressed concerns regarding:
· The level of lighting particularly in terms of the street lighting on Coxes Corner and the potential for it to have an urbanising influence.
· Any replacement bus shelter needs to be appropriately designed to reflect its rural location.
· The quiet road scheme for Sandy Lane would be welcomed with suggestions that it should not be just confined to Sandy Lane but also extend to Marvel Lane and Nunnery Lane all of which mark the boundary of the AONB.
· Concern that the local road system should not be improved in the future to cater for high traffic levels bearing in mind again the rural character of these local roads.
· Concern that a detailed landscape assessment needs to be carried out in terms of long distance views suggesting photo montages impressions are obtained for the key views from Shepherds Trail and the view from Nunnery Lane looking south to Whitecroft. (Following these comments applicants have submitted a plan indicating sky line studies with any proposed development being superimposed and the AONB Officer has been advised accordingly.)
5.8 External Consultees
Environment Agency raises no objection in principle but have suggested a number of conditions relating to the prevention of pollution of the water environment, prevention of flooding and ensuring future maintenance, ensuring any piling does not lead to contamination of the underlying aquifer, storage of oils, fuels and chemicals on site to ensure no pollution to the water environment, any surface water discharge from parking areas and hardstanding be passed through oil separators in order to prevent pollution of water environment and any inspection manholes that may be provided should be clearly identified in respect of foul or surface water drainage.
5.9 Southern Water note that the hospital was provided with a private pumping station connected to the public foul sewer which is some considerable distance away. They also note the surface water was also disposed in this way. They express concern that the flow from the pumping station may overload the existing sewer downstream and therefore advise that the applicant initiate a sewer capacity check related to the potential scale of discharge.
· They note that depending on the tenure of the site i.e. one site owner or multiple ownership it may be possible for the existing pumping station some of the on site sewers to be adopted.
· They note that there are no public surface water sewers in the area and therefore surface water from the development should not be directed to the foul sewer but disposed of locally to the soakaways, water courses etc.
· Water supply can be provided for proposed development as and when required in accordance with normal conditions.
5.10 Due to the sites’ status as a Conservation Area, English Heritage have been consulted and their comments are summarised as follows:
· EH note that independent advice has been sought in respect of the enabling development a process which they agree with.
· Suggestion that the applicant needs to provide additional background context for the layout history of the site.
· Important that the axial aspect of the site is retained with EH acknowledging that the current scheme essentially achieves this aim.
· Important that original details and materials are retained with particular reference to joinery. Reference is made to the need for accuracy and respect for glazing proportions. Needs to be proper justification for removal and replacement of window making reference to the need for changes to be clearly annotated where appropriate.
· Acknowledgement that current proposal provides an improved relationship of the proposed blocks. EH content to see the modern approach but does suggest proposed elevational treatments need to be further considered which better relate to local context.
· EH emphasises the need to resist any potential proposal for building on the green area adjacent the entrance on the basis that this open space is an important aspect of the sense of arrival reflecting the sites history.
· EH welcome the fact that existing access roads are to be retained along with the existing trees.
· Disappointment that detailed proposals for the existing buildings have not been supplied suggesting that each building needs to be inspected and an itemised repair schedule should be prepared. EH consider this should be reflected in the specification and the sequence of repair works and should be dealt with under the auspices of the Section 106 Agreement tailored to the timetable of implementation. EH would also expect such enabling development to have implementation guarantees.
· EH conclude by stating the following:
Overall it is considered the revised plans in respect of the new development are moving in a positive direction but we draw attention to the above and clear need for detailed information on the extent of work proposed on the existing buildings and for clarity of information on the delivery of appropriate repairs, conversion and restoration.
They make reference to booklet on enabling development produced by English Heritage. Finally they express the view that they are content that the Conservation Design Team advise on the above matters without further reference to English Heritage on the application.
5.11 As implied above, because of the unusual circumstances of this site and the proposed development, an independent Sustainable Property Consultant has been commissioned in line with the English Heritage advice and substantial reference will be made to his report in the evaluation section. His remit was:
· Examine the proposal submitted of Whitecroft
· Consider critically the applicants supporting financial appraisals in the capacity of an independent assessor
· Report the findings to the Isle of Wight Council.
In essence the report the financial appraisal submitted by the applicants has been reasonable given the unique circumstances of the site and that a satisfactory case has been put forward justifying the enabling in the form of 42 new build apartments and the 10 live work units and just as significantly the applicants case for requesting the waiving of any affordable housing provision although this is with some reservation. The consultant concludes as follows:
This development proposal is the product of difficult financial circumstances. Having reviewed the development appraisal and the costs in more detail we consider that although the scheme does not meet the Council’s policy expectations the circumstances of this site suggest there is a reasoned case for considering that the affordable housing provision may be foregone at least in the initial stages of the project and perhaps deferred until the ‘real’ values and cost have become clear on the assumption that value inflation outstrips cost inflation then contributions towards affordable housing commuted sums may be feasible at a later stage.
5.12 Third Party Representations
Application has been subject of 35 letters of objection and comment from both immediate local residents and other Isle of Wight residents with these objections following a re-advertisement of the application in June 2005. A substantial number of concerns have been raised in one particular letter from an adjacent resident most affected by the proposal with these concerns being reflected in the other letters. I therefore summarise those concerns as follows:
· Concern that the readvertised application was devoid of important elements of information essential for a valued assessment of the proposal to be made. These include drainage plan, revised demolition plan and bat report and therefore at that time the writer considered the application was not ready for determination.
Other objections relate to the following:
· A general concern that the location and scale of the new buildings making reference to new build units N8, N9, N10, N11 and N12 extending beyond the defined boundary thus in the writers opinion spoiling the parkland setting and intruding on setting of neighbouring properties.
· Concern that design and appearance of the new build elements of the proposal are completely inappropriate failing to respect or harmonise with the rural and historic conservation area. Particular reference made to white render, wooden boarding, yellow brick and zinc roofs being out of character.
· In terms of the design of the new build units there is a specific concern that they fail to respect the integrity of the conservation area and are not harmonious or sensitive to that conservation area. Writer considers that the applicants should be encouraged to revisit the design in the interest of achieving compatible development in this important conservation area.
· Reference made to English Heritage’s advice that developers planning authority should work closely with local residents in reaching proposals for enabling development. Local residents acknowledge some consultation has taken place but this process has in their view now been discontinued which they consider to be regrettable having lost an opportunity to influence the design of the enabling new build elements.
· In summary they consider the new build will materially detract from the special character of the site and applicants should be encouraged to consider a more traditional approach to design in relation to the setting of the Grade II listed building but in particular to the setting of the conservation area.
· There are specific objections to the location of units N8 and N9 making particular reference to the three storey building being on the edge of the built area of the site and therefore inappropriate in this rural setting.
· Specific objections to the live/work units which they consider to be an unwelcome introduction sitting outside the defined development area being an area where protected species could well; be affected.
· Specific concern relating to the removal of Copper Beech trees to accommodate the access road serving the live/work units. Loss of these trees will have an effect on wild life habitat along with a section of hedgerow.
· Specific concern relating to the proposal for a detached house (formerly N12) on the Sandy Lane frontage of the site to the north east. (This unit has since been omitted from the proposal).
· Concern that alterations to the external of the Grade II Listed clock tower are unacceptable bearing in mind that two windows on the listed building are to be bricked up. Strong concern that the ecology on the site is protected with resident suggesting that consideration be given for the placing of an obligation on developers to prevent the introduction of cats and dogs onto the site through a Section 106 Agreement. Other issues within the 106 Agreement which the applicants consider as important are listed as follows:
· Applicants are committed to a phased approach to the restoration of historic buildings in tandem with the new build enabling development.
· A management plan enabling the on-going preservation and maintenance of these historic buildings and parkland setting.
· Concern that proposal will result in the urbanization of Sandy Lane with particular reference to on street lighting and street furniture that would be inappropriate.
· Writer notes that previous proposal indicated future commercial employment use on the open space area at the entrance to the site which they consider to be inappropriate. (This element of the proposal has been omitted.) Writer concludes as follows:
· Local residents realize that an urgent solution to the future of this unique site is needed. The increase in physical deterioration together with escalating levels of vandalism means that the viable life span of these buildings is limited. I believe some further work to address the issues raised in this letter of objection and those raised by other residents, developer could make this proposal meet what should be joint objective of the development which respects the historic and ecological sensitivity of the site whilst producing an economically viable project.
5.13 Other issues raised are summarized as follows:
· Concern that the level of parking provision is insufficient to service the development.
· Concerns that traffic impact will be excessive with particular reference to increased use of Sandy Lane and pressures on Whitcombe Road.
· Local residents support the concept of Sandy Lane becoming a “quiet lane” and even consider that this type of road should be extended to other rural roads in the area.
· One writer is concerned at the methodology of comparing traffic generation from the established use of the site with traffic lights generating from the current proposals.
· Some concern relating to the potential additional use of Sandy Lane by vehicular traffic on cyclist who also use that lane.
· Concern that the drainage proposals particularly in respect to the use of soakaways may not be acceptable unless such soakaways are appropriately constructed. (This is an issue which will be addressed under the auspices of the Building Regulations.)
· Some concern that the overall development may have an adverse impact on the adjoining Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty and that the proposal could set a precedent for further development in the countryside.
· Any proposal should ensure the restoration of the clock tower with particular reference to the clock itself.
· During development works all trees to be retained should be protected.
· Concern that the likely length of the building works and the disturbance to local residents that would be caused.
· There is an excessive prevalence of flats.
5.14 Although the above represents a précis of the points of criticism and objection of the proposal within those letters there elements of support which are summarized as follows:
· Support for the retention of most of the Victorian buildings in the Conservation Area and the sensitive method that has been used in their conversion.
· Support for the development within the Defined Development Footprint is welcomed apart from those elements which in objectors’ views extend beyond the development envelope.
· Retention of the parkland setting is welcomed.
· Proposal to designate Sandy Lane as a “quiet lane” is supported although residents would expect to be consulted on the details.
5.15 Members are advised that since receipt of these letters further information has been received and all letter writers have been advised accordingly. The information has been included in the Council web site and have been available for inspection. A summary of the revisions are as follows:
· Revised Master Plan (omits detached house N12) (omits reference to proposed office building on open green area).
· Revised drainage layout.
· Updated design statement.
· Complete set of drawings in A3 format.
· Skyline views
· Copy of bat survey report
· Samples of materials for ‘new build’ units.
5.16 As a
result of the above mentioned procedure, four additional letters received
objecting to the proposal in the main the points raised are already covered
however additional points are summarised as follows:
·
Proposal provides a lack of facilities
·
Concern that the loss of the existing nurses home
·
Lack of Environmental Impact Assessment
·
Proposal generally excessive creating effectively a new village
·
Need for comprehensive geological survey
One of
the letters is from the Whitecroft Residents Association questioning the
accuracy and interpretation within the updated design statement. Other points
raised relate to:
·
Urbanisation of Sandy Lane
·
Need to ensure conservation of the Landscape Management Plan covers
the whole site and is submitted and agreed at the beginning of the process.
·
Concern that the presence of protected species has not been
adequately covered with particular reference to the involvement of English Nature.
·
No detail proposal as to how risk from cats and dogs to wild life is
to be addressed.
·
Design Statement does not indicate as to how the orchard is to be
retained.
·
Phasing Plan does not indicate lengths of time of each phase.
·
Need to ensure no further development takes place on the site.
6. Evaluation
6.1 The Whitecroft site is unique to the Isle of
Wight containing as it does a significant number of substantial Victorian
buildings of notable character set within the quality landscape and parkland
setting located in the countryside. This coupled with the historical
significance of the buildings with particular reference to their former use has
resulted in the site having the status of a conservation area which emphasizes
the importance of ensuring their retention. Having established this as being
the overriding aim then the criteria in terms of considering development
proposals was to establish what type of alternative use would provide the most
viable option in ensuring the buildings retention.
6.2 Policy Issues
It
is patently obvious that in normal circumstances any proposal which would
result in excess of 100 units in the countryside would be strongly resisted on
the basis of being contrary to general locational policies and also being
unsustainable. However, in this case a balance has to be struck due to the
uniqueness of the site with this scheme indicating the retention of all the
important buildings thus ensuring the unique character is protected for future
generations to enjoy.
6.3 I therefore consider from a principle point
of view more weight should be given to national policies and local policies
which emphasise in exceptional circumstances the need to protect special
quality and integrity of a site’s character and thus ensuring a continued
contribution to the character of the area.
6.4 Having established the retention of the
buildings as being the most important consideration, the next policy issue to
consider is that of the appropriateness of the residential use being proposed
in respect of these applications. It is appreciated that this use does not
comply with the detailed planning brief which specifically stated that housing
use would be unacceptable. Again on the face of it this proposal is therefore
unacceptable being contrary to that planning brief and other basic policies.
However, again I suggest that because of the high conversion of costs
implications involved in this scheme the question of what represents the most
practical viable solution to achieving a profitable development is paramount.
Whilst acknowledging the uses referred to in that planning brief would provide
a more inclusive mix compatible with the countryside location, the criteria
here is whether those uses would provide the returns to cover the high
conversion costs and whether the buildings lend themselves to any or all of the
preferred uses in the planning brief. It is important to appreciate that where
public have access to buildings there are clearly strict regulations which
involve high building costs. During the negotiating process the applicants at
one time suggested a hotel use on the site as part of the mainly residential
proposal but even this following their research found no active participants.
6.5 Therefore, whilst recognizing that generally
residential conversions could be deemed to be more detrimental to the fabric
and character of historic buildings, in this case because of the past type of
uses these buildings do lend themselves to sympathetic conversion to
residential use whilst retaining the general fabric of the building with
particular reference to the external features and as such the residential reuse
of the buildings is considered to be the only method of ensuring the retention
of the buildings.
6.6 In this regard I make reference Policy C17
and whether or not this proposal satisfies the three caveats suggested in the
text to that policy. In this regard it suggests that applicants should clarify
the steps that have been taken to market the buildings or arranged for
alternative uses, establish why alternative uses are not economically viable
based on a clear understanding of costs etc and ensure that the work required
would not undermine the character of the buildings.
6.7 I am satisfied that the marketing exercise
has taken place since the hospital closed in 1992 without resulting in any firm
offers coming forward. Applicant states that during the two year period that
they have been involved, discussions with the Isle of Wight Development Agency
as well as SEEDA have taken place. During that time they discussed all options
for potential uses. The problem is that the buildings are falling into great
and greater disrepair resulting in the alternative uses mentioned in the brief
becoming more and more unviable both in terms of the former layout of the
buildings and the substantial amount of work and money that now needs to be
spent on restoring the buildings and the surrounding landscape.
6.8 Thirdly, the test of whether or not
conversion would undermine the character of the buildings has clearly been
satisfied with the conversion proposals being sensitively applied resulting in
minimal alteration to the building’s facades.
6.9 From the above Members will note that the
application of policies has had to be flexible in this case for I consider that
the scheme before Members is likely to be the only viable proposition if
Members agree that the basic principle must be to ensure retention of the major
proportion of the existing buildings on the site for reasons given.
6.10 Enabling
Issues.
Members will note that the proposal involves
the construction of 42 new build units which are deemed necessary to cover the
high conversion costs of the existing buildings. The applicants have submitted
extensive financial information and supporting material evidence all of which
have been scrutinized by an independent sustainable property consultant
commissioned by the Council to fulfill this task. The enabling analysis is
based on English Heritage’s practical guide which covers enabling development
and the conservation of heritage assets. It is important that Members
appreciate that the applicants are well versed in this type of scheme with
particular reference to conversion of mental hospitals in Dorset, Somerset and
Lincolnshire.
6.11 The sustainable property consultants report
indicates a thorough examination of the information identifying key variables
being income costs, developers profit and land values. A breakdown of his
report is as follows:
·
Income: Consultant has been advised by local agents that the sales
values being quoted are reasonable and represents a slight premium to the
market which is relatively small and transparent.
·
Costs: Consultant acknowledged that base construction costs for the new
build are acceptable; however it is less straight forward in terms of
refurbishment costs. Specific reference is made to unknown factors such as
costs of asbestos removal and other contaminants and the refurbishment costs
which are likely to be 20% higher than new build. This reflects generally poor state
of the buildings particularly from dry rot. It is significant that the
consultants state that, “we have taken advice from out own costs consultants
who agree that the refurbishment costs are not excessive and could be
conservative especially if the buildings are not addressed soon.”
·
Developers Profit: Developers profits are based on an assumed percentage
on costs, normally between 15 and 25%. Higher profit figures reflect levels of
risk, the higher the potential risk the higher profit margin in order to offset
those risks. Again, consultant significantly states that in this case, profits
are within the standard range but at the bottom of the range which suggests
very little scope for unexpected factors.
·
Land Value: Site valued in its current state by a reputable firm of
valuers and was acquired on the basis of that valuation. Consultant states
significantly the following. “Whilst one can be critical of that valuation in
that it does not incur any costs for affordable housing with such an inclusion
the outcome would have been a negative site value thus making all proposals
non-viable.”
6.12 Members will note from the above the viability
is a significant issues in this case and in this regard I make reference to the
fact that the proposal does not make allowance for provision of affordable
housing in any form either off site or as a financial contribution. The
applicants have clearly stated that the requirement for social housing could
only be achieved by a greater increase in the level of new build to cover those
costs. Apart from commissioning the sustainable property consultant to assess
the general enabling development in terms of the costs of refurbishment they
were also requested to consider the applicants case to waive provision of
affordable housing in any form. In this regard I can do no more than quote the
conclusion of the consultants as follows:
“This development proposal is the product of
difficult financial circumstances. Having reviewed the development appraisal
and the costs in more detail, we consider that although the scheme does not
meet the Council’s policy expectations, the circumstances of this site suggest
there is a reasoned case for considering the affordable housing provision may
be forgone at least in the initial stages of the project and perhaps deferred
until the real values and costs have become clear. On the assumption that value
inflation out strips costs, inflation then contribution towards affordable
housing commuted sums may be feasible at a later stage.”
6.13 I can do more than concur with these
comments and as the proposal will require Section 106 Agreement covering a
number of other issues then I suggest Members consider the imposition of an
appropriate clause within that agreement to cover the recommendations of the property
consultants.
6.14 Design, Density and Location
The issue of most concern to some local
residents is the design approach of the applicants with particular reference to
the new build units. Whilst understanding the concerns of local residents on
this issue it is important to recognise that this contemporary architectural
approach to the new build has been carefully considered and justified in this
case on the principle basis that the retained original buildings should form
the dominant architecture on the development with the new build playing a
lesser role while still using elements of traditional materials.
6.15 Members will note that this approach has
been supported by the Architects Panel and the Council’s Conservation and
Design Team Leader. In terms of the latter, she states the following:
“The visual relationship of new and old
buildings within the site in terms of size, form, style and materials need to
be carefully considered. I have noted that the existing buildings are strong and
large structures so to place small weak buildings within their area of
influence would not work visually. To try to replicate the original buildings
regardless of the requirements of the regulations and the site’s space would
detract from the grandeur of those buildings and water down the historic
importance of the site. To provide buildings of a comparable height and form
without over dominating the originals is a delicate balance but a contemporary
solution can provide a contrast which can show off both old and new in good
light as well as meeting the regulations and aspirations for modern standards
of accommodation.”
6.16 Members will also note that English Heritage
has also been consulted and whilst they have raised a number of issues they
significantly raise no objection to the “modern approach” although they express
concern regarding choice of materials etc. Members are advised that these
comments have been taken on board with particularly reference to a more muted
colour in terms of the use of render and suggesting either a light or dark grey
in terms of the use of weathered zinc roofs.
6.17 Whilst recognizing the subjective nature of
this important issue I can do no more than be advised by those consultants
available to provide professional design advice and therefore concur with their
comments and suggest that the contemporary approach has been fully justified in
this case and is therefore acceptable.
6.18 In the main the location of the new build units
are within the previously developed area of the hospital and have been
positioned to retain the axial aspect of the site upon which the historic
layout is centered. English Heritage also commented on the importance of the
spatial relationship of the proposed blocks which are considered to be acceptable
in terms of the new build relationship to the retained buildings.
6.19 The proposed new buildings are mainly within
the previously developed area of the hospital which was a requirement of the
planning brief with the exception of the live/work units being located in the
valley on the eastern boundary and to a lesser degree the ‘new build’ units N8
and N9. In this position these units are making use of land, the landscape
value of which is less than that adjoining land and enables the introduction of
units which can provide living accommodation but more significantly commercial
floor space which could assist in encouraging small rural businesses.
6.20 In terms of the conversion and refurbishment of
the existing building being the main element of the proposal evidence provided
suggests these have been carefully considered with the application being
accompanied by a structural engineers report and a schedule of conditions of
the existing buildings to be retained. Proposal does include some demolition mainly
of buildings of little character but also elements of the existing buildings
which are considered necessary to open up those buildings and make them more
conducive to residential conversion. The application is accompanied by a plan
which clearly indicates the level of demolition works which obviously will need
to be carefully carried out. Application is also accompanied by a phasing plan
which indicates the first phase of any development on the assumption it is
approved to be in the north western corner of the site with the final phase
(number 6) being the live/work units close to the eastern boundary.
6.21 Further benefit from this proposal is the
removal of existing buildings to the south east of the main complex which jut
into the existing parkland. Removal of these buildings will enable this area to
return to parkland with the only facility being provided in this area being a
tennis court for residents use.
6.22 Other subsidiary issues which have been
addressed by the applicant are as follows:
·
Applicants intend to install a new motor in the water tower in order
that the clock functions again.
·
Applicants have confirmed that they intend to renovate the existing bus
shelter at the junction of Sandy Lane.
·
Applicants propose to use low level halogen light to illuminate
footpaths, roadways and car parking areas. With in addition similar lighting
being proposed in Sandy Lane from the bus stop to the entrance to the
development.
·
Members will note that
the existing nurses’ home located to the south east of the main complex of
buildings is to be demolished. It is important to appreciate that this is not
one of the original buildings having been constructed in the 1950s. Whilst it
is acknowledged that there is some regret at the loss of this building, the reasoning
behind this proposal to both demolish and not replace, is to return this area
of the site to the parkland and to create an improved setting for the older
retained converted buildings to the northwest.
6.23 Ecology
and landscape. Members will note that the applicants have commissioned
appropriate ecology reports relating to protected species with the main area of
concern relating to bat occupation of the existing building. Given the contents
of the report, clearly it is important that the applicants obtain the necessary
DEFRA and bat licence to allow demolition and conversion works to proceed in
accordance with legislation. The comments of the Council’s Ecology Officer are
self explanatory and appropriate conditions will be suggested.
Members
are advised that the site does not fall within a category requiring
consultation with English Nature although their advice has been sought in
respect of introduction of controls preventing domestic cats and dogs being
kept on the site. The Council’s Ecology Officer has been heavily involved in
issues relating to protecting species as indicated by his supporting comments
within this report. Members’ attention is also drawn to the suggested
conditions 17 and 18 which relate to protected species in respect of bats and
badgers.
Members
are advised that a screening opinion has resulted in an Environmental Impact
Assessment not being required in this case. The fact that the site is a
Conservation Area is not one of the criterias which would trigger the need for
an EIA.
6.24 With respect to effect on red squirrel
habitation, applicants indicate that it is their objective to retain all the
Pine trees and shrub corridors and more significantly develop new planting
areas on Pine and Hazel which are species attractive to red squirrels.
6.25 In general I consider the applicants have
clearly recognized the importance of ecology issues in respect of the site and
would take the necessary steps to protect those species accordingly. I would
also suggest relevant conditions, should Members be mindful to approve the
application.
6.26 In terms of landscape, again an extensive
report accompanies the application and although the proposal does involve loss
of a small number of preserved trees, this is more than adequately compensated
for by extensive new planting mainly of native species designed to reinforce
the existing tree cover. Again, such landscaping proposals including protection
of existing trees which would be subject of standard conditions.
6.27 Transport (Parking). Application is
accompanied by transport assessment with the proposal indicating the use of the
main entrance off Sandy Lane. In terms of level of traffic likely to be
generated by this proposal it is important that comparisons would need to be
made against the likely generation of traffic caused by the previous use. The
last patients left in early 1992 with the site being used for administrative
purposes following that departure. It is clear that up to the mid 90s the site
attracted a level of traffic conducive to that use. Whilst direct comparison in
terms of exact numbers is not possible it is suggested that the current
residential use proposal is unlikely to attract a level of additional traffic
which would be significant and therefore have any greater impact on the road
system than the previous use had.
6.28 In terms of the parking the applicants have
been encouraged to keep the parking levels to a minimum whilst still providing
a practical level of parking. In this case the applicants have provided a total
of 165 car parking spaces which equates to an average of 1.5 spaces per unit. I
consider this is an acceptable ratio given the variance of apartment sizes with
this level of parking providing potential for two parking spaces for the larger
units and one car parking space for smaller units. Also the level of parking
will hopefully control the level of vehicles likely to be using the site for
there is no possibility of any on street parking being available given the
rural nature of the surrounding roads.
6.29 The parking areas themselves have been split
into small groups dispersed throughout the developed area of the site located
to relate readily to the units to which they serve.
6.30 Proposal indicates the closure of the
secondary access off Sandy Lane to the north between the properties The Pines
and The Lodge with that access being limited to cycle and footpath use only.
Essentially, apart from this vehicular access closure, the site will be served
via the existing access arrangements as previously described, the only
additional access road within the site being that related to serving the
live/work units adjacent the eastern boundary.
6.31 Members will appreciate that given the site’s
location the applicants will be required to submit a Green Travel Plan as part
of the Section 106 Agreement procedures. Applicants have indicated that a
management company will be set up to be responsible with the overall
maintenance, security and management of the site and it clearly present an
opportunity through residents involvement to consider car sharing scheme or
other sustainable transport proposals. Such Green Travel Plan should also
include clear linkages to and ensure links are provided for the cycle routes to
Blackwater.
6.32 Finally, in terms of highway issues
negotiations are ongoing regarding the creation of a “quiet road” status for
Sandy Lane the extent and starting point of that quiet road status is currently
still under discussion. This is obviously important for residents of this site
should be encouraged to use Whitcombe Road as an entrance and exit point when
traveling to and from the site. Again this is an issue which can be covered by
Section 106 Agreement covering the relatively modest financial contribution
necessary to create the quiet road status subject to consultation with local
residents.
6.33 Drainage. Some concern has been
expressed regarding the site’s ability to cater for exceptional weather
conditions which in the past has resulted in flooding problems. Applicants have
submitted drainage proposals which should address this issue. Applicants now
indicate that surface water drainage from both the existing and the proposed
buildings is to be taken to strategically place soakaways which I understand is
entirely acceptable given the ground conditions would result in a more
environmentally acceptable solution putting surface water back into the ground
rather than piping that surface water away to a discharge point. The second
benefit of removing surface water drainage from the system results in the
existing pump having only to take foul drainage. Proposal also indicates via
the new access road to live/work units a service road to the existing pump to
enable ease of servicing.
6.34 Concerns
relating to the geology of the site are noted, however the conditions suggested
by the Environment Agency more than adequately cover the details of surface
water drainage requiring applicants to submit details of surface water
regulation system with the Environment Agency’s concerns being in the main relating
to potential contamination on the site. In terms of the size and position of
the soakaways, this would be an issued covered under Building Regulation
Control and would be subject of percolation tests before they are accepted as
being appropriately located and of an appropriate size. It is important to
appreciate an important element of the Environment Agency’s strategy for
surface water disposal is on site disposal into the ground rather than piping
the surface water to a surface water drainage system. This is considered to be
more environmentally friendly ensuring that the surface water contributes to
the water tables in the area. I therefore consider that the two issues relating
to geology i.e. its suitability for use as soakaways and monitoring of the site
in respect of contamination are more than adequately covered by condition.
7. Conclusion
and Justification for Recommendation
7.1 Having due regard and appropriate weight to
the matters discussed in the evaluation section your Officers have taken the
view that the uniqueness of both the overall visual character of the site in
terms of buildings and landscape and the paramount need to bring those
buildings into a viable use in the interests of their long term retention and
integrity has resulted in a flexible planning approach. Your Officers are
satisfied that the applicants have, following extensive negotiations achieved a
scheme which addresses that prime aim. Inevitably comprises have had to be made
with particular reference to the extent of enabling new build development
however again this has been justified through the submission of costings which
have been vetted by independent consultants. There is no doubt that this level
of residential development will have an impact but one which should contribute
to the areas’ uniqueness and satisfy the test of preservation and enhancement
it is essential in respect of development in a conservation area.
7.2 The applicants have addressed a number of
issues of concern expressed by local residents with a major proportion of the
remaining concerns being able to be addressed through the auspices of
conditions or Section 106 Agreement.
7.3 There are however issues of concern which
the applicant has been unable to take on board with particular reference to the
contemporary design approach of the new build and in some cases location of a
small element of the new build outside the existing built area of the hospital.
I consider that these issues have been adequately addressed within the
evaluation and are not of sufficient concern to warrant refusal of the
application.
7.4 There is urgency to the determining of this
application in order to ensure the cessation of the continued decline of the
existing building and therefore Members are recommended to approve the
application subject to conditions and subject to Section 106 Agreement.
8. Recommendation
To grant Conditional Permission to both
applications subject to completion of a Section 106 Agreement covering the
following:
·
Submission of a Green Travel Plan.
·
Financial Contribution of £20,000 towards costs of designating Sandy
Lane as a ‘quiet lane’, the implementation of suitable associated works in the
lane and improvements of its connection with the cycleway at Blackwater.
·
Evidence of the setting up of a fully funded registered management
company for the purposes of establishing design objectives, management
responsibilities, maintenance schedules in respect of the maintenance and
security of the development, implementation of conservation/landscape
management plan and repair and
maintenance of all buildings.
·
Agreement covering the
prohibition of any further development on the site.
·
Evidence that lease covenance are set up to ensure residents contribute
towards maintenance costs before occupation of any dwelling.
·
The submission of a phased construction programme in relation to
retaining and restoring the existing buildings with any such programme
including specification and sequence of repair works. Such phasing programme to
be carried out in accordance with the 6 phases indicated on drawing number
C03/03/91005 Revision A.
·
Mechanisms to be introduced to prevent the introduction for domestic
cats and dogs onto the site.
·
Mechanisms put in place to carry out a valuation review following
completion of phases 1 to 3 in order to establish whether the scheme can fund
limited affordable housing commuted sum. Such review to be carried out by an
independent assessor.
1 |
A10 |
The development hereby permitted shall
be begun before the expiration of 5 years from date of this permission. Reason: To comply with Section 91 of the Town and
Country Planning Act 1990. |
2 |
UN1 |
Development shall not begin until
the details of any changes to the construction and surfacing of the existing
roads along with details of means of disposal of surface water drainage have
been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.
Any such road alterations shall be carried out in accordance with those
approved details. Reason: To ensure an adequate standard of highway access and
drainage for the proposed dwellings to comply with Policy TR7 (Highway
Considerations) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan. |
3 |
UN2 |
Development shall not begin until
details of the design and surfacing and construction of the new access road
together with details of means of disposal of surface water drainage serving
the live/work units abutting the eastern boundary 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 live/work units to comply with Policy TR7 (Highway
Considerations) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan. |
4 |
J11 |
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 IW Unitary Development Plan. |
5 |
UN3 |
Agreed works shall be carried out
to improve the visibility at the existing access junction with Sandy Lane.
Such works shall ensure no detriment to the existing boundary trees either
side of the junction. The development shall not be occupied until these
visibility improvement works have been carried out. A management plan shall
be submitted to ensure such visibility improvement works are carried out on a
yearly basis. Reason: In the interests of highway safety and to comply with
Policy TR7 (Highway Considerations) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development
Plan. |
6 |
UN4 |
No dwelling shall be occupied
until means of access thereto for pedestrians and cyclists have been
constructed in accordance with the approved plan. Reason: To ensure adequate safe provision 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. |
7 |
UN5 |
No apartment hereby permitted
shall be occupied until space has been laid out within the site in accordance
with details which have been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning
Authority in writing for bicycles to be securely parked and any such
provision shall be retained thereafter. Reason: To ensure adequate
provision for the parking of bicycles in compliance with Policy TR6 (Cycling
and Walking) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan. |
8 |
UN6 |
No later than one month after the
day on which the first dwelling hereby permitted is occupied the existing
access to the north of the site from Sandy Lane shall be permanently closed
in accordance with the approved plans drawing number CO/03/009/1003. Reason: In the interests of
highway safety and to comply with Policy TR7 (Highway Considerations) of the
Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan. |
9 |
UN7 |
No development shall take place
until the developer has carried out an adequate investigation to assess the
degree of contamination of the and to determine its water pollution
potential. The methods and extent of the investigation shall be agreed with
the Local Planning Authority before any works commence. Details of
appropriate measures to prevent pollution of ground water and surface water
including provision of monitoring shall then be submitted to and approved in
writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To prevent pollution of the water environment of the site
may be contaminated due to the previous use in compliance with Policy P3
(Restoration of Contaminated Land) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development
Plan. |
10 |
UN8 |
No soakaways shall be constructed
in contaminated ground. Reason: To prevent pollution of the ground water in compliance Policy P2
(Minimise Contamination of Development) of the Isle of Wight Unitary
Development Plan. |
11 |
UN9 |
No development shall be commenced
until a scheme for the provision and implementation of a surface water
regulation system is designed to the satisfaction of the Local Planning
Authority and supported by detailed calculations. Such a drainage system for
the site must be capable of delivering the estimated 1% probability storm run
off to storage. The system must be capable of storing the run off from the 1%
event restricting the outflow to that which would have occurred had the site
have been a greenfield. The scheme shall include a maintenance programme and
establish ownership of the storage system for the future. Reason: To prevent flooding and ensure future maintenance in compliance with
Policy U11 (Infrastructure and Services Provision) of the Isle of Wight
Unitary Development Plan. |
12 |
UN10 |
The method of piling foundations
for the development shall be carried out in accordance with a scheme to be
approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority prior to any development
commencing. Reason: The site is potentially contaminated and piling could lead to the
contamination of the underlying aquifer in compliance with Policy P2
(Minimise Contamination from Development) of the Isle of Wight Unitary
Development Plan. |
13 |
UN11 |
During construction any facilities
for the storage of oils, fuels or chemicals shall be sited on impervious
bases and surrounded by impervious bund walls. The volume of the bunded
compound shall be at least equivalent to the capacity of the tank plus 10 %.
If there is a multiple tankage the compound shall be at least equivalent to
the capacity of the largest tank or the combined capacity of the
interconnected tanks plus 10%. All filling points, gauges and site glasses
shall be located within the bund. The drainage system of the bund shall be
sealed with no discharge to any watercourse, land or underground strata.
Associated pipework should be located above ground and protected from
accidental damage. All filling points and tank overflow pipes outlets shall
be detailed to discharge downwards into the bund. Reason: To prevent pollution to the water environment in compliance with
Policy P2 (Minimise Contamination from Development) of the Isle of Wight
Unitary Development Plan. |
14 |
UN12 |
Prior to being discharged into any
watercourse, surface, water sewer or soakaway system all surface water
drainage from parking areas and hardstandings and roads within the site shall
be passed through an oiled separator designed and constructed to have a
capacity and details compatible with the site being drained. Roof water shall
not pass through the separator. Reason: To prevent pollution of the water environment in
compliance with Policy P2 (Minimise Contamination from Development) of the
Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan. |
15 |
UN13 |
Any inspection manholes being
provided shall be clearly identified on foul and surface water drainage
systems in accordance with a scheme to be submitted to and approved by the
Local Planning Authority. Reason: To enable discharges from individual premises or buildings to be
inspected and sampled in compliance with Policy U11 (Infrastructure and
Services Provision) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan. |
16 |
UN14 |
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. |
17 |
UN15 |
All mitigation measures for the
protection of bats shall be carried out in accordance with the recommendation
contained within the bat survey update report dated May 2005 prepared by 4
Woods Ecology. Such mitigating measures shall include a programme of works
and details of provision of bat access points which should be submitted to
and approved by the Local Planning Authority prior to implementation.
(Applicant is advised that a development license from the Wildlife Licensing
Division of DEFRA will be required before any works can be undertaken). Reason: To allow proper consideration of the impact of the proposed
development and contribution of nature conservation interest to the amenities
of the area and to comply with Policy C8 (Nature Conservation as a Material
Consideration) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan. |
18 |
UN16 |
Prior to commencement of work a
programme of protection measures in respect of badgers shall be submitted to
and approved by the Local Planning Authority. Such agreed measures shall be
carried out in accordance with those agreed details and shall be retained
thereafter. Reason: To allow the proper consideration of the impact of the proposed
development and contribution of nature conservation interest to the amenities
of the area and to comply with Policy C8 (Nature Conservation as a Material
Consideration) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan. |
19 |
S03 |
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. |
20 |
S22 |
Notwithstanding the provisions of
the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995 (or
any Order revoking or re-enacting that Order with or without modification)
the exterior of the building(s) hereby permitted shall not be painted or
coloured other than as expressly authorised by this permission. Reason: In the interests of the amenities and
character of the area and to comply with policy D1 (Standards of Design) of
the IW Unitary Development Plan. |
21 |
UN17 |
The conversion of the existing
buildings hereby approved shall not commence until a detailed repair schedule
including photographic evidence and detailed drawings of all the existing
window repair works have been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning
Authority. Such schedule shall accord with the agreed phasing programme and
shall ensure an exact match with the original timber sash windows in terms of
number of panes, type of mullions, transoms, glazing beads, cills and use of
curved glass where appropriate. Such repair works shall be carried out in
accordance with the approved details. Reason: To reflect the requirements of Section 72 (1) of the Planning (Listed
Building and Conservation Area) Act 1990 and protect the character and
appearance of the Conservation Area and to comply with Policy B6 (Protection
and Enhancement of Conservation Areas) of the Isle of Wight Unitary
Development Plan. |
22 |
UN18 |
Where window repair/partial
replacement is beyond economic viability and prior to the conversion of the
existing buildings hereby approved all detailed drawings to scale of 1:20 or
larger where appropriateof the replacement windows shall be submitted to and
approved by the Local Planning Authority. Any such replacement timber sash
window to match the appearance of the original window and its construction
detail shall accord with the specification mentioned in condition 21. Reason: To reflect the requirements of Section 72 (1) of the Planning (Listed
Building and Conservation Area) Act 1990 and protect the character and
appearance of the Conservation Area and to comply with Policy B6 (Protection
and Enhancement of Conservation Areas) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development
Plan. |
23 |
UN19 |
The conversion of the existing
buildings hereby approved shall not commence until a detailed schedule
including accurate drawings (scale 1:20) of both existing and proposed
entrance timber doors including door surrounds have been submitted to and
approved by the Local Planning Authority. Development shall be carried out in
accordance with the approved details. Reason: To reflect the requirements of Section 72 (1) of the Planning (Listed
Building and Conservation Area) Act 1990 and protect the character and
appearance of the Conservation Area and to comply with Policy B6 (Protection
and Enhancement of Conservation Areas) of the Isle of Wight Unitary
Development Plan. |
24 |
UN20 |
Prior to commencement of work in
respect of any of the proposed 'new build' units a full detailed schedule and
drawings (scale 1:20) of the proposed entrance doors, windows and balconies
including balustrading shall be submitted to and approved by the Local
Planning Authority. Development shall be carried out in accordance with the
approved details. Reason: To reflect the requirements of Section 72 (1) of the Planning (Listed
Building and Conservation Area) Act 1990 and protect the character and
appearance of the Conservation Area and to comply with Policy B6 (Protection
and Enhancement of Conservation Areas) of the Isle of Wight Unitary
Development Plan. |
25 |
UN21 |
The conversion of the existing
buildings hereby approved shall not commence until details of the brick and
its bonding to be used in their repair has been submitted to and approved in
writing by the Local Planning Authority. Any such details shall include
specification of lime mortar (strength of mix, colour, texture and finish
etc.) used for bedding and repointing. Development shall be carried out in accordance
with the approved details. Reason: To reflect the requirements of Section 72 (1) of the Planning (Listed
Building and Conservation Area) Act 1990 and protect the character and
appearance of the Conservation Area and to comply with Policy B6 (Protection
and Enhancement of Conservation Areas) of the Isle of Wight Unitary
Development Plan. |
26 |
UN22 |
Conversion of the existing
buildings hereby approved shall not commence until details of the slate to be
used in the repair of the roofs has 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 reflect the requirements of Section 72 (1) of the Planning (Listed
Building and Conservation Area) Act 1990 and protect the character and
appearance of the Conservation Area and to comply with Policy B6 (Protection
and Enhancement of Conservation Areas) of the Isle of Wight Unitary
Development Plan. |
27 |
UN23 |
Any materials removed during the
conversion of the buildings (such as bricks and slates) shall be retained in
safe place on site ready for reuse where appropriate. Reason: To reflect the requirements of Section 72 (1) of the Planning (Listed
Building and Conservation Area) Act 1990 and protect the character and
appearance of the Conservation Area and to comply with Policy B6 (Protection
and Enhancement of Conservation Areas) of the Isle of Wight Unitary
Development Plan. |
28 |
UN24 |
The conversion of the existing
buildings hereby approved shall not commence until a specification for the
repair (including details of like for like replacements where necessary) of
the rain water goods has 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 reflect the requirements of Section 72 (1) of the Planning (Listed
Building and Conservation Area) Act 1990 and protect the character and
appearance of the Conservation Area and to comply with Policy B6 (Protection
and Enhancement of Conservation Areas) of the Isle of Wight Unitary
Development Plan. |
29 |
UN25 |
Before any works is undertaken in
pursuance of this consent to demolish any part of the building the applicant
shall carry out works as maybe necessary to secure the safety and stability
of those parts of the buildings which are to be retained. Such steps and
works shall where necessary include in relation to any part of the building
to be retained measures to strengthen any wall or vertical surface to support
any floor, roof or horizontal surface and to provide protection for the
building against weather during the progress of the work. Reason: To reflect the requirements of Section 72 (1) of the Planning (Listed
Building and Conservation Area) Act 1990 and protect the character and
appearance of the Conservation Area and to comply with Policy B6 (Protection
and Enhancement of Conservation Areas) of the Isle of Wight Unitary
Development Plan. |
30 |
UN26 |
Any mitigation works in relation
to the protection of badgers shall be in accordance with the detailed
recommendations contained in the badger survey report prepared by ARC
Environmental Consultants Limited and such mitigation measures shall be
retained thereafter. Prior to mitigation works taking place the badger report
shall be updated. Reason: To allow proper consideration of the impact of the proposed
development and contribution of nature conservation interest to the amenities
of the area and to comply with Policy C8 (Nature Conservation as a Material
Consideration) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan. |
31 |
UN27 |
Prior to commencement of work the
phasing programme for the landscaping and tree planting shall be submitted to
and approved by the Local Planning Authority. Such phasing programme shall include
details of any advance or screen planting with such planting being maintained
and protected to encourage its establishment. Such landscaping proposals
shall accord with the details contained in the landscaping report dated May
2005 prepared by Jennifer Maconchy Landscape Architect and there shall be no
deviation from those agreed landscaping proposals without the prior written
consent of the Local Planning Authority. Reason: In the interests of the amenities of the area in
compliance with Policy D3 (Landscaping) of the Isle of Wight Unitary
Development Plan. |
32 |
UN28 |
No development including site
clearance where appropriate shall commence on the site until all trees and
hedgerows to be retained have been protected by fencing or other agreed
barrier along a line to be agreed in writing with the Local Planning
Authority. Any fencing shall conform to the following specification: 1.2 metre minimum height chestnut
paling to BS1722 Part 4 standard, securely mounted on 1.2 metre minimum above
ground height timber post driven firmly into the ground or 2.4 metre minimum
height heavy duty hoardings securely mounted on scaffold poles or other
method of agreed protection which forms an effective barrier to disturbance
to the retained trees. Such fencing or barrier shall be
maintained throughout the course of the works on the site during which period
the following restrictions shall apply: · No
placement or storage of materials · No
placement or storage of fuels or chemicals · No
placement or storage of excavated soil · No
lighting of bonfires · No
physical damage to bark or branches · No
changes to natural ground drainage in the area · No
changes in ground levels · No
digging of trenches for services drains or sewers · Any
trenches required in close proximity shall be hand dug ensuring all major
roots are left undamaged. Reason: To ensure the trees,
hedging 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 amenities of the area in compliance with Policy D3
(Landscaping) and Policy C12 (Development Affecting Trees and Woodland) of
the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan. |
33 |
UN29 |
Any proposed hard landscape areas
(car parking/proposed access roads) within or in close proximity to crown
spreads of existing trees shall be constructed of porous materials of an
agreed specification which shall be retained in that condition thereafter. Reason: To ensure any adjacent
trees are not adversely affected and to comply with Policy C12 (Development
Affecting Trees and Woodland) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan. |
34 |
M51 |
No development shall take place
[within the area shown on the site until a programme of scrub, shrub and
ground clearance has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local
Planning Authority. The programme
shall be carried out as approved. Reason: To minimise disturbance to wildlife and to
comply with policy C8 (Nature Conservation as a Material Consideration) of
the IW Unitary Development Plan. |
35 |
UN30 |
Prior to occupation of any
dwelling on the site the existing bus shelter (located on Cox's Corner) shall
either have been replaced or renovated in accordance with details to be
agreed with the Local Planning Authority. Any such renovated or replacement
bus shelter shall be retained thereafter. Reason: In the interests of
the amenities of the area in compliance with Policy B6 (Protection and
Enhancement of Conservation Areas) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development
Plan. |
36 |
UN3 |
Prior to commencement of work
further details shall be submitted indicating the level of light spillage
which will result from the external lighting specification set out on drawing
number CO3/03/009/1003 Revision E1. Such details shall also include position
of and type of light fittings to be used both within the site in respect of
footpaths, access roads and car parking areas and within Sandy Lane from
Cox's Corner to the entrance to the site. No occupation shall take place
until such lighting scheme has been implemented in respect of Sandy Lane and
the relevant phase of development. Reason: In the interests of
ensuring lighting scheme proposed is the minimum required for the task in
compliance with Policy D14 (Light Spillage) of the Isle of Wight Unitary
Development Plan. |
37 |
UN3 |
Prior to commencement of work a
detailed programme of demolition works shall be submitted to and approved by
the Local Planning Authority. Such demolition works shall be limited to those
buildings or parts of buildings indicated on drawing number CO3/03/009/1002
Revision A1 and there shall be no amendment to those demolition proposals
without the prior written consent of the Local Planning Authority. Such
demolition programme shall allow for storage of relevant materials on site
for reuse referred to in condition number 27. Such programme shall also
include designated areas on site for storage of materials which shall be
within the vicinity of the defined development area. Such demolition work
shall be carried out in accordance with the agreed details. Reason: In the interests of
the amenities of the area in compliance with Policy D1 (Standards of Design)
and B6 (Protection and Enhancement of Conservation Areas) of the Isle of
Wight Unitary Development Plan. |
38 |
UN3 |
Prior to completion and occupation
of the conversion of block T a new clock motor mechanism shall be installed
details of which shall be agreed with the Local Planning Authority with such
mechanism being retained and maintained thereafter. Reason: In the interests of
the historical use of the Listed Building in compliance with Policy B4
(Protection and Enhancement of Listed Buildings) of the Isle of Wight Unitary
Development Plan. |
39 |
UN3 |
Details of any new boundary walls
or repair works to existing boundary walls shall be submitted to and approved
by the Local Planning Authority and no occupation of any dwellings to which
these boundary walls relate shall take place until the agreed details have
been implemented. Any such boundary walls shall be finished in materials to
match existing buildings. Reason: In the interests of
the amenities of the area in compliance with Policy D1 (Standards of Design)
and B6 (Protection and Enhancement of Conservation Areas) of the Isle of
Wight Unitary Development Plan. |
40 |
UN3 |
All construction traffic related
to development hereby approved shall be directed to leave the site via Sandy
Lane and Whitcombe Road with such direction being by means of prominent
signage details of which shall be submitted to and agreed in writing by the
Local Planning Authority. Such signage shall be erected at the junction
between the site and Sandy Lane and in the vicinity of Cox's Corner and shall
be in place at the commencement of works. The signage shall be retained in a
clean and legible condition for the duration of the development and any sign
that is damaged beyond repair shall be removed and immediately replaced. Reason: In the interest of
highway safety to comply with Policy TR7 (Highway Considerations) of the Isle
of Wight Unitary Development Plan. |
41 |
UN3 |
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 materials being deposited on the highway as a result of any
operation on the site. Any deposited material from the site on the highway
shall be removed as soon as it is practical by site operators. Reason: In the interest of
highway safety and to prevent mud and dust from getting on the highway and to
comply with Policy TR7 (Highway Considerations) of the Isle of Wight Unitary
Development Plan. |
42 |
UN3 |
The work space area within the
live/work units shall be retained for business use and shall not be altered
or changed to residential use without the prior written consent of the Local
Planning Authority. Such work space shall not be sold off or sub let
separately from the residential occupation with the live/work units being
retained on one ownership. Reason: To ensure the
continued use of these units for mix of business/residential use in the
interest of encouraging rural employment in compliance with Policy E8
(Employment in the Countryside) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development
Plan. |
43 |
UN3 |
The conversion of the existing
buildings hereby approved shall not commence until a detailed survey of the
existing buildings to be demolished has been carried out in respect of the
existence of plaques, foundation stones or any other historic artefacts and a
programme has been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority
for the careful removal and storage for reuse within conversion works of the
retained buildings. Reason: In the interests of retaining
the historic character of the site in compliance with Policy B6 (Protection
and Enhancement of Conservation Areas) of the Isle of Wight Unitary
Development Plan. |
44 |
UN3 |
The development proposal hereby
approved shall be retained as one planning unit and none of the retained or
new build units shall be sold off for separate development. Any development
shall be carried out in accordance with the agreed phasing programme. Reason: To ensure continuity
of development in the interest of the amenities of the area and in compliance
with relevant policies in the Unitary Development Plan, in compliance with B6
(Protection and Enhancement of Conservation Areas) of the Isle of Wight
Unitary Development Plan. |
Conditions/Reasons for P/02173/04 –
LBC/24342/C
1 |
The works hereby authorised shall
be begun not later than [5] years from the date of this consent. Reason: As required by s18 Planning (Listed
Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 [and (if less than 5 years) to …]. |
2 |
The conversion of the Building T
hereby approved shall not commence until a detailed reparation schedule
including photographic evidence and detailed drawings of all the existing
window repair works have been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning
Authority. Such schedule shall accord with the agreed phasing programme and
shall ensure an exact match with the original windows in terms of number of
panes, type of mullions, transoms, glazing beads, cills and use of curved
glass where appropriate. Such reparation works shall be carried out in
accordance with the approved details. Reason: To reflect the requirements of Section 72 (1) of the Planning (Listed
Building and Conservation Area) Act 1990 and protect the character and
appearance of the Conservation Area and to comply with Policy B6 (Protection
and Enhancement of Conservation Areas) of the Isle of Wight Unitary
Development Plan. |
3 |
Where window repair/partial
replacement is beyond economic viability and prior to the conversion of the
existing buildings hereby approved all detailed drawings to scale of 1:20 or
larger where appropriate of the replacement windows shall be submitted to and
approved by the Local Planning Authority. Any such replacement timber sash
window to match the appearance of the original window and its construction
detail shall accord with the specification mentioned in condition 21. Reason: To reflect the requirements of Section 72 (1) of the Planning (Listed
Building and Conservation Area) Act 1990 and protect the character and
appearance of the Conservation Area and to comply with Policy B6 (Protection
and Enhancement of Conservation Areas) of the Isle of Wight Unitary
Development Plan. |
4 |
The conversion of Building T
hereby approved shall not commence until a detailed schedule including
accurate drawings (scale 1:20) of both existing and proposed entrance timber
doors including door surrounds have been submitted to and approved by the
Local Planning Authority. Development shall be carried out in accordance with
the approved details. Reason: To reflect the requirements of Section 72 (1) of the Planning (Listed
Building and Conservation Area) Act 1990 and protect the character and
appearance of the Conservation Area and to comply with Policy B6 (Protection
and Enhancement of Conservation Areas) of the Isle of Wight Unitary
Development Plan. |
5 |
The conversion of Building T
hereby approved shall not commence until details of the brick and its bonding
to be used in their repair has been submitted to and approved in writing by
the Local Planning Authority. Any such details shall include specification of
lime mortar (strength of mix, colour, texture and finish etc.) used for
bedding and repointing. Development shall be carried out in accordance with
the approved details. Reason: To reflect the requirements of Section 72 (1) of the Planning (Listed
Building and Conservation Area) Act 1990 and protect the character and
appearance of the Conservation Area and to comply with Policy B6 (Protection
and Enhancement of Conservation Areas) of the Isle of Wight Unitary
Development Plan. |
6 |
Any materials removed during the
conversion of Building T (such as bricks and slates) shall be retained in
safe place on site ready for reuse where appropriate. Reason: To reflect the requirements of Section 72 (1) of the Planning (Listed
Building and Conservation Area) Act 1990 and protect the character and
appearance of the Conservation Area and to comply with Policy B6 (Protection
and Enhancement of Conservation Areas) of the Isle of Wight Unitary
Development Plan. |
7 |
The conversion of Building T
hereby approved shall not commence until a specification for the repair
(including details of like for like replacements where necessary) of the rain
water goods has 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 reflect the requirements of Section 72 (1) of the Planning (Listed
Building and Conservation Area) Act 1990 and protect the character and
appearance of the Conservation Area and to comply with Policy B6 (Protection
and Enhancement of Conservation Areas) of the Isle of Wight Unitary
Development Plan. |
8 |
Before any works is undertaken in
pursuance of this consent to demolish any part of the building the applicant
shall carry out works as maybe necessary to secure the safety and stability
of those parts of the buildings which are to be retained. Such steps and
works shall where necessary include in relation to any part of the building
to be retained measures to strengthen any wall or vertical surface to support
any floor, roof or horizontal surface and to provide protection for the
building against weather during the progress of the work. Reason: To reflect the requirements of Section 72 (1) of the Planning (Listed
Building and Conservation Area) Act 1990 and protect the character and
appearance of the Conservation Area and to comply with Policy B6 (Protection
and Enhancement of Conservation Areas) of the Isle of Wight Unitary
Development Plan. |
9 |
Prior to completion and occupation
of the conversion of block T a new clock motor mechanism shall be installed
details of which shall be agreed with the Local Planning Authority with such
mechanism being retained and maintained thereafter. Reason: In the interests of the historical use of the Listed Building in
compliance with Policy B4 (Protection and Enhancement of Listed Buildings) of
the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan. |
10 |
All mitigation measures for the
protection of bats shall be carried out in accordance with the recommendation
contained within the bat survey update report dated May 2005 prepared by 4
Woods Ecology. Such mitigating measures shall include a programme of works
and details of provision of bat access points which should be submitted to
and approved by the Local Planning Authority prior to implementation. (Applicant
is advised that a development license from the Wildlife Licensing Division of
DEFRA will be required before any works can be undertaken). Reason: To allow proper consideration of the impact of the proposed
development and contribution of nature conservation interest to the amenities
of the area and to comply with Policy C8 (Nature Conservation as a Material
Consideration) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan. |
Head
of Planning Services