|
1. |
STRATEGIC
OVERVIEW OF TWO MAJOR PLANNING APPLICATIONS FOR EAST COWES AS SUBMITTED BY
SEEDA & ENGLISH PARTNERSHIPS AND BARRATT (SOUTHAMPTON) LTD |
1. Purpose
1.1 The purpose of this report is to outline
the wider strategic planning considerations as part of the determination of two
major outline planning applications proposed for East Cowes namely:
P/00027/06 – TCP/27465
Demolition of Venture Quays, Trinity House Depot, Red Funnel ticket
office, Public Conveniences and Camelia; outline for a mix of uses including
employment, retail, health facility, community facilities, marine heritage
experience, events space, hotels, residential and ferry marshalling facilities,
together with associated highway and junction improvements to include new road from
Church Path to Old Road; public transport interchange, car parking and
servicing, open space and landscaping, flood defence measures and site
remediation works; full permission for land reclamation works to the west of
Venture Quays (plots 7A, 7C & 8B part) at Venture Quays/Trinity House Depot
& Wharf/former North Works/land to west of Sylvan Avenue, Red Funnel
Marshalling Yards/Public Conveniences/Well Road Car Park/located in vicinity
of, Castle Street, East Cowes, PO32
P/00563/06 – TCP/18291/D Outline consent for 9.9 hectares of
residential development; 9.9 hectares of employment development; managed
woodland; nature conservation areas; proposed access road junction with
Whippingham Road & Beatrice Avenue; network of public footpaths/cycleways;
public transport link only to Kingston Road at land bounded by Kingston Fm
Lane/Cadets Walk/Kingslea Park/Beatrice Ave, E Cowes power station/agricultural
land/south of E Cowes Vics football ground inc land off, Whippingham Road, East
Cowes, PO32
1.2 Report identifies the key areas where the
planning issues and impacts are common to both applications, including
strategic policy. As such, elements of
both proposals require an integrated approach for their determination.
Recommendation: That
Development Control Sub-Committee note the strategic issues and policy context
outlined in this report in the consideration of the two major planning
applications for East Cowes.
2. Background
2.1 Members considered the Barratt outline
planning application for housing and employment uses at Kingston in January of
2006 and resolved to refuse it on the grounds that there was insufficient
affordable housing, that the proposals represented greenfield development in an
area where there were brownfield opportunities, and for issues of lack of
access to community facilities. This
application has now been resubmitted. Barratt, the applicants, are now seeking
to address the reasons for refusal by amending contributions as part of a proposed
section 106 agreement. These include
the increasing of the proportion of affordable housing to a full 30%, the
re-phasing of a new proposed link road now to be completed as part of phase 1,
and an increased contribution towards the provision of a public transport link. The details of the proposals are outlined in
the attached report addressing the planning application.
2.2 English Partnership’s and SEEDA’s
proposals for the regeneration of East Cowes was submitted on 3 January 2006
and represents the culmination of 2½ years of joint working and consultation
with the East Cowes community, the Isle of Wight Council and the Economic
Partnership to develop a regeneration masterplan. This is now reflected in the outline application that broadly
seeks permission for a major mixed use regeneration scheme that includes
housing, employment uses, retail, town square, health centre, commercial
activities and a new ferry marshalling yard.
2.3 Both planning applications seek
permission for in excess of over 500 residential units together with significant
provision of industrial, commercial and other employment uses and major
infrastructure to serve them. The
potential strategic gains for the Island are considerable. Similarly the impacts on East Cowes itself
are significant and require careful consideration. Whilst Members will decide whether planning permission should be
granted for each separate application, they must also have regard to the wider
strategic considerations.
3. Islandwide Strategic Issues
3.1 Housing
3.1.1
The Island’s current housing need reflects the
requirement for 520 residential units to be developed per annum up to the year
2011. The review of housing issues as part of the preparation of the new Island
Plan has identified a need for the same annual completion rate of 520 residential
units per year to 2026. An update of
the Council’s urban capacity study published in November 2005, illustrated that
the number of brownfield opportunities has declined since 2001/02 but that the
average size and yield of sites has increased, assuming higher densities. Moreover, it also concluded that there is
insufficient brownfield land available to meet housing needs through until 2026
and that greenfield allocations contained within the UDP will still be required,
even though it may be over a longer timeframe than originally identified in the
Unitary Development Plan.
3.1.2
The Island Plan Core Strategy submitted to GOSE
in June 2006) clearly identifies a phased approach to regeneration with the
focus being the Medina Valley through until 2015. This means ensuring that enough employment and residential
opportunities are made available within the area to enable regeneration.
3.1.2 Members will be aware that a significant
proportion of the allocated sites will not come forward for development for
some time. These include land at Ashey
Road, Ryde for which planning permission was refused in February 2006 and both
the Newport expansion at Pan, which the Isle of Wight Council are currently
considering how to take forward, and land at Worsley Road, Newport. Should both the SEEDA and Barratt schemes be
approved, this would provide only 40% of the Island’s housing need up to the
year 2011.
3.1.3 In addition to contributing to the required
growth of the general Island housing stock, each significantly proposes to
provide the full 30% proportion of affordable housing. The Isle of Wight was recently successful in
receiving substantial grant funding from the Housing Corporation for the
provision of affordable housing.
£2,900,000 is committed to the provision of affordable units at both the
Kingston site and the SEEDA scheme for the regeneration of East Cowes. The funding from the Housing Corporation is
subject to both applicants commencing development on site within a given
timeframe. A major concern is should
either or both schemes be delayed, Housing Corporation funding could be lost
with potential repercussions for future bids.
3.2 Employment
3.2.1 The SEEDA regeneration scheme proposes new
upgraded employment floorspace. The
Barratt scheme for Kingston proposes 9.9 hectares of new additional employment
land. Together both schemes represent a
significant opportunity for the creation of a wide range of employment sites to
serve and maintain the Island economy.
The projected growth in ‘Gross Value Added’ on the Island as identified
by the Experian report on the Island Economy October 2005, as part of the
Island Plan process, suggests a continued need for a wide range of employment
sites.
3.3 Emergency Planning
3.3.1 Emergency Planning current contingency plans
for interruption to cross Solent services look at alternative holding sites for
ferry traffic and consider the issues to be primarily traffic management
problems in the remit of highways and police/emergency services. Additional highway routes associated with
new development offer the possibility of providing alternative routes should
parts of the existing network become blocked.
The Fire Service have confirmed verbally that in emergency there would
be alternative means of access to East Cowes.
3.4 Highways
3.4.1 The Council commissioned Mott MacDonald to
review the Transport Assessment (TA) that accompanied the SEEDA / English
Partnerships application for East Cowes. As part of their brief they were asked
to include a review of the Kingston Development and comment on the combined
impact of the two developments upon the highway infrastructure of East Cowes.
3.4.2 The traffic model covers East Cowes urban
area and the A3021 as far as the A3054, Newport/Ryde Road and The methodology
for forecasting traffic is appropriate.
3.4.3 The estimates of traffic generated by the
Kingston Development are considered robust and assume that all residents will
travel outside the development to work rather than travel internally to the
employment area within the development.
Thus the calculation of traffic flows associated with the development is
likely to be an overestimation.
Similarly the SEEDA East Cowes Development has identified that
employment in East Cowes will attract trips from the Kingston development and
vice versa thus resulting in duplication of traffic generated.
3.4.4 The approach taken in assigning the Kingston
traffic to the network in conjunction with the East Cowes generated traffic
appears reasonable and although there are minor differences in assumptions
these differences would not alter the conclusion reached that the combined
development traffic can be accommodated by the highway network.
3.4.5 In strategic highway network terms, officers
are satisfied that the proposed layouts provide sufficient capacity to
accommodate the proposed development and provide some relief to the congestion
currently encountered in East Cowes as a result of Red Funnel’s activities.
They cannot however be expected to resolve all the historic traffic problems of
East Cowes.
3.5 Cowes Waterfront
Supplementary Planning Guidance
3.5.1 Supplementary Planning Guidance was
published following public consultation in 2003 that provides the regeneration
framework for the whole Cowes area and the rest of the Medina Valley. It sets out a strategy for the comprehensive
redevelopment and strengthening of East Cowes town centre, including the
relocation of the Red Funnel terminal, new mixed use development and
residential development. The SPG also
provides for the development of new marine based employment areas, a new link
road and enabling housing development, all of which are accommodated in the
Barratt outline planning application.
3.6 The Island Plan Submitted Core Strategy
3.6.1 The new emerging Local Development
Framework, ‘The Island Plan’, has reached a stage where the preferred option
for the core strategy has been submitted to the Secretary of State. The preferred option identifies East Cowes
as a ‘Major Settlement and Growth Area’ (together with Cowes, Ryde, Sandown,
Shanklin, and Newport). The key issues
for East Cowes include encouraging new development to use brownfield sites, and
to ensure that any larger housing developments on urban extensions offer a high
quality, mixed-use environment that integrates them into surrounding
neighbourhoods. The core strategy
maintains economic regeneration and growth at the heart of the Isle of Wight’s
future objectives. Strategies include
the identification of a range of employment generating sites and premises that offer
up to 70 hectares of employment land between 2006 and 2026.
4. Conclusions
4.1 There is a strong strategic case for the
approval of both outline applications.
This is based on housing need, provision of affordable housing, the
meeting of economic regeneration objectives and the new strategy of the
emerging Island Plan. Members will,
however, need to be satisfied that the details of each application have
sufficient merit to warrant approval of planning permission.
5. Background Papers
5.1 South East Plan
5.2 Unitary Development Plan
5.3 Cowes Waterfront SPG
5.4 Other technical papers
|
3. |
Reference Number: P/00563/06
– TCP/18291/D Parish/Name: East
Cowes – Ward/Name: Osborne Registration Date:
03/03/2006 - Outline Planning Permission Officer: Mr P
Salmon Tel:
(01983) 823552 Applicant: Barratt
(Southampton) Ltd Outline consent for 9.9 hectares of residential
development; 9.9 hectares of employment development; managed woodland; nature
conservation areas; proposed access road junction with Whippingham Road &
Beatrice Avenue; network of public footpaths/cycleways; public transport link
only to Kingston Road land bounded by Kingston Fm Lane/Cadets Walk/Kingslea
Park/Beatrice Ave, E Cowes power station/agricultural land/south of E Cowes
Vics football ground inc land off, Whippingham Road, East Cowes, PO32 |
The application is recommended for Conditional Permission subject
to a s106 Agreement and reference to GOSE under the Town and Country
Planning (Residential Development on Greenfield Land) (England) Directions
2000) as the site is likely to generate in excess of 150 units.
This Report should be read
in conjunction with the Overview Report which considers the wider strategic
planning considerations which are common to both the planning application
submitted by SEEDA and that made by Barratts.
|
REASON FOR COMMITTEE CONSIDERATION This is a major application of strategic significance
relating to a site allocated for both residential and employment uses in the
Unitary Development Plan. |
This report to the Development Control Sub Committee has
been prepared by Helen Ashworth of Urban Vision for Phil Salmon, Development
Team Manager on behalf of the Isle of Wight Council.
1.1
This
application represents a resubmission of a planning application submitted by
the applicant in September 2005. Members will recall that the previous
application, which had an officer recommendation for approval, was considered
by Members and refused at the Committee in January 2006. There were three
reasons for the refusal of the application, as follows:
1)
The site is a Greenfield location in an area that has alternative
brownfield opportunities and will create a development that is not adequately
linked to or integrated with the adjacent urban area and encourages reliance
upon the car to access facilities and as such is contrary to guidance provided
by Planning Policy Statement (PPS) 1 – Delivering Sustainable Development and
PPS7 – Development in the Countryside, and is contrary to policies S1
(Development to be Concentrated Within Existing Urban Areas), S2 (Development
to be Encouraged on Brownfield Sites) and S11 (Reduction of the Impact and
Reliance on the Car) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.
2)
The proposals fail to make adequate provision for locally affordable
housing depriving the whole community access to housing and is contrary to
guidance provided by Planning Policy Guidance Note 3(PPG3) Housing and to
policy H14 (Locally Affordable Housing as an Element of Housing Schemes) of the
Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.
3)
The proposals would represent an over-development of the site at an
excessive density, in an area that is not close to local facilities and would
be out of character with the prevailing pattern of development of the
surrounding area and is contrary to policy H6 (High Density Residential
Development) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.
1.2
This
application is essentially the same as that previously submitted, but the
applicant has attempted to address the reasons for refusal, following meetings
with Council officers and Members. The applicant has made amendments to the
phasing of the proposed development (the provision of the access road in one
phase, rather than linked to the release of housing, to allow the employment
land to developed at an early stage and to enable traffic to be diverted away
from Kingston Road and existing residential uses and the establishment of a bus
route at an earlier stage), has increased the provision of affordable housing
within the development (from 25% to 30% across the site and 36% of these would
be provided within the first phase) and has reduced the number of dwellings
proposed (by six). The applicant has also submitted details with regards to
brownfield versus greenfield issues, site sustainability issues and a property
market report, which considers housing market demand in the area.
2. Details
of Application
2.1
This
is an outline application for residential and employment development on a 20ha
site with means of access only to be considered. All other matters, including
siting, design, external appearance and landscaping, are reserved for
subsequent approval. The application site boundary also incorporates 25ha of
land which will be covered by a long term ecological management plan and will
include areas of ecological mitigation.
2.2
The
application is accompanied by an Environmental Statement (ES), which considers
the potential significant environmental effects and includes an assessment of
air quality, community and social effects, cultural heritage, ground
conditions, land use, landscape and visual effects, natural heritage, noise,
traffic and transport and water quality and hydrology. There are also separate
transport assessments and drainage flood risk assessment and services report.
2.3
The
application is also accompanied by an illustrative Masterplan, indicative
siting plan, a planning and design statement and a surface water and foul
drainage strategy.
2.4
In
summary, the proposal comprises 10ha of residential development to the
north-east of the site, 10ha of employment development to the north-west of the
site, a new vehicular access from Whippingham Road, footpaths and cycleways,
open space provision and children’s play areas and an ecological buffer.
2.5
The
development details are as follows:
The Masterplan
The Masterplan provides the
framework for the development proposals. In addition, plans for the design of
the landscape buffer, drainage strategy and illustrative siting of buildings
are also provided. The Masterplan provides an indication of proposed land uses
and maximum heights of buildings. Residential development of a maximum height
of 15m (4 storey) is proposed in the eastern part of the site. An area of open
space is proposed to the south-west corner of the residential site, which
connects to Beatrice Avenue at the north-east corner of the site via a
pedestrian boulevard link. The proposed employment area would be situated
within the western part of the site. The Masterplan identifies maximum heights
of buildings within three broad areas of the employment site. Adjacent to
Kingston Copse and the proposed residential development, building heights would
be a maximum of 12m. In the central part of the employment site, adjacent to
the existing dwellings at Kingslea Park and the south-western part of the site,
building heights would be a maximum of 15m. In the western part of the
employment site, adjacent to the power station and the closest part of the
development to the River, building heights would be a maximum of 17m. The
proposed access road from Whippingham Road is positioned to the south of the
existing track that leads to the former sewage works. The fields to the south
of the access road will remain for habitat creation and enhancement. This will
include ecological mitigation works comprising a wetland area, Wader roosting
area and grassland scrub for reptiles will be undertaken in this area. An
ecological buffer zone is proposed to separate the development site from the
River. Balancing ponds are proposed to the west of Kingston Copse.
Access and Movement
The access road would be taken from
Whippingham Road via a new roundabout and would be 7.3m wide with a 2m wide
footway to the northern side. The existing streetlighting may need to be
upgraded in this location. A staggered junction would be created where the road
crosses Beatrice Avenue. Two alternatives were considered for the proposed
access road within the development site – to enter the site to the north of the
hedge, cutting through Kingston Copse, which was rejected due to loss of
ecological habitat and disturbance; and as currently proposed, to enter the
site south of the hedge, cutting through the hedge to access the residential
area (midway between Kingston Copse and Beatrice Avenue) and with access to the
employment area to the west of Kingston Copse. No direct access is proposed
from Beatrice Avenue, except for emergency vehicles. The northern end of the
access road will terminate close to the power station gates and the junction of
Kingston Road/Cadets Walk. A closure is proposed to prevent vehicular access to
and from Kingston Road and the site, with the exception of buses – access will
be controlled by the introduction of a ‘bus gate’.
Access for pedestrians, cycles and
emergency vehicles is proposed between Beatrice Avenue and the residential
development. Footpaths are proposed within/around Kingston Copse and adjacent to
the hedge to the west of Beatrice Avenue, linking with the footpath at St.
Mildred’s Church.
Residential Development
The ES is based on the assumption of
a maximum of 557 dwellings on 10ha, giving a maximum density of 55 dwellings
per hectare. The ES also assumes the following mix of sizes: 8.5% one bedroom,
47.5% two bedroom, 37% three bedroom and 7% four bedroom. The ES also assumes a
maximum height of four-storey or 15m. 25% of the dwellings will be affordable.
In a covering letter in respect of this resubmitted planning application, the
applicant has confirmed that the actual number of dwellings now proposed is 551
(a reduction of 6 from the original proposals).
Employment Development
In order to assess worst case
traffic generation, the ES is based on the assumption that the site is split
into 4.1ha of 50:50 mix of B1 (business) and marine related B2 (general
industrial) /B8 (storage and distribution) uses in the northern part of the
site and 5.9ha of marine related B2/B8 uses in the southern part of the site.
The maximum heights of buildings are as described in section 1.5.1 of this
report.
Landscape Buffer
A 50m wide buffer is proposed
adjacent to the River Medina, comprising a 25m wide planted, 3m high bund and a
25m wide wetland strip. The southern end of the bund will end at the edge of
the built development, but the buffer area will be extended a further 150m to
the south.
Public Open Space
Kingston Copse will remain and will
be publicly accessible. An area of public open space is proposed to the
south-west of the residential area. Two children’s play areas are proposed
within the residential area, one in the north and one in the centre.
Phasing
The development will commence with
the construction of the access road from Whippingham Road to enable all
construction traffic to access the site without affecting any local distributor
roads. It is now intended to complete the access road within 18 months of the
commencement of development. Under the previous application, the completion of
the access road was to be linked to the construction of the first 220
dwellings, however, the applicant has now confirmed that this would be provided
in one phase. Dwellings will be constructed at a rate of approximately 55 per
year over a 10 year period. The employment uses will be developed over a period
of five years from the completion of the access road, although this will be
dependant upon demand. The landscape buffer will be created during the site
preparation of the residential area and prior to commencement of construction
activities.
Service Provision
Surface water will be dealt with by
a sustainable urban drainage system (SUDS). Two balancing ponds will be created
to the west of Kingston Copse which will discharge into the existing ditch that
crosses the site. A foul pumping station is required at the lower end of the
site, in addition, parts of the sewer network will require upsizing. An
additional transformer will be provided at the power station to accommodate the
electricity supply. It is not anticipated that the overhead cables will need to
be grounded. No reinforcement is proposed for the drinking water supply. Gas
and telecommunications will be supplied to the site.
Construction
Construction compounds are proposed
which will include car parking, temporary buildings and secure storage. In the
region of 200 construction jobs will be created. Hours of working proposed are
0730 to 1730 Mondays to Fridays and 0730 to 1300 on Saturdays, with no working
on Sundays or bank Holidays.
Post Construction
It is estimated that the development
would increase the population of East Cowes by 1, 337 people. Assuming this,
there are likely to be 255 primary school children, 204 middle school children
and 102 secondary school children. An estimated 400 to 600 job opportunities
will arise from the employment development.
3.1
The
application site is located at the southern edge of East Cowes. The site is
bounded by the River Medina to the west and Beatrice Avenue to the east. Beyond
Beatrice Avenue is Osborne Middle School, sports pitches and the Osborne Works
industrial area. To the south of the site are fields and St. Mildred’s Church
and the Victoria and Albert Almshouses. To the north of the site is the Cowes power
station and residential properties which include Kingston Farm and dwellings on
Greenlands Road, Kingslea Park and Harvey Close.
3.2
This
is a Greenfield site and the predominant use is arable farmland, with fields typically bounded by hedgerows. There is a
significant area of woodland, Kingston Copse, to the centre of the site.
Immediately to the south of the woodland is the site of a former sewage works.
3.3
The
arable farmland has been cultivated for crops such as cereals, beans and oil
seed rape. The farmland is classified as Grade 3 (moderate to good) quality
agricultural land. To the north of the site and east of the power station is an
area of uncultivated land, which has been overgrown and has been used for fly
tipping. Kingston Copse is an area of dense woodland, the southern part
comprising relatively recent woodland. A track runs from east to west through
the copse and there is a footpath along the eastern edge running north to south
and then east towards Beatrice Avenue.
3.4
The
site slopes from east to west from approximately 50m AOD at a gradient of
approximately 1:12. Overhead power lines from the power station run from north
to south across the western part of the site.
3.5
The
River Medina to the west of the site forms part of the Medina Estuary Site of
Special Scientific Interest (SSSI), the Solent Maritime Special Area of
Conservation (SAC) and the Solent and Southampton Water Special Protection Area
(SPA) and RAMSAR site, which form part of the Solent European Marine Site.
3.6
The
main views into the site are from the River Medina, the western bank of the
River, Beatrice Avenue and the residential area to the north of the site.
The findings of the ES are
summarised as follows:
4.1 Air Quality
·
The
main source contributing to effects on future air quality is considered by the
applicant to be vehicle emissions. The
location of the site, adjacent to Dominion Oils petroleum storage depot, Cowes
power station and within relatively close proximity to the East Cowes Ferry
Terminal, meant that the scope of the assessment was broadened further to
include nitrogen dioxide, fine particulate matter, benzene, sulphur dioxide and
fugitive dust. During the construction phase of the proposal, there is likely
to be an increase in heavy vehicle traffic servicing the site. The requirement for earth moving plant
on-site indicates that there will be possible dust during the construction
phase. Site-specific mitigation measures for construction practices and dust
suppression are proposed and are considered to adequately mitigate this
potential effect to surrounding land use receptors to negligible significance.
·
The
modelling undertaken to predict post-construction emissions shows that the
national air quality strategy objective limits for the pollutants included in
the assessment are unlikely to be exceeded for any of the pollutants modelled.
It is concluded that there will not be any significant effects on sensitive
receptors resulting from the proposed development in terms of air quality.
4.2
Community
and Social Effects
·
The
provision of housing and employment uses is likely to have effects on the local
community and services. An assessment of the current conditions in East Cowes,
Osborne and on the Isle of Wight as a whole, have been analysed. A need for
increased affordable housing provision is identified. Unemployment in Osborne
and the Island is above the national average, although East Cowes is similar to
the national average. The Island experiences a seasonal cycle in unemployment
due to the role of the tourism industry. It has higher proportions of the
workforce employed in tourism and public services than the national average,
and lower proportions in the financial and communications industries. Businesses
in East Cowes are focused on meeting the needs of the local community, rather
than catering for tourists or shoppers from other areas. All the schools in
East Cowes, and the high school in Cowes, have some spare capacity. The GP
surgery has an average list size of 1,684 patients per doctor and the NHS
dental practice is not accepting new NHS patients. No dental surgeries on the
Island are currently registering new adult patients for NHS treatment, although
two are registering children. There is currently uncertainty regarding the
scale of care provision in the long-term at St Mary’s hospital.
·
There
will be a small, short-term increase in employment as the proposed development
is constructed, which will be a beneficial effect of moderate significance.
There will be a long-term small to medium increase in population when the site
is occupied, although this will build gradually over the ten-year development
period, and this will be an effect of moderate significance. The increase in
population is likely to lead to increased trade for local businesses, which
will be of moderate significance. The proposals will lead to a small increase
in the provision of affordable housing on the Island, which will also be of
moderate significance. There will be a medium increase in employment as a
result of the proposed development, which will be of substantial beneficial
significance. The proposals will lead to an increase in pressure on local
schools. However, appropriate contributions to address these issues will be agreed
with the Council. The increase in population over ten years associated with the
proposals will lead to a small increase in pressure on GP services and NHS
dental services, which is considered to be of moderate significance.
4.3
Cultural
Heritage
·
An archaeological
desk-based assessment was carried out in 2004 to ascertain the likelihood of
the site containing significant archaeological remains. The Sites and Monuments
Record database lists a number of prehistoric finds in the intertidal zone of
the River Medina. Some limited finds were listed from the Romano-British
period, but little else was known about the history and development of this
site, which has been arable and pasture land associated with Kingston Farm
since cartographic records began. While development took place in the vicinity
during the 20th century, very little change has occurred to the site
itself for nearly 200 years.
·
The
Council requested further assessment and evaluation before submission of the
planning application to categorically prove/disprove the site’s antiquity.
Three forms of archaeological investigation were employed at the site; a
fieldwalking survey, geophysical survey and an intrusive trench evaluation. The
latter was the only method that produced some (limited) archaeological results.
The other two methods proved inconclusive. An agreed sample of the 20 ha area
proposed for development was tested by archaeological trenching. Some 73
trenches were investigated. Only two trenches produced positive archaeological
results. Both contained the remains of a pond and an associated stone wall.
These have been dated to the 19th century and are shown on the 1841
Tithe map for the site. They have been interpreted as a sheep dip area, of
local importance. Several samples were recovered from trenches to allow an
environmental analysis of the deposits. No significant or noteworthy samples
were identified anywhere on the site. Given the absence of known archaeological
features at the proposals site, and the low potential for discovery of currently
unknown features or remains, the proposals will result in no change to the
archaeology of the site, giving no significant effects.
·
The
historic environment of the immediate area of the proposals site shows evidence
of long established patterns of occupation and use and, from the mid 19th
century, the dominating influence of one factor in the common origin of the
many buildings associated with the royal household at Osborne estate. Several buildings and areas are therefore
designated at national or local level in recognition of their historic
interest. Any effects of these features
as a result of the proposals, either directly or indirectly, have been
assessed. Kingston Farmhouse, immediately adjoining the proposals site, is of
some local interest although it is not statutorily Listed. The village of
Whippingham to the south is designated as a Conservation Area in recognition of
the coherence and quality of the group of buildings. These include the Grade-I
church of St Mildred and a terrace of Almshouses built to house former royal
servants. The buildings at Whippingham are closely associated with the estate
at Osborne that was the home of Queen Victoria from 1845. Whippingham Road is
the western boundary of the 240-hectare landscape park at Osborne which is
included in the register of historic parks and gardens at Grade II. In addition to Osborne House, which is Grade
I listed, many other structures within the park and on its boundary with East
Cowes are of national importance.
·
The
assessment concluded that the proposed development could have several effects
on the historic environment. Kingston Farmhouse will experience the greatest
change, being surrounded by new development and divorced from its previous
agricultural setting. The potential impacts of the development on the groups of
nationally important buildings and landscapes at Whippingham and Osborne derive
from the effects on their settings of the visual change due to the new built
form and the new access and spine road. These changes are identified as being
of small magnitude, resulting in a moderate impact on features of high and
medium importance.
·
The
southern part of the site is to remain undeveloped, with built development only
to the north of the new spine road through the site from the A3021 Whippingham
Road. There are no views of the built
development from the Conservation Area at Whippingham because of the landform
and existing trees which will be reinforced by new planting. There are some views from the approach roads
and paths. The development will not be
visible from Osborne House, although there will be some views of rooftops from
the western entrance drive. The strong boundary of trees along the western
boundary of the landscape park provides a screen for development at Kingston. The new roundabout and access road for the
development on Whippingham Road are directly on the boundary of the historic
park at Osborne. The effects of the new junction and the potentially alien
features of the roundabout and the spine road with its earth bunds and new tree
planting are reduced by the existing development at the Westland works and the
effective screening of the trees of Boundary Plantation.
4.4
Ground Conditions
·
The
desk-top study for the contaminated land assessment identified a number of
potential sources of contamination: former landfill tip to the south-east of
the site – leachate and landfill gas; aircraft works to the south-east and
north-east of the site; former landfill tip at Cowes Power Station – leachate
and landfill gas; former sewage works on site – heavy metals and organic and
inorganic chemicals; former sheep dip at Kingston Farm; contaminants introduced
by the River Medina. A source-pathway-receptor assessment was undertaken to
identify plausible linkages for these sources of contamination, and intrusive
site investigations were undertaken.
·
The
intrusive investigations found concentrations of arsenic in excess of its Soil
Guideline Value in three of the trial pits in the eastern half of the site.
Four of the five soil samples from the western half of the site that were
tested for Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons (TPH) contained concentrations in
exceedence of the Environmental Quality Standard (EQS). No groundwater samples
contained levels of contaminants exceeding the EQSs. The results of the biogas
monitoring indicate that methane is not present on site. However, carbon
dioxide was found at elevated concentrations and oxygen concentrations were
slightly depleted in all boreholes. Gas flows are negligible.
·
A range
of mitigation measures are proposed to ensure that there are no adverse effects
on the health of site operatives and future occupants, water quality or
building materials from the contaminants identified above. These include
capping the arsenic-contaminated soils with certified clean soil and topsoil,
and stripping and stockpiling the soils containing TPH prior to construction.
Service trenches will be over-excavated and backfilled with certified clean
material and site operatives will wear protective clothing and dust masks as
appropriate. The site will be kept damp during dry weather and when
construction activities generate dust, and will be securely fenced at all
times. Gas protection measures for carbon dioxide, such as ventilation of
confined spaces within buildings, well-constructed ground slabs and low
permeability gas membranes will be incorporated into the development.
4.5 Land Use
·
Existing
and potential land uses on and surrounding the site were established from a
field survey and a review of maps and local authority documents. At present,
the site is predominantly used for arable farming and is of Grade 3 quality.
Kingston Copse is situated in the centre and there is a disused sewage works
immediately to the South of the copse. There are no public rights of way on
site. There is a range of land uses in the areas adjacent to the site,
including residential, agricultural and industrial.
·
The
proposed changes in land use will result in the removal of the northern half of
the site, and 5.25 ha of the southern half of the site, from agricultural use.
This is considered by the applicant to be of negligible significance in the
context of agricultural resources on the Island as a whole. The applicant
considers that the provision of housing and employment on the site will
contribute towards meeting UDP objectives and will be a beneficial effect of
substantial significance. New footpaths are proposed, which will link into the
existing public right of way network. This is considered by the applicant to be
a beneficial effect of slight to moderate significance.
4.6 Landscape and Visual Effects
·
Both
desk and field studies were used to evaluate the landscape in and around the
site and to identify potential views and visual receptors. A number were
selected to present typical views from various locations and to provide a
representative selection of views from all directions.
·
The
application site falls within the Medina Valley landscape character area, which
consists of farmland with clusters of farm buildings, churches, small housing
developments and light industry. The fields in this area are generally
irregular and broken up by a patchwork of copses. In the wider landscape
context, the main elements of the built environment consist of the urban edge
of East Cowes. The proposals will result in the partial loss of key landscape
elements and the introduction of prominent built elements. However, the
applicant considers that these are not uncharacteristic when set against the
urban edge of East Cowes, and that there will be an overall impact on landscape
character of moderate significance.
·
The
potential impacts on the landscape and visual resources were a significant
consideration in the evolution of the Masterplan. The Masterplan proposes maximum
height that places the tallest buildings on the lowest ground and in the area
screened by the power station, in order to minimise the visual impact. The
existing copse and hedges will be retained and will help to screen the
development. This will be reinforced by the introduction of buffer planting and
scrub along the western boundary and around the copse.
·
The
proposed housing and employment development will lead to changes in the views
from several of the viewpoints, including residential properties in close
proximity to the site, Osborne Middle School, the allotments to the north, a
public footpath to the west of the site and a church and museum to the
south-west of the site. Additional information in the form of sections and
sketches has been submitted by the developer.
4.7 Natural
Heritage
·
The
application site lies adjacent to the River Medina, which forms part of the
internationally designated Solent and Southampton Water RAMSAR Site, the Solent
Maritime Special Area of Conservation and the Solent and Southampton Water
Special Protection Area. The area was designated because it supports
internationally important populations of wintering waterfowl and intertidal
habitats. A number of protected species were recorded on site during specialist
surveys. Signs of dormouse activity were recorded from the copse and hedgerow
network and small numbers of slow-worm and common lizard were recorded within
the area proposed for built development. The assessment found that no birds
associated with the Medina are roosting on the fields within the area proposed
for built development or the adjacent fields to the south. The latter have been
used occasionally by foraging gulls.
·
There
is an important high tide roost area within the overall application site, but
this is at the far southern end and over 250m away from the nearest part
proposed built development. This roosting area is of high importance because it
is apparent that, on occasion, large numbers of some species wintering in the
Medina (oystercatcher and curlew) are roosting in the area during the highest
high tides. There is a more important high tide roost area at Pinkmead on the
western shore of the river, which is used on a regular basis.
·
A
range of mitigation measures has been developed to minimise the potential for
adverse impacts on natural heritage and to ensure that there are no adverse
impacts on the habitats and species for which the Medina is designated. These
measures include an ecological buffer area and habitat creation and additional
measures to mitigate potential impacts from habitat loss, disturbance and
pollution, including buffer planting and management of copse and hedges;
creation of a footpath network to manage access to the copse and discourage use
of the intertidal zone; implementation of drainage strategy to prevent
pollution of the intertidal zone; restricting construction activities to
outside sensitive periods; introduction of a rope bridge across one of the
roads to reduce habitat fragmentation for dormice; and translocation of reptiles
prior to construction.
·
As a
result of the above mitigation, the applicant predicts no significant adverse
impacts on important habitats, birds and reptiles. Potential for a slight
impact on dormice is identified, depending on the success of the rope bridge.
The assessment concludes that habitat creation will lead to significant
beneficial impacts on Kingston Copse, the hedgerows and bird populations.
4.8 Noise
·
Noise
was determined to be a secondary issue in the EIA scoping process and no
vibration effects were considered likely, due to the nature of the proposals
and the construction techniques that will be used. A number of noise sensitive
receptors in the vicinity of the proposed development site, including housing
along the site’s northern boundary; a middle school located on the site’s
eastern boundary; ecologically sensitive wetland habitat on the intertidal zone
of the River Medina, which forms the site’s western boundary; and a bird roost
and open land along the site’s southern boundary.
·
A
baseline noise survey was undertaken during the daytime and early morning
period. The survey established that road traffic noise and activities in the
aggregates depot on the western bank of the river were the principal noise
sources during the daytime. In the early morning, noise from the large flour
silos located on the western bank of the river dominates and gives rise to
noise levels greater than would typically be expected in this semi-rural
environment. Aside from this, the baseline noise environment was considered
typical of such an area and subjectively judged to be ‘good’.
·
The construction phase of the proposed development will
include the construction of a 3 m high earth bund along the western boundary of
the site to screen the sensitive intertidal habitat. Birds use the habitat
primarily during the winter period; conversely, earthworks are generally
undertaken during the drier summer months. Therefore, it was concluded that
there would be no significant effects on the habitat during the construction of
the bund.
·
Once
operational the principal source of noise from the development proposals will
arise from the additional road traffic generated. In consideration of the
traffic data contained in the Traffic Assessment, the applicant concludes that
the increase in traffic volume is not sufficient to give rise to a perceptible
change in the road traffic noise levels that will arise in the future in the
absence of the proposed development. Particular attention was paid to the
potential effect of the proposed new link road from the site to Whippingham
Road. The assessment found that the noise levels in the school’s netball pitch
would remain below those recommended in Government guidance. Overall, the
conclusion of the noise assessment was that there would be no significant
effects on any of the identified sensitive receptors.
4.9 Traffic
and Transport
·
The
traffic and transport assessment deals with the effect of the increased traffic
associated with the proposals on traffic patterns and sensitive receptors in
the vicinity of the site. It focuses on the community as a sensitive receptor
and addresses the traffic and transport effects in terms of the severance and
changes in people’s perception that may result from increases in traffic
volumes in close proximity to sensitive receptors, such as schools, residences
and churches. The assessment found that the increase in traffic flows and
associated severance effects will be negligible for the majority of the
sensitive receptors identified. There is the potential for a small increase in
severance at Osborne Middle School, but this will be mitigated by the
introduction of traffic calming and a 20 mph school zone and there will be no
significant effect. There is likely to be a small increase in severance at
Whippingham Primary School, however, which will be of moderate significance.
·
A
network of new pedestrian and cycle routes will be provided that will link the
proposed development to the existing services of East Cowes and the existing
public right of way network. This increase in provision is considered by the
applicant to be a beneficial effect of slight significance. The potential for
the provision of a bus gate in the north-west or north-east corner of the
development would also be beneficial.
4.10 Water Quality and Hydrology
·
The
water quality and hydrology assessment focused on the quality of surface water
and groundwater bodies and on potential impacts on surface water flows. The
main issues addressed included potential contamination of surface water and
groundwater during construction and the need for a drainage system that could
address the potential for pollution of sensitive waterbodies post-construction,
particularly from the employment area, and the potential for changes to run-off
rates. The key sensitive receptors identified were the River Medina, ditches on
site and groundwater. The drainage strategy has been devised to fully manage
the run-off from the proposals and to control both the quality and rate of
discharge to the River Medina. As a result, the applicant predicts that there
will be no significant post-construction impacts on water quality and
hydrology. A range of additional mitigation measures will be put in place both
during and after construction to ensure that there will be no adverse impacts
on water quality as a result of the proposals.
5.1 The site has been allocated for housing
and employment in the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan, and previously
part allocated for housing and employment development in the Cowes Local Plan
1988.
5.2 Planning permission (P/01885/05 &
TCP/18291/C) was refused for broadly the same development at a Committee
meeting in January 2006. The three reasons for refusal are detailed in the
introduction to this report. In summary, the reasons relate to the development
of a Greenfield site in an area with Brownfield opportunities that is not
adequately linked or integrated with the adjacent urban area and encourages
reliance on the car; inadequate provision for locally affordable housing; and
that the proposals represented an over-development of the site at an excessive
density in a location not close to local facilities and out of character with
the prevailing character of development.
6.1 Planning Policy Statement (PPS) 1 –
Delivering Sustainable Development, sets out the overarching planning policies
on the delivery of sustainable development through the planning system. PPS1
states that planning should facilitate and promote sustainable and inclusive
patterns of urban and rural development by making suitable land available for
development in line with economic, social and environmental objectives to
improve people's quality of life; by contributing to sustainable economic
development; by protecting and enhancing the natural and historic environment,
the quality and character of the countryside, and existing communities; by
ensuring high quality development through good and inclusive design, and the
efficient use of resources; and by ensuring that development supports existing
communities and contributes to the creation of safe, sustainable, liveable and
mixed communities with good access to jobs and key services for all members of
the community.
6.2 Planning Policy Guidance Note 3 (PPG3) -
Housing sets out National guidance on range of issues relating to the provision
of housing. The issues of particular relevance are summarised as follows:
·
Ensure new homes are provided in the right place at the
right time and that there is a choice of sites which are both suitable and
available for house building.
·
There
should be a regular review of housing requirements through the mechanism of a
local housing needs assessment.
·
In
providing sufficient housing land, priorities should be given to reusing previously
developed land within urban areas in preference to the development of green
field sites.
·
Provide
a wider housing opportunity and choice, better mix and size, type and location
of housing.
·
Local
plan policies should seek to achieve as an element of housing scheme
appropriate level of affordable housing having identified through the housing
needs survey what the Authority considers to be affordable in the local planned
area. It should be related to lower income levels and house prices or rents for
different types of households.
·
The
amount and types of affordable housing to be provided should reflect local
housing need and individual sites suitability and be a matter for agreement
between the parties.
·
Planning
authorities should ensure maintenance of supply of housing by:
·
Concentrating
most additional housing development within urban areas.
·
Making
more efficient use of land, particularly previously developed land.
·
Assessing
the capacity of urban areas to accommodate more housing.
·
Adopting
a sequential approach to the allocation of land for housing development.
·
Managing
the release of housing land.
·
Reviewing
existing allocations of housing land in plans.
·
Criteria for allocation
should be based on:
·
The
amount and types of affordable housing to be provided should reflect local
housing need and individual sites suitability and be a matter for agreement
between the parties.
·
Availability
of previously developed sites.
· Location and accessibility
· Capacity of existing and potential
infrastructure
· Ability to build communities
· Physical and environmental
constraints on the development of land.
Draft PPS3 indicates that the Government is seeking
to ensure that there is a wide choice of housing types available, for both
affordable and market housing, to meet the needs of all members of the
community; to deliver a better balance between housing demand and supply in
every housing market and to improve affordability where necessary; and to
create sustainable, inclusive, mixed communities in all areas. There is an
emphasis on attractive, safe and well designed developments which should be
located in areas with good access to jobs, key services and infrastructure. In
terms of density, PPS3 proposes densities of over 75 dwellings per hectare for
city centres; 40 to 75 dwellings per hectare for urban areas and 35 to 55
dwellings per hectare for suburban areas. PPS advises that density should be
informed by an assessment of the characteristics of an area, including the mix
of uses; the location and level of public transport accessibility; the need to
use land efficiently; the importance of promoting high quality design; the
broader spatial strategy and vision for the future development of their area,
in particular the need for housing and the housing plans and policies; the
level of service provision and public spaces; and resource efficiency and the
minimisation of environmental impacts.
Members are advised that a housing
need survey was carried out in 2001 which sought to identify the extent,
distribution and type of housing needed over and above homelessness. The main
findings of the survey were that there is a chronic shortage of affordable
housing across the whole Island; there is an increasing demand for smaller one
and two bedroom housing units that is not currently being met by the housing
market; that the principal areas of housing need both in affordability and
demand are the main towns of Newport, Ryde, Shanklin and Sandown followed by
Cowes/East Cowes.
6.3 PPS7 sets out the national guidance on
sustainable development in rural areas, including largely undeveloped
countryside up to the fringes of larger urban areas. The guidance seeks to
promote more sustainable patterns of development in a number of different ways
including by focusing most development in, or next to, existing towns and
villages; by preventing urban sprawl; by discouraging the development of
'greenfield' land, and, where such land must be used, ensuring it is not used
wastefully and by promoting a range of uses to maximise the potential benefits
of the countryside fringing urban areas.
6.4 PPS 9 – Biodiversity and Geological
Conservation, replaces Planning Policy Guidance Note 9 (PPG9) on Nature
Conservation published in 1994. The guidance states that the aim of
planning decisions should be to prevent harm to biodiversity and geological
conservation interests and that where granting planning permission would result
in significant harm to those interests, local planning authorities will need to
be satisfied that the development cannot reasonably be located on any
alternative sites that would result in less or no harm. In the absence of any
such alternatives, local planning authorities should ensure that, before
planning permission is granted, adequate mitigation measures are put in place.
Where a planning decision would result in significant harm to biodiversity and
geological interests which cannot be prevented or adequately mitigated against,
appropriate compensation measures should be sought. If that significant harm
cannot be prevented, adequately mitigated against, or compensated for, then
planning permission should be refused.
6.5 PPG13 – Transport, emphasises the need to
integrate planning and transport at the national, regional, strategic and local
level to promote more sustainable transport choices for both people and for
moving freight; to promote accessibility to jobs, shopping, leisure facilities
and services by public transport, walking and cycling, and to reduce the need
to travel, especially by car.
6.6 PPG24 – Planning and Noise advises that
the impact of noise can be a material planning consideration. It recognises
that it is hard to reconcile some land uses with housing and some other
activities which generate high levels of noise but stresses that wherever
practicable noise generating development are separated from major sources of
noise. Development involving noisy activities should if possible be sited away
from noise sensitive uses. Where this is not possible there is a need to
consider what can practically be controlled to reduce noise levels or mitigate
noise through conditions and planning obligations.
6.7 Regional Planning Guidance for the South
East is contained within RPG9. There are a number of relevant policies
including Policy E1 which requires priority to be given to protecting areas
designated at international or national level either for their intrinsic nature
conservation value, their landscape quality or their cultural importance.
Policy RE5, states that better use should be made of existing employment land
resources. Sites for industry and commerce should be developed particularly in
urban areas and in places which are accessible by environmentally friendly
modes of transport. Precedence should be given to the re-use of developed land
over the release of new land and wherever possible the intensification of use
on existing sites should be encouraged. Policy H4 states that a range of
dwelling types and sizes should be provided, including alternative forms of
tenure, in order to meet the needs of all sectors of the community and to plan
for balanced communities. Affordable housing should be provided to meet locally
assessed need. Policy RE4 states that business should be encouraged in adopting
the principles of sustainable development.
6.8 The part of the site identified for
residential development is within the development envelope boundary, with that
boundary forming part of the western boundary and the southern boundary of the
area of the site to be developed for housing. The site is specifically
allocated for housing development within the Unitary Development Plan, under
policy H3 (69). Policy H3 – Allocation of Residential Development Sites states
that planning proposals for residential development will be acceptable in
principle on the sites listed in Appendix A, subject to any specific guidance
as detailed. The guidance for policy H3 (69) states:
“An area of some 10.5ha south of
Kingston Farm Lane and west of Beatrice Avenue is allocated for residential
development. This area is to be served off, and developed in conjunction with,
a new access road to the area from Whippingham Road which will also serve
proposed and existing employment uses to the south of East Cowes. The proposals
for a mix of development at Kingston south of East Cowes have been considered
following the demise of the Medina Bridge crossing proposals. Proposed land
uses have been re-arranged to provide a better relationship between existing
and proposed uses, particularly the existing middle and proposed primary
schools while retaining the ability to improve access and infrastructure for
the whole area.”
6.9 Other relevant housing policies within the Unitary Development
Plan are as follows:
§
H1 – Major New
Residential Developments to be Located Within the Main Island Towns.
§
H2 – Ensure that Large
Residential Developments Contain a Variety of House Sizes and Types.
§
H14 – Locally Affordable
Housing as an Element of Housing Schemes.
§
H6 – High Density
Residential Development
For Members information over the
Unitary Development Plan Period (1996-2011) there is a development potential
for approximately 8,000 units which assumes that the development of allocated
sites which will make a contribution. In terms of regional policies for the
south-east, the targets for the Isle of Wight are in the region of 500+ units a
year which up to the present time is being achieved on a year by year basis.
Obviously these figures may be revisited during the local development framework
process however; the Unitary Development Plan is the statutory policy document
which should apply to this site. Finally, in terms of housing policies Members
are advised that the above calculations are based on an average density figure
of 30 dwellings per hectare.
6.10 The part of the site identified for
employment development is within the development envelope boundary, with that
boundary forming part of the eastern boundary and the southern boundary of the
area of the site to be developed for employment uses. The site is specifically
allocated for employment development within the Unitary Development Plan, under
policy E5 (13). Policy E5 – Allocation of Employment Land states that planning
proposals for employment development will be considered in principle on
employment sites allocated on the Proposals Map and set out in Appendix B.
The guidance for policy E5 (13)
states:
“Areas of land totalling 12.2ha to
the south of Kingston, East Cowes is allocated for B1, B2 or B8 uses. Made up
of three distinct areas, the development of this land will necessitate the
upgrading of road access and a comprehensive approach to infrastructure
provision along with housing allocations in this location. The site can be
subdivided into three sections:
· the northernmost 1.8ha has a long-standing planning
approval where initial site works for access road have been carried out
· central position of site, previously the site of a
number of agricultural buildings, is also considered suitable for a full range
of employment uses, 3.1ha
· the 8.1ha area adjoining the waterside, is considered
vital to provide for future expansion or relocation of marine related empoyment
uses, and will be reserved for uses which require a coastal location. Access to
the area shall be primarily from Whippingham Road to the south of Osborne
School and East Cowes Old Vics Football Ground and will also serve the major
residential allocation to the west of Beatrice Avenue. It is intended
eventually that this road shall link to Kingston Road, where it will also
improve access for the wharfage facilities at Kingston”
6.11 Other relevant employment policies within
the Unitary Development Plan are as follows:
·
E1 – Promote Suitably
Located New Employment Uses
·
E9 – Employment
Development Anywhere Within Settlements
·
E10 – Warehouse and
Storage Uses
6.12 Other local Unitary Development Plan
policies are itemised as follows:
·
G1 – Development
Envelopes for Towns and Villages
·
G4 – General Locational
Criteria for Development
·
G6 – Development in
Areas Liable to Flooding
·
B2 - Settings of Listed Buildings
·
B6 – Protection and
Enhancement of Conservation Areas
·
B9 – Protection of
Archaeological Heritage
·
B10 Park, Gardens and
Landscapes of Historic Interest
·
C7 – River Corridors
and Estuaries
·
C8 – Nature
Conservation as a material consideration
·
C9 – Sites of
International Importance for Nature Conservation
·
C12 – Development
Affecting Trees and Woodland
·
C13 – Hedgerows
·
C14 – Safeguarding Best
Agricultural Land
·
P1 – Pollution and Development
·
P5 – Reducing the
Impact of Noise
·
TR4 – Transport
Statements Required for Major Development
·
TR6 – Cycling and
Walking
·
TR7 – Highway
Considerations for New Development
·
TR8 –The Environmental
Impact of New Infrastructure Systems
·
TR16 – Parking Policies
and Guidelines
·
TR17 – Public Rights of
Way
·
U2 – Ensuring Adequate
Educational, Social and Community Facilities for the Future Population.
·
U11 – Infrastructure and
Services Provision
·
U16 – Development Near High Voltage Overhead
Power Lines
·
L10 – Open Space in Housing Development
6.13 The majority of the site where employment
and residential development is proposed is within Zone 3 of the Council’s
parking policy thus requiring parking provision that shall not exceed 0-75% of
parking guidelines. Part of the residential site falls within Zone 4, which
allows a higher level of off-street parking (0% - 100%), where public access is
poorer and the development would help maintain the rural economy.
6.14 Relevant strategic policies within the
Unitary Development Plan are listed as follows:
· S1 – New Development will be
concentrated within existing urban areas.
· S2
– Development will be encouraged on land which has previously been developed
(brownfield sites) rather than undeveloped (greenfield sites). Greenfield sites
will only be allocated for development where they are extensions to urban areas
and where no suitable alternative brownfield site exists.
· S3 – New developments of a large scale will be expected to
be located in or adjacent to the defined development envelopes of the main
island towns of Cowes/East Cowes/ Newport/ Ryde/ Sandown/ Shanklin.
· S7 – There is a need to provide for the development of at
least 8,000 housing units over the plan period. While a large proportion of
this development will occur on sites with existing allocations or planning
approvals, or on currently on unidentified sites, enough new land will be
allocated to enable this target to be met and to provide a range of choice and
affordability.
· S8 – At least 60 hectares of employment land will be
allocated within, or adjacent to the main Island towns in areas well served by
public transport.
· S10 – In areas of designated or defined scientific, nature
conservation, archaeological, historic or landscape value, development will be
permitted only if it will conserve or enhance the features of special character
of these areas.
· S11
– Land use policies and proposals to reduce the impact of and reliance on the
private car will be adopted and the Council will aim to encourage development
of an effective, efficient and integrated transport network.
· S15
– Important natural resources, including water and the best agricultural land
will be safeguarded.
6.15 Members attention is also drawn to
Supplementary Planning Guidance (SPG) in respect of affordable housing which
now seeks a 30% contribution from developers on those qualifying sites; the
Phasing Report for the Managed Release of Housing Sites, which constitutes SPG;
and Urban Capacity Study, which also constitutes SPG.
6.16 Regard must also be had to the Cowes
Waterfront SPG: A Vision for the Medina Valley (July 2003). It is about
developing a new vision for the area and putting in place a Strategic
Development Framework to guide new investment and development opportunities.
The aim is to attract new investment to provide the opportunities, facilities
and attractions that both local people and visitors can enjoy. This investment
will enable the growth of local businesses and the attraction of new
businesses.
The Strategic Development Framework
sets out the vision for Project Cowes and a detailed programme of new projects.
It focuses on a number of key priorities, identified by local people during the
consultation process, including: the creation of new employment opportunities
and the release of suitable employment sites, responding to existing and future
demand; an improvement in the perceptions of Cowes and East Cowes as two of the
main gateways to the Island and world-class visitor destinations; capitalising
on and strengthening Cowes’ status as an international centre of yachting
excellence and as the “home” of UK sailing; ensuring that key waterfront sites
are made available for those uses which genuinely require a waterfront
location, and that the most appropriate uses are located on the limited number
of sites that benefit from deep-water access; strengthening and capitalising on
other growth areas in the Island’s economy, such as the manufacture of
composite materials, and renewable energy related industries; increasing the
Medina Valley’s contribution to the role of tourism in the wider economy of the
Island and ensuring that the Island benefits from its large number of visitors;
supporting and strengthening the existing communities and town centres in the
Medina Valley; providing where appropriate additional residential
accommodation, having particular regard to ensuring a suitable mix and adequate
supply of affordable housing for local residents; maintaining and enhancing the
substantial unique environmental resources of the Medina Valley; and improving
linkages with the mainland, and cross-Medina links.
The Strategic Development Framework
identifies five key activity zones in the Medina Valley, reflecting both the
existing roles of each zone and the potential for these roles to be enhanced.
This application site is included within Zone 3: Commercial Shipping. This zone comprises PD Wharf and the
Kingston power station and the adjacent marine related employment land
allocation and is a focus for commercial shipping activity within the Medina
Valley. Opportunities for enabling residential development and for employment
that does not require waterfront access are identified.
7.1 Internal Consultees
·
The
Council’s Environmental Health Department has recommended a site investigation
condition.
·
The Council’s
Ecological Officer has made no comments in respect of this current application.
The principles of the development are the same, therefore, the recommendations
and conditions made on the previous application have been carried over. The
Council’s Ecological officer had previously advised that the part of the site
proposed for development has a comparatively low nature conservation value
apart from the woodland (Kingston Copse) and some of the hedgerows. The
Environmental Statement proposes a suite of measures to enhance habitats within
the application site and these will be the subject of an ecological management
plan, the details to be agreed with the planning authority. The proposals put
forward are considered to be a pragmatic and helpful mechanism to protect and
enhance the nature conservation / biodiversity of the site and the public
enjoyment of this resource. A number of conditions are recommended.
·
The
Council’s Arboricultural Officer has made no comments in respect of this
current application. The principles of the development are the same,
therefore, the recommendations and conditions made on the previous application
have been carried over. Previously, concerns were raised that the proposed
development could potentially have a great detrimental impact on the trees and
woodland around the site if not dealt with in the correct manner and that any
loss of trees would result in a detrimental impact on visual amenity. The
damage could be prevented by having a tree survey made prior to detailing the
actual positioning of the development and from this tree survey detail, a Tree
Constraints Plan should be drawn up showing root protection areas, future and
present crown spread, future and present heights and potential shading issues,
so the layout and design of the site could then take these details into
consideration. An Arboricultural Assessment should therefore be carried out to
ensure that the site is optimised for development, whilst maintaining the high
amenity trees and woodland areas. From the plans submitted, two areas of
potential conflict are identified – the linear group of Ash and Turkey Oak
alongside the access track from Beatrice Avenue to the southern perimeter of
the site and the area of woodland east of the field adjacent to this track. A
buffer zone should be maintained between these trees and the proposed
development to ensure that there is no damage to the trees.
·
The Councils
AONB Officer has no objection to the proposals and has made the following
comments. The Isle of Wight AONB Partnership declined to comment on this
application when first submitted as it is considered that the development would
not be seen or have an impact on any areas of the Isle of Wight AONB. The
Countryside Agency’s request for visual assessments in order to illustrate the
visual impact of this development on the AONB is considered unnecessary. The
nearest area of AONB is the Osborne Estate, this is heavily wooded, not open to
the public and has no public rights of way through it. There would be no visual
impact from the development in this area. Taking into account the distance and
topography from the development and any views afforded from within other parts
of the Island’s AONB it is considered that there would be no negative visual
impact. In conclusion, whilst it is good practice for major development
proposals, we do not consider it necessary in this instance for the applicant
to provide visual impact assessments for this development in relation to its
impact on the AONB.
·
Following
consideration of the site evaluation, the Council’s Archaeological Officer is
satisfied that no further investigation is required.
·
The
Council’s Highway Engineer has made the following comments:
§
The
revised Kingston application has been submitted to and reviewed by the
principal highways development control officer. Additional information and
revised drawings have been submitted following detailed consultations with the
traffic section of the Isle of Wight Council and Escher Silverman the highway
consultants working for Barratt.
§
A
stage road safety audit has been carried out by MB Projects on behalf of
Barratt dated June 2006. The highways design consultant acting for Barratts
have submitted their designer’s response acknowledging the issues raised and
agreeing to address the issues at detail design stage.
§
An
Auto track analysis of the Beatrice Avenue junction has been produced and areas
of vehicle over-run identified, the detailed scheme drawings will be amended to
comply with the requirements of Department for Transport Standards within
Design Manual for Road and Bridges.
§
The
new highways work on Beatrice Avenue, Kingston Road and Whippingham Road will
be subject to Section 278 Agreement. The link road and internal residential
highway, street lighting and drainage proposed to be adopted, will be covered
by Section 38 Agreement and a 106 Agreement for commuted sums to cover the cost
of future maintenance.
§
Details
of the proposed bus gate have been submitted with the application showing an
automatic telescopic bollard. This is the system recommended by the Traffic
section of the Isle of Wight Council. All traffic from the existing and new
employment area will be diverted onto the new access road and out onto
Whippingham Road, removing the industrial traffic that now uses Minerva Road
and Victoria Grove.
§
All
construction details will be in accordance with the Isle of Wight Council,
Engineering sections standard details and will be in compliant with current
Department for Transport requirements. All details will be approved in writing
before any works commence on site, and the construction works will be inspected
by Isle of Wight Council staff. The costs of site inspections and design
checking will be covered by fees paid by the applicant, the fees are required
as part of the section 278/38.
§
The
Development Team Highways Officer recommends this application for outline
approval.
7.2
External
Consultees
·
Health and Safety Executive – has made no comments in
respect of this current application. The principles of the development
are the same as the previous application. On the previous application, the HSE
did not advise, on safety grounds, against the granting of planning permission
in this case.
·
Environment Agency – The Agency has advised that they have
no further comments following on from the letter submitted for the last
application where they had no objection in principal to the proposal, but requested
that a number of issues to be taken into consideration. Conditions are
recommended for the provision of a site investigation; to ensure no
infiltration of surface water into the ground without written consent; no
piling or foundation designs using penetrative methods without written consent;
a scheme for the provision of a surface water regulation system; only native
species to be planted at the site. The long-term ecological management plan for
the area should be covered under an s106 agreement, to ensure that the actions
are carried out. Detailed advice is provided to the Council and Applicant with
regards to surface water drainage, water resources, contamination and water
efficiency. The Agency also encourages watercourses to be incorporated within
the overall Masterplan as green corridors across the site.
·
Scottish
and Southern Energy
– No comments received. Verbal comments on the earlier application indicated
that there are no particular concerns at this outline application stage.
·
English
Nature - Has confirmed that the changes do not have substantial implications
for impacts on nature conservation interests. It will be necessary to ensure
that any reduction in the rate of supply of new housing does not prevent the
funding of environmental mitigation and enhancement measures. In view of the
above English Nature would advise that the assessment made in the Appropriate
Assessment for the former application can apply to the re-application. Given
the agreed conditions and S106 agreement that will be applied English Nature
would concur with the findings of the Appropriate Assessment that the
application will not have an adverse effect on the integrity of the European
site.
·
DEFRA
– No comments received to date
·
Southern
Water have not yet responded to the resubmitted application. They previously raised no objection to the
original application having provisionally agreed with the developer to provide
suitable foul drainage under S98 sewer requisition procedure. Southern Water were content for a condition
covering foul and surface water drainage to be applied.
·
Countryside
Agency – Did not comment on the original application, however, has now raised a
number of concerns. It is highly recommend that further information is sought.
The key concerns relate to the potential impact on the AONB and its setting,
including views, peace and tranquillity and dark skies. There are concerns
regarding quality and completeness of the Landscape and Visual Impact
Assessment (LVIA) submitted. There is a lack of information on the AONB and its
importance and impacts on its setting, an absence of key viewpoints from within
the AONB and a lack of photomontages. No consideration has been made of
lighting impacts. Detailed comments are provided on the LVIA and it is
concluded that it is difficult to form an objective view without the
viewpoints/photomontages requested. Do not consider that the importance of the
landscape character of the AONB has been taken into consideration. Other
concerns are that no details of tree/plant species are given - required to
assess accordance with the existing landscape character for the area; further
details are required on building design and materials. There are concerns that
this is a Greenfield site. There are inconsistencies between Planning & Design
Statement and the ES regarding heights of buildings.
·
SEEDA’s
regional planner has objected on grounds of lack of affordable housing and
potential adverse impact on the regeneration of Cowes.
7.3 Town or Parish Council comments
·
East
Cowes Town Council – Together with the SEEDA scheme, roads will be gridlocked.
7.4 Neighbours
Nine responses from neighbouring
occupants and residents have been received. Their comments are summarised as
follows:
·
East
Cowes cannot sustain its populous; there is a lack of medical facilities,
dentists, shops, facilities for children to play at the moment and it is
therefore ridiculous to build more homes before the present situation is
attended to.
·
East
Cowes infrastructure (schools, doctors, one hospital, dentists, employment,
shops, leisure) barely provides for the current residents. Current
infrastructure must be determined first in a robust and sustainable manner,
with detailed and widespread consultation.
·
Strongly
object to proposals for an additional 500 homes over and above the SEEDA plans
·
Problems
are compounded by SEEDA development
· Object strongly to this application being allowed to proceed
before the SEEDA project for the town centre has been decided.
· Loss of countryside
· Loss and disturbance of wildlife habitat
· Loss of uninterrupted views over the River Medina and surrounding
areas.
· Concern that this is a very sensitive area of natural wildlife
habitat e.g. there are regularly sky larks.
· Development would ruin the environment
· Infrastructure is insufficient/inadequate to cater for additional
vehicles and water supply demands.
· Is the development solely for the Island or can anyone from the
mainland needing low cost housing buy a property here?
·
Beatrice
Avenue will become much busier. There is no footpath, so people will have to
walk in the road which will be hazardous – will hedgerows be destroyed to widen
the road and put footpaths along the lane?
·
Many visitors
from UK and abroad come to visit Osborne House and to see St. Mildred’s Church
and the Listed Victoria & Albert cottages – all have strong royal
connections and are historically very important – proposed large housing estate
will have total disregard to their importance to the nation.
·
There
are already lots of housing developments (Osborne Heights, Medina complex,
Marlborough Park, Ryde) – do we need to keep building these homes when the
property page of the local paper is full of homes for sale?
·
Tourists
come to Island for its beauty and wildlife (squirrels, bats, owls etc)
·
There
will not be sufficient jobs for an extra 1000 householders.
·
SEEDA
has already taken over the majority of the town and it is becoming a concrete
jungle.
·
Would
be a good if this development was publicised and detailed consultation with
locals was provided.
·
Increase
in noise levels for residents
7.5 Others
·
King Sturge
(on behalf of SEEDA and English Partnerships) – objection submitted. Is not an
‘in-principal’ objection, but it is essential that the advice contained within
PPG3 and PPS1 is met to give priority to the East Cowes Project proposals. Also
refer to the PPS3 consultation paper issued in December 2005, in particular, it
is emphasised that priority to Brownfield development remains. They do not
consider that the current planning application addresses their objections to
the previous proposal and is likely to prejudice the implementation of the
proposals for the regeneration of East Cowes. They consider that planning
permission should be refused for a number of reasons:
1)
Priority
to brownfield development – although the site was allocated in the UDP, the UDP
was prepared prior to the closure of the GKN North Works and the land coming
forward in East Cowes; the UDP was prepared prior to PPG3 which emphasises the
reuse of previously developed sites and maximising the potential of land with
good access to jobs, shops and services by other means than the car; the
Government’s presumption that previously developed sites should be developed
before Greenfield sites; concern is expressed that the Council’s Urban Capacity
Study and Phasing Report did not consider the potential of GKN site to provide
a significant amount of capacity for residential development as it was still an
operational site; concerned that Barratt pay insufficient regard to market
considerations and don’t consider take up if permission is granted for both
schemes. Concerned that if both schemes are approved then, at best, it will
result in the proposals for East Cowes town centre taking place over a much
longer period or at worst, developers will favour the development at Kingston
where constraints of development are less.
As a minimum, they consider that the Kingston proposals should be
co-ordinated with East Cowes regeneration proposals. In the event of both
applications being approved, they suggest that Barratts provide more
information on the consequences for residential land take up.
2)
Integration
With Urban Area - The supporting information submitted does not appear to have
regard to the cumulative effect of the Kingston and East Cowes proposals, for
example, traffic impact, public transport, drainage and services. The applicant
suggests that the Kingston facility will rely heavily on the community
facilities and shops of East Cowes town centre – this approach is acknowledged,
but there needs to be a financial contribution provided.
3)
Affordable
Housing - Barratts propose 25% affordable housing rather than 30% to meet the
requirements of the UDP SPG (adopted 2004). Do not consider that Barratts have
provided adequate justification for this. Whilst Barratts may have negotiated
this with the landowners prior to this date, they do not own all the land and
there is an opportunity to renegotiate; if Barratt are relying on exceptional
development costs to justify the lower level, then an ‘open book’ approach
should be adopted; suggestion that 30% target is a starting point is incorrect
as the SPG confirms that the Council will seek to achieve at least 30% of units
to be provided as affordable housing. A common approach for the Kingston and
East Cowes proposals should be adopted.
4)
Industrial
Land Issues – Barratt has suggested that if permission is not approved then it
eliminates opportunity for providing 10ha of suitable alternative employment
land to compensate for the loss of town centre employment land. SEEDA does not
consider that there is any policy or other justification for alternative
employment land to be provided to offset the loss of the land within the East
Cowes town centre site formerly used for employment uses. There is no
suggestion that the provision of SEEDA’s mixed use development is subject to
other employment land coming forward at Kingston.
·
Solent
Protection Society – No comments received.
·
Ramblers
Association – No comments received.
·
Vectis
Road Allotments Association – No comments received.
·
Isle
of Wight Society – There is a lack of risk assessment by the Council into
overall community safety. The total impact will be an increase in population of
East Cowes of several thousand residents and considerable increase in people
travelling into area for employment. Concerned will increase ‘statistical chance’
of a major accident occurring, especially in the Alverstone Road/Folly Lane
area. Whilst plans for movement of emergency vehicles into site is shown, there
is no study of the town as a whole. Application should not be considered until
complete study of the risks to the community is undertaken. Proposals create an
imbalanced community environment – opposite end of town from retail outlets and
community amenities. Consider should be inclusion within the site for such
amenities.
·
Isle
of Wight Society (East Cowes Group) – Dispute the need for employment
floorspace - 150,000 sq ft of industrial units are empty on the Island. GKN
relocated to Osborne Works freeing space in town centre, 25% of Whites
industrial estate is unoccupied, no account made of SARO site. No land within
site is allocated for amenities/shops. There has been no overall risk
assessment for the East Cowes peninsular. Don’t like the phasing which will
result in the site being a building site for 10 years, but support amendment for
construction of road in first phase. 2.5 storey properties should not be built
on the skyline, but lower on the site.
8.1 The most important material
considerations in respect of this proposal are whether the three reasons for
refusal of the previous application have been overcome. Consideration is also
required regarding whether the principal of the development is acceptable,
whether the means of access to the site is acceptable, the impact of the
development on natural heritage, the impacts of the development on visual
amenity and local residential amenity and the extent to which the development
is in accord with national and regional planning guidance and the policies and
proposals of the adopted UDP.
8.2 Principal of Development
·
Policy Position
Under the Planning Acts all
applications should be determined on the basis of statutory policies unless
other material considerations suggest otherwise. In determining this
application, regard must be had to national policies, in particular PPS1 and
PPG3 , in addition to Unitary Development Plan policies. Consideration should
also be given to Draft PPS3,
The areas of the site where
residential and employment uses are proposed are allocated in the adopted UDP
for both residential development, under Policy H3 (69) and employment use under
policy E5 (13). Objection has been raised in relation to the suitability of
East Cowes as a strategic location for housing development. This issue has been
debated extensively through the UDP inquiry. There is no justification to
revisit the strategic decisions that were debated and accepted by the Inspector
at the UDP inquiry.
The proposal must also be assessed
against the relevant strategic policies of the UDP. The proposed residential
and employment development is located within the development envelope for East
Cowes as defined on the UDP proposals map and as such, is in accordance with
Policy S3 of the UDP.
Policy S2 encourages development on
land which has previously been developed (brownfield sites) rather than
undeveloped (greenfield sites) and states that Greenfield sites will only be
allocated for development where they are extensions to urban areas and where no
suitable alternative brownfield site exists. Objections have been received
which imply that the UDP does not properly comply with PPG3. The Inspector’s
decision letter (August 2000) on the UDP Inquiry refers to the March 2000
version of PPG3 and states that policy S2 is ‘broadly in conformity’ with the
advice contained within PPG3, but an insertion restricting Greenfield
development to urban extensions was recommended. The Inspector concluded that
restricting Greenfield development until Brownfield opportunities are exhausted
could potentially lead to shortages of housing land. The Inspector also
considered that policies for phasing and release of housing should be
considered by the Council.
The Council has therefore produced
Supplementary Planning Guidance (SPG), a Phasing Report for the Managed Release
of Housing Sites and an Urban Capacity Study, which must be taken into account
in considering this application. With regards to the above policies and the
SPG, whilst this is a Greenfield site its status as allocated land within the
development envelope makes it appropriate for it to come forward at this time
to meet housing requirements as set out in the UDP and, more importantly, as
identified in the Urban Capacity Study. Policy S7 of the UDP indicates that
there is a need to provide for the development of at least 8,000 housing units
over the plan period. The Urban Capacity Study identifies the need for both
identified brownfield and greenfield sites and windfall sites to come forward
in order for these housing requirements to be met.
The Phasing Report and the Urban Capacity
Study were produced prior to the closure of the GKN North Works and the
subsequent proposals by SEEDA for a development including up to 550 dwellings.
An update to the Urban Capacity Study was produced in November 2005. This
considered both the Kingston and East Cowes town centre sites and concluded
that although some large urban capacity sites had been identified, these sites
were restricted in number and the Council would still need the release of
Greenfield allocations to meet its requirements for affordable housing. The
study concluded that the large urban capacity sites along with existing
allocations would still be required to come forward in the UDP period and that
additional sites would be needed to fulfil the housing requirement over the period
2012-2026.
The proposed rate of development at
the site is 75 units per year. The applicant has confirmed that this figure
does not relate to the anticipated market demand for housing (which is in
excess of this), but is related to the company’s capacity and resources to
construct the development. In consideration of the concerns raised by King
Sturge, on behalf of SEEDA and English partnerships, the applicant has
submitted a ‘Property Market Report’ in support of the application which
demonstrates that there is more than sufficient market demand for both
developments in East Cowes and that the market segments that are likely to be
attracted to each development are very different. The report suggests that the
number of units proposed to be built per annum for both schemes is only a small
proportion of the overall Island housing requirement and will be easily
marketed. The report concludes that it is not considered that approval of this
application would impact on the take up of dwellings on the SEEDA site and
therefore be detrimental to the regeneration proposals in East Cowes town
centre. The Report has been made available to SEEDA and their response has now
been received. In their response to Barratt’s report, SEEDA suggest that a)
there is no evidence that the immediate release of the Barratts land is
required to meet housing targets on the island. There is sufficient land with
consent to meet housing targets for the next 3 years and thus by ruling the
Barratts scheme to be premature, the ability of the Island to meet its regional
housing targets will not be compromised; b) the amount of brownfield land in
the pipeline is sufficient at the present time such that a ‘plan, monitor,
manage’ approach would imply that Greenfield land should not be released at
this stage in the planning period; c) the early release of the Barratts land is
not in accordance with the national or the local policy framework to prioritise
brownfield land, regeneration in East Cowes and balanced residential
development across the island; and d) There is no evidence that the East Cowes
market could absorb 100 new dwellings per year for a 10 year period on the
assumption that they would be for local need rather than to meet ‘mainlander’
desires for second homes or buy to let.
a) Whilst we may only have to specifically
provide for 3-5 years, we clearly have a duty to show that we are capable of
providing the 520 pa through to 2026 in the Core Strategy and it remains clear
from the figures in the residential monitoring report and accompanying urban
capacity study that this will need to be made up of existing allocations and
extant permissions and UCS sites, plus additional sites.
b) The plan, monitor and manage approach
is not only aimed at releasing 520 units, but ensuring that there is an
appropriate mix of sites released. There are other issues, the main one of
which is the provision of affordable housing, whish is key to this development.
The Council will require these sites, not only to provide for its housing
supply but more importantly to provide for its housing need.
c) The release of the Greenfield site at
Kingston is not contrary to the UDP, or its supplementary planning guidance
(Phasing report). Kingston is an allocated site and was actually phased to come
on line earlier than it is currently doing so.
d) There is clearly a link with both
applications in terms of the provision of employment opportunities through
redevelopment and new opportunities. The Council’s approach to new housing,
outlined in the submitted Core Strategy is that new housing should link to the
provision of employment opportunities.
Given the size of the site and scale
of the residential element of the proposed development, it is considered
desirable to control the rate of its release to restrict development over a
number of years. The Urban Capacity
Study and Phasing Report would allow major sites to “trickle feed” new housing
into the marketplace as opposed to one site being dependent on another site
being built out. This should also
sustain competition between housing developers and impact on house prices. A
condition is recommended requiring a phasing programme to be submitted in order
to enable the Planning Authority to exercise appropriate controls.
·
Affordable
Housing
With regards to Policy H14 of the
UDP, the size of the site is such that there is scope to provide a significant
level of affordable housing for which there is a clear and recognised demand,
with that demand being difficult to satisfy through the development of the much
smaller brownfield sites which in many cases don’t generate any affordable
housing whatever. Without significant levels of housing provision on major
sites, the potential provision of affordable housing will be restricted.
Current figures suggest that the average delivery of affordable housing is
falling short of targets.
Members will note that under
Supplementary Planning Guidance affordable housing provision has increased from
20% to 30%.
Following further discussions, the
applicant has now agreed an approach which will allow for the provision of 30%
affordable housing provision across the site. This equates to 167 dwellings, of
which 86 will be rented units and 81 homebuy units. There will also be
substantial frontloading, with 79 of the 218 (36%) dwellings in Phase 1 being
affordable dwellings. This is considered to be in accordance with Council
policies for the delivery of affordable homes. The applicant also has a partner
Registered Social Landlord (RSL) signed up to the scheme. The Isle of Wight was
recently successful in receiving grant funding from the Housing Corporation of
a total of £7,926,899 for the provision of affordable housing. £2,942,899 is committed to the provision of
affordable units at both the Kingston site and the SEEDA scheme for the
regeneration of East Cowes. The funding
from the Housing Corporation is subject to both applicants commencing
development on site within a given timeframe.
A major concern is should either or both schemes be delayed, Housing
Corporation funding could be lost with potential repercussions for future bids.
·
Density
and Site Sustainability
The third reason for the refusal of
the previous application was because the scheme represented an overdevelopment
of the site at an excessive density.
While siting and therefore density
is not a matter for Members to determine at this stage, consideration has to be
given to whether or not controls need to be put in place to limit numbers of
units on this site. The ES has been prepared on the basis of a maximum number
of 557 dwellings being built on the 10ha site. The applicant has since reduced
the number of units by six to 551 dwellings. This would still equate to a
density of 55 dwellings per hectare. Paragraph 58 of PPG3 states that local
planning authorities should avoid developments which make inefficient use of
land (those of less than 30 dwellings per hectare net), should encourage
housing development which makes more efficient use of land (between 30 and 50
dwellings per hectare net); and should seek greater intensity of development at
places with good public transport accessibility such as city, town, district
and local centres or around major nodes along good quality public transport
corridors. More recently, Draft PPS3 proposes densities of between 35 and 55
dwellings per hectare for suburban areas. UDP policy H6 relates to high density
residential development and for the purposes of this policy, high density is
defined as development of about 40 dwellings per hectare. Whilst PPS3 is only
in draft form, it suggests that high density is above 70 dwellings per hectare.
Policy H6 states that applications for high density residential development
will be permitted in appropriate areas within the development envelope where
the development is close to public transport services and local/town centre
facilities, where the amenity of surrounding areas will not be unduly affected,
where open space and other requirements are not compromised and where the
density and design is acceptable and appropriate to the historic character and
layout of the settlement.
With regards to the proposed density
of the development in comparison to adjacent housing developments, the density
of neighbouring areas to the north of the site average 40 dwellings per hectare
and the Kingslea Park estate is approximately 50 dwellings per hectare. Whilst
the surrounding sites demonstrate a lower density, it is considered that the
proposed density is in accordance with Government guidance and that to reduce
density would represent a less efficient use of land. In order to ensure a high
quality of development that is complementary to existing developments, a
condition is recommended requiring the applicant to submit a comprehensive
Design Statement for the development.
With reference to concerns raised
regarding sustainability of the site’s location, the developer has submitted a
further evidence to demonstrate the relationship of the proposed development to
local services and infrastructure. The site is linked to the urban area by the
proposed development access road, cycleways and footpaths. The early completion
of the proposed access road will enable the earlier provision of bus services
within the development and will also take commercial traffic off existing
residential roads. The development of the site for both residential and
employment uses will also encourage residents who are employed within the new
employment site to walk to work. In terms of local facilities, the nearest
primary school is approximately 1km from the site and there is a site allocated
for a new primary school should this be required in the future next to the
middle school which adjoins the site to the east. The developer will also make
contributions to education through a section 106 legal agreement. In terms of
shops, the town centre is approximately 1 mile away and there is a small local
shop near the site. Government guidance contained within PPS6 encourages new
retail development to be focussed within existing centres. With regards to
concerns raised about water provision, I have received no objections from the
utilities consultees.
Whilst the development is located at
the edge of East Cowes, the site is well located for other local services and
schools and would be served by buses. Given that the proposal has been assessed
against the parameters outlined in the submitted Environmental Impact
Assessment and traffic assessment, it is considered that any material
alteration from such assessments may have an impact which has not been subject
to proper consideration against the relevant planning policies and as such
would be undesirable. For this reason, it is recommended that a density limit
condition is attached to the approval.
·
Employment
Use
With regards to the employment
element of the development, in addition to the site specific allocation,
strategic Policy S8 of the UDP requires that at least 60 hectares of employment
land will be allocated within, or adjacent to the main Island towns in areas
well served by public transport. The development of this site will make a
significant contribution to the provision of land for employment purposes on
the Island. The proposal indicates that marine related uses are proposed, which
is in accordance with the UDP allocation which considers the area adjoining the
waterside vital in providing for the future expansion or relocation of marine
related employment uses. While direct access to the water has not been proposed
due to consideration of environmental impacts, the new access road will,
subject to agreement, enable the use of facilities at the Power Station,
Kingston Quay or the Harbour Commissioners boat hoist facilities.
·
Agricultural
Land
Consideration must also be given to
Policy C14 of the UDP which seeks to ensure that the best agricultural land is
safeguarded. In addition to being a Greenfield site, the site is currently in
use as agricultural land, specifically arable farming. The proposal to develop
part of the site for residential and employment uses will inevitably result in
the loss of a significant amount of agricultural land. The land has been
identified as Grade 3b (moderate) and as such is not considered to be of a high
quality agricultural land. DEFRA have made no comments on the application.
8.3 Highways and Access Issues
·
Policy
H3 (69) of the UDP states that the residential area is to be served off, and
developed in conjunction with, a new access road from Whippingham Road which
will also serve proposed and existing employment uses to the south of East
Cowes. The access is also referred to by policy E5 (13) which states that
access to the employment area shall be primarily from Whippingham Road to the
south of Osborne School and East Cowes Vics Football Ground. The UDP proposals
map indicates that the route of the road would be further north, to the north
of the access track to the former sewage works, than the route proposed by this
application.
·
The
UDP is not prescriptive with regards to the route that the access road should
take. The ES considered an alternative route to the north of the hedge and passing
through Kingston Copse, which was discounted due to ecological and habitat
concerns. The route that has been selected enables heavy goods vehicles and
commercial traffic to be properly excluded from the future residential areas,
in addition to minimising any potential adverse impacts on Kingston Copse.
Lorry movements from the aggregate and petroleum landings at Kingston Wharf to
the rest of the Island currently have to pass through residential areas of the
town. The proposal will allow this traffic to directly access Whippingham Road
leading to significant environmental benefits.
Concern has been expressed in the
third party representations that the Island road infrastructure cannot
accommodate this level of development. As indicated above, policy S7 of the UDP
states that there is a need to provide for the development of at least 8,000
housing units over the plan period. This level of residential development is
therefore likely to take place in any case. The provision of infrastructure is
a strategic issue for the Council and not an issue that is specific to this
site. With reference to the concerns
raised regarding risks of an accident blocking the road to East Cowes, this is
an existing possibility and the likelihood of such an event should not be
significantly increased by this proposal, furthermore, the road has the
capacity to service this scale of development. Further advice is being sought
from Emergency Planning in this respect.
·
Users
of the allotments to the north of the site have previously expressed concern
that their access and parking would be restricted. Whilst the application site
boundary does include part of Cadets Walk, the applicant has confirmed that
this has been included on the basis that the road closure may be required by
the Council to prevent commercial traffic using this as a short-cut. Part of
Kingston Road has been included in the application site boundary for the same
reason. Parking and turning facilities on Cadets Walk and access to the
allotments would therefore not be affected by this proposal.
·
The
proposals indicate that Beatrice Avenue will remain as an alternative access to
East Cowes, there would, however, be amendments to Beatrice Avenue at its
junction with the new access road to the development. In terms of coach access,
coaches will still be able to access Beatrice Avenue, although they would
inevitably need to cross the new access road by means of the proposed staggered
junction.
·
GKN
were previously concerned that the proposals will interfere with legal rights
belonging to them to gain access to the sewage works from Beatrice Avenue. The
sewage works are now a redundant facility, however, maintenance access will be
provided from the main spur road at the south-east corner of the residential
part of the site. A condition has been attached to ensure this access is
provided.
·
A
resident of Kingslea Park previously expressed concern regarding access to the
rear of their dwelling. The applicant has stated that there is no right of
access at present from these properties to the land forming part of the
application site and that if the detailed application shows a footpath
immediately adjacent to the rear of these properties it may be practical to
permit some form of permissive access provided that this did not create a
permanent right. This matter would be given consideration at the detailed
planning stage.
·
With
regards to the proposed footpaths, the proposed location of the north-south
footpath conflicts with the position shown on the UDP proposals map. The
Ramblers Association previously commented that a footpath in this position is
required. This matter has, however, been the subject of pre-application
discussion with English Nature and it was concluded that the footpath would be
better located at a greater distance from the estuary in order to discourage
public access and dogs from this sensitive area. There are some outstanding
concerns regarding footpaths in the Kingston copse area. A condition has
therefore been recommended requiring full details of the proposed footpath
network and its links to be submitted for subsequent approval.
8.4 Ecological and Natural Heritage Issues
·
UDP
policies C8, C9 and C10 relate to the significance of nature conservation as a
material consideration.
·
English
Nature has confirmed that the changes to the application following the earlier
refusal do not have substantial implications for impacts on nature conservation
interests. English Nature has advised that the assessment made in the
Appropriate Assessment for the former application can apply to the
re-application. Given the agreed conditions and S106 agreement that will be
applied English Nature would concur with the findings of the Appropriate
Assessment that the application will not have an adverse effect on the integrity
of the European site.
·
The part
of the site proposed for development has comparatively low nature conservation
value apart from the woodland (Kingston Copse) and some of the hedgerows. The
ES proposes a suite a measures to enhance habitats within the application site
and these will be the subject of an ecological management plan, the details to
be agreed with the planning authority.
·
There
are a number of issues regarding to protected species at the site. The ES
considers that the site is of negligible importance for bats. Kingston Copse
is, however, likely to provide roosting potential for several different bat
species. A condition is therefore recommended requiring that works to any
mature trees should be first assessed for the potential to support bat roosts.
The ES confirms that dormice are present on site and puts forward a number of
proposals for mitigation. Such measures must be implemented and will be
required to be a component of the ecological management plan.
·
The ES
states that no evidence of badgers has been found. Badgers are, however, known
to be in the immediate vicinity and as such, immediately prior to development,
a survey should be carried out to determine the presence or otherwise of
badgers on site. Evidence of red squirrels in Kingston Copse is reported in the
ES. Providing that no trees containing dreys are felled, no specific actions
are required. In order to avoid disturbance to nesting birds, a condition is
recommended requiring that no tree or scrub clearance is carried out between
the months of March to July inclusive.
·
The ES
reports the presence of Slow-worm and Common Lizard species and the proposal is
to remove these, under Licence, and translocate them to a receptor area in the
south east corner of the application site. A condition is required to ensure a
mitigation plan for the translocation of reptiles is agreed.
·
With
regards to policy C12 which relates to development affecting trees and woodland
and policy C13 relating to the protection of hedgerows, the Council’s
Arboricultural Officer is concerned that the proposed development could
potentially have a detrimental impact on the trees and woodland around the
site. As siting of buildings is not a consideration at this stage, conditions
have been recommended to ensure the submission of a full arboricultural survey
and to require the developer to submit details of measures to protect and
safeguard the hedgerows. This information will be taken into account when
siting is considered. There will inevitably be some impact on hedgerows due to
the construction of access roads and paths. Of the five individual hedgerows
considered to be of ecological value under the Hedgerow Evaluation and Grading
System, three are considered important under the Hedgerow Regulations (1997).
The extent of habitat loss would be small and mitigation measures proposed
including planting new hedgerows, enhancing existing hedgerows and hedge
management.
8.5 Landscape and Visual Impact
·
The
Countryside Agency has raised a number of concerns, in particular, in relation
to the potential impact on the AONB and its setting, including views, peace and
tranquillity and dark skies. The nearest area of AONB is the Osborne Estate,
this is heavily wooded, not open to the public and has no public rights of way
through it. The AONB Officer has confirmed that there would be no visual impact
from the development in this area. Taking into account the distance and
topography from the development and any views afforded from within other parts
of the Island’s AONB it is considered that there would be no negative visual
impact.
·
In
addition to the assessments undertaken for the ES, the applicant has provided
further information to assist in the assessment of the landscape and visual
impacts of the development, which includes sections to show heights of
buildings and sketches and photomontages. As already established above, the
sites are allocated in the UDP for both employment and residential development.
It has therefore already been established that there will be some form of
‘urbanising’ development on this site. The main consideration is therefore the
impact that the proposed heights and density of development will have on
landscape and visual amenity. Consideration must also be given to the
topography of the site and the location of sensitive receptors in the vicinity
of the site, in particular, the River Medina, the Conservation Area at
Whippingham, a number of Listed Buildings at the Osborne Estate and in
Whippingham and the Osborne estate which is on the Register of Historic Parks
and Gardens.
·
The
Masterplan indicates that the highest buildings would be located on the lower
contours to reduce visual impact. The residential development to the Beatrice
Avenue and the southern part of the residential development adjacent to the
spinal access road would be restricted to development of no more than 2.5
storey, again in order to minimise visual impact. The spinal access road itself
would be constructed in a cutting with mounding to either side to reduce its
visual impact from viewpoints to the south of the site. The Conservation Area
and Listed Buildings within it are located a significant distance (500m) to the
south of the proposed development and although there would be no impact on
their setting, elements of the development would be visible. Consideration has
been given to the construction of the access road at its junction with
Whippingham Road and potential visual impacts on the Osborne Estate and Barton
Lodges. There will be no visual impact from the development on Osborne House
itself is due to a number of factors including the distance, existing buildings
and existing trees. Woodland on the edge of the Estate would effectively screen
any views of the proposed access road from within the Estate.
·
With
regards to the proposed employment uses, this part of the site will be
separated from the River by a 50m wide buffer, comprising a 25m wide planted
strip, a 3m high bund and a 25m wide wetland strip. The buffer area will ensure
that no development can take place within the 50m strip, which would bring the
development in line with the existing power station chimneys and set further
back than the storage tanks. Adjacent to the River, the proposed buildings
would be a maximum height of 17m, with the southern area being a maximum height
of 15m. As the level of the land raises away from the River, towards Kingston
Copse, the height of the units would reduce from 17m to 15m to 12m adjacent to
the proposed residential area and Kingston Copse. Views from the River towards
the proposed residential area would be substantially obscured by the employment
development and Kingston Copse. Views from the opposite bank of the River, in
particular from existing dwellings and a public footpath towards the employment
part of the site would change substantially, however, this would be the case
regardless of the height of the units.
8.6 Foul and Surface Water Drainage
·
The
Environment Agency has made comments and recommendations regarding foul and
surface drainage. Appropriate conditions have been attached requiring detailed
schemes to be prepared and submitted for approval.
8.7
Slope
Stability and Geotechnics
·
Ground
stability is a material consideration, with the test being whether or not the
site is capable of supporting the development proposed. In this case the ground conditions will need
to be taken into account when designing the foundation details, for those
ground conditions vary even within the site.
I am satisfied that this is essentially a Building Control matter, with
the Building Regulations providing the legislation to control this issue.
8.8 Noise and Residential Amenity
·
Appropriate
conditions are recommended to protect existing and future residents from
potential disturbance from noise and vibration during both the construction
period and eventual operation of the employment uses.
8.9 Cumulative Impact
·
With
regards to the issue of cumulative impact of both the Barratt’s scheme and
SEEDA’s proposed regeneration of East Cowes, officers have taken into account
both schemes both in highways terms and on impacts to community facilities in
and around East Cowes. Officers have been negotiating an appropriate
contribution from the Barratt scheme towards community facilities and
infrastructure through a Section 106 Legal Agreement.
8.10 Section 106 Agreement Issues
·
Members
are advised that officers have been undertaking negotiations regarding the
Section 106 benefits which can be reasonably achieved from development of this
site. Heads of terms have been
discussed and a draft agreement has been prepared. Members are also advised that the various departmental recipients
of contribution have been involved.
·
The contribution,
which is considered to be reasonable in this case, are as follows:
o
Following
consultation with the Council’s Education Officer a sum of £2,154 (based on 2+
bed dwellings) has been negotiated.
o
Open
Space and habitat Maintenance contributions
o
Community
facility contribution of £250,000
o
Provision
of neighbourhood equipped area of play
o
Provision
of a public transport contribution of £100,000 to initially fund bus service
through the site
o
Included
in the 106 Agreement will be a requirement to provide this level of affordable
housing in conjunction with a registered social landlord (Housing Association)
with the method of provision being either to sell to a registered social
landlord. Such affordable housing will be provided in phases to link in with
any overall phasing of development on the site, with 79 (36%) of the 218
dwellings to be built in Phase 1 to be affordable.
8.11 Other s106 Issues
·
Other
issues which are included in the legal agreement are the need to ensure that a
management company is set up to guarantee the future management of maintenance
of the attenuation ponds and ecological management of southern part of the
site.
·
In
summary, it is considered that the benefits and contributions which have been
negotiated have been set at a level which takes due account of the
circumstances of the site.
9.1
It is
considered that the applicant has effectively demonstrated how the three
reasons for refusal have been overcome. It is considered that whilst this is a
Greenfield site, the development of part of the site for residential purposes
would not be contrary to the guidance contained within PPG3, Draft PPS3, the
Council’s UDP policies and the Urban Capacity and Phasing Reports which
constitute SPG. The maximum density of the proposed development is also in
accordance with the aforementioned policies. The applicant has now increased
the level of affordable housing provision, which is in accordance with
national, regional and UDP policies.
9.2 It is considered that appropriate weight
to all material considerations referred to in the Report has been given and
that the site is appropriate for both employment development and residential
development subject to the conditions suggested and the Section 106 agreement
and therefore approval is recommended.
9.3 Should Members be minded to approve this
application then it will have to be referred to GOSE (Government Office South
East) under the Town and Country Planning (Residential Development on
Greenfield Land) (England) Directions 2000.
This is required to enable the Secretary of State to ensure that the
national policies are being complied with, with particular reference to those
policies within PPG3 – Housing.
10.1
Approval,
subject to reference to GOSE under the Town and Country Planning (Residential
Development on Greenfield Land) (England) Directions 2000) as the site is
likely to generate in excess of 150 units; and subject to the applicant
entering into a s278 agreement with the local highway authority and subject to
the completion of a Section 106 Agreement covering the following:
·
Provision of 30%
affordable housing to be transferred to a registered social landlord.
·
Public transport
contribution of £100,000
·
An education
contribution.
·
Open space maintenance
contribution.
·
Community facilities
contribution
·
Setting up of a
registered management company to adopt and maintain the two balancing ponds and
retained ditches.
·
Long term ecological
management and maintenance plan
Failure on the part of the applicant to sign the s106
obligation within 3 months of the date of the first draft being sent out will
render the application liable to being reconsidered by the LPA based on a
refusal of the applicant to enter into this legal agreement.
Conditions/Reasons:
|
1 |
Application for approval of reserved matters must be made
not later than the expiration of three years beginning with the date of this
permission and the development must be begun not later than the expiration of
two years from the final approval of the reserved matters, or, in the case of
approval on different dates, the final approval of the last such matter to be
approved. Reason: To comply with Section 92 of the Town and Country
Planning Act 1990. |
|
2 |
No development shall be started until full details of the
following reserved matters have been submitted to and approved by the Local
Planning Authority: ·
finished floor levels
and/or contours and floor levels of buildings ·
the layout of the
site, including the disposition of buildings and roads and provision for
parking and servicing; ·
plans and elevations
showing the design of all buildings and other structures; ·
the colour and type
of facing materials to be used for all external walls and roofs; ·
a landscape scheme
for the site which shall include details of trees and shrubs to be planted,
any existing trees to be retained, or felled indicating the spread of the
branches and trunk positions, walls, fences, boundary and surface treatment. Reason: In order to secure a satisfactory development and be in
accordance with policies S6 (Standards of Design), D1 (Standards of Design),
D2 (Standards of Development Within the Site), D3 (Landscaping), TR7 (Highway
Consideration for New Development) of the IW Unitary Development Plan. |
|
3 |
No development of the employment site shall commence until
an overall Masterplan for that area has been submitted for the written
approval of the Local Planning Authority. Such Masterplan shall include the
following: An element of development that fronts onto Kingston Copse
for the purposes of surveillance and public safety The locations and split of B1c, B2 and B8 uses within the
employment area, with particular attention to the location of B2 marine uses
in locations accessible to the River and B1 uses in areas adjacent to
existing and future residential properties A scheme to indicate how the means of access to the
waterfront for the B2 marine uses will be secured, which will consider the
options of using the Wharf at the Kingston Works site, Cowes Harbour
Commissions launch/recovery facilities, and/or access through the Kingston
power station site Internal road layout of the employment site, which shall
accord with the advice contained with Design Bulletin 32 Overall strategy for car parking, disabled persons
parking, HGV parking and cycle parking Overall strategy for landscaping and boundary treatments An overall artificial lighting strategy for the site A phasing programme for the development of the site Such Masterplan shall be approved in writing by the Local
Planning Authority and development on the employment site shall take place in
accordance with such principals, unless otherwise agreed in writing with the
local Planning Authority. Reason: To ensure that development is carried out in accordance
with an overall design strategy in accordance with policy G4 (General Locational
Criteria) and D2 (Standards for Development Within the site) of the IW
Unitary Development Plan. |
|
4 |
The
development on this site shall be carried out in substantial accordance with
the zoned areas relating to the mix of residential and employment uses and
the maximum heights of buildings within these areas, as identified by the
colour-coding on the illustrative Masterplan drawing no. D18/1111/SMP/A101
Rev K received 23rd June 2006 and indicated in Sections XXX and
XXX as shown on drawing no. D18/1111/SKSS/01. Reason:
In order to
secure a satisfactory development and be in accordance with policies S5 and
S10 of the IW Unitary Development Plan. |
|
5 |
A phasing
programme for the residential development shall be submitted to the Local
Planning Authority for written approval before any operations are commenced.
The development shall proceed in accordance with the approved phasing
programme. Reason: To ensure the development is
carried out in a properly phased manner in compliance with policy G4 (General
Locational Criteria for Development) and D2 (Standards for Development within
the Site) of the IW Unitary Development Plan. |
|
6 |
The
density of development on this site shall be between 30 dwellings per hectare
and 55 dwellings per hectare and shall contain a variety of house-types and
size of units. Reason: In compliance with policy H2 (To
ensure that large residential developments contain a variety of house sizes
and types) of the IW Unitary Development Plan. |
|
7 |
Prior to
the commencement of the development, the developer shall submit a site
investigation report for the approval of the Local Planning Authority. The investigation shall address the
nature, degree and distribution of ground contamination and ground gases on
site and shall include an identification and assessment of the risk to
receptors as defined under the Environmental Protection Act 1990, Part IIA,
focusing primarily on risks to human health and controlled waters. The investigation shall also address the
implications of ground conditions on the health and safety of site workers,
on nearby occupied building structures, on services and landscaping schemes
and on wider environmental receptors including ecological systems and
property. The
sampling and analytical strategy shall be approved by the Local Planning
Authority prior to the start of the site investigation survey. Recommendations and remedial works
contained within the approved report shall be implemented by the developer
prior to occupation of the site. Prior to
discharge of the Contaminated Land Condition, a Site Completion Report shall
be submitted to the Local Planning Authority for approval. The Site Completion Report shall validate
that all works undertaken on site were completed in accordance with those
agreed by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To protect the environment and
prevent harm to human health by ensuring that where necessary the land is
remediated to an appropriate standard in order to comply with Part IIA of the
Environmental Protection Act 1990, in accordance with policy P3 of the IW
Unitary Development Plan |
|
8 |
Prior to
the commencement of any development including site clearance and preparation
a Noise Management Scheme shall be submitted to and approved in writing by
the Local Planning Authority. The
Scheme shall detail the works involved for various stages of the development
and shall detail the impact of noise and vibration from the proposed works on
the neighbouring noise sensitive properties along the northern aspects of the
site including dwellings on Kingslea Park, Greenlands Road, Harvey Close and
Kingston Farmhouse and future residents of the proposed development. The
Scheme shall detail any mitigation measures which are required to minimise
the impact of noise and vibration from the construction phase of the
development on the neighbouring noise sensitive properties. The construction
phases of the development shall be carried out in strict accordance with the
approved Scheme and associated mitigation measures unless otherwise agreed in
writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason:
To safeguard the
amenity of existing and future residents, in accordance with policy P5 of the
IW Unitary Development Plan |
|
9 |
The
combined noise level from all fixed plant and machinery associated with the
proposed development shall not exceed 27.0 dB LAeq.1hr (freefield) at
the proposed dwellings and existing dwellings. Reason:
To safeguard the
amenity of existing and future residents, in accordance with policy P5 of the
IW Unitary Development Plan |
|
10 |
Prior to
the commencement of any development including site clearance and preparation
a Dust Management Plan for the site clearance/site remodelling and
construction phases shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the
Local Planning Authority. The Plan
shall examine all aspects of the site preparation and construction phases
where the generation of dust is feasible and further identify control
measures to mitigate the generation of dust. The Dust Management Plan shall
contain recommendations for measures to adequately control the generation of
dust on the site including the access and egress of vehicles on and off the
site. The development shall be carried out in strict accordance with the
approved Plan unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning
Authority. Reason:
To safeguard the
amenity of existing and future residents, in accordance with policy P5 of the
IW Unitary Development Plan |
|
11 |
Construction
works shall not occur before 08.00hrs or after 18.00hrs Monday to Fridays
inclusive and Saturdays 08.00 to 13.00hrs and there should be no working or
deliveries to the site outside those hours. Reason:
To safeguard the
amenity of existing and future residents, in accordance with policy P5 of the
IW Unitary Development Plan |
|
12 |
On
completion of the spinal access road, the surfaces of the spinal access road
and other internal access roads shall be maintained in good state of repair
and kept clean and free of mud and other debris at all times during
construction works and until completion of construction works. Reason:
In the interests of highway safety and safeguarding the local
environment, in accordance with policy P1 of the IW Unitary Development Plan |
|
13 |
No
construction vehicle shall enter the public highway unless their wheels and
chassis have been cleaned to prevent material being deposited on the highway.
Reason:
In the interests of highway safety and to prevent mud and dust getting
on the highway, in accordance with policy P1 of the IW Unitary Development
Plan |
|
14 |
Prior to
the submission of any reserved matters application a full arboricultural
survey shall be submitted for the written approval of the Local Planning
Authority and shall include the following: a plan showing the location of,
and allocating a reference number to, each existing tree on the site which
has a stem with a diameter, measured over the bark at a point 1.5 metres
above ground level, exceeding 75mm, showing the species, girth or stem
diameter, height, crown spread, state of health and stability of each tree,
together with details of those trees that are to be retained and details of
any proposed topping or lopping; details of any proposed topping or lopping
of any tree on land adjacent to the site; a plan showing existing ground
levels and details of any proposed alterations thereto and of any proposed
excavations; a plan showing the location, spread, height, species and state
of health of all existing hedgerows, hedges and other areas of vegetation on
the site, together with details of those that are to be retained and details
of any that are proposed to be cut back or removed, wholly or partially. No
development shall be started until all the trees within (or overhanging) the
site, with the exception of those trees clearly shown to be felled on the
submitted plan, have been surrounded by substantial fences which shall extend
to the extreme circumference of the spread of the branches of the trees (or
such positions as may be agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority). Such fences shall be erected in accordance
with a specification to be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local
Planning Authority and shall remain until all development is completed and no
work, including any form of drainage or storage of materials, earth or
topsoil shall take place within the perimeter of such fencing. Development
shall be carried out in accordance with the approved plans, particulars and
details pursuant to this condition. Reason:
To allow the proper consideration of the impact of the proposed
development on the amenity value of the existing site and to comply with
policies D3 (Landscaping) and C12 (Development affecting Trees and Woodland)
of the IW Unitary Development Plan. |
|
15 |
No
development shall be commenced unless and until details of measures to
protect and safeguard the hedgerows within the application site, have been
submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Such
measures as may be agreed shall be implemented prior to the commencement of
site works and remain for the duration of the construction phase In this
condition "retained hedge or hedgerow" means an existing hedge or
hedgerow which is to be retained in accordance with the approved plans and
particulars. No
retained hedge or hedgerow shall be cut down, uprooted or destroyed, nor
shall any retained hedge or hedgerow be reduced in height other than in
accordance with the approved plans and particulars, without the written
approval of the Local Planning Authority. If within
a period of 5 years from the completion of the development the whole or any
part of any retained hedge or hedgerow is removed, uprooted, is destroyed or
dies, another hedge or hedgerow shall be planted at the same place and that
hedge or hedgerow shall be of such size and species, and shall be planted at
such time, as may be specified in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The
erection of fencing for the protection of any retained hedge or hedgerow
shall be undertaken in accordance with the approved plans and particulars
before any equipment, machinery or materials are brought onto the site for
the purposes of the development, and shall be maintained until all equipment,
machinery and surplus materials have been removed from the site. Nothing shall be stored or placed in any
fenced area in accordance with this condition and the ground levels within
those areas shall not be altered nor shall any excavation be made or fire be
lit, without the written consent of the Local Planning Authority. Reason:
To ensure the continuity of amenity afforded by existing hedges or
hedgerows and to comply with policies D1 (Standards of Design) and C13
(Hedgerows) of the IW Unitary Development Plan. |
|
16 |
This
permission shall authorise to the use of the site identified on the plan
attached to and forming part of this decision notice for Classes B1c, B2 and
B8 of the Town and Country Planning (Use Classes) Order 2005 and the
development and in total combination shall not exceed a maximum gross
floorspace of 49,774m2 and individually shall not exceed 12,831m2
B1c uses and 36,943m2 B2/B8 uses. Reason: In accordance with the stated intentions of the applicant
and the submitted Environmental Impact Assessment and traffic assessment
against which the application has been assessed. Any material alteration from
such assessments may have an impact which has not been subject to proper
consideration against the relevant planning policies. |
|
17 |
No
development of the employment site shall be commenced unless and until a
scheme detailing the proposed artificial lighting for that part of the
application site has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local
Planning Authority. The development
shall be carried out in strict accordance with the approved lighting scheme
unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority and
maintained as such thereafter. Reason:
In the interests of maintaining the amenity value of the area and to
comply with policy D4 (Light Spillage) of the IW Unitary Development Plan |
|
18 |
Within a
period of one month of the occupation of each unit within the employment area
of the site, the occupier/tenant/landlord of each unit shall undertake a
travel survey and this data will form part of a Travel Plan. Within a period
of 6 months from the first date of occupation of each unit, a Travel Plan
shall be submitted for the written approval of the Local Planning Authority.
The Travel Plan shall as a minimum include the broad areas of actions,
objectives and timescales for review and monitoring. Within a period of twelve
months of the occupation of the building, the tenant/landlord shall undertake
a monitoring survey. Within twelve months of occupation of each unit, a
Travel Plan shall be submitted for the written approval of the Local Planning
Authority, which shall include a review of targets, measures and staff survey
data. Annually from the occupation of the building, a Travel Plan shall be
submitted for the written approval of the Local Planning Authority for a
period of 5 years and then at a time agreed in writing by the Local Planning
Authority. Reason:
To ensure
sustainable modes of travel are used in accordance with policy of the E1
(Promotion of New Employment Uses) and TR3 (Locating Development to Minimize
the Need to Travel) of the IW Unitary Development Plan. |
|
19 |
Overall
parking provision on the residential area of the site shall ensure minimum 1
parking space per unit and shall not exceed an average of 1.5 parking spaces
per unit. No dwelling shall be occupied until the associated provision for
off street parking has been completed and made available for the use of that
dwelling to the satisfaction of the Local Planning Authority. Such spaces
shall be available at all times for the parking of a private motor vehicle. Reason:
In compliance with policy TR16 (Parking Policies and Guidelines) of
the IW Unitary Development Plan and advice contained in PPG3 - Housing. |
|
20 |
No
development shall be commenced on the residential part of the site unless and
until a scheme detailing the locations of and level of provision for disabled
persons car parking has been submitted for the written approval of the Local
Planning Authority. Such approved parking provision shall be completed in
accordance with the approved details and made available for use prior to the
first occupation of the associated dwellings. The parking provision shall be
retained and kept available for use thereafter. Reason:
To ensure an
adequate level of provision for disabled persons car parking, in accordance
with policy TR16 (Parking Policies and Guidelines) of the IW Unitary
Development Plan |
|
21 |
No
development shall be commenced on the residential part of the site unless and
until a scheme detailing the design, locations and level of provision for
cycle parking has been submitted for the written approval of the Local
Planning Authority. The scheme shall provide for a minimum level of provision
of 1 space per flat and 1 space for each dwellinghouse without curtilage or
garage. Such approved cycle parking provision shall be completed in accordance
with the approved details and made available for use prior to the first
occupation of the associated dwellings. The cycle parking provision shall be
retained and kept available for use thereafter. Reason:
To ensure an
adequate level of provision for cycle parking, in accordance with policy TR16
(Parking Policies and Guidelines) of the IW Unitary Development Plan |
|
22 |
Vehicular
access to the North of the site connecting to Kingston Road shall not be used
other than as a route for the arrival and departure of buses, cycles,
pedestrians and emergency vehicles.
Details of how such use is to be restricted and maintained including
physical and management controls (the measures) shall be submitted to and
approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority prior to the first use of
the new road. The approved measures shall be implemented, retained and
maintained thereafter. Reason:
In the interests
of highway safety in accordance with policy TR7 (Highway Considerations) of
the IW Unitary Development Plan and in accordance with the requirements of
policyE5 (13) (Allocation of Employment Sites – Kingston) of the IW Unitary
Development Plan |
|
23 |
Notwithstanding
the details contained within the ES and shown on the Masterplan
D18/1111/SMP/A101 dated 18 April 2005, no development shall be commenced
unless and until a detailed pedestrian access strategy including timescales
for its implementation has been submitted to and approved in writing by the
Local Planning Authority. The strategy shall include full details of the
network of paths in and around Kingston Copse; within the southern area of
the application site; and within the area where residential development and
the links with the internal networks to the footpath networks outside the
application site. The strategy shall include full details of path standards
including their dimensions, construction and surface materials. The
development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved strategy. Reason:
To ensure an
adequate level and standard of provision in appropriate locations and to
prevent disturbance to wildlife and sensitive areas, in accordance with
policies C8 (Nature Conservation), TR17 (Public Rights of Way) and TR6
(Cycling and Walking) of the IW Unitary Development Plan. |
|
24 |
No development
pursuant to this planning permission shall commence unless and until the
developer has submitted the following full design and construction details of
the required improvements to the access with Beatrice Avenue and such details
have been first agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority, in
consultation with the local highway authorities and shown in outline in
Drawing XXXX dated XXXX. Development shall be carried out in accordance with
the approved details. Reason:
In the interests of highway safety and to comply with policy TR7
(Highway Considerations) of the IW Unitary Development Plan. |
|
25 |
Notwithstanding
the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted
Development) Order 1995 (or any Order revoking and re-enacting that Order
with or without modification), no means of access shall be provided between
the development hereby approved and Beatrice Avenue other than that expressly
authorised by this permission. Reason:
In the interests of highway safety and to comply with policy TR7
(Highway Considerations) of the IW Unitary Development Plan. |
|
26 |
Prior to
the commencement of development on the residential area of the site, the
developer shall submit a traffic calming and street lighting scheme for that
part of the development and for Beatrice Avenue for the written approval of
the Local Planning Authority. The approved scheme shall be implemented prior
to the 25% occupation of the dwellings (the remainder to be implemented
concurrently with the continuing occupation) and shall be retained and
maintained thereafter. Reason:
In the interests of highway safety and to comply with policy TR7
(Highway Considerations) of the IW Unitary Development Plan. |
|
27 |
Within 18
months of the commencement of development, the spinal access road as
indicated on the Masterplan D18/1111/MPOL/A001 dated 29 November 2005
(received by the Council 3rd March 2006) shall be provided and
completed in its entirety to its junction with Kingston Road, in accordance
with detailed drawings (which shall include full details of levels,
construction details, surfacing, drainage, bund positions and construction,
verge planting and sectional drawings) to be first submitted for the written
approval of the Local Planning Authority.
Reason:
To ensure an adequate standard of highway access and drainage for the
proposed dwellings and employment land and to comply with policy TR7 (Highway
Considerations) of the IW Unitary Development Plan. |
|
28 |
The
development shall proceed in accordance with an Urban Design Report which
explains the underlying urban design principles. The Report shall be
submitted for the written approval of the local planning authority, prior to
the first submission of any Reserved Matters application. The development
shall be designed in accordance with the approved principles. Reason: In order to secure a satisfactory
development and be in accordance with policies S6 (Standards of Design), D1
(Standards of Design), D2 (Standards of Development Within the Site) of the
IW Unitary Development Plan. |
|
29 |
Prior to
the commencement of any development including site clearance and preparation,
a scheme detailing the provision of maintenance access to the former sewage
works site shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning
Authority. The scheme shall indicate how access to the former sewage works
will be provided and maintained and shall include levels, surfacing, drainage
and construction details and how the means of restricting its use to
maintenance vehicles will be achieved. Development shall be carried out in
accordance with the approved details and shall be retained and maintained
thereafter. Reason:
To ensure that an
adequate means of access is provided to the former sewage works site, in
accordance with policies TR7 (Highway Considerations) and C12 (Development
affecting Trees and Woodland) of the IW Unitary Development Plan. |
|
30 |
No
development approved by this permission shall be commenced until schemes for
the disposal of foul and surface waters have been approved in writing by the
Local Planning Authority. The scheme for the surface water regulatory system
shall be designed and implemented to the satisfaction of the Local Planning
Authority and shall be supported by detailed calculations. The surface water regulatory
system scheme shall include a maintenance programme and shall establish
ownership of the storage system for the future. The formulation of a scheme
for the disposal of surface waters shall investigate the potential for such a
scheme to be delivered in a sustainable form (SuDS). Should such an approach
prove not to be feasible or viable the developer shall demonstrate in writing
the reasons why. The development shall be constructed, completed and
maintained in accordance with the approved schemes unless otherwise agreed in
writing by the Local Planning Authority. No dwelling or employment unit shall
be first occupied until the associated infrastructure for the disposal of
foul and surface waters has been completed.
Reason:
To ensure that the disposal of foul waters and surface water run-off
is satisfactorily accommodated and to comply with policies C8 (Nature
Conservation), G6 (Development in Areas Liable to Flooding) and U11
(Infrastructure and Services Provision) of the IW Unitary Development Plan. |
|
31 |
Prior to
being discharged into any watercourse, surface water sewer or soakaway
system, all surface water drainage from parking areas and hardstanding shall
be passed through an oil interceptor that has been constructed in accordance
with details submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning
Authority. Roof water shall not be
permitted to pass through the interceptor.
Reason:
To minimise the risk of pollution and to comply with policy P1
(Pollution and Development) of the IW Unitary Development Plan. |
|
32 |
Prior to
the commencement of any development including site clearance and preparation
and between the months of March and September inclusive, engineering works
associated with the creation of an ecological bund and buffer area adjacent
to the River Medina shall be undertaken in accordance with a detailed scheme
to be first submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning
Authority. The scheme shall also include full details of planting for the
ecological buffer area which shall be undertaken in the first available
planting season following the completion of the engineering works associated
with the construction of the bund. If within a period of 5 years from the
completion of the ecological bund and buffer area any planting is removed,
uprooted, is destroyed or dies, replacement planting shall be provided in
locations and of a size and species and timing, as shall be specified in
writing to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.
Development of the ecological bund and buffer area shall be carried out in
accordance with the approved details and shall be retained and maintained
thereafter. Reason:
In order to
prevent disturbance to wildlife and habitats in accordance with policies C8
(Nature Conservation), C7 (River Corridors and Estuaries) and C9 (Sites of
International Importance for Nature Conservation) of the IW Unitary
Development Plan. |
|
33 |
Prior to
the commencement of any development including site clearance and preparation,
the landscape buffer zone and land to the south of the areas of the site
identified for employment and residential development shall be fenced in
accordance with a scheme to be first submitted and approved in writing by the
Local Planning Authority. Such scheme shall include the locations of fencing,
its height and design. The approved fencing shall be erected, retained and
maintained thereafter. Reason:
In order to
prevent disturbance to wildlife and habitats in accordance with policies C8
(Nature Conservation), C7 (River Corridors and Estuaries) and C9 (Sites of
International Importance for Nature Conservation) of the IW Unitary
Development Plan |
|
34 |
No site
clearance, ground remodelling or other preparatory works including the
removal of trees, shrubs and grassland vegetation shall be carried out
between the months of March to July inclusive. Reason:
In order to
prevent disturbance to wildlife and habitats in accordance with policies C8
(Nature Conservation) and C9 (Sites of International Importance for Nature
Conservation) of the IW Unitary Development Plan. |
|
35 |
Any trees
or buildings on the site which are to be felled/removed and which have the
potential to provide bat roosts shall be surveyed by a competent specialist
one month prior to their felling/removal. If the presence of bats is recorded
mitigation measures shall be first submitted to and agreed in writing by the
Local Planning Authority. The felling/removal of such trees/buildings shall
be carried out in accordance with the approved mitigation measures. Reason:
In order to
prevent disturbance to wildlife and habitats in accordance with policy C8
(Nature Conservation) of the IW Unitary Development Plan. |
|
36 |
No
development shall be commenced unless and until an ecological mitigation
strategy has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning
Authority. The strategy shall include full details of measures for habitat
creation and enhancement and mitigation planting throughout the application
site and details of its management and maintenance. The strategy shall also
include details of measures for the management of maintenance of retained
features including hedgerows and Kingston Copse. The strategy shall also
include details to demonstrate how the wildlife on adjacent sites is to be
protected during the construction period. The development shall be carried
out in accordance with the approved strategy. Reason:
In order to
protect and enhance the nature conservation and bio-diversity of the site in
accordance with policies C8 (Nature Conservation), C7 (River Corridors and
Estuaries) and C9 (Sites of International Importance for Nature Conservation)
of the IW Unitary Development Plan. |
|
37 |
Piling,
or any other foundation design using penetrative methods, will not be
permitted on any part of the site between the months of October to March
inclusive. Reason:
In order to
prevent disturbance to wildlife and habitats in accordance with policies C8
(Nature Conservation) and C9 (Sites of International Importance for Nature
Conservation) of the IW Unitary Development Plan. |
|
38 |
Immediately
prior to development, a survey should be carried out to determine the
presence or otherwise of badgers on site. The results of the survey should be
submitted to the planning authority. Reason:
In order to
prevent disturbance to wildlife and habitats in accordance with policy C8
(Nature Conservation) of the IW Unitary Development Plan. |
|
39 |
A
mitigation plan for the translocation of reptiles shall be agreed with the
Local Planning Authority and implemented in full, prior to development of
those parts of site where reptiles are known to be present. Reason:
In order to
prevent disturbance to wildlife and habitats in accordance with policy C8
(Nature Conservation) of the IW Unitary Development Plan. |
|
40 |
No
development shall be commenced within the application site until the
applicant has secured the implementation of a programme of archaeological
work in accordance with a written scheme of investigation which shall have
been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.
The development of the site shall be carried out in accordance with the
approved scheme of investigation. Reason:
In order to
ensure that provision is made for the provision of a programme of
archaeological recording, in accordance with policy B9 of the IW Unitary
Development Plan. |
|
41 |
No
development on the residential part of the site approved by this permission
shall be commenced until full details of the existing and proposed ground
levels for that part of the site have been submitted to and approved by the
Local Planning Authority. The development shall be constructed and completed
in accordance with the approved details. Reason:
In the interests
of maintaining the amenity value of the area and maintaining the visual
amenity of existing residents, in accordance with policies C1 (Protection of
Landscape Character), D1 (Standards of Design) and D2 (Standards for
Development Within the Site) of the IW Unitary Development Plan. |
|
42 |
No
development on the employment part of the site approved by this permission
shall be commenced until full details of the existing and proposed ground
levels for that part of the site have been submitted to and approved by the
Local Planning Authority. The development shall be constructed and completed
in accordance with the approved details. Reason:
In the interests
of maintaining the amenity value of the area and maintaining the visual
amenity of existing residents, in accordance with policies C1 (Protection of
Landscape Character), D1 (Standards of Design) and D2 (Standards for
Development Within the Site) of the IW Unitary Development Plan. |
|
43 |
No
development shall be commenced on the employment part of the site unless and
until a scheme demonstrating the incorporation of energy efficiency measures
into the design and operation of the buildings have been submitted to and
approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall be
carried out in accordance with the approved particulars. Reason:
In the interests
of making more efficient uses of existing resources and renewable energy, in
accordance with policy D13 (Energy Conservation) of the IW Unitary
Development Plan. |
|
44 |
No
development shall commence on the employment part of the site unless and
until a scheme demonstrating the incorporation of renewable energy options to
be used in the design and operation of the buildings have been submitted to
and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall be carried out in
accordance with the approved scheme. Reason:
In the interests
of making more efficient uses of existing resources and renewable energy, in
accordance with policy D13 (Energy Conservation) of the IW Unitary
Development Plan. |
|
45 |
No
development shall be commenced on the residential part of the site unless and
until a scheme demonstrating the incorporation of energy efficiency measures
into the design and operation of the buildings have been submitted to and
approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall be
carried out in accordance with the approved particulars. Reason:
In the interests
of making more efficient uses of existing resources and renewable energy, in
accordance with policy D13 (Energy Conservation) of the IW Unitary
Development Plan. |
|
46 |
No
development shall commence on the residential part of the site unless and
until a scheme demonstrating the incorporation of renewable energy options to
be used in the design and operation of the buildings have been submitted to
and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall be carried out in
accordance with the approved scheme. Reason:
In the interests
of making more efficient uses of existing resources and renewable energy, in
accordance with policy D13 (Energy Conservation) of the IW Unitary
Development Plan. |
|
47 |
No
development shall commence on the residential part of the site unless and
until details of the location and layout of the site compound (s) for that
part of the site have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local
Planning Authority. The development shall be carried out in accordance with
the approved details. Reason:
In the interests
of maintaining the amenity value of the area and maintaining the amenity of
existing residents, in accordance with policies C1 (Protection of Landscape
Character), D1 (Standards of Design) and D2 (Standards for Development Within
the Site) of the IW Unitary Development Plan. |
|
48 |
No
development shall commence on the employment part of the site unless and
until details of the location and layout of the site compound (s) for that
part of the site have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local
Planning Authority. The development shall be carried out in accordance with
the approved details. Reason:
In the interests
of maintaining the amenity value of the area and maintaining the amenity of
existing residents, in accordance with policies C1 (Protection of Landscape
Character), D1 (Standards of Design) and D2 (Standards for Development Within
the Site) of the IW Unitary Development Plan. |
|
49 |
Prior to
the first occupation of the development, a landscape management plan,
including long-term design objectives, management responsibilities and
maintenance schedules for all landscaped areas, other than privately owned
domestic gardens, shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local
Planning Authority. The landscape management plan shall be carried out in
accordance with the approved details. Reason:
To ensure the
provision of long-term maintenance at the site, in accordance with policy D3
(Landscaping) of the IW Unitary Development Plan. |
|
50 |
Prior to
the commencement of any development a scheme outlining the provisions of open
space within the proposed housing development shall be submitted to and
agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason:
In order to
reduce pressures on sensitive nature conservation areas and to receive a
satisfactory development and be in accordance with Policy L10 (Open Space in
Housing Development) of the IW Unitary Development Plan. |
|
51 |
Prior to
the commencement of any development a scheme detailing the boundary treatment
between the development site and any mitigation land shall be submitted to
and agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority. Reason:
In order to
protect nature conservation interests and be in accordance with Policy C8
(Nature Conservation) of the IW Unitary Development Plan. |
|
52 |
Prior to
the commencement of any development a scheme outlining the management of
public parking within industrial area shall be submitted to and agreed in
writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason:
In order to
reduce the likelihood of public access to the waterfront and to protect
nature conservation interests and be in accordance with Policy C8 (Nature
Conservation of the IW Unitary Development Plan. |
|
53 |
All
mitigation proposals for the protection of nature conservation interests
shall be overseen by an appropriately qualified ecologist. Reason:
In order to
secure the appropriate implementation of any mitigation measures in order to
protect nature conservation interests and be in accordance with Policy C8
(Nature Conservation) of the IW Unitary Development Plan. |
|
54 |
Prior to
the commencement of any development a scheme outlining public access controls
shall be submitted to and agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason:
In order to
protect nature conservation interests and be in accordance with Policy C8
(Nature Conservation) of the IW Unitary Development Plan. |
|
55 |
All uses,
construction and operations associated with the development hereby permitted
shall be carried out in a manner that falls within the parameters of the
Environment Statement (as amended) including all of the relevant mitigation
measures, unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Local Planning
Authority. Reason: To keep to a minimum the impacts associated with the
development in the interests of the designated sites and the amenities of the
area and nearby residential occupiers and to comply with the strategic policy
S10 (Designated and Defined Areas) and policies G4 (General Locational
Criteria for Development), G10 (Potential Conflict Between Proposed Development
and Existing Surrounding Uses), C1 (Protection of Landscape Character), C8
(Nature Conservation as a Material Consideration) and C9 (Sites of
International Importance for Nature Conservation) of the Isle of Wight
Unitary Development Plan. |
Informatives:
· This development is subject to the planning
obligation entered into by the applicant under Section 106 of the Town and
Country Planning Act 1990, prior to the granting of planning permission.
· This grant of planning permission does not authorise the
closure or diversion of the public right of way as indicated on the approved
plan, until the appropriate order has been made.
· The applicant is advised that the requirements of all the
conditions precedent must be satisfied prior to the commencement of the
development. Failure to satisfy the conditions precedent renders all
development unauthorised and unlawful and appropriate action may be taken by
the Council.
· The applicant is advised that any works which could
impact upon dormice will require a DEFRA licence before works can commence
· The applicant’s attention is drawn to the following design
guides produced by the Council:
www.iow.gov.uk/living_here/planning/images/open_space.pdf;
www.iow.gov.uk/living_here/planning/images/Affordable_Housing.pdf;and
www.iow.gov.uk/living_here/planning/images/Communitysafety.pdf
· The applicant is advised that the landscape proposals shall
include the planting of native species only.
· The applicant is advised of the potential conflict between
the indicative siting shown on the plans and existing trees at the site,
namely, the linear group of Ash and Turkey Oak alongside the access track from
Beatrice Avenue to the southern perimeter of the site and the area of woodland
east of the field adjacent to this track. A buffer zone should be maintained
between these trees and the proposed development to ensure that there is no
damage to the trees. The development proposals shall reflect this advice.
· The applicant's attention is drawn to the contents of the
attached letter from the Environment Agency.
· It is recommended that anybody involved with inspecting or
carrying out work on trees at the site is made aware of the possible presence
of bat roosts in and to proceed with caution. If bats are discovered at any
time, work must cease and advice sought from a licensed bat worker.
· Your attention is drawn to the provisions of the Building
Regulations, and related legislation which must be complied with.
· The applicant’s attention is drawn to the need to comply
with the requirements of the Control of Pollution Act 1974 concerning
construction site noise and in this respect you are advised to contact the
Council’s Environmental Health Division.
·
The
applicant is advised that this permission does not authorise the display of
advertisements at the premises and separate consent may be required from the
Local Planning Authority under the Town and Country Planning (Control of
Advertisements) Regulations 1992.
·
The
following policies from the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan were
considered relevant in determining this application: S1, S2, S3, S7, S8, S10,
S11, S15, G1, G4, G6, D1, D2, D3, D10, D11, D12, D13, D14, B2, B6, B9, B10, C7,
C8, C9, C12, C14, P1, P5, TR4 , TR6,
TR7, TR8, TR16 , TR17 , U2, U11, U16 , L10
Derek Rowell
STRATEGIC DIRECTOR FOR
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT & REGENERATION