PAPER C2

ISLE OF WIGHT COUNCIL DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE –

TUESDAY 14 JANUARY 2003

REPORT OF THE STRATEGIC DIRECTOR OF CORPORATE AND ENVIRONMENT 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 CORPORATE AND 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 PART II APPLICATIONS ON REPORT TO COMMITTEE - 14 JANUARY 2003

If you need to see a copy of any of the reports they can be accessed on the Isle of Wight Council Web Site :

www.iwight.com/council/committees/Mod-development_control/14-01-03/agenda

LIST OF PART III APPLICATION ON REPORT TO COMMITTEE - 14 JANUARY 2003

LIST OF PART IV ITEMS ON REPORT TO COMMITTEE – 14 JANUARY 2003

(a)       TCP/18901G  Island Salvage, Pritchetts Way,ROOKLEY

Rookley

PART II

REASON FOR COMMITTEE CONSIDERATION

The application is a major submission where there are a number of significant issues to be resolved.

LOCATION & SITE CHARACTERISTICS

Application site is an existing extraction area known as Lower Knighton Sandpit which is located some 360 metres north east of Lower Knighton Farm. Access to site obtained via a public road of some 0.8 km in length from Griggs Hole which runs through to Lower Knighton Farm. From there is a 400 metre long private track into pit. Application site is currently active pit with face advancing in north easterly direction up slope of hill. Site is presently bounded to north by rising grassland, whilst to east beyond thin hedge boundary is footpath. Site is also bounded along its southern edge by public footpath, whilst to east is wooded area. Site lies within open countryside.

RELEVANT HISTORY

TCP/690/C – Extraction of sand – Knighton Sandpit – Approved 30 April 1976.

TCP/690/D – Continued extraction of sand – Knighton Sandpit – Approved 4 September 1979.

TCP/690/E – Continued extraction of sand for a further 10 year period – OS parcel 4153 – Approved 11 November 1980.

TCP/690/G – Continued extraction of sand and backfilling with inert material – Approved 29 July 1992.

TCP/690/H – Siting of mobile concrete crushing plant – Approved 28 July 1992.

TCP/690/J – Renewal: Continued siting of mobile concrete crushing plan – 7 September 1994.

TCP/690/K – Renewal: Continued siting of mobile crushing plant – Approved 5 January 2002.

DETAILS OF APPLICATION

Application is for the continued extraction of sand and backfilling of inert materials in the area delineated on the attached plan.

In essence that application seeks to remove sand and replace with inert materials in a phased manner. The inert material will be much less in volume and will change the landscape character to form a depression as opposed to the slope that is currently being extracted.

The application is further described as:

“Excavation of sand will progress in an anti-clockwise direction, starting at the south-eastern corner and ending at the north-western corner of the site. Inert waste which is bought onto the site will continue to be either crushed and screened for reuse with fines, then places in its final resting position, or if it is suitably fragmented and loose, places immediately in its restoration position. Pending completion of excavation in the south eastern corner of the site, inert materials will initially be placed at the northern end of a knoll feature at the south west of the quarry. Thereafter filling will follow the direction of excavation thereby allowing the progressive restoration of first the eastern and then the northern faces of the quarry.

Operational hours will therefore be limited to 0700-1800 Monday to Friday, and 0700-1300 Saturday. There shall be no operations on Sundays and Bank Holidays.

Restoration Proposals – The main aim of the restoration design is to produce a landform and land-uses which are wholly consistent with the surrounding landscape. The restoration design aims to produce a tributary valley landform, with steep, wooded valley sides and damp grassland on the valley floor. The proposed landform incorporates gradients of between 1:3 and 1:12 on the surrounding slopes and 1:12 and 1:100 on the restored quarry floor, these gradients being wholly consistent with those already found within and around the application site.

The restoration scheme also aims to provide an increase in the ecological value of the site by planting an extensive area of native, broadleaved woodland and by establishing significant areas of damp grassland. In addition, the progressive restoration of the site will ensure that existing landscape and visual impacts would be gradually mitigated.

Geology and Hydrogeology – The application site is located on the southern face of the geological ridge which runs east to west along the Isle of Wight, within the Sandrock Beds of the Lower Greensand unit. The Sandrock Beds, which are of Lower Cretaceous age, overlie Ferruginous Sands of similar age. The Sandrock is described as current bedded white sands with fine seams of grey clay. The Atherfield Clay and Wealdon Shales lie at depth beneath the Ferruginous Sands.

The Lower Greensand unit, including the Sandrock Beds and Ferruginous Sands have been classed as a major aquifer by the Environment Agency. There are six groundwater abstractions located within 1 kilometre of the site, with the nearest being associated with the Knighton Pumping Station some 325 metres to the west. The site lies within Protection Zone 2 of this source.

It is considered that the proposed development of the site will not impact on groundwater resources as the sand extraction operations will be controlled to a level above the groundwater table, and the materials to be deposited at the site will be purely inert, and will contain no degradable or toxic components.

Landscape and Visual Impacts – The site is within the Isle of Wight Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. Accordingly the consideration of potential landscape and visual impacts is paramount and a detailed objective and subjective assessment of the potential landscape and visual effects of the proposed time extension of the site has been carried out.

The landscape of the application site id dominated by the existing quarry, with its excavated faces, stockpiles and the associated infrastructure of buildings and plant. Consequently, the development proposals do not cause a significant additional landscape impact. Indeed, the restoration proposals would result in the creation of slopes and habitats which are wholly consistent with those found adjacent to the application site.

The application site is visible from rights of way to the west and north, but then majority of the Zone of Visual Influence is to the south. Although the existing site is therefore visible from a number of rights of way and private residences, the development proposals would not result in a significant additional impact, and the final restoration proposals would not result in a significant additional impact, and the final restoration proposals would enable the assimilation of the site into its context when reviewed from all viewpoints.

Ecology - In order to evaluate the potential ecological impacts of the proposed development, an ecological survey was carried out to determine baseline conditions, an evaluation was made of the value of the identified features, potential impacts and effects considered and mitigation proposed.

The site comprises mainly of areas already modified by quarrying with some rank grassland and woodland vegetation to the north. Examinations within the north-western corner of the application area revealed the presence of a badger sett. Badgers are protected by virtue of the Protection of Badgers Act 1992. There was little evidence of recent excavation or bedding and it is therefore considered that this is an outlier sett for the local Badger Group. There was no evidence of any other setts within 30 metres of the application boundary.

Hazel nuts collected from the wooded are to the north west of the application site showed evidence of dormouse feeding, confirming that this species, protected under The Conservation (Natural Habitats, etc) Regulations 1994 is present in the woodland. However due to the low density and young age of the hazel trees within the application area, and the fact that it comprises such a small part of the whole wooded resource it is considered unlikely that the loss of this area would be critical for the dormouse.

None of the trees within the application area offer suitable conditions for bars, and there was no evidence of squirrel activity or records to suggest that the site would support or be important for any other protected, rare or notable species.

The renewal of the planning consent would result in the loss of a small area of set-aside agricultural land of negligible value, and a small area of young woodland of local importance. The proposed restoration scheme includes areas of broad-leaved woodland on the steeper slopes, with areas of damp grassland in the low lying areas of the quarry base, This restoration provides much greater benefits to that which was consented previously, and will provide increased diversity and value to local flora and fauna.

As the extension of the current extraction area will lead to disturbance to and eventually the loss of the outlier badger sett it will be necessary to apply for an English Nature licence before such work can commence. To meet the requirements of the licence and to develop a scheme of mitigation it will be necessary to undertake more detailed studies into the status of the sett and the local badger social group. As the sett appears to be an outlier and the application area is of limited foraging potential, it is likely that the issues relating to badgers can be resolved satisfactorily. The restoration of the steep slopes to woodland and low lying areas to damp grassland would in the long term provide further habitat for new setts and foraging areas for this species.

Further appraisals of the woodland area within and adjacent to the application area got dormouse would be undertaken in order to fulfil the requirements of a DEFRA approved mitigation scheme. The planting schedule for the woodland area contains hazel and other fruit bearing species that could potentially provide a food resource for this species in the long term.

Traffic and Highways – The proposed application does not seek to increase the volumes of traffic using the site, and accordingly there will be no impact on the capacity of the local road network. The majority of traffic accessing the site uses the northern route to access the wider road network. In order to avoid the use of the southern route through the village of Newchurch, all drivers visiting the site are being instructed to use the northern route, and appropriate signage is proposed. A policy of environmental awareness on all drivers is also being enforced to minimise noise and dust pollution and ensure drivers adopt a courteous driving policy.

The development proposals include for the extension of the bond agreement, which previously existed with the Highway Authority for road maintenance during the period of the previous consent and a contribution towards roadside signage warning of heavy lorries turning.

Archaeology – A study has been carried out in order to identify and describe the nature, location, extent, periods and importance of known archaeology and cultural heritage, likely to be affected by the development.

The study has revealed that there are no scheduled ancient monuments, listed buildings or archaeological sites/finds within the site and within 50 metres of the site boundary. A track way and enclosure of unknown date, a medieval deserted manorial village and a single find, prehistoric core are located between 50 metres and 250 metres from the site boundary with the nearest being 100 metres away. Two surface spot finds comprising prehistoric flint scatters with a Neolithic flint arrowhead and an Acheulean axe are located within the 250 metre to 500 metre zone from the site. Two farmhouses have also been identified from historic maps.

Due to the distance of the archaeological features from the site, and the nature a=of the proposed operation, it is considered that the proposed development will not have a significant impact on any known feature of archaeological interest.

Socio-Economic – The socio-economic effects of the development are deemed as having a positive direct effect in terms or retaining existing employment in the local area. This also has the effect of furthering economic support for local services. The development is unlikely to have an effect on population immigration and will therefore have little effect in terms of pressure on local services. The nearest residents are located some 400 metres from the site and it is considered unlikely that they will experience changes in their quality of life. When compared to the continuation of the works, socio-economic effects of the development not proceeding are likely to be negative ion terms of employment loss and the associated loss of revenue for local services.

Amenity – Due to the nature of the proposed operations at the site, it is possible that the site could have an impact on the amenity of surrounding receptors due mainly to noise or dust. However the site is located ion a relatively remote location, with the nearest residential properties being located some 400 metres from the site boundary. The proposed development comprises an extension to an existing operation with no increase in intensity of use, changes to plant and equipment, or method of operation.

The Isle of Wight Council, Environmental Health Department have advised that they have received no complaints associated with the quarrying or landfilling activities since records began in 1995.

Operational practices that will be employed at the site to control dist include the continued use of water sprays wherever necessary, the seeding of earth stockpiles to minimise wind erosion, and the imposition of speed limits for vehicles using the site. Bunding around the quarry perimeter will also provide protection from emissions of dust.

With regard to noise, the power screen is located on the quarry floor and consequently the quarry sides will provide attenuation for any noise generated by this equipment. All items of plant and equipment will be maintained in accordance with manufacturers recommendations and fitted with silencers, and operations will be restricted to specified operational hours.

Emissions of litter and odour from the facility will not be significant due to the restricted and inert nature of materials to be deposited at the site.”

DEVELOPMENT PLAN/POLICY

Minerals Planning Guidance: Guidelines for Aggregate Provision (MPG6) April 1994 – Advances guidance on the importance of mineral supply while taking into consideration social , environmental and economic costs. It puts a responsibility on Mineral Authorities to identify sites.

PPG10 Planning and Waste Management – the planning system should ensure adequate provision to be made for waste management facilities in appropriate locations without undue adverse environmental effects or nuisance.

Regional Planning Guidelines for South East (RPG9) 2001

UDP Policies

M1 (Availability of Mineral Resources)

M2 (Criteria for defined Mineral Workings)

M3 (Criteria for New Mineral Workings)

M4 (Safeguarding Mineral Reserves)

M8 (restoration and After Care)

W1 (General Waste Disposal)

D1 (Standards of Design)

P1 (Pollution and Development)

P2 (Minimise Contamination from Development)

P5 (Reducing the impact of noise)

C1 (Protection of landscape character)

C2 (Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty)

Site is allocated as a mineral site.

CONSULTEE RESPONSES

The Council’s Ecology Officer comments:

“The application seeks permission for continued extraction of the area which is currently worked and its subsequent restoration to form a small damp, wooded valley. The accompanying ecology report has identified the presence of two protected species, badger and dormouse, in the wooded valley extending northwards from the application site. The evidence presented suggests that although the population of these species is unlikely to be adversely affected by the proposals, nevertheless a precautionary approach is advised. If the intention, in due course, is to extend the workings further up the hillside then impacts upon these protected species would be of much greater significance.

Badger

The extension of the sandpit northwards within the application site would result in the loss of an outlier badger sett and this would require a licence issued by either DEFRA or English Nature.

Dormouse

The extension of the sandpit northwards within the application site would encroach upon the wooded habitat used by dormice, a European protected species, and this will require a ‘development licence’ issued by DEFRA.

I would advise that up to date survey information about the current state of these species should be obtained prior to obtaining licences.

Restoration Scheme

The proposed restoration scheme is an imaginative use of the site and I would strongly support the proposals to create a small, damp wooded valley. This could have significant biodiversity gains. However, I would advise one modification to this scheme. Sand Martins have attempted to create burrows and nest in the actively worked face of the sandpit in the recent past. I would advice that an open vertical sand face should be retained within the restoration scheme and managed to attract nesting Sand Martins. This has been successfully done in many other worked sand and gravel excavation sites elsewhere. The details of this should be agreed with the planning authority.”

The Environment Agency comment:

“I can confirm the Agency has no objection in principle to the proposal would, however, wish the following to be taken into consideration:

The Knighton Sandpit is within 325 m of the Knighton boreholes used for potable supply. While conditions of the Waste License specify that the landfill restricted to inert materials, the Agency is concerned that there is still a possible risk of pollution to the aquifer and thence to public water supply from any putrescible material that may be landfilled. The policing of landfills is complex but in this case it is worthwhile emphasising that only real inerts can be deposited and that anything else poses a risk to the Island’s water supply. Any reduction in output from this source caused by pollution would be very serious for the security of water supply for Isle of Wight residents.

Planning Condition(s):

The Environment Agency requests that the following condition(s) be attached to any planning permission grated, and that details in relation to these conditions (and on which the Environment Agency would wish to comment) be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority:

Backfilling with inert materials shall be restricted to the following; non-contaminated soils and/or clean construction/demolition brick/concrete rubble. Other types of waste, including plasterboard, asphalt, plastics, timber, metals and liquids are specifically excluded.

Reason: To protect the groundwater and source of Potable Supply for the Island.

Advice to Planning Authority/Applicant

With regard to site restoration, the Agency generally support the proposed restoration plan as outlined in Section 6 of the Supporting Statement, SLR Consulting, July 2002, but would wish to see the following taken into account when formulating a condition, legal agreement or planning obligation as referred to in paragraph 11.38 of the adopted Isle of Wight UDP:

The site should be capped to a minimum of 1 metre with material that would not interfere with the future use of the site. The cap should minimise the ingress of rainwater and have a fall to allow for surface water runoff. Any proposed planting, in particular root structures, should not interfere with the integrity of the cap.

Reason: To protect the groundwater and source of Potable Supply for the Island.

Note: A condition to monitor groundwater would be considered as part of a review of the existing Waste Management Licence under the Landfill Directive.

Under the terms of the Environment Protection Act 1990 any expansion of the site for the disposal of waste will require a new Waste Management Licence. The applicant is advised to contact the Regulatory Waste Team at an early stage for further advice on this issue.

The agent for this application has been informed of our comments. A copy if the subsequent decision notice would be appreciated.”

The County Archaeologist recommends that there are no archaeological implications for this particular development proposal.

The Footpath Definition Map Officer comments:

“Improvements to these informal parking areas at access points to paths are very desirable and there have been some problems with fly-tipping in the past at this particular site. However, I am not quite clear how improvements can be related to the application and would welcome further information on this. We were not currently seeking any development of the footpath network, but would of course give consideration to any thoughts you might have.

We are carrying out a full survey of the network at the moment which will include the condition of signing.”

The AONB Officer comments:

“This site lies within the Isle of Wight Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty designation. I welcome the thorough supporting statement with this application, which covers many of the issues that will have impact as a result of the proposed development. I was particularly heartened to see such a thorough assessment made of the impact that this proposal will have on the landscape character of the area. If I am reading the application correctly, this is a renewal of an existing permission for extraction at this site, with a revision with regard to the restoration works planned. I believe that such restoration works will in the long term restore this area to a landscape character conducive with its surroundings. I would like, however, to make the following comment:

I would ask whether it is possible to secure some form of mitigation for previous works to the south of this application’s site. Public Footpath NC10 runs on the eastern flank of the former quarry site and is at present fenced as a health and safety precaution to prevent the public straying from the route. This fencing is somewhat derelict and does not look pleasing in the landscape. If possible I would like to see a native species hedgerow planted adjacent to this fence-line, which in time will grow up and form a continuation of the hollow-way, similar to the bridleway to the north, being a more usual landscape character feature for this part of the Island’s AONB. At the southern end of this footpath close to its junction with B53, there is a further difficulty, which would benefit from a surface and drainage improvement. It is a steep slope and is subject to a rapid run-off causing silting and erosion. I would ask the planning officer to negotiate with the developer and the rights of way section to see if an improvement can be made in this area as mitigation. I will copy my comments to Rights of Way for their information.

My next comment refers to the suggestion that the car parking area to the north of the site, be cleared of rubbish, surfaced and improved as a more formal area, with the provision of wooden cycle racks. I welcome this suggestion, as it will enable people to park in order to walk in the area, but would ask that it be sensitively designed in order to retain its rural nature. I am, however, concerned that there may be a requirement to increase visibility in order for this to be used safely. It is important that such engineering works, if required, are sensitive to the rural nature of the area. It is my belief that this car parking area is owned by Southern Water, who own the land immediately to the west, which is subject to a Stewardship agreement with DEFRA. I am also interested to hear how negotiations have progressed with regard to this and also to your suggestion of the formation of a viewing platform for bird species on the restored site.

I have one final suggestion which I would ask is considered, this is the provision of interpretation boards of a low key nature, preferably on the Bembridge Trail, to outline the restoration works that have been agreed, including some form of artist’s impression of the finalised scheme. I am conscious that in the short term this site will appear to be marred by the extraction that is taking place and feel that provision of information and interpretation will help the general public, when walking in the area, to understand the level of restoration works required when extracting materials from within sites within the AONB. This will be a useful opportunity to re-emphasise the fact that AONB landscapes are living and dynamic and not preserved in aspic; but that we need to secure through the planning process the best possible, sustainable outcome for any development proposals within the Island’s finest landscapes. “

PARISH/TOWN COUNCIL COMMENTS

“This Council makes no formal objection to the above application. It does, however, express the following concerns and observations in relation to the application:

I.         Historically not all lorries have observed the guidance regarding access routes to the pit;

II.        The timing of the application for renewal implies that use has continued after expiry of the previous permission; and

III.       In future, restoration and backfilling should be properly monitored and enforced. “

THIRD PARTY REPRESENTATIONS

None.

CRIME & DISORDER IMPLICATIONS

Relevant officer given opportunity to comment but no observations received.

EVALUATION

This site has been identified within the Unitary Development Plan (UDP) for use as a site appropriate for the mining of minerals. The UDP adopts regional and national policy.

There is therefore no objection in principle to this site being developed as proposed. Planning permission should be forthcoming providing the details of operation, restoration and after care are satisfactory.

It is envisaged that the site will be extracted at a maximum rate of 20,000 tonnes per annum for a duration of 12 years. The length of duration of course depends upon the rate of extraction. By the nature of the deposit there is a substantial amount of inert material on site which are in essence layers of material between the sand seams that cannot be used. This would appear from the figure submitted that the rate of external inert material being deposited on site is not fundamental to the restoration process. However there is approximately 15,000 tonnes being deposited on site per year. The current stockpile seems more than adequate to complete phases 1 and 2 of the restoration.

Policy M2 within the Unitary Development Plan refers to the criteria for defined mineral working. Therefore I propose to take each detail outlined within this policy in turn;

The effect which any proposal working and restoration will have on the landscape. It is not disputed that this development will have an impact on the landscape value of the area. However this will be for a finite period and so any impact should be judged that within 12 years the land will be restored. It is planned that the landscape will be graded to form a depression. The land does not form part of a visible ridge line so the provision of a depression will not cause demonstrable harm.

During the extraction operation a front apron will remain to effectively screen the toe of the working face. The AONB Officer is satisfied that such restoration works well and in the long term will restore the area to a landscape character conducive with the surroundings. Tied in with this is an opportunity via a legal agreement to improve the footpath network to the immediate south and east. It will be essential to tie any restoration through conditions. As the north face proceeds its height will be reduced.

The conservation status of this site and the potential effect of the proposal on flora and fauna, geological, geomorphological and archaeological remains and Ancient Monuments. This application through the restoration seeks to add to the biodiversity in this area. The use of a ponding/wet area will allow colonization to take place. Protected species such as the dormouse and badger will have to have a separate licenses from DEFRA. The Archaeological Officer confirms that there is little risk of disturbing archaeological remains.

The amount and quality of any agricultural land affected. This is an existing site with land to the north effectively sterilized by lack of access by this development. The land will be restored back to a primarily agricultural use with some grazing taking place. The site will be treescaped with a wet area so although arguably not to agriculture will allow for enhanced environmental benefits.

Proposals for restoration to a condition suitable for an appropriate after use. The proposal to restore in a phased anticlockwise method appears to be the most logical. The use of inert material covered with a layer of topsoil will establish appropriate foundation for the landscaping. Suitable conditions of aftercare will secure the use.

Access and traffic management scheme. A S106 agreement for contribution to future maintenance and routes taken remains appropriate. It has been agreed that a contribution of 20% of maintenance costs up to a maximum of £10,000 in a 10 year period is appropriate. Some concern has been expressed regarding the land to the south being drained onto the highway and how this is accelerating the need for maintenance. This is being investigated currently with a view to resolving the situation before the legal agreement is signed.

The scale and lifespan of the operation. It is anticipated that the life of the pit will be approximately 12-14 years depending on the rate of extraction. This covers the plan period for the Unitary Development Plan and therefore meets the requirements of providing a consistent supply. The pit itself is somewhat self contained and its scale is not of a magnitude that its impact is wide spread. The return of inert material onto site is not pivotable in the application as there is a substantial amount of overburden that cannot be used and remains on site. Therefore if inert material going onto site dries up the whole in the ground can be appropriately restored.

The effect of the proposal on ground water supplies and land drainage. The land lies very close to an aquifer which supplies potable waters for the Island’s water supply. It is essential that the material deposited remains inert and does not bleed into the water courses. Details of this are covered within the Waste Licence from the Environment Agency and do not need to be duplicated.

The direct effects on adjacent residents and properties for example of noise and dust. The immediate area is clear of any residential properties. Hours of operation and ensuring that wheels etc. are kept damp will reduce any impact.

The effects on countryside and coastal recreation. To degree this has been covered in the previous section but nevertheless the main impact on the countryside is visual. However a positive impact on the countryside is that this site employs several workers throughout the year.

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 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 on 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 in public interest.

JUSTIFICATION FOR RECOMMENDATION

This application has been submitted with a full and broad appraisal by the applicants and accordingly it is very clear what the likely impacts of this development area. This is an allocated site which is in operation. With conditions and a legal agreement to reduce its impact I believe this development will be acceptable.

RECOMMENDATION – APPROVAL (Subject to a S106 agreement covering:

           1.        Access and exit routes of the site by vehicles.

           2.        Contribution of cost to maintain highway.

           3.        Improvement of footpath network to make good existing paths and enhance hedgerows to the south of the site.

Conditions/Reasons:

REASON FOR COMMITTEE CONSIDERATION

Report requested by Local Member as he is not prepared to agree to the application being dealt with under the delegated procedure.

LOCATION AND SITE CHARACTERISTICS

Application relates to an existing building known as the Hotel Victoria which has been used as a residential care home. The building is located on the northern side of St Thomas Street and abuts the western side of the green and amenity area. The northern side of the building is adjacent to the green area and amenity space fronting the beach. To the west of the property is a former car park associated with the Prince Consort and this has planning consent for residential development. The Prince Consort itself is a Grade II Listed Building and sits further to the west whilst properties on the southern side of St Thomas Street comprise a mixture of terraced and semi-detached properties of between three and four storeys in height.

The building itself is a three storey Victorian style structure constructed of facing brick work with decorative details. The eastern elevation comprises a blank wall fronting the green and there is currently a very shallow pitched roof screened by a parapet. The building has central projections on the northern and southern elevations with the main entrance fronting onto St Thomas Street with a covered porch area. There is also a semi-basement with a small access area to the northern and southern faces of the building.

RELEVANT HISTORY

Longstanding consent for use of hotel as long term accommodation for elderly residents. Members are advised that the building is currently empty.

An application for comprehensive redevelopment of the property and adjacent land has recently been withdrawn.

DETAILS OF APPLICATION

This application relates to conversion of the existing building to provide seven residential flats with provision of a new roof including third floor accommodation served by dormer windows.

The submitted details show subdivision of the existing building internally retaining the existing entrance hall and stairway and providing two number three bedroom units using the lower ground floor and ground floor accommodation with two number two bedroom flats at each level on the first and second floors and a new two bedroom unit at third floor level contained within the extended roof.

The new roof would comprise sloping elevations set behind the existing parapets and served by dormer windows on the northern, southern and eastern elevations. The roof would have a flat top to the central area and would project above the existing parapet line by approximately 1.5 metres. The existing northern, southern and western elevations of the existing building would remain substantially unaltered and a new facing to the eastern facade fronting the green would be provided to improve its appearance and to provide additional windows serving the accommodation. New balcony details would be provided to the rear (northern) elevation.

DEVELOPMENT PLAN/POLICY

The existing property is situated within the development envelope as identified in the Unitary Development Plan.

The site is within the designated Conservation Area of Ryde and is close to the Prince Consort which is a Grade II Listed Building.

Unitary Development Plan policies B2, B6 and D1 are considered applicable.

The property is also close to a designated SSSI, SPA and RAMSAR and policies C8, C9 and C10 therefore have to be taken into account.

CONSULTEE RESPONSES

National Care Standards Commission confirms that the home ceased trading some time ago and therefore makes no comment regarding the future use of the property.

English Nature confirm no objection to application but urges the Council to consider that the area is at risk from coastal flooding which is likely to increase with sea level rises. It is not wished to see any further enhancement of the coastal defences such that they may encroach into the SSSI or promote coastal squeeze. The present Shoreline Management Policy is to hold the existing defence line. Also, would not wish to see any significant additional recreational activity arising from the property. English Nature also comment that there is potential for the presence of protected species, in particular bats being present in the existing building which should be surveyed.

Council's Ecology Officer comments that following a visual inspection of the property no evidence of bats were found. In the event of a bat being discovered during the works the developer or contractor should contact English Nature for advice.

Highway Engineer confirms no objection to the application in principle but comments that internal cycle storage shown is not large enough. Storage should be provided for seven bicycles or alternatively a secure and covered external store should be shown using four Sheffield Hoops.

PARISH/TOWN COUNCIL COMMENTS

None.

THIRD PARTY REPRESENTATIONS

Letter received from Islandwatch objecting to principle of converting the building to flats. In addition the raised roof makes the building overbearing in an important location in Ryde.

Letter received from Ryde Heritage indicating that the plans are considered to be overdevelopment and detrimental to the special character of the area and the elegant period surrounding buildings, particularly its immediate neighbour The Prince Consort which is a focal point. Comment is also made that the previous occupiers of the care home were, by their nature, quiet and unimposing. Those of permanent occupiers of flats would inevitably be the opposite to a greater or lesser degree depending on age groups. The additional floor with dormer windows and balconies around the building would further propose general environmental overdevelopment. Although not a listed building, it is nevertheless a period property that contributes to the period flavour of the town. Existing features of the building should be respected.

CRIME & DISORDER IMPLICATIONS

Relevant Officer given the opportunity to comment but no observations received.

EVALUATION

This application relates to an established detached building situated in a prominent location on the northern side of St Thomas Street adjacent to the open space at the bottom end of Union Street and abutting the promenade and beach.

Although known as an hotel, the property has for many years been used as a residential care home in accordance with previous planning consents. The building is now disused and there is not considered to be any objection in principle to the use of the property for residential purposes.

The submitted details indicate conversion of the existing building to form seven flats as outlined earlier in this report.

The building is situated within a designated conservation area and in close proximity to listed buildings. The determining factors are therefore considered to be the effect of the proposed alterations and extensions on the character and appearance of the area and the amenities of nearby residents as well as the suitability of the building for conversion in the form shown.

The external appearance of the existing facades would remain substantially unaltered, although some minor changes are proposed to the existing door and window openings on the front and rear elevations. The eastern end elevation would be reclad with new facings incorporating additional window openings to improve its appearance. Members will be aware that this elevation is currently a blank brick wall of poor appearance which currently detracts from the overall character of this part of the conservation area due to its prominent location. The proposed alterations to this elevation are therefore considered to be an improvement.

The most significant change to the building would be the addition of third floor accommodation contained within a roof extension including dormer windows. Whilst it is acknowledged that the roof extension would increase the overall size and mass of the building, the existing appearance of the structure which has a very shallow, almost flat, roof situated behind a parapet does not appear particularly well proportioned. The additional roof element would, in principle, be acceptable in this context and would improve the overall balance and proportion of the building.

The proposed roof structure would be of traditional design with grey slate cladding and traditional dormer windows including small balconies. These have been designed in scale and character with the existing building and would be partially screened by the existing parapets at roof level. The flat roofed area at the centre of the building would not be visually prominent and in fact, could not be appreciated from ground level in the locality and would not be dissimilar to other roof structures in the area.

With regard to the proposed accommodation, this is considered to be an acceptable layout providing two bedroom accommodation on the first and second floors with maisonettes at ground floor and lower ground floor and a flat at roof level. The layout has been arranged to retain the existing entrance hall and stairway which is an important feature of this building.

No objections have been received from consultees and matters relating to possible use of the existing building by bats have been addressed as have comments from the Highway Engineer regarding secure storage for cycles on the premises.

HUMAN RIGHTS

In coming to this recommendation to grant planning permission consideration has been given to the rights set our in Article 8 (Right to Privacy) and Article 1of the First Protocol (Right to Peaceful Enjoyment of Possessions) of the European Convention on Human Rights. The impacts of this development on 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 applicants 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 raised in this report, I consider that the alterations, extension and conversion of this existing building for residential purposes in the form shown would be acceptable and would not adversely affect the character or appearance of the conservation area, the setting of nearby listed buildings or the amenities of local residents. The layout and standard of accommodation is considered acceptable and the proposal is therefore considered to be in accordance with policies D1, B2 and B6 of the Unitary Development Plan.

RECOMMENDATION - APPROVAL (Revised plans)

Conditions/Reasons:

REASON FOR COMMITTEE CONSIDERATION

Report requested by local member as he is not prepared to agree the application being dealt with under the delegated procedure.

LOCATION & SITE CHARACTERISTICS

This application related to a detached single storey property situated on the northern side of Hillway Road almost opposite the junction of the lane which leads to Whitecliff Bay Holiday Club.

The area is semi-rural in character with a scattering of dwellings, mostly bungalows and chalet bungalows, along the northern side of Hillway Road with open land to the south. There are fields to the rear of the site and a smaller chalet bungalow to the eastern side with open land to the west and north.

The property itself comprises a single storey flat roofed structure with rendered elevations and a glazed verandah along the front. It is understood that the property was previously used as a dwelling with attached shop/cafe but has recently been in residential use. There are a number of other structures and outbuildings at the rear of the property and a fore court/garden area at the front.

RELEVANT HISTORY

TCP/1018/C - Consent granted in 1965 for conversion of the shop unit to a self contained flat resulting in two separate units of accommodation at the property.

There have been no subsequent planning consents for use of the property but it is understood that it has until recently been occupied as a single unit.

DETAILS OF APPLICATION

Planning permission requested for the provision of a pitched roof extension above the existing flat roof of the property to provide additional bedroom accommodation and to use the building as two separate residential units as previously agreed.

The submitted details also show alterations to the elevations of the building and provision of vehicular access and car parking at the front.

A number of poor quality outbuildings at the rear of the property would be removed to provide amenity space.

DEVELOPMENT PLAN/POLICY

Site is situated outside the designated development envelope as identified in the Unitary Development Plan. Unitary Development Plan policies D1 and H7 are considered to be applicable to the extensions to the residential property.

The application site is situated outside the designated Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty but is close to the boundary which encompasses land to the south of Hill Way. Unitary Development Plan policy C2 indicates that development should not have as detrimental impact on the landscape of the AONB.

CONSULTEE RESPONSES

Highway Engineer requests conditions regarding the visibility access and parking and turning areas if application is approved.

AONB Officer has made the following comments:

"The application is sited just outside of the boundary of the AONB, but is visible from higher ground in the area.

I have the following observations to make:

Scale of the proposed roof the new structure - The roof structure would seem to be a predominate feature of the proposed design being somewhat higher than the neighbouring property.

The applicant has not specified the materials to be used for the new building. It is essential should the Authority be minded to approve the site that these reflect the local character of the area and adjacent properties."

Letter received from local member objecting to development for proposed enlargement of existing property outside development envelope and within AONB. Increasing the size of the building from single to two storeys would be of a height and mass incompatible with the adjoining buildings and would adversely affect the amenities of the adjoining property by virtue of loss of daylight, overlooking and overbearing and unneighbourly building. Only limited attempts have been made to minimise the impact of the roof by cropping the gables and concern is also expressed regarding generation of additional traffic for the proposal. Comment is also made that property is on flight path to Bembridge airport and increasing height may present an additional hazard as a light aircraft crash landed in the garden of a property on the opposite side of Hill Way. The proposals are therefore considered to be contrary to the requirements of Unitary Development Plan policies D1, H7 and C2.

PARISH/TOWN COUNCIL COMMENTS

Parish Council recommend application for approval as this would represent an enhancement to the appearance of the building and the street scene.

THIRD PARTY REPRESENTATIONS

Five letters received from local residents expressing concerns about the proposal with matters summarised below;

Proposal is not in keeping with adjacent bungalow or others in the vicinity as the roof extension would be too high.

Proposed buildings would be out of character with surrounding properties and Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty.

Existing drainage pipes run across rear of adjacent property and have been the subject of endless problems and a real health hazard. The additional number of toilets shown within the property would cause a real problem and it is suggested that a separate connection can be made to Hill Way Road to alleviate the ongoing problem.

Although accommodation is shown as domestic, concern is expressed regarding a possible future uses such as letting or bed sit accommodation.

Proposal is considered to be out of character with the existing area and comments have been made regarding other developments nearby which have also affected the rural character of the area.

Concerns expressed regarding increased number of vehicles and safety of highway.

Building works on adjoining site may affect stability of existing property next door.

One writer comments that no objection is made to the overall effect given the size of the plot and existing building which should be very pleasant when finished.

CRIME & DISORDER IMPLICATIONS

Relevant officer given opportunity to comment but no observations received.

EVALUATION

This application relates to a substantial detached property of unusual design situated on the northern side of Hill Way in Bembridge. It is understood that the property was formerly part commercial and part residential with subsequent conversion to two separate residential units although the accommodation has I understand, recently been occupied as a single unit.

The existing building is of unusual design with rendered elevations and a flat roof with parapet edging. There is a glazed verandah on the front of the property as well as a number of outbuildings and other structures at the rear. The adjoining property to the east is a traditional hipped roof chalet bungalow and there are a scattering of similar properties in the area. There is open land to the side (west) and rear of the site.

The existing property contains a total of six bedroom accommodation with three living rooms, two kitchens and two bathrooms. There is a separating wall through the centre of the property which currently has an opening linking the accommodation.

The proposal now under consideration is for alterations to the existing property together with a new roof extension to provide additional bedroom accommodation at first floor level. The separating wall would be reinstated to provide separate accommodation for each of the two units. Each unit would have two bedroom accommodation at first floor level contained within the roof space together with additional bedrooms and living accommodation within the existing ground floor of the building.

The main roof extension would have a ridge running parallel with the front elevation with cropped gables at either end. As the existing building as an "L" shaped footprint there would be a gabled projection to the rear.

Following negotiations, revised plans have been submitted indicating an overall reduction in the ridge height of approximately 600 mm, together with alterations to the front elevation including small porches to the properties in order to reduce the visual impact of the roof and to reduce the visual scale of the building.

As a result of discussions with the applicants agent following concerns expressed regarding the application, further information has been received to clarify the situation regarding drainage at the property. This indicates that the existing building was previously occupied as two separate units each with a separate drainage connection. One unit connects directly to the sewer within Hill Way Road whilst the other unit connects to a 100 mm diameter pipe passing through the adjoining properties drainage system and then into the road system.

Whilst the concerns of local residents about the drainage system are noted, it does appear that the properties each have a separate connection to the existing system and whilst the additional accommodation may put an extra load on the existing system, this would be a matter for control under the Building Regulations if the development goes ahead.

Matters relating to highway access and parking are also noted and the Highway Engineer has recommended conditions regarding visibility sight lines access and parking and turning areas should the application be approved.

The determining factors are therefore considered to be the size and scale of the proposed roof extension, together with other alterations to the property on the overall amenities of the area and the adjacent property in particular.

The submitted details indicate a street scene showing the relationship between the proposal and the adjacent property which, although smaller, is also a chalet style dwelling. It should also be noted that there is a flat roofed garage situated between the existing property to the east and the development now under consideration such that the proposed roof extension would not be in close proximity to any existing windows on the adjoining property.

Whilst it is acknowledged that the roof extension would be somewhat large due to the existing footprint and width of the building, I do not consider this to be significantly out of character, over dominant or unduly overbearing in respect of the adjoining property. Comments have been received regarding the effect of the proposals on the overall character of the area which is semi-rural in nature. The site itself is in fact outside the designated Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty but is close to the designated area which is to the south of Hillway. The proposals have therefore been considered with regard to their effect on the designated Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty but are considered to be compatible with other buildings in the locality and would not appear unduly uncharacteristic or over dominant in this regard provided suitable materials are chosen for the roof cladding. This matter could be covered by condition if the application is approved.

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 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 of freedoms 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 outlined in this report, I am of the opinion that the proposed alterations and roof extension, together with use of the accommodation as two separate dwellings would be acceptable and would not unduly affect the amenities of the area or nearby residential properties. Evidence indicates that previous consent was granted for the occupation of the property as two separate units and the property was so occupied until recently. Whilst concerns regarding the existing drainage system are noted, these are not considered to be sufficient to warrant refusal of the planning application and would be for agreement for owners of the property and control under the Building Regulations. Overall, the proposed alterations and extension to the roof are considered to be acceptable in accordance with policies D1, H7 and C2 of the Unitary development Plan. I therefore recommend accordingly.

RECOMMENDATION - APPROVAL (REVISED PLANS)

Conditions/Reasons:

See joint report on application no. TCP/23547B/P1709/02 (Item No. 5).

Conditions/Reasons:

This report also relates to application no. TCP/9477C/P1710/02 (Item no. 4 ).

REASON FOR COMMITTEE CONSIDERATION

These applications are particularly contentious and have attracted a substantial number of representations.

LOCATION AND SITE CHARACTERISTICS

These applications relate firstly to rear curtilage of no. 13 Melville Street which has recently been Listed Grade II and adjoining garage block to west which is served by separate covered access between properties on Nelson Street.

RELEVANT HISTORY

TCP/9477 - construction of block of lock-up garages and stores - approved October 1983.

TCP/23547 - alterations to existing garage and provision of external staircase and sun deck - approved July 2000.

TCP/23547A - formation of vehicular access, new boundary wall and railings - approved April 2001.

DETAILS OF APPLICATIONS

TCP/9477C

Application seeks consent for demolition of existing L-shaped garage block and adjoining coach house which are located adjacent western boundary of no. 13 Melville Street and their replacement with five houses.

Submitted plans show houses to be staggered in their siting which would result in four of the units being partially constructed within curtilage of no. 13. Given slope of land northwards, ridge height of buildings would be stepped accordingly.

Submitted plans show two storey units comprising living area and kitchen at ground floor level with two bedrooms and bathroom above. Front elevation (facing westwards) shows both ground and first floor windows, the latter constructed at eaves level. Overall height of buildings would be approximately 6.7 metres above ground level to ridge. Externally buildings would be constructed in render and boarding panels beneath artificial slate roofs. Rear elevation of properties would present solid wall with velux window lights.

Submitted scheme is not specific in detail in respect of parking arrangements for proposed development.

TCP/23547B

This application relates to rear curtilage of no. 13 Melville Street which relates to northern section of curtilage currently used as garden area in connection with that property. Site lies immediately northeast of block of garages and forms part of common boundary with block of garages which are subject of this joint report.

Submitted plan indicates plot size of depth of approximately 30 metres by 12 metres width.

Plans show U-shaped building enclosing courtyard having maximum dimensions of some 20.5 metres by 12 metres i.e. full width of application site thereby resulting in building being built hard against both east and western boundary walls of adjoining properties. Northern boundary of site has been recently partitioned off with new fencing and thereby achieves distance of some 8 metres to that boundary.

U-shaped building designed round small courtyard area will comprise part single part two storey accommodation with latter accommodation located along southern boundary of application site. Height to ridge of two storey element would be approximately 7 metres above ground level providing galleried accommodation at first floor level.

Pedestrian access would be gained via existing courtyard and covered entrance from Nelson Street and no provision is made in respect of associated parking. Building would be rendered externally and constructed underneath artificial slate roof.

DEVELOPMENT PLAN/POLICY

The following policies of the Unitary Development Plan are considered particularly relevant:

G1 - Development Envelopes.

G4 - General Locational Criteria for Development.

D1 - Standards of Design.

B2 - Settings of Listed Buildings.

B6 - Protection and Enhancement of Conservation Areas.

B7 - Demolition of Non-Listed Buildings in Conservation Areas.

H1 - New Development Within Main Island Towns.

H4 - Unallocated Residential Development.

H5 - Infill Development.

TR7 - Highway Considerations for New Development.

Relevant advice is also contained within Planning Policy Guidance Note 15 "Planning and the Historic Environment". Members will also be aware of the requirements of Section 72 of Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 in requiring Local Authorities to pay special attention to the desirability of preserving or enhancing the character or appearance of Conservation Areas. Sections 16 and 66 of this Act also require Authorities in considering applications for planning permission which affect a listed building to have special regard to certain matters including the desirability of preserving the setting of such buildings. The guidance note goes on to state that settings are often an essential part of the building's character especially if a garden or grounds have been laid out to complement its design or function. Space about building can also contribute to contribution it makes to townscape.

CONSULTEE RESPONSES

Highway Engineer advises that Nelson Street is lightly trafficked residential road with public transport links within easy walking distance. Access to site is substandard due to its restricted pedestrian visibility and inadequate width. These two proposals constitute an increase in the use of this access and current layout does not provide for adequate vehicle turning area or parking. Combination of these factors means that development in its current form is not acceptable. He suggests two different options which may address the situation, firstly, that no parking provision is made on site and vehicular access to site is physically obstructed or reduction in density and provision of suitable parking arrangements at a rate of one space per dwelling.

Environmental Health Officer raises no comment.

Site has been inspected by the Council's Tree and Landscape Officer who advises that there are some trees in northwest corner of back garden to no. 14 Melville Street which would have to be removed if houses were built. These trees are two mimosas, several bays and a purple cherry plum. Of these, the mimosas are the only trees significantly attractive enough to be worth protecting. She therefore recommends that application TCP/23547B be refused. Furthermore, she did not note any trees within site itself which would be worth protecting. She further advises that the Old Coach House to southeast of 2 Nelson Street is an attractive building and contributes to local landscape so unless proposed buildings would be more attractive she also considers that this application should be refused on landscape grounds. A Tree Preservation Order has been issued in respect of two mimosa trees referred to in her report. These lie in back garden of no. 14 Melville Street.

PARISH/TOWN COUNCIL COMMENTS

Not applicable.

THIRD PARTY REPRESENTATIONS

Comments received in respect of TCP/23547B

25 letters have been received objecting to this application on the following grounds:

Loss of historic walls.

Scheme inappropriate for conservation area.

Represents backland development.

Inappropriate development by reason of design, scale and materials.

Inadequate access, particularly in respect of use by emergency vehicles.

Detrimental impact on surrounding listed buildings.

Proposal represents worst type of house cramming.

Proposal results in loss of open space and garden area.

Impact on existing trees.

Resultant loss of privacy and light.

Unacceptable increase in noise.

Problems relating to parking both within site and on street.

Difference in levels between application sites and adjoining property emphasising impact of development.

Inappropriateness of site being served by narrow access.

Represents overdevelopment of site.

Inappropriate design of proposed dwelling.

Loss of existing garaging.

Ten letters have been received supporting application on following grounds:

Proposal represents opportunity to improve area in helping tidy up existing site.

Makes best use of urban land.

Proposal is in keeping with character of area.

Presents compatible development and is well designed.

No detrimental impact on levels of privacy.

Comments received in respect of TCP/9477C

41 letters have been received objecting to this proposal on the following grounds:

Lack of amenity space about buildings.

Problems related to parking both on site and on street which is restricted to residents only.

Overdevelopment of site.

Inappropriate backland development.

Access insufficient to cater for emergency vehicles.

Development not in accordance with conservation area character.

Adverse impact on setting of listed buildings.

Inadequate drainage.

Potential effect on trees.

Resultant loss of privacy.

Inappropriate design and use of materials.

Scale out of proportion with buildings in locality.

Setting of precedent.

14 letters have been received supporting proposal on following grounds:

Proposal provides opportunity to remove unsightly garages.

Regenerates existing rundown area.

Represents appropriate development.

CRIME & DISORDER IMPLICATIONS

Relevant Officer given opportunity to comment but no observations received.

EVALUATION

Given constraints of site, main planning considerations in respect of this development relate to the appropriateness of development in terms of its impact on the character and appearance of the Conservation Area, the implications for the setting of listed buildings and impact on amenities of surrounding residential occupiers together with related highway issues.

In respect of application seeking demolition of garages and construction of five houses (TCP/9477C) the Council's Conservation Officer has considered the scheme and advises that the existing coach house which is accessed from lane rear of The Observatory (no. 11, Melville Street) is shown to be demolished and whilst inspecting property with regards to its quality of architecture and historic value he is of the opinion that it does not possess sufficient of either to be of listable quality. He further comments that site is located within Ryde Conservation Area and indeed is within probably the most historic part of town outside Union Street and High Street and both impact of proposal on character of area and quality of design are paramount considerations. He goes on to state:

"Given that the development is located behind the main building mass of Nelson Street its impact could be said to be less since in effect it is masked from the main public routes. This is not an argument for accepting a lesser design, it is perhaps more important that a high density proposal is considered with greater sensitivity to ameliorate the impact of the massing and to raise the architectural quality of the development.

My first concern is with the encroachment of the four houses onto the land of no. 13 Melville Street and this most certainly have an adverse effect on the setting of that building, particularly if the building is given listed status. It will have an adverse impact on the ground even if the listing is unsuccessful in the narrowing down of the garden by a stepped wall nearly 5 metres in height and 24 metres in length.

The close proximity of the backs of nos. 2 - 12 Nelson Street to the front elevation of the proposed blocks at its closest around 9 metres is unacceptable giving rise to direct confrontation of window to window and with rear balconies at first and second floor level on the existing buildings. The development will be cramped and confined within the rear area, with little amenity space around the buildings.

The quality of the proposed elevation shows no regard whatsoever for the early Victorian character of the surrounding district, the windows are out of scale with the size of house, the doors are modern catalogue style of little relevance to the area, the roofs are bland and contribute little to the quality of the building.

There appears to be no attempt to try and integrate the houses into the area, indeed the overall concept seems to be of a minimum quality estate-type housing scheme, suitable for any town anywhere. This is unacceptable given the importance that Members place on the quality of design in Ryde".

He is therefore of the opinion that the development proposed is unacceptable, if approved it will give precedence to other similar developments and will effectively erode the quality of the character of the conservation area.

In respect of the proposed dwelling (TCP/23547B) again the Conservation Officer has considered the proposal and comments as follows:

"The proposal is for a part two storey dwelling house to be erected at the end of the long garden of no. 13 Melville Street accessed from the arched opening from Nelson Street (which it shares with the proposal for five houses) and presenting to the perimeter walls (which are located on the boundaries) a bland wall, and providing an enclosed courtyard or atrium house".

Conservation Officer continues with his assessment:

"The cutting off of approximately 40% of the rear garden of no. 13 will undoubtably have a detrimental effect on the setting of no. 13, particularly if the listing is confirmed and will considerably affect the setting of no. 11 Bellevue Road which is Grade II Listed. This listed building is not shown on the site plan despite it being within six metres of the proposal and this must be accurately plotted with a cross section through both.

The access to the new house is tortuous and narrow and will cause undoubted problems in respect of building on the site and the subsequent servicing.

Were there a building on the site that was capable of conversion then a dwelling may be possible, but as it stands the actual new construction will be almost impossible without infringing on surrounding gardens and boundaries.

The design of the house is considerably out of character with the surrounding properties, there is no attempt to consider scale, massing, fenestration or materials in the context of integrating the new building into the area, it is the type of design one might expect to see in a high density proliferal housing scheme in new town suburbs where land is at a premium."

He is therefore of the opinion that the design, location and siting cannot be supported within the Conservation Area.

The ground is part of garden of no. 13 Melville Street which was recently listed by the Department for Culture, Media and Sport in November of this year. The application for listing was put forward on the basis of the property's contribution to the street scene of Melville Street and its unaltered condition since its original construction.

Notwithstanding the abovementioned planning objections with regard to the impact of the proposed schemes on the character and appearance of the conservation area and setting of listed buildings, concern is also raised in respect of potential impact of proposed developments on amenities of surrounding residential occupiers.

As mentioned by the Conservation Officer, scale of housing on site of former garage block and proximity to surrounding residential property would result both overlooking of residential property to west whilst having over dominant and overbearing effect on living conditions of those residents.

In respect of proposed detached single dwelling, this building would be constructed adjoining common east and west boundaries of residential property and given height and proposed massing of building and when taking into account land levels of adjoining property and proximity to property, particularly no. 11 Bellevue Street, it is considered that development would adversely impact on residential amenity of surrounding residential occupiers as well as setting of that particular listed building.

With regards parking arrangements, in the absence of any detail it is assumed that access and space in front of proposed dwellings will remain available for vehicles to service proposed developments, however, such a situation is considered undesirable given lack of turning space and parking facilities available.

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 and in the public interest.

JUSTIFICATION FOR RECOMMENDATION

For reasons outlined in the evaluation section of this report, it is considered that the proposed schemes do not meet requirements of either Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act or Unitary Development policy in seeking to protect or enhance conservation areas and related issue of maintaining appropriate settings for listed buildings within such areas. Furthermore, it is considered that design of proposal is not of sufficient standard given site's location, whilst proposal is also considered to adversely impact on amenities of surrounding residential occupiers and is deficient in terms of detailed highway considerations.

RECOMMENDATION - REFUSAL (Both applications)

Conditions/Reasons:

REASON FOR COMMITTEE CONSIDERATION

Report requested by Local Member as he is not prepared to agree the application being dealt with under the delegated procedure.

LOCATION AND SITE CHARACTERISTICS

This application relates to a plot of land situated between the Prince Consort and the Victoria Residential Hotel which is accessed from the northern side of St Thomas Street and also has a frontage to the Esplanade and the green to the north. The site is currently undeveloped with a rough gravelled surface and has been used by the Prince Consort for car parking. There is a natural stone boundary wall to the west and a gable end of the Victoria Residential Home immediately abuts the eastern boundary. There are two lime trees adjacent to the southern entrance of the site which are subject to Tree Preservation Orders.

It is understood there was previously a building on the site associated with Rayners boatyard but this has long since disappeared.

RELEVANT HISTORY

Application for planning permission for a four storey block of six flats was refused following a Committee site inspection on 25 February 2002. Reasons for refusal referred to detrimental effect on the setting of the adjacent listed building (The Prince Consort) due to the scale, mass, ground coverage and position and relationship with the listed building. Second reason for refusal was based on the adverse effect of the proposal on the visual amenities of the designated conservation area.

Subsequent application for a revised scheme for planning permission for a four storey block of four flats was approved subject to conditions in June 2002. The approved scheme comprised a scaled down building addressing Members' concerns regarding the previously refused application.

DETAILS OF APPLICATION

The application now under consideration is for a building of similar scale, mass and design to that previously approved but incorporating further subdivision of the accommodation to provide two one bedroomed flats on each floor instead of the larger two bedroomed flats as previously approved. The overall height of the building as shown on the revised plans would be the same as that previously approved and the design characteristics of the building would be similar although there are some minor changes shown to the elevational details to incorporate the changes to the accommodation as outlined above.

The submitted plans shown the existing vehicular access to St Thomas Street to be retained with a small hard surfaced area within the site. The stone boundary walls would be reinstated with iron railings similar to those previously approved and the two preserved trees on the St Thomas Street frontages would also be retained.

Members are advised that the originally submitted details showed a five storey building incorporating an additional flat within a "mansard" style roof with steeply sloping sides and a flat top and also including dormer windows.

Following concerns regarding the scale and design of this element of the building, the revised plans now submitted omit the top floor flat and have reduced the roof element of the building. The overall roof height of the building would now be similar to that shown on the previously approved plans although the proportions of the elevation are slightly different as the parapet height has been lowered allowing a greater part of the roof to be visible on the elevations.

DEVELOPMENT PLAN/POLICY

The site is located within the development envelope for Ryde as indicated in the Unitary Development Plan.

The site is also contained within the designated conservation area and the adjoining building (the Prince Consort) is a Grade II Listed Building.

The two trees on the southern boundary are covered by Tree Preservation Orders.

Policies D1, B2, B6, H5 and H6 of the Unitary Development Plan are considered to be applicable to the application.

CONSULTEE RESPONSES

English Nature confirm no objection to the application but urges the Council to take the following points into consideration;

                     The area is at risk from coastal flooding which is likely to increase with a sea level rise of at least mm per year over the next fifty years. It does not wish to see any further enhancement of the coastal defences such that they may encroach into the SSSI or promote coastal squeeze. The present Shoreline Management policy is to hold the existing defence line.

                     It does not wish to increase the capital value of property to lead to an increased requirement for coastal defences. The applicant should be made aware that any investment made in the property might not be protected from flooding through coastal defence works.

                     It does not wish to see any significant additional recreational activity arising from the property which may cause disturbance to habitats or species within a designated site.

Fire Officer confirms that the proposals are considered satisfactory.

PARISH/TOWN COUNCIL COMMENTS

None.

THIRD PARTY REPRESENTATIONS

Letter received from Islandwatch objecting to application to build a five storey block of nine flats in the location. Proposed building would be overbearing and would seriously detract from setting of the Prince Consort an important listed building.

Letter received from owner of adjoining property (Hotel Victoria) raising objection on the following grounds;

The position of the proposed building is sited hard up against the wall of adjoining building making it impossible to undertake any routine maintenance.

Property would suffer dramatically due to loss of light that would result from position and height of proposed building.

It is suggested that the building should be sited centrally within the plot.

Letter received from Ryde Heritage with matters summarised below;

Reference is made to the outstanding nature of the Ryde Conservation Area and to previous studies carried out into the character of the area which identify the importance of the views of the buildings from the Solent. The period town scape entity plays a part of the greater picturesque coastal panoramic landscape which is exceptional in this context. The Prince Consort building along with Brigstock Terrace and the church spires are the most dominant and distinguished buildings of the town scape. Views of the Prince Consort need to be seen from all sides and the proposed construction of a five storey block in this location would be outrageous. Not only does the plan show the building higher than its large Victorian neighbour (the Victoria Hotel) but would compete with the Prince Consort itself. The site has provided open space to appreciate the eastern aspect of the Prince Consort as well as the architecture of the listed buildings behind in St Thomas Street and the fine established trees. The proposed development would hide this and would be unnecessary.

Letter received from local resident objecting to application with matters summarised below;

The proposed development of the site for a five storey block would have a detrimental effect on the setting of the adjacent listed building due to its scale, mass and ground coverage.

Proposals would be contrary to policies in the Unitary Development Plan.

The site is within a designated conservation area and the proposed development because of its scale, mass, ground coverage and relationship to neighbouring properties would adversely affect the visual amenities of the area.

The refurbished Prince Consort being a Grade II Listed Building provides a valuable contribution to the visual historic and architectural character of the area.

There is currently an approval for a four storey block of flats on the site and the new submission alters the interior giving an additional four flats and the addition of a fifth floor penthouse is definitely out of keeping with the adjoining properties. Letter confirms that these objections are on behalf of the two residents of the property.

CRIME & DISORDER IMPLICATIONS

Relevant Officer given opportunity to comment but no observations received.

EVALUATION

This application relates to a site which already has consent for a four storey building comprising four flats.

The application as originally submitted indicated various changes to the previously approved scheme including further subdivision of the accommodation to provide two flats on each floor with an additional roof structure comprising a penthouse flat making nine flats in all.

The plans also showed various changes to the elevational details including a mansard style roof on top of the main building. In order to minimise the visual impact of this, the overall height of the elevations to parapet level have been reduced slightly in order to minimise the overall height of the extended building.

The application details were considered by the Architects Panel and in their opinion, the principle of a mansard style roof may be acceptable although concerns were expressed regarding the lack of detail in the application and also noting that a proposed roof extension was also being considered for the adjacent property (see Hotel Victoria) which may affect the overall height and setting of the buildings.

As a result of negotiations, further details were submitted showing the proposed roofline of the adjoining building together with a simplification of the roof design of the proposed penthouse flat. Nevertheless, concerns were still apparent regarding the overall height and dominant nature of the proposed building with particular respect to the effect of the setting of the adjacent Prince Consort building which is Listed Grade II.

Further revised details have therefore been submitted omitting the proposed penthouse flat within the roof and consequently lowering and reducing the size of the roof element.

The overall height of the building as shown on the revised plans would therefore be the same as that shown on the previously approved scheme although a slightly increased element of the roof would now be visible due to a lowering of the parapet walls. The overall scale, mass and design of the building now under consideration is therefore very similar to that shown on the previously approved plans and although each of the floors would now be subdivided to form two smaller flats, I do not consider this would have any adverse effect on the character or appearance of the building or on the amenities of other properties or the conservation area. In fact, the subdivision of the proposed building to form additional units of accommodation would comply with Government guidance contained in PPG3 to maximise the use of land within built-up areas.

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 impact of this development might have on the owners/occupiers of the 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 has been 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, and taking into account the previous consent for a four storey building of similar scale, mass and design on this site which is still valid, I am of the opinion that the proposal now under consideration is acceptable and would serve to provide suitable residential accommodation within the built up area and without significantly adversely affecting the character or amenities of the conservation area, the setting of the nearby listed building or the amenities of nearby residents. The proposal is therefore considered to be acceptable in accordance with policies D1, B2, B6, H5 and H6 of the Unitary Development Plan and I therefore recommend accordingly.

RECOMMENDATION - APPROVAL (Revised Plans)

Conditions/Reasons:

PART III

REASON FOR COMMITTEE CONSIDERATION

Report requested by Local Member as he is not prepared to agree to the application being dealt with under the delegated procedure.

LOCATION AND SITE CHARACTERISTICS

The application site relates to part of the rear garden of 13 Woodvale Road. The plot is an irregular rectangular shape measuring approximately 23 metres deep with the longest frontage of 40 metres facing onto an access drive from Cow Lane. The boundary between the rear of 13 Woodvale Road and the application site measures approximately 25 metres long. The application site is well treed around the boundaries providing screening on the north, south and eastern boundaries, the centre of the site is overgrown with garden shrubs.

Access to the site is from Cow Lane via a concrete access drive to an adjoining property known as Kenly House. Cow Lane itself has a metalled surface as far as the access drive to Kenly House and is approximately four metres in width with overgrown verges on either side. Woodvale Road is characterised by a mix of bungalows, interspersed with houses on regular shaped plots with Solent Middle School immediately to the north of Cow Lane.

RELEVANT HISTORY

Previous applications at the site relate to extensions to 13 Woodvale Road.

DETAILS OF APPLICATION

The proposal is for an outline application for bungalow and garage with only access to be considered. Illustrative plans show a modest two bed bungalow to be sited in the centre of the proposed plot. Access to the site is from a drive to Kenley House which links to Cow Lane approximately 50 metres from its junction with Woodvale Road, where there is a dropped kerb.

DEVELOPMENT PLAN/POLICY

The application site is within the development envelope for Cowes/Gurnard and therefore policy H5 (Infill Development) would apply. Infill development is normally acceptable if it does not unduly damage the amenity of neighbouring property and the surrounding area.

CONSULTEE RESPONSES

Highway Engineer – no comments

Countryside Access Manager –

‘no major objections to the proposed dwelling off of Cow Lane, Gurnard. We would like to make the comment that whilst works are carried out the path is to remain unobstructed and the surface undamaged. Should any damage to the surface take place, we must be notified as soon as possible and the path reinstated. During development fences or boundaries must not encroach on the path or other properties.’

PARISH/TOWN COUNCIL COMMENTS

Gurnard Parish Council objects to the application on the grounds that

‘there would be increased traffic flow on a footpath, that the proposal amount to over-development of the site, that the proposed access would obstruct a Country footpath, and there would be safety concerns for children accessing Solent Middle School along Cow Lane.’

THIRD PARTY REPRESENTATIONS

Letter received from Councillor Mundy;

‘I consider that the access to the proposed property is completely unsuitable in its present form and a proper road would have to be constructed. The footpath is used by a number of adults and children to the schools of Cowes High, Solent Middle and possibly Gurnard Primary and to have traffic going down this lane or the vast majority of it, with the exception of the well-established house, I find extremely dangerous and also detracts away from the access being a small country lane.’

Four letters of objection received with the following concerns:

                     Overdevelopment of the land, as the area is characterised by housing with large gardens.

                     Proposal is detrimental to existing properties and resulting in loss of privacy to properties in Woodvale Road.

                     Extra traffic over Cow Lane, which is little more than a footpath and not suitable for vehicles. The main use of Cow Lane is by pedestrians and additional traffic would be dangerous.

                     Removal of hedges and trees and the loss of the semi-rural atmosphere of Cow Lane.

                     Detrimental to the natural environment, which has a rich and interesting wildlife population.

                     Unstable area of land, removal of trees could lead to land movements.

                     No right of access to the rear of 13 Woodvale Road without crossing land in the ownership of Kenley House, submitted plans do not reflect this fact and plans should be resubmitted to omit land not in the ownership of the applicant. 13 Woodvale Road is also subject to a covenant restricting development to one dwelling.

                     If planning permission is granted then Cow Lane should be upgraded to accommodate two way traffic or provide parking places. The developer should provide remuneration to Kenley House for use of access. Ample parking and turning to be included in the development.

CRIME & DISORDER IMPLICATIONS

Officer given opportunity to comment, but no observations received.

EVALUATION

The character of Woodvale Road is one of bungalows with a small number of houses on fairly regular sized plots. To the south, the land around Dottens Farm is more open in character. The curtilage of 13 Woodvale Road is a wedge shape with the application site formed from part of the rear garden of 13 Woodvale Road and is around 600 square metres in size. The existing bungalow retains a sufficient amount of amenity space around it, particularly to the north and south of the bungalow.

Despite detailed plans accompanying the application, the proposal is for an outline application for a bungalow and garage with only access to be considered. Details of the siting, design, external appearance, parking and turning would be confirmed as and when a reserved matters application is submitted.

The plot is well screened on three of its boundaries with a mix of Oak and Elm trees, hedges and shrubs and is compatible with the size of other plots in the vicinity. The proposal is for a single storey building and this again is compatible with the type of development in the immediate area and would limit any overlooking into rear gardens of adjacent properties.

The access to the plot is along the tarmac ked section of Cow Lane and onto a small section of concrete drive, which leads to Kenley House. The agent acting for the applicant has served notice on the owners of Kenley House who are owners of the access track and the land adjacent to it and has confirmed by letter that the applicant has unlimited pedestrian and vehicular access across the driveway and land at Kenley House. Access to and from Kenley House is by this route and the development of the site would result in additional vehicle movements for only one new property. Given that there is a clear line of sight from the access drive to Woodvale Road, it should be possible to minimise any inconvenience to pedestrians using Cow Lane.

It is likely that the development of the site can be achieved without significant loss of vegetation around the boundaries of the site. The character of Cow Lane would remain substantially unaltered, as views along Cow Lane from Woodvale Road would be unaffected. At the junction of Cow Lane and the access drive to Kenley House, any development would be viewed in conjunction with the backdrop of vegetation and views of other properties in Woodvale Road.

The application site is covered in the Cowes to Gurnard Coastal Slope Stability Study and falls within an area where no stability report is required. On this basis any construction issues relating to the stability of the land would be covered under Building Regulations.

HUMAN RIGHTS

In coming to a recommendation, consideration has been given to the rights set out in the Articles of the European Convention on Human Rights. The impact 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 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 proposal conforms with policies D1 and H5 of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.

RECOMMENDATION - APPROVAL

Conditions/Reasons:

REASON FOR COMMITTEE CONSIDERATION

The application is a major submission having potentially significant impact and a number of issues to be resolved.

LOCATION & SITE CHARACTERISTICS

Application site is located on western side of Church Hill approximately 130 metres south of its junction with Eden Road. Site is presently occupied by relatively substantial building providing predominantly two storey accommodation with some accommodation at 2nd floor level within roof space. Property was formerly used as a nursing home but is presently vacant.

Property is located within predominantly residential area characterised by a mix of dwelling types and styles. Property immediately to the north is relatively modern chalet bungalow whilst to south is modern terrace of three dwellings providing accommodation of three storeys. Whilst, in general ground in locality slopes in northerly direction, site is relatively level.

RELEVANT HISTORY

There is no planning history in respect of Culverdene itself which is considered relevant to the current application. Area of land to south of site was subject of number of applications for residential development including an application for approval of reserved matters for three houses approved in June 1995 which has been implemented.

DETAILS OF APPLICATION

Current proposal involves demolition of existing building and erection on site of a three/four storey building providing ten flats. Units would be arranged with three flats on each of the ground, first and second floors with penthouse flat on third floor, within roof space. Flats on ground, first and second floors would each provide accommodation comprising lounge diner, kitchen, bathroom and two bedrooms, one with en-suite facility. Penthouse flat on third floor would provide accommodation comprising lounge/dining room, kitchen, bathroom and three bedrooms, two with en-suite facilities. Flats would be accessed through communal entrance lobby with lift and stairs to all floors. All flats would have benefit of balconies on rear elevation.

Residents car park with access off Church Hill would be located in northeastern corner of site with additional parking for visitors adjacent with separate access from Church Hill. Provision would be made for total of twelve parking spaces.

Submitted plans indicate that building would be constructed in brick with tile hanging to first and second floors on front elevation with central gable feature finished in render with Tudor style beams. Roof would be finished in concrete tiles.

DEVELOPMENT PLAN/POLICY

Planning Policy Guidance Note 3 - Housing, sets out governments policies and provides guidance on a range of issues relating to the provision of housing. In particular, it emphasises that the government is committed to promoting more sustainable patterns of development and minimising the amount of greenfield land being taken for development. This can be achieved by employing a range of measure including concentrating most additional housing development within urban areas and making more efficient use of land by maximising the reuse of existing buildings. The 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.

Site is locates within development boundary as defined on Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan. Relevant policies of the plan are considered to be as follows:

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

S2 - Development will be encouraged on land which has been previously developed (brownfield sites), rather than undeveloped (greenfield) sites.

S6 - All development will be expected to be of a high standards of design.

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.

TR7 - Highway considerations for new development.

CONSULTEE RESPONSES

Highway Engineer raises no objection in principle to proposal. However, he advises that, at present, there is no proper footway separate from the carriage way, just a demarcation white line separating the two. He considers that this proposal would bring about a large increase in pedestrian movements compared with the previous use of the site and therefore considers it reasonable to require the developer to construct a proper kerbed foot way along the frontage of the site and to be continued across the frontage of the property immediately to south to link up with the existing foot way. He considers that the amount of parking proposed is satisfactory.

Council's Tree and Landscape Officer comments that there are three pines within site along southern boundary and one immediately adjacent boundary within neighbouring property. She advises that the site layout plan does not exactly correlate the position of these trees and the one within the adjacent property is not marked at all. She considered that the proposal, as originally submitted, would probably result in loss of three pines within the application site eroding local landscape character and distinctiveness. Therefore she recommended refusal. However, following submission of revised plans together with a report on the protection and management of the trees, further consultations were carried out with her. As a result, further comments were received from her advising that the tree protection measures are good and acceptable and if they were strictly complied with it might be possible for the proposed development to take place while retaining the trees. However, failure to adhere to the protection measures would probably result in damage to the trees to such an extent that they would have to be removed. Therefore, she recommends that, should application be approved, consent is subject to a condition that the tree protection measures are strictly complied with.

Southern Water Services confirm that there have been no reports of flooding from the public sewer to indicate lack of capacity. They advise that the only incidents in the area have been blockages in private drains. They also confirm that there is no public surface water sewer in the area. With regard to water pressure, they advise that the pressure at the site would be about 40 m head pressures which is well above the minimum expected of 15 m. They advise that some properties nearby have long service pipes which may cause low pressure and that, earlier this year, new valves were installed which may have resulted in low pressure for a few days.

National Care Standards Commission confirm that property ceased trading as a nursing home some time ago and they therefore wish to make no comment regarding the future use of the property.

PARISH/TOWN COUNCIL COMMENTS

Totland Parish Council raise no objection to application. However, I am advised that Councillors were a little concerned about the number of bathrooms that are suggested and wonder if the water supply and waste water facilities will be adequate for the number of flats and bathrooms. They also point out that speed limit on hill at this point is 40 mph (which is often exceeded) and that the road is used a lot by coaches going to the Needles. They express concern regarding the low number of parking spaces which they consider will result in on street parking. Whilst accepting that this is not a valid ground for refusal they requested that consideration is given to more parking spaces being provided.

THIRD PARTY REPRESENTATIONS

Publication of original submission attracted five letters from local residents objecting to application on grounds which can be summarised as follows:

No four storey buildings or modern flats anywhere in this area - development out of keeping to detriment of rural character.

Existing property is attractive building - in danger of losing our heritage.

Need to demolish existing building is questioned.

Nursing home closed down as result of new government legislation - now rescinded.

Proposed building closer to adjacent property than existing building.

Proposed building greater footprint than existing.

Loss of light.

Overlooking/loss of privacy - adequate measures need to be implemented to avoid overlooking from windows in side elevations of proposed building and balconies - obscure glazing/screens etc.

Surface water run off should be directed away from adjacent properties - increase in impermeable areas on properties in locality reduced areas for surface water to soak away naturally causing subsidence and cliff falls.

Inadequate provision for parking, more spaces required.

Poor water supply in locality.

Plans do not accurately show distance between building.

Responsibility for trees is questioned.

Location of bin storage is questioned.

Objectors were notified of receipt of revised plans. As a result, a further two letters were received raising additional points as follows:

Reduction in number of flats would facilitate improvements to development including reduction in footprint, height, relocation of building and reduced pressure for parking facilities.

Overdevelopment to detriment of environment.

Inadequate facilities/transport in area to serve development.

CRIME & DISORDER IMPLICATIONS

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

EVALUATION

Determining factors in considering application are whether redevelopment of the site for residential purposes is acceptable in principle and whether the building is of an appropriate size, scale, mass, design and general appearance or whether development would be out of keeping and detract from amenities of locality in general and of neighbouring residential occupiers.

I consider that proposal involves development of a brownfield (previously developed) site which is within the settlement of Totland as defined by the development boundary on the Unitary Development Plan. Therefore, I am satisfied that redevelopment of the site for residential purposes as proposed is acceptable in principle.

Site is within area characterised by mix of dwelling types, including some quite substantial buildings in large plots. Whilst the existing building on this site provides, for most part, two storey accommodation, with some accommodation in roof space, application was accompanied by a plan providing a comparison of the height and mass of the existing building and the proposed block of flats. This plan indicates that, whilst the proposed building is slightly higher than the existing building, it is of a similar scale and mass. Furthermore, whilst the proposed building provides accommodation on four floors, it is effectively a three storey building with accommodation at third floor level provided within the roof space. Submitted plans also indicate that the footprint of proposed building, albeit slightly larger, is similar to the existing property. Applicant's agent has also provided a plan showing proposed building in a street scene, which includes the relatively new development to the south which comprises a terrace of three houses providing accommodation on three floors. I consider that this information illustrates that proposed building is not of an excessive height or that its scale is out of keeping with properties in the immediate locality.

Whilst noting concerns regarding adequacy of public sewer to serve the development and problems with water pressure in the area, I would draw members attention to the comments of Southern Water in the consultee responses section of this report. With regard to the latter, it is understood that there are multiple sources of water supply serving properties in this locality and whilst some properties may experience poor pressure, the comments would indicate that pressure within Church Hill itself should not present any problems. With regard to surface water run off, whilst Southern Water Services advise that there is no public surface water sewer for which they are responsible, it is understood, following consultations with Highway Engineer, that there is a highway storm water drain in Church Hill which could accommodate surface water run off from the development. It is understood that the storm water drain system runs down Church Hill and along Madeira Road before discharging into the sea, adjacent Totland pier. Records held by the Highway Engineer indicate that there is a gully in Church Hill immediately adjacent the application site to which the surface water system from the development could be connected. In any event, and notwithstanding the above comments, proposed building is of similar scale and mass to existing structure and proposal will not reduce significantly the amount of permeable surfaces within the site. Therefore, I do not consider that there will be a significant change in terms of surface water run off from the site and, subject to this being handled in an appropriate manner, I am satisfied that proposal will not cause surface water problems.

Whilst noting objectors comments regarding contribution of existing building to the character of the locality, it should be noted that the property is not listed or within a conservation area. Therefore, the authority would have no control over the demolition of this building, nor do I consider that its loss would detract significantly from the character of the area or provide a sustainable reason for refusal of the current application.

Side elevations of the building would contain two windows to each floor, one to an en-suite and one to kitchen accommodation. I do not consider that, in the interests of maintaining privacy of neighbouring properties, it would be unreasonable to require that these windows are obscure glazed and fixed shut. Majority of balconies on rear elevation are contained within recessed areas thereby limiting over looking of neighbouring properties. Again, I do not consider that it would be unreasonable to provide screening on the end of those balconies at first and second floor level which project beyond the rear most part of the building in order to safeguard privacy of neighbouring properties.

I am satisfied that proposal makes adequate provision for parking of vehicles in accordance with the Unitary Development Plan guidelines to serve the development and, whilst noting concerns of local residents in this respect, in the absence of any objection from Highway Engineer, I do not consider this issue would provide a sustainable reason for refusal of the application.

Having regard to comments of the Tree and Landscape Officer is relation to effect of proposal on adjacent trees, I am satisfied that, subject to appropriate protections measures during the construction of the building, it should be possible to retain the trees along the southern boundary of the site. Therefore, should Members be minded to approve application, I would recommend that consent is subject to appropriate conditions in this respect.

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 proposal represents an acceptable form of development which will not detract from the character of the area or amenities of neighbouring properties. I am satisfied that proposal does not conflict with the policies of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan and, therefore, recommend accordingly.

RECOMMENDATION - APPROVAL

(Covering letter to accompany decision notice drawing applicants attention to conditions in respect of protection of trees during construction works which must be strictly adhered to).

Conditions/Reasons:

REASON FOR COMMITTEE CONSIDERATION

This application is particularly contentious and has attracted a substantial number of representations.

LOCATION AND SITE CHARACTERISTICS

Hill Farm is a former farm complex located to the west of Alverstone Garden Village and to the northeast of Hill Top, off Skinners Hill, Newchurch. Vehicular access is currently off Hill Top Lane, a rough, narrow unmade track to the northeast of Skinners Hill, the lane which links Newchurch village with Queen Bower and is situated approximately 400 metres from the junction of Hill Top Lane with Skinners Hill. Hill Top Lane contains eight or nine dwellings abutting its southeastern side and with the exception of two dwellings fronting Skinners Hill and some other buildings at the junction, the land is otherwise undeveloped mostly farm land situated on a ridge.

Hill Farm comprises a small group of buildings including a dwelling, stables and used and disused barns abutting a public footpath which runs through the farmyard.

The existing buildings are brick, stone and timber with tiled roofs and these are located towards the northeastern end of the complex abutting part of the farmyard.

RELEVANT HISTORY

Formation of vehicular access and access road off Skinners Hill, submitted in April 2000 was subsequently withdrawn in September 2001.

DETAILS OF APPLICATION

Whilst this application was originally submitted in July 2000, it has been subsequently revised twice and the current revisions now seek consent for the conversion of two farm buildings to form two units of holiday accommodation and for the creation of a new access track running from Skinners Hill to the Hill Farm.

The plans show the access road to join Skinners Hill approximately 210 metres to the southeast of the junction of Hill Top with Skinners Lane. The new access position includes a bell mouth and allows for the access to run in a north - northeasterly direction almost parallel to the field hedgerow for a distance of approximately 310 metres and then to turn in a northwesterly direction to link up with the access track and footpath leading to Hill Farm. It then turns again in a northeasterly direction, running parallel to a further field boundary where it accesses the smaller of the two barns in question and then continues around the barn and the northeastern extent of the complex, doubling back on itself to a position due north of the larger of the two barns. The access track is intended to be 3.2 metres wide, incorporates a passing bay and is shown to be constructed in a gravelled finish running at existing ground levels. The plan shows the access track to run parallel to the field boundary off Skinners Hill at a distance of approximately three metres.

The application was originally submitted with a structural report which concludes that whilst some parts of the structures are showing the signs of age and are unsound, essentially the buildings' main structural elements are sound and conversion is possible with the exception of the roof structure to the smaller barn which will need to be replaced. The plans show a large proportion of the smaller barn (barn B) to be demolished and a replacement but much smaller extension to be added on the southeast end. The conversion would provide a living area with a kitchen in one corner, a bedroom off the living area with a bathroom en suite. The replacement structure on the southeast end would provide a sun lounge and revised plans show the structure to be a brickwork plinth with three glazed sides under a small plain tiled roof supported by large timber posts, similar to those on the north side of the existing structure. The northeast elevation shows existing features to be retained achieved by the recession of the new front wall which incorporates much glass framed in vertical timberwork. The existing corrugated sheet roof of the buildings proposed to be removed and the new structure to be reclad in small plain tiles to match the existing farmhouse further to the southwest. Stained vertical timber boarding is proposed to the gable ends.

The proposed conversion of the larger barn (barn A) shows the majority of the structure to be retained but with the necessary rebuilding of the gable end on the western end and with the corrugated sheet structures on the southern side to be removed and replaced with a brickwork structure under a 'cat slide' type roof. The eastern rebuilt section is shown to be in natural stone and brick work and the existing open sections to the north and south are shown to be closed with timber framework with glazing. Within the finished structure, the plan shows the ground floor to provide a living area, a kitchen area, a sitting room, laundry room and shower room and one bedroom with an en suite whilst on first floor the accommodation comprises seven bedrooms, two of which are en suite and an additional bathroom. The conversion involves the installation of stud partitioning mostly utilising the existing internal layout but provides two staircases to access first floor with open galleries in the central section.

Barn A is proposed to be converted with external materials within new plain tiled roofs to match the existing farmhouse and vertical timber stained boarding features with facing brick work and stonework.

Externally the plans show small parking and turning areas to be situated outside the respective units.

Barn B, the smaller unit will have a small garden area situated on its southwest side whilst Barn A, the larger unit, will also have landscaped garden areas surrounding it.

Whilst shown in the previous submissions, it is no longer intended to divert the footpath which runs through the existing farmyard.

A further revision proposes the separation of the access track and footpath at the Hill Farm end of the new track.

DEVELOPMENT PLAN/POLICY

National policy, in PPGs 7 and 21 generally support tourism in the countryside providing it does not impact adversely on the surroundings and, in supporting tourism, recognises the contribution economically to the rural environment. In addition, PPG7 also supports the diversification of agricultural units and supports the reuse and adaptation of existing rural buildings for commercial and industrial development as well as for tourism, sport and recreation, subject to safeguards. In addition, PPG7 affirms the necessary special care to be taken in Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty and that planning decisions should favour conservation of the natural beauty of the landscape.

UDP Policy C17 supports the reuse and adaptation of rural buildings for employment, recreation or tourism purposes, again subject to certain safeguards and Policy C2 seeks to safeguard the Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty from development which might have a detrimental impact on the landscape. Policy T3 supports developments of holiday accommodation in certain instances which in this instance it is small scale and ancillary to an existing agricultural enterprise.

Policy TR7 seeks highway safety in new developments.

Policy TR17 seeks to maintain, improve or extend the existing network of footpaths or bridleways etc.

The site is shown to be within an Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty and adjoining a Site of Interest to Nature Conservation.

CONSULTEE RESPONSES

AONB Officer is concerned about the impact of the development on the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty through impact of the access, loss of trees and hedgerows, design of the proposed conversion and the need to carry out extensive landscaping to ensure reduced impact. It is questioned that a new access road may reduce the need for access via Hill Top and the possibility of ensuring the new access road takes the traffic rather than Hill Top. Furthermore, a new access road may allow for further development at Hill Farm which would impact again on the landscape and suggests that permitted development rights should be removed to ensure that 28 day uses of land cannot occur so as to conserve and enhance the AONB.

Highway Engineer recommends conditions if approved.

Environmental Health Officer makes no adverse comment.

County Archaeological Officer recommends conditions if approved.

Environment Agency recommends conditions if approved.

English Nature raise the question of bats roosting in the larger barn and inadequate information supporting the application to establish whether or not such roosting occurs.

County Ecology Officer echoes concerns of English Nature.

Two letters of objection from CPRE objecting on grounds of increased traffic, adverse impact on the AONB and precedent for further, similar developments suggesting that a new access track will enable further developments to occur.

PARISH/TOWN COUNCIL COMMENTS

Newchurch Parish Council confirms its objection to the development pointing out that the site is in an Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty and that development would be contrary to Policy C2 but that it would also appear to be subject to Policy C15; raising concern over the use of Skinners Lane for potential increase in vehicular traffic and the network of narrow country lanes suggesting the development will be contrary to Policy C17c of the UDP and objecting on the grounds that the development be contrary to the interests of wildlife, especially on the SSSI SINC nearby.

THIRD PARTY REPRESENTATIONS

Two petitions from Alverstone Garden Village Residents Association, one of 254 signatures, to the original application and superseded by a second of 281 signatures objecting on grounds of development contrary to planning policy; the fact that the farm is no longer an agricultural unit, concentrating on livery for horses and a builders yard; that the layout of the site clashes with the use of existing footpaths and that the new access track would increase traffic speed on both the new track and the original access; adverse effect on neighbouring property, especially properties in Alverstone Garden Village which are in close proximity; adverse effect on the surrounding area, detailed as being unjustified as a farm diversification, increase in services and increased surface water runoff, concluding that the development has no regard for existing footpaths resulting in the likely flooding of Skinners Lane.

Islandwatch object most strongly as the access track would cut through unspoilt meadows in the AONB causing danger to walkers on the public footpath suggesting that Hill Top Lane is adequate.

Three letters from the Isle of Wight Observatory pointing out that the applicants have not taken into account environmentally friendly lighting installation and possible light pollution, writer urges strict control over lighting suggesting that Members prohibit lighting unless included with this application.

Rights of Way Officer raises concern over the joint use of part of the right of way for vehicular access, suggesting the two should be separated so as to maintain pedestrian safety.

Two letters from Friends of the Earth raising concern over impact of the access track through ancient meadows which are situated in the AONB especially during construction works, pollution carried in runoff into the valley, also raises concern over the dual use of part of the footpath with vehicles suggesting that Hill Top Lane should be used and that such a development would set a precedent for further development.

Ramblers Association acknowledge that the right of way over Hill Top and through the farmyard are no longer to be affected but are concerned with the dual use of the footpath linking Alverstone Garden Village with Hill Farm for access, urging safeguards to be carried out, signs to be erected to ensure walkers do not use the track, urging that the right of way should remain open during the development.

Thirty nine letters of objection on behalf of twenty six households (some resubmitted representations due to revisions of application) objecting on grounds of overdevelopment of the site, development does not comply with policies of UDP; inappropriate development and an adverse effect on this Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty; visual intrusion resulting in an urbanisation of this rural area; pollution by vehicles and light pollution, also pollution from the noise of vehicles accessing the site which, in addition, will result in glaring headlights towards residential property; increased traffic to the site would result in a severe traffic danger and a dangerous access point with Skinners Lane; that the area is prone to flooding and further development can only worsen the situation; loss of trees and hedgerows resulting in an ecological change; loss of habitats to local wildlife. Objectors also claim that a new roadway is not required, that Hill Top Lane is adequate and that new roadway presumes that further development will ensue; additional traffic will create congestion in roads surrounding this area thus impeding access by emergency vehicles; adverse effect on footpath pattern; inadequate foul drainage; the creation of an eight bedroomed holiday unit is not an appropriate form of development and too intensive; that the farm no longer operates as an agricultural unit and inadequate information. One writer asks for comprehensive screening if the application is approved.

CRIME & DISORDER IMPLICATIONS

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

EVALUATION

Essentially this application seeks to convert two disused farm buildings into one large and one small holiday units and to access these by the provision of a new farm track from Skinners Hill to the existing farm buildings.

In policy and principle terms, the main two conflicting principal policies are Policy C17 which essentially supports the reuse and adaptation of rural buildings, in this case for tourism purposes and Policy C2 which allows for development within the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty providing it does not have a detrimental impact on the landscape but again subject to certain safeguards.

The development does relate to buildings of substantial, sound and permanent construction and the structural survey confirms that the conversion could take place without major or complete reconstruction; the conversion respects the local character, the buildings' style and materials proposed are similar to those in the existing structure.

Traffic generated by the new use is proposed to be managed by the formation of the new access track but, of course, remains to be distributed in the local road system. In principle, therefore, the refurbishment of the buildings in a form which is consistent with the character of the buildings is considered to be consistent with policy. The refurbishment of the buildings "in character" is unlikely, on its own, to affect adversely the amenity of the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. Accordingly it is felt that the development is principally consistent with policy.

The details of the design conversion retains the character of the building by utilising existing openings and restoring some parts of the building which are in poor condition, utilising a mix of brickwork, natural stone which are in keeping with the character of the structure; re roofing in materials which will enhance the appearance of the building by replacing corrugated sheet steel with plain tiles. Existing openings in buildings have been utilised, infilling the voids but retaining the original features.

In highway terms, the Highways Engineer recommends conditions if approval is granted. He feels that the access point with Skinners Hill allows adequate visibility in both directions and, in positive terms, allows a passing space in the narrow Skinners Lane. Access to the farm from Skinners Hill follows a route parallel to the field boundary and details submitted show the track to be finished in gravel surface of softer appearance than concrete or macadam and the track running at ground level rather than cut in or built up. Its junction with the footpath has been realigned to observe the Rights of Way Officers concerns over dual use of the surface and the provision of this access track would take traffic away from Hilltop Lane.

In visual terms this access will have little effect since its junction with Skinners Lane is through a gap in the tree and shrub boundary between the field and Skinners Lane where little grubbing out would be required.

With this particular aspect in mind, the Ecology Officer considers that the hedgerow serves as a valuable wildlife corridor and aerial route way and it is important that new access does not reduce its value for wildlife. Accordingly as it appears that no trees need to be felled to create the appropriate access, the remaining trees and hedgerows need to be protected but, within the visibility splays the area should be maintained by coppicing by cutting everything down to ground level leaving it to regrow naturally, the process being repeated at suitable intervals probably every 2 or 3 years.

In terms of nature conservation issues, it is felt that the access track, which runs nearby to SINC, is unlikely to have any adverse effect, including the possibility of flooding due to the proposed construction utilising a permeable form. Despite that, the area of the road is not considered to be significant enough to increase water run off to the degree which might alter the water table or create a flooding problem. English Nature raised the question of the possibility of bats roosting in the larger barn and a survey and report have been prepared, but at the time of writing, the report has not yet been received.

Amongst the various reasons for objecting to the proposals as detailed above, it is drawn to members attention that the creation of a new access road could be seen as setting a precedent for further, similar developments at the farm, various objectors citing further proposals including caravan site, camping and other activities, none of which form part of this application. Each of those would be determined on merit but it may be appropriate to remove the permitted development allowances on temporary uses of land such as 28 day camping which can be carried out without the need for a further planning permission. This I believe can only be properly done by the imposition of an article 4 direction and, under the circumstances, should cover all of the land within the ownership of the applicants rather than just the site the subject of this application.

Objections also received cite adverse affects on adjoining properties from the use of the development currently proposed by way of vehicle noise, light pollution noise of activities by residents. The nearest residential property is Hilltop Cottage which is approximately 100 metres from the barns, Alverstone Garden Village where the nearest dwelling is approximately 180 metres and from Hilltop where there is a distance of approximately 200 metres I am of the opinion that the use of the barns for holiday accommodation is not of sufficient scale to create substantial nuisance, especially if conditions are imposed to ensure further developments which otherwise could be carried out without the need for planning permission are prohibited.

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 on 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 the material considerations as described in the evaluation section above it is felt that the conversion of these two barns into holiday accommodation with the associated works comprising car parking areas and an access track would be in line with policy C17 and B2 of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan and in the interests of tourism as described in policy T3 of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.

           1.        RECOMMENDATION - APPROVAL (Revised Plans).

Conditions/Reasons:

           2.        RECOMMENDATION -

TREE PRESERVATION ORDER BE MADE TO PRESERVE THE TREES ALONG THE SKINNERS HILL FRONTAGE OF THE SITE.

           3.        RECOMMENDATION -

ARTICLE 4 DIRECTION BE MADE TO REMOVE THE TEMPORARY USE OF LAND WITHIN THE OWNERSHIP OF THE APPLICANTS AS DESCRIBED IN CLASS B OF PART 4 AND CLASS A OF PART 5 OF THE TOWN & COUNTRY PLANNING (GENERAL PERMITTED DEVELOPMENT) ORDER 1995.

REASON FOR COMMITTEE CONSIDERATION

Report requested by Local Member as he is not prepared to agree to the application being dealt with under the delegated procedure.

LOCATION AND SITE CHARACTERISTICS

Site with overall dimensions of 18 metres by 42 metres located between the stone Wesleyan Chapel and the Council's car park and entrance to The Smithy car park on the northeast side of High Street, Godshill. Site is basically flat, a gravelled finish surrounded by hedgerows on the road, car park and rear boundaries. Site is extremely visible from an easterly direction whilst entering the village and marks the point where physical development commences on the northern side of the road.

To the north of the site is the car parking area associated with The Smithy whilst to the east is the Council's car park.

RELEVANT HISTORY

TCP/10108A - refusal for erection of telecommunications post in May 2000.

DETAILS OF APPLICATION

Consent sought for erection of pair of semi-detached houses. Plan shows a single building, two storeys, constructed in natural stone under a natural slate roof with cast stone dressings to detailing. Incorporates hipped and gabled roofs with parts of roof punctured by first floor windows, building giving appearance of single property located centrally in the width of the site and about 11 metres back from the front boundary. Site plan shows there to be a single access with a shared parking and turning area and accommodation in each of the units to comprise kitchen/dining room, lounge, downstairs W.C, three bedrooms (one of which is en suite) and a bathroom on first floor.

DEVELOPMENT PLAN/POLICY

Site is within the designated development envelope and within the designated conservation area. Policies G1, D1, D2 and B5 apply relating to development with the development envelope, design issues and enhancement to the conservation areas. PPG15 sets out the criteria for preservation and enhancement of conservation areas.

CONSULTEE RESPONSES

Highway Engineer recommends conditions if approved.

Environment Agency confirms no objection subject to safeguards regarding drainage.

PARISH/COUNCIL COMMENTS

Parish Council do not object in principle to the development but are dissatisfied with the design scheme for this site which adjoins the Listed Wesleyan Chapel, suggesting that the dwellings proposed are too modern and that a cottage style construction is more appropriate.

THIRD PARTY REPRESENTATIONS

The Methodist Church object to the proposals on grounds of loss of coach parking in the village which would cause a downturn in the local economy and loss of hedgerow between the site and the Church which is within the Church's ownership.

Three letters of objection from local residents on grounds of adverse effect on the conservation area, loss of coach parking.

CRIME & DISORDER IMPLICATIONS

The relevant Officer has been given the opportunity to comment but no observations have been received.

EVALUATION

This is a prominent site within the conservation area at the entrance to the main part of the village being prominent in both the street scene and obliquely from the east. The area's status as a conservation area does not preclude development but does warrant the provision of development of a high standard and of compatibility and harmony with the area.

This pair of semi-detached houses uses the site economically, providing two units but a mass of building which gives the appearance of a single, substantial dwelling. The street scene shows a building of compatible scale and height to the adjoining chapel and one which emulates the style, a building with natural stone finishes to the main elevations and quoin features to echo those of the chapel. A single vehicular access is proposed with an undivided front with a car parking and turning area. In terms of access, the Highway Engineer raises no objection, acknowledging that maneuvering coaches into the site off the main road through the village is a hazardous operation and that access for residential property would be more acceptable.

The choice of materials is critical. High quality, natural stone with natural slate with windows, barge boards, fascias and other detailing to be in timber and not UPVC.

In order to minimise any impacts, the boundaries of the site should be maintained in hedgerow and not timber fencing although the front boundary with the highway should be compatible with the remaining part of the conservation area and although no boundary is shown on the proposed plan, I am suggesting a condition be imposed in order to achieve suitable boundary treatments.

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 impact that this development may have on 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 within 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 and in the public interest.

JUSTIFICATION FOR RECOMMENDATION

Having given appropriate weight to the determination of this application upon the issues included in the evaluation section above, the development of this site for residential purposes as proposed would result in an economic use of land within a designated development envelope, a safe and appropriate form of vehicular access and an appropriate development in the conservation area and therefore the development would be consistent with policies B6, D2, H5 and TR7 of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.

RECOMMENDATION - APPROVAL (Revised Plans)

Conditions/Reasons:

REASON FOR COMMITTEE CONSIDERATION

Report requested by Local Member as he is not prepared to agree to the application being dealt with under the delegated procedure.

LOCATION AND SITE CHARACTERISTICS

Joe Daflo’s is situated on the southern side of the High Street within the Newport Conservation Area and operates as a bar/restaurant. Immediately to the east is the Hogshead pub, while to the west is the vacant cinema building, which has planning permission for a similar A3 (food and drink) use. There are a number of residential properties to the rear of the premises in Pyle Street.

RELEVANT HISTORY

TCP/11483/K - New shop front, 21-22 High Street, Newport, Isle of Wight, PO30 1SS, approved 08/08/2001

TCP/11483/M - Retention of kitchen extraction system incorporating filters & silencer unit, Joe Daflo's 21-22, High Street, Newport, PO30, approved 18/09/2002

TCP/11483/ - Use of 1st floor as additional dining area, Joe Daflo's 21-22, High Street, Newport, PO30, approved 26/11/02

DETAILS OF APPLICATION

The buildings forming Joe Daflo’s comprise a two storey building with a pitched roof (22 High Street) with a single storey flat roofed building (21 High Street) to its east. To the rear of these buildings there are a number of single storey flat roof extensions, which extend along the eastern boundary of the site as far as its southern boundary. A pedestrian access between 22 High Street and the former Cinema links to a courtyard area providing access to the kitchen and storage areas at the rear of Joe Daflo’s.

The proposal involves the use of the flat roof above the front of 21 High Street to create a roof deck providing an external dining area. Two trellises measuring two metres in height define the area to be used and a further three trellises screen views at the rear of the site over the kitchen area of the premises and towards properties in Pyle Street to the south.

Access to the roof deck is via a door in the southern elevation of the first floor dining area. Revised plans have been received which provide an external lobby area adjacent to the door from which a series of steps leads to the roof deck which measures approximately 65 square metres. This area is bounded on its western elevation by the external wall of 22 High Street and on the eastern side by the rendered external wall of 20 High Street. A trellis screen set back from the edge of the front parapet by 1.8 metres provides screening from the High Street and space for landscaping in tubs. Further landscaping is to be provided against the trellis defining the southern extent of the area. A fire exit route has been provide across part of the flat roof and descending into the courtyard at the rear of the premises.

DEVELOPMENT PLAN/POLICY

The application site is within the Newport Conservation Area, Development Envelope and Town Centre Boundary for Newport and outside the retail-only frontage. Policy B8 ‘Alteration and Extension of Non-Listed Buildings in Conservation Areas’, aims to ensure that the proposal is particular to the character of the Conservation Area; Policy R6 ‘Areas outside Retail-Only Frontages’ states that planning proposals for retail A1, A2 and A3 uses within the defined town centre shopping areas but outside the retail-only frontages will be acceptable in principle. Policy D1 ‘ Standards of Design’ ensures that the proposal does not detract from the reasonable use and enjoyment of adjoining buildings.

CONSULTEE RESPONSES

Environmental Health Officer – The application includes proposals for use of an external area, which has the potential to introduce a source of noise disturbance arising from customers using this area. This type of noise is notoriously difficult to control and accordingly this section would request the imposition of conditions restricting the hours of use and the provision of a lobby and self-closing devices.

PARISH/TOWN COUNCIL COMMENTS

None

THIRD PARTY REPRESENTATIONS

One letter of representation received from the director of the Apollo Theatre, Pyle Street concerning the disruption to performances from smells and noise disturbance from music through open doors.

One letter of objection from a local resident expressing the view that the use of a roof terrace would be totally unacceptable for the following reasons:

'The trellis fencing and fire escape is too close to the boundary and the public access to the external dining area will directly overlook our first floor bedroom and parts of the garden. The noise and lighting disturbance generated from open air dining is an inappropriate use backing onto a residential property during the day.'

CRIME & DISORDER IMPLICATIONS

Officer given opportunity to comment, but no observations received.

EVALUATION

While the premises lies within the Newport Conservation Area, it is considered that the trellis work is to be sited at a sufficient distance from the edge of the roof to ensure that it will not be unduly visible within the street scene. The provision of soft landscaping in front on the trellis would provide an attractive feature, which would enhance the appearance of the building.

The access to the roof deck is via the rear of the property and the route from the external lobby to the roof deck has been placed close to the rear of 22 High Street, consequently, users of the area will be a minimum of 20 metres from the rear boundary of the premises. Two rows of trellis fencing would screen views looking southwards towards properties in Pyle Street and the only potential for views in this direction is from the fire exit, which will only be used should an emergency arise. The purpose of an external lobby from the access to the roof is to minimise noise spillage from inside the premises and the Environmental Health Officer has stated that conditions would need to be applied to ensure that the hours of use of the deck area is restricted to 10.00 to 21.00 and that there should be no music or live entertainment outside. On this basis, it is considered that the potential for disturbance to adjoining residential properties will be kept to a minimum and that the proposal is considered to be acceptable.

HUMAN RIGHTS

In coming to a recommendation, consideration has been given to the rights set out in the Articles of the European Convention on Human Rights. The impact 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 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 proposal conforms with policies R6 and D1 and B8 of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.

RECOMMENDATION - APPROVAL

Conditions/Reasons:

REASON FOR COMMITTEE CONSIDERATION

Report requested by local member as she is not prepared to agree to the application being dealt with under the delegated procedure.

LOCATION & SITE CHARACTERISTICS

Site is located on the eastern side of Embankment Road in a mixed residential commercial area. The site is a stone surfaced area used for parking with two vehicular accesses.

RELEVANT HISTORY

No recent relevant history.

DETAILS OF APPLICATION

This application seeks consent to construct new vehicular access and landscaped amenity area and close two existing accesses and has been revised from the original submission taking account of Highway Engineer comments. Proposal includes 600 mm high brick walls and landscaped area, paviours to the new access and laid out parking spaces. The parking area is to be constructed of "no fines concrete" with gravel surface.

DEVELOPMENT PLAN/POLICY

Site is just outside the development envelope for Bembridge adjacent SSSI in area liable to flooding and the following policies are considered relevant; Policy G5 (Development Outside Defined Settlements), G6 (Development in Areas Liable to Flooding), C1 (Protection of Landscape Character), C10 (Sites of National Importance for Nature Conservation), D1 (Standards of Design), D4 (External Building Works) and TR7 (Highway Considerations for New Development).

In particular, policy G5 permits development of small scale ancillary to existing housing, industrial, commercial, tourist, recreational or community development, D4 permits works which relate well to character of area, C10 will not permit development if it would adversely affect a SSSI, G6 permits development if adverse affects on adjoining or associated areas will not be exacerbated and there is no increased risk of flooding elsewhere as a result. Policy TR7 permits development that takes account of highway safety to ensure safe movement and separation of vehicular traffic; buses, bicycles and pedestrians and that any new access provides safe conditions for all road users.

CONSULTEE RESPONSES

Highways initially raised concerns which have been addressed by submission of revised plan. Highway Engineer comments that parking spaces need to be 4.8 metres long although only shown to be 4.5 at the moment but is of view this can be conditioned. Recommends conditional approval.

Environment Agency have raised no objection in principle but advises that as the site is adjacent to the Solent and Isle of Wight lagoons cSAC, surface water drainage should not be discharged into the lagoons.

PARISH/TOWN COUNCIL COMMENTS

Bembridge Parish Council recommended approval to the scheme commenting proposal is enhancement to the site and improvement to road safety.

THIRD PARTY REPRESENTATIONS

Local member commented on original scheme: although there is an application for refurbishment of the existing building 1-2 Embankment Road, the adjacent area, currently used as Bembridge Sailing Club car park, is outside the village envelope. Closing one access in order to landscape the plot to add to the existing buildings will increase urbanisation of the area. Also concerned on road safety grounds stating existing two access routes are safer from a highway traffic hazard perspective. Concerned about single two-way access and parking arrangement restricting visibility.

In summary "on the grounds of increased urbanisation and therefore change to the character of the area and chiefly on road safety issues I oppose this application."

One objector (3 letters) main concern relates to potential residential development which is not subject of this application. Comments in respect of revised scheme raises objection relating to congestion on busy road, removal of space for customer parking and access to the chandlery and the dangers that will be caused by road side parking, poor visibility made worse by brick wall, highway safety, loss of scrub, undergrowth and tree barrier.

Two letters of support received from Bembridge Sailing Club although disappointed that amendments have reduced car parking potential.

CRIME & DISORDER IMPLICATIONS

Relevant officer given opportunity to comment, but no observations received.

EVALUATION

The proposed alterations involve the closure of two existing accesses, creation of new access in paviours, provision of walls and parking and landscaped amenity area.

Main consideration is highway safety and whether introduction of wall and landscaping is detrimental to visual amenity of the area.

Potential flood risk and effect on adjacent SSSI is not considered to be greater than current situation. A condition can be imposed to safeguard any potential risk.

In terms of boundary feature and given wall height of only 600, it is considered refusal on grounds of character of area would not be sustainable. The wall will actually define access location.

Concern relating to residential development of the site and loss of trees is not the subject of this application and at the time of report writing no other scheme is pending.

Scheme has been revised to take account of initial highway engineer concerns and a refusal on highway safety grounds is therefore unsustainable.

HUMAN RIGHTS

In coming to this recommendation to grant 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 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 on 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 outlined in this report I am of view that application represents acceptable development complying with Policies G5, G6, C1, C10, D1, D4 and TR7 and recommend accordingly.

RECOMMENDATION - APPROVAL

Conditions/Reasons:

REASON FOR COMMITTEE CONSIDERATION

Report requested by Local Member as he is not prepared to agree to the application being dealt with under the delegated procedure.

LOCATION AND SITE CHARACTERISTICS

Application relates to rectangular plot of land which forms northern section of industrial complex known as Clark Masts which itself is located between Binstead Lodge Road and Wellington Road with access to site served off former highway. Site mainly comprises existing parking area and single storey workshop building.

RELEVANT HISTORY

Various consents in past for related commercial development of site.

DETAILS OF APPLICATION

This is outline application with access to be considered at this time seeking consent in principle for residential development of this site.

Application site incorporates existing hard surface parking area together with single storey workshop to rear (east) of site and involves demolition of small section of existing premises. Access to the site would be via the existing gated access point off Ringwood Road/Binstead Lodge Road.

Illustrative plans submitted with application show site being developed in form of seven pairs of semi-detached properties accessed off existing service road.

DEVELOPMENT PLAN/POLICY

Site has not been allocated for any specific purpose within Unitary Development Plan. Following policies of that plan are considered relevant in this instance:

G1 - Development Envelopes.

H1 - New Developments Within Main Island Towns.

H4 - Unallocated Residential Development.

E3 - Resist Development of Allocated Employment Land for Other Uses.

CONSULTEE RESPONSES

Highway Engineer advises that revised plans should be submitted showing larger turning area and increased road width.

Environmental Health Officer has no adverse comment to make.

Council's Tree and Landscape Officer has inspected the site and advises that there are four magnificent large oaks running diagonally across site and illustrative new car park would necessitate loss of two or three of these trees which would be unacceptable. She advises that additional trees on or near boundaries could be retained.

PARISH/TOWN COUNCIL COMMENTS

Not applicable.

THIRD PARTY REPRESENTATIONS

One letter has been received with writer expressing view that residential development of this land is, on face of it, not unreasonable. However, concern is expressed over proposed density and quality of housing and potential impact on neighbouring residential properties. Concern is also expressed concerning potential overlooking and increased movement of vehicles with consequent impact on highway safety.

CRIME & DISORDER IMPLICATIONS

Relevant Officer given opportunity to comment but no observations received.

EVALUATION

Given site's location within development envelope there is no objection in principle to residential redevelopment of this site. Whilst Policy E3 seeks to protect employment use of existing and allocated employment land it is not considered that this proposal will compromise this particular policy.

Existing parking area can be relocated within site around open space on southern side of site and loss of single storey workshop building will have no impact on existing commercial operation of site.

Members should appreciate that application is pure outline seeking consent in principle for residential use of this site and given space around mature trees on site it is considered that the site itself represents opportunity to provide additional residential accommodation without adversely impacting on either the existing mature trees or commercial operation of the site itself. Subject to detail comments of Highway Engineer which can be incorporated in subsequent detailed application as can any requirement to operate access to site as shared surface.

HUMAN RIGHTS

In coming to this recommendation to grant permission consideration has been given to the Articles of the European Convention on Human Rights. Impact this development may have on owners/occupiers of neighbouring property has been carefully considered and whilst there may be some interference with rights of these people balance has to be achieved with rights of applicant to develop land in manner proposed. Insofar as there is an interference with the rights of others it is considered necessary for the protection of the rights and freedoms of the applicant. It is also considered that such action is proportional to the legitimate aim and in the public interest.

JUSTIFICATION FOR RECOMMENDATION

It is considered that development of this site for residential purposes represents windfall site and any such approval will not compromise either existing commercial activity on site or retention of mature trees which characterise the site. Development is seen as complying with policies G1, H1 and H4 of the Unitary Development Plan and does not compromise Policy E3 and I recommend accordingly.

RECOMMENDATION - APPROVAL

Conditions/Reasons: