PAPER B1

ISLE OF WIGHT COUNCIL DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE - TUESDAY 12 APRIL 2005

REPORT OF THE HEAD OF PLANNING SERVICES

WARNING

1. THE RECOMMENDATIONS CONTAINED IN THIS REPORT OTHER THAN PART 1 SCHEDULE AND DECISIONS ARE DISCLOSED FOR INFORMATION PURPOSES ONLY.

2. THE RECOMMENDATIONS WILL BE CONSIDERED ON THE DATE INDICATED ABOVE IN THE FIRST INSTANCE. (In some circumstances, consideration of an item may be deferred to a later meeting).

3. THE RECOMMENDATIONS MAY OR MAY NOT BE ACCEPTED BY THE DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE AND MAY BE SUBJECT TO ALTERATION IN THE LIGHT OF FURTHER INFORMATION RECEIVED BY THE OFFICERS AND PRESENTED TO MEMBERS AT MEETINGS.

4. YOU ARE ADVISED TO CHECK WITH THE DIRECTORATE OF ENVIRONMENT SERVICES (TEL: 821000) AS TO WHETHER OR NOT A DECISION HAS BEEN TAKEN ON ANY ITEM BEFORE YOU TAKE ANY ACTION ON ANY OF THE RECOMMENDATIONS CONTAINED IN THIS REPORT.

5. THE COUNCIL CANNOT ACCEPT ANY RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE CONSEQUENCES OF ANY ACTION TAKEN BY ANY PERSON ON ANY OF THE RECOMMENDATIONS.

Background Papers

The various documents, letters and other correspondence referred to in the Report in respect of each planning application or other item of business.

Members are advised that every application on this report has been considered against a background of the implications of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998 and, where necessary, consultations have taken place with the Crime and Disorder Facilitator and Architectural Liaison Officer. Any responses received prior to publication are featured in the report under the heading Representations.

Members are advised that every application on this report has been considered against a background of the implications of the Human Rights Act 1998 and, following advice from the Head of Legal and Democratic Services, in recognition of a duty to give reasons for a decision, each report will include a section explaining and giving a justification for the recommendation.

LIST OF PLANNING APPLICATIONS ON REPORT TO COMMITTEE - 12 APRIL 2005

1.	TCP/02215/U P/02148/04 Porch; alterations to roof to provide additional living accommodation at 1st floor level to include two dormer windows on front elevation The Old Dairy, Gusters Shute, Calbourne, Newport	Calbourne	Refusal
2.	A/02316/A P/02221/04 Non-illuminated promotional sign boards for island wide events Various sites within Yarmouth including one outside 2 Southford, Tennyson Road, Yarmouth	Yarmouth	Conditional Approval
3.	A/02317/A P/02223/04 Non-illuminated promotional sign boards for Island wide events Various sites within the Isle of Wight including outside County Hall, High Street, Newport	Newport	Conditional Approval
4.	A/02318/A P/02222/04 Non-illuminated promotional sign boards for island-wide events Various sites within conservation areas including one outside 100, St. James Street, Newport	Newport	Conditional Approval
5.	TCP/12301/C P/01083/01 Outline for 5 houses & turning area Land adjacent Bedford Court, Bedford Row, site of J Rowland Glazing Contractor, Unit 4, Laundry Lane Newport,	Newport	Refusal
6.	TCP/13425/D P/00984/04 Demolition of bungalow; outline for 8 dwellings 50 Gunville Road, Newport	Newport	Conditional Approval
7.	TCP/19614/C P/00153/05 Alterations; conversion of garage into study; single storey extension to form replacement garage and enlarge hall (revised scheme) 2 Alma Cottages, Fishbourne Lane, Ryde	Fishbourne	Conditional Approval
8.	TCP/22370/C P/02070/04 Demolition of factory buildings; residential development of 58 houses & 3 storey block of 8 flats with parking/garages & associated access roads, (aorm) (Application to be determined by Development Control Committee) (revised plans) East of Winston Close/north of Grange Avenue existing industrial site south of, Sherbourne Avenue, Ryde	Ryde	Conditional Approval
9.	TCP/26052/B P/01400/04 Demolition of warehouse and workshop; outline for 7 houses and alterations to vehicular access (revised scheme) (readvertised application) Land rear of St Leonards - Cornerways, Binstead Road, Ryde	Ryde	Conditional Approval
10.	TCP/26192/C P/02353/04 Conversion of existing property to form 7 flats; 2/3 storey extension to form 3 flats; parking & alterations to vehicular access (revised scheme) 1 Clatterford Road, Newport	Newport	Conditional Approval
11.	TCP/26510/A P/02676/04 Outline for two dwellings; formation of vehicular access Land rear of 35, Ashey Road, Ryde	Ryde	Conditional Approval

TCP/02215/U P/02148/04 Parish/Name: Calbourne Ward: Brighstone and Calbourne

Registration Date: 12/10/2004 - Full Planning Permission

Officer: Mrs. H. Byrne Tel: (01983) 823594

Applicant: Mrs T Hayles

Porch; alterations to roof to provide additional living accommodation at 1st floor level to include two dormer windows on front elevation

The Old Dairy, Gusters Shute, Calbourne, Newport, Isle Of Wight, PO304PT

REASON FOR COMMITTEE CONSIDERATION

Previous report was requested by local member, Cllr J Wareham as she wrote in support of the application and was not prepared for the application to be dealt with under the delegated procedure.

Reasons for the request were: She did not feel that the proposals conflicted with the visual integrity of this part of Calbourne; there are other properties within the area that have gables; the extension would not be seen from the side as the telephone exchange is sited in front of the bungalow and the bungalow is set back from the road; two properties to the west, a previously small cottage has been enlarged/rebuilt. The applicants provide a shop in the village of Calbourne where there are few facilities and wish to provide accommodation for their growing family; the height of the proposed extension will be no bigger than existing.

PROCESSING INFORMATION

This is a minor application, the processing of which will have taken 26 weeks to the date of the committee meeting. The application has exceeded the prescribed 8 week period for the determination of planning applications due to the need for committee consideration and subsequently the resolution of the members at the committee meeting held on 18 January 2005, to defer the application for further negotiations.

LOCATION AND SITE CHARACTERISTICS

Application relates to a simple unassertive chalet bungalow in a rural location outside of the development envelope but sited on the main road, running through the village, the building is sited slightly set back from the road with a small front garden bordered by a low fence, the bungalow occupies a prominent position on the hill as you approach Calbourne from Newport.

The street scene consists of a mixture of properties, stone and rendered, of various sizes and different positions in relation to the road.

RELEVANT HISTORY

TCP/2215/P – Conversion of redundant farm buildings to form manager’s accommodation with office and dairy storage unit for milk rounds, new vehicle access, service road and parking at the Old Dairy, Newport Road, Calbourne. Consent granted May 1993, during the conversion a large part of the building was removed entirely causing the consent to be no longer valid as the alterations were deemed to be a rebuild.

TCP/2215/R – Construction of manager’s dwelling for dairy business at the site of The Old Dairy, Newport Road, Calbourne. Conditional approval August 1993, subject to agricultural occupancy condition.

DETAILS OF APPLICATION

Consent is sought for alterations to the front elevation of the property to include a porch, two dormer windows and a large central gable with a semi circular window. The additions will create minimal additional useable space but seeks to provide a more interesting front elevation to that which currently exists.

Agent acting on behalf of the applicant considers that there is no obvious pattern to the street scene and no building line and that the existing telephone exchange screens the site from the west. Gable ends are visible on both directions on Sun Hill and the proposal does not induce overlooking nor does it affect amenity.

The agent also considers that the existing roof is too bland and that a return gable is not uncommon on a village building and would break the blandness of the roof by putting the building into two segments.

DEVELOPMENT PLAN/POLICY

Site is located outside of the development envelope. Relevant Unitary Development Plan policies are as follows:

S6 – All Development will be Expected to be of a High Standard of Design

C1 – Protection of Landscape Character

D1 – Standards of Design

D2 – Standards for Development within the Site

H7 - Extension and Alteration of Existing Properties

G4 - General Locational criteria for Development

CONSULTEE RESPONSES

Conservation Officer considers proposal is contrary to policies D1 and D2. Officer considers proposals to change what is a simple and unassertive building into one which is fussy and confused and which is poorly designed both from the front and sides, and thus in the oblique when passing the site. The new gable addition over dominates when viewed from the side and in conjunction with the dormers and porch provides a disproportionate and unbalanced composition.

The mix of flat roofed dormer to the rear, new gabled dormers to the front incorporating diagonal boarding facings, a lean-to porch and a large semi circular window to a large central gable springing from the centre of a window on one side, includes many different elements which do not sit well together and lead to a poorly designed composition.

PARISH /TOWN COUNCIL COMMENTS

Calbourne Parish Council has no objection to the scheme.

THIRD PARTY REPRESENTATIONS

None received.

CRIME AND DISORDER IMPLICATIONS

No crime and disorder implications are anticipated.

EVALUATION

Determining factors in considering this application are the size, design and form of the proposal in relation to the existing and surrounding properties, the impact on the character of the area and whether the proposal maintains or enhances the character of the built environment.

Although a modest extension to the front of the property in terms of additional living accommodation provided, the cumulative affect of these additions is to change what is a simple and unassertive building into one which is fussy and confused. The main concern in this instance is the bulk that is added to the front elevation of the property, particularly when viewed from the east approaching Calbourne. It is acknowledged that there is a mixture of properties within the small street scene both in terms of design and materials and that the telephone exchange building to the west has a gable fronting the highway which will screen part of the proposal to some degree. There is no adverse impact on neighbouring privacy.

The Local Member and Agent’s comments have been fully considered but do not carry sufficient weight to outweigh the principle concern in respect of the design. The fact that the applicant provides services in a village where there are few facilities should not carry any weight in the determination of this application.

In conclusion, the overriding concern is the design of the proposal in relation to the original dwelling. The inappropriately complicated design with its height and mass and unbalancing effect particularly in respect of the side elevations results in and over dominant addition which does not maintain or enhance the quality and character of the built environment.

A report was presented to the Development Control Committee held on 18 January 2005, recommending refusal of the application as it was considered that the proposed alterations to the front elevation would be an intrusive, over complicated and over dominant alteration out of scale and character with the original dwelling. At the meeting members resolved to defer the application pending further negotiations to secure an alternative design. Despite the case officer having written to the applicant on two separate occasions giving clear and reasonable timescales, seeking advice as to how they wish to proceed, to date no reply has been received.

HUMAN RIGHTS

In coming to this recommendation to refuse planning permission, consideration has been given to the rights set out in Article 8 (Right to Privacy) and Article 1 of the First Protocol (Right to Peaceful Enjoyment of Possessions) of the European Convention on Human Rights. The impacts this development might have on the owners/occupiers of the other property in the area and other third parties have been carefully considered. Whilst there may be some interference with the rights of the applicant to develop the land in the manner proposed, it is considered that the recommendation to refuse is proportional to the legitimate aim of the Council’s Unitary Development Plan in the public interest.

JUSTIFICATION FOR RECOMMENDATION

Having given due regard and appropriate weight to all material considerations, the proposed alterations to the front elevation of the property, represents an unacceptable form of development, failing to enhance the quality and character of the built environment and the visual integrity of the site.

The applicants have failed to respond to an invitation to negotiate on the scheme as per members resolution to defer the decision pending negotiations to secure a suitable alternative design and accordingly the scheme under consideration is contrary to Policy.

RECOMMENDATION – REFUSAL

Conditions/Reasons:

The proposed alterations to the front elevation of the property by reason of size, design materials and appearance would be an intrusive, overcomplicated and over dominant alteration, out of scale and character with the original dwelling, failing to respect the visual integrity of the site and detrimental to the visual amenity of the area. The proposal is therefore contrary to policy S6 (Be of a high standard of design) and policies C1 ((Protection of landscape Character), D1 (Standards of design), D2 (Standards of development within the site), H7 (Alterations and extensions of existing properties) and G4 (General Locational Criteria) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.

A/02316/A P/02221/04 Parish/Name: Yarmouth Ward: Shalfleet and Yarmouth

Registration Date: 21/10/2004 - Advertisement Consent

Officer: Mr. J. Packman Tel: (01983) 823571

Applicant: Isle of Wight Council - Wight Leisure

Non-illuminated promotional sign boards for island wide events (application to be determined by the Council's Development Control Committee)

various sites within Yarmouth including one outside 2 Southford, Tennyson Road, Yarmouth, PO41

Joint Report with A/2317/A and A/2318/A

A/02317/A P/02223/04 Parish/Name: Newport Ward: Newport North

Registration Date: 21/10/2004 - Advertisement Consent

Officer: Mr. J. Packman Tel: (01983) 823571

Applicant: Isle of Wight Council - Wight Leisure

Non-illuminated promotional sign boards for Island wide events (application to be determined by the Council's Development Control Committee)

various sites within the Isle of Wight including outside County Hall, High Street, Newport, PO30

Joint report with A/2316/A and A2318/A

A/02318/A P/02222/04 Parish/Name: Newport Ward: Newport North

Registration Date: 21/10/2004 - Advertisement Consent

Officer: Mr. J. Packman Tel: (01983) 823571

Applicant: Isle of Wight Council - Wight Leisure

Non-illuminated promotional sign boards for island-wide events (application to be determined by the Council's Development Control Committee)

various sites within conservation areas including one outside 100, St. James Street, Newport, PO30

REASON FOR COMMITTEE CONSIDERATION

The report is to be given committee consideration due to the island wide scale and potential impact of the proposals especially on Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty and designated Conservation Areas.

PROCESSING INFORMATION

The processing of these applications will have taken nearly 19 weeks to the date of the committee meeting. The application has exceeded the prescribed 8 week period for the determination of planning applications due to officer workload and the need for committee consideration. This report concerns 3 interrelated applications that form part of one proposal submitted by Wight Leisure. A/2316/A relates to proposed signs within the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty A/2318/A relates to proposed signs within designated conservation areas and A/2317/A relates to all other locations.

LOCATION AND SITE CHARACTERISTICS

Under this revised proposal up to 317 boards would be located within any of the 197 specified site locations. The signs would be located upon lamp standards in most of the major villages and towns on the Island including Newport, Wootton, Ryde, Seaview, Brading, Bembridge, Sandown, Ventnor, Cowes, Yarmouth, Freshwater, East Cowes and Shanklin.

RELEVANT HISTORY

On the 2/5/2003 Wight Leisure submitted 3 similar applications (A/2316, A/2317, and A2318) for a number of signs to be located island wide on lampstands to publicise the Isle of Wight Music Festival. After some revisions to the proposal to reduce the number of proposed boards within the AONB the 3 applications were approved on the 4/6/2003.

DETAILS OF APPLICATION

The applications relate to the proposal to locate up to 317 advertising boards island wide at any one time to publicise Wight Leisure strategic events. The boards would be located at any of the 197 specified site locations. The events include the Walking Festival, Skandia Cowes Week, the Cycling Festival, and White Air. During this period Wight Leisure shall also be using similar signs at similar locations to advertise the Isle of Wight music festival. The signs would be located upon lamp standards in all of the major villages and towns on the Island. The signs would be erected up to two weeks prior to the event and taken down within one week of the event finishing. The signs (including those for the music festival) would be in place intermittently for 8 months of the year from April to November.

Initially the proposal put forward was for up to 250 signs to be strategically located at any of the 316 specified Island sites during large scale strategic events, to be erected up to 2 weeks before and taken down within two weeks after the event.

119 site locations have been excluded from the revised proposal; the excluded sites are mainly located in Conservation Areas and those sites within or adjoining AONBs.

DEVELOPMENT PLAN/POLICY

The Town and Country planning Act (Control of Advertisements) Regulations 1992 Part 1 Paragraph 4 identifies that the Local Planning Authority shall only exercise power under the regulations in the interests of amenity and public safety.

Relevant Unitary Development Plan policies are as follows:

S1 - New development will be concentrated within existing urban areas

S4 - Countryside will be protected from inappropriate development

S10 - Conserve or enhance the features of special character of these areas.

D6 - Advertisements in defined settlements

D7 - Advertisements in the countryside

B6 - Protection and Enhancement of Conservation Areas

T1 - The Promotion of Tourism and the Extension of the Season

C1 - Protection of Landscape Character

C2 - Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty

C9 - Sites of International Importance for Nature Conservation

C10 - Sites of National Importance for Nature Conservation

C11 - Sites of Local Importance for Nature Conservation

CONSULTEE RESPONSES

AONB Unit – raise strong objections to the proposed signs in Yarmouth and the Wootton Bridge Area

Highways – recommend conditional approval

PARISH/TOWN COUNCIL COMMENTS

Sandown Town Council – no objections

Ventnor Town Council – no objections

Wootton Bridge Parish Council – number of boards should be reduced in Wootton

Freshwater Parish Council – raise objections on the grounds that the boards would provide a visual distraction to motorists. Suggest a reduction in the number of boards

East Cowes Town Council – no objections

Bembridge Parish Council – recommend refusal on grounds of visual amenity

Brading Town Council – raise objects, would like to see the number of signs significantly reduced

Brighstone Parish Council – raise objections, impact on conservation area and AONBs

Cowes Town Council – object, signs too large, loss of visual amenity

Nettlestone and Seaview Parish Council – raise objections, adverse impact on conservation area and AONB

Shanklin Town Council – no objections

Yarmouth – no objections

THIRD PARTY REPRESENTATIONS

The application has attracted 47 letters of objection from local residents and local interest groups some objectors have sent one or more letters for each individual application.

A number letters raised the issue of highway safety and the potential for the proposed signs to distract road users. The most frequent issue was the potential loss of amenity for the areas concerned. Some representations were specifically concerned about the affect the proposals would have on the AONB, Conservation Areas and those locations outside of the defined development envelopes.

Councillor Patrick Joyce raises concerns about the proposed number of boards in Brading and the impact these could have upon the conservation area

Councillor Barbara Clough has raised concerns about the proposed number of boards to be located in Bembridge

Isle of Wight Estuaries – strongly object to the proposal for additional signs in the Yarmouth area, they wish for existing signs and street furniture to be rationalized.

The Isle of Wight Society – object to the proposal

Campaign to Protect Rural England – strongly objects to the proposal – they believe that the signs would be detrimental to the character of the built environment

Wootton Bridge Village Partnership – believes the number of signs should be reduced in Wootton.

CRIME AND DISORDER IMPLICATIONS

No crime and disorder implications are anticipated.

EVALUATION

Determining factors are policy considerations, how the development will impact on the character and appearance of built and natural environments of the Towns and Villages of the Isle of Wight. Specific areas of concern are the designated Conservation Areas and AONB. There are also a number of potential highway and public safety issues.

Highways has recommended approval subject to conditions as a result I do not consider that the proposed signs would have any adverse impact on public safety.

The main issue is the degree of impact that the proposed signs would have on the amenities of the proposed locations. Most important is the potential impact the signs would have on the Conservation Areas and the Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty and to what extent the revised proposals have overcome these concerns.

The reduced scheme would involve potentially more signs (317) being located at only 197 different sites up to two weeks before and one week after the event. 76 different site locations have been excluded from the original scheme the number of signs to be displayed at any one time has been reduced from 250 to 200 and the signs would have to be removed within 1 week of the event ending instead of 2.

These revisions have been suggested to lessen the potential impact the signs might have on their surrounding environment. The revisions reduce the number of signs in total, the total number of sites and the duration of display. The 197 excluded locations have been targeted within the most sensitive areas. The proposed number of signs to be displayed with the AONB in Yarmouth has been halved. All proposed signs along Wootton Bridge have been excluded from the scheme including those near the bridge located on the High Street and Kite Hill to ensure that the impact has been minimised on the adjoining SSSI, SAC and AONB. The number of proposed signs in Ryde has been significantly reduced to lessen the impact upon the conservation area. The number of proposed signs in Freshwater has also been reduced to lessen the impact on the nearby AONB.

I am satisfied that the revised scheme would ensure that there would be a minimal impact upon the amenities of the proposed locations for the signs. I also believe that sufficient revisions have been made to ensure that Conservation Areas and AONBs in particular have been sufficiently protected from inappropriate development.

HUMAN RIGHTS

In coming to this recommendation to grant planning permission consideration has been given to the rights set out in Article 8 (Right to Privacy and Article 1 of the First Protocol (Right to Peaceful Enjoyment of Possessions) of the European Convention on Human Rights. The impacts this development might have on the owners/occupiers of other properties in the area and other third parties have been carefully considered. Whilst there may be some interference with the rights of these people this has to be balanced with the rights of the applicant to develop the land in the manner proposed. Insofar as there is an interference with the rights of others it is considered necessary for the protection of the rights and freedom of the applicant. It is also considered that such action is proportional to the legitimate aim of the Council’s Unitary Development Plan and in the public interest.

JUSTIFICATION FOR RECOMMENDATION

Having given due regard and appropriate weight to all material considerations, I am satisfied that the revised proposal to erect up to 317 1219 x 610 mm signs at 197 lampstand locations subject to conditions represents an acceptable form of development.

The number, location and display duration of the boards will not lead to a significant detrimental impact on the site locations including those areas outside of the development envelopment, within Conservation Areas and Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty.

RECOMMENDATION – APPROVAL

Conditions/Reasons:

1	The display of the advertisements hereby permitted shall be discontinued after 31 December 2009. Unless the prior written consent of the Local Planning Authority has been obtained for a further period. Reason: To enable the Local planning Authority to assess the impact of the proposal on the amenities of the wider area in accordance with Policies D6 and B6 of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.
2	Unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority the signs subject of this consent shall only be displayed between the months of April and November with the specific dates being provided to the Local Planning Authority one month before the first notice is displayed in any year. Reason: To ensure that the signs are not displayed for longer than the approved period in the interests of the amenities of the area and in accordance with Policies D2 and B76 of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.
3	The signs shall be erected no earlier than 14 days before the date of the first event day as identified on the advertisement and removed no later than 7 days after the date of the last event day as identified on the advertisement. Reason: To ensure that the signs are not displayed for longer than the approved period in the interests of the amenities of the area and in accordance with Policies D2 and B76 of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.
4	No part of the promotional sign boards shall be displayed at a height of less than 2.2 metres above the level of the highway. Reason: In the interests of highway safety and to comply with policy TR7 (Highway Considerations) of the IOW Unitary Development Plan.
5	Standard condition - B01
6	Standard condition - B02
7	Standard condition - B03
8	Standard condition - B04
9	Standard condition - B05

TCP/12301/C P/02524/03 Parish/Name: Newport Ward: Newport South

Registration Date: 17/12/2003 - Outline Planning Permission

Officer: Mr. A. Pegram Tel: (01983) 823575

Applicant: Mr J Rowlands

Outline for 5 houses & turning area

land adjacent Bedford Court, Bedford Row, site of J Rowland Glazing Contractor, Unit 4, Laundry Lane Newport, PO301QL

REASON FOR COMMITTEE CONSIDERATION

Previous application was due to be considered at the meeting of the Development Control Committee on 23 April 2002 under a recommendation for refusal on the grounds of inadequate access for fire appliances but was deferred at the applicant's request to allow further discussions with the Isle of Wight Fire and Rescue Service. These discussions have taken place. The current application has attracted further opposition and it is considered that the history of this site and the outstanding matters of access for fire appliances warrants consideration by Committee.

PROCESSING INFORMATION

This is a minor application, the processing of which has gone beyond the prescribed eight week period for the determination of planning applications due to protracted discussions and consideration of issues relating to access to site by emergency vehicles, particularly fire appliances, which have been further delayed by case officer workload.

LOCATION AND SITE CHARACTERISTICS

Application relates to roughly rectangular site with frontage of 25 metres to the northwestern side of Laundry Lane and depth of some 15 metres. Site sits opposite Scout hall in Laundry Lane with residential properties fronting The Mall to the northwest. Site located some 20 metres southwest of junction of Laundry Lane with Bedford Row.

Existing buildings form a "U" shape with open area for parking/vehicular access centrally located on Laundry Lane frontage. Immediately to southwest is group of garages accessed off Laundry Lane.

RELEVANT HISTORY

TCP/12301A - alterations and use for storage and sale of electrical and fuel system parts for vehicles - conditional approval in December 1968.

Enforcement Notice requiring cessation of use of premises for repair, maintenance, storage etc of agricultural machinery, upheld on appeal in March 1979.

TCP/12301/B - Application seeking outline consent for residential development was submitted to the Authority in June 2001. This application was due to be considered by the Development Control Committee in April 2002 and was recommended for refusal for the following reason:

The access road, Laundry Lane is unsatisfactory to serve the proposed development by reason of inadequate width for access by a fire appliance contrary to Policy TR7 of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.

The application was deferred at the applicants request to allow further discussions with the Isle of Wight Fire and Rescue Service. The application was subsequently withdrawn.

DETAILS OF APPLICATION

Outline consent sought for 5 dwellings with all matters reserved for subsequent approval with the exception of siting. Plans which accompany the submission show five dwellings, arranged as a terrace of three dwellings and two semi-detached, to be located fronting Laundry Lane. Plans indicate alternative site layout, one including the widening of Laundry Lane across site frontage from 3.6 metres to 4.8 metres.

Submitted plans contain section illustrating applicant's view that there is reasonable distance to overcome overlooking from properties in Carisbrooke Road and that privacy presently protected by high brick wall which could in part be retained. Information which accompanied previous submission acknowledged narrowness of Laundry Lane but pointed out there are already domestic properties in the vicinity. In addition it was suggested that traffic generation from five dwellings with zero parking would be likely to be significantly less than when property was in full use for light industry, industrial manufacturing and storage purposes. Premises in poor state of repair and difficult to let so most of premises are vacant and current occupiers wishing to relocate. Therefore, proposal would not result in loss of employment. Considered ideal brownfield site for zero parking scheme given location close to town centre.

Information which accompanies the current submission draws attention to history of site and fact that principle of redevelopment for residential purposes has not been in question. Therefore, negotiations have centered on issues relating to affect on neighbouring properties and issues of Highways and access for emergency vehicles. The affect on neighbouring properties was addressed in information which accompanied previous submission and is detailed above. Given limited access to site, applicants consider scheme with zero parking appropriate although there is a possibility of providing some parking by repositioning the dwellings further back from road.

Area of land forming garage forecourt accessed off Bedford Row, to rear of Bedford Court, is also included as part of the application site. This area of land has been identified as a turning facility for emergency vehicles. However, this area of land is not within the ownership of the applicant. Therefore, the submission was accompanied by a legal agreement, between the applicant and residents of Bedford Court which requires the garage forecourt to be kept free of parked vehicles and to remove vehicles from the area at the request of the crew of any emergency vehicle.

DEVELOPMENT PLAN/POLICY

PPG3 (Housing) encourages Local Planning Authorities to make best use of urban land within their areas in order to reduce demand for development on greenfield sites. PPG13 (Transport) promotes sustainable residential development, within easy reach of public transport and shops, work and leisure facilities.

The site is within the development envelope for Newport and the following Unitary Development Plan policies are considered to be relevant:

S1 - New development concentrated within existing urban areas;

S2 - Development encouraged on previously developed land;

S7 - Need to provide for at least 8,000 housing units over the Plan period;

G1 - Development Envelopes;

G4 - General Locational Criteria for Development;

D1 - Standards of Design;

D2 - Standards for Development within the site;

H1 - New Development Within Main Island Towns;

H4 - Unallocated Residential Development to be Restricted to Defined Settlements;

E3 - Resist the Development of Allocated Employment Land for Other Uses;

TR7 - Highway Considerations for New Development; and

TR16 - Parking Policies and Guidelines.

CONSULTEE RESPONSES

Chief Environmental Health Officer recommends conditions relating to contaminated land, should application be approved.

Deputy Senior Fire Safety Officer confirms that the proposed turning area for fire appliances would be expected to be available for use at all times and that there comments in respect of the previous application remain the recommendations of his department. In this respect, the previous comments concluded as follows:

"Although appliances can turn round in the proposed area, the lighting in the area is poor .... the surface of the turning area is uneven .... and to ensure this area is available for access at all times it would require to be made 'strictly no parking' with a permanent access agreement."

PARISH/TOWN COUNCIL COMMENTS

Not applicable.

THIRD PARTY REPRESENTATIONS

Five letters received from local residents objecting to and/or expressing concern to development on grounds which can be summarised as follows:

a Question whether narrow access roads (Laundry Lane/Bedford Row) are capable of accommodating emergency vehicles, particularly fire appliances.

b Proposal provides no parking which surely is impractical and would interrupt free flow of traffic.

c Likely to be increase of traffic which would result in increased danger particularly due to visibility and geometry of roads leading to site.

d Proposal represents overdevelopment of the site.

e Access for emergency vehicles is poor - Laundry Lane has average width of 3.5 metres and is not suitable for large vehicles.

f Not possible for fire appliance to access point within 45 metres of proposed dwellings.

g Laundry Lane and other roads leading to site are narrow, only adequate for single track highway - two way traffic creating difficulties.

h Proposal is inconsistent with Councils parking guidelines.

i Overlooking/loss of privacy to adjacent properties.

j Development out of keeping with pattern of development in surrounding area.

k Legal agreement between applicant and residents of Bedford Court is not clear in what is required of the residents.

l Enforceability of legal agreement between applicant and residents of Bedford Court is questioned. Parties who have signed agreement are leaseholders, they do not own the flats in which they live or garages and forecourt. This raises questions as to whether they can give third party rights over the land.

m Whilst it is intended to resurface the garage forecourt, it is not considered that this will be to a standard required to support a fire tender (12.5 tonnes).

n Garage forecourt to Bedford Court is smaller than portrayed on plans.

o Lack of lighting in Bedford Row and Laundry Lane area could encourage illegal activities.

p Lack of suitable amenity space.

q It is suggested that Members carry out a site visit.

One resident, whilst expressing concern with regard to the proposal, welcomes development on this site as it is a dump for litter and supermarket trolleys.

Local Councillor comments as follows:

"The above planning request was turned down previously on grounds of 24 hour emergency vehicle access to Laundry Lane at either end and from Carisbrooke Road via Bedford Row. These were sound reasons.

It is my concern and that of five other residents in close proximity to the development that the existence of a covenant signed by three of the existing residents at Bedford Court, also in close proximity to the above development, will not guarantee 24 hour/ 7 day access needed by the Fire Service or other emergency vehicles.

There exists vehicular congestion for short periods of time in the area of the scout building opposite the proposed development. This is one source of temporary congestion. At night there is witness of cars parked both temporary or throughout the night.

Other objections have come from some of the homes backing onto the laundry building and from two or three residents within Laundry Lane that I spoke with. These objections cover being overlooked and extra traffic created in such a tight enclosed area consisting of a high wall and no pavements.

The general view is that a covenant signed by three occupants of Bedford Court will not guarantee that cars will not be parked for short periods or overnight."

CRIME & DISORDER IMPLICATIONS

No crime and disorder implications anticipated.

EVALUATION

Proposal involves redevelopment of brownfield site within the development envelope for Newport and the surrounding area is residential in character. Therefore proposal is considered to be acceptable in principle and meets strategic aims of UDP and national policy insofar as appropriate location of new residential development is concerned.

Site has an existing established and authorised use for light industrial purposes, constrained by the nature of the buildings and access to them. Therefore although currently an employment site, whose development would normally be resisted under Policy E3, I consider the proposal would meet the exceptional criteria identified in that policy in that redevelopment would be unlikely to prejudice the overall ability of the area to meet local employment needs and will involve the relocation of a nonconforming use from an unsuitable existing site. I therefore see no conflict with Policy E3, should the application be approved.

The location of the site with good level access to the town centre complies with national and local policies seeking to reduce reliance on the private car. The location is appropriate for a "zero parking" development in accordance with the Council's Zonal Parking Policies expressed in Appendix G of the UDP and therefore a no parking development will accord with Policy TR16 of the Plan. Furthermore, it is considered that the authorised use of the existing buildings for commercial purposes could generate higher volume of traffic movements particularly during day time, and development of site for residential purposes would arguably result in a reduction in traffic congestion problems in Laundry Lane.

The illustrative drawings submitted with the application show that the site can accommodate a terrace of three and a pair of dwellings, with reasonable garden sizes for a town centre location, and still allow for improvement in the width of Laundry Lane immediately outside the site. I do not therefore consider the proposal to constitute overdevelopment of the site.

With regard to relationship with and privacy of adjoining residential properties, particularly those fronting The Mall, a condition could be imposed, should the application be approved, requiring the retention of the rear wall of the existing building, to maintain privacy. However, whilst some overlooking may result from rear upper floor windows, the distances involved (some 20 metres) between the rear of properties would be acceptable in this urban location. Similarly, any views into garden areas of properties fronting Trafalgar Road would be across Laundry Lane and involve a distance which would not result in unacceptable level of overlooking and loss of privacy.

The main issue and the sole reason why the application was previously recommended for refusal, is the question of access by emergency vehicles, particularly fire appliances.

Following deferral of consideration of the previous submission, the applicant's agent has met on site with a representative of the Fire and Rescue Service, as a result of which an area of land has been identified which can be used for the turning of fire appliances. Although it may be necessary to improve the surface of this area, in principle, its provision as a turning area would overcome the objections of the Fire and Rescue Service and allow the provision of adequate access within adopted perimeters. However, I am not convinced that the provision of this area for the turning of fire appliances would totally overcome the concerns previously raised by the Chief Fire Officer. In particular, concern was expressed regarding the level of lighting within the area which was considered to be poor, and in order to ensure that this area was available for access at all times, it would be necessary for this area to be a "strictly no parking area" with a permanent access agreement. Representative of the Fire and Rescue Service has indicated that use of lockable bollards across the garage forecourt would be acceptable as long as the fire service is provided with a key. Furthermore, concerns that residents or their guests may still park in this area are understood but it was considered that all reasonable precautions would have been taken to prevent this and the risk would be acceptable.

Whilst it may be possible for a fire appliance to turn within the garage forecourt to Bedford Court, subject to this area being unobstructed, this area of land is not within the ownership of the applicant. The applicant has sought to exercise control over this area by entering into an agreement with the residents of Bedford Court effectively requiring this area to be kept clear of parked vehicles or any other obstruction which would otherwise impede access to emergency vehicles and to remove any vehicles or obstruction at the request of the crew of any emergency vehicle. The Council is not party to this agreement, although it may be possible to enforce the requirements of the agreement by requiring the applicant to enter into a separate planning obligation with the Council. Legal advice has been sought in this respect and I am advised that the Council, as Local Planning Authority could enforce against the developer and his successors in title should the other agreement not be complied with. However, I consider that the need for such an agreement highlights the deficiencies in the site to provide for development in an acceptable form. In particular, I am concerned that use of such an obligation or a Grampian Condition would require an ongoing commitment by a third party to make provision for the turning space and, notwithstanding the legal advice received in this respect, I would question the enforceability of this requirement once the development had been completed or occupied.

HUMAN RIGHTS

JUSTIFICATION FOR RECOMMENDATION

Having given due regard and appropriate weight to all material considerations referred to in this report, I consider that the proposal represents development of a brownfield site within the Development Envelope which is acceptable in principle. However, I consider that the limited width and alignment of roads over which the site is accessed creates difficulties in accessing the site, particularly by large vehicles including fire appliances. Whilst the applicant has sought to overcome this difficulty through the provision of a turning area on third party land, I do not consider that this represents a practical solution to the problems.

RECOMMENDATION - REFUSAL

Conditions/Reasons:

Reason: The Local Planning Authority is not satisfied that adequate provision can be made for access by and turning of fire appliances and, in consequence, the proposal is contrary to Policies G4 (General Locational Criteria for Development), D1 (Standards of Design) and TR7 (Highway Considerations for New Development) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.

TCP/13425/D P/00984/04 Parish/Name: Newport Ward: Carisbrooke West

Registration Date: 06/05/2004 - Outline Planning Permission

Officer: Mr. A. Pegram Tel: (01983) 823575

Applicant: Mr P Dodds & Mr T Chatfield

Demolition of bungalow; outline for 8 dwellings

50 Gunville Road, Newport, Isle Of Wight, PO305LF

REASON FOR COMMITTEE CONSIDERATION

The local Member, Councillor Mrs Foster, has requested that this application is determined by the Development Control Committee on the basis that the site has been the subject of previous applications which were particularly contentious and she is aware that the current submission has attracted a number of letters of representation.

This application was considered by members of the Development Control Committee at the meeting held on 7 December 2004 where it was resolved to defer consideration of the application in order that further negotiations could take place with the applicant’s agent in respect of the proposal. In particular, members were concerned that proposal before them represented over development of the site resulting in a poor layout and dwellings with limited private amenity space. Members were also concerned that there was a general lack of play space for children in this locality and felt that the development should incorporate such a facility.

Following deferral of the application further discussions have taken place with the applicant’s agent which has resulted in the submission of revised plans. This report has been amended to take into account the alterations to the plans and all additions to the report are produced in bold type for ease of reference.

PROCESSING INFORMATION

This is a minor application, the processing of which has gone beyond the prescribed 8 week period for determination of applications due to the negotiations over siting of dwellings and layout, case officer workload, the need for Committee consideration and deferral of the application for further negotiations.

LOCATION AND SITE CHARACTERISTICS

Application relates to site, presently forming relatively large curtilage to a detached bungalow located on eastern side of Gunville Road approximately 80 metres south of its junction with Taylor Road. Site has frontage to Gunville Road of approximately 13 metres with maximum width of approximately 30 metres and a depth of some 49 metres.

The properties adjoining part of southern boundary and to east of site were constructed in recent years, forming part of the Carisbrooke Park Estate. Roadway (Kestrel Way) which serves properties to south of application site terminates immediately adjacent south eastern corner of the site.

Application site falls gently in easterly direction away from road, and is presently the large and mature garden to the existing bungalow within the site. The immediate area is characterized by a mix of dwelling types with longer established properties fronting Gunville Road and the more recent and higher density development to the east, including terraced properties two and three storeys in height.

RELEVANT HISTORY

TCP/13425/C – P/00802/03 – Application for demolition of dwelling and outline for 8 dwellings, garages, parking and alterations to vehicular access onto Gunville Road refused July 2003 on grounds that the proposed access was unsatisfactory to serve the proposed development by reason of unacceptable visibility therefore adding unduly to hazards to highway users. In addition, it was considered that the proposed courtyard area represented an undesirable arrangement of parking, garages and maneuvering area likely to result in uncontrolled intensification of parking in excess of that indicated on the plan and therefore contrary to Policy TR16 (Parking Policies and Guidelines) of the IOW Unitary Development Plan.

DETAILS OF APPLICATION

Application seeks permission for demolition of the bungalow within the site and outline consent for 8 dwellings, comprising 6 houses and 2 flats. Submitted plans show 2 flats in a 2 storey building fronting Gunville Road with 3 pairs of semi-detached dwellings to rear with 8 parking places, 1 for each unit, and access road off Kestrel Way. This proposal does not involve formation of vehicular access directly onto Gunville Road.

Following further discussions with the applicant’s agent, revised plans have been submitted showing relatively minor alterations to the layout of buildings within the site. The changes generally relate to the footprint and orientation of the buildings and the applicant’s agent explains in a letter which accompanies the revised plans that the scheme has been amended to show six two bedroom dwellings in lieu of three bedrooms as previously indicated. In addition, it is understood that the applicants agent has consulted the title deeds for the property as a result of which, the northern boundary has been slightly realigned. These alterations to the plan have resulted in a modest increase in the size of the private amenity space to each dwelling. Applicant’s agent has requested that these revised plans are presented to the Committee for consideration.

DEVELOPMENT PLAN/POLICY

Planning Policy Guidance Note 3 (PPG3) – Housing, sets out Government’s policies and provides guidance on a range of issues relating to the provision of housing. In particular it emphasizes that the Government is committed to promoting more sustainable patterns of development and minimizing the amount of greenfield land being taken for development. This can be achieved by employing a range of measures, including concentrating most additional housing development within urban areas and making more efficient use of land by maximizing the reuse of existing buildings. Guidance note indicates that national target is that by 2008 60% of additional housing should be provided on previously developed land and through conversion of existing buildings. In terms of making best use of land, guidance note advises that local planning authorities should consider range of measure, including seeking greater intensity of development, particularly in areas with good public transport accessibility such as city, town, district and local centres and around major nodes along good quality public transport corridors.

Proposal is considered to represent development of a brownfield site which is located the development envelope as defined in the IOW Unitary Development Plan. Relevant policies of the plan are considered to be as follows:

S1 – New developments will be concentrated within existing urban areas.

S2 – Developments will be encouraged on land which has been previously developed (brownfield sites) rather than undeveloped (Greenfield) sites.

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 unidentified sites, enough new land will be allocated to enable this target to be met and to provide a range of choice and affordability.

G1 – Development Envelopes for Towns and Villages

G4 – General Locational Criteria for Development.

D1 – Standards of Design

D2 – Standard for Development within the site

H4 – Unallocated Residential Development to be restricted to defined settlements

H6 – High Density Residential Development

TR7 – Highway Considerations for New Development

TR16 – Parking Policies and Guidelines.

CONSULTEE RESPONSES

Highway Engineer recommends conditions should application be approved.

Comments of the Council's Ecology Officer have been sought in response to suggestion that newts and bats are present within this site. He comments that there is no pond on site, although newts will use areas of rough ground at times during the year. However, he advises that the site is extremely unlikely to harbour Great Crested Newts, which are the only protected species, and consequently this is not a legitimate planning constraint. With regard to the possible presence of bats, he advises that many species will roost in buildings and Pipistrelle Bats, the most frequent species in built up areas, will roost in bungalows. All bats are protected under United Kingdom and European legislation and presence or otherwise of bats in a building proposed for demolition cannot be ruled out and is a material consideration.

The Ecology Officer advises that, ideally, the property should be checked for the presence of a bat roost prior to determination of the application. However, in this instance, the applicant does not occupy the dwelling and he advises that if access to the property proves to be impossible, then a planning condition should be imposed requiring a bat survey to be carried out by a licensed consultant prior to demolition. In the event of a bat roost being found, a licence will be required from DEFRA.

Southern Water advise that the sewer which serves this site runs to the north and their records indicate a considerable number sewer incidents in this section of the road, some of which include flooding. However, they are all referred to as being caused by blockages on the system and not due to the sewers being overloaded by the flow. There is a separate surface water sewer available in Gunville Road which should limit the amount of surface water entering the foul sewer which Southern Water would want to eliminate completely on redevelopment of any site.

PARISH/TOWN COUNCIL COMMENTS

Not applicable.

THIRD PARTY REPRESENTATIONS

Application has attracted 12 letters from local residents objecting to proposal and/or expressing concern with regard to the following issues:

Over development of site resulting in properties with insufficient garden area and play space.

Increase noise levels from activity of residents and vehicle movements.

Traffic generation creating highway hazard and danger to children playing in Kestrel Way.

Proposal will lead to more vehicles parked in Gunville Road and will exacerbate parking problems in area.

Kestrel Way too narrow for large vehicles/emergency vehicles and is often congested with parked cars.

Several residents comment that proposal does not allow access to Gunville Road although others consider this to be of benefit.

Existing access road (Kestrel Way) shared by both vehicles and pedestrians – separate safe footpath should be provided.

Parking bays adjacent access to site inappropriately placed as maneuvering vehicles create hazard to pedestrians.

Site has history of refusal for development.

Loss of trees and adverse impact on wildlife.

Hedge surrounding site should be retained to protect privacy of neighbouring properties.

Adequacy and means of drainage questioned – inadequate room for soakaways.

Submitted plans contain no finished floor levels.

Plans submitted with application misleading – streetscene does not include existing bungalow.

The right of access over Kestrel Way and, in particular an area of land at the end of the road has been questioned. Matters relating to rights of way are not relevant to the consideration of a planning application. However, in this instance, Members are advised that Kestrel Way is an adopted highway with the exception of the turning area adjacent the application site which has been retained in private ownership. In accordance with the Town and Country Planning (General Development Procedure) Order 1995, an applicant is required to serve notice on all parties who are owners of any part of the land to which the application relates. In this instance, the applicants have served notice on the owners of the bungalow and the person who has retained ownership of the turning area in Kestrel Way. This issue has been clarified further with the applicants agent and I am satisfied that the correct procedures have been carried out.

Additional letter received from local resident accompanied by copy of their original objection submitted in respect of the proposal. Grounds for objection are already summarised in this report, in addition to which, the resident questions on what grounds the Planning Department would recommend approval, albeit conditional, for the overdevelopment of the site with associated significant impact on residents of Kestrel Way. He suggested that, if the Authority are inclined to grant approval of development of the site, a smaller scheme should be considered, notwithstanding the shortcomings already highlighted in his original objection.

Copy of a letter from a local resident to the MP, Mr A Turner, was also received in respect of proposal suggesting that no notices were posted publicising the application and that their human rights under the 1998 Act have been abused.

CRIME AND DISORDER IMPLICATIONS

No crime and disorder implications anticipated.

EVALUATION

Determining factors in consider application are whether proposal is acceptable in principle and whether development of site as proposed would represent overdevelopment in a form which does not reflect the prevailing pattern of development in the area or is likely to give rise to adverse impacts on neighbouring properties such as overlooking.

Site presently forms generous curtilage to an existing detached bungalow, demolition of which forms part of the current submission. Therefore, I consider that site, by definition, is a brownfield site. Furthermore, site is located within the development boundary as defined on the Unitary Development Plan. Therefore, redevelopment of site for residential purposes is acceptable in principle.

Site is located immediately adjacent to and would be accessed from Carisbrooke Park Estate, an area characterizes by relatively high density development comprising a mix of housing types ranging from single to three storeys in height. Longer established development fronting Gunville Road is of lower density generally comprising detached and semi detached properties in large gardens. The proposed development would be of similar density to the more modern housing development to the east and, although current application seeks outline consent only, information accompanying the submission indicates that building fronting Gunville Road itself would be two storeys in height providing two flats and of similar scale to neighbouring buildings. Footprint of buildings shown on the submitted plans would suggest that the development will provide two/three bedroomed units. I consider that the layout, density and style of development proposed is compatible with the surrounding area and, in particular, the more modern development immediately adjacent site on the Carisbrooke Park Estate. Given character of the area, I do not consider that proposal can be considered as overdevelopment of this site.

Previous application for redevelopment of site also included provision of 8 units of accommodation, garages, parking and alterations to vehicular access. This particular proposal involved access directly onto Gunville Road. It is important to note that this application was refused solely on grounds relating to highway and parking matters. In particular, the proposed access was considered to be unsatisfactory to serve the proposed development by reason of unacceptable visibility, thereby adding to hazards of highway users and it was also considered that the courtyard layout would represent an undesirable arrangement of parking/garaging and maneuvering likely to result in uncontrolled intensification of parking in excess of the adopted guidelines. Current proposal does not involve vehicular access directly onto Gunville Road and the development would be served via an access from an estate road from within the neighbouring development.

Concern has been expressed by local residents regarding the traffic likely to be generated by this proposal, the potential adverse impact on highway safety in the area, parking congestion and the adequacy of Kestrel Way to serve the development. Notwithstanding the possibility of vehicles parked on the highway, Kestrel Way is of adequate width to enable two cars to pass and to accommodate emergency and service vehicles. Kestrel Way presently serves 42 properties and varies in width along its length. The main section of Kestrel Way off Fieldfare Road has a carriageway width of approximately 5 metres whilst the section which would give access to the application site is approximately 4.5 metres wide. The advice contained in Design Bulletin 32 and the companion guide Places, Streets and Movements, suggests that a road with a width of 4.8 metres would be suitable to serve up to 50 dwellings and a road of 4.1 metres in width would be suitable for up to and around 25 dwellings. The number of dwellings to be provided on the application site together with the existing dwellings accessed from that section of Kestrel Way over which the application site would be approached would not exceed the number specified in DB32.

The access road within the site itself is shown on the submitted plans to be for the most part approximately 3 metres wide, although given the limited length of this section of road and number of dwellings it serves, this is not necessarily considered to be inadequate. However, the roadway could be increased in width if this is considered necessary and I am satisfied that this matter can be addressed when dealing with a subsequent application for approval of reserved matters or full planning permission. With regard to level of parking, site is located within Zone 3 for the purpose of applying the Council’s parking guidelines and I am satisfied that the level of parking to be provided is appropriate for this location. In the absence of any objection from the Highway Engineer, I do not consider that refusal of application on grounds relating to level of parking and/or highway safety would be sustainable. Having regard to these factors, it is considered that the current proposal overcomes the reasons for refusal of the previous application.

Site is enclosed in part by hedgerows and contains several trees. Whilst proposal would necessitate removal of the trees within the site, these are considered to be of limited merit and amenity value and I do not consider that their loss would justify refusal of planning permission. The natural growth along the eastern boundary of the site does provide a degree of screening, although this does not form the common boundary with gardens of neighbouring properties and provision of appropriate boundary treatment can be addressed when considering a subsequent application for approval of reserved matters or full planning permission. Furthermore, at such time careful consideration can also be given to the design of the buildings and positioning of windows in order to minimize potential for overlooking and loss of privacy to neighbouring properties. In this respect, although current submission seeks outline planning permission, siting is to be considered at this stage and I am satisfied that the layout of the development is such that unacceptable overlooking and loss of privacy is unlikely to occur.

Whilst reference has been made in letters of representation to the level of information and/or inaccuracies in the submitted plans, Members are reminded that this is an outline application with all matters reserved for subsequent approval, with the exception of siting and means of access. Should Members be minded to approve the application, details accompanying any subsequent submission for approval of reserved matters or full planning permission will be expected to be accompanied by full details of the proposal, including finished floor levels.

With regard to issues relating to impact on wildlife and drainage, I would draw Members attention to comments of the relevant consultees detailed in the Consultee Responses section of this report.

Notwithstanding Members concerns with regard to this proposal, I remain of the opinion that the layout and density of development is not dissimilar to that on the adjacent Carisbrooke Park Estate. The applicant’s agent indicates that it is his client’s intention to build two bedroom dwellings within this site, in lieu of three bedroomed units as previously indicated thereby reducing the level of occupancy within each dwelling. This in turn reduces the footprint of the buildings, increasing the size of the private amenity space.

Members indicated a desire to see the provision of a children's play area as part of the proposed development, particularly given location of the site adjacent a substantial modern residential estate (Carisbrooke Park). In this respect, I consider that it would be unreasonable to require the applicant to provide a play area on this site, which is of limited size and that any such provision should have been made as part of the more substantial estate development to the east. In any event, I consider that the area is reasonably well served by existing recreational facilities, including the Victoria Recreation Ground.

Concern was expressed that no notices were posted in the vicinity of the site publicising the application and that human rights under the 1998 Act have been abused. With regard to the publicity of the application, information held on the application file confirms that two public notices were displayed in respect of the proposal, one at the end of Kestrel Way and one on the Gunville Road frontage. Matters relating to human rights form part of the consideration of the application and the potential impacts on neighbouring residents have been considered.

I remain of the opinion that, given location of site and character of surrounding area, proposal is acceptable in terms of density and layout of dwellings.

HUMAN RIGHTS

In coming to this recommendation to grant planning permission consideration has been given to the rights set out in Article 8 (Right to Privacy) and Article 1 of the First Protocol (Right to Peaceful Enjoyment of Possessions) of the European Convention on Human Rights. The impacts this development might have on the owners/occupiers of other property in the area and other third parties have been carefully considered. Whilst there may be some interference with the rights of these people this has to be balanced with the rights of the applicant to develop the land in the manner proposed. Insofar as there is an interference with the rights of others it is considered necessary for the protection of the rights and freedom of the applicant. It is also considered that such action is proportional to the legitimate aim of the Council’s Unitary Development Plan and in the public interest.

JUSTIFICATION FOR RECOMMENDATION

Having given due regard and appropriate weight to all material considerations referred to in this report, I am satisfied that development of the site for residential purposes is acceptable in principle. Furthermore, I am satisfied that proposal makes efficient use of a brownfield site within the defined settlement and, in particular, that site is of adequate size to accommodate number of dwelling proposed in a form compatible with neighbouring development and without having excessive or unacceptable impact on the amenities of the area in general and neighbouring residential occupiers in particular.

RECOMMENDATION – Approval

Conditions/Reasons:

1	Time limit - outline - A01
2	Time limit - reserved - A02
3	Approval of the details of the design and external appearance of the building(s) and the landscaping of the site (hereinafter called "the reserved matters") shall be obtained from the Local Planning Authority in writing before any development is commenced. Reason: In order to secure a satisfactory development and be in accordance with policies S6 (Standards of Design), D1 (Standards of Design), D2 (Standards of Development Within the Site), D3 (Landscaping), TR7 (Highway Consideration for New Development) of the IW Unitary Development Plan.
4	Vehicular access - J30
5	Timing of occupation - J11
6	No building/dwelling hereby permitted shall be occupied until space has been laid out within the site and drained and surface in accordance with details that have been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority in writing for 8 cars to be parked and for vehicles to be loaded and unloaded and for vehicles to turn so that they may enter and leave the site in forward gear. The space shall not thereafter be used for any purpose other than that approved in accordance with this condition. Reason: In the interests of highway safety and to comply with policy TR7 (Highway Considerations) of the IW Unitary Development Plan.
7	No development shall take place until a detailed scheme, including calculations and capacity studies, have been submitted and agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority indicating the means of foul and surface water disposal. Any such agreed foul and surface water disposal system shall indicate connection points on the system that adequate capacity exists, including any reasonable repairs which may be required, or shall provide for attenuation measures to ensure any additional flows do not cause flooding or overload the existing system. No dwelling shall be occupied until such systems have been completed in accordance with the approved details. Reason: To ensure an adequate system of foul drainage is provided for the development in compliance with Policy U11 (Infrastructure and Services Provision) of the IOW Unitary Development Plan.
8	No work in respect of the demolition of the dwelling within the site shall commence until such time as a survey has been carried out by a competent licensed consultant to ascertain whether bats are present within the building. Thereafter, a report on the results of the survey shall be submitted to and agreed with the Local Planning Authority. Reason: In the interests of nature conservation and to comply with Policy C8 (Nature Conservation as a Material Consideration) of the IOW Unitary Development Plan.
9	No building on any part of the development hereby permitted shall exceed [two storeys] in height. Reason: In the interests of the amenities and character of the area and to comply with policy D1 (Standards of Design) of the IW Unitary Development Plan.

RECOMMENDATION 2 - That a letter is sent to the applicant drawing attention to the requirements of Condition 8 and advising that, in the event of bats being present within the building, it will be necessary to obtain a licence from DEFRA prior to demolition of the building.

TCP/19614/C P/00153/05 Parish/Name: Fishbourne Ward: Binstead

Registration Date: 26/01/2005 - Full Planning Permission

Officer: Mr. M. Grantham Tel: (01983) 823570

Applicant: Mr & Mrs de Payer

Alterations; conversion of garage into study; single storey extension to form replacement garage and enlarge hall (revised scheme)

2 Alma Cottages, Fishbourne Lane, Ryde, PO334EU

REASON FOR COMMITTEE CONSIDERATION

The Local Member, Councillor E Fox has requested that this application is reported to Committee due to considerable local concern at the impact of the proposal on the existing pair of cottages and the special characteristics of the area around “The Green”.

PROCESSING INFORMATION

This is a minor application, the processing of which will have taken eleven weeks to the date of the committee meeting. The application has exceeded the prescribed eight week period for the determination of planning applications due to the need for committee consideration.

LOCATION & SITE CHARACTERISTICS

Application relates to a Victorian semi detached property located in a quiet lane. Other properties in the locality are of mixed types and styles.

The site rises slightly from the road and is fairly open to the front. The application property is set back from the road with gravelled parking area to the front. There is a vehicle driveway between the site and the adjacent property which gives good spacing between the two properties.

RELEVANT HISTORY

TCP 19614 B, Alterations; conversion of garage into study; single storey extension to form replacement garage & enlarge hall; single storey extension to enlarge sitting room - refused April 2004.

DETAILS OF APPLICATION

The revised application seeks consent for the conversion of the existing garage to extra living accommodation and the construction of a replacement pitched roof garage to the front of the existing garage coming level with the front existing wall of the property. There is also a small addition between the proposed garage and the main dwelling to create a larger hallway and entrance.

DEVELOPMENT PLAN/POLICY

Site is located within the development envelope boundary. Relevant Unitary Development Plan policies are as follows:

S6 – All Development will be Expected to be of a High Standard of Design

D1 – Standards of design

H7 - Extension and Alteration of Existing Properties

G4 – General Locational Criteria for Development

TR7 – Highway Considerations for New Development

CONSULTEE RESPONSES

Highway Engineer confirms there are no highway implications.

PARISH/TOWN COUNCIL COMMENTS

None

THIRD PARTY REPRESENTATIONS

The application has attracted six letters of objection from the occupants of four properties. The points raised are summarised as follows:

Proposal out of keeping with the existing property and the immediate location, detrimental to the existing cottage and “The Green”.

Affects symmetry, out of scale and character with cultural and architectural balance of properties.

Overdevelopment of the site.

Loss of light and privacy and overlooking of the adjacent property, intrusive.

Concerns over the publicity of the application.

CRIME AND DISORDER IMPLICATIONS

No crime and disorder implications are anticipated.

EVALUATION

Determining factors are policy considerations, amenities currently enjoyed by adjoining property occupiers and how the development will impact on the character of the original dwelling and the amenity of the area.

With regards to the neighbouring property and concern relating to the loss of light and amenity, given the position of the neighbouring door and window on the elevation facing the proposal and the distance between, I am satisfied that the proposal presents a minimal impact on the adjacent property.

With regard to concerns relating to a detrimental impact on the locality, there is a mix of properties in the area. Given the design and position of the proposed single storey garage with pitched roof that would not project forward of the front wall of the property, provided that appropriate matching materials are used and after “weathering in”, there would be no detrimental impact on the character of the area or the property itself and the proposal could not be considered to be overdevelopment.

Regarding concerns over the publicity for the application, I am satisfied that adequate publicity has been carried out.

HUMAN RIGHTS

In coming to this recommendation to approve planning permission consideration has been given to the rights set out in Article 8 (Right to Privacy and Article 1 of the First Protocol (Right to Peaceful Enjoyment of Possessions) of the European Convention on Human Rights. The impacts this development might have on the owners/occupiers of other properties in the area and other third parties have been carefully considered. Whilst there may be some interference with the rights of these people this has to be balanced with the rights of the applicant to develop the land in the manner proposed. Insofar as there is an interference with the rights of others it is considered necessary for the protection of the rights and freedom of the applicant. It is also considered that such action is proportional to the legitimate aim of the Council’s Unitary Development Plan and in the public interest.

JUSTIFICATION FOR RECOMMENDATION

Having given due regard and appropriate weight to all material considerations, the proposed development is acceptable, subject to the use of appropriate materials in accordance with policy.

RECOMMENDATION – APPROVAL

Conditions/Reasons:

Time limit - full - A10

No development shall take place until samples of materials to be used in the construction of the external surfaces of the development hereby permitted have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.

Reason: In the interests of the amenities of the area and to comply with policy D1 (Standards of Design) of the IW Unitary Development Plan.

Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995 (or any Order revoking and re-enacting that Order, with or without modification), no windows/dormer windows (other than those expressly authorised by this permission) shall be constructed in the north elevation of the development hereby approved.

Reason: In the interests of the character and amenities of the area and to comply with policy D1 (Standards of Design) of the IW Unitary Development Plan.

TCP/22370/C P/02070/04 Parish/Name: Ryde Ward: Ryde South West

Registration Date: 25/10/2004 - Reserved Matters

Officer: Mr. J. Fletcher Tel: (01983) 823598

Applicant: Westbury Homes Ltd

Demolition of factory buildings; residential development of 58 houses & 3 storey block of 8 flats with parking/garages & associated access roads, (aorm) (Application to be determined by Development Control Committee) (revised plans)

east of Winston Close/north of Grange Avenue existing industrial site south of, Sherbourne Avenue, Ryde, PO33

REASONS FOR COMMITTEE CONSIDERATION

This is a reserved matter application following the granting of an outline consent it is therefore a major submission in excess of 20 units requiring determination by the Committee.

PERFORMANCE INFORMATION

Application was received in October 2004 and will have taken sixteen weeks to the date of the Committee meeting. Application has exceeded the prescribed thirteen week period for determination of major planning application due to a need to carry out negotiation on detail issues and the need for Committee consideration.

LOCATION AND SITE CHARACTERISTICS

Former industrial site having a total area of approximately 2.5 hectares. Site is rectangular in shape although omits the existing former single storey warehouse building and parking area. Site is accessed off Sherbourne Avenue which is an adopted highway consisting of carriageway, grass verges and footpaths. Area is characterised mainly by residential development to the south west and north and has Mayfield C of E Middle School abutting in part its northern and eastern boundaries.

Site has recently been the subject of demolition and site clearance having now been cordoned off with a view to its future residential development.

Site accessed off the southern end of Sherbourne Avenue. Existing landscape features on the site are restricted to boundary trees within the site but abutting the eastern boundary and partially within and partially adjacent to the southern boundary within the garden areas are the properties which front Grange Avenue further to the south.

In terms of adjacent development the following applies:

Abutting northern boundary in part are properties 36 and 37 Sherbourne Avenue with the remainder being the Mayfield C of E Middle School.

Abutting the eastern boundary in part is the playing fields of the Mayfield C of E Middle School with the remainder being the curtilage of flats 9 to 19 and 21 to 31 Mountbatten Drive.

Abutting southern boundary are the rear gardens of properties 2 to 30 Grange Avenue.

Abutting the western boundary are properties 4 and 5 Winston Close and rear garden of properties which front Winston Avenue.

Site is virtually level apart from an embankment along the western boundary where the site slopes down and within that embankment is an area of trees and scrub.

RELEVANT HISTORY

Outline consent granted for residential development accessed off Sherbourne Avenue; increased site area to include community building and open space area between Sherbourne Avenue and Winston Close. That consent was granted in June 2004 and was subject of a legal agreement. That legal agreement covered the following:

Ensuring relocation of former industrial premises to Westridge Business Park to ensure proposal will result in no loss of employment.

The payment of an education contribution of £100,000.

The transference to the local community of the existing single storey industrial building in the north western corner of the site along with the proposed surrounding open space area.

Provision of a small area of land in the north eastern corner abutting the school to be used in conjunction with the adjoining education use.

The provision of affordable housing as an appropriate proportion of the overall development.

That approval is also subject of a number of conditions the most significant of which are itemised as follows:

Submission of a detailed foul and surface water sewage system.

Provision of a parking standard on site not to exceed 1.5 spaces per unit.

Submission of details of all boundary treatments.

Access shall be off the existing access in the north western corner of the site and pedestrian vehicular access shall be made into the north eastern boundary linking the school with the residential roads.

Details shall be submitted providing traffic calming for the whole length of Sherbourne Avenue in compliance with advice contained within Design Bulletin 32.

DETAILS OF APPLICATION

This is a Reserved Matter application following the issuing of the abovementioned outline consent and indicates a total of sixty six dwellings in a mixture of two, to three storeys in height all accessed off Sherbourne Avenue. In detail proposal consists of the following:

Open Market Housing

Two bed units - 11 no.

Three bed units - 35 no.

Four bed units - 7 no.

Sub total: - 53 no.

Affordable Housing

One bed units - 2 no.

Two bed units - 8 no.

Three bed units - 2 no.

Four bed units - 1 no.

Sub total: - 13 no. (11 rented, 2 shared ownership)

Total: 66

Parking Provision

97 allocated spaces including 28 garages

14 visitors’ spaces

Total: 111

Dwellings are in the main two storeys in height with exceptions being the occasional focal building within street scenes which are either 2.5 or three storeys in height.

The affordable housing units are located in the south western area of the site and includes a block of three/two storey flats with the two storey element forming the western wing where it is in close proximity to the properties which adjoin the site in Winston Close.

The proposed access road off Sherbourne Avenue serves most of the site and has a number of traffic calming features in the form of pinch points and tight radius curves with the remaining road layout being in the form of a shared surface block paved road. Proposal provides for four small scale parking courts accessed under bridging units. All garages have individual parking spaces to their fronts providing those properties with effectively two parking spaces. Proposal provides for retention of all existing boundary trees along with additional boundary tree planting. Boundary treatments have been carefully considered particularly the southern boundary with the parking areas being pulled away from those boundaries to allow for the planting of the boundary trees. Within the residential element of the proposal is a hard paved open space area with two feature trees centrally located on the site linking the shared surface cul-de-sac with the main estate road.

In terms of the area around the community learning centre building in the north western corner this is indicated as public open space with the existing treed area which abuts the western boundary being retained along with additional tree planting within the proposed public open space. The area of the land to the west of the proposed affordable flats to be fenced off through to the western boundary including the banking.

Traffic Calming

Proposal indicates table top traffic calming feature at junction of Sherbourne Avenue with Maybrick Road and, following negotiations, a speed reducing pinch point at northern end of Sherbourne Avenue. This pinch point will not be raised but will reduce width to 3.5 metres.

Drainage

Submitted details indicate foul drainage to the site will connect to the existing sewer in the playing fields adjacent to the site. All foul drainage below the roads will be adopted by Southern Water who will be paid by the Developer to carry out improvement works to off site sewers near Binstead Road.

Surface water drainage has been more difficult to resolve. Following consultation with both the Councils Highway Department and Southern Water it was clear that the existing sewer in Sherbourne Avenue could not be used. In view of this situation applicants have considered alternative discharge routes for the surface water drainage. The end result is that surface water run off will now be via a new sewer to cross the open space area and following attenuation will then run along Winston Close and Winston Avenue connecting to an existing surface water sewer at junction of Winston Avenue and Wellington Road. Part of the surface water sewage system within the site is in the form of oversized pipes required to attenuate flow. These sewers will be 900 mm diameter where they run under the proposed roads to be increased to 1500 mm in diameter where it crosses the open space. Prior to its discharge into the new sewers in Winston Close/Winston Avenue surface water will flow into a hydro brake flow control man hole. All sewers will be adopted by Southern Water including the surface water sewer that crosses the open space area. It is my understanding that a drainage easement will be incorporated within any conveyance of the open space area to the local community group.

DEVELOPMENT PLAN/POLICY

National policies covered in PPG 3 - Housing as follows:

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

· Give priority to reusing previously developed land within urban areas taking pressures off greenfield sites

· Create more sustainable patterns of development ensuring accessibility to public transport, jobs, education, health facilities etc.

· Make more efficient use of land by adopting appropriate densities with 30 to 50 units per hectare quoted as being the appropriate levels of density with even greater intensity of development being appropriate with good public transport, accessibility such as town centre sites

· Emphasise the need for good quality designs

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

· More than 1.5 parking spaces per dwelling unlikely to reflect governments emphasis on sustainable residential development

Also requires the provision of an element of affordable housing where appropriate thresholds have been exceeded.

Site is within Zone 3 of the Councils parking policy thus requiring parking provision that shall not exceed 0 to 75% of parking guidelines.

Local Plan Policies

Relevant local plan policies are as follows:

G1 - Development Envelopes for Towns and Villages

G4 - General Locational Criteria for Development

D1 - Standards of Design

D2 - Standards for Development within the Site

H4 - Unallocated Residential Development to be Restricted to Defined Settlements

TR16 - Parking Policies and Guidelines

TR7 - Highway Considerations for New Development

TR6 - Cycling and Walking

U 11 - Infrastructure and Services Provision

U2 - Ensuring Adequate Education and social community facilities

A number of trees along the boundary of the site are subject to Tree Preservation Orders with those orders relating in the main to those trees along the southern and eastern boundaries.

CONSULTEE RESPONSES

At time of preparing report the final recommendation from the Highway Engineer has yet to be received with this being due to clarifying issues of drainage etc. However Highway Engineer has considered the application in some detail covering a number of issues as follows:

Traffic Calming

In principle the traffic calming proposal in Sherbourne Avenue as submitted by the applicant is considered to be broadly acceptable. That both traffic calming features are satisfactory in terms of discharging the condition on the Outline Consent.

Secondary traffic calming proposals at northern end of Sherbourne Avenue still remain the subject of discussion. Highway Engineer does not consider that the table top junction alone fulfills the traffic calming requirement for the whole length of Sherbourne Avenue.

Surface Water Drainage

Highway Engineer has verbally agreed that the surface water drainage solution as described above is entirely acceptable with the Highway authority in merely adopting the gulleys and connections to the sewer.

Parking

Highway Engineer acknowledges that the zoning of the site which on that basis should require a maximum of 88.5 spaces. However Condition 8 of the outline consent suggests 1.5 spaces per unit is a maximum which would give a limit of 100.5 spaces. Proposal provides approximately 93 spaces and therefore is in compliance with that condition.

Highway Engineer considers it will be appropriate to allow for space to be laid out within the site for the parking of construction workers.

Apart from the above Highway Engineer suggests appropriate conditional approval.

Southern Waters comments are summarised as follows:

Drainage layout should be designed to ensure new sewers are located in highways or open space areas in order for them to be adopted.

Exact position of public sewers must be determined on site by applicants before layout is finalised.

No surface water should discharge to the foul sewer.

Foul sewer capacity check has been carried out showing that there is sufficient foul sewer capacity in the existing sewer in St Vincent's Road.

Copy of confirmation letter received from Contaminated Land Officer which expresses satisfaction that the decontamination works so far undertaken are appropriate. He does suggest however further works are required around the electricity sub station in due course.

THIRD PARTY REPRESENTATIONS

Application is subject of four letters of comment and objection, three from residents of Grange Avenue and one from resident of Winston Avenue. Points raised are summarised as follows:

· Concern that social housing is concentrated in one area. Writer is also concerned that the flats will be four storeys high.

· Writer considers that pepper potting would have been a better option and that building should not exceed two storeys in height to avoid any loss of privacy.

· Concern that the concentration in garages could lead to antisocial behaviour.

· Concern regarding the location of the substation in proximity to the boundaries of existing properties.

· Concern that occupation of the affordable housing will not be restricted to Island residents.

· Lack of recreational facilities.

· Position, size, mass and design and appearance is out of character with the neighbouring dwelling.

· One writer was impressed with the type of houses to be built but required assurances that any new boundary tree planting is carried out.

E-mail received from Secretary of Sherbourne area Residents Association which expresses concern at the series of operation which have taken place on site prior to reserved matter approval being granted. Writer also concerned the social housing element of the proposal has apparently been located in a different position to that which writer suggests was agreed at the time of the outline approval.

EVALUATION

This is a reserved matter application following outline consent with the reserved matters for consideration being siting, design, external appearance and landscaping. Therefore the application will be assessed on those four issues and where appropriate covering those issues which are specifically referred to in any conditions attached to the outline consent.

Siting

Firstly for Members information the density on this site is calculated at 44 units per hectare. The layout itself is fairly traditional in form being mainly in the form of houses each with private garden amenity space. Houses themselves with one or two exceptions front onto the road albeit in close proximity to the back edge of footway. Parking provision is more than adequate with again a high percentage of the dwellings having their own on site parking with the remaining dwellings being in the form of small parking courtyards. Each courtyard is of a small compact size again with units either side fronting the road and which also overlook courtyard providing security. Negotiations have resulted in these parking courtyard areas to be pulled away from rear boundaries to existing adjoining properties to enable landscaping to be carried out. This along with the provision of good quality fencing should provide an adequate buffer.

The only flatted element is in the south western corner being two/three storeys in height. It is this flat block along with five housing units which make up the affordable housing provision.

Negotiations have resulted in windows overlooking the adjoining parking area and as with the other parking areas these have been set away from the adjoining boundary to provide an element of intensive planting.

The siting of the flats along with the siting of the units which act as an extension of Sherbourne Avenue all face the proposed public open space area and negotiations have resulted in these units which face that road being set back to provide an element of space in front of the units slightly more generous than those provided elsewhere on the layout. This was thought necessary to visually link the open space and the space in front of the houses and to soften the appearance when approaching from Sherbourne Avenue.

Members will note that proposal provides for 13 affordable housing units which represent slightly less than the 20 % required. This followed the negotiated reduction in height of the flat block forming part of the affordable housing units from three storeys to two storeys. This resulted in the loss of one unit and whilst it was suggested that one of the three bedroom units could have been converted in two one bedroom units I was advised that there was a clear need for a three bedroom unit a fact supported by the Council's Housing Department and therefore the reduction from 14 to 13 is considered acceptable in this case.

In general location, range and mix of affordable housing units have been recognised as being appropriate to satisfy housing needs for the area and fully supported by the nominated Housing Association.

It has been suggested that the location on site differs from that which may have been shown on the indicative layout which accompanied the outline consent. However I can find no specific records or notation which suggest any specific location for affordable housing and certainly there is no reference to any specific affordable housing location on the site within the Section 106 Agreement or the conditions attached to the outline consent. In terms of the current proposal Members are reminded that this is a Reserved Matter application with one of the matters to be considered being siting. Applicants have therefore submitted a layout which recognises the need to provide affordable housing and in this case have sited a range and mix of affordable housing units in the south western corner of the site as previously described. The applicants were requested to consider an alternative siting but did not feel in this instance it was a suggestion they could take on board having fully negotiated with the nominated Housing Association the current proposal. I would concur that the position of the Affordable Housing is acceptable in this location, for in design and appearance terms they are no different to the open market housing and there certainly would be no reason to refuse the application on the grounds that there are inappropriately located.

In general I consider that the arrangement of dwellings on the site are appropriate for this area respecting the general prevailing pattern albeit at a higher density. That density is achieved by applying the principles contained within guidance documents Design Bulletin 32, Places, Streets and Movement and the companion guide to PPG3 with the aim being to create a sense of place, sense of community.

Design/External Appearance

Members will note that the proposals relates to a mix of dwelling types being mainly terrace and semi-detached reflecting to some degree the prevailing pattern of development in the area. Applicants have states in their design statement that proposal represents:

“A strong built form has been placed either side of the access roads with straight frontages and close proximity of houses to each other. This emphasises the entrance and creates and urban street feel to the development.”

The design inevitably indicates a layout with less space about however providing the appropriate environment is produced that the close proximity of those houses creates a feeling of good neighbourliness promoting security and a high level of surveillance which is in the interest of all residents.

Applicants have stated the following:

“Here and there we have broken up these houses with wide frontage detached dwellings to provide variety and interest. Along the eastern boundary we have situated larger detached dwellings to take advantage of the views of the open school playing fields beyond.”

In terms of the design of the houses themselves the aim has been to “reflect the varied forms in the area with the use of various roof pitches between 35 and 45 degrees, dormers, bay windows and rendering etc.”

Finally the applicants consider that:

“With these houses and the layout design we believe this gives the site a strong sense of place amongst the overall development.”

Members are requested to note that the block of flats forming part of the affordable housing unit situated in the south western corner of the site have been the subject of negotiations to reduce the height of the wing of those flats nearest to the western boundary from three storeys to two storeys. This reduction in height assists in creating a block which relates more readily to the topography of the site and the domestic two storey dwellings which adjoin the western boundary fronting Winston Close. It is important that Members appreciate that the maximum height of dwellings in terms of this proposal is three storeys with the majority of the units being two storeys in height. There are no four storey units being proposed and if such a height of unit were to be proposed in the future it is extremely likely that it would be resisted as being out of character and excessive for this area.

Landscaping/Boundary Treatment

The layout plan indicates existing trees to be retained. This also indicates that the proposal will result in the loss of five existing trees all within close proximity to the southern boundary. More significantly the proposal indicates extensive additional planting particularly along the southern boundary and particularly where the parking areas are adjacent to this boundary. Proposal does result in one tree to be removed.

The fairly steep embankment which abuts the western boundary is to be untouched. Providing Members are mindful to approve the application I suggest condition requiring the fencing off of this area. This is the only area on the site which has extensive tree and shrub growth which provides a natural buffer between the properties which adjoin the western boundary and this site.

The small area of open space which links the shared surface cul-de-sac with the main access cul-de-sac is to be laid out with a hard paved finish with two feature trees in order to reduce maintenance.

The boundary treatments will be subject of appropriate conditions but Members should note that negotiations have taken place with the applicants in respect of the treatment of those boundaries which stand between the communal parking areas and the existing rear gardens of the properties in Grange Avenue. Applicants have agreed to ensure in all cases a margin for appropriate landscaping both in terms of tree planting but more significantly in terms of appropriate hedge planting along with the erection of a solid 2 metre high close boarded fence. Also applicant has agreed to introduce muted lighting possibly in the form of bollard lighting. Finally these communal parking areas will be subject of appropriate management agreements either involving the open market housing through the setting up of a management company or where the parking area relates to the affordable housing through the auspices of management of the appropriate housing association.

Drainage

The issue of surface water drainage has now been resolved through discussions with Southern Water and the Environment Agency with result that discharge is now indicated to be in the direction of Winston Close in the form previously described. By discharging in the direction of Winston Close the surface water from this site will be taken out of the existing Sherbourne Avenue sewer systems thus relieving pressures on that sewer. This solution does mean however that it would be unreasonable to pursue the applicants to fund improvements to the Sherbourne Avenue drainage system when they are not using it for discharge and have taken out a significant level of surface water discharge into it.

In terms of foul drainage this continues to discharge into the existing foul sewer within the adjoining school playing field in this regard Members should note that Southern Water are satisfied that this sewer has sufficient capacity having carried out the appropriate capacity checks.

Traffic Calming

Traffic calming in Sherbourne Avenue was a conditional requirement and again Members will note that this has been addressed by the introduction of a table top traffic calming feature at the junction of Sherbourne Avenue with Maybrick Road along with the pinch point. Highway Engineer is satisfied that this provides appropriate traffic calming function for Sherbourne Avenue.

Community Issues

Recent discussions suggest that the handing over of the open space area and the existing building to the community is now able to be expedited now the surface water drainage issue and resultant easement issue has been resolved. Obviously this will be subject to legal procedures being satisfactorily concluded.

With regard to the existing building which is to function as a community building applicants have agreed to reclad that building in agreement with the community group. I will cover this matter by condition that it fairly and reasonably relates to the proposed development.

HUMAN RIGHTS

In coming to this recommendation to grant planning permission, consideration has been given to the rights set out in Article 8 (Right to Privacy) and Article 1 of the First Protocol (Right to Peaceful Enjoyment of Possessions) of the European Convention on Human Rights. The impacts this development might have on the owners/occupiers of the other property in the area and other third parties have been carefully considered. Whilst there may be some interference with the rights of these people this has to balanced with the right of the applicant to develop the land in the manner proposed. Insofar as there is an interference with the rights of others it is considered necessary for the protection of the rights and freedom of the applicant. It is also considered that such action is proportional to the legitimate aim and in the public interest.

JUSTIFICATION FOR RECOMMENDATION

Having given due regard and appropriate weight to all material considerations referred to in this report it is considered that the reserved matters have been satisfactorily addressed resulting in an appropriate layout, arrangement of dwellings, variety of house sizes and types, provision of affordable housing, provision of open space, creation of an appropriate drainage system and provision of traffic calming in Sherbourne Avenue. I therefore consider proposal to be acceptable and recommend accordingly.

RECOMMENDATION – APPROVAL (REVISED PLANS)

Conditions/Reasons:

1	The development hereby permitted shall be begun either before the expiration of 5 years from the date of this outline permission, or before the expiration of 2 years from the date of approval of the last of the reserved matters to be approved, whichever is the later. Reason: To comply with Section 92 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.
2	The materials to be used in the construction of the external surfaces of the dwellings hereby approved shall be as specified on applicants drawing number 48-1316-006 Revision B. All development shall be carried out in accordance with those agreed details. Reason: In the interests of the amenities of the area and to comply with Policy D1 (Standards of Design) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.
3	No individual dwelling shall be occupied until the boundary treatments as specified on applicants drawing number 48-1316-001 Revision M have been implemented and any such boundary treatment shall be retained and maintained thereafter. Reason: In the interests of maintaining amenity value of the area and to comply with Policy D1 (Standards of Design) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.
4	Notwithstanding the boundary details specified on drawing number 48-1316-001 Revision M the southern boundaries to the parking areas between plots 44 and 46, 49 and 51, and 58 and 59 shall be in the form of a 2 metre high close boarded fence with such fencing being retained and maintained thereafter. No occupation shall take place of units 43 to 52 inclusive and 56 to 66 inclusive until such fencing has been erected. Reason: In the interests of the amenities of the adjoining properties in compliance with Policy D1 (Standards of Design) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.
5	No occupation shall take place of units 43 to 52 inclusive and 56 to 66 inclusive until lighting has been installed in the car parking area serving those units in accordance with details to be submitted to and agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Such lighting scheme shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details and shall be subject of an appropriate management plan. Reason: In the interests of the future occupiers and adjoining property owners in compliance with Policy D1 (Standards of Design) and Policy D14 (Light Spillage) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.
6	No development shall take place until full details of both hard and soft landscaping works have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority and these works shall be carried out as approved prior to occupation of those dwellings which abut the hard and soft landscaped areas. These details shall include hard surfacing materials for the proposed communal parking areas, shared surface block paved areas and the hard surfaced open space area between plots 9 to 12 and 36 to 38 inclusive. These details shall also include soft landscape works proposals which should include planting plans, written specifications (including cultivation and other operations associated with plant and grass establishment), schedule of plants noting species, plant sizes and proposed numbers/densities, and an implementation programme. Such soft landscaping scheme shall include for hedge planting along the southern boundary to the three parking areas between plots 44 to 46, 49 and 51 and 58 and 59. Reason: To ensure the appearance of the development in satisfactory and to comply with Policy D1 (Standards of Design) and D3 (Landscaping) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.
7	All existing tree protection works on site shall be maintained through the course of the construction works during which period the following restrictions shall apply. (a) No placement or storage of materials; (b) No placement of storage of chemicals; (c) No placement or storage of excavated soil; (d) No lighting of bonfires; (e) No physical damage to bark or branches; (f) No changes to natural ground drainage in the area; (g) No changes in ground levels; (h) No digging of trenches for surfaces, drains or sewers; and (i) Any trenches required in close proximity shall be hand dug ensuring all major roots are left undamaged. Reason: To ensure the trees and groups of trees to be retained or adequately protected from damage to health and stability throughout the construction period in the interests of the amenities of the area and to comply with Policy D3 (Landscaping) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.
8	Prior to occupation of flats 59 to 66 a 1.2 metre high railing as indicated on application drawing number 48-1316-001 Revision M shall be erected. Such railings shall be retained and maintained thereafter. Reason: In the interests of providing private amenity area for the flats in compliance with Policy D1 (Standard of Design) of the IOW Unitary Development Plan.
9	Prior to occupation of the final dwelling on site the public open space area shall be suitably landscaped and grassed in accordance with the agreed details submitted under condition. Reason: In the interests of the amenities of the area and to comply with Policy D1 (Standards of Design) and Policy D3 (Landscaping) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.
10	A landscape management plan including long term design objectives, management responsibilities and maintenance schedules for all landscape areas other than privately owned domestic gardens shall be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority prior to the occupation of the development or any phase of the development whichever is the sooner. The landscape management plan shall be carried out as approved and shall include management of the agreed lighting to the parking areas referred to in condition. Reason: To ensure long-term maintenance of hard and soft landscaped areas to comply with Policy D1 (Standards of Design) and Policy D3 (Landscaping) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.
11	Prior to occupation of the final dwelling on the site the existing building to be retained as a community building indicating on the plan hereby approved shall be clad in materials of a type and colour to be agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority. Reason: In the interests of the visual amenities of the area and to comply with Policy D1 (Standards of Design) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.
12	None of the flats hereby approved (Plots 59-66) shall be brought into use until provision has been made within the site for the secure and covered parking of a minimum of 8 bicycles as indicated on the plans hereby approved. Such provision shall be made in the form of Sheffield hoops unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority and such provision shall be retained thereafter. Reason: To ensure adequate provision for the parking of bicycles in compliance with Policy TR6 (Cycling and Walking) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.
13	Lower half of the south facing first and second floor windows of first and second floor flats (Plots 62 and 65) shall be glazed in fixed obscure glazing which shall be retained thereafter. Reason: To protect the privacy of the neighbouring properties and to comply with Policy D1 (Standards of Design) of the IOW Unitary Development Plan.

TCP/26052/B P/01400/04 Parish/Name: Ryde Ward: Binstead

Registration Date: 13/07/2004 - Outline Planning Permission

Officer: Mr. P. Stack Tel: (01983) 823575

Applicant: N W Corbin Ltd

Demolition of warehouse and workshop; outline for 7 houses and alterations to vehicular access (revised scheme) (readvertised application)

land rear of St Leonard’s - Cornerways, Binstead Road, Ryde, PO33

Application considered at meeting held on 15 February 2005 and deferred by Members to allow an opportunity to negotiate a reduction in density and possible improvements to access. Agent has requested that application, as previously considered, be formally presented to Members for determination. Therefore, previous report considered by Members is reproduced accordingly.

REASON FOR COMMITTEE CONSIDERATION

Report requested by Local Member, Councillor Fox, as he considers application raises important issues concerning highways and potential impact on adjoining residents.

PROCESSING INFORMATION

This is a minor application, the processing of which has taken 8 months to date. This is principally due to negotiation and submission of revised plans, the need for additional information to be submitted by the agent deferral from previous Committee and request by the Local Member for Committee determination.

LOCATION AND SITE CHARACTERISTICS

This irregularly shaped site is located on southern side of Binstead Hill, almost directly opposite Binstead Garage and which immediately abuts former Binstead Bakery site which has been residentially redeveloped. Site presently comprises two large vacant industrial/commercial buildings which are served by existing access between properties fronting Binstead Hill.

RELEVANT HISTORY

Application seeking outline consent for nine houses was refused in March 2004 under delegated procedure. Reasons for refusal related to excessive density of development giving rise to overlooking, loss of outlook and having over bearing impact on surrounding environment. Further reason for refusal related to inadequate and deficient detail in respect of highway visibility splays and detail in respect of capacity of existing drainage system to accept additional load.

Resubmission again seeking outline consent for nine houses was refused under delegated powers in May 2004. Reasons for refusal again related to excessive density of development and inadequate detail in respect of drainage systems. Highway reason for refusal was not included within this decision.

DETAILS OF APPLICATION

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

Originally submitted proposal proposed eight houses however, following negotiation scheme has been revised to scheme for seven houses involving a terrace of five dwellings and two detached units.

Terraced units will be located along eastern boundary of site which abuts car park area rear of Fleming Arms. Two detached units will be located towards eastern half of site. Development would utilize shared forecourt surface and provide eight off street parking spaces.

Site will be served by existing drive which previously served commercial premises between existing properties fronting Binstead Hill.

Following deferral, agent has requested formal determination by Members and a copy of his letter is appended to this report.

DEVELOPMENT PLAN/POLICY

Site is located within development envelope boundary for Ryde as identified on Unitary Development Plan.

Relevant Policies are as follows:

S1 – New Development will be Concentrated within Existing Urban Areas.

S2 – Development will be encouraged on land which has been previously developed (brown field sites).

S4 – Countryside will be Protected from Inappropriate Development

G1 – Development Envelopes

G4 – General Locational Criteria for Development

D1 – Standards of Design

H4 – Unallocated Residential Developments to be Restricted to Define Settlements.

TR7 – Highway Considerations for New Development

E3 - Resist Developments for Allocated Employment Land for Other Uses.

TR3 – Locate Development to Minimize Need to Travel

U11 – Infrastructure and Services Provision

CONSULTEE RESPONSES

Contaminated Land Officer wishes standard condition be imposed concerning site investigation to assess potential contamination.

Highway Engineer wishes standard conditions be imposed should consent be granted.

Southern Water have been consulted on drainage arrangements and their comments are awaited.

PARISH/TOWN COUNCIL COMMENTS

Not applicable.

THIRD PARTY REPRESENTATIONS

In respect of original submission six letters were received from local residents and business. Main points of objection are summarized as follows:

· Proposal represents over development of site

· Increase in noise

· Development out of character with locality

· Loss of trees

· Inadequate drainage capacity

· Detrimental impact on highway and pedestrian safety

· Potential over shadowing of adjoining properties

· Poor access arrangements

· Increased disturbance

· Accessibility for emergency vehicles

· Boundary treatments

· Adverse ground conditions

Following revised submission application re-advertised and seven letters were received from local residents and business again raising similar issues to those outlined in previous paragraph.

CRIME AND DISORDER IMPLICATIONS

No crime and disorder implications are anticipated.

EVALUATION

Proposal represents opportunity to provide residential development within previously developed land within development envelope in sustainable location. In principle therefore, proposal complies with Central Government advice on housing (PPG3) and relevant Local Authority UDP guidelines. Whilst proposal does result in loss of former employment site to which Policy E3 seeks to retain, it is not clear as to the level of employment site offered in past and in any event loss of employment land in this location would not compromise overall employment potential of area and indeed this policy did not figure in previous reasons for refusal and is not considered appropriate to reach different view on this issue now.

Principle of residential development has not been questioned in previous refusals issued on this site and proposal should be looked at in detail in order to assess appropriateness of development for locality and assess whether or not current revised scheme overcomes previous reason for refusal relating principally to over development and insufficient details in respect of drainage.

Development of site with seven dwelling units would result in density of some 50 units per hectare which is top end of suggested density guidelines contained within PPG3. Layout is similar to previously refused scheme and therefore no objection in principle can be raised to layout. In any event, given orientation of buildings and distances from adjoining development is not considered that any sustainable objection can be raised in terms of likely impacts on residential amenity.

In terms of highway and parking arrangements, site is located within parking zone 3 which requires a maximum of 75% of normal parking provision and on site provision of eight spaces complies with zonal requirements. Given Highway Engineer comments refusal on highway or associated grounds would be unreasonable and in my view unsustainable on appeal.

In respect of drainage, capacity check has been carried out by civil engineers acting on behalf applicant report suggests installation of hydro brake to control rate of flow into sewer to ensure that it is not greater than the contributing flows. Further more the amount of surface water flow entering combined public sewer can also be controlled and the use of hydro brake will in fact reduce rate of flow entering sewer when development is completed.

HUMAN RIGHTS

JUSTIFICATION FOR RECOMMENDATION

Having given due regard and appropriate weight to all material consideration referred to in this report I am of the opinion that the application site is capable of accommodating seven dwelling units as proposed without impacting significantly on neighbouring properties, highway safety or character of area in general. Proposal is therefore consistent with relevant policies of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.

RECOMMENDATION – APPROVAL (REVISED SCHEME)

Conditions/Reasons:

1	Time limit - outline - A01
2	Time limit - reserved - A02
3	Approval of the details of the design and external appearance of the building(s) and the landscaping of the site (hereinafter called "the reserved matters") shall be obtained from the Local Planning Authority in writing before any development is commenced. Reason: In order to secure a satisfactory development and be in accordance with policies S6 (Standards of Design), D1 (Standards of Design), D2 (Standards of Development Within the Site), D3 (Landscaping), TR7 (Highway Consideration for New Development) of the IW Unitary Development Plan.
4	Details of roads, etc, design and constr - J01
5	No dwelling shall be occupied until the parts of the service roads which provide access to it have been constructed, surfaced and drained in accordance with details which have been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To ensure an adequate standard of highway and access for the proposed dwellings and to comply with policy TR7 (Highway Considerations) of the IW Unitary Development Plan.
6	Visibility splays of x = 2 metres and y= 90 metres dimension shall be constructed prior to commencement of the development hereby approved and shall be maintained thereafter. Reason: In the interests of highway safety and to comply with Policy TR7 (Highway Considerations) of the IOW Unitary Development Plan.
7	Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995 (or any Order revoking and re-enacting that Order with or without modification), no gates shall be erected other than those expressly authorised by this permission/other than gates that are set back a minimum distance of 5 metres from the edge of the carriageway of the adjoining highway. Reason: In the interests of highway safety and to comply with policy TR7 (Highway Considerations) of the IW Unitary Development Plan.
8	No part of the development hereby permitted shall commence until there has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority: a) A desk-top study documenting all previous and existing land uses of the site and adjacent land in accordance with national guidance as set out in Contaminated Land Research Report Nos. 2 & 3 and BS10175: 2001; and, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority, b) a site investigation report documenting the ground conditions of the site and incorporating chemical and gas analysis identified as appropriate by the desk-top study in accordance with BS10175: 2001 – “Investigation of Potentially Contaminated Sites – Code of Practice”; and, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority, a remediation scheme to deal with any contaminant including an implementation timetable, monitoring proposals and a remediation verification methodology. The verification methodology shall include a sampling and analysis programme to confirm the adequacy of decontamination and an appropriately qualified person shall oversee the implementation of all remediation. 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.
9	The construction of buildings shall not commence until the investigator, identified in Condition No.8, has provided a report, which shall include confirmation that all remediation measures have been carried out fully in accordance with the scheme. The report shall also include results of the verification programme of post-remediation sampling and monitoring in order to demonstrate that the required remediation has been fully met. Future monitoring proposals and reporting shall also be detailed in the report. Reason: To protect the environment and prevent harm to human health by ensuring that where necessary, the land is remediated to an appropriate standard in order to comply with Part IIA of the Environmental Protection Act 1990.
10	No dwelling hereby permitted shall be occupied until space has been laid out within the site and surfaced in accordance with details that have been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority in writing for 9 cars to be parked and for vehicles to turn so that they may enter and leave the site in forward gear. The space shall not thereafter be used for any purpose other than that approved in accordance with this condition. Reason: In the interests of highway safety and to comply with policy TR7 (Highway Considerations) of the IW Unitary Development Plan.

10.

TCP/26192/C P/02353/04 Parish/Name: Newport Ward: Carisbrooke West

Registration Date: 28/01/2005 - Full Planning Permission

Officer: Mr. J. Fletcher Tel: (01983) 823598

Applicant: J Lavell

Conversion of existing property to form 7 flats; 2/3 storey extension to form 3 flats; parking & alterations to vehicular access (revised scheme)

1 Clatterford Road, Newport, Isle Of Wight, PO301PA

REASON FOR COMMITTEE CONSIDERATION

Councillor Foster, the local Member has requested that this application go before the Development Control Committee on the grounds that it involves a number of contentious issues, this being despite the fact that applicant has addressed the three previous reasons for refusal and the scheme is now supported by relevant consultees. Chairman having given due consideration to the request by the Local Councillor is not willing in this instance to override that request for Committee determination.

PROCESSING INFORMATION

This is a major application the processing of which will have taken less than 11 weeks if it is determined at this meeting. The reason for processing this application within the 13 week period required for major application is due to the applicant failing to submit an appropriate fee until 28 January 2005.

LOCATION AND SITE CHARACTERISTICS

St Mary’s Vicarage, approximately 35 metres south west of junction of Clatterford Road/High Street/ Priory road. Building stands within a treed curtilage and slopes in a series of tiers from a road frontage towards the south east. Vehicular access is off Clatterford Road located in the northern corner, which not only gives access to the dwelling but also serves side access to the rear of the property. Pedestrian access exists along the whole of the length of the north eastern boundary providing access to a Roman Villa which is a Grade I Listed Building.

Adjoining to the south west is a two storey detached house which stands at close proximity to Clatterford Road. This property stands within an extensive curtilage and has an access which runs parallel with the south western boundary of the application site. This vehicular access which is off Clatterford Road also provides access to other properties that sit in the lower land behind Clatterford Road. Adjoining the north eastern boundary are in the main rear gardens to properties which front Carisbrooke Road, being numbers 95 and 97 Carisbrooke Road. Opposite the site is car park which serves the public house, The Waverley. Site itself stands on the outside of a curve in Clatterford Road.

RELEVANT HISTORY

In September 2004 an application for a similar development was refused on grounds of:

Development likely to lead to an increase use in existing access onto classified road which would add unduly to the hazards of highway users.

Access is unsatisfactory to serve the proposed development by reason of unacceptable visibility to the south west.

Application failed to indicate how provision of the right of way to the Roman Villa is to be retained.

DETAILS OF APPLICATION

Detailed consent sought for conversion of the Vicarage to provide a total of 7 flats, 6 providing two bedroomed accommodation and 1 providing three bedroomed accommodation. 2 flats on ground floor entered via separate access one being from the south and the other from the east. Remaining 5 flats entered via the existing main entrance on the north facing elevation. Proposal involves radical internal layout alteration involving a new staircase entrance serving the first, second and third floors. The three bedroomed flat is within the third floor, largely within the roof space.

Second element relates to an extension on the western side providing 3, two bedroomed flats on ground, first and second floors accessed via a second common entrance off the north facing element of the extension.

Design of extension an exact copy of the existing building in terms of window shapes, quoins, dressing around windows, two gabled features with central valley and decorative barge boards.

In terms of the access this has been the subject of negotiations being a critical issue and the submitted plans now indicate major alterations to the existing access resulting in a 5 metre wide access linked to provision of specific radii and more significantly the visibility splay area which has been created by the removal of bushes and shrubs along the frontage of the site to the north west of the proposed access. The creation of this visibility splay area is also achieved by the removal of part of the existing picket fence in the western corner of the site. Other alterations to the frontage involve the relocation of the existing telegraph pole and a short extension of the existing pavement in the northern corner of the site to form a radii off Clatterford Road. None of these alterations involve the removal of trees.

This proposed access both serves parking provision and doubles up as a shared pedestrian access to the Roman Villa as previously described.

Proposal provides for a total of 14 parking spaces, split into a group of three to the front of the house, accessed directly off the access with the access continuing to the side of the existing property adjacent to the north eastern boundary and then curving to the rear of the property where a further 11 parking spaces and turning spaces to be provided on the top tier adjacent the rear of that property.

Proposal provides for the retention of all the important trees on the site apart from the removal of an existing Bay tree joining the south western boundary to accommodate the proposed extension and an existing Yew tree which is one of a pair of similar trees to accommodate the proposed driveway.

In terms of boundary treatments proposed driveway to finish 400 mm off the screen boundary fence with that boundary to be in a form of a dwarf retaining wall to support the access in accordance with highway requirements.

Application has been accompanied by a design statement which, in the main, covers the process of negotiations which have taken place with the Council's Highway Engineers culminating in agreement that an access can be formed providing adequate visibility in the form of submitted.

Reference is also made to the provision of access to the Roman Villa and again, reference is made to discussions with the Council’s Archaeological Officer. The result is the proposal as described whereby the pedestrian access is to effectively be shared with the vehicular access over a width of 4.2 metres serving the rear parking area with the access being widened where it extends beyond the rear of the existing building. This will be upgraded to a hardwearing surface approximately 3.5 metres wide down as far as the southern boundary of the site some 90 metres in length.

DEVELOPMENT PLAN/POLICY

Site stands within Carisbrooke Conservation Area with the south western boundary forming the edge of the conservation area. Site is also within the development envelope boundary and situated within an Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty.

National policies covered in PPG3 – House March 2000 which makes a particular reference to the following:

“Conversions of housing, buildings formally in other uses and upper floor spaces over shops can provide an important source of additional housing particularly in town centres.”

Reference also made to PPG15 – Planning and Historic Environment which covers issues relating to development within or adjacent to conservation areas which emphasises:

“New buildings shall be carefully designed to respect their setting following fundamental architectural principles of scale, height, massing and alignment and use of appropriate material.

Document also emphasises that developer has a duty of care to ensure proposed development sin Conservation Areas both preserve or enhance those areas.”

Reference also made to PPG13 – Transport and more significantly to the Companion Guide to DB32, being “Places, Streets and Movements.” The advice in this latter document should be seen in the context of the wider national policies and initiatives aimed at achieving attractive sustainable residential areas and settlements through better design.

This document covers issues such as sight lines and road junctions and emphasises that these should not be reduced to a level where danger is likely to be caused however it does state that each situation needs to be assessed on its own merits. The document provides advice in terms of the ‘X’ dimension (minor road distance) and more significantly the ‘Y’ dimension (major road distances). The ‘X’ Dimension is based on road speeds.

Relevant Local Plan Policies are as follows:-

Strategic Policies, S1, S2, S6 and S7 are appropriate.

Other Relevant Policies are as follows:

Gl - Development Envelopes for Towns and Villages

G4 - General Locational Criteria for Development

D1 - Standards of Design

D2 - Standards for Development with the Site

B6 - Protection and Enhancement of Conservation Areas

C2 - Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty

TR17 - Parking Policies and Guidelines

TR7 - Highway Considerations for New Developments

U2 - Ensuring Adequate Educational, Social and Community Facilities for the Future Population.

L10 - Open Space and Housing Development

B8 - Alterations and Extensions of Non-listed Buildings in Conservation Areas

Site is located within Parking Zone 3 of the UDP which restricts parking 0-75% of maximum non operational vehicle parking provision.

The Roman Villa as previously mentioned is a Grade I Listed Building.

CONSULTEE RESPONSES

Highway Engineer recommends condition should application be approved. Those conditions relating to the laying out of the 14 car parking spaces and 10 bicycle parking spaces, the achievement of an maximum gradient of 1 in 20 reducing to a grade 1 in 12 for the access, the identification of the visibility splay area, submission of details of road etc. relocation of utility services pole and no parking sign and submission of junction details.

Application accompanied by a letter to the applicant from the Council’s Archaeologist confirms that the provisions indicated on the submitted plan provide a permanent solution to the access issue and confirm that the provisions indicated satisfy the concerns in respect of the villa access. She also suggests that these access facilities should be secured by condition.

AONB officer raises concerns regarding certain detail elements of the proposed extension referring to the dormer windows on the south elevation, the roof line on the west elevation.

PARISH/TOWN COUNCIL COMMENTS

Not applicable.

THIRD PARTY REPRESENTATIVES

Application subject of 5 letters of objection 4 from residents of Clatterford Road including one from the adjoining property owner which abuts the south western boundary. Points raised are summarised as follows:

Concern that the increase in generation of traffic with particular reference to the safety of the access and the inadequacies of visibility. Particular reference is made to the level of use of Clatterford Road by all types of traffic.

Proposal is considered to be over development.

Reference made to the site’s location within a Conservation Area and an Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty and therefore the proposal is considered to be of insufficient quality to be sympathetic for that area. A neighbouring property to the south west expresses particular concern regarding the potential loss of privacy, loss of light, increase in noise emission associated with the use of the adjoining proposed car park. Similar concerns expressed by property owner who adjoins to the north east.

One adjoining owner is concerned that his water service supply may be damaged by the construction works relating to the proposed access road.

Application has been accompanied by one letter of support with that letter making reference to the following:

Writer considers overall appearance of this part of Carisbrooke would be greatly enhanced by allowing the development.

Reference is also made to the enhanced access to the Roman Villa which would accrue from this proposal and therefore provide a more user friendly attraction for Carisbrooke.

Finally, writer considers that this proposal would provide a much needed and desirable accommodation sadly lacking in Carisbrooke.

CRIME AND DISORDER IMPLICATIONS

Relevant officer has been given the opportunity to comment but no observations have been received.

EVALUATION

It will be noted that the general principle and architectural approach along with massing and scale and parking provision were not cited as being unacceptable in terms of the rejection of the previous application. Therefore, an assessment of this application is based on whether or not the applicants have adequately addressed the three reasons for refusal of the previous proposal for in essence this application apart from the alterations to the access is the same is that previously refused.

I therefore address these issues as follows:

Access

This has been a major issue in respect of this proposal with the first two reasons relating to this issue. Since that refusal extensive negotiations have taken place with the Highway Department who revisited the site and came to the conclusion that those reasons for refusal could be overcome by utilising land within the applicant’s control.

The main issue relates to the achievement of a suitable visibility splay of X = 2.4 metres and Y = 90 metres. Such a visibility splay would provide full sight of the approaching traffic travelling in a north easterly direction from the direction of Shorwell. Highway Engineer has identified that providing land falling within this visibility splay is retained at a height not exceeding 200 mm above the level of the existing carriageway this level of visibility, particularly the ‘Y’ measurement is achievable. Indeed onsite measurements have proven that north east approaching traffic visibility splay of 2.4 metres by 109 metres is achieved. This will involve some treatment around the base of the preserved Chestnut tree however, again measurement suggest that there will be no interference in the root ball of the existing tree.

The second issue related to the achievable gradient on the access which in this case relates to the first 5 metres of the driveway being 1 in 20 and the remaining being at a gradient of 1 in 12. Such an alteration to the gradient at the access assists in the visibility splay functioning satisfactorily.

Highway Engineer also requires turning area and particularly parking provision to be set at the appropriate level compatible with the requirements within Design Bulletin 32 and the parking policies. I can confirm that this has been achieved.

Finally, the previous refused proposal indicated the provision of a footway along the roadside boundary of the site. Further investigation however, suggest that such a footway would impinge on the root system of the mature Chestnut tree and similarly, from a traffic point of view, would result in the discharge of pedestrians into a live carriageway. Therefore, this footway has now been omitted with the visibility area effectively becoming a grass verge.

All the above has been agreed with the applicant’s consulting engineer. Obviously, these issues will be subject of appropriate conditions, which have been suggested by the Highway Engineer.

Access to the Roman Villa

As with the above this issue has also been the subject of extensive negotiation and site meeting involving Ruth Waller, the County Archaeologist who has essentially raised two issues. Firstly:

· The need for archaeological recordings to take place during any construction work which can adequately be covered by way of a condition.

· The need to ensure public right of way access is maintained and it has been agreed that this should be achieved by the following.

· To remove the existing fence.

· Take the driveway down to the eastern extent of your land holding.

· To provide a gated access to the Villa site.

· To allow unrestricted public foot access and access for occasional maintenance vehicles through your driveway to the Roman Villa.

The above can adequately be covered by condition.

The above represented the matters discussed on site and subsequent to this meeting submitted plans had been accepted by Ruth Waller providing a permanent solution to the access issue, again subject to appropriate conditions.

HUMAN RIGHTS

JUSTIFICATION FOR RECOMMENDATION

Having given due regard and appropriate weight to the material considerations outlined in this report the issues, which were the subject of the reasons for refusal, have been addressed and on that basis there is no other course of action but to recommend the proposal for approval.

RECOMMENDATION – APPROVAL (REVISED PLAN)

Conditions/Reasons:

1	Time limit - full - A10
2	Section 106 Agreement. The development permitted by this planning permission shall not be initiated by the undertaking of material operation as defined in Section 56 (4) A – D of the Town & Country Planning Act 1990 in relation to the development, until a planning obligation pursuant to Section 106 of the said Act relating to the land has been made and lodged with the Local Planning Authority and that the Local Planning Authority has notified the person submitting the same that it is to the Local Planning Authority’s approval. The said planning obligation will provide for a) sum of £19,305 (9 x £2,145) to be paid to the Local Planning Authority ads a contribution to education facilities, b) the sum of £2,610 (9 x £290) to be paid to the Local Planning Authority for the purposes of upgrading local open space and recreational facilities, c) (1) A public access by foot and occasional maintenance vehicle access via the regarded and maintained driveway. c) (2) A gated entrance to the Roman Villa site at the south eastern end of the driveway c) (3) An appropriately worded sign at the Clatterford Road entrance to the driveway guiding visitors down the driveway to the Roman villa site entrance. Reason: To ensure adequate provision of a) education facilities and b) open space and recreational facilities in compliance with Policy U2 (Ensuring adequate educational and social and community facilities for the future population), and Policy L10 (Open Space and Housing Developments) of the IOW Unitary development Plan.
3	No dwelling hereby permitted shall be occupied until space has been laid out within the site in accordance with drawing number SF880/19B for 14 cars (minimum dimension 4.8 metres x 2.4 metres) and 10 bicycles to be parked and for vehicles to turn so that they may enter and leave the site in a forward gear. The space shall not thereafter be used for any purpose other than that approved in accordance with this condition. Reason: In the interest of highway safety and to comply with Policy TR7 (Highway Considerations) and TR16 (Parking Policies and Guidelines) of the IOW Unitary Development Plan.
4	The gradient of the access shall be a maximum of 1 in 20 over the first 5 metres measured from the edge of carriageway of the adjoining highway with the balance not to exceed 1 in 12 in accordance with drawing number SF880/20 dated 14 November 2004. Reason: In the interest of highway safety and to comply with Policy TR7 (Highway Considerations) of the IOW Unitary development Plan
5	Prior to commencement of the development hereby approved a site clearance work shall be carried out within the land hatched yellow on the attached drawing forming part of this Decision Notice which shall ensure no structure, natural feature or foliage exceeds 0.2 metres in height above the level of the carriageway. Such work shall ensure no damage to the existing Horse Chestnut tree including its root system. The resultant visibility splay height restriction shall thereafter be retained and maintained and kept free of any obstruction. Reason: In the interest of highway safety and to comply with Policy TR7 (Highway Consideration) of the IOW Unitary Development Plan.
6	Development shall not begin until details of the design, surfacing and construction of any new roads, footways, accesses and car parking areas, together with details of the means of disposal of surface water drainage there from have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details. Reason: To ensure an adequate standard of highway access and drainage for the proposed dwellings and to comply with Policy TR7 (Highway Considerations) of the IOW Unitary Development
7	Development shall not begin until details of the relocation of the utility services pole and the no parking sign adjacent the existing vehicular access have been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority and thereafter implemented to the satisfaction of the Local Planning Authority. Reason: In the interest of ensuring adequate access to the proposed development and to comply with Policy TR7 (Highway Considerations) of the IOW Unitary Development Plan.
8	Development shall not begin until details of the junction between the proposed service road and the highway have been approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority; and the building shall not be occupied until that junction has been constructed in accordance with the approved details. Reason: To ensure adequate access to the proposed development and to comply with policy D1 (Standards of Design) of the IOW Unitary Development Plan.
9	The materials to be used in the construction of the external surfaces of the extension hereby permitted shall match those used in the existing building. Reason: In the interests of the amenities of the area and to comply with Policy D1 (Standards of Design) of the IOW Unitary Development
10	No development shall take place until samples of materials/details of the materials and finishes, including mortar colour to be used in the construction of the external surfaces of the development hereby permitted have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Development shall be carried our in accordance with the approved details. Reason: In the interests of the amenities of the area and to comply with Policy D1 (Standards of Design) of the IOW Unitary Development Plan
11	The doors and window frames of the building shall be constructed of timber and shall be painted and thereafter maintained to match those of the existing building. Reason: To protect the character and appearance of the existing building and to comply with Policy B8 (Alterations and Extensions to non-Listed Buildings in Conservation Areas) of the IOW Unitary Development Plan.
12	Before development is hereby approved is commenced detail drawings at a scale of at least 1:20 shall be provided and agreed by the Local Planning Authority showing construction of material detailing in respect of the proposed windows including dormer windows, eaves and bargeboard details and any other external and decorative features proposed. The construction of these detailed features shall be carried out in accordance with those agreed details. Reason: To secure a satisfactory and sympathetic form of development and compatible with the existing building in compliance with Policy D1 (Standards of Design) of the IOW Unitary development Plan.
13	No development including site clearance shall commence on the site until all trees or group of trees to be retained have been protected by fencing or other agreed barrier along a line to be agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority. Any fencing shall conform to the following specification: A 1.2 m min height chestnut paling to BS 1722 Part 4 Standard securely mounted on 1.2m min above ground height timber posts driven firmly into the ground. Such fencing or barrier shall be maintained throughout the course of the works on site during which period the following restrictions shall apply. c) No placement or storage of material d) No placement or storage of chemicals e) No placement or storage of excavated soil f) No lighting of bonfires g) No physical damage to bark or branches h) No changes to natural ground drainage in the area i) No changes to ground levels j) No digging of trenches for services, drains or sewers k) Any trenches required in close proximity shall be hand dug ensuring all major roots are left undamaged Reason: To ensure that the preserved trees and groups of trees to be retained are adequately protected to damage to health and stability throughout the construction period in the interests of the amenities of the area and to comply with Policy D3 (Landscaping) of the IOW Unitary Development Plan.
14	Existing trees which are to be retained in accordance with the approved plans shall be subject to paragraph A and B below. Such conditions shall have effect until the expiration of three years from the date of the occupation of the building hereby approved. No retained preserved tree shall be cut down, uprooted or destroyed nor shall any retained tree be topped or lopped other than in accordance with the details to be agreed with Local Planning Authority. Any topping or lopping approved shall be carried out in accordance with the BS3998 (Tree Work). If any retained preserved tree is removed, uprooted or destroyed or dies replacement tree shall be planted in the same place or a place to be agreed and that tree shall be of such size and species and shall be planted at such time as may be specified in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To ensure the protection of trees to be retained and in the interests of the amenities of the area and to comply with Policy D3 (Landscaping) of the IOW Unitary development Plan.
15	No development shall take place until full details of both hard and soft landscaping works have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. These works shall be carried out as approved prior to occupation of any of the units hereby approved. Such scheme shall specify position and species and size of any trees and shrubs to be planted along with timing of such planting and shall include the provision for their maintenance during the first 5 years from the date of planting. Scheme shall also include construction method of any proposed access or parking areas within the proximity of trees which shall accord with the arboriculture practice note (Trees in Focus Practical Care and Management issues by the Arboriculture Advisory Information Service dated 1999.) Any such detailed porous surface finish shall be carried out in accordance with those agreed details and shall be retained and maintained thereafter. Reason: To ensure the appearance of the development is satisfactory and to comply with Policy D1 (Standards of Design), and D3 (Landscaping) of the IOW Unitary Development Plan.
16	No development shall take place until a detailed scheme including calculations and capacity studies have been submitted to and agreed with the Local Planning Authority indicating the means of surface water and foul drainage disposal. Any such agreed surface water and foul drainage system shall indicate connections at points on the system where adequate capacity exists or shall provide for attenuation measures to ensure any additional flows do not cause flooding or overload the existing system. Any drainage system involving a pump and rising main shall ensure future maintenance of those drainage systems. Reason: To ensure an adequate system of storm and foul water drainage is provided for the development in compliance with Policy U11 (Infrastructure and services provision) of the IOW Unitary development Plan.
17	A landscape management plan, including long-term design objectives, management responsibilities and maintenance schedules for all landscape areas, other than privately owned domestic gardens, shall be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority prior to the occupation of the development or any phase of the development, whichever is the sooner. The landscape management plan shall be carried out as approved. Reason: To ensure long-term maintenance of the landscaping of the site/development and to comply with D3 (Landscaping) of the IOW Unitary Development Plan.
18	No development shall take place until there has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority a plan indicating the positions design materials, height and type of boundary treatment to be erected. The boundary treatment shall be completed before any of the units hereby approved are occupied. Development shall be carried out thereafter in accordance with the approved plans. Reason: In the interests of maintaining the amenity value of the area in compliance with Policy D1 (Standards of Design) of the IOW Unitary Development Plan.
19	None of the flats hereby approved shall be occupied until details of any lighting to be installed in respect of the car parking and amenity areas have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Such lighting scheme shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details. Reason: In the interests of the future occupiers and adjoining property owners in compliance with Policy D1 (Standards of Design) of the IOW Unitary Development Plan.
20	Lower half of the south west facing first and second floor windows in the proposed extension shall be in the form of obscure glazing which shall be retained thereafter. Reason: To protect the privacy of the neighbouring properties in compliance with Policy D1 (Standards of Design) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.

11.

TCP/26510/A P/02676/04 Parish/Name: Ryde Ward: Ryde South East

Registration Date: 21/12/2004 - Outline Planning Permission

Officer: Mr. A. White Tel: (01983) 823550

Applicant: Mr M P Allingham

Outline for two dwellings; formation of vehicular access

land rear of 35, Ashey Road, Ryde, PO33

REASON FOR COMMITTEE CONSIDERATION

The Local Member, Councillor Chapman has requested this application is reported to Committee in the light of representations received from local residents and other matters relating to highways.

PROCESSING INFORMATION

This is a minor application, the processing of which has taken 16 weeks to date and has gone beyond the prescribed period owing to work load of officers and requests for Committee consideration.

LOCATION AND SITE CHARACTERISTICS

Application relates to rear garden space of number 35 Ashey Road which itself is a detached property on eastern side of that highway some 50 yards north of its junction with Bettesworth Road.

Application site is located north of relatively recent residential development served off Woodland View. Land falls from west to east and is mainly laid to grass presently.

RELEVANT HISTORY

Application seeking outline consent for four dwellings and garages on this site refused under delegated powers in October 2004. Reasons for refusal included undesirable peace meal development which in future development in area, over development from insufficient detail in respect of required visibility splays and drainage arrangements.

DETAILS OF APPLICATION

This is an outline application with siting, means of access and landscaping to be considered at this stage.

Submission seeks consent for construction of two, three bedroomed detached dwellings with access to site gained from Woodland View and routing across existing private right of way.

Submitted plans indicate that foul sewage will be pumped up to main sewer in Ashey Road with storm water from roads, roofs and hardstandings directed towards onsite attenuation ponds.

DEVELOPMENT PLAN/POLICY

S1 – New development to be concentrated within existing urban areas

S2 – Brownfield sites

G1 – Development Envelopes

D1 – Standards of Design

H5 – Infill Development

TR7 – Highway Considerations for development

CONSULTEE RESPONSES

Highway Engineer advises that proposal now shows adequate visibility splays and in view of low speeds in Woodland View he does not require any traffic speed data.

Environment Agency raises no objection in principle subject to conditions being attached to any consent relating to surface water drainage arrangements and bunding during construction works.

South Water advise that two additional houses will have no significant effect on sewerage capacity however no surface water should be discharged to foul sewer as this may cause flooding to down stream properties.

PARISH TOWN COUNCIL COMMENTS

No applicable.

THIRD PARTY REPRESENTATIONS

Six letters have been received from local residents objecting to proposal on the grounds of adverse highway implications particularly in respect of adequacy of access and visibility and problems related to drainage of the site. Majority of respondents refer to possible obstruction and use of private right of way however, this in itself is not a planning consideration.

CRIME AND DISORDER IMPLICATIONS

No crime and disorder implications are anticipated.

EVALUATION

Site is located within the development envelope and immediately abuts a substantial area of land allocated as housing site. The initial phases of which have been constructed.

The development of this site served off the partially constructed access road does not raise any fundamental land use problem representing further brownfield development adjacent allocated housing land.

Whilst proposal can be seen as piecemeal proposal does provide for construction of road through site thereby allowing potential future development of land to north.

Application is accompanied by comprehensive drainage scheme which has been vetted by Southern Water and Environment Agency with latter organization recommending conditions on any consent.

In view of the above comments proposal is considered to represent appropriate development located between existing residential development fronting Ashey Road, recent development served off Woodland View and further consented residential development to immediate east and substantial area of allocated housing land to north.

HUMAN RIGHTS

JUSTIFICATION FOR RECOMMENDATION

Having given due regard and appropriate weight to all material considerations contained in this report I consider that in principle site is suitable for development of two dwellings making best use of urban land whilst not adversely impacting neither on the street scene or amenities of surrounding residential occupiers. Accordingly, proposal accords with relevant UDP policies and general guidance contained within PPG3 ‘Housing’ which seeks to encourage efficient sustainable use of urban land.

RECOMMENDATION – APPROVAL (REVISED PLANS)

Conditions/Reasons:

1	Time limit - outline - A01
2	Time limit - reserved - A02
3	Approval of reserved matters - A03
4	No dwelling hereby permitted shall be occupied until space has been laid out within the site and drained and surfaced in accordance with drawing number 1137 02 for 4 cars to be parked and for vehicles to turn so that they may enter and leave the site in forward gear. The space shall not thereafter be used for any purpose other than that approved in accordance with this condition. Reason: In the interests of highway safety and to comply with policy TR7 (Highway Considerations) of the IW Unitary Development Plan.
5	Before the development commences, a landscaping and tree planting scheme and details of other hard surfacing shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Such scheme shall specify the position, species and size of trees to be planted, the phasing and timing of such planting and shall include provision for its maintenance during the first five years from the date of planting. Reason: To ensure that the appearance of the development is satisfactory and to comply with Policy D3 (Landscaping) of the IOW Unitary Development Plan.
6	The landscaping scheme shall be completed within six months from the substantial completion of the development, or such other date as may be agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority. Any trees or plants which die during the first five years shall be replaced during the next planting season. Reason: To ensure that the landscape scheme is completed in the interests of the appearance of the development and to comply with Policy D3 (Landscaping) of the IOW Unitary Development Plan.
7	No development shall take place until details have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority of the positions, design, materials and type of boundary treatment to be erected. The boundary treatment shall be completed before the building(s) hereby permitted are occupied. Development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details. Reason: In the interests of maintaining the amenity value of the area and to comply with policy D1 (Standards of Design) of the IW Unitary Development Plan.
8	No development shall be commenced until a scheme for the provision and implementation of a surface water regulation system is design in accordance with a scheme to be agreed with the Local Planning Authority and supported by detailed calculations. Such a drainage system for the site must be capable of delivering the estimated 1% probability storm run off to storage. The system must be capable of storing the run off from the 1% event restricting the outflow to that which would have occurred had the site been a greenfield. The scheme shall include a maintenance program and establish ownership of the storage system for the future. Reason: To prevent flooding and ensure future maintenance and to comply with policy G6 (Development in Areas Liable to Flooding) of the IOW Unitary Development Plan.
9	Prior to being discharged into any watercourse, surface water sewer or soakaway system, all surface water drainage from parking areas and hardstandings shall be passed through trapped gullies to BS5911:1982 with an overall capacity compatible with the site being drained. Reason: To prevent pollution of the water environment and to comply with Policy P1 (Pollution and Development) of the IOW Unitary Development Plan.
10	During construction, any facilities for the storage of oils, fuels or chemicals shall be sited on impervious bases and surrounded by impervious bund walls. The volume of the bunded compound should be at least equivalent to the capacity of the tank plus 10%. If there is multiple tankage, the compound should be at least equivalent to the capacity of the largest tank, or the combined capacity of interconnected tanks, plus 10%. All filling points, vents, gauges and sight glasses shall be located within the bund. The drainage system of the bund shall be sealed with no discharge to any watercourse, land or underground strata. Associated pipework should be located above ground and protected from accidental damage. All filling points and tank overflow pipe outlets should be detailed to discharge downwards into the bund. Reason: To prevent pollution of the water environment and to comply with Policy P1 (Pollution and Development) of the IOW Unitary Development Plan.
11	The proposed access road shall be constructed and completed up to the northern boundary of the site as shown on plan, drawing number 1137 02 Rev A received on 7 March 2005, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: In the interests of adjoining land as a future development and to comply with Policy G4 (General Locational Criteria for Development) of the IOW Unitary Development Plan.

ANDREW ASHCROFT

Head of Planning Services