Reference Number: P/01594/04
- TCP/23899/D
Parish/Name:
Seaview - Ward/Name: Seaview & Nettlestone
Registration Date:
26/07/2004 - Full Planning Permission
Officer: Mr P
Salmon Tel: (01983) 823552
Applicant:
Tesco Stores Limited
Demolition of supermarket and petrol station;
construction of supermarket and petrol station; alterations to vehicular
access, access road and parking areas
Tesco Stores Ltd, Brading Road, Ryde, Isle Of Wight,
PO331QS
This application is recommended for Conditional Permission subject to
referral to the Secretary of State as a departure from the Isle of Wight
Unitary Development Plan.
REASON FOR COMMITTEE CONSIDERATION
This application is put before Members because of it scale and because it has genuine Island wide significance. The consideration of this application was deferred from the Development Control Sub-Committee of 20 December 2005 in order for officers to re-negotiate financial contributions towards infrastructure and to seek improvement to highway junction proposals.
1.
Details
of Application
1.1
Full planning
permission is sought for a new Store to replace the existing Tesco outlet to be
located on land immediately to the north east of the existing store on a site
formerly occupied by a go-kart track.
Proposals also include the relocation of the petrol filling station to
the southwest corner of the site, a new car park layout, and new access routes
to the buildings from the existing access road adjoining Brading Road.
1.2
The new store
is proposed to provide a total of 9,180 square metres of floor space, an
increase of 1,366m2 on the existing store (which currently has a
floor space area of 7,514m2). There would be a total net sales area
of 5,567m2, 2,201m2 more than the existing store as currently
laid out. The majority of the floor
area will be taken up by convenience goods (food, groceries and every day
items) with some also being used for the sale of the comparison goods (household
items).
1.3
The proposed
store building itself is proposed to be a flat roof rectangular building, the
frontage of which on its south elevation will comprise largely a glass wall
extending to some 7m high; the building itself will be 9m high in total. The glass front of the south elevation would
also comprise a series of an exposed steel structural frame supporting a front
canopy. The remaining three sides of
the building, the east west and north elevations will be clad by Rannila panels
(white coloured coated metal panels). The service yard will be to the rear of the
building on its north side and will be enclosed with a palisade fence
structure.
1.4
The relocated
petrol filling station in the south west corner of the site would provide
twelve pump stands arranged between wider isles than are currently available at
the existing petrol filling station.
The kiosk will have a floor space area of 70m2 and is an
exact copy of the existing facility. To
the rear of the kiosk are proposed a car wash and jet was facility. The height of the petrol filling station
awning is 5m2 in comparison with the existing Tesco building of
10.6m. The impact of the petrol filling
station will be further reduced by the proposed lowering of the ground floor
level at this point by approximately 2m sheltering the facility behind the
existing grass embankment.
1.5
The proposed
car park needs to be reconfigured to provide a total of 686 car parking spaces
and 14 motorcycle spaces. The current
car park provides 750 spaces. Of the
new spaces 30 will be provided for disabled parking and 29 will be allocated as
parent/toddler spaces.
1.6
The store will
be accessed from a new three-armed roundabout located on the existing access
road some 230m from the junction with Brading Road. The roundabout will serve to provide access to the rear service
yard of the new store by delivery vehicles and access to all the car parking
spaces from a new road which will form part of the proposed car parking
layout. The petrol filling station will
have its own entrance and exit with the existing access road situated some 80m
from the Brading Road junction. The applicants are considering an amended
entrance/exit layout for the petrol filling station in response to Members’
concerns outlined at the last Development Control Sub-Committee (20 December
2005).
1.7
A new bus stop
lay-by is proposed on the existing access road which will drop passengers off
at a distance of some 110m from the front door of the proposed new store. Tesco have secured by agreement with
Southern Vectis that all commercial bus services that utilise the Brading Road,
as well as the Tesco free bus services, will use this bus stop.
1.8
Proposals also
include a new pedestrian and cycle access link from the east side of Brading
Road, immediately to the south of the current IMO car wash
facility. This link will be approximately
150m long between Brading Road and the main front entrance of the proposed
store.
1.9
The planning
application was originally submitted with the following supporting documents:
§
A retail and
planning assessment prepared by DPP.
§
A transport
assessment prepared by Boreham Consulting Engineers.
§
A landscape
supporting statement prepared by EPCAD.
§
An ecological
assessment prepared by EPCAD.
§
A drainage
review prepared by White Young Green.
1.10
Since the
submission of the original application in July 2004, additional information has
been provided that includes:
§
Additional
landscape information for the petrol filling station (August 2005).
§
A petrol
filling station access briefing note (January 2005).
§
Revised access
route within car parking area (November 2005).
1.11
Tesco have
offered a contribution of £190,000 towards the improvement of Ryde town centre
as a mitigation measure towards any impact that the new store would have.
Officers have requested that Tesco reconsider their offer in the light of
Members’ concerns outlined at the previous Development Control Sub-Committee
(20 December 2005). They are also offering a public transport contribution of
£56,000 towards the re-routing of all Brading Road commercial services to the
proposed new bus stop on the Tesco access road. These contributions will be
included within a Section 106 Agreement.
2.
Location
and Site Characteristics
2.1
The proposed
development site broadly comprises the existing Tesco store, its petrol filling
station and car parking area. It also includes
a former go-kart track to the north (formerly developed land) and an area of
mature woodland and landscaping to the north and north east. Immediately to the west of the site of the
proposed store building are located the Jehovah Witness’ Kingdom Hall (18m)
between which would be a retained fence and line of mature landscaping, the Imo
car wash facility (90m) and the rear of the McDonald’s fast food takeaway at
75m. The rear of the nightclub is
situated at 20m from the north western most point of the proposed store. The nearest houses are located to the north
of the site at Mulberry Way, at a distance of some 80m. Between the service yard and these houses is
a line of mature woodland and undeveloped land. To the east of the site of the proposed new store are the vacant
vehicle museum buildings and the Westridge Leisure Centre situated some 50 –
100m away.
3.
Relevant
History
3.1
Outline
planning permission for the Tesco Store was originally granted on appeal in
August 1979. It also granted consent for
development of the adjoining recreation and leisure complex. The permission restricted the store to the
provision of 1,394m2 for convenience goods and 1,115m2
for durable goods.
3.2
The petrol
filling station and bus lay-by facilities were granted in January 1982.
3.3
In January 1984
permission was granted for the enlargement of the Tesco Store to provide a new
floor space limit of 1,858m2 for convenience goods and 1,245m2
for sale of comparison goods.
3.4
In August 1992
the Council approved a variation of planning condition to enable an increase in
floor space area for the sale of convenience goods; no alternative condition
was imposed to restrict the floor space of the store.
3.5
Permissions
were granted in April 1994 and April 1995 which enabled an expansion of the
total floor space to 6,760m2.
No conditions were imposed to limit the amount of convenience or
comparison floor space within the overall area.
3.6
In November
2002 permission was granted for the extension of the bulk storage area by 783m2
to give a new total floor space for the store of 7,543m2.
3.7
In June 2003 a
Certificate of Proposed Lawful Use or Development was issued enabling the
installation of a new mezzanine floor within the existing Tesco Store
building. The mezzanine floor would
increase substantially the available retail floor space. Tescos have stated that the mezzanine floor
would provide a total internal floorspace of 9,100 m2 with a net
sales area of 6,600 m2 (equivalent to the proposed store currently
before members)
4.
Development
Plan Policy
4.1
National
Guidance
·
PPS6 was
published in March 2005 replacing the former PPG6. PPS6 states (paragraph 3.4) that applicants should be required to
demonstrate the following:
(a)
the need for
development,
(b)
that
development is of an appropriate scale,
(c)
that there are
no more central sites for development,
(d)
that there are
no unacceptable impacts on existing centres and
(e) that locations are accessible.
·
PPS6 requires
that retail assessments prepared in support of planning applications need to be
based on those carried out with development plan documents. In assessing the need and capacity for
additional retail and leisure development, greater weight should be placed on
quantitative need for additional floor space.
PPS6 does acknowledge, however, that account should be taken of
qualitative considerations. The
guidance also requires that a sequential approach to site selection should be
applied to all development proposals for main town centre uses for sites that
are not in an existing centre. Developers
and operators need to demonstrate they have been flexible about the proposed
business model. PPS6 also states the
following material considerations may also be taken into account, these being:
(a)
physical
regeneration,
(b)
employment
creation,
(c)
economic growth
and social inclusion.
· PPG 13 entitled Transport states “A key planning objective is to ensure that jobs, shopping, leisure facilities and services are accessible by public transport, walking and cycling. This is important for all, but especially for those who do not have a regular use of a car and to promote social inclusion.” Paragraph 35 of PPG13 states “At the local level preference should be given to town centre sites followed by edge of centre and, only then, out of centre sites in locations which are, or will be, served by public transport. Where there is a clearly established need for such development and it cannot be accommodated in or on the edge of existing centres it may be appropriate to combine the proposal with existing out of centre developments provided that improvements to public transport can be negotiated.”
The relevant strategic policies of the Isle of Wight
Unitary Development Plan are considered to be S1, S2, S5, S6 and S14.
The
following policies are relevant:
·
G4 General
Locational Criteria for Development
·
D1 Standards of
Design
·
D2 Standards
for Development Within the Site
·
TR3 Locating
Development to Minimise the Need to Travel
·
TR7 Highway
Considerations for New Development
·
TR16 Parking
Policies and Guidelines
·
R2 New Retail
Development
·
R4 Development
on Unidentified Sites
·
P5 Reducing
Impact of Noise
5.
Consultee
and Third Party Comments
5.1
Internal
Consultees
·
Highways
Engineers have no objection to the proposals subject to applying conditions on
agreeing road details, parking and pedestrian and cycle access.
·
Environmental
Health Officers recommend applying a condition seeking the provision of a
scheme to minimise noise impacts to nearby residents and the control of delivery
times.
·
The
Conservation and Design Tam Leader considers this site to be one of generally
large buildings, many of which are contemporary in design. The scale and style
of the proposal is therefore not out of context. The area is commercial with
‘form following function.’ The store design is an honest solution to this area.
5.2
External
Consultees
The Environment Agency have proposed a number
of planning conditions which prevent the pollution of water, prevent flooding,
prevent the discharge of hydro carbons, prevent the pollution of ground water
and which seek to the prevention of contamination of any underlying aquifers.
King Sturge, acting on behalf of SEEDA and
the regeneration of East Cowes have expressed concerns that the sequential
analysis of alternative sites has not appropriately addressed all options. They
do not wish this to be considered an objection but merely to seek to ensure
that appropriate avenues have been considered.
5.3
Town and Parish
Council
·
Nettlestone and
Seaview Parish Council objected to the following:
·
The relocation
of the petrol filling station due to potential problems of queuing traffic and
the impact on Brading Road.
·
The
questionable benefits of a second car wash so close to the existing facility to
the north of the site.
5.4
Third Party
Responses
·
Roger Tym and
Partners, acting for Somerfield, cite that the proposals are contrary to the
Unitary Development Plan for the following reasons:
·
The proposed
site lies outside the development envelope for Ryde.
·
The proposals
prejudice the policy which identifies the site for leisure use and tourism.
·
Additional
retail development lies outside of the Ryde town centre.
·
There will be
an unacceptable impact on Ryde town centre and other centres on the Island.
·
The sequential
test has not been applied in accordance with PPS6
·
Islandwatch
object on the grounds that proposals will lead to more traffic generation.
·
SEEDA have
objected on the grounds of the potential impact on store proposals for part of
the regeneration of East Cowes.
·
The Isle of
Wight Bus Users Group have objected on the grounds that buses shall have direct
access to the front entrance of the store and as such the layout should be
amended.
·
Isle of Wight
Friends of the Earth have objected on the following grounds:
·
Impact on the
Ryde economy.
·
Effect on local
employment.
·
Increased car
generation.
·
Feeble
mitigation put forward by Tesco to counter negative impacts.
5.5
Neighbours
Four residents have objected on the following
grounds:
·
Concern on
layout and design of disabled parking.
·
Insufficient
disabled parking spaces.
·
Impact of noise
from the rear service yard to residents of Mulberry Way.
·
The issue of
flash flooding which needs to be resolved prior to the construction of the new
store.
6.
Evaluation
6.1
The key issues
to be considered in determining this application are as follows:
§
Retail capacity
and headroom assessment
§
The need for
the new store.
§
Potential
impacts on existing town centres.
§
Sequential test
§
Access, car
parking and the proposed road layout.
§
Access for
public transport.
§
Impact on
residential amenity.
§
Response to
representations received.
§
Design and
Scale
Retail Capacity and Headroom
Assessment
6.2
The Isle of
Wight Council has sought help in the determination of this planning application
from consultants Drivas Jonas with particular regard to the issues of
identifying need and in the assessment of retail capacity in the Cowes,
Newport, Ryde, Sandown and Shanklin catchment area. In October 2004 Drivas Jonas outlined their response to DPP’s
retail assessment in a report submitted to the Isle of Wight Council. This was subsequently followed up by the
publication of Drivas Jonas’s Islandwide Retail Capacity Study in June 2005
which was essentially produced to review the Unitary Development Plan and to
respond to national guidance, PPG 6 Town Centres and Retail Developments that
development plans should be based on an up to date assessment of retail
capacity. This report, nevertheless,
provides the context for the determination of this application with regard to
retail capacity and need.
6.3
The Drivas
Jonas report (June 2005) identifies projected retail capacity for both
convenience and comparison shops. It
does so by firstly defining respective catchment areas within which people
travel to shop and (by applying projected population estimates) calculates
average and future expenditure. The
report assesses available expenditure for convenience and comparison goods at
2006, 2011 and 2016. The report uses
several data sources to identify the total amount of comparison and convenience
goods floor space including commitments on the Island. Finally, the report compares future levels
of expenditure with existing turnover estimates based on national turnover
figures and translates the residual expenditure into floor space requirements.
6.4
The 2005 Drivas
Jonas report concluded that for convenience retailing there would be a net
surplus of expenditure of some £22.6 million by 2006 and some £25.3 million
pounds by 2011. The report goes on to
state the Council should make provision for this and states that the increased
turnover is the equivalent of a small superstore or several medium sized
stores. The report is also aware that
at the time the Council had received applications for the new Tesco store
(subject of this application) and for a new store in Shanklin which has
subsequently been approved (the Lidl store).
The Drivas Jonas report finally concludes that the level of capacity is
sufficient to support the current proposals (namely the Tesco application, the
Lidl’s proposal and the proposed store to form part of the East Cowes
Regeneration). Concerning comparison
retailing the report forecasts a surplus of expenditure that would support an
additional 37,917m2 gross of comparison floor space. The report identifies particular potential
for take up of convenience floor space in Newport.
6.5
In October 2005
the Council was notified of Sainsbury’s intention to submit a planning
application for the extension of its store in Newport. In the light of the fact that the Sainsbury’s
store is a town centre site, whereas Tesco is an out of centre, and the fact
that this would potentially have a further impact on the take up of retail
capacity, Drivas Jonas were further instructed to update their retail headroom
exercise. Attached as Appendix 1 to
this report is Drivas Jonas’ letter which confirms that there is sufficient
headroom to accommodate the potential Sainsbury’s extension, the Lidl store at
Shanklin, the foodstore at East Cowes and the Tesco redevelopment proposals
currently before you. It should be
noted that at the time of writing this report there is no planning application
received for the extension of Sainsbury’s.
In summary the letter states that if the East Cowes, Sainsbury’s and
Lidl proposals are fully implemented there would still be a net surplus of
expenditure of some £14.3 million (excluding tourist expenditure). This is significantly more than the
increased turnover of the proposed new store at Tesco (£6.2 million).
6.6
The work
undertaken for the Isle of Wight Council by Drivas Jonas confirms there is
sufficient retail capacity to accommodate commitments and proposals for town
centre expansion and development for convenience retail as well as the
proposals for the new redeveloped store at Tesco. Beyond this there would still be an expenditure surplus of some
£8.1 million excluding tourist expenditure that should be provided for
elsewhere.
6.7
DPP’s retail and planning assessment submitted in support of the
application identifies the quantitative need.
This is demonstrated by the comparison of the existing store’s trading
performance against Tesco’s company average levels. DPP state that the existing store overtrades by some 30% above
the company average. The overtrading
situation has been exacerbated by the growth and expenditure which will set to
continue. They state that this is a
valid demonstration of quantitative need for the redevelopment proposals
arising specifically from the existing Tesco store. DPP also seek to demonstrate that the growth and expenditure in
convenience goods and comparison goods far exceeds any increase in the turnover
of the existing store.
6.8
In terms of
qualitative need DPP state that in spite of the success and popularity of the
existing store it also has distinct problems with overcrowding, in store
congestion, stock control problems, queuing, restocking difficulties and “a
generally uncomfortable shopping experience for the customer, particularly at
busy periods in the summer. Whilst
Tesco have a number of planning
consents and a Lawful Development Certificate for the extension on floor
space area, the internal layout of the store will continue to be compromised by
the fact that it has evolved over many years, rather than being specifically
planned from the outset. DPP state that
the new store would resolve these problems by placing storage and preparation
areas in close proximity to where they are needed on the shop floor and that a
more efficient use of floor space would enable customers to receive the best service
possible.
6.9
DPP state that
the new store would provide an additional 80 jobs in addition to the 400 that
are currently employed. Whilst
employment is not an overriding component of need, DPP promote this as a valid
material consideration.
6.10
The case for
both the qualitative and quantitative need put forward by DPP is
acknowledged. Planning officers accept
the case for the need, particularly in the light of the conclusions made by
Drivas Jonas in their headroom exercise identifying retail capacity. Should Tesco implement their current
consents and options for the installation of a mezzanine floor, this would
undoubtedly result in a poorer quality store environment in comparison with the
proposals for the new store, and one that would not trade so efficiently.
6.11 The DPP report acknowledges that either the mezzanine floor scheme (and expansion consents) and the new store proposals would have some impact on town centre expenditure for convenience goods. It is anticipated that a new store would have a slightly higher impact than the mezzanine scheme since it is considered it would be more attractive to customers and therefore likely to generate additional turnover. DPP state that the new store would have a convenience turnover of some £54.7 million and a comparison goods turnover of £10.17 million, resulting in a total good turnover of £64.9 million, this would compare to £62.13 million for the mezzanine scheme. DPP report there would be potential impacts on expenditure as follows:
Somerfield
in Ryde - 4.3%
Iceland
in Ryde around 1.1%
Other
stores in Ryde - 1.9%
Morrisons
in Sandown – 2.5%
Morrisons
in Newport – 0.8%
Sainsbury’s
in Newport – 0.9%
The report also
acknowledges that Tesco Express at Wootton would experience an impact of around
2.6%. The impact cited by DPP they
argue, would not undermine the future viability of the stores or centres to
which they belong, indeed DPP consider the impacts to be low level.
6.12
Officers accept
that some impact on existing stores and expenditure in town centres is
inevitable. However it is accepted that such impacts would be insufficient to
undermine the future viability of the other stores and as such this would not
raise an objection in policy terms.
Moreover the fact that the existing Tesco store has consents for its
extension and an LDC for a mezzanine floor, these schemes could be implemented
irrespective of any further examination with regard to need or impact. The offer of a financial contribution for
the improvement of Ryde town centre made as part of the proposals for the new
store is appropriate given the increased impact that the new store is likely to
have above the expansion of the existing store. This contribution would seek to ensure that the vitality and
viability of Ryde town centre is maintained.
6.13
The impact on
Ryde town centre resulting from this proposed development is a material
consideration. Although the impact on Ryde is described as within the DPP report
as low (confirmed by Drivers Jonas’ findings), it is not considered to be ‘de
minimus’. Neither is the impact on Ryde town centre considered to be
unacceptable. In any event, the low level impact can be mitigated against by
the payment of £190,000 towards improvement works in Ryde.
6.14
Whilst the
current Tesco proposals are for a new store, these need to be considered in the
light of the fact that there is an existing store for which there is already a
consent and an LDC for increased floor space that would not have to undergo the
sequential test. DPP have nevertheless
provided a sequential analysis of potential options or alternative sites for a
new store. They consider that Ryde, in
particular its town centre, is extensively developed and there is insufficient
space or any appropriate sites available for the type of store proposed. The one available site identified in the
Unitary Development Plan in George Street has already been taken up by
Somerfield. In respect of any edge of
centre site, DPP conclude there are no viable alternative options for the
‘complete store’ proposed. DPP have
also considered whether a proportion of additional floor space such as for the
comparison goods could be separated and accommodated within vacant units in the
town centre. The conclusion is that by
separating the floor space in this way, a single retailer could not
practically, or viably, operate the various stores created with increased
overheads and the need for widespread duplication of product ranges. In any event, the alternative to that
scenario would be the implementation of existing consents for the extension of
the current store including the installation of the mezzanine floor.
6.15
With regard to
Newport, the UDP identifies four sites, all of which are in the periphery of
the main shopping centre, only one of which remains undeveloped, namely the
Newport Fire Station site in South Street.
This site has, however, been discounted on grounds of availability. A relocation to Newport would also seem
inappropriate considering that there are already two large food store retailers
in the town and that a relocation of Tesco would distort current retail travel
patterns.
6.16
Officers are
satisfied that the sequential test provided by DPP as part of the planning
application is appropriate. They agree that there are no ‘more appropriate’
sites available for the proposed new TESCO store when considering possible
alternative sites. They also consider that the current Tesco site and location
is established. It is served by public
transport and is now accompanied by adjacent alternative trip generating
uses. The site therefore encourages
multiple use trips and as such the existing site is considered to be more
sustainable than an alternative option of seeking a new out of centre site.
6.17
The level of
car parking proposed as part of the scheme is considered appropriate and meets
the requirements of PPG13. Highway
Engineers raise no objection to the proposed road layout. Further information concerning the queuing
distances of the proposed petrol filling station submitted by the applicants’
Highway Consultants Forum confirms the siting of the junction to be acceptable.
6.18
A revision to
the access layout has been provided that would enable bus access directly to
the front main entrance of the Tesco building if required in the future.
Impact on
Residential Amenity
6.19
Officers
support the application of planning conditions to protect the amenity of
residents to the north of the proposed store. This will seek n noise reduction
from operations and control hours of delivery.
Design and Scale
6.20
The design and
scale of the proposed store is considered appropriate.
Public Transport
6.21
Proposals for a
new bus stop on the access road are welcomed.
These will result in all commercial services on the Brading Road
directly access the Tesco store site.
Whilst the stop is still situated some 100m from its main entrance at
the new Tesco store, officers are keen that the walkway should be covered and
propose to provide a condition that seeks to agree design of the walkway prior
to the commencement of the scheme.
6.22 Officers consider that the sequential test outlined in the supporting documentation provided by DPP is appropriate and accords with national guidance. Whilst the site lies outside of the development envelope for Ryde the location, nevertheless, provides for multiple use trips when considering adjacent traffic generating uses.
6.23 Whilst it is acknowledged that there may be impacts on Ryde town centre, these are considered of minor nature and are mitigated by the proposed contribution towards improvements to the upgrading of the town centre environment.
6.24 Officers acknowledge that the proposed site encompasses part of the leisure/tourism allocation in the Unitary Development Plan (Policy T7(d)). The proposal is nevertheless considered appropriate as a significant leisure scheme in this location is feasible in land use terms whilst the opportunity for multiple use trips would be supported.
6.25 The use of conditions will seek to secure an adequate provision of parking spaces for the disabled. They will also ensure that the appropriate measures are put into place to reduce any impact from the rear service yard on residents of Mulberry Way and beyond.
6.25 Officers acknowledge that the use will generate significant levels of traffic, however, improved measures for alternative means of access are proposed as part of the scheme, including a more direct relationship between all commercial bus routes on Brading Road and the Tesco store as well as improved access for pedestrians and cyclists.
7.
Conclusion
and Justification for Recommendation
7.1 The application seeks consent for the redevelopment of an existing store. A key issue remains, that Tesco could lawfully increase the retail floor space of their current store without requiring any further consent. Planning conditions are such that they would be able to sell any amount of either comparison or convenience goods.
7.2
The proposals
would provide a new store that would represent an improved shopping facility
than the current building which dates back to the early 1980s and which has
been subsequently added to by various extensions.
7.3
This location
is an established one for Tesco. There
are already adjacent traffic or trip generating uses which together represent
an area that would generate multiple use trips.
7.4
The retail
headroom exercises have demonstrated that there is adequate and sufficient
retail capacity to accommodate not only this Tesco application but also those
that by definition are located in town centres as defined by PPS6. These include Sainsbury’s in Newport, a
proposed foodstore as part of the East Cowes regeneration, Tesco in Wootton and
the Lidl store in Shanklin.
7.5
The sequential
analysis has demonstrated that there are no more appropriate sites for a new
expanded Tesco store. The impacts on
Ryde town centre are considered to be minimal whilst the contribution towards
the upgrade of the centre are deemed appropriate mitigation against any
negative impacts.
7.6
The building is
of an appropriate design and the proposed landscaping scheme adequately shields
the proposed petrol filling station on the south west corner of the site. The proposals will have a greatly reduced
impact on Brading Road where the existing building has a dominant and
overbearing presence.
7.7
Alternative
means of access to the site by way of improved bus links and access by
pedestrians and cyclists are supported.
8.
Recommendation
It is recommended that conditional planning permission is resolved to be granted, subject to a S106 Agreement, and subject to referral to the Secretary of State as a departure from the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.
You are advised that the signage shown on the permitted drawings has
not been granted consent and is subject to consideration under different
regulations.