REPORT OF THE DIRECTOR OF CORPORATE AND ENVIRONMENT SERVICES TO DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE

SITE INSPECTIONS – 1 MARCH 2002

Representations

Highway Engineer considers there to be no highway implications.

Applicant's agent has requested that the following specific points be put before Members:

there is a need for small industrial units on sites such as this - two further prospective tenants have been identified;

gradual improvements are taking place on the site which will continue under the control of the present owner;

the whole of the area around the proposed buildings is currently used for employment purposes;

the building that is not immediately required for an existing occupier of the site (extension B) is occupied by an existing building which it will replace and is also currently used for open storage purposes;

application does not seek to change use of area, but to improve employment capability in accordance with the needs of the area;

regret that officers have taken a very limited view of Policy E8 in the light of the general need for this type of development on the Island;

if application cannot be agreed as submitted, request application be treated as amendment for extension A only.

Copy of the agent's original letter of support for the application is attached.

Evaluation

Members will be familiar with Palmers Brook Farm which is situated at the bottom of Lushington Hill on corner of junction with Park Road. Site has more recently been used for light industrial purposes, storage area and as a nursery.

Site has a complex planning history. Relevant applications are change of use of buildings for light industrial purposes which was approved in July 1989. Outline for nine industrial units was approved in October 1992 but this was not followed by an approval for reserved matters.

The light industrial aspect of this site is mainly confined to two buildings. Extension A is shown to have a floor area of 18.2 metres by 10.2 metres and is attached to a long rectangular building adjacent the western boundary of industrial complex. Submitted floor plans for extension A confirm that an existing unit will be extended and that a new unit will be provided. The new unit measures approximately 10 metres by 9 metres. Extension B is shown to have a floor area of 9 metres by 12.2 metres and is attached to an existing industrial building adjacent the eastern boundary of complex. This extension is to comprise of two additional units, each measuring 12 metres by 4.5 metres. Both extensions are shown to be constructed of UPV steel coated cladding.

Determining factors are considered to be policy and whether the proposed industrial development is acceptable in this area.

Site is shown to be outside of any development envelope as identified on the IW Unitary Development Plan. Relevant UDP policies are therefore considered to be S4 (Countryside Protected from Inappropriate Development), G5 (Development Outside Defined Settlements), D2 (Standards for Development), C1 (Protection of Landscape Character), P1 (Pollution and Development), TR7 (Highway Considerations in New Development) and E8 (Employment in the Countryside). E8 states that applications for employment related development on land outside the development envelope boundaries will be approved where the proposal is of benefit to the rural economy, is of a scale and design appropriate for the location and meets at least one of the following criteria:

The development allows for the expansion of firms which could not be expected to relocate;

The application is for the reuse of a suitable agricultural or other appropriate rural building;

Where the development is associated with an existing farm complex or other employment operation and is compatible with, and complimentary to, that use.

This application contains two elements. The first is to extend an existing building in matching materials and design to provide additional floor space for the current occupier. This element is considered to comply with the policies set out above and, on its own, would be acceptable. However, the second element of this application involves new build additional industrial units not specifically proposed for the expansion of existing firms, not involving the reuse of a suitable agricultural or other rural building and not associated with an existing farm complex. No evidence has been submitted by the applicant to show that any of these critical criteria of Policy E8 have been met, in so far as the new units are concerned.

Although the extension may be considered acceptable in policy terms, it is not possible to issue a split decision and therefore I have no alternative but to recommend refusal of the whole application. If Members do consider that the extension for an existing occupier is acceptable but not the other extension, then a decision on the application should be deferred to allow the applicant to amend the proposal to refer to that single extension only.

Reason for Recommendation

Having given due regard and appropriate weight to the material considerations outlined in this report, whilst recognising that the expansion of industrial units is acceptable and in accordance with policy, I am of the view that there is insufficient justification to grant planning permission for additional units in this rural location. Proposal is therefore contrary to Policy E8 of the IW Unitary Development Plan.

                       Recommendation                 -          Refusal

Conditions/Reasons: