PAPER B1

LIST OF PLANNING APPLICATIONS

REPORT TO COMMITTEE – 21 NOVEMBER 2006

1.	P/01752/06 TCP/18846/E	Wroxall	Conditional Permission
Page 4	Appuldurcombe Holiday Park, Appuldurcombe Road, Wroxall, Ventnor, PO38 3EP Proposed use of land for all year round touring pitches; outline for log cabins and toilet block (revised scheme)
2.	P/02126/06 TCP/02068/A	Arreton	Conditional Permission
Page 14	Part OS Parcel 4400 Blackwater Road, Newport Change of use of agricultural land to cricket ground to include construction of cricket pavilion and store; parking; vehicular access
3.	P/02174/06 TCP/21265/A	Ryde	Refusal
Page 29	23 Ashey Road, Ryde, PO33 2UW Proposed demolition of dwelling and siting of new access road
4.	P/01567/06 TCP/13956/B	Ventnor	Refusal
Page 38	4-5 Alexandra Gardens, Ventnor, PO38 1EE Demolition of link between properties; conversion and division of 12-bed hotel into 6-bed guest house and separate dwelling
5.	P/01727/06 TCP/02459/H - Joint	Brading	Conditional Permission
Page 44	70 and 71 High Street, Brading, Sandown, PO36 0DG Demolition of single storey extension and outbuilding; conversion of dwelling into 3 separate living units; residential development of 4 terraced houses with parking and alterations to vehicular access, (revised scheme)
6.	P/01728/06 CAC/02459/G - Joint	Brading	Conditional Permission
Page 44	70 and 71 High Street, Brading, Sandown, PO36 0DG Conservation Area Consent for demolition of single storey extension and outbuilding in connection with conversion of dwelling into 3 separate living units; residential development of 4 terraced houses with parking and alterations to vehicular access, (revised scheme)
7.	P/01809/06 TCP/07571/K	Cowes	Conditional Permission
Page 53	S and J Builders Merchant, Brunswick Road, Cowes, PO31 7DD Demolition of builders store; construction of 3 storey block of 5 flats; cycle racks, bin store and landscaping
8.	P/01846/06 TCP/07778/F	Gurnard	Conditional Permission
Page 61	17 Albert Road, Cowes, PO31 8JU Demolition of bungalow; 2 pairs of semi-detached houses with alterations to vehicular access; parking and landscaping, (revised scheme)
9.	P/02122/06 TCP/26818/A	Ventnor	Conditional Permission
Page 70	13 Leeson Road, Ventnor, PO38 1PR Removal of pitched roof; 1st floor extension to create 4 bedroomed house with balconies and flat roof; alterations and extensions
10.	P/02295/06 TCP/25882/B	Shanklin	Conditional Permission
Page 78	33 Landguard Manor Road, Shanklin, PO37 7HZ Demolition of existing property; outline for construction of 2 storey building comprising 8 flats with parking area and alterations to vehicular access, (revised scheme)

Reference Number: P/01752/06 - TCP/18846/E

Parish/Name: Wroxall - Ward/Name: Wroxall and Godshill

Registration Date: 13/07/2006 - Outline Planning Permission

Officer: Mr J Mackenzie Tel: (01983) 823552

Applicant: Appuldurcombe Gardens Holiday Park

Proposed use of land for all year round touring pitches; outline for log cabins and toilet block (revised scheme)

Appuldurcombe Holiday Park, Appuldurcombe Road, Wroxall, Ventnor, PO383EP

The application is recommended for Conditional Permission

REASON FOR COMMITTEE CONSIDERATION

This is a major application which has generated a number of policy issues and has proved to be contentious.

1. Details of Application

1.1 This is a hybrid application that is to say, part full and part outline. It seeks full permission for the use of land for touring pitches and outline permission for the erection of log cabins with siting and means of access to be considered at this time.

1.2 The change of use section of the application relates to the use and laying out of a piece of land for touring pitches for caravans, an area of approximately 1.37 hectares and located at the northern extent of the site, the full width of the site at that point. It is proposed to enable the site to be used all year round for tented and touring caravan use.

1.3 The proposed log cabins are proposed to be located between that northern tract and the existing walled garden area which abuts the northern side of Appuldurcombe Road and comprises approximately 1 hectare.

1.4 A phasing plan has been submitted indicating essentially a six year implementation as follows:

Year 1 – New infrastructure – Existing and upgrade to encompass new toilet block; upgrades to main services; roadways and lighting; planting and landscaping and carrying out the necessary ecological parts of the development.

Year 2 – Installation and set phasing of new timber lodges – Upgrading landscaping and pitch alterations.

Year 3 – Infrastructure for five lodges and then pro rata on a yearly basis.

Year 4, 5 & 6 – Completion of the scheme.

1.5 In support of the application plans, for guidance purposes show possible details of toilet block, typical details of one, two and three bedroom chalets. Details show timber clad buildings with low pitched roofing with unspecified materials. Layout plan of the site shows proposed 21 chalets located between Redhill Lane which marks the western boundary of the site and the existing touring area which is located towards the east to Wroxall stream.

1.6 The toilet block is proposed to be sited at the northern end of the existing touring site, before the open field now proposed for touring, located to the east and approximately 8 metres from the Wroxall stream it has overall dimensions of approximately 13 metres by 8 metres and is suggested to be finished in timber cladding on a feature brick plinth with PVC doors and windows and the roof clad in an unspecified material. These plans, however, are to be treated for guidance purposes only.

2. Location and Site Characteristics

2.1 The whole of the Appuldurcombe Holiday Park has an area of approximately 4.8 hectares of land situated between the residential development located on the western side of St. Johns Road and Worseley Drive and bounded, on the west, by Redhill Lane. The site is on the northern side of Appuldurcombe Road.

2.2 The site is low lying, the eastern boundary being marked by the watercourse, the Wroxall Stream flowing northwards as far as the northern extent of the existing caravan park then turning westwards and meandering through the northern part of the site, which presently has the appearance of an open field bounded by field hedgerows. This piece of land is currently used for overspill caravan camping for up to 28 days per calendar year.

2.3 Site is located at the north western extent of Wroxall village, abuts Appuldurcombe Park and is accessed via Appuldurcombe Road, off a narrow access which adjoins Appuldurcombe Road at the south western corner of the site.

2.4 St. Johns Road is the main road through Wroxall to Ventnor from Whiteley Bank.

3. Relevant History

3.1 In July 2005 an application for the proposed use of the land for touring pitches from March to October and outline application for log cabins and toilet block was refused on grounds of inadequate and deficient detail in respect of design, landscaping and phasing and details of how the protected species habitat would be safeguarded.

3.2 There is considerable history dating back from the 1950’s to the 1970’s for caravans and tented camping.

3.3 In 1977 an application to rearrange and extend the caravan park was refused on grounds of visual intrusion and adverse effect on the amenities of the area. The subsequent appeal was dismissed. The Inspector felt that large static caravans should be confined to the walled area of the caravan park.

3.4 Despite the above, the site is clearly a comparatively long established camping location.

4. Development Plan Policy

4.1 National Policy Guidance

· PPG21 – Tourism. Supports the lengthening of the holiday season but recognises the possible conflict between employment and tourism promotion and possible adverse effects on the countryside and the highway system.

· PPS7 – Sustainable Development in Rural Areas. Recognises the benefits of tourism to the rural economy but, again, recognises the possible conflict between visual impacts, nature conservation issues and access implications of development in rural areas.

· PPG13 – Transport. Recognises the need to focus on sustainable development in appropriate locations.

4.2 Unitary Development Plan Policies

· T5A and T5B relate to touring caravans and tented sites supporting new touring and tented camping sites where they are located in visually unobtrusive locations and where the caravans and tents are removed from the site outside the holiday season. T5B seeks to retain touring caravan and tented camping sites, resisting changes to permanent holiday accommodation sites if the visual or other impact permanent development of the sites detract from its rural character.

· D3 expects landscaping to be carried out to reflect general character and reduce visual impact if development is approved.

· T6 supports the expansion of existing permanent accommodation sites, provided they adjoin or are directly related to existing built facilities and do not detract from their surroundings, that they enhance the environment and does not impact on the surrounding area.

· C1 and C2 relate to the protection of landscape character, specifically C2 seeks to resist development within the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty unless meeting a proven need.

· C8 recognises that nature conservation areas are a material consideration. B10 – Parks and Gardens and Landscapes of Historic Interest seeks to protect such gardens or landscapes from inappropriate development.

· The site abuts the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty and is in close proximity to the historic gardens of Appuldurcombe.

5. Consultee and Third Party Comments

5.1 Internal Consultees

· Highway Engineers acknowledge receipt of Road Safety Audit and further comments will be reported later.

· County Ecology Officer points out that the Wroxall stream flows through the site and has nature conservation value. Water voles use the banks and stream and they are a fully protected species under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 as amended.

The Wroxall stream is known to support the highest densities of this nationally declining species of any stream on the Island and advises that these creatures confine the great majority of their time to activities to within a few metres of the water. Currently where the stream flows through the park their survival is being compromised by close mowing of the waterside vegetation and banks.

The ecologist continues by pointing out that although the current phase of the application avoids the vicinity of the Wroxall stream, it is important that any structure that is sited at least 5 metres from the streamside to avoid any impacts upon water voles and wetland wildlife and that in the event that the application is approved, he advises a management plan for the river corridor be submitted for approval of the Local Planning Authority and that such a plan should incorporate a significant area of waterside vegetation thereafter the area shall be managed to optimise the nature conservation value of this attractive feature of the site.

· AONB Officer advises that the site is well screened but recommends reinforcement of the planting, advising that involvement of the evolution of the plan has involved the AONB unit.

5.2 External Consultees

· Environment Agency object to the development as no Flood Risk Assessment has been carried out.

· NATS – no objection.

· Southern Water – no adverse comment.

5.3 Parish Council Comments

Wroxall Parish Council recommend approval and comment that the plan has been prepared carefully and properly.

5.4 Neighbours

15 letters of objection from local residents objecting on grounds of adverse visual impact especially on Appuldurcombe Park and the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty adjacent; inadequate access; unacceptable impact; development in tantamount to residential development; inadequate screening; light pollution from the development; site is outside UDP policy area and too close to the AONB; loss of light from trees of excessive height; generation of noise and smells; development contrary to policy in providing permanent pitches; likely selling of cabins and adverse effect on wildlife. One writer refers to the appeal in June 1978 which was rejected.

6. Evaluation

6.1 The main determining factors relating to this application are considered to be:

· Policy and principle, relating to the protection of the landscape, protection of the historic park which was designed by Capability Brown, possible effects on the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty against the presumption in favour of development, more specifically the support for tourism is expressed in the Unitary Development Plan and PPG21.

· National policy supports tourism for its employment value but recognises the potential conflicts with visual impacts, especially on landscaping matters relating to highway safety.

· The ecological value of the site.

· The impact on adjoining residential properties through visual intrusion, disturbance and pollution.

· The impacts of the increase in camping units, the intensity of the use of the site and any possible resultant impacts on access and highway safety.

· Whether or not it is considered that the reasons to withhold permission previously have subsequently been adequately addressed.

6.2 Policy and Principle

Policy T5A supports the establishment of new touring caravan and tented camping sites so long as they are located in visually unobtrusive locations and that the caravans and tents are removed from the site outside of the holiday season.

6.3 Policy T5B refers to the loss of touring caravans and camping sites even where it changes to permanent holiday accommodation stating that if the visual or other impact permanent development of the site detracts from the rural character of the area.

6.4 Policy T6 supports expansion of existing permanent accommodation sites if it adjoins existing built facilities or where it does not detract from the surroundings and that the design and appearance of the development does not adversely affect the rural character of the area. There is, therefore, support for this type of development so long as it does not adversely affect the amenities of the area. In addition this is a unique location since it does adjoin an Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty and the historic landscape park that being Appuldurcombe Park designed Capability Brown.

6.5 Policy C1 and C2 of the UDP seek to protect the landscape character and C2 especially refers to the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. Whist the site is not within, it does abut the AONB and therefore sites which abut can have an influence over the resultant character of the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. However, it will be seen that the AONB Unit have been involved in the pre-application planning of this scheme and are quite satisfied with the scheme providing reinforcement landscaping is carried out.

6.6 Policy D3 of the UDP seeks to achieve significant landscaping to ensure that developments are integrated into the character of the area and in this particular instance its importance cannot be overemphasised since the site is quite visible from surrounding viewpoints and the adjoining residential development.

6.7 Ecology of the Site

County Ecologist has examined the scheme and, as with the previous proposal refused last year, points out that the stream habitat which passes through the site is important for the protected species of water voles whilst he considers that the development would not necessarily conflict with the ecological value of the site, it would be necessary to formulate and implement a management plan to create and preserve satisfactory environmental factors for water voles. Bearing in mind it would form the creation of a habitat, such a habitat could be a visually important feature within the park whilst also enhancing the habitat of that protected species. Accordingly, the County Ecologist recommends conditions to require that management plan to be put in place and implemented.

6.8 Impacts on Adjoining Properties

The properties which are most likely to be affected are those in Worseley Road and on the western side of St. Johns Road, north of the existing site but it is acknowledged that all properties in Appuldurcombe Road will be affected to a greater or lesser degree dependent upon the levels of vehicular traffic generated by the proposal.

6.9 Essentially the proposal seeks to move a large proportion of the touring units into the field towards the north whilst utilising that centre section for erection of 21 log cabins. The encroachment further north means that some of the touring caravans will be a greater distance from adjoining properties than at present but the centre section of the site will be of lesser density. Noise pollution is a factor of all caravan and camping sites since holiday sites, by their nature, are areas of entertainment. Light pollution can be reduced by the imposition of conditions to ensure lighting schemes are approved and that they reduce light spillage to a minimum. However, it is intended, in line with government policy, that the cabins can be occupied all year round for holiday purposes. The application states that it is not the intention to sell any of the log cabins and that they would be retained for holiday purposes. Conditions can be imposed in order to restrict their occupation to holiday use and to put in place checks to ensure they are used for that purpose rather than longer stay accommodation.

6.10 Impacts on Highway Safety and Highway Considerations

A Road Safety Audit has been carried out and it is clear that from that audit, the authors consider that no material increase to road users at this location will arise from the proportionate increase in an established pattern of movements. It should be pointed out that the access not only serves Appuldurcombe Park as a holiday park but also serves the Appuldurcombe House which is a major tourist attraction with its various activities and, proportionately, the increase in traffic envisaged by his development is not significant. Highway Engineer concurs with the traffic auditors report and recommends conditions accordingly.

7. Conclusion and Justification for Recommendation

7.1 This is a long established holiday park with static caravans in the walled area nearest to Appuldurcombe Road with touring and tented camping provision further to the north. The proposal represents an improvement in quality and standard without a significant increase in accommodation units throughout the park. With sensitive and appropriate landscaping, the log cabin centre section of the park could be developed without significant detriment either visually or in terms of traffic safety and both the AONB Unit and the Parish Council afford qualified support to the scheme. So long as the Wroxall stream is protected and the environment surrounding the stream is enhanced to improve the habitat for water voles the use of the field to the north for tented and touring caravan camping from March to October should not have significant visual impacts which would be unacceptable in the landscape.

7.2 Highway and traffic implications have been carefully considered bearing in mind the Road Safety Audit which has been carried out and the level of increase in accommodation units is felt that both the period of occupancy and the intensity of the use of the site will be acceptable.

7.3 Landscaping of the site, as identified by the AONB Officer will, in the longer term prove to be an essential part of the scheme and a comprehensive landscaping scheme must be implemented to ensure visual impacts are reduced to the maximum.

7.4 Bearing in mind the previous refusal was based on inadequate information, further details regarding the types of structure and the type of landscaping proposed have now been submitted but there are still no details of the land moulding proposed which would be necessary in order to allow the paddock to the north to be laid out and used for caravan and tented camping. However, it is felt that this could be the subject of a condition which will adequately safeguard the way in which the site is used and approval is recommended subject to appropriate conditions.

8. Recommendation

Approval.

Conditions/Reasons:

1	The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of 3 years from date of this permission. Reason: To comply with Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.
2	Before any works or development hereby approved is commenced on site details relating to the siting, design, external appearance of any building(s) to be erected, the means of access thereto and the landscaping of the site shall be submitted to, and approved by the Local Planning Authority. These details shall comprise the ‘reserved matters’ and shall be submitted within the time constraints referred to in condition 1 above before any development is commenced. Reason: To enable the Local Planning Authority to control the development in detail and to comply with Section 92 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended).
3	Approval of the details of the siting, design and external appearance of the building(s), the means of access thereto and the landscaping of the site (hereinafter called "the reserved matters") shall be obtained from the Local Planning Authority in writing before any development is commenced. Reason: In order to secure a satisfactory development and be in accordance with policies S6 (Standards of Design), D1 (Standards of Design), D2 (Standards of Development Within the Site), D3 (Landscaping), TR7 (Highway Consideration for New Development) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.
4	No development authorised by this permission shall commence until a comprehensive management plan for the river corridor to safeguard the ecology and habitat has been formulated, submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority. Thereafter the plan shall be implemented in accordance within an agreed timetable and the scheme maintained thereafter. Reason: In the interests of the ecological value of the site and in accordance with policy C8 of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.
5	No development shall take place until full details of both hard and soft landscape works have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority and these works shall be carried out as approved. These details shall include [proposed finished levels or contours; means of enclosure; car parking layouts; other vehicle and pedestrian access and circulation areas; hard surfacing materials; minor artefacts and structures (e.g. furniture, play equipment, refuse or other storage units, signs, lighting, etc); proposed and existing functional services above and below ground (e.g. drainage power, communications cables, pipelines, etc, indicating lines, manholes, supports, etc); retained historic landscape features and proposals for restoration, where relevant]. Reason: To ensure the appearance of the development is satisfactory and to comply with policy D3 (Landscaping) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.
6	All planting, seeding or turfing comprised in the approved details of landscaping shall be carried out in the first planting and seeding seasons following the occupation of the buildings or the completion of the development, whichever is the sooner, and any trees or plants which within a period of 5 years from the completion of the development die, are removed or become seriously damaged or diseased shall be replaced in the next planting season with others of similar size and species, unless the Local Planning Authority gives written consent to any variation. Reason: To ensure the appearance of the development is satisfactory and to comply with policy D3 (Landscaping) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.
7	No lighting of the site shall be installed unless in accordance with a scheme which has been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority. the approved scheme shall indicate type, height and intensity of illumination and means of minimising spill lighting. The lighting shall be used only whilst that retrospective area of the holiday park is in use. Reason: In order to minimise environmental pollution and in accordance with policy P1 (Pollution and Development) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.
8	The holiday cabins hereby approved shall be used for holiday accommodation only and none shall be occupied as a sole or main residence. Reason: To ensure that the development remains for holiday purposes and to comply with policies T1 (Tourism) and T3 (Holiday Accommodation) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.
9	A comprehensive register of all occupants of the site shall be maintained giving details of all names, home addresses and dates of occupation at the site and the said register shall be made available for inspection by the Local Planning Authority as reasonable notice. Reason: To ensure that the development remains for holiday purposes and to comply with policies T1 (Tourism) and T3 (Holiday Accommodation) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.
10	The northern section of the site, shown in the application to be used as an extension to the touring use, shall only be occupied by touring caravans and tents. Reason: In the interests of the character of the area and to comply with Policy C1 (Protection of Landscape Character) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.
11	No land moulding or hard surfacing including the construction of access tracks shall be carried out (other than authorised by this permission) unless the prior written consent of the Local Planning authority has been obtained. Reason: In the interests of the character of the area and to comply with policy C1 (Protection of Landscape Character) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.

Reference Number: P/02126/06 - TCP/02068/A

Parish/Name: Arreton - Ward/Name: Central Rural

Registration Date: 25/08/2006 - Full Planning Permission

Officer: Mr J Mackenzie Tel: (01983) 823552

Applicant: Isle of Wight Cricket Board

Change of use of agricultural land to cricket ground to include construction of cricket pavilion & store; parking; vehicular access

part OS Parcel 4400, Blackwater Road, Newport, PO30

The application is recommended for Conditional Permission

REASON FOR COMMITTEE CONSIDERATION

This is a major application which has Island wide implications with a history which has proved to be contentious.

1. Details of Application

1.1 This is a full application with all matters to be considered at this stage.

1.2 The proposal comprises the change of use of agricultural land and for associated engineering works to form a cricket ground which is proposed to include the construction of a cricket pavilion and store, parking and for a vehicular access.

1.3 Vehicular access to the site is shown to be towards the northern extent, off the western side of Blackwater Road where the access road would turn in a southerly direction to set of gates and perimeter fencing leading into a car parking area situated behind the hedgerow which fronts Blackwater Road.

1.4 The playing pitch is roughly circular with overall dimensions of 180 metres by 150 metres surrounding the central cricket square formed by land moulding by cut and fill to produce a virtually level playing field.

1.5 The pavilion is shown to be located between the new parking area and the pitch and comprises a building with overall dimensions of 32.5 metres by 19.4 metres. The building is shown to be ‘T’ shaped with the frontage facing the cricket square where a 2.5 metre wide verandah with a central staircase leading down towards the pitch.

1.6 Facilities within the building are centralised on a lounge which includes a bar, cellar and kitchen and, on either side, facilities associated with the cricket ground such as changing facilities, showers, stores and toilets over a lower ground floor of limited area for storage. The lower ground floor level is facilitated by the cut and fill required for the leveling of the ground and, essentially, the ground floor level of the building is shown to be about 1 metre above ground level..

1.9 The plans show the building has a pitched and hipped roof with a projecting gable towards the south west, towards the cricket square with the verandah also facing the pitch and includes very large windows underneath the overhanging verandah.

1.10 No details of materials have been proposed but, in design terms, the appearance of the pavilion is of a typical pavilion design, probably incorporating timber features such as in the verandah, staircases and possibly wany edged boarding to the gable fronting the pitch.

1.11 Additional features included in the application are screens, a scoreboard and cricket nets located to the north west of the pitch, an area for covers to the west of the pavilion and it is anticipated that spectator seating would be provided around the periphery of the pitch but the Agent has confirmed that spectators will either bring their own chairs or hire deck chairs and that no formal or fixed seating would be installed.

1.12 Sections through the site show the comparisons between existing and proposed ground levels of four axes through the pitch and surrounding area. Section A which is approximately in a north east to south west axis shows little cut and fill with the majority of fill being in the south west producing a bund around the periphery of the pitch but with some changes in land levels around the north eastern part where the pavilion is located. Section B which runs in a virtually north to south axis also has little fill. Section C which runs in an east to west axis foresees substantial cut and fill to a maximum of approximately 4 metres at the extremities. The maximum fill at that point would be towards the north western part of site where the site abuts the cycle track and a backdrop of trees. Section DD which runs on the axis north west to south east also proposes substantial cut and fill with similar depths of cut and high fill.

1.13 In addition to the vehicular access proposed to be located at the northern extent of the site, it is proposed to install a new pedestrian access close to the pavilion and a further pedestrian and cyclist access in the extreme south western corner of the site where it abuts the cycle path. Whilst approximately 20 car parking spaces are shown adjoining the pavilion, further areas of overflow parking are shown just inside the access point.

1.14 The access arrangements include visibility splays of 4.5 metres by 120 metres and the provision of a right turn lane when approaching from the Newport direction, achievable by the widening of Blackwater Road and the reestablishment of a new highway boundary at the back of the visibility splays and the widened highway.

1.15 Details on the plan have been related to a datum level of 19.35 on Blackwater Road. The finished floor level of the pavilion is shown as 21.2 metres a height difference of 1.85 metres. Coupled with the overall ridge height of the pavilion, the ridge would be 9.35 metres above road level, but about 7.7 metres above finished ground level at the rear of the building

1.16 Plans detailing the access and highway arrangements also include proposals for new bus stops close to the pavilion and the closure of the existing access situated in the south eastern corner of the site opposite the entrance to Standen House.

1.17 A Road Safety Audit has been carried out which has identified potential problems, all of which can be addressed by conditions.

1.18 In addition to the application details the agent has furnished further information detailing the number of vehicles likely and the hours of operation of the cricket ground under normal circumstances. In addition he stresses that traffic generation for day to day matches will be outside of the heaviest periods of use (of Blackwater Road) and will be very small in the context of overall flows on Blackwater Road. There will be “one off” matches which are already regular fixtures of the Island cricket scene where it is difficult to predict the numbers of spectators likely to attend. However with such large gatherings, such as with the Garlic Festival and the County Show, traffic marshalling is employed to ensure the smooth passage of vehicles into and out of the site at appropriate times. The agent also confirms that there will be no floodlights installed at the ground although they will probably need to be some low level safety lighting around the pavilion access and parking areas.

1.19 In answer to some of the queries what raised regarding the proposals, the agent has asserted that the two High Schools cannot offer of the quality of facilities, playing surface, maintenance, access and particularly control of use required gold standard. They are playing fields rather than cricket grounds and support other activities such as rugby and football. Besides effect of such uses on the playing area, there is an overlap of seasons and school use would inevitably come first, making it difficult to agree fixtures.

1.20 Agent confirms that they expect there to be approximately 48 matches per season which would be played at this ground. Of these 12 or so would be evening matches rather than afternoon games and matches would be of a one day maximum duration and that there are no current plans for two day matches.

1.21 The scoreboard, a large feature of any cricket ground confirms that the dimensions 7.01 metres high by 5.99 metres wide and 0.2 metres deep with digits 0.46 by 0.38 metres, the background would be black and when not in use the “flip” digits would not show, the display simply being black to match the rest of the board. The only permanent display, in black and white would be the words such as “Total”, “Wickets”, “Runs”, “Batsmen” and “Bowler”. The appearance when not in use would be similar to that of the scoreboard at Ventnor CC and the location and the western side of the ground, backed by trees is considered to be the least prominent achievable. It has not been considered necessary to shutter the board when not in use but if the display is felt to be inappropriate, steps could be taken to minimise impact.

1.22 Seating

It is not intended to provide permanent seating around the ground either now or in the future. Some benches may be provided in the area immediately in front of the pavilion but spectators would be expected to bring their own folding chairs or hire deck chairs from the pavilion; when there is no cricket there will be no chairs left around the ground.

1.23 Other Uses

The intention is that the ground will be used only for cricket. When St. Georges (or other schools) use it, it would be expected that the pavilion would be open to provide toilet facilities and shelter if needed. The pavilion itself may be used out of season for cricket related activities such as training for umpires, scorers, coaches, club administrators etc and possibly Isle of Wight Cricket Board monthly board meetings. The owners lease will prohibit loud music, wedding receptions, etc. The pavilion bar will only be open on cricket match days or when training/meetings are held.

2. Location and Site Characteristics

2.1 The application site has an area of 4.65 hectares and is part of a larger area of land on the west side of Blackwater Road having an area of approximately 6.15 hectares. It has overall depth of approximately 260 metres reaching from Blackwater Road to the cycle path, the former railway line and a frontage of approximately 300 metres to Blackwater Road and is presently open, agricultural land containing few but mature trees on its southern boundary with two or three oak trees located within the confines of the site.

2.2 The site is located approximately 1.4 kilometres south of St. Georges Park on Blackwater Road opposite the entrance to Standen House.

2.3 The site is in open countryside on valley floor between St. Georges Down and the higher land located to the west which is also south of Carisbrooke Castle.

2.4 The western boundary of the site is marked by fairly dense woodland and, beyond, ponds associated with the agricultural use of Marvel Farm situated approximately 250 metres to the west.

2.5 Blackwater Road is the main road out of Newport in a southerly direction towards Blackwater, Arreton and Godshill. The site is relatively flat but there is a fall towards the west towards the former railway line which is now a cycle track and the tributary of the Medina.

2.6 Approximately 80 metres to the south is a small group of residential properties also on the west side of Blackwater Road and approximately the same distance from the sites’ northern boundary, a small group of properties on the eastern side of Blackwater Road.

3. Relevant History

3.1 Nothing relevant to this site but Members will recall that a similar proposal to this was considered in October 2005 relating to land to the north off the Whitecroft complex of Whitcombe Road and which was refused for reasons of its unsustainability due to its isolated location, its adverse effect in the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty, its unacceptable access arrangements and the fact that the site was one of archaeological importance containing a bronze age burial ground.

4. Development Plan Policy

4.1 National Policy Guidance

PPG17 advice supports the provision of sports and recreational facilities.

PPS7 – Sustainable Development in Rural Areas: seeks to protect countryside areas from inappropriate development.

4.2 The following Unitary Development Plan policies are applicable:

· S1	-	New Development will be Concentrated within Existing Urban Areas
· S3	-	New development of a large scale will be expected to be located in or adjacent to the defined development envelopes of the main island towns
· S4	-	The Countryside will be Protected from Inappropriate Development
· S5	-	Proposals for development which on balance will be for the overall benefit of the island by enhancing the economic, social or environmental position will be approved, provided any adverse impacts can be ameliorated
· S10	-	In areas of designated or defined scientific, nature conservation, archaeological, historic or landscape value, development will be permitted only if it will conserve or enhance the features of special character of these areas
· S11	-	Land use policies and proposals to reduce the impact of and reliance on the private car will be adopted and the Council will aim to encourage the development of an effective, efficient and integrated transport network.

With reference to specific, detailed policies of the Unitary Development Plan the following are considered appropriate:

· D1	-	Standards of Design
· D2	-	Standards for Development within the Site
· C1	-	Protection of Landscape Character
· C2	-	Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty
· C8	-	Nature Conservation as a Material Consideration
· C11	-	Sites of Local Importance for Nature Conservation
· TR3	-	Locating Development to Minimise the Need to Travel
· TR4	-	Transport Statement Requirements for Major Development
· TR6	-	Cycling and Walking
· TR7	-	Highway Considerations for New Development
· TR13	-	Highway Improvements
· TR17	-	Public Rights of Way
· L2	-	Formal Recreational Provision

4.3 The site is not within an Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty but is located within the gap between two Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty in the valley between St. Georges Down and the high land to the west.

5. Consultee and Third Party Comments

5.1 Internal Consultees

· Highway Engineer recommends conditions if approved.

· County Ecologist considers the application site has no intrinsic nature conservation value. Points out that it does adjoin a Site of Importance for Nature Conservation but recommends only that comprehensive landscaping scheme should be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority which includes the creation of a buffer strip along the woodland edge.

· Council’s Tree Officer points out that there are a number of good quality trees on the site which could be adversely affected through possible soil level changes and construction within their root protection area and recommends refusal due to insufficient information.

· Rights of Way Officer recommends establishment of a new bridleway along the southern boundary to link with the A3020 and the cycle way and bridleway situated to the west and the imposition of conditions to ensure the cycle way and public right of way remains open at all times.

5.2 External Consultees

None received at time of writing.

5.3 Parish Council Comments

Arreton Parish Council point out that the two High Schools could be used for the establishment of the facility. However raises no objection in principle.

5.4 Neighbours

Eighteen letters of objection from local and Island residents on grounds of:

· Increased traffic and increased traffic hazards

· Adverse effects on habitats and wildlife

· Visual intrusion

· Adverse effect in the landscape

· Unjustified exception to and therefore contrary to UDP policy

· Use of premises for additional functions

· Light pollution

· Danger to traffic from cricket balls

· Adverse effect on residential property in the vicinity especially Standen House which is a Grade II Listed Building

· Vandalism and increased levels of noise

· Loss of agricultural land

· Wrong location with suggestion that there are 20 existing cricket grounds elsewhere which could be improved

· One writer reports that there has been a recent accident on this section of road

· Precedent for further developments at this location if approved

· Two writers report that a legal agreement prevents the use of this land. The agreement is within the Isle of Wight County Council and was dated 1941. The restriction in the agreement states the land the subject of the agreement shall be used only as private open space as a private ground for sports, play, rest or recreation or as an ornamental garden or pleasure ground or as arable, meadow or pasture land, osier land, orchard or nursery grounds etc.

38 letters of support from Island and mainland sources.

5.5 Others

· Island Watch object to the development on loss of agricultural land and on traffic hazards.

· CPRE letter initially supported the scheme but second letter from CPRE raises other concerns regarding management of spectators and vehicles; seating or stands may be installed, querying levels of traffic, contamination from cars parked on grass areas, the visual impact of the development which may affect Standen House and the landscape by the erection of screens etc. and querying if alternative sites have been considered.

6. Evaluation

6.1 The main issues relating to this application are:

· Policy implications

· Traffic and highway implications

· The sustainability of the location

· The alternative sites and why this one has been chosen by the applicants

· Visual impacts

· Additional developments and uses if approved

· Habitats and ecology

· Effects on trees and hedgerows

6.2 Policy Implications

Policy L2 of the UDP states that proposals for new buildings, extensions or improvements to form sports facilities, including all weather, floodlit pitches, will be acceptable in principle provided that they are located within or adjacent to existing settlement boundaries and there are no unresolvable traffic problems; conditions limiting hours of use are applied where necessary; and that they do not result in an unacceptable loss of amenity. Despite other general policies of the UDP it is generally accepted that the establishment of a gold standard cricket ground is a desirable development for the Island as a whole but it must also be accepted that to find a site which will be within the designated development envelope will be extremely difficult especially bearing in mind land values and the physical rarity of such an amount of open space.

6.3 It is therefore likely that the only site which is likely to be available and to meet the specification needed is going to one on the periphery or at least nearby an existing settlement boundary rather than one within it. However, any developments in the countryside outside of the designated development envelopes will raise questions over suitability in terms of other policies within the UDP. Members will recall the past application for a similar development at Whitcombe Road and that the application was refused and, at that time, the development was welcomed in principle but it was felt the site chosen was inappropriate. Despite that previous refusal and the fact that Members might feel that this is more preferable location, the determination of this application should be made on its individual merit rather than the fact that it may be a better location than the previous one chosen.

6.4 Traffic and Highways

In terms of traffic and highway implications, the A3020 is a heavily trafficked road, a major route out of Newport and the site is approximately 2 km (just over 1 mile) from Newport town centre. It is a major bus route but the proposed access arrangements include the provision of both substantial visibility splays and the provision of a right turn lane in order to cater for the volume of traffic in terms of visibility and crossing the flow when entering the site. The access design involves the removal of a substantial length of hedgerow, the widening of the road to facilitate the provision of the right turn lane whilst maintaining the north bound lane and the replanting of the hedgerow at the back of the visibility splays, the Highway engineer considers the proposal to be acceptable, subject to conditions. The Road Safety Audit has only raised issues which can be covered by conditions.

6.5 Sustainability

The site is approximately 2 km (just over 1 mile) from Newport town centre and therefore is within cycling and possibly walking distance and, in addition, not only abuts the major route, the A3020 but also abuts the south bound cycle track the route of the old railway. The site is also on the route of a comparably frequent bus service. The site accordingly is considered to be a sustainable location and although in a rural location the choice represents a reasonable compromise between accessibility and the availability if a suitable site.

6.6 In the applicants’ Design and Access Statement it is quite clear that multiple uses are not contemplated and although this may be seen as justifying the existence of such a facility, it also indicates that the scale of the use will be significantly less as the site is only likely to be used for cricketing activities during the cricket season. Under the circumstances it is felt that this site is a sustainable location.

6.7 Alternative Sites

Research into the possibility of alternative sites was carried out prior to submission of this application and the site chosen meets the needs of the applicants. As a Gold Standard Cricket Ground, such a facility should have exclusive use rather than sharing with other sports or organisations. There is also a minimum standard and size required for the pitch and many of the alternatives investigated were simply of inadequate size to cater for the pitch size. In this instance the choice of site has been influenced to a degree by the availability of the area concerned to cater for the size of pitch required and, in addition, its central location on the outskirts of Newport would minimise traveling distances for all clubs as opposed to the choice of a more isolated location. In addition, it is pointed out by the applicants that a minibus is available to assist the movement of visitors and/or school children who are also permitted to use the site, to and from the site, so the use of private vehicles is minimised.

6.8 Visual Impact

In terms of visual impact, the works proposed are largely engineering operations with the moulding of the land to produce a flat “table” upon which cricket can take place. The majority of the site will be green with the main exception to the openness of the site will be the new pavilion building which it is acknowledged is a very substantial structure. In addition score boards and site screen will be erected and although the score board will be a permanent feature it will be viewed mainly from a significant distance but with a dark backdrop of the woodland behind. The site screens are traditionally white and will be in place during the cricket season although, according to the application, they will be removed and stored during the winter months. Visual impacts will also include the relaying out of the highway with its right turn lane and newly planted hedgerows following the removal of those existing roadside hedgerows to improve visibility.

6.9 The site is on the valley floor between two higher areas of land, St George’s Down to the east and a higher land to the west of Marvel Farm. Both of these areas are of Outstanding Natural Beauty and there will be long distance views occasionally from both locations. Largely the main impact will be that of the pavilion but the correct choice of materials and colours, coupled with extensive and appropriate landscaping should reduce the impact of the mass of that structure satisfactorily. The site itself is not within the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty but is visible from it and although objections have been received from local residents, the AONB Unit have declined to object to the development in terms of its visual impact.

6.10 Additional Uses and Developments

The applicants’ Access and Design Statement makes it quite clear that the intention is to maintain an exclusive use of the site for cricketing but, of course, the facilities provided within the pavilion namely the lounge, bar and kitchen does raise concern regarding social events taking place at the cricket pavilion unconnected with cricketing activities. It is pointed out that similarly the sports pavilion at the Rookley Recreation Ground is in a countryside location and does operate for those activities at other times. Bearing in mind the facilities proposed and the agents assurance that the other activities will not occur, activities being restricted to direct association with the sport, it is appropriate to improve conditions accordingly. Bearing in mind the Access and Design Statement does seek to minimise the number of buildings and structures on the site (i.e. by the incorporation of the groundsman’s store beneath the pavilion) it is not anticipated there will be a call for further buildings at the site.

6.11 Ecology

In terms of habitats and ecology the Council’s Ecology Officer has examined the application and considers the site to be of little ecological value but does point out that the adjoining Site of Importance to Nature Conservation does require some consideration and recommends that buffer planting should be carried out along the western side of the site in order to ameliorate any possible affects of additional surface water run off.

6.12 The Council’s Tree Officer has inspected the site and the trees thereon and has raised concern over one of the oaks closest to the pavilion. He has pointed out that there are changes in ground levels proposed which could affect the tree through encroachment of fill material onto the root protection area. The applicants suggest that this part of the application could be amended to incorporate a retaining wall rather than the area being graded to avoid the root protection area. These discussions are continuing but could be the subject of a condition if felt necessary.

7. Conclusion and Justification for Recommendation

7.1 In this instance the principle of the establishment of a Gold Standard Cricket Ground has already been welcomed but, hitherto, the previous site was felt inappropriate due to its location, its inaccessibility and unsustainability, its visual impact and its adverse effect on archaeology.

7.2 Whilst I have said previously that this application should be determined on merit rather than it just being better than the previous proposed site, it is felt that the development is justifiable in this location. Whilst it could be argued that there are other sites more appropriate for this development, such sites may not be available, may be unsuitable in terms of their size and it is likely that such sites would not be maintained exclusively for the Gold Standard Cricket Ground use only.

7.3 Located on the valley floor with good communication links to Newport and at a distance of just over a mile from the town centre, it is centrally located in the Island and it is perhaps apt that it is relatively close to St George’s Park, the football equivalent, despite its countryside location. The site is located outside of the designated Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty and although sandwiched between two such designated areas it is felt that the impact the development would have on those areas is not of sufficient weight to warrant its rejection. It is therefore felt that this proposal is acceptable and consistent with the relevant policies contained within the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.

8. Recommendation

Conditional Permission.

Conditions/Reasons:

1	The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of 3 years from date of this permission. Reason: To comply with Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.
2	The Cricket Pavilion and other parts of the site hereby approved shall not be used for any purposes other than in direct connection with the use of the site as a Gold Standard Cricket ground and the bar and lounge shall not be open to the public other than on match days without the prior written consent of the Local Planning Authority. Reason: The site is in an area where general recreational uses would not normally be approved and in order to comply with policy L2 (Formal Recreational Provision) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.
3	No development shall take place until details of the materials and finishes to be used in the construction of the external surfaces of the development hereby permitted have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details. Reason: In the interests of the amenities of the area and to comply with policy D1 (Standards of Design) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.
4	No development shall take place until full details of both hard and soft landscape works have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority and these works shall be carried out as approved. These details shall include proposed finished levels or contours; means of enclosure; car parking layouts; other vehicle and pedestrian access and circulation areas; hard surfacing materials; minor artefacts and structures (e.g. furniture, play equipment, refuse or other storage units, signs, lighting, etc); proposed and existing functional services above and below ground (e.g. drainage power, communications cables, pipelines, etc, indicating lines, manholes, supports, etc). Reason: To ensure the appearance of the development is satisfactory and to comply with policy D3 (Landscaping) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.
5	All planting, seeding or turfing comprised in the approved details of landscaping shall be carried out in the first planting and seeding seasons following the occupation of the buildings or the completion of the development, whichever is the sooner, and any trees or plants which within a period of 5 years from the completion of the development die, are removed or become seriously damaged or diseased shall be replaced in the next planting season with others of similar size and species, unless the Local Planning Authority gives written consent to any variation. Reason: To ensure the appearance of the development is satisfactory and to comply with policy D3 (Landscaping) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.
6	The developer shall afford access at all reasonable times to any archaeologists nominated by the Local Planning Authority and shall allow them to observe all groundwork and to record [items/features] of archaeological significance and finds. Notification of the opening up and information as to whom the archaeologist should contact on site shall be given in writing to the address below (or to any alternative address notified to the developer by the Local Planning Authority) not less than 14 days before the commencement of any work: County Archaeologist County Archaeological Centre 61 Clatterford Road Carisbrooke Newport Isle of Wight PO30 1NZ Reason: In order to ensure access by specified archaeologists during the permitted operations and to comply with policies B9 (Protection of Archaeological Heritage) and B10 (Parks and Gardens and Landscapes of Historic Interest) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.
7	No development shall take place until a scheme for the drainage and disposal of surface water from the development hereby approved has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The scheme as approved shall be completed before any [residential] unit hereby permitted is first occupied. Reason: To ensure that surface water run-off is satisfactorily accommodated and to comply with policies G6 (Development in Areas Liable to Flooding) and G7 (Development on Unstable Land) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.
8	No development approved by this permission shall be commenced until a scheme for the provision and implementation of foul drainage works has been approved by and implemented to the reasonable satisfaction of the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To minimise the risk of pollution and to comply with policy P1 (Pollution and Development) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.
9	Before any development is commenced comprehensive plan showing all finished ground levels indicating spot heights and/or contours shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Thereafter all land moulding works shall be carried out strictly in accordance with the approved plan without variation unless the prior written consent of the Local Planning Authority has first been obtained. Reason: In the interests of the amenities of the area and in order to comply with policy C1 (Protection of Landscape Character) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.
10	No development shall take place until comprehensive details of surface treatments of the access, car parking and overspill car parking areas have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Thereafter all of those areas shall be carried out in accordance with that approved plan without variation unless the prior written consent of the Local Planning Authority has first been obtained. Reason: In the interests of the amenities of the area and in order to comply with policy C1 (Protection of Landscape Character) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.
11	There shall be no floodlighting of the cricket pitch or other parts of the site. Reason: In the interests of the amenities of the area and in compliance with policy D1 (Standards of Design) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.
12	No external lighting of any kind shall be installed at the site including around the pavilion, the car parking areas and the access to the site unless the prior written consent of the Local Planning Authority has first been obtained. Reason: In the interests of the amenities of the area and in compliance with policy D1 (Standards of Design) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.
13	Development shall not begin until details of the design, surfacing and construction of any new roads, footways, accesses and car parking areas, together with details of the means of disposal of surface water drainage therefrom have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details. Reason: To ensure an adequate standard of highway access and drainage for the proposed dwellings and to comply with policy TR7 (Highway Considerations) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.
14	The development shall not be occupied until sight lines have been provided in accordance with the visibility splay shown on the approved plan number MAGeneral/BW/1 Revision B. Nothing that may cause an obstruction to visibility shall at any time be placed or be permitted to remain within that visibility splay. Reason: In the interests of highway safety and to comply with policy TR7 (Highway Considerations) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.
15	Development shall not begin until details of the junction between the proposed service road and the highway have been approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority; and the building shall not be occupied until that junction has been constructed in accordance with the approved details. Reason: To ensure adequate access to the proposed development and to comply with policy D1 (Standards of Design) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.
16	Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995 (or any Order revoking and re-enacting that Order with or without modification), no gates shall be erected other than gates that are set back a minimum distance of 10 metres from the edge of the carriageway of the adjoining highway. Reason: In the interests of highway safety and to comply with policy TR7 (Highway Considerations) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.
17	No later than one month after the day on which the use hereby permitted commences] or the access hereby permitted is first used (whichever is the earlier) the existing access to the site from A3020 in the south eastern corner of the site shall be permanently closed in accordance with details which have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: In the interests of highway safety and to comply with policy TR7 (Highway Considerations) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.
18	Steps, including the installation and use of wheel cleaning facilities in accordance with details to be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority, shall be taken to prevent material being deposited on the highway as a result of any operation on the site. Any deposit of material from the site on the highway shall be removed as soon as practicable by the site operator. Reason: In the interests of highway safety and to prevent mud and dust from getting on the highway and to comply with policies TR7 (Highway Considerations) and M2 (Defined Mineral Working) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.
19	A replacement hedgerow shall be planted along the rear of the visibility splays and details of the replacement hedgerow shall be submitted as part of the landscaping and landscape implementation conditions 3 and 4 above. Reason: To ensure the appearance of the development is satisfactory and to comply with policy D3 (Landscaping) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.
20	The site screens situated on the north to south axis of the cricket pitch hereby approved, shown on drawing number 42-2004VW.1 shall be removed from their respective sites and stored outside of the recognised cricket season. Reason: In the interests of the amenities of the area and in accordance with policy D1 (Standards of Design) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.
21	The use of the cricket pitch hereby approved shall not commence until the road improvements comprising the widening of the A3020 and the provision of the right turn lane into the site including all road construction, surfacing and markings and the provision of the two new bus stop positions, all shown on drawing number MAGeneral/BW/1 Revision B have been carried out in accordance with details that have been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority in writing. Reason: In the interests of highway safety and to comply with policy TR7 (Highway Considerations for New Development) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.
22	No development shall take place until the applicant or their agents has secured the implementation of a programme of archaeological works in accordance with a written scheme of investigation which has been submitted to and approved by the planning authority in writing To facilitate monitoring of the on-site archaeological works, notification of the start date and appointed archaeological contractor should be given in writing to the address below not less than 14 days before the commencement of any works:- Owen Cambridge, Planning Archaeologist, Seaclose Offices, Fairlee Road, Newport

Reference Number: P/02174/06 - TCP/21265/A

Parish/Name: Ryde - Ward/Name: Ryde South East

Registration Date: 07/09/2006 - Full Planning Permission

Officer: Mr J Mackenzie Tel: (01983) 823552

Applicant: Mr K Thomas

Proposed demolition of dwelling and siting of new access road

23 Ashey Road, Ryde, Isle Of Wight, PO332UW

The application is recommended for Refusal

REASON FOR COMMITTEE CONSIDERATION

This is a contentious application and has been requested to be considered by the Local Member, Mrs Vanessa Churchman.

1. Details of Application

1.1 This is a full application seeking consent for the demolition of number 23 Ashey Road in order to form an access road from Ashey Road through the site to reach land situated to the east for a possible future development of up to 220 houses.

1.2 The submitted plan shows intention to demolish the property, form vehicular access and bell mouth and road of 6.1 metres in width plus two 1.8 metre footpaths.

1.3 The plan shows a straight road, parallel to the side boundaries which are almost to the rear of the site, a distance of approximately 84 metres.

1.4 Junction details indicate 10.5 metre radii and visibility splays with two alternative dimensions. One shows the X distance of 3.5 metres which will provide a Y distance of 90 metres and secondly an X distance of 4.5 metres with a Y distance of 52 metres in a northerly direction and 30 metres in a southerly direction. No details of construction, drainage or a road safety audit have been received.

2. Location and Site Characteristics

2.1 Site is located on the east side of Ashey Road a few metres south of the junction of Ashey Road with Pitt Street lying immediately adjacent to the north side of the site considered at the last meeting (25/27 Ashey Road) which also sought consent for an access road and which was approved. The site has a width of 16 metres, widening at the rear to about 18 metres and is presently occupied by a detached two storey single residence of a substantial age, constructed in buff brick under a slate roof.

2.2 Rear garden is open and laid to grass with mostly fruit trees. On both sides of the existing dwelling are established residential properties either in flats or as individual residences. The land has a steady but substantial fall to the east.

3. Relevant History

3.1 None in relation to this site.

3.2 In October of this year planning permission was granted for the partial demolition of number 25 (property adjoining to the south) and for the construction of an access road off Ashey Road between the remaining properties of 25 and 27 to service land at the rear.

3.3 Outline for residential development, which related to the land situated to the east of the site, with an access off Woodland View was refused in March this year for the following reason:

“In the opinion of the Local Planning Authority, the proposal would result in an intensification of vehicle movements to and from the site utilizing the existing access off Ashey Road which is considered to be substandard by reason of inadequate visibility and capacity to serve the resultant number of dwellings, adding unduly to the hazards of highway users, and would be contrary to Policies G4 (c) - General Locational Criteria for Development, D1 (d) - Standards of Design and TR7 - Highway Considerations for New Development of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.”

The above development included no land the subject of the current application nor the application on the adjoining site but it is the clear intention of the new access road to serve that land situated to the east, formerly the subject of that unsuccessful application.

That application is now the subject of an appeal which is likely to be heard in the New Year.

3.3 An outline application for residential development that land referred to in the preceding paragraph was refused in December 2002 on grounds of insufficient capacity within the existing sewage system and inadequate details of means of treatment or upgrading of the existing sewerage and possible adverse affects on the nature conservation interests in the near vicinity

3.4 In February 1999 an outline application which included the siting, landscape and access for ten semi-detached house and six terraced houses was refused. Again, that application related to the larger tract of land situated behind the properties fronting Ashey Road, the tract which adjoins the application site. The subsequent appeal against that refusal was allowed in November 1999 subject to conditions and a unilateral undertaking regarding pro-rata payments towards cumulative facilities and traffic calming measures was provided to stop.

3.5 The above permission was not implemented but a further outline application submitted seeking revised scheme for the residential development of that site was granted consent in February 2003 subject to a Section 106 Agreement which replaced the original unilateral undertaking referred to above. Reserved Matters consent was granted in May 2005.

3.6 Outline application for 21 detached and six terraced dwellings was approved in August 1999 subject to the 106 Agreement covering the payment towards community facilities and towards traffic calming in Ashey Road. A subsequent reserved matter application was approved in October 1999 which has now been completed, that development is now known as Woodland View.

3.7 A further permission for two detached houses within the rear garden of number 35 Ashey Road was also granted permission utilising access off Woodland View.

3.8 The above applications relate essentially to that land situated to the east at the rear of the site and in the vicinity.

4. Development Plan Policy

4.1 National Policy Guidance

National policies covered in PPG3/PPS3 – housing seeking to:

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

· Recommends regular review of housing requirement through the mechanism of local housing needs assessment.

· To provide sufficient housing land, preferring Brownfield to Greenfield sites.

· To provide a mix of size, type and location for housing.

· Provide for affordable housing initiatives.

· Recommends planning authorities ensure maintenance of supply of housing, concentrating most additional housing within urban areas.

· Making more efficient use of land by increased densities particular on previously developed land.

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

· Adopting a sequential approach to choice of sites.

· Manage the release of housing land.

4.2 UDP Policy

The application site is located within the designated development envelope. The whole of the land located between Woodland View and Hazlewood Close stretching as far as the lane almost 200 metres to the east of Weeks Road and traveling southwards, is also contained with the designated development envelope and is a scheduled housing site in the Unitary Development Plan, identified as H3 (38) which states that:

“It is proposed that an area of land to the rear of properties on the eastern side of Ashey Road to be released for residential purposes. Access to the proposed residential area will be from Ashey Road and will be constructed to the satisfaction of the Local Planning Authority. The development of the area should be in conjunction with the provision of community care facilities either within the site or on adjoining land. The land is undulating in nature and individual fields enclosed in the main by hedges and tree boundaries. The design and layout of any development should take account of the topography of the site, the proximity of nearby properties and maintain the natural features of the area where possible.”

4.3 As scheduled housing site the following housing policies in the UDP apply as follows:

· H1	-	Major New Residential Developments to be Located within the main Island Towns
· H2	-	To ensure that large residential developments contain a variety of house sizes and types.
· H14	-	Locally affordable housing is an element of housing schemes.

4.4 Unitary Development planned period (1996 to 2011) stated that there is a development potential for approximately 8,000 housing units which assumes that the development of allocated sites which will make a contribution. In terms of regional policies in respect of the south and southeast the targets for the Isle of Wight are in the region of 500 plus units per year. These figures will of course be revisited during the local development framework process (Island Plan) however the Unitary Development Plan is the statutory policy document which should apply to this site.

4.5 Other local Unitary Development Policies applicable to this proposal are:

· G1	-	Development Envelopes for Towns and Villages
· G4	-	General Locational Criteria for Development
· G6	-	Development in Areas Liable to Flooding
· G7	-	Development on Unstable Land
· C8	-	Nature Conservation as a Material Consideration
· C11	-	Sites of Local Importance for Nature Conservation
· C12	-	Development Affecting Trees and Woodland
· C13	-	Hedgerows
· TR6	-	Cycling and Walking
· TR7	-	Highway Considerations for New Development
· TR16	-	Parking Policies and Guidelines
· U2	-	Ensuring Adequate Educational, Social and Community Facilities for the Future Population
· U11	-	Infrastructure and Services Provision
· L10	-	Open Space and Housing Development

4.6 Site is located within Zone 3 of the Council’s Parking Policy.

4.7 Relevant Strategic Policies of the UDP relevant to this proposal are:

· S1

New development will be concentrated within existing urban areas

· S2

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

· S3

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

· S7

There is a need to provide for the development of at least 8,000 housing units in the planned period while a large population of this development will occur on sites within existing allocations or planning approvals or on currently unidentified sites or enough new land will be allocated to enable this target to be met and provide a range of choice and affordability.

· S11

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

4.8 Reference is also made to National document Residential Roads and Footpaths – Layout Considerations – Design Bulletin 32 and its companion guide – Places, Streets and Movements dated September 1998.

4.9 Supplementary Planning Guidance regarding affordable housing now seeks a 30% contribution from developers on those qualifying sites and contribution towards education facilities, open space and transport initiatives.

5. Consultee and Third Party Comments

5.1 Internal Consultees

Highway engineer recommends refusal on grounds of insufficient information pointing out that the following information would be required:

1. A Stage 1/2 Road Safety Audit.

2. Details of surface water drainage

3. Details of foul/sewage drainage

4. Detail of any on site water attenuation.

5. Highway construction details (carriageway to be adopted)

6. Street lighting details

7. Copies of legal agreement with the adjoining property owners, numbers 21 and 25A agreeing to site lines being cleared and the land dedicated without cost to the Highways Department, Isle of Wight Council.

5.2 External Consultees

Environment Agency has not been consulted due to the lack of information accompanying the application. However, Members will recall that when the application for the access road on the adjoining site was determined, the Agency recommended conditions which required that the surface water runoff from the road should not exceed that of a Greenfield site.

5.3 Neighbours

34 letters of objection from local residents on grounds of the following:

· Traffic hazards and pedestrian danger

· Inadequate visibility

· Impacts on bus stops

· Loss of on-street parking

· Proximity to the local school and traffic dangers for children and implications of conflict with safe routes to school.

· Loss of an attractive building.

· Excessive levels of traffic on this very busy road.

· The land which is proposed to be served is prone to flooding and land instability.

· Proposals are contrary to UDP Policy

· Dangerous access due to proximity to junction with Pitt Street.

· Excessive traffic speeds in Ashey Road

· Lack of detail in the application.

· Loss of habitats

· Creation of additional dangers for adjoining properties accessing their property.

· Some writers suggest that the new pavement should be installed on the west side of Ashey Road.

6. Evaluation

6.1 This is a second application following the consideration of application for the formation of an access road on the adjoining property. This is an alternative access, submitted by the new applicant and it is clear there is competition to provide the access to the land at the rear, the scheduled housing site which is the subject of the appeal which will be heard next year.

6.2 However, in determining whether or not an access is suitable and acceptable in planning terms, consideration of the purpose to which the access is to be put is essential. It is, again, clear that the access is proposed to serve up to 250 dwellings, therefore the capacity of the access road and its specification at its junction with Ashey Road are the prime considerations.

6.3 As an alternative access to that which was approved at the October meeting, despite the fact that that access was approved, it has not yet been implemented (and may not be) and therefore this application must be considered on its individual merits.

6.4 As with the previous application, this application does not include the land to the east to which access will be gained and although not included within the application, acceptance of this proposal will be a tacit acknowledgement of the suitability of the development of that land situated to the east.

6.5 Again as with the previous application the use of the land to the east for residential purposes cannot be separated from consideration from this proposal but determination of the application should turn on the following issues:

· Adequacy of the access in highway terms, i.e. visibility, gradient, road safety issues, capacity etc.

· Policy implications as detailed above.

· Drainage.

· Land stability

· Affect on adjoining properties.

6.6 It can be seen from the consultation section above that the Highway Engineers are not satisfied with the level of detail which has been submitted with the application and, more specifically, point out that a Road Safety Audit, details of drainage and road construction have not been submitted. The plans submitted show a 6.1 metre wide road with two 1.8 metre footpaths but visibility splays are shown to be X = 4.5; Y = 52 metres in a northerly direction and 30 metres in a southerly direction. Alternatively, a lesser visibility of X = 3.5 and Y = 90 metres is achievable but this requires the provision of those splays over both adjoining properties. Bearing in mind the current guidance as detailed above the visibility splays are short on the Y distance if an X distance of 4.5 metres is employed, however if it is as expected that national guidance suggests reducing X distances in the emerging advice then a visibility splay of Y = 90 will be achievable if the X distance can be reduced to 3.5 metres.

6.7 Policy Implications

Land to the east is shown in the Isle of Wight unitary Development Plan as a scheduled housing site and the explanatory notes in the relevant appendix indicate that the intention is to access the land from Ashey Road. Accordingly, providing the access is proved to be safe and complies with relevant specification and the other impacts such as the effect of adjoining properties are satisfactory, the proposal is not contrary to established policy.

6.8 Drainage

Members will appreciate that the application approved on the adjoining site met with the approval of the Environment Agency subject to adequate attenuation measures to ensure that the storm water run off from the site was attenuated to the levels of Greenfield site then drainage of this particular section of the access road would not be a problem.

6.9 Land Stability

As with the previous application on the adjoining site, Members were advised that there are no known wide spread land instability problems in this area. Whilst some individual properties have had to undergo underpinning, I am advised by Building Control that these are generally unique to the property rather than general problems in the area.

6.10 Affect on Adjoining Properties

With regard to affect on adjoining properties, as opposed to the previous application on the adjoining site, this proposal involves total demolition of a dwelling which is not substantially attached to adjoining properties and therefore the result would be that each of the two adjoining properties will have its side elevations fronting the access road. The plan shows that following demolition of the building distances from the adjoining properties to the back of the footpath would be approximately 3.3 and 5 metres respectively. Providing boundary treatments are carried out to segregate the properties from the access corridor and landscaping be carried out within the new verges, a satisfactory result could occur.

6.11 Other Issues

The unusual situation of two proposed access to serve the same land has resulted. It is clear that both applicants intend to provide access to the scheduled housing site to the east and it is clear that they are in competition to achieve their goal. It is not yet clear if one or other of these proposed accesses would be a secondary access to the site at the rear in the event that the appeal lodged by Wadham College is successful. Despite that, in the event that the appeal is dismissed, one of these accesses may be the sole access to that land at the rear. It is, however, inconceivable that both accesses will be implemented and, in highway terms, such a situation would be dangerous. In addition, despite the fact that consent was granted in October for the access on the adjoining site, this application should be determined on merit and cannot be refused on the basis that an alternative access has been granted since that access has not and might not be implemented. Bearing in mind the applications are submitted by separated parties it is not possible to revoke one permission in favour of the other without compensation being payable.

6.12 This leaves the situation that both accesses could be considered acceptable, both gaining planning permission when only one or the other as alternatives is acceptable. The developers of the site to the east will not entertain two accesses in close proximity and therefore in order to overcome this difficulty it is appropriate to impose Grampian type condition preventing the commencement of the development of either access until an agreement with the owners/developers of the housing site to the east has been concluded and planning permission granted for the residential development of that land. This condition will appear on each permission (in the event that consent is granted).

7. Conclusion and Justification for Recommendation

7.1 As with the previous application, this proposal seeks to provide access to a tract of land which has been scheduled in the Unitary Development Plan and before for residential purposes. That land has been the subject of an application for residential development and refused earlier this year with access from a different position, a position which was considered by this committee to be unacceptable. That application was refused solely on the grounds of inadequate access as detailed above and accordingly this application may only be determined on highway issues and issues emanating directly from the development included within this application. No road safety audit has been carried out on proposed access and due to the fact that its safety has not been established and the fact that visibility splays fall short of what would be required, it is considered that despite the fact that the access is in a similar position to that which has already been approved, inadequate information has been submitted to justify a consent at this time. It is considered that road safety audit is essential, that visibility splays are of insufficient magnitude under current guidance to be acceptable and that insufficient information has been submitted regarding levels, gradients, construction, drainage to enable the application to be properly considered and therefore the application is recommended for refusal and contrary to policies TR7 of the Unitary Development Plan.

8. Recommendation

Refusal.

Conditions/Reasons:

The information accompanying this application is inadequate and deficient in detail in respect of drainage and construction details and a road safety audit so that the Local Planning Authority is unable to consider fully the effects of the proposal on highway safety and in the absence of further details it is considered that the proposal is likely to be prejudicial to road safety and contrary to policy TR7 of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.

The access is unsatisfactory to serve the proposed development by reason of unacceptable visibility and would therefore be contrary to Policy TR7 (Highway Considerations for New Development) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.

Reference Number: P/01567/06 - TCP/13956/B

Parish/Name: Ventnor - Ward/Name: Ventnor East

Registration Date: 20/06/2006 - Full Planning Permission

Officer: Mr S Wiltshire Tel: (01983) 823552

Applicant: Mr & Mrs Hutchins

Demolition of link between properties; conversion and division of 12-bed hotel into 6-bed guest house and separate dwelling

4-5 Alexandra Gardens, Ventnor, PO381EE

The application is recommended for Refusal

REASON FOR COMMITTEE CONSIDERATION

This application is referred to the Development Control Committee for consideration as it raises a significant planning policy issue.

Notification has been received from the Planning Inspectorate that the applicant has lodged a valid appeal against the non-determination of this application within the statutory period. Consequently the power to determine this application rests with the Planning Inspectorate. However in accordance with the provisions of Section 78(a) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 the Local Planning Authority are required to give an indication to the Planning Inspectorate of what their decision would have been in this matter had the appeal not been lodged.

1. Details of Application

1.1 This is an application for full planning permission for the change of use of an existing 12 bedroom hotel into a 6 bedroom guest house and a separate 4 bedroom dwellinghouse. The proposal would involve the demolition of a ground floor flat roof link between the two parts of the existing hotel.

1.2 Applicant has submitted a covering letter and a nine page business development strategy with the application from which the following points are taken:

· 4 and 5 Alexandra Gardens presently trading as the Windsor-Carlton Hotel.

· Has 13 bedrooms one of which currently used as private accommodation by us.

· Business comprises of a mix of private guests and school parties.

· Due to the high maintenance, caused by the heavy traffic of school children many of the bedrooms are of low standard and not of a standard expected by today’s discerning visitor.

· Plan is to stop taking school parties and increase the standard of guest accommodation.

· Have discussed plans with Head of Tourism and they have offered their support and believe as we do that we could offer a five bedroom of four or five star standard as quality town house/guest accommodation in Ventnor.

· Believe this the only way forward in changing and improving Ventnor area.

1.3 The business development strategy document is broken down into a series of sections under the following headings:

1. Background

2. Tourism Development strategy

3. Policy

4. Development proposals

5. Conclusion

1.4 Further information submitted during the determination period from which the following points are taken.

· Owned hotel since March 2003

· Recognised Island changing and have proactive in approach to secure our future.

· Believe our proposals are transparent and committed to staying in Ventnor as part of local community and fully intend to continue running and investing in our business.

· Also committed to improving the standard of accommodation which is vital if we are to ensure we survive in changing market. To this end, prepared to commit to increase the standard of the remaining hotel to at least four star guest accommodation in line with the new common standards for guest accommodation. This is a tangible standard of accommodation that can be base lined, measured and monitored.

· Have attached a schedule of works we envisaged subject to survey will be undertaken at 5 Alexandra Gardens to achieve standard.

· Also prepared to commit to retain number 5 within existing use class and understand a planning condition would be appropriate as part of a package aimed at securing acceptable planning proposal.

· The upgrading schedule is attached at the end of this report as an appendix for Members information.

2. Location and Site Characteristics

2.1 The application site comprises the Windsor-Carlton Hotel which fronts Alexandra Gardens in Ventnor. The hotel comprises two 4 storey semi-detached buildings which have been linked at ground floor level to provide a single hotel unit. The original conversion works appear to have been undertaken prior to 1948. The rear of the hotel has a frontage onto Dudley Road.

3. Relevant History

3.1 The following applications have been determined on the application site;

TCP/13956/A	Covered storage area	Approved 9.6.89
TCP/13956	Front porch	Approved 10.3.72

4. Development Plan Policy

4.1 The Unitary Development Plan identifies the application site as being within the Development Envelope boundary and Ventnor Conservation Area. The site is currently used as a 12 bed hotel, thus the loss of this accommodation will need to be considered against the tourism policies of the Plan.

4.2 The relevant policies of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan are considered to be as follows:

· S1 – New development will be concentrated within existing areas

· S6 – Be of a high standard of design

· S10 – Conserve or enhance the features of special character of these areas

· G1 – Development envelopes for towns and villages

· G4 - General Locational Criteria

· B6 – Protection and enhancement of Conservation Areas

· D1 - Standards of Design

· D2 - Standards of Development within the site

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

· H7 – Extension and alteration of existing properties

· T5 – Hotels outside of defined hotel areas

· TR7 - Highway Considerations for New Development

· TR16 – Parking policies and guidelines

5. Consultee and Third Party Comments

5.1 Internal Consultees

· Conservation & Design Officer – No objection to the removal of the link structure

· Highways Engineer – No objection, subject to the imposition to a condition relating to car parking provision.

· Head of Tourism – Supports the application.

· Environmental Health Officer – No adverse comment to make regards noise, odour, fumes etc

5.2 External Consultees

· NATS – Has no safeguarding objection to the proposal.

5.3 Town or Parish Council Comments

· Ventnor Town Council – See no reason why planning consent should not be issued.

5.4 Neighbours

· No letters of representation have been received in respect of this application.

6. Evaluation

6.1 Principle of Development - The Unitary Development Plan (UDP) identifies the application site as being within the Development Envelope boundary and Ventnor Conservation Area. The site is within a mixed use area and the principle for conversion from a hotel to a guest house and dwelling needs to be assessed against policies G1, H4, T5 of the UDP, as discussed below;

6.2 Loss of Hotel Accommodation – The hotel is not within a defined hotel area identified in the UDP. Policy T5 states that applications which would involve the loss of hotel accommodation will only be approved where the proposal involves the change of use of less than 10 lettable bedrooms, or the existing accommodation is upgraded or improved.

6.3 A letter of justification for the proposal has been submitted by the applicants to support the proposal. This seeks to justify the proposal on the basis that the existing accommodation requires upgrading, and to enable a shift from the school break market to meet the growing demand for short breaks.

6.4 The Head of Tourism has commented that although the proposal would result in the loss of bed spaces in Ventnor, the proposal to move away from reliance on school groups and provide capital to invest in a better quality product with better occupancy rates would be consistent with the Hotel Futures Study and Development Strategy which identifies a need for further “boutique” style accommodation in Ventnor. As such he supports the proposal.

6.5 Policy T5 does acknowledge that a loss of hotel bed spaces may be acceptable if it results in an upgrade of accommodation. It is the officer’s interpretation of this policy that any proposal should have a clear justification with appropriate safeguards and “controls” to ensure that the resources generated by the release of part of the business and directed back into the remaining element. In assessing this application Officers have expressed concern that the application has not been supported by sufficient information which:

o Commits the applicant to the completion of a legal agreement to formally secure the future retention of No. 5 as a hotel.

o Provides detailed financial information on the money to be freed up by the sale and the level of investment required to refurbish the hotel to an acceptable standard that would warrant the loss of half of the hotel accommodation.

6.6 Without the first information the future retention of No. 5 can not be fully secured and would leave the Local Planning Authority in a weak position to resist a planning application for the future change of use of the remaining hotel element as it would be below the 10 bedroom threshold.

6.7 Regarding the second concern over the provision of financial information, this is considered necessary in order that the Council can consider if the level of finance raised is both sufficient to achieve the necessary upgrade and that the monies raised are indeed focused on the reinvestment. Member may recall similar requests when dealing with applications to allow the surrender of industrial sites to residential development on the basis that such an action would finance an employment relocation. Obviously, if considered necessary such financial information could be treated as confidential. Unfortunately to date, other than a schedule of works (which is attached an appendix to this report) despite several requests the applicant appears to be unwilling to provide the Local Planning Authority with any such information. Officers are not prepared on that basis to support a scheme based on trust.

6.8 Amenity for Neighbouring Occupiers – The alteration from a hotel to dwelling and guest house would have an acceptable relationship with the neighbouring uses.

6.9 Design and Conservation Area – The proposed change of use would involve the demolition of a ground floor link between the two halves of these buildings which is not in keeping with area. No other alterations to the external appearance of the building would be made. The Conservation and Design Officer has commented that he has no objection to the removal of the link structure in terms of impact on the character and appearance of Ventnor Conservation Area.

6.10 Highways & Parking – The existing hotel has 5 allocated on-street spaces in the private road to the front of the site. The application site is within Parking Zone 3 where 0 – 75% of the maximum operational provision will be allowed. A car parking layout has been subsequently supplied by the applicant which shows 1 space for the proposed dwelling and 4 cars for the hotel.

6.11 The Highways Engineer has commented that the proposed car parking layout does not comply with any current standards. However, since the application site is a private road and the proposal would be unlikely to generate a higher level of usage than the existing, it would be unreasonable to require any improvements, although 1 space should be secured for the residential dwelling through a condition.

7. Conclusion and Justification for Recommendation

7.1 The applicant seeks full planning permission for the change of use of an existing 12 bedroom hotel into a 6 bedroom guest house and a separate 4 bedroom dwellinghouse. Having given due regard and appropriate weight to all material considerations referred to in this report, it is considered that the approval of planning permission for the this change of use would result in the loss of hotel accommodation which is above the 10 bedroom threshold. Insufficient information has been submitted to justify the loss of this accommodation by virtue of the up-grading and future retention of the remaining portion of the hotel. As such the proposal is not in accordance with the strategic and local policies of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.

7.2 For Members information, the applicant has submitted an appeal against the Council for failing to determine the application within the 8 week period. At the time of writing this report that appeal has not bee validated but once it does then the final decision is taken out of the hands of the Local Planning Authority and would rest with the Planning Inspectorate. Members will be advised on this matter at the meeting.

8. Recommendation

This application is recommended for the refusal of planning permission.

Conditions/Reasons:

Whilst planning policy T5 (Hotels Outside of Defined Hotel Areas) does allow the Local Planning Authority to allow the loss or reduction in hotel accommodation premises which have more than ten lettable bedrooms where the proposal involves an upgrade of hotel accommodation it is a view of the Local Planning Authority that such a view requires adequate justification. In this particular instance, whilst the applicant has submitted certain supporting evidence this is not considered of sufficient weight to provide the Local Planning Authority with a sound justification to approved the scheme. As a consequence, the proposal as submitted, is considered contrary to policy T5 (Development Outside Defined Hotel Areas) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.

05 & 06

Reference Numbers: P/01727/06 - TCP/02459/H

P/01728/06 - CAC/02459/G

Parish/Name: Brading - Ward/Name: Brading and St Helens

Registration Date: 10/07/2006 - Full Planning Permission

Officer: Mr C Hougham Tel: (01983) 823552

Applicant: Hepburns Town & Country Planning Partnership

Demolition of single storey extension & outbuilding; conversion of dwelling into 3 separate living units; residential development of 4 terraced houses with parking & alterations to vehicular access, (revised scheme)

Conservation Area Consent for demolition of single storey extension & outbuilding in connection with conversion of dwelling into 3 separate living units; residential development of 4 terraced houses with parking & alterations to vehicular access, (revised scheme)

70 and 71, High Street, Brading, Sandown, PO360DG

These applications are recommended for Conditional Permission

REASON FOR COMMITTEE CONSIDERATION

Local Member shares concerns of Brading Town Council principally in respect of the proposed access arrangements and likely level of traffic generation.

1. Details of Application

1.1 Applications for planning permission and Conservation Area Consent involve the demolition of a small single storey addition/extensions and various outbuildings and seeks approval to convert the existing building (nos. 70 and 71) into three units comprising a three bedroom terraced house (no. 71) and two one bedroom self-contained flats, one at ground floor level and one at first floor level (no. 70) with a terrace of four small two bedroom town cottages to the rear of the site facing in a westerly direction “down” the site towards the rear of the existing buildings.

1.2 Proposals involve improvement to the existing vehicular access and a landscaped hard surfaced parking area with space for seven vehicles, one for each unit.

1.3 Agent has submitted supporting design and access statement which includes a Conservation Area appraisal prepared by the former Conservation Officer and photographs of the immediate vicinity of the site. Statement deals with policy related issues; analysis of the setting within the designated Conservation Area and the suitability of the proposed development; design and technical constraints including highway related issues and drainage.

2. Location and Site Characteristics

2.1 Site comprises older style terrace properties and relatively large rear gardens situated on the eastern side of Brading High Street to the north of the Bull Ring and the Wheatsheaf (PH).

2.2 Essentially the building comprises three elements, two terraced properties but with a third element in the form of first floor accommodation over a gated entrance which gives vehicular/pedestrian access to the rear of the site. It is difficult to establish the age of the building because of extensive repair and improvement work carried out over many years with a number of unsympathetic alterations including installation of inappropriate replacement windows.

3. Relevant History

3.1 In April 2006 applications were submitted for the demolition of a single storey rear extension and outbuildings and conversion of the existing premises into two separate living units with four terraced houses and a detached house to the rear with parking and alterations to vehicular access onto the High Street. On completion of the various consultations, having carried out an analysis of third party representations and a detailed site inspection, a letter was sent to the applicant’s agent advising him that officers were not prepared to support the application for three specific reasons.

· Inclusion in the scheme of a single narrow fronted detached unit adjacent to the northern boundary of the site represented an inappropriate form of development which failed to enhance then concept of a small courtyard scheme in the village centre.

· Integral part of the scheme was the conversion of 70/71 into two reasonably sized three bedroom dwellings and as the main façade of these properties had been the subject of unsympathetic alterations it was disappointing that as part of the overall scheme the agent had failed to undertake improvements to the external appearance of the buildings to achieve a balance of design, style and proportion in keeping with the prevailing character of the area.

· As this was a relatively high density development the application should have included details of landscaping/planting, particularly the boundary treatment including information on walls/fences to be retained, restored/improved or replaced.

On officers advice these applications were withdrawn.

3.2 Agent then submitted draft amended proposals which addressed the above concerns and focused on converting the existing building(s) into three separate living units with a terrace of four town cottages to the rear giving a total of seven units. He was advised that if these amended proposals form the basis of an amended application(s) it was likely to be supported by officers.

4. Development Plan Policy

4.1 National Policies are:

PPS1, PPG3, PP13 and PPG15.

4.2 The relevant Strategic Policies are:

· S1	-	New development will be concentrated within existing urban areas
· S2	-	Development will be encouraged on land which has been previously development (Brownfield sites), …
· S5	-	Proposals for development which on balance, ………… will be for the overall benefit of the Island, by enhancing the economic, social and environmental position will be approved, provided any adverse impacts can be ameliorated
· 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 units over the plan period……………
· S10	-	In areas of designated or defined …………historic value, development will be permitted only if it will conserved or enhance the features of special character of these areas

4.3 The relevant local planning policies

· G4	-	General Locational Criteria for Development
· D1	-	Standards of Design
· D2	-	Standards for Development Within the Site
· B6	-	Protection and Enhancement of Conservation Areas
· B7	-	Demolition of Non Listed Buildings in Conservation Areas
· B8	-	Alterations and Extension on Non Listed Buildings in Conservation Areas
· H4	-	Unallocated Residential Development to be Restricted to Defined Settlements
· H5	-	Infill Development
· H6	-	High Density Residential Development
· TR7	-	Highway Considerations for New Development
· TR16	-	Parking Policies and Guidelines
· U11	-	Infrastructure and Services Provision

5. Consultee and Third Party Comments

5.1 Internal Consultees

· Area Highway Engineer raises no objection to the proposed development but requests the imposition of appropriate conditions should the application be approved. In support of this decision he has provided some detailed observations, in which he says:

High Street, Brading (A3055) is within a 20 mph limit which due to the width and horizontal/vertical alignment of this road, is basically self enforcing. As such visibility splays of only x = 2 metres by y = 33 metres are required. Due to the width of the footway and favourable alignment of the road at this point, splays in excess of this figure are achievable. There is also adequate roadside boundary width to provide acceptable pedestrian visibility splays. Proposed level of parking is suitable for this Zone 4 area and will not result in any additional stress being placed on the surrounding streets in terms of “on street” parking.

Conditions have been recommended to provide a landscaping scheme to remove the possibility of any more than the seven car parking spaces being provided and to stop indiscriminate parking occurring, blocking the turning areas. A gate set back condition has been included that, if they are provided, will allow adequate space for vehicles to leave the highway prior to stopping to open the gates, thus allowing continued free flow of traffic. Details of works at the junction to ensure that the newly laid footway construction across the sites’ roadside boundary is satisfactorily reinstated have been requested. Standard conditions requesting detail of all access construction within the site, including surface water drainage have also been recommended along with a “timing of occupation” condition.

5.2 Town or Parish Council Comments

Brading Town Council object to the applications for reasons that can be summarised in the following terms.

· Access point is in close proximity to the controlled pedestrian crossing at the Bull Ring.

· Vehicles entering and leaving the site would need to cross a busy pavement area used by school children and people using nearby shops.

· Visibility onto busy A3055 is “not good” which could cause a hazard to users of the highway.

5.3 Others

There are three letters of objection from local residents living in the immediate vicinity of the site who make a number of points similar to those submitted by the local Town Council (see above) but also object on grounds of loss of privacy and amenity due to overlooking, noise pollution arising from vehicular movement and density of development.

6. Evaluation

6.1 There are a number of key considerations in connection with the determination of these applications. However, it is important to highlight several fundamental points.

· Site is within the development envelope boundary and therefore in terms of broad principle there is no objection to the redevelopment or further development for residential purposes.

· Site is within a designated Conservation Area and, as such, a duty is imposed on the Council as Planning Authority to ensure that all new development protects and enhances the character and amenities of the Area.

· Numbers 70 and 71 High Street are not Listed Buildings but nevertheless make a significant contribution to the character of the area in terms of scale and height although the main façade has been damaged by unsympathetic alterations and “improvements” over a period of time.

· There is no sustainable objection to the demolition of various later extensions/additions and outbuildings in order to facilitate the proposed development.

6.2 Major determining factor in this application is the opportunity to renovate and upgrade the existing building(s) and use the area of land to the rear to provide seven units of accommodation in the form of affordable homes within a sustainable location close to local facilities and on a main public transport corridor.

6.3 Provision of affordable homes in this location may present an opportunity to local people to continue to live in the village while also improving the viability of local facilities mostly centred around the Bull Ring just a short distance away from the application site. Indeed, this scheme has a number of similarities with another application to convert and develop land to the rear of nos. 67 and 68 High Street, currently the local grocery (Londis) store, which was approved several months ago.

6.4 In terms of layout the limited selective demolition of later additions result in improvements to the existing access leading to a landscaped parking area between the proposed terrace and the existing building. This layout is satisfactory and makes provision for small garden areas to the rear of the proposed cottages while restricting “on site” car parking to a “one for one” basis which will limit the amount of vehicular traffic entering and leaving the site and is more than acceptable in this particular location, especially when giving appropriate weight to the current policy and relevant guidelines.

6.5 In design terms the installation of suitably proportioned sash windows at first floor level will benefit the building is visual terms and enhance the area and, if approved, an appropriate condition should be imposed requiring the submission of further details on this particular point which may eventually involve some improvements at ground floor level on the main façade. Small terrace at the rear of the site is of an appropriate scale and size in keeping with the character of the area with further interest created by a vertical “stagger” because of a fall across the site.

6.6 Clearly there is much to commend the proposed scheme but nevertheless there are objections from the Town Council and three local residents (see above). Principle concern would appear to be the access to the site, a view not shared by the Area Highway Engineer who does not consider that this represents a sustainable reason for withholding permission. In this respect it is important to take into consideration the following points.

· Existing premises already has a restricted although rarely used vehicular access off High Street.

· Number of “on site” parking spaces is limited to one per unit and there is no certainty that the provision of small affordable homes in such a sustainable location is necessarily going to attract car owners in every instance.

· Brading High Street is the subject of a 20 mph speed restriction.

· Visibility in either direction is good and more than adequate when taking into account the speed of vehicular traffic.

It is considered that there is no sustainable reason for refusing permission.

7. Conclusion and Justification for Recommendation

7.1 In conclusion, in terms of the Governments initiative to make the “best possible use of urban land”, the need to protect and enhance the character and amenities of a designated Conservation Area and provide affordable homes in a sustainable location, this application should be supported and it is recommended for conditional approval accordingly.

8. Recommendation

Conditional Approval.

Conditions/Reasons:

1	The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of 3 years from date of this permission. Reason: To comply with Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.
2	The proposed courtyard area between the existing buildings and the proposed terrace of four town cottages should be laid out in accordance with the details shown on the approved plan (drawing no. 613/01/06B) before any of the individual units, hereby approved, are occupied and shall be retained as such thereafter. Reason: To ensure adequate off street parking provision and in the interests of the amenities of the area to comply with policies TR7 (Highway Considerations for New Development), D1 (Standards of Design) and D3 (Landscaping) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.
3	Development shall not commence until details of the facilities to be provided for the storage of refuse have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. No building shall be occupied until the facilities have been provided in accordance with the approved details and the facilities shall thereafter be retained. Reason: To safeguard the amenities of the locality and to comply with policy D1 (Standards of Design) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.
4	Before the development hereby permitted is commenced details of the width, alignment, gradient and drainage of the proposed improved access shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Development should be carried out in accordance with the approved details. Reason: To ensure an adequate standard of highway access and drainage for the proposed dwellings and to comply with policy TR7 (Highway Considerations for New Development) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.
5	No development shall take place until details have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority of the positions, design, materials and type of boundary treatment to be erected. The boundary treatment shall be completed before the building(s) hereby permitted are occupied. Development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details. Reason: In the interests of maintaining the amenity value of the area and to comply with policy D1 (Standards of Design) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.
6	No development shall take place until a schedule of landscape maintenance for a minimum period of five years has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The schedule shall include details of the arrangements for its implementation. Development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved schedule. Reason: To ensure satisfactory long-term maintenance of the landscaping of the [site/ development] and to comply with policy D3 (Landscaping) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.
7	Before any work commences on site full details of the alterations/improvements to the external fabric of the existing building(s) including both ground and first floor elements and the elevations of the proposed terrace of town cottages, at a minimum scale of 1:50, showing all details shall be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority. Work shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details. Reason: To secure a satisfactory and sympathetic form of development in the interests of the character of the area and to comply with policy B6 (Protection and Enhancement of Conservation Areas) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.
8	The doors and door/window frames of the converted and new buildings shall be constructed of timber and shall be painted in an appropriate colour in accordance with a scheme to be agreed with the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To protect the character and appearance of the existing building and to comply with policies B1 to B8 (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.
9	Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995 (or any Order revoking and re-enacting that Order with or without modification), no development within Classes A to E of Part 1 of Schedule 2 to that Order shall be carried out other than that expressly authorised by this permission. Reason: To safeguard the amenities of the locality and to comply with policy D1 (Standards of Design) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.
10	Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995 (or any Order revoking and re-enacting that Order, with or without modification), no windows/dormer windows (other than those expressly authorised by this permission) shall be constructed. Reason: To safeguard the amenities of the locality and to comply with policy D1 (Standards of Design) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.
11	Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995 (or any Order revoking and re-enacting that Order, with or without modification), no addition or alteration to the roof of the dwelling hereby approved (including the addition of windows) shall be made. Reason: To safeguard the amenities of the locality and to comply with policy D1 (Standards of Design) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.
12	No development shall take place until details of the materials and finishes to be used in the construction of the external surfaces of the development hereby permitted have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details. Reason: In the interests of the amenities of the area and to comply with policy D1 (Standards of Design) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.
13	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 Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.
14	Development shall not begin until details of the junction between the proposed service road and the highway have been approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority; and the building shall not be occupied until that junction has been constructed in accordance with the approved details. Reason: To ensure adequate access to the proposed development and to comply with policy D1 (Standards of Design) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.
15	Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995 (or any Order revoking and re-enacting that Order with or without modification), no gates shall be erected other than gates that are set back a minimum distance of five metres from the edge of the carriageway of the adjoining highway. Reason: In the interests of highway safety and to comply with policy TR7 (Highway Considerations) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.
16	No development shall take place until full details of both hard and soft landscaping works have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. No dwelling hereby permitted shall be occupied until these works have been carried out in accordance with the approved details and the approved works shall be retained thereafter. These details shall include provision to restrict parking on site to seven car parking spaces, hard and soft surfacing materials, extent of hard and soft landscaping, proposed and existing functional services above and below ground. Reason: To ensure that parking provision within the site is limited to seven spaces and to comply with Policies TR16 and TR7 (Highway Considerations) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.

Second Recommendation

That a letter be sent to the applicant’s agent drawing attention to condition 7 and advising him that in future small scale elevational drawings will not be acceptable and may result in the application being invalidated; referring him to the notes for guidance produced for applicants an agents when submitting applications.

Reference Number: P/01809/06 - TCP/07571/K

Parish/Name: Cowes - Ward/Name: Cowes Medina

Registration Date: 20/07/2006 - Full Planning Permission

Officer: Mr A White Tel: (01983) 823552

Applicant: Messrs Barbour & Gough

Demolition of builders store; construction of 3 storey block of 5 flats; cycle racks, bin store & landscaping

S and J Builders Merchant, Brunswick Road, Cowes, PO31 7DD

The application is recommended for Conditional Permission

REASON FOR COMMITTEE CONSIDERATION

The local Member, Councillor G Brown, is not prepared for this application to be determined under the delegated powers procedure given the level of local opposition and the likely impact of this development on the amenities currently enjoyed by neighbouring property occupiers in St Andrews Street.

1. Details of Application

1.1 Full planning permission is sought for a two storey block of five flats. Four flats would be arranged on the ground and first floors, whilst the fifth flat would be provided within the roof space. Each flat would offer an open plan living area/kitchen, two bedrooms and a bathroom. There would be bin storage and cycle parking for each flat to the front of the building and shared amenity space to the rear. No parking provision is to be made on site.

1.2 In terms of scale, mass and design, the proposed ground floor level would be set approximately 1.1 metres above highway level in order to satisfy Environment Agency criteria in respect of flood risk to prospective occupiers. Revised plans have been submitted in an attempt to reduce the apparent mass of the building which is partially attributable to the Environment Agency requirement. The reduction in mass has been achieved through replacing two of the three front facing gable elements as originally shown with two modest dormer windows.

1.3 The proposed building is shown to have a traditional form and appearance, with a fully hipped roof including a projecting gable element to the front, brick elevations with contrasting details and overall proportions that are generally vertically emphasised.

2. Location and Site Characteristics

2.1 This is an irregular shaped site situated on the south-west side of Brunswick Road approximately 28 metres north-west of its junction with Bridge Road. It was previously used as a builders storage yard. The site has frontage onto Brunswick Road of some 14 metres with depth in the region of 18 metres. The site backs onto a terrace of two and three storey houses fronting St Andrew’s Street.

2.2 Site is surrounded by a mix of uses including commercial garage to the north west, playground to the south-east, a community hall to the south and offices to the north. Intermingled with this variety of commercial uses is a mix of residential properties that are generally arranged as traditional two storey terraces with occasional three storey properties interspersed.

2.3 The Brunswick Road public car park lies a short distance to the north west.

3. Relevant History

3.1 P/01039/01 – TCP/07571/F – Demolition of existing building and carport, erection of three storey block of eight flats – Refused July 2001 on grounds of overdevelopment, excessive scale and mass in relation to adjoining properties and inappropriate design.

3.2 P/01678/01 – TCP/07571/G – Demolition of existing building and car port, construction of two storey block of four flats and two storey block of two flats – Approved June 2002.

3.3 P/01775/05 – TCP/07571/H – Construction of three storey building to provide six flats – Refused November 2005 on grounds of overdevelopment, excessive scale and mass in relation to adjoining properties fronting St Andrew’s Street as well as being detrimental to the character and appearance of surrounding area.

3.4 P/00807/06 – TCP/07571/J – Demolition of builders store; construction of three storey block of six flats; cycle racks, bin store and landscaping – Refused June 2006 on grounds of overdevelopment, excessive scale and mass in relation to adjoining properties fronting St Andrew’s Street, detrimental to character and appearance of the surrounding area and inadequate and deficient information in respect of flood risk to prospective occupants.

4. Development Plan Policy

4.1 National Policy Guidance

PPS1 (Delivering Sustainable Development) emphasises the following:

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

· Good design should:

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

o Optimise the potential for site to accommodate development.

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

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

PPG3 (Housing) emphasises the following:

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

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

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

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

· Emphasise the need for good quality design.

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

4.2 Local Policy context

Site is within the development envelope for Cowes as identified on the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan (UDP) and is not allocated for any specific purpose. The following policies of the UDP are considered to be relevant:

· S1	-	New development will be concentrated with existing urban areas
· S2	-	Development will be encouraged on brownfield sites
· S6	-	All development will be expected to be of a high standard of design
· G1	-	Development Envelopes
· G4	-	General Locational Criteria
· G6	-	Areas Liable to Flooding
· D1	-	Standards of Design
· D2	-	Standards for Development within the Site
· H4	-	Unallocated Residential Development to be Restricted to Define Settlements
· H5	-	Infill Development
· H6	-	High Density Residential Development
· TR7	-	Highway Considerations for New Development
· TR16	-	Parking Policies and Guidelines
· U11	-	Infrastructure and Services Provision

4.3 Reference is also made to the housing needs survey which identifies, among other needs, a demand for smaller two bedroom homes that could appeal to people at the lower end of the housing market.

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

5. Consultee and Third Party Comments

5.1 External Consultees

Environment Agency confirm no objection following the submission of an acceptable Flood Risk Assessment.

5.2 Town and Parish Council comments

Cowes Town Council object on grounds of overdevelopment, lack of amenity space and risk of flooding.

5.3 Third Party Comments

Six letters received from local residents objecting on grounds that can be summarised as follows:

· Too large in relation to properties behind fronting St Andrew’s Street, particularly for very modest cottages that sit far lower than most other properties along this terrace.

· Loss of privacy and loss of light.

· The proposed zero parking scheme would result in traffic congestion.

· Flood risk.

· Drainage capacity is questioned.

· Previous reasons for refusal have not been satisfactorily resolved.

6. Evaluation

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

· Principle

· Density

· Scale and mass relative to adjoining properties and surrounding area in its wider context.

· Design

· Parking

· Flooding

· Drainage

6.2 Site is within the development envelope boundary for Cowes and is regarded as a brownfield site given its previous use as a builders yard and store. It is also the subject of an extant consent for six flats, albeit on a slightly larger site including some adjoining land. Accordingly, the principle of developing this site for residential purposes is considered to be acceptable, subject to it meeting other criteria.

6.3 Site is within close proximity of Cowes town centre, within a short and relatively level walking distance of the many local facilities and amenities as well as the floating bridge and cross Solent ferry terminals. Accordingly, Officers are of the opinion that the application site has the locational attributes of being a suitable candidate for high density residential development as discussed in PPG3 and Policy H6 of the UDP. Whilst the proposed density appears high in numerical terms, it is generally the case that new developments containing flats will give a distorted impression of the overall density. Arguably, the main gauge in respect of assessing density is whether the size of building required to accommodate the five units of accommodation proposed is acceptable in this context, both in terms of the likely impact on neighbours and within the established streetscene. It is also necessary to consider whether the development would allow for sufficient amenity space and living conditions for its future occupants.

6.4 Regarding impact of proposal relative to properties behind, Members are reminded that permission does exist for a two storey building of six flats. This is shown to be situated at an oblique angle to the modest two storey cottages directly behind that front St Andrew’s Street, with a minimum and maximum separation between existing and proposed buildings of 12 metres and 17 metres respectively. The approved plans show four rear facing gables that vary in ridge height between 7.5 metres and 8.2 metres. In comparison, the proposed development would be situated some 12 metres away from properties behind as its nearest point and approximately 15 metres at its furthest. The proposed roof would be hipped away from neighbouring properties with overall eaves height of some 5.5 metres increasing to ridge height of some 8.6 metres approximately 20 metres from the rear wall of St Andrews Street dwellings. Whilst the proposed building is marginally closer to neighbours compared to the approved scheme and is of course higher to ridge in order to account for the floor height recommendation by the Environment Agency and to accommodate the roof flat, it is felt that the alternative roof design whereby the pitch would hip away from neighbours as opposed to being gabled as approved would mitigate against the impact upon adjoining property occupiers. With this in mind, it is not felt that the differences between the extant consent and the latest revised scheme are such to justify a further refusal in respect of the relationship between this development and adjoining property occupiers. The agent is also indicating that the rear facing windows would be partially fitted with obscure glazing in order to minimise overlooking, which is considered to be an improvement upon the approved scheme which did not include any such provision.

6.5 Regarding the impact of the proposed development in its wider context, it is relevant to note that the building would adjoin a playground on one side and a single storey flat roofed garage on the other side. To the rear is a mixed terrace of two and three storey dwellings and almost opposite is a short terrace of early 20^th century houses. Most housing in the immediate area comprises of fairly simple and traditional terraces. The proposal, being essentially two storey in form but with a fifth flat in its pitched roof, would accord with the traditional appearance of local housing whilst reflecting the vertical proportions that prevail. Essentially, the proposed design including the use of its roof space would, in Officers opinion, make maximum and efficient use of this brownfield site without appearing out of keeping in this highly varied urban context. Accordingly, Officers are satisfied that the proposal satisfies design policies contained in the UDP.

6.6 As said above, proposal does constitute a high density scheme but does nevertheless make provision for bicycle parking, bin storage as well as a small area of shared amenity space. Whilst noting the limited nature of the amenity space, it is felt that the available space coupled with accessibility to local amenities would be sufficient in order for prospective occupiers to enjoy an acceptable degree of amenity.

6.7 Regarding parking, the proposed scheme does not make provision for any on-site parking but neither does the extant permission for six flats. Members are advised that there is a long-stay car park in close proximity to the site and that public transport including cross Solent ferry terminals is easily accessible. Accordingly, it is felt that the application site is a suitable candidate for a zero parking scheme as it clearly accords with the policy objective of reducing reliance on the motor car.

6.8 In terms of flooding, this application is the subject of a Flood Risk Assessment which has concluded that the building should be set at a certain floor level in order to minimise the risk of flooding to prospective occupants of the flats. This has naturally resulted in a higher building compared to what has already been approved for this site, and the impact of such has been discussed in this report. Bearing in mind the findings of the Flood Risk Assessment together with the comments made by the Environment Agency, it is felt that the proposal would neither exacerbate the risk of flooding, nor put prospective occupiers at undue risk. Accordingly, proposal satisfies Policy G6 in this respect. Regarding drainage, given that consent has already been granted to redevelop this site and that documentary evidence has not been submitted to demonstrate inadequate capacity, Officers are satisfied that proposal can proceed but subject to a condition asking that capacity is established prior to development commencing.

7. Conclusion and Justification for Recommendation

7.1 Having given due regard and appropriate weight to all material considerations as discussed in this report, it is considered that the revisions made to the previously refused schemes are such that the development proposed would have an acceptable relationship with properties to the rear particularly when comparing the proposed scheme with what has already been approved. It is considered that the proposed design is acceptable within this highly varied urban context and that a zero parking scheme is also acceptable bearing in mind the locational attributes of the site coupled with what has already been approved. Furthermore, it is felt the proposal is acceptable from a flooding point of view. Accordingly, proposal is compliant with policies contained within the UDP.

8. Recommendation

Conditional Permission.

Conditions/Reasons:

1	The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of 3 years from date of this permission. Reason: To comply with Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.
2	No development shall take place until samples of materials and finishes to be used in the construction of the external surfaces of the development hereby permitted have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details. Reason: In the interests of the amenities of the area and to comply with policy D1 (Standards of Design) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.
3	No development shall take place until details have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority of the positions, design, materials and type of boundary treatment to be erected. The boundary treatment shall be completed before and of the flats hereby approved are occupied. Reason: In the interests of maintaining the amenity value of the area and to comply with policy D1 (Standards of Design) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.
4	No flat shall be occupied until space has been laid out within the site for 5 bicycles to be parked and for refuse for each flat to be stored in accordance with a scheme to be agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Such provision shall be retained thereafter. Reason: To ensure adequate provision for the parking of bicycles and storage of refuse and to comply with policies D1 (Standards of Design) and TR6 (Cycling and Walking) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.
5	The existing access to the site shall be stopped up and abandoned and any footway/verge crossing shall be reinstated upon completion of the new access. Reason: In the interest of highway safety and to comply with policy TR7 (Highway Considerations) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.
6	All materials excavated as a result of general ground works, including site leveling, installation of services or the digging of foundations, shall not be disposed of within the area identified in red or blue on the submitted plans. The materials shall be removed from the site prior to occupation of any of the dwellings hereby approved. . Reason: In the interest of the amenities of the area in general and neighbouring residential properties in particular and to comply with policy D1 (Standards of Design) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.
7	No development shall take place until full details of both hard and soft landscape works have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority and these works shall be carried out as approved. These details shall include proposed finished levels, hard surfacing materials and specification of planting. Reason: To ensure the appearance of the development is satisfactory and to comply with policy D3 (Landscaping) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.
8	All hard and soft landscape works shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details. The works shall be carried out prior to the occupation of any part of the development or in accordance with the programme agreed with the Local Planning Authority. Reason: In the interests of the amenities and character of the area and to comply with policy D3 (Landscaping) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.
9	All windows in the rear (southwest) elevation shall have their lower half fitted with obscure glass as indicated on drawing number 05/07.29 with a glass panel which has been rendered obscure as part its manufacturing process to Pilkington Glass Classification 5 (or equivalent of glass supplied by alternative manufacturer) and shall be retained to this specification as obscure glazed hereafter. Reason: In the interest of the amenities and privacy of neighbouring property occupiers and to comply with policy D1 (Standards of Design) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.
10	Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995 (or any Order revoking and re-enacting that Order, with or without modification), no windows/dormer windows (other than those expressly authorised by this permission) shall be constructed in the rear (southwest) elevation unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: In the interests of the amenities and privacy of neighbouring property occupiers and to comply with policy D1 (Standards of Design) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.

Reference Number: P/01846/06 - TCP/07778/F

Parish/Name: Gurnard - Ward/Name: Gurnard

Registration Date: 04/08/2006 - Full Planning Permission

Officer: Mr A White Tel: (01983) 823552

Applicant: Mr W Button

Demolition of bungalow; 2 pairs of semi-detached houses with alterations to vehicular access; parking & landscaping, (revised scheme)

17 Albert Road, Cowes, PO318JU

The application is recommended for Conditional Permission

REASON FOR COMMITTEE CONSIDERATION

Local Member, Councillor J Hobart, is not prepared for this application to be determined under the delegated powers procedure given the level of local opposition. He considers that proposal would constitute overdevelopment of the site and also expresses concern regarding the cumulative impact of housing development in the Gurnard area and the parking difficulties that this can pose.

1. Details of Application

1.1 Full permission is sought to demolish an existing 1960s bungalow and replace with two pairs of semi-detached houses. The existing property is constructed of artificial stone blocks under a tiled roof and is considered to be of little architectural merit.

1.2 Each pair would measure some 8 metres across its front elevation with a 1.4 metre gap in between and approximately 1 metre between flank walls and respective side boundaries. Each dwelling would have a depth in the region of 12 metres offering kitchen/diner, living room and w.c. on the ground floor with two bedrooms (one en-suite) and a bathroom above.

1.3 Submitted drawings indicate that all dwellings would be of brick construction under a hipped pitched roof. The roofs would incorporate a valley running parallel with Albert Road in order to allow for the depth of proposed houses. Front elevations are shown to include a degree of articulation including porches and bay windows to add relief and interest to the streetscene.

1.4 Each property would be provided with a single parking space, a front garden and an enclosed rear garden. The proposed layout plan indicates that the parking spaces would be arranged as two pairs with landscaping in between.

2. Location and Site Characteristics

2.1 Application site is rectangular in shape, with frontage onto Albert Road of 18.4 metres and depth in the region of 38 metres. Land slopes away relatively gently from east to west being reflective of the gradient of Albert Road. Site boundaries average 2 metres in height and include a variety of hedges and larch lap fencing.

2.2 Albert Road is a street of mixed residential character, exhibiting bungalows, chalet bungalows and houses of different ages and design. There is also diversity in terms of roofscape, with examples of both hipped and gabled roofs fronting onto the highway. The existing property is bounded by a pair of semi-detached houses to the west and a detached chalet bungalow to the east with pairs of narrow fronted houses directly opposite.

3. Relevant History

3.1 P/02526/03 – Demolition of bungalow; construction of two detached houses; alterations to vehicular access and the formation of parking/turning area – Approved subject to conditions 18 March 2004.

P/00157/05 – Demolition of bungalow; construction of two detached houses; alterations to vehicular access and formation of parking/turning area (revised scheme) Approved 15 July 2005.

P/00444/06 – Demolition of bungalow; proposed terrace of four houses with alterations to vehicular access; parking and landscaping – Refused 12 April 2006 on grounds that the design, external appearance and layout would have been an intrusive development in the streetscene being out of character with the prevailing form and appearance of development in the surrounding area.

4. Development Plan Policy

4.1 National Policy Guidance

PPS1 (Delivering Sustainable Development) emphasises the following:

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

· Good design should:

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

o Optimise the potential for sites to accommodate development.

o Respond to local context and create and enforce local distinctiveness

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

PPG3/PPS3 (Housing) emphasises the following:

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

· Recommends regular review of housing requirement through the mechanism of local housing needs assessment.

· To provide sufficient housing land, preferring brownfield and Greenfield sites.

· To provide a mix of size, type and location for housing.

· Provide for affordable housing initiatives.

· Recommend planning authorities ensure maintenance of supply of housing, concentrating most additional housing within urban areas.

· Making more efficient use of land by increased densities particularly on previously developed land.

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

· Adopting a sequential approach to choice of sites.

· Manage the release of housing land.

4.2 Local Policies

Site is within the development envelope for Cowes as identified on the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan (UDP) and is not shown to be allocated for any specific purpose. The following policies of the UDP are considered to be relevant:

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

· S2 – Development will be encouraged on brownfield land

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

· G1 - Development Envelopes

· G4 - General Locational Criteria

· G6 - Areas Liable to Flooding

· D1 - Standards of Design

· D2 - Standards for Development within the Site

· D3 - Landscaping

· H4 - Unallocated Residential Development to be Restricted to Define Settlements

· H5 - Infill Development

· H6 – High Density Residential Development

· TR7 - Highway Considerations for New Development

· TR16 - Parking Policies and Guidelines

· U11 - Infrastructure and Services Provision

4.3 Reference is also made to the Housing Needs Survey which identifies, among other needs, a demand for smaller two bedroom homes that could appeal to people at the lower end of the housing market.

4.4 Site is located within parking zone 3 of the UDP where parking is provision is 0-75% of the non-operational requirement.

5. Consultee and Third Party Comments

5.1 Internal Consultees

· Highway engineer recommends conditional permission.

5.2 Parish Council comments.

· Gurnard Parish Council objects on grounds that proposal constitutes overdevelopment, that density is too high and out of character with the local environment, that the local drainage system is unable to cope with additional demands and that there are parking concerns in an already congested road. It is also mentioned that there are building line concerns as well as recognised ground stability problems.

5.3 Neighbours

· Seven letters received from local residents objecting on grounds that can be summarised as follows:

o Overdevelopment

o Would appear cramped

o Out of character with ambience of Albert Road

o Exacerbate existing parking problems and local congestion

o Will place additional strain on services and infrastructure.

o Overshadow number 15.

6. Evaluation

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

· Principle

· Density

· Appearance of development in the streetscene.

· Impact on adjoining property occupiers.

· Parking

· Drainage

6.2 Site is within the development envelope boundary for Cowes. It is also the subject of an extant consent to demolish the existing bungalow and replace with two detached houses. Accordingly, the principle of developing this site for more intensive residential purposes is considered to be acceptable, subject to it meeting other criteria.

6.3 Regarding density, attention is drawn to Government advice that encourages a efficient use of brownfield sites with suggested density of between 30 and 50 dwellings per hectare and even higher where public transport and local facilities are available and easily accessible. The proposal amounts to some 57 dwellings to the hectare, which constitutes quite an intensive use of the application site. Gurnard does, however, offer local amenities for its residents including shops, pubs and a school as well as being on a bus route and reasonably accessible to Cowes and the many amenities that it has to offer. Accordingly, Officers are of the opinion that the application site has the locational attributes of being a suitable candidate for high density residential development as discussed in PPG3 and Policy H6 of the UDP. Arguably, the main gauge in respect of assessing density is whether the size of buildings required to accommodate the four houses proposed is acceptable in this context, both in terms of its appearance in the streetscene and likely impact on neighbouring property occupiers.

6.4 In terms of streetscene, Albert Road has no recognisable theme either in terms of type of property or design. Properties are one and two storeys, terrace, detached and semi-detached of varying age with a variety of materials. There are examples of narrow fronted semi-detached houses in plots that are comparable in size terms to the application site. Accordingly, it is not considered that the provision of two pairs of semi-detached houses in the fashion shown would appear unduly cramped or out of character given the variety of properties and the many different spacings between buildings. Similarly, the variation in property style would allow for the proposed design – being relatively traditional in terms of its appearance and proportions – to fit comfortably within the streetscene without being detrimental to the character and appearance of the surrounding area. The incorporation of ground floor bay windows is reflective of a common theme and also provides a degree of interest on the front elevation. The precise selection of materials can be controlled through a condition should Members be minded to grant consent. Taking the above into consideration, it is felt that the provision of two pairs of semi-detached houses in the manner shown would fit comfortably and sympathetically into this highly varied streetscene and therefore complies with all relevant locational and design policies contained in the UDP.

6.5 One of the main concerns in respect of the recently refused terrace was the monotony of the design and the heavily engineered solution to the front of the site in order to achieve the required parking. It was felt that the combination of these issues would have resulted in an unnecessary urbanisation appearance that would have appeared unsympathetic in this village environment. The scheme under consideration is considered to be acceptable in design terms as discussed above. It also allows for a more acceptable parking arrangement to the front by reason of planted areas in between parking bays therefore softening the impact of hard paving.

6.6 Regarding impact on neighbouring property occupiers, proposed dwellings would be situated at a lower level approximately 14 metres from the occupiers of a chalet bungalow at no. 15. Accordingly, proposal would have minimal impact on the said neighbour owing to the significant distance involved. Proposal would be far closer to the neighbour to the west (no. 23), would be situated at a slightly higher level to that property as well as projecting approximately 3 metres beyond its rear wall. There would, however, be a gap of some 3.5 metres between respective flank walls which is not an uncommon arrangement along Albert Road. Also, any loss of sunlight to the occupiers of no. 23 would be restricted to early mornings owing to the orientation of the proposed development relative to the path of the sum. Taking the above into consideration, it is not felt that the proposed development would detract from the reasonable use and enjoyment of adjoining buildings. Accordingly, proposal is consistent with the requirements of UDP policies in this respect.

6.7 Concerning parking, proposed scheme allows for one parking space per dwelling (4 in total). Given that the proposed dwellings would only offer two bedrooms each, the maximum level of parking allowed under policy would be six spaces. Whilst the site could arguably accommodate six spaces and therefore satisfy the maximum requirement, this would entail placing hardstanding across much of the site frontage which is an arrangement that Officers consider to be undesirable owing to the visual impact that would arise. Whereas one parking space per dwelling would not only accord with the spirit and requirements of local policies in respect of parking it would also allow for an element of landscaping to be incorporated into the scheme in order to help soften the overall impact of this development. Accordingly, it is felt that the provision of four parking spaces is the optimum level of parking in this instance and is therefore compliant with the requirement of policy TR16.

6.9 Regarding the issue of drainage, Members are advised that planning permission already exists for two 3 bedroom detached houses on this site. The drainage output from the proposed scheme is not likely to be significantly higher than the scheme already approved but will nevertheless be considered in greater detail at the Building Control stage. It is suggested, however, that a condition is imposed regarding drainage to ensure that sufficient capacity does exist before work commences. With this in mind, it is felt that proposal is compliant with policy U11 of the UDP. Concern has been expressed that site is situated within an area that is vulnerable to ground movement. Members are advised that the site is outside of the Cowes to Gurnard Slope Stability Study area and is not thought to pose any significant constraints in so far as ground conditions are concerned. It is considered that sufficient control exists under the building regulations to ensure that the development will neither trigger nor be affected by ground instability.

7. Conclusion and Justification for Recommendation

7.1 Having given due regard and appropriate weight to all material considerations referred to in this report, it is considered that the site is of sufficient size to accommodate two pairs of semi-detached house in such a way that would accord with the prevailing pattern and appearance of housing development along Albert Road. Essentially, it is felt that proposal strikes the balance of making efficient use of this brownfield site without compromising the character and appearance of the surrounding area or the amenities currently enjoyed by neighbouring property occupiers. The level of parking proposed is also considered to be acceptable in the context of national and local parking policies.

8. Recommendation

Conditional permission.

Conditions/Reasons:

1	The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of 3 years from date of this permission. Reason: To comply with Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.
2	No development shall take place until samples of materials and finishes to be used in the construction of the external surfaces of the development hereby permitted have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details. Reason: In the interests of the amenities of the area and to comply with policy D1 (Standards of Design) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.
3	No development shall take place until details have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority of the positions, design, materials and type of boundary treatment to be erected. The boundary treatment shall be completed before the dwellings hereby permitted are occupied. Development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details. Reason: In the interests of maintaining the amenity value of the area and to comply with policy D1 (Standards of Design) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.
4	All materials consequent upon the demolition of the existing dwelling, and those excavated as a result of the general ground works including site levelling, installation of services or the digging of foundations, shall not be disposed of within the area identified in red on the submitted plans. the materials shall be removed from site prior to occupation of any of the dwellings hereby approved. Reason: In the interests of the amenities of the area in general and the neighbouring residential properties in particular and to comply with policy D1 (Standards of Design) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.
5	No development shall take place until full details of both hard and soft landscape works have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority and these works shall be carried out as approved. These details shall include proposed finished levels means of enclosure; car parking layouts; hard surfacing materials. Reason: To ensure the appearance of the development is satisfactory and to comply with policy D3 (Landscaping) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.
6	All hard and soft landscape works shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details. The works shall be carried out prior to the occupation of any part of the development or in accordance with the programme agreed with the Local Planning Authority. Reason: In the interests of the amenities and character of the area and to comply with policy D3 (Landscaping) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.
7	No development shall take place until a detailed scheme including calculations and a capacity study, have been submitted to and agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority indicating the means of foul and surface water disposal. Any such agreed foul and surface water disposal system shall indicate connection points on the system that adequate capacity exists, including any reasonable repairs which may be required, or shall provide for attenuation measures to ensure any additional flows do not cause flooding or over load the existing system. No unit shall be occupied until such system has been completed in accordance with the approved details. Reason: To ensure and adequate system of foul water drainage is provided for the development in compliance with policy U11 (Infrastructure and Services Provision) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.
8	Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995 (or any Order revoking and re-enacting that Order, with or without modification), no first floor windows/dormer windows (other than those expressly authorised by this permission) shall be constructed in the side elevations of the eastern and western most units unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: In the interests of the amenities and privacy of neighbouring property occupiers and to comply with policy D1 (Standards of Design) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.
9	The first floor bathroom and en suite shower room windows as shown on drawing number 2006/01.12 shall be fitted with obscure glass with a glass panel which has been rendered obscure as part of its manufacturing process to Pilkington Glass Classification 5 (or equivalent if glass supplied by an alternative manufacturer) and shall be retained to the specification as obscure glazed thereafter. Reason: In the interests of privacy and amenities of the neighbouring property occupiers and to comply with policy D1 (Standards of Design) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.
10	No part of any boundary wall or fence adjacent to the site frontage, nor any hedge, shrubs or vegetation planted adjacent to that boundary or alongside any such boundary, wall or fence shall at any time be permitted to be more than 1 metre above the level of the highway footway. Reason: In the interests of highway safety and to comply with policy TR7 (Highway Considerations for New Development) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.
11	No dwelling hereby permitted shall be occupied until space has been laid out within the site and drained and surfaced in accordance with details that have been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority in writing for 4 cars (1 space per dwelling) to be parked. The space shall not thereafter be used for any purpose other than that approved in accordance with this condition. Reason: In the interests of highway safety and to comply with policy TR7 (Highway Considerations) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.

Reference Number: P/02122/06 - TCP/26818/A

Parish/Name: Ventnor - Ward/Name: Ventnor East

Registration Date: 18/08/2006 - Full Planning Permission

Officer: Mr S Wiltshire Tel: (01983) 823552

Applicant: Mr N Carter

Removal of pitched roof; 1st floor extension to create 4 bedroomed house with balconies & flat roof; alterations & extensions

13 Leeson Road, Ventnor, Isle Of Wight, PO381PR

The application is recommended for Conditional Permission

REASON FOR COMMITTEE CONSIDERATION

The Chairman has requested that this application is referred to the Development Control Committee for consideration due to concerns about the designs solution put forward regarding this proposal.

1. Details of Application

1.1 The applicant seeks planning permission for extensions and alterations to no. 13 Leeson Road, Ventnor. The application proposes the removal of a gabled roof incorporating front dormer windows to the chalet bungalow and its replacement with a first floor extension of a contemporary flat roof design which incorporates balcony areas to the front and western side elevations. A two storey extension is proposed to the eastern side elevation, which due to the change in ground levels of this site reduces in height to single storey at the rear. A timber deck would be provided to the rear linking the first floor of the dwelling to the rear garden area.

1.2 The proposal would not alter the total number of bedrooms provided at the dwelling, which would remain at 4, although the proposal would result in alterations to the dwelling such that the main living accommodation is located on the first floor, with the bedrooms to the ground floor.

1.3 The Design Statement submitted with the application concludes with the following summary:

“The proposed design may be a radical change from the existing building. It is designed as a modern villa that takes advantage of current technology to create an open plan living space that maximizes the views out to sea whilst respecting the privacy of its neighbour. It is also designed to integrate into its site both physically and visually.”

1.4 A Slope Stability and Ground Assessment was submitted with the planning application which indicates the additional load of the works is nominal when considering the bearing capacity of the sub soil beneath the foundations and as such can sustain the additional load and the foundations extended to depth within the site and as such considering slope instability the risk of the structure becoming unstable is removed.

2. Location and Site Characteristics

2.1 The application site comprises a chalet bungalow constructed in the 1960’s which is situated in an elevated position to the north of Leeson Road, Ventnor. The site is accessed from Leeson Road via a winding driveway which is shared with No. 11 Leeson Road. The ground levels within the application site rise steeply from south to north, towards St. Boniface Down at the rear of the site.

2.2 No. 11 Leeson Road is a detached chalet bungalow situated adjacent to the western boundary of the application site, with No. 15 a detached chalet bungalow situated approximately 14 metres to the east. The land to the rear is open rising up to Ventnor Down.

2.3 The elevated nature of the site and character of the surrounding area is such that only fleeting views of the existing property can be obtained from Leeson Road unlike other sections of the frontage development on Leeson Road to the east where the frontages are more open.

3. Relevant History

3.1 The following applications are relevant to the consideration of these applications;

TCP/3973/B	Erection of bungalow	Approved 12.11.62
TCP/3973/G	Alterations to form dormers	Approved 25.4.79

4. Development Plan Policy

4.1 The Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan (UDP) identifies the application site as being outside the Development Envelope boundary for Ventnor. The application site is also located within the Isle of Wight Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty.

4.2 Relevant policies of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan are considered to be as follows:

· S4 – The Countryside will be protected from inappropriate development

· S10 – Conserve or enhance the features of special character of these areas

· C1 – Protection of landscape character

· C2 – Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty

· D1 – Standards of Design

· D2 – Standards of Development within the site

· G1 – Development envelopes for towns and villages

· G4 - General Locational Criteria

· G5 – Development outside defined envelopes

· G7 – Development on Unstable Land.

· H7 – Extensions and alterations

· TR7 – Highway Considerations for New Development

· TR16 – Parking policies and guidelines

5. Consultee and Third Party Comments

5.1 Internal Consultees

· Highways Engineer – No objection, subject to the imposition of a Highways condition.

· AONB Partnership – No objection to the proposal.

· Conservation and Design – Support the proposal.

5.2 External Consultees

· None

5.3 Town or Parish Council Comments

· Ventnor Town Council – See no reason why planning consent should not be issued.

5.4 Neighbours

· Three letters of objection have been received from local residents. These letters raise the following planning issues;

· Ground stability

· Volume increase over 35%

· Design

· Loss of privacy

· Loss of light

· Car parking provision

· Impact on trees

6. Evaluation

6.1 Principle of Development - The Unitary Development Plan (UDP) identifies the application site as being outside the Development Envelope boundary and within an area where the Countryside policies of the Plan apply. Although in some respects akin to a replacement dwelling, the application proposes alterations and extensions whilst utilising the existing ground floor of the chalet bungalow. The principle of extending an existing property accords with the aims of Policy H7 of the UDP, and associated SPG (Extending Your Home), subject to the criteria set out within the policy, and the other considerations discussed below;

6.2 Amenity for Neighbouring Occupiers – The proposed extensions to form a covered balcony area on the western side of the property would be located approximately 2.6 metres from the boundary with No. 11 Leeson Road, a detached chalet bungalow. No. 11 has ancillary ground floor windows in the side elevation and a rooflight serving a bathroom in the side roofslope facing the application site. The extensions would not encroach on a 45° angle drawn from the centre of windows in the rear elevation of this property, and thus would not significantly reduce light into the windows in the rear elevation. The proposed balcony would be fitted with vertical screening, which would be angled so as to prevent overlooking of this neighbouring dwelling, whilst still allowing some views towards the coast. The dwelling would be extended forwards by 1.8 metres to provide a front balcony area, this would not impact on the neighbouring property. Overall it is considered that the proposal would have a satisfactory relationship with this neighbouring dwelling.

6.3 No. 15 Leeson Road is situated approximately 14 metres from the proposal and is sited in a forward position, which is closer to Leeson Road than no. 13. This neighbouring property has first floor and ground floor windows in the side elevation. The application proposes a first floor balcony in the side elevation, with flat roof above, and a high level kitchen window. The changes in ground levels and existing boundary detailing are such to prevent overlooking from the proposed balcony. The roof above the proposed side extension would be used to site solar panels behind low parapet walls. Views over No. 15 would be afforded from this flat roof area, thus in the event of approval, a condition is required to prevent the use of this roof as an amenity area. In terms of bulk and massing the proposal, the separation distances are such that the proposal would not impact adversely on the occupiers of this property.

6.4 It is considered, therefore, that the proposal would not have an excessive impact on the neighbouring properties and thus meets the aims of policy H7 and D1 in this regard.

6.5 Scale and massing –The Council’s adopted Supplementary Planning Guidance “Extending your home” (SPG) advises that as a guide, within the Countryside, any increase should not normally exceed 35% of the volume of the original dwelling. The extension of dwellings above this guideline will be assessed primarily on the impact of the resulting dwelling

6.6 The existing chalet bungalow has a volume of 410 m³. The proposed dwelling would have a volume of 780 m³, including balcony areas which is an increase of 90% over the volume of the existing dwelling, clearly above the 35% guideline.

6.7 The 35% guideline is primarily a tool to prevent extensions which are of an excessive scale and massing having an adverse impact on the character and appearance of the Countryside. In the consideration of this proposal, it is noted that the overall height of the dwelling would be slightly below that of the existing dwelling, although the bulk and massing would be increased by the provision of the balcony areas and a two storey extension to the eastern elevation. The volume increase is largely made up by open balcony areas, which would result in a dwelling having similar frontage width to the neighbouring property, no. 11. Taking into account the scale, massing and form of the neighbouring development, that the site is not visually prominent, and it is located within a built-up frontage which has a semi-rural character, in this instance it is considered that the scale and massing of the proposal is acceptable for this location.

6.8 Design - The proposed extensions and alterations would result in the change from a chalet bungalow to a two storey dwelling of a contemporary design. Leeson Road is characterised by a mix of dwelling types and styles which have developed incrementally over a number of years. The existing property was originally constructed in the early 1960’s as a bungalow, with the addition of dormer windows to the front roof slope in 1979 creating a chalet style design, similar to no. 11.

6.9 The design of the proposal is radically different to the existing dwelling, as well as the neighbouring chalet bungalow, and when viewed as a pair would be visually exclusive. However, there are limited public views of this site due to the rise of the land and existing screening vegetation, such that from Leeson Road only the south-eastern corner of the proposal would be visible behind no. 15, and the dwellings would not be seen together. The existing dwelling is of no architectural merit in its own right, and the proposed design is of a high standard which utilises sustainable principles. It is noted that a dwelling of a contemporary design has been permitted at 5-7 Leeson Road, with a curved roof dwelling recently constructed further up Leeson Road.

6.10 A design and access statement has been submitted in support of the application. This details how the design of the proposal has developed in relation to the characteristics of the site and pattern of development in the area. The scheme also incorporates the sustainability principles through use of solar energy for hot water and electricity and a sedum roof to control run-off. It is considered the design and access statement satisfactorily supports the proposal.

6.10 Although not in a Conservation Area or affecting the setting of a Listed Building, the comments of the Conservation and Design Officer have been sought on this application, and these support the design of the proposal. For the above reasons it is considered that the design of the extensions and alterations are acceptable in this location.

6.11 Ground Stability – The application site is within an area where ground stability problems may exist and a ground stability report prepared by Herts and Essex Site Investigations was submitted with the application. This report was sent to an independent geotechnical engineering consultant for assessment, who has confirmed that the application fulfills the requirements of Planning Policy Guidance Note 14: Development on Unstable Land.

6.12 Area Of Outstanding Natural Beauty – The application site is within the Isle of Wight Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. The AONB Partnership has confirmed that it has no objection to the proposal.

6.13 Trees – There is a row of lleylandii on higher land to the rear of the existing dwelling which are proposed to be removed and replaced with a beech screen to allow the rebuilding of a retaining wall. These trees are of low visual value, and not of any public amenity significance therefore it is considered that their removal is acceptable.

6.14 Highways & Parking – The existing dwelling is served via a long winding driveway from Leeson Road which is also shared with No. 11. There is an existing single garage to the front of the house, which the plans show would be replaced by a carport, although no plans have been provided for this development which would require planning permission in is own right. The submitted plans and design statement show that the proposal would not alter the number of bedrooms in this dwelling. The Highways Engineer has no objection to the proposal, subject to the imposition of a condition relating to visibility improvements at the access onto Leeson Road.

7. Conclusion and Justification for Recommendation

7.1 Having given due regard and appropriate weight to all the material considerations set out in this report, it is considered that the proposed alterations and extension to 13 Leeson Road, Ventnor would not have any detrimental impact on the amenities of the neighbouring properties. The scale, massing and design of the proposal are considered to be acceptable for this residential area and would have an acceptable visual impact within the Isle of Wight Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. The Highway Engineer has confirmed that, subject to a condition, the existing vehicular access and parking provision is satisfactory without adding to the hazards for other highway users. Accordingly, the proposal is consistent with the objectives of the UDP.

8. Recommendations

Conditional approval.

Conditions/Reasons:

1	The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of 3 years from date of this permission. Reason: To comply with Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.
2	No development shall take place until details of the materials and finishes to be used in the construction of the external surfaces of the development hereby permitted have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details. Reason: In the interests of the amenities of the area and to comply with policy D1 (Standards of design) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.
3	The western first floor balcony area shall not be brought into use until privacy screening has been provided in accordance with the details specified on drawing numbers 2502/02 and 2502/03, and the screening shall be retained thereafter. Reason: In the interests of the privacy and amenities of the occupiers of the neighbouring properties and to comply with policy D1 (Standards of design) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.
4	Access to the roof above the eastern side extension shall only be used for maintenance purposes in connection with the solar panels and shall not be utilised as an amenity or sitting out area. Reason – In the interests of the privacy and amenities of the occupiers of the neighbouring properties and to comply with policy D1 (Standards of design) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.
5	No development shall take place until details have been submitted to and agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority of the positions, design, materials and type of boundary treatment to be erected. The boundary treatment shall be completed in accordance with a timetable agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority. Development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details. Reason – In the interests of the privacy and amenities of the occupiers of the neighbouring properties and to comply with policy D1 (Standards of design) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.
6	No structure, erection or natural growth (plants, shrubs etc) exceeding 0.5 metres in height (above existing road level), shall be placed or permitted within the area shaded red on the plan attached to and forming part of this decision notice. Reason - In the interests of highway safety and to comply with policy TR7 (Highway considerations) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan
7	Before any development is commenced on site the proposed methods for the disposal of foul and surface water shall be submitted and agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority. the agreed scheme shall be implemented before the new sections of the property are first brought into use and retained hereafter unless connections can be made to mains piped systems. Reason: To ensure that water discharge into the surrounding ground does not contribute towards ground instability and to comply with policy G7 (Development on Unstable Land) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.

Reference Number: P/02295/06 - TCP/25882/B

Parish/Name: Shanklin - Ward/Name: Shanklin North

Registration Date: 20/09/2006 - Outline Planning Permission

Officer: Mr C Hougham Tel: (01983) 823552

Applicant: Landguard Developments Ltd

Demolition of existing property; outline for construction of 2 storey building comprising 8 flats with parking area & alterations to vehicular access, (revised scheme)

33 Landguard Manor Road, Shanklin, Isle Of Wight, PO377HZ

The application is recommended for Conditional Permission

REASON FOR COMMITTEE CONSIDERATION

This is an amended submission which has proved to be relatively contentious with a number of letters of objection and the local Members has asked that it be determined by elected Members.

1. Details of Application

1.1 Proposal involves demolition of the existing detached dwellinghouse and the redevelopment of the site with a two storey detached block comprising eight self-contained flats with the formation of a parking area in front of the proposed building using the existing access onto Landguard Manor Road.

1.2 This is an outline submission with siting and means of access to be considered at this stage.

1.3 Nevertheless the application is supported by a detailed survey of the existing property, a detailed layout of the proposed development including the proposed floor plan, a “suggested” main elevation, a street scene and a tree report prepared by a local arboriculturalist. Each unit will comprise an entrance hall, a lounge with kitchenette, two bedrooms and a bathroom. Suggested design and street scene indicate a two storey building of a traditional appearance similar to the neighbouring property and other premises in the immediate vicinity of the site. Existing vehicular access will be relocated to a more central location given access to a parking area capable of accommodating eight vehicles on a “one for one” basis.

1.4 In accordance with the new requirements the applicants’ agent submitted a relatively detailed Design and Access Statement which is attached to this report as an appendix.

2. Location and Site Characteristics

2.1 Large detached residential property situated on the eastern side of Landguard Manor Road, immediately next door to the Arthur Webster Clinic, approximately midway between the junctions with Green Lane and Whitbank Gardens.

2.2 Immediate locality is characterised by large detached residential properties mostly developed between 1900 and 1950 with large spacious mature garden areas with more recent development on the opposite side of the road.

2.3 Site has a frontage onto Landguard Manor Road of approximately 25 metres and a maximum depth of about 54 metres.

2.4 Existing property is a substantial four or five bedroom detached unit with a later conservatory occupying an “off-centre” position towards the northern (side) boundary of the site which leaves sufficient space for a double aspect to the front and the side of the property, the latter overlooking the private garden area between the building and the southern boundary of the site. Rear garden area is relatively well screened by boundary fences, a number of semi-mature/mature trees and vegetation affording the present occupants a good standard of privacy and amenity.

2.5 Neighbouring property to the north of the application site is a large Edwardian building which has been used as a private clinic for many years and to the south of the site is the former Culham Lodge Hotel which, following the grant of planning permission in February 2004, is now a house and four self-contained flats. Application site backs onto residential properties on the western side of Green Lane.

3. Relevant History

3.1 In November 2003 an outline application for a detached house within the garden area between the property and the southern boundary of the site was refused permission on grounds that can be summarised in the following terms:

· Development would not be in keeping with prevailing pattern of development and consequently would be unduly damaging to the amenities currently enjoyed by local residents.

· Unacceptable level of impact on neighbouring property due to loss of light, overshadowing, overdominance, etc.

3.2 In August 2006 an outline application to redevelop the site with a two storey building comprising eight flats and the formation of a parking area was refused permission under the delegated procedure on grounds relating to overdevelopment of the site which meant that the scheme conflicted with policies S6 (To be of a High Standard of Design) and D1 (Standards of Design) in addition to a reason relating to insufficient information in respect of the protection of retained trees/shrubs during the construction period and additional planting/landscaping.

3.3 Following this decision the applicants’ agent discussed the matter with the Case Officer with a view to making certain amendments to the initial scheme in order to overcome the identified problems. The amended submission is the subject of this report.

4. Development Plan Policy

4.1 National Policy Guidance is contained in PPG3 (Housing) and the recent consultation paper on housing.

4.2 Following Strategic Policies within the Unitary Development Plan are applicable:

· S1	-	New development will be concentrated within existing urban areas
· S2	-	Development will be encouraged on land which has been previously development
· S6	-	All development will be expected to be of a high standard of design
· S7	-	Provision of housing units on the Island

4.3 The following local planning policies are applicable:

· G4	-	General Locational Criteria for Development
· D1	-	Standards of Design
· D2	-	Standards for Development Within the Site
· D3	-	Landscaping
· H4	-	Unallocated Residential Development to be Restricted to Defined Settlements
· H5	-	Infill Development
· H6	-	High Density Residential Development
· TR7	-	Highway Considerations for New Development
· TR16	-	Parking Policies and Guidelines

5. Consultee and Third Party Comments

5.1 Internal Consultees

· Area Highway Engineer raises no objection to the application subject to the imposition of appropriate conditions if permission is granted.

· Tree Officer has indicated that in his view the development will have only a limited impact on any tree of high amenity within the curtilage of the property. He says that the design shows the impact to trees to be minimal, but it could be incurred during the development of the site which could be minimised by placing a condition that a detailed arboricultural method statement of how they intend to minimise any disturbance and impact on the trees around the site during and after its development; the statement would need to be submitted and approved by the Council before any work commenced on site.

5.2 Town Council

· Shanklin Town Council object to the application, stating:

Members wish to reiterate the comments previously made; Members are concerned that the proposal will be out of keeping with the other properties in the area and would like to see the present Victorian building remain.

5.3 Others

· Application has attracted more than a dozen letters of objection from local residents mostly living in Landguard Manor Road but also representations from residents in Green Lane. Reason for objecting the application can be summarised in the following terms:

o Loss of attractive detached dwellinghouse

o Overdevelopment of the site

o Inadequate “onsite” parking facilities

o Creation of potential traffic hazard due to the high volume of traffic already using Landguard Manor Road.

o Potential for overlooking of neighbouring properties with associated loss of privacy and amenity

6. Evaluation

6.1 Prior to examining the determining factors in this particular case it is important to eliminate from the various considerations some fundamental points:

· Site is within the built up area inside the development envelope boundary and therefore in terms of broad principle there is no objection to (re)development. Existing property is a typical example of a large detached family home constructed prior to the Second World War. However, it is not a Listed Building and it is not within a designated Conservation Area and therefore there is no sustainable objection to its demolition providing there is a scheme for the redevelopment of the site.

· This is a predominantly residential area and consequently there is no sustainable objection to the (re)development of the site for residential purposes.

6.2 In my view the determining factors in this particular case set against a background of strategic and local planning policies can be summarised in the following terms:

· Position, overall size (or) “footprint”, scale and size of the proposed building.

· Likely impact of the proposed building in the streetscene and the visual character and amenities of the area.

· Likely level of impact on the current level of privacy and amenity enjoyed by the owner/occupiers of neighbouring properties.

· Retention of existing trees/vegetation, boundary treatment and proposed additional landscaping.

· Access and parking arrangements.

6.3 Similar outline application to redevelop the site with a single block of eight self-contained flats was refused permission just a few months ago (see relevant history). In the context of this amended submission, it is important examine in some detail why officers chose to use delegated powers to refuse permission; the changes that have been made in this amended submission and whether these are sufficient to overcome the previous objections resulting in the grant of (conditional) permission. When the initial application was under consideration there were two key points which were highlighted in the written justification in support of the decision to refuse permission.

Siting………….. is key to the determination of this application and when giving due regard to the reasons for refusing an earlier submission to use the garden area between the existing property and the southern boundary of the site and the likely affect that this would have on the neighbouring property it is clear that this proposal would be likely to have a similar affect if it is taken into account that the gap between the proposed building and the boundary, at the narrowest point, is only 1.47 metres. This means that there will be an impact on the level of amenity of the neighbouring property and that the proximity of the proposed building to the boundary means that there will be a threat to the retention of trees/vegetation and considerable difficulty in carrying out any meaningful landscaping that could mitigate against this potential problem.

Tree survey ……. lacks appropriate recommendations in terms of the suitability the proposed development and the likely relationship of trees to be retained, protection of retained trees during the construction period and further planting/landscaping in order to enhance the development in terms of the level of amenity likely to be enjoyed by future occupants but also mitigate against any impact that the significant increase in density is likely to have on neighbouring properties.

6.4 Applicants’ agent’s response to these concerns is essentially two fold.

· While the overall footprint of the building has only been modestly reduced it has been reconfigured in order to increase the space between the flank wall of the proposed building and the southern boundary of the site to a maximum of 3.70 metres providing sufficient room for appropriate boundary treatment and additional landscaping/planting. In the accompanying Design and Access Statement the agent makes the following observation:

We have sited the building relatively central to the plot allowing a parking area to the front and communal gardens to the rear. We have also kept a significant distance to the adjoining properties, nos. 31 and 35. The proposal also includes significant soft and hard landscaping to screen the parking area from Landguard Manor Road. significant soft landscaping will also be carried out to the northern and southern boundaries.

· Application is supported by a Tree Survey which now includes details on landscape proposals and retained tree protection which meets with the approval of our Tree Officer.

6.5 Notwithstanding the overarching objectives of PPG3 to make the best possible use of urban land and while there is no fundamental objection to the redevelopment of the site for a multiple number of units, due regard and appropriate weight has to be given to the local pattern of development and the character and appearance of the immediate locality when dealing with new (re)development. In this context there is inevitably concern about the redevelopment of the site with a building that is substantially larger than the existing property in terms of “footprint”, and whether the likely impact of a building of this size could have a sufficiently detrimental affect on the general amenities of the area to sustain withholding planning permission. Essentially, this particular factor comprises two basic factors.

· Impact of the proposed (re)development in the streetscene and the affect on the prevailing pattern and character of development in the locality.

· Overall size of the proposed building in terms of “footprint” and depth and whether this will have sufficient impact on any neighbouring properties to sustain a decision to withhold permission.

6.6 Although this is only an outline application the applicants agent has submitted an illustrative streetscene and a suggested front elevation for the proposed replacement building which more than adequately demonstrate that the proposed building will sit comfortably within the streetscene as it will be very similar in terms of scale, mass, height and appearance to the immediate neighbouring properties on this side of Landguard Manor Road.

6.7 The density of development, bearing in mind that the applicants agent has accepted that the new building should be restricted to a maximum of two storeys, is achieved by replacing the existing building with one of greater depth. Nevertheless, it can be seen from the submitted layout plan that the proposed new building, which is set further back than the existing property in order to provide space for “onsite” parking, does not project significantly at the rear beyond the rear most elements of either of the two neighbouring properties; there is adequate space on either side of the proposed building for suitable boundary treatment and the relatively dense landscaping/planting to the rear of the site will not be affected by the proposed development.

6.5 Consequently while the amendments to the original scheme are relatively modest the view is taken that the submitted drawings in conjunction with illustrative material and the design and access statement demonstrates sufficiently that the (re)development of the site with a building of this size in this particular position in relation to the neighbouring properties does not represent overdevelopment of the site. Obviously there is a very significant increase in density but it should be noted that these are relatively small self-contained two bedroom flats with floor areas ranging from 61 to 68 square metres, which is why they can be accommodated in a building of a size that is compatible with existing development in the immediate vicinity of the site.

6.6 Finally, the application has attracted a considerable number of letters of objection from third parties which, in some respects, in my view, is a disproportionate response to the proposed development of a two storey block of eight flats in a residential area. Local concern is an understandable matter but when taking into account the likely level of impact that this (re)development is likely to have on the immediate locality, and more specifically the neighbouring properties, it is considered that the information provided with the application and the absence of any objection from the Area Highway Engineer or the Tree Officer means that, on balance, the application can be approved.

7. Conclusion and Justification for Recommendation

7.1 Although the earlier application was refused permission on grounds of overdevelopment of the site and insufficient information it is considered that the applicants agent has demonstrated that a suitably designed two storey building of this size providing a multiple number of small units (an identified requirement in the most recent Housing Needs Survey) can be accommodated on this site without harming the present level of amenities sufficient to justify withholding permission. Indeed, based on the illustrative information accompanying the application, it is considered that the new building is likely to enhance the character and amenities of the area as it will be of an appropriate scale in the streetscene in keeping with the two neighbouring properties and other premises along this side of Landguard Manor Road.

8. Recommendation

Approve.

Conditions/Reasons:

1	Application for approval of the reserved matters shall be made to the Local Planning Authority before the expiration of 3 years from the date of this planning permission. The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of 2 years from the date of approval of the final approval of the reserved matters or, in the case of approval on different dates, the final approval of the last such matter to be approved. Reason: To comply with Section 92 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended) and to prevent the accumulation of unimplemented planning permissions.
2	Before any works or development hereby approved is commenced on site details relating to the design, external appearance of any building(s) to be erected and the landscaping of the site shall be submitted to, and approved by the Local Planning Authority. These details shall comprise the ‘reserved matters’ and shall be submitted within the time constraints referred to in condition 1 above before any development is commenced. Reason: To enable the Local Planning Authority to control the development in detail and to comply with Section 92 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended).
4	No building on any part of the development hereby permitted shall exceed 2 storeys in height. Reason: In the interests of the amenities and character of the area and to comply with policy D1 (Standards of Design) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.
5	Development shall not commence until details of the facilities to be provided for the storage of refuse have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. No building shall be occupied until the facilities have been provided in accordance with the approved details and the facilities shall thereafter be retained. Reason: To safeguard the amenities of the locality and to comply with policy D1 (Standards of Design) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.
6	Prior to any development taking place and notwithstanding the approved plans, details of an access of a minimum width of 3.5 metres together with details of the relocation of the telegraph pole in the highway footway should be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. the access should be constructed in accordance with the approved plans prior to the occupation of any of the units hereby approved. Reason: To ensure adequate access to the proposed development and to comply with policy TR7 (Highway Considerations) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.
7	None of the units hereby approved shall be occupied until space has laid out within the site and drained and surfaced for 8 vehicles and bicycles to be parked and for vehicles to turn so that they may enter and leave the site in a forward gear. The space shall not thereafter be used for any purpose other than that approved in accordance with this condition. Reason: In the interest of highway safety and to comply with policy TR7 (Highway Considerations) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.
8	No development including site clearance shall commence on the site until all trees, not previously agreed with the Local Planning Authority for removal, shall has been protected by fencing or other agreed barrier, Any fencing shall conform to the following specification: Barrier shall consist of a scaffold framework as shown in figure 2 of BS 5837 (2005). Comprising of vertical and horizontal framework braced to resist impact, with vertical tubes spaced at a maximum of 3 m intervals. Onto this weldmesh panels are to be securely fixed. Such fencing or barrier shall be maintained throughout the course of the works on the site, during which period the following restrictions shall apply: (a)No placement or storage of material; (b)No placement or storage of fuels or chemicals. (c)No placement or storage of excavated soil. (d)No lighting of bonfires. (e)No physical damage to bark or branches. (f)No changes to natural ground drainage in the area. (g)No changes in ground levels. (h)No digging of trenches for services, drains or sewers. (i)Any trenches required in close proximity shall be hand dug ensuring all major roots are left undamaged. Reason: To ensure that all general trees and shrubs and other natural features to be retained are adequately protected from damage to health and stability throughout the construction period in the interests of the amenity and to ensure the wooded southern boundary is retained as an important landscape feature which provides a valuable wildlife corridor, all in compliance with policies D3 (Landscaping) and C12 (Development Affecting Trees and Woodland) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.
9	In this condition “retained tree” means an existing tree which is to be retained in accordance with the approved plans and particulars; and paragraphs (a) and (b) below shall have effect until the expiration of (1 year) from (the date of the occupation of the building for its permitted use). (a)No retained tree shall be cut down, uprooted or destroyed, nor shall any retained tree be topped or lopped other than in accordance with the approved plans and particulars, without the written approval of the Local Planning Authority. Any topping or lopping approved shall be carried out in accordance with British Standard 3998 (Tree Work); (b)If any retained tree is removed, uprooted or destroyed or dies, a replacement tree shall be planted in the same place, or place to be agreed and that tree shall be of such size and species, and shall be planted at such time, as may be specified in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To ensure the protection of the trees to be retained in the interests of the amenities of the area and in compliance with policy D3 (Landscaping) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.
10	No development shall take place until there has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority a scheme of landscaping, which shall include indications of all existing trees and hedgerows on the land, and details of any to be retained, together with measures for their protection in the course of development. Reason: To ensure the appearance of the development is satisfactory and to comply with policy D3 (Landscaping) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.
11	No development shall take place until a scheme of landscape implementation and maintenance for a minimum period of 5 years has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. All hard and soft landscape works shall be carried out in accordance with the approved scheme. The works shall be carried out prior to the occupation of any part of the development or in accordance with the programme agreed with the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To ensure the provision, establishment and maintenance of a reasonable standard of landscape in accordance with the approved design and to comply with policy D3 (Landscaping) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.
12	No development shall take place until details have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority of the positions, design, materials and type of boundary treatment to be erected. The boundary treatment shall be completed before the building hereby permitted is occupied. Development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details. Reason: In the interests of maintaining the amenity value of the area and to comply with policy D1 (Standards of Design) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.

Derek Rowell

STRATEGIC DIRECTOR FOR

ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT & REGENERATION

PAPER B

ISLE OF WIGHT COUNCIL DEVELOPMENT CONTROL SUB COMMITTEE -

TUESDAY 21 NOVEMBER 2006

REPORT OF THE STRATEGIC DIRECTOR FOR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND REGENERATION

WARNING

Background Papers