1.
THE RECOMMENDATIONS CONTAINED IN THIS REPORT OTHER THAN PART 1 SCHEDULE
AND DECISIONS ARE DISCLOSED FOR INFORMATION PURPOSES ONLY.
2.
THE RECOMMENDATIONS WILL BE CONSIDERED ON THE DATE INDICATED ABOVE IN
THE FIRST INSTANCE. (In some
circumstances, consideration of an item may be deferred to a later meeting).
3.
THE RECOMMENDATIONS MAY OR MAY NOT BE ACCEPTED BY THE DEVELOPMENT
CONTROL COMMITTEE AND MAY BE SUBJECT TO ALTERATION IN THE LIGHT OF FURTHER
INFORMATION RECEIVED BY THE OFFICERS AND PRESENTED TO MEMBERS AT MEETINGS.
4.
YOU ARE ADVISED TO CHECK WITH THE DIRECTORATE OF ENVIRONMENT SERVICES
(TEL: 821000) AS TO WHETHER OR NOT A DECISION HAS BEEN TAKEN ON ANY ITEM BEFORE
YOU TAKE ANY ACTION ON ANY OF THE RECOMMENDATIONS CONTAINED IN THIS REPORT.
5.
THE COUNCIL CANNOT ACCEPT ANY RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE CONSEQUENCES OF ANY
ACTION TAKEN BY ANY PERSON ON ANY OF THE RECOMMENDATIONS.
The various documents, letters and other correspondence referred to in the Report in respect of each planning application or other item of business.
Members are
advised that every application on this report has been considered against a background of the implications of
the Crime and Disorder Act 1998 and, where necessary, consultations have taken
place with the Crime and Disorder Facilitator and Architectural Liaison
Officer. Any responses received prior
to publication are featured in the report under the heading Representations.
Members are advised that every application on this report has been considered against a background of the implications of the Human Rights Act 1998 and, following advice from the Head of Legal and Democratic Services, in recognition of a duty to give reasons for a decision, each report will include a section explaining and giving a justification for the recommendation.
LIST OF PLANNING APPLICATIONS ON REPORT TO COMMITTEE – 18
JANUARY 2005
|
1. |
TCP/02215/U P/02148/04 Porch; alterations to
roof to provide additional living accommodation at 1st floor level to include
two dormer windows on front elevation The Old Dairy, Gusters
Shute, Calbourne, Newport |
Calbourne |
Refusal |
|
2. |
TCP/03886/W P/01634/04 Demolition of garage
workshops & stores; construction of a terrace of 5 houses and a pair of
semi-detached houses with parking; alterations to vehicular access Land adjacent, forming
part of Binstead Auto Centre, Binstead Road, Ryde |
Ryde |
Conditional Approval |
|
3. |
TCP/12808/L P/02099/04 Change of use from place
of worship to museum & heritage centre with ancillary office &
storage areas St. Thomas Church, St.
Thomas Street, Ryde |
Ryde |
Conditional Approval |
|
4. |
TCP/14938/K P/01187/04 Single and two storey
extension to provide additional bedrooms, day room and lift shaft (revised
scheme) Kinloch Tay Residential
Care Home, Granville Road, Totland Bay |
Totland |
Refusal |
|
5. |
TCP/21255/B P/01954/04 Outline for a dwelling Land adjacent Woodlands,
Quarr Road, Ryde |
Ryde |
Refusal |
|
6. |
TCP/21861/B P/02296/04 Change
of use from offices to residential 17, Quay Street, Newport |
Newport |
Conditional Approval |
|
7. |
TCP/22460/H P/02092/04 New block of four
classrooms and associated accommodation Medina High School,
Fairlee Road, Newport |
Newport |
Conditional Approval |
|
8. |
TCP/22587/C P/01959/04 Demolition of building;
outline for residential development of 20 flats in 2 blocks Xtreme Play, The Old
Drill Hall, Drill Hall Road, Newport |
Newport |
Conditional Approval |
|
9. |
TCP/26665 P/02271/04 Single storey extension
to form replacement porch/utility area & shower room 2 Kings Close, Bembridge |
Bembridge |
Conditional Approval |
LIST OF PLANNING APPLICATIONS ON
REPORT TO COMMITTEE –
18 JANUARY 2004
|
1. |
TCP/02215/U P/02148/04 Parish/Name: Calbourne
Ward: Brighstone and Calbourne Registration Date: 12/10/2004 -
Full Planning Permission Officer: Mrs. H. Byrne Tel: (01983) 823594 Applicant: Mrs T Hayles Porch; alterations to roof to
provide additional living accommodation at 1st floor level to include two
dormer windows on front elevation The Old Dairy, Gusters Shute,
Calbourne, Newport, Isle Of Wight, PO304PT |
REASON FOR COMMITTEE
CONSIDERATION
Report has been requested
by local member, Councillor J Wareham as she has written in support of the
application and is not prepared for the application to be dealt with under the
delegated procedure.
Reasons for this request
are: She does not feel that the proposals conflict with the visual integrity of
this part of Calbourne; there are other properties within the area that have
gables; the extension will not be seen from the side as the telephone exchange
is sited in front of the bungalow and the bungalow is set back from the road;
two properties to the west, a previously small cottage has been
enlarged/rebuilt. The applicants provide a shop in the village of Calbourne
where there are few facilities and wish to provide accommodation for their
growing family; the height of the proposed extension will be no bigger than
existing.
PROCESSING INFORMATION
This is a minor
application, the processing of which will have taken 14 weeks to the date of
the committee meeting. The application has exceeded the prescribed 8 week
period for the determination of planning applications due to the need for
committee consideration.
LOCATION AND SITE
CHARACTERISTICS
Application relates to a
simple unassertive chalet bungalow in a rural location outside of the
development envelope but sited on the main road, running through the village,
the building is sited slightly set back from the road with a small front garden
bordered by a low fence, the bungalow occupies a prominent position on the hill
as you approach Calbourne from Newport.
The street scene consists
of a mixture of properties, stone and rendered, of various sizes and different
positions in relation to the road.
RELEVANT HISTORY
TCP 2215 P – Conversion
of redundant farm buildings to form manager’s accommodation with office and
dairy storage unit for milk rounds, new vehicle access, service road and
parking at the The Old Dairy, Newport Road, Calbourne. Consent granted May
1993, during the conversion a large part of the building was removed entirely
causing the consent to be no longer valid as the alterations were deemed to be
a rebuild.
TCP 2215 R – Construction
of manager’s dwelling for dairy business at the site of The Old Dairy, Newport
Road, Calbourne. Conditional approval August 1993, subject to agricultural
occupancy condition.
DETAILS OF APPLICATION
Consent is sought for
alterations to the front elevation of the property to include a porch, two
dormer windows and a large central gable with a semi circular window. The
additions will create minimal additional useable space but seeks to provide a
more interesting front elevation to that which currently exists.
Agent acting on behalf of
the applicant considers that there is no obvious pattern to the street scene
and no building line and that the existing telephone exchange screens the site
from the west. Gable ends are visible on both directions on Sun Hill and the
proposal does not induce overlooking nor does it affect amenity.
The agent also considers
that the existing roof is too bland and that a return gable is not uncommon on
a village building and would break the blandness of the roof by putting the
building into two segments.
DEVELOPMENT PLAN/POLICY
Site is located outside
of the development envelope. Relevant Unitary Development Plan policies are as
follows:
S6 – All development will
be expected to be of a high standard of design
C1 – Protection of
Landscape Character
D1 – Standards of design
D2 – Standards for
development within the site
H7 - Extension and
alteration of existing properties
G4 - General locational
criteria for development
CONSULTEE RESPONSES
Conservation Officer
considers proposal is contrary to policies D1 and D2. Officer considers
proposals to change what is a simple and unassertive building into one which is
fussy and confused and which is poorly designed both from the front and sides,
and thus in the oblique when passing the site. The new gable addition over
dominates when viewed from the side and in conjunction with the dormers and
porch provides a disproportionate and unbalanced composition.
The mix of flat roofed
dormer to the rear, new gabled dormers to the front incorporating diagonal
boarding facings, a lean-to porch and a large semi circular window to a large
central gable springing from the centre of a window on one side, includes many
different elements which do not sit well together and lead to a poorly designed
composition.
PARISH /TOWN COUNCIL
COMMENTS
Calbourne Parish Council
has no objection to the scheme.
THIRD PARTY
REPRESENTATIONS
None received
CRIME AND DISORDER
IMPLICATIONS
No crime and disorder
implications are anticipated.
EVALUATION
Determining factors in
considering this application are the size, design and form of the proposal in
relation to the existing and surrounding properties, the impact on the
character of the area and whether the proposal maintains or enhances the
character of the built environment.
Although a modest
extension to the front of the property in terms of additional living
accommodation provided, the cumulative affect of these additions is to change
what is a simple and unassertive building into one which is fussy and confused.
The main concern in this instance is the bulk that is added to the front
elevation of the property, particularly when viewed from the east approaching
Calbourne. It is acknowledged that there is a mixture of properties within the
small street scene both in terms of design and materials and that the telephone
exchange building to the west has a gable fronting the highway which will
screen part of the proposal to some degree. There is no adverse impact on
neighbouring privacy.
The Local Member and
Agent’s comments have been fully considered but do not carry sufficient weight
to outweigh the principle concern in respect of the design. The fact that the
applicant provides services in a village where there are few facilities should
not carry any weight in the determination of this application.
In conclusion, the
overriding concern is the design of the proposal in relation to the original
dwelling. The inappropriately complicated design with its height and mass and
unbalancing effect particularly in respect of the side elevations results in
and over dominant addition which does not maintain or enhance the quality and
character of the built environment.
HUMAN RIGHTS
In coming to this
recommendation to refuse planning permission, consideration has been given to
the rights set out in Article 8 (Right to Privacy) and Article 1 of the First
Protocol (Right to Peaceful Enjoyment of Possessions) of the European
Convention on Human Rights. The impacts this development might have on the owners/occupiers
of the other property in the area and other third parties have been carefully
considered. Whilst there may be some interference with the rights of the
applicant to develop the land in the manner proposed, it is considered that the
recommendation to refuse is proportional to the legitimate aim of the Council’s
Unitary Development Plan in the public interest.
JUSTIFICATION FOR
RECOMMENDATION
Having given due regard
and appropriate weight to all material considerations, the proposed alterations to the front
elevation of the property, represents an unacceptable form of development,
failing to enhance the quality and character of the built environment and the
visual integrity of the site.
RECOMMENDATION – REFUSAL
Conditions/Reasons:
|
|
The proposed
alterations to the front elevation of the property by reason of size, design
materials and appearance would be an intrusive, overcomplicated and over
dominant alteration, out of scale and character with the original dwelling,
failing to respect the visual integrity of the site and detrimental to the
visual amenity of the area. The proposal is therefore contrary to policy S6
(Be of a high standard of design) and policies C1 ((Protection of landscape
Character), D1 (Standards of design), D2 (Standards of development within the
site), H7 (Alterations and extensions of existing properties) and G4 (General
Locational Criteria) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan. |
|
2. |
TCP/03886/W P/01634/04 Parish/Name: Ryde
Ward: Binstead Registration Date: 28/09/2004 -
Full Planning Permission Officer: Mr. P. Stack Tel: (01983) 823575 Applicant: Binstead Garage Ltd Demolition of garage workshops
& stores; construction of a terrace of 5 houses and a pair of
semi-detached houses with parking; alterations to vehicular access land adjacent, forming part of
Binstead Auto Centre, Binstead Road, Ryde, PO33 |
REASON FOR COMMITTEE CONSIDERATION
The local member Councillor Fox has
requested that this application is determined by the Development Control
Committee on the basis that the application raises issues including highway
access, impact on adjoining residents and history of previous refusals on the
site.
PROCESSING INFORMATION
This is a minor application the
processing of which has gone beyond the prescribed eight week period for
determination due to case officer workload and need for committee
consideration.
LOCATION AND SITE CHARACTERISTICS
Application relates to former garage
workshops associated with Binstead Garage which itself is situated on northern
side of Binstead Hill approximately midway between junctions Pitts Lane and
Brookfield Gardens. North western corner of application site is bounded by a
stream and access is gained over existing forecourt area which is shared with
garage premises and residential property rear of garage.
RELEVANT HISTORY
Application seeking consent for
erection of nine houses in two terraces was refused by members at their meeting
held on the 27 August 2002 following site inspection in July. Reasons for
refusal related to lack of provision of satisfactory range in choice of
dwelling types and repetitious visual nature of proposal, impact on vegetation
on site and potential unacceptable living conditions. Subsequent appeal
dismissed in May 2003 with inspector of opinion that form, siting and layout of
development would not be sympathetic to surrounding residential area, failing
to maintain or enhance quality and character of built environment, loss of
trees and lack of window to window to window distance between opposing terraced
properties.
Subsequent applications seeking
consent for seven houses in two terraces refused in March 2004. Reasons for
refusal related to undesirable arrangement of dwellings likely to prejudice
privacy and amenities in neighbouring residential sites, failing to maintain
and enhance in quality and character of built environment, lack of detailed
accurate tree survey.
DETAILS OF APPLICATION
Application seeks consent for
construction of terrace of five dwellings together with construction of pair of
semi detached dwellings on this irregularly shaped site.
Main terrace would run diagonally
across site (north west to south east) with pair of dwellings positioned in
south western corner of site. Each dwelling would comprise living room and
kitchen diner at ground floor level with two bedrooms and study above with roof
accommodation providing additional bedroom and en-suite facilities. Buildings
in main would give impression of two storey development with limited dormer
additions.
Site would be served by existing
opening from adjoining garage site and provide access to nine car parking
spaces with land between dwellings shown to be landscaped to provide pedestrian
forecourt areas.
Each property would have its own
individual rear amenity space and site would be bounded by 1.8 m high close
boarded fencing along its western and northern boundaries. Tree survey does
indicate that while several trees including two ash and two small sycamores are
to be removed from site remaining trees particularly on western boundary of
site will be retained. Plan also indicates additional planting.
DEVELOPMENT PLAN/POLICY
PPG (Housing) encourages efficient
use of urban land by promoting higher densities whilst also stressing need for
good design.
Site is situated within development
envelope for Ryde and relevant policies are considered to be:
S1 New Development will be concentrated
within existing urban areas
S6 All development will be expected to be of a
high standard of design
G1 Development Envelopes for Towns and
Villages
G4 General Locational Criteria for
Development
D1 Standards of Design
D2 Standards of Development within the
Site
H4 Unallocated Residential Development to
be Restricted to Defined Settlement
TR7 Highway Considerations for New
Development
C12
Development affecting Trees and
Woodlands
CONSULTEE RESPONSES
Fire Engineer advises
that the application does not appear to represent any alteration to
highway/access arrangements. No objection is raised and he repeats comments
previously recommended in respect of previous applications.
Environmental Health
Officer has no adverse comments to make in respect of this application as
regards notice over fumes. However Contaminated Land Office recommends standard
conditions requiring site assessment to assess potential contamination issues.
PARISH/TOWN COUNCIL
COMMENTS
Parish/Town Council
comments not applicable.
THIRD PARTY
REPRESENTATIONS
Two letters have been
received raising no objection to proposed development.
Two letters have been
received objecting to proposal on the following grounds:
·
Over development of site
·
Increase in traffic and pollution problems
·
Impact on neighbouring residential occupiers and in particular proximity
of
dwellings to boundaries
·
Insufficient detail
·
Loss of trees
·
Inadequate car parking
·
Drainage problems
CRIME AND DISORDER
IMPLICATIONS
No crime and disorder
implications are anticipated
EVALUATION
While site itself is not
allocated for any specific purpose within the Unitary Development Plan site
does lie within development envelope and there is therefore no objection in
principle to residential redevelopment of this brownfield site.
Application seeks consent
to demolish part two part single storey workshop premises (now vacant) and
replace with seven residential units. In view of previous industrial use of
premises, comments of both Environment Agency and Contaminated Land Officer are
appreciated and the imposition of conditions can satisfactorily overcome this particular
constraint.
Provision of nine off
street parking spaces complies with adopted zonal parking policy of this
location.
As with previous schemes
it is expected that development will connect with foul sewer system whilst in
terms of surface water run off it should be noted that impervious surface area
of development is significantly less than is currently the case in respect of
industrial workshop and hard surfaced areas. Therefore surface water run off
from site should be reduced to reflect reduction in impervious surfaces. This
will drain into existing stream and in view of reduced flow of site no
sustainable objection can be raised on this particular issue. Environment
Agency raised no objection in principle when considering previous proposal to development
of this site.
With regards highway
issue Highway Engineer has maintained consistent approach in that, whilst
existing access is sub standard in terms of visibility nor reasonable objection
can be raised on highway grounds to replacement of industrial workshops with
residential use as it is likely that vehicle movements will be similar or
indeed less than most recent previous use which could recommence at any time.
When comparing current
proposal and previously rejected schemes proposal now involves orientation of
buildings which will minimize impact on residential development to north west
whilst seeking to retain as many trees on site as practicably possible. There
is no direct window to window overlooking with revised scheme and whilst each property
has benefit of individual private amenity space. Development of site represents
an opportunity to provide appropriately designed and landscaped central
pedestrian forecourt area.
It is considered that
revised proposal has taken on board criticisms made in respect of previous
schemes and by Inspector in dealing with appeal on this site. Providing
appropriate conditions are attached particularly regarding landscaping
requirements it is considered that
application represents opportunity to remove non conforming user which giving
usages involved had potentials to impact on surrounding residential occupiers.
Whilst proposal does result in loss of previous employment generator given
relatively small scale of operation it is not considered to be sufficiently
significant to raise policy objection in respect of seeking to retain
employment land.
It is considered that in
view of above comments proposal represents appropriate development of brown
field site which minimizes impact on locality and adjoining residential
occupiers in particular.
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
DECISION
Having given due regard
and appropriate weight to all material considerations referred to in this
report I am of the opinion that the application site is capable of
accommodating seven dwellings as proposed without impacting significantly on
neighbouring properties or the character of the area in general. Proposal is
therefore consistent with relevant policies of the Unitary Development Plan.
RECOMMENDATION - APPROVAL
Conditions/Reasons:
|
1 |
Time limit - full -
A10 |
|
2 |
Details of roads, etc, design and
constr - J01 |
|
3 |
No dwelling shall be
occupied until those parts of the roads and drainage system have been
constructed in accordance with a scheme agreed by the Local Planning
Authority. Reason: To ensure an adequate standard of highway
access and drainage for the proposed dwellings and to comply with policy TR7
(Highway Considerations) of the IW Unitary Development Plan. |
|
4 |
No (dwelling) hereby
permitted shall be occupied until space has been laid out within the site and
[in accordance with drawing number (515-8)] for 9 cars/bicycles to be parked
and for vehicles to turn so that they may enter and leave the site in forward
gear. The space shall not thereafter be used for any purpose other than that
approved in accordance with this condition. Reason: In the interests of highway safety and to
comply with policy TR7 (Highway Considerations) of the IW Unitary Development
Plan. |
|
5 |
Withdrawn PD right for
windows/dormers - R03 |
|
6 |
Only Foul drainage from
the development hereby approved shall be to the main foul sewer. Reason: to prevent
pollution of the water environments and to comply with Policy U11
(Infrastructure and Service Provision) of the Isle of Wight Unitary
Development Plan, |
|
7 |
No part of the
development hereby permitted shall commence until there has been submitted to
and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority: a) a desk-top study documenting all
previous and existing land uses of the site and adjacent land in accordance
with national guidance as set out in Contaminated Land Research Report Nos. 2
& 3 BS10175: 2001; and unless otherwise
agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority b) a site investigation report
documenting the ground conditions of the site and incorporating chemical and
gas analysis identified as appropriate by the desk-top study in accordance
with BS10175: 2001 - "Investigation of Potentially Contaminated Sites -
Code of Practice", and unless otherwise
agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority c) a remediation scheme to
deal with any contaminant including an implementation timetable monitoring
proposals and a remediation verification methodology. the verification
decontamination and an appropriately qualified person shall oversee the
implementation of all remediation. Reason: To protect the environment and prevent
harm to human health by ensuring that where necessary, the land is remediated
to an appropriate standard in order to comply with Part IIA of the
Environmental Protection Plan. |
|
8 |
The construction of
buildings shall not commence until the investigator has provided a report,
which shall include confirmation that all remediation measures have been
carried out fully in accordance with the scheme. The report shall also
include results of the verification programme of post-remediation sampling
and monitoring in order to demonstrate that the required remediation has been
fully met. Future monitoring proposals and reporting shall also be detailed
in the report Reason: To protect the
environment and prevent harm to human health by ensuring that were necessary,
the land is remediated to an appropriate standard in order to comply with
Part IIA of the Environment Protection Act 1990. |
|
9 |
No development shall
take place until samples of materials/details of the materials and finishes,
to be used in the construction of the external surfaces of the development
hereby permitted have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local
Planning Authority. Development shall be carried out in accordance with the
approved details. Reason: In the interests of the amenities of the
area and to comply with policy D1 (Standards of Design) of the IW Unitary
Development Plan. |
|
10 |
Before the development
commences a landscaping and tree planting scheme and details of other hard
surfacing shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Local
Planning Authority. Such scheme shall specify the position, species and size
of trees to be planted, the phasing and timing of such planting and shall
include provision for its maintenance during the first 5 years from the date
of planting. Reason: To ensure that the
appearance of the development is satisfactory and to comply with Policy D3
(Landscaping) of the IW Unitary Development Plan. |
|
3. |
TCP/12808/L P/02099/04 Parish/Name: Ryde
Ward: Ryde North West Registration Date: 04/10/2004 -
Full Planning Permission Officer: Mr. D. Long Tel: (01983) 823854 Applicant: IW Council Change of use from place of
worship to museum & heritage centre with ancillary office & storage
areas (application to be determined by Development Control Committee) St. Thomas Church, St. Thomas
Street, Ryde, PO33 |
REASON FOR COMMITTEE CONSIDERATION
This is a minor application. This is
a change of use application to a historical building
(Grade II listed) within the Ryde region submitted by the Local Authority and
should therefore be considered by this committee.
PROCESSING INFORMATION
This is a minor application the
processing of which has taken sixteen weeks to date and has gone beyond the
prescribed eight week period for determination of planning applications because
of the need for consideration by this Development Control Committee, and due to
officer case load.
LOCATION AND SITE CHARACTERISTICS
St Thomas Church lies within the
Conservation Area of Ryde just outside the town centre boundary. The front
elevation faces St Thomas Street, while the rear faces Church Lane. The area of
land to the south of the site is designated as 'open space' and slopes upwards
towards Lind Street with the natural topography. Both St Thomas Street and
Church Lane slope down towards Ryde Esplanade in a steep gradient. There are a
range of surrounding land uses from flats and houses to shops, bars and
restaurants all of which are in close proximity to this building.
Residential dwellings are found to
the north and east of the building while land to the west comprises of business premises previously
converted from residential properties. There is variation in design,
architectural style and character within the area, ranging from historical
buildings (some of which are listed) to newer built properties through the
undergoing regeneration of the Ryde region.
The church, has not been used for a
number of years (last used for worship in July 1997) and has subsequently been
barricaded by a metalled barrier blocking access to this site. The surrounding
curtilage is either hard standing or gardens, comprising of land or a number of
established trees.
The church is a Grade 2 listed
building, and located within the conservation area of Ryde.
RELEVANT HISTORY
None
DETAILS OF APPLICATION
This application is for the change
of use from a place of worship to a museum and heritage centre, with ancillary
office and storage areas. The overall aim is to create a project that is
regarded to be a centre of excellence for building restoration and heritage
techniques. There are no changes to the external facade of the building, with
all alterations being internal.
The ground floor consists of two
offices, one storage area, a site shop, lecture area (housing approximately 40
seats) and four display units, all of which are sub divided by moveable
partition walls. The aim being not to change any of the internal building
fabric to the protected building.
There is also access to the first
floor which is sub divided into two public areas, one being permanently open,
with the other only accessed by prior arrangement. There is also a modest sized
office being ancillary to the works of this operation.
The centre for building restoration
and heritage techniques will involve public displays involving masonry repairs,
ties, structural anchors to pointing, roofing and thatching (to name a few).
DEVELOPMENT PLAN/POLICY
Relevant Policies of the Unitary
Development Plan are considered to be as follows:
S6 To be of a High Standard of Design
G4 General Locational Criteria
D1 Standards of Design
B2 Settings of Listed Buildings
B3
Change of Use of Listed
Buildings
B6 Protection and Enhancement of
Conservation Areas
T1 The Promotion of Tourism and the
Extension of the Season
T2 Tourism Related Development (Other
than Accommodation)
CONSULTEE RESPONSES
The Conservation Officer suggests
that there will be no impact to the Conservation Area or to the Grade 2 listed
building and therefore he does not wish to comment, but requests that a
condition is applied, that all internal alterations must use moveable partition
walls that will not be fixed to the internal building fabric.
PARISH/TOWN COUNCIL COMMENTS
No comment
THIRD PARTY REPRESENTATIONS
This application has attracted no
letters of representation
CRIME & DISORDER IMPLICATIONS
No crime and disorder implications
anticipated
EVALUATION
In consideration to this application
members must consider Policy B3 (Change of Use of Listed Buildings). This
policy states that planning applications for the change of use to listed
buildings will be approved providing that the alternative will not
detrimentally affect the long term structure of the building and would preserve
any historic, archeological or special architectural features it possesses.
In viewing the submitted plans it
would appear that there would be no detrimental impact to the long term
structure of the building as the external building fabric will remain as
existing, with only minor changes to the internal structure. The Conservation
Officer suggests that these internal alterations will not hinder the long term
sustainability of the building as the changes are relatively minor, only being
movable partition walls that respect the original built form.
The Local Planning Authority do not
encourage inappropriate uses within change of use applications to listed
buildings, but it is deemed that the use hereby proposed is sympathetic to; and
will cause no detrimental impact to the building. It could be argued that this
change of use is appropriate as it will ensure the building is maintained,
restored and up kept in line with the principles for use hereby proposed.
Members should note that PPG 15 (Planning and the Historic Environment) states
"the principle aim should be to identify the optimum viable use that is
compatible with the fabric, interior and setting of the historic
building". It is deemed that this is a compatible use, being sympathetic
to the buildings character and is considered a particularly important issue as
the church is subject to a redundancy scheme which provides for the sale of
this redundant church.
By reason of its position,
relationship with other uses in the area and its location within Ryde town
centre there will be no impact to third parties whatsoever. There will be no
loss of amenity to neighbours as there will be no intensification of use in
comparison with the existing. The use will not detrimentally affect the
character and appearance of the Conservation Area as the application preserves
the historic building which has been a landmark feature within the Ryde region.
St Thomas Church is located within Zone 1 of the parking guidelines and
therefore no provision is necessary and can be met within the vicinity of the
nearby car parks.
HUMAN RIGHTS
In coming to this
recommendation to grant planning permission consideration has been given to the
rights set out in article 8 (Rights to Privacy) and article 1 of the lst
Protocol (Rights to peoples enjoyment of possessions) of the European
Convention on Human Rights. The impact this development might have on the
owners/occupiers of other properties in the area and other third parties have
been carefully considered.
Whilst there may be some
interference with the rights of these people this has to be balanced with the
rights of the applicant to develop the land in the manner proposed. Insofar as
there is an interference with the rights of others it is considered necessary
for the protection of the rights and freedom of the applicant. It is also
considered that such action is proportional to the legitimate aim of the
Council’s unitary development plan and in the public interest.
JUSTIFICATION FOR DECISION
Having given due regard to
appropriate weight of all material considerations referred to in this report it
is considered that, having regard to the spatial relationship of the proposal
with nearby residential properties and the nature of use to the listed building
it is deemed that this application is in accordance with policies contained
within the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan, having no detrimental impact
to the long term sustainability of the listed building, Conservation Area or
Ryde region.
RECOMMENDATION - APPROVAL
Conditions/Reasons:
|
1 |
The development hereby
permitted shall be begun before the expiration of 5 years from date of this
permission. Reason: To comply with Section 91 of the Town and
Country Planning Act 1990. |
|
2 |
The internal
alterations hereby approved shall only use moveable partition walls that are
not fixed to the building fabric whatsoever unless prior written approval has
been granted by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: In the interest of the
amenities of the area, to preserve this historic building fabric and to be in
accordance with Policies D1 (Standards of Design), and Policy B3 (Change of
Use of Listed Building) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan. |
|
4. |
TCP/14938/K P/01187/04 Parish/Name: Totland Ward: Totland Registration Date: 01/06/2004 -
Full Planning Permission Officer: Miss. S. Gooch Tel: (01983) 823568 Applicant: Mr & Mrs J Fuller Single and two storey extension to
provide additional bedrooms, day room and lift shaft (revised scheme) Kinloch Tay Residential Care Home,
Granville Road, Totland Bay, Isle Of Wight, PO390AX |
REASON FOR COMMITTEE CONSIDERATION
The Chairman, Councillor Mrs Miller
requested that the application is considered by The Committee as she considers
there to be a number of issues to be resolved.
PROCESSING INFORMATION
This is a minor application, the
processing of which has taken thirty three weeks to date and has gone beyond
the prescribed eight week period for determination of planning application due
to the need for a further consultation, case officer workload and the request
from the Chairman for Committee consideration.
LOCATION AND SITE CHARACTERISTICS
Kinloch Tay is a large 12 bedroom,
residential care home located on northern side of Granville Road some 60 metres
west of its junction with The Broadway. Front elevation is cream painted with
side and rear elevations being constructed in red brick under a concrete
interlocking tile roof.
Granville Road is characterised by
large properties varying in designs with strong presence of gable features.
Kinloch Tay is primarily a two storey property set back five metres from the
road with single storey additions. To the rear is a large amenity area which
slopes up in a northerly direction and measures some 25 metres x 19 metres.
RELEVANT HISTORY
TCP/14938/H - Full Planning
Permission granted February 1998 for alterations, two storey extension and
extension at first floor level to provide additional accommodation.
TCP/14938/J - Application for a
single and two storey extension to provide additional bedrooms, dayroom and lift
shaft was refused December 2003 as proposal by reason of its size and position
in relation to the adjoining property would be overbearing and over dominant.
It was considered that this intrusive and unneighbourly addition would have an
adverse effect on the amenities enjoyed by the occupants of the neighbouring
property.
DETAILS OF APPLICATION
A revised scheme has been submitted
for a single and two storey extension to provide additional bedrooms, dayroom
and lift shaft. These alterations and extensions would increase the number of
bedrooms to a total of twenty. When compared with the previous proposals
(refused in December 2003), the two storey element has been reduced in length
by 8.40 metres. The single storey element which measures 21.70 metres will be
cut into the bank.
DEVELOPMENT PLAN/POLICY
Site is located within the
development envelope, as defined on the Unitary Development Plan.
Relevant policies of the plan are
considered to be as follows:
S1 New development will be concentrated within existing
areas
S6 All development will be expected to be of a
high standard of design
G4 General Locational Criteria for Development
G7 Unstable Land
D1 Standards of Design
D2 Standards for Development within the Site
TR7 Highway Considerations for New Development
U9 Residential Care and Nursing Home
Accommodation
U11 Infrastructure and Services Provision
P5 Reducing the Impact of Noise
CONSULTEE RESPONSES
Highway Engineer does not consider
proposal would have any highway safety implications.
Commission for Social Care
Inspection raises no objection to this proposal.
Southern Water has concerns about
the limited capacity of the sewers in this area and confirm that for new
development sites in this locality there is insufficient capacity within the
existing sewers. There is no separate surface water system and a considerable
amount of surface water is discharged into the combined sewage system. This
system is only there due to historical reasons and is a potential cause of
flooding during periods of heavy or prolonged rain. However they do confirm
that they would prefer that an alternative means of disposal of surface water
be used.
After consulting with head of Adult
Services they would be unable to support proposal for residential care unit on the
basis that there is a greater need for extra care sheltered housing flats.
Environmental Health raised no
comment.
PARISH/TOWN COUNCILS COMMENTS
Totland Parish Council believe that
the reduction in size of the proposed property does not alter the reasons given
for the previous refusal of planning permission and oppose to this proposal as
overdevelopment.
THIRD PARTY REPRESENTATIONS
Seven letters were received from local residents objecting to the application on grounds which can be summarised as follow:
·
Parking Problems
·
Sewers are already overloaded
·
Not suitable development in a residential area
·
Overdevelopment due to height and size resulting in loss of privacy and
light
·
Noise
·
Concerns over level of excavation work as it would cause instability
·
Proposal will create an imbalance on front elevation
CRIME AND DISORDER
IMPLICATIONS
No crime and disorder
implications are anticipated
EVALUATION
Determining factors in
considering this application are matters of policy and principle, scale, mass
and design, overall site coverage and how proposal affects neighbouring
properties.
Site is located within
the development envelope as defined in the Isle of Wight Unitary Development
Plan. Resubmission follows previous refusal for reason of proposals size and
position in relation to the adjoining property would be an overbearing, over
dominant, intrusive and unneighbourly addition.
Proposal now incorporates
extensions and alterations to change property from a twelve bedroom nursing
home to a total of twenty bedrooms with a day room and a lift shaft. The two
storey element has now been reduced in length by 8.40 metres. However I am
still of the opinion that current proposal is still excessive in size and has
an unacceptable impact on the visual amenity creating intrusive and
unneighbourly additions.
Windows at first floor
level in the north west elevation have been reduced in number, comprising of
three, one serving a WC, one serving a hallway and one serving a bedroom.
Having regard to windows within the original building I do not consider there
to be a further loss of privacy/overlooking. Ground floor windows primarily
serve a hallway. However there is currently a 1.8 metre high larch lap fence on
the north west boundary alleviating any loss of amenity.
Previous approval granted
February 1998 was for an extension on the front at ground floor set back 675 mm
from the front wall of the property to increase lounge/dining area. A first
floor extension was also proposed over the existing and new ground floor
elements along the full depth of the building to provide four additional
bedrooms, all with en suite facilities. Plans also showed a fire escape within
the building leading to an external door and stairway running down the side of
the extension from the first floor towards the rear garden. This consent was
not implemented.
Concerns were raised on
parking issues and after consulting with the Highways Engineers they raised no
objections. With regards to issues relating to the limited capacity of the
sewers in the area and following consultations with Southern Water it has been
identified that there is insufficient capacity on the system and they would
prefer that surface water from this development was not discharged into the
combined sewer to alleviate any problems. After consulting with the Council's
Land Drainage Officer he has confirmed that there is an existing highway
surface water system which passes this site into which surface water could be
discharged.
In order to identify the
need for extra accommodation within residential care homes the Isle of Wight
Social Services Inspectorate have published a report dated September 1999. They
acknowledged that out of a population of approximately 130,000 people on the
Isle of Wight, the retired population is close to the highest of any council in
England, with an "over 75" population that is predicted to continue
increasing. However, members should note that after consulting with the head of
adult services they would support extra care sheltered housing but would not be
happy to support this type of application.
On a national scale a
report was prepared by Dame Denise Platt - Chairman, Commission for Social Care
Inspections. It was found that elderly people value their independence and
would prefer to stay in their own homes either receiving care from family or
friends (62%) or professional care (56%), rather than move into sheltered
housing or care home. This information does not provide overwhelming support
for proposals involving the provision of additional residential care home
accommodation.
Due to the large amount
of excavation works required in connection with this proposal neighbours are
concerned that this would cause instability to the ground as the land rises
considerably in a northerly direction and it is the applicants intention to cut
into the bank. PPG 14 (Development on Unstable Land) states "The
responsibility for determining land is suitable for a particular purpose rests
primarily with the developer" and then goes on to say "The developer
should therefore make a thorough investigation on the assessment of the ground
to ensure it is stable or that any actual or potential instability can be
overcome by appropriate remedial,
preventative or precautionary measures."
Taking all issues into
account I remain of the opinion that proposal represents overdevelopment with
unacceptable impact on the neighbouring property and is an unacceptable form of
development. In this instance, I do not consider that there is sufficient
demand for the type of accommodation being provided to outweigh these concerns.
HUMAN RIGHTS
In coming to this
recommendation to refuse planning permission, consideration has been given to
the rights set out in Article 8 (Right to Privacy) and Article 1 of the First
Protocol (Right to Peaceful Enjoyment of Possessions) of the European
Convention on Human Rights. The impacts this development might have on the
owners/occupiers of the other property in the area and other third parties have
been carefully considered. Whilst there may be some interference with the
rights of the applicant to develop the land in the manner proposed, it is
considered that the recommendation to refuse is proportional to the legitimate
aim of the Council’s Unitary Development Plan in the public interest.
JUSTIFICATION FOR
RECOMMENDATION
Having given due regard
and appropriate weight to all material considerations referred to in this
report, I am of the opinion that the proposal is an unacceptable form of development creating intrusive and unneighbourly
addition and would have an adverse affect on the amenities enjoyed by the
occupant of the neighbouring property. In view of the above I so not consider
that the proposal does not comply with Policies of the Isle of Wight Unitary
Development Plan or that there is sufficient demand for the type of
accommodation proposed to outweigh these concerns.
RECOMMENDATION -
REFUSAL
Conditions/Reasons:
|
1 |
Reason: The proposal
represents overdevelopment of the site which by reasons of its size and
position in relation to the adjoining property would be overbearing and over
dominant. This intrusive and unneighbourly addition would have an adverse
effect on the amenities enjoyed by the occupants of the neighbouring property
and would be contrary to Strategic Policy S6 (All Development Would Be
Expected to be of a High Standard of Design) and Policies D1(Standards of
Design), D2 (Standards for Development Within the Site) and G4 (General
Locational Criteria for Development) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development
Plan. |
|
5. |
TCP/21255/B P/01954/04 Parish/Name: Ryde
Ward: Binstead Registration Date: 24/09/2004 -
Outline Planning Permission Officer: Mr. A. White Tel: (01983) 823550 Applicant: Mrs K Woolfenden Outline for a dwelling land adjacent Woodlands, Quarr
Road, Ryde, PO33 |
REASON FOR COMMITTEE CONSIDERATION
Report requested by local Member,
Councillor Fox, when consulted under the delegated powers procedure. He was
initially advised that his reasons for requesting Committee consideration were
not sufficient, but has since insisted that application is put before Members
for the following reason:
“I am of the view that
informed public discussion of the relevant factors is likely to help inform the
public that we have sensible policies in place to protect these special areas
and still wish to have this application considered by the Committee.”
PROCESSING INFORMATION
This is a minor application, the
processing of which has taken 16 weeks to date. It has gone beyond the
prescribed 8 week period for determination of planning applications owing to
the need for Committee consideration.
LOCATION AND SITE CHARACTERISTICS
Application relates to rectangular
shaped plot of land fronting Church Road currently forming part of curtilage to
property known as “Woodlands”, which itself is located on northern side of
junction of Quarr Road and Church Road. Site contains four individually
protected trees.
Church Road is developed in a linear
fashion along the entirety of its eastern side, but stops at application site
on western side of road with woodland area beyond to the north.
RELEVANT HISTORY
TCP/21255/MB/1168 – Outline for a
dwelling on land adjacent Woodlands, was due to be considered by Planning
Committee in April 1993 with recommendation of refusal. The seven reasons given
mainly refer to the policy implications of developing outside of development
envelope boundary. This application was eventually withdrawn at the request of
the applicant.
DETAILS OF APPLICATION
This is an outline application for a
single dwelling with all detailed matters reserved for subsequent
consideration. Applicant confirms that existing garden chalet immediately
behind dwelling would be demolished. This chalet is used for domestic storage
purposes.
Site itself would measure some 30
metres in width with depth of some 35 metres and is likely to utilise existing
access onto Church Road.
DEVELOPMENT PLAN/POLICY
Site is shown as being outside of
the development envelope boundary for Ryde as identified on the Isle of Wight
Unitary Development Plan (UDP). Relevant policies are as follows:
S1 – New development will
be concentrated within existing urban areas
S4 – The countryside will
be protected from inappropriate development
S6 – All developments will
be expected to be of a high standard of design
G1 – Development
Envelopes for Towns and Villages
G2 – Consolidation and
Infilling of scattered settlements outside development envelopes
G4 – General Locational
Criteria for development
G5 – Development outside
defined settlements
D1 – Standards of Design
D2 – Standards for
Development within the site
D3 – Landscaping
H9 – Residential
Development outside Development Boundaries
C12 – Development
Affecting Tress and Woodlands
TR7 – Highway
Considerations for New Developments
U11 - Infrastructure and
Services Provision
CONSULTEE REPONSES
Highway engineer indicates that
satisfactory access is likely to be achievable subject to a condition in
respect of visibility splays.
Council’s ecologist confirms no objection
as site is just outside of the Site of Importance for Nature Conservation
(SINC).
PARISH/TOWN COUNCIL COMMENTS
Not applicable.
THIRD PARTY REPRESENTATIONS
Campaign to Protect Rural England
(CPRE) acknowledges that the site is outside of the development envelope
boundary and therefore objects on grounds that proposal would constitute
undesirable intensification of development that would be prejudicial to rural
character.
Seven letters and a 22 signature petition have been received from local residents who object on grounds that can be summarised as follows:
·
Outside development envelope.
·
Nature conservation interests.
·
Impact on trees.
·
Hazardous access.
·
Drainage system may be at a capacity.
·
Objectors point out that building to be demolished is no more than an
outhouse providing incidental accommodation to “Woodlands”.
Seven letters of support have been
received which generally state that proposal would be an improvement upon
existing dilapidated chalet building.
CRIME AND DISORDER IMPLICATIONS
No crime and disorder implications
are anticipated.
EVALUATION
The site is situated outside of the
development envelope boundary for Ryde and is therefore considered to form part
of countryside for the purpose of planning policy. Routing of development envelope
boundary in this area runs north-south along Church Road thereby seeking to
restrict any further westward expansion of residential development. Main
consideration therefore is whether the proposed dwelling would satisfy any of
the recognised exceptions in respect of residential development in the
countryside.
Policy H9 of the UDP specifically
deals with residential development outside of development boundaries, and lists
six categories of housing development that may be acceptable. Since the
proposed dwelling is not for an agricultural worker, or a conversion, or for
tourist related development or an affordable home, it is my view that the only
other criterion worthy of further consideration are infill development and a
one for one replacement.
Other than the application property,
the western side of Church Road beyond its junction with Quarr Road is
undeveloped and mainly comprises of woodland. Under no circumstances could it
be described as a “built up” frontage and therefore contains no “small gaps”.
Accordingly, proposal would clearly not constitute infill development and
therefore fails policy H9 (f) in this respect.
Although applicant claims that an
existing building would be demolished and replaced by the proposed dwelling, it
should be noted that the building referred to is relatively small, clearly
uninhabitable and used solely for purposes incidental to the enjoyment of the
host property (Woodlands). An internal inspection of this building revealed no
indication whatsoever of comprising self-contained accommodation. Therefore,
proposal could not be regarded as a replacement dwelling and cannot be
considered against Policy H9 (a).
Turning to detailed matters, the
site contains four individually protected trees which all appear to be in good
condition and are making a significant contribution to the visual amenities of
the areas. In the absence of a layout plan and tree survey/report, it is my
opinion that a dwelling could not be accommodated on this site without
compromising the health or stability of these trees.
Concern has been expressed that
existing main sewer is at, or nearing capacity. Although applicant has
indicated that sewage would be disposed of to this system, no further
information has been submitted in respect of its capacity. Accordingly, I
consider that insufficient information has been submitted to demonstrate that
adequate drainage capacity would be available to serve the proposed development
and therefore fails Policy U11 in this respect.
Whilst concern has been expressed in
respect of the wildlife implications of developing the site, it should be noted
that the site is outside of the designated SINC. The Council’s Ecologist
therefore confirms that he would have no specific objection in this respect.
Accordingly, it would not be sustainable to include a separate reason for
refusal in respect of nature conservation.
To summarise, a dwelling in this
location outside of the development envelope boundary is clearly contrary to
policies contained in the UDP. Whilst policies G5 and H9 do set out exceptions
to normally restrictive policy, it should be noted that these do clearly not
apply in this instance.
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
Having given due regard and
appropriate weight to all material considerations referred to in this report,
there is no justification whatsoever to allow the proposed dwelling outside the
development envelope boundary. Therefore, in accordance with Section 54a of the
Town and Country Planning Act 1990 which states that planning applications
shall be determined in accordance with development plan policy unless material
considerations indicate otherwise, I have no alternative other than to
recommend refusal of this application.
RECOMMENDATION
– REFUSAL
Conditions/Reasons:
|
1 |
The site lies outside
the designated development boundary and the proposal, which comprises an
undesirable intensification of development and would be prejudicial to the
rural character of the area and therefore contrary to Policy S1 (Concentrated
Within Existing Urban Areas), Policies G1 (Development Envelopes for Towns
and Villages), G2 (Consolidation and Infilling of Scattered Settlements
Outside Development Envelopes) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan. |
|
2 |
Dwelling Contrary to Development
Plan - Z03C |
|
3 |
The information
accompanying this application is inadequate and deficient in detail in
respect of a layout plan and tree survey/report so that the Local Planning
Authority is unable to consider fully the effects of the proposal on the
protected trees and in the absence of further details it is considered that
the proposal would compromise the health and stability of the protected trees
and is therefore contrary to policies D3 (Landscaping) and C12 (Development
Affecting Trees and Woodland) of the IOW Unitary Development Plan. |
|
4 |
The information
accompanying this application is inadequate and deficient in detail in
respect of capacity within the existing foul sewage system so that the Local
Planning Authority is unable to consider fully the effects of the proposal on
the existing system and in the absence of further details it is considered
that the proposed dwelling could not be adequately drained and is therefore
contrary to Policy U11 (Infrastructure and Services Provision) of the IOW
Unitary Development Plan. |
|
6. |
TCP/21861/B P/02296/04 Parish/Name: Newport
Ward: Newport North Registration Date: 01/11/2004 -
Development by Council Itself (Reg 3) Officer: Mr. J. Packman Tel: (01983) 823571 Applicant: IW Council Change of use from offices to
residential 17, Quay Street, Newport, PO305BA |
REASON FOR COMMITTEE
CONSIDERATION
This application is
submitted by the Isle of Wight Council seeking a change of use of the property
with the intention of disposing of the premises. Therefore, in accordance with
the agreed procedures, this matter is before the Development Control Committee
for consideration.
PROCESSING INFORMATION
This is a minor
application, the processing of which will have taken 11 weeks to the date of
the committee meeting. The processing of this application has gone beyond the
prescribed 8 week period for the determination of planning applications due to
the need for committee consideration.
LOCATION AND SITE
CHARACTERISTICS
Application relates to a
Grade 2 listed terraced town house in Quay Street within the Newport
Conservation Area. The building has a number of period features including large
sash windows, small dormer windows and large chimney stacks. The street scene
is a mixture of listed Georgian and Victorian buildings of various sizes and styles,
a number of businesses are located on this street. The building is currently
used as office accommodation.
RELEVANT HISTORY
None
DETAILS OF APPLICATION
The building currently
houses the offices of Wight Leisure. This application forms part of a scheme to
relocate the offices to alternative accommodation, obviating need to upgrade 17
Quay Street to satisfy the requirements of the Disability Discrimination Act.
The intension is to sell these premises in order to provide part of the funding
for the transfer to new offices. The proposal does not involve any external or
internal alterations to the building and the submission was accompanied by an
indicative room layout.
DEVELOPMENT PLAN/POLICY
G4 General Locational
Criteria for Development
B2 Settings of Listed
Buildings
B3 Change of use of
listed buildings
B6 Protection and
enhancement of Conservation Areas
H4 Restricted to Defined
Settlements
CONSULTEE RESPONSES
Highway Engineer does not
consider there to be any highway implications as the proposed use will generate
less traffic than the existing use.
PARISH/TOWN COUNCIL
COMMENTS
Not applicable,
THIRD PARTY
REPRESENTATIONS
None received.
CRIME AND DISORDER
IMPLICATIONS
No crime and disorder
implications are anticipated.
EVALUATION
Determining factors are
policy considerations, employment issues, the affect that this proposal would
have upon the listed building itself, the setting of other listed buildings and
the conservation area in general. Highway considerations must also be taken
into account.
It is intended to
relocate the occupants of the premises to alternative accommodation on the
Island and, therefore, this proposal would not result in any loss of
employment.
Under this application
the proposal to change the use of the building will not affect the external or
internal appearance of this listed building and therefore will not impact upon
the character of the street scene or the conservation area. The proposal would
result in a less intensive use of the building and therefore will not generate
further traffic or parking issues.
HUMAN RIGHTS
In coming to this
recommendation to grant planning permission consideration has been given to the
rights set out in Article 8 (Right to Privacy and Article 1 of the First
Protocol (Right to Peaceful Enjoyment of Possessions) of the European
Convention on Human Rights. The impacts this development might have on the
owners/occupiers of other properties in the area and other third parties have
been carefully considered. Whilst there may be some interference with the
rights of these people this has to be balanced with the rights of the applicant
to develop the land in the manner proposed. Insofar as there is an interference
with the rights of others it is considered necessary for the protection of the
rights and freedom of the applicant. It is also considered that such action is
proportional to the legitimate aim of the Council’s Unitary Development Plan
and in the public interest.
JUSTIFICATION FOR
RECOMMENDATION
Having given due regard and
appropriate weight to all material considerations referred to in this report, I
am satisfied that the change of use of the building from offices to residential
will represent an acceptable use of the building. The proposal will not impact
upon the amenities of the neighbouring buildings or the character of the listed
building and the street scene. The conversion of this office to residential
development will also provide much needed accommodation in this town centre
location and will not result in the loss of any employment.
RECOMMENDATION – Approval
Conditions/Reasons:
|
1 |
Time limit - full -
A10 |
|
7. |
TCP/22460/H P/02092/04 Parish/Name: Newport Ward: Fairlee Registration Date: 04/10/2004 -
Full Planning Permission Officer: Miss. S. Wilkinson Tel: (01983) 823566 Applicant: Mr C Cesar New block of four classrooms and
associated accommodation Medina High School, Fairlee Road,
Newport, Isle Of Wight, PO302DX |
REASON FOR COMMITTEE CONSIDERATION
Local member Councillor A J Mellor,
is unable to deal with this application under delegated procedure as he is a
governor at the school.
PROCESSING INFORMATION
This is a minor application, the
processing of which will have taken 15 weeks to the date of the committee
meeting. The application has gone beyond the prescribed 8 week period for
determination of planning applications due to negotiations on the position of
the building and the need for committee consideration.
LOCATION AND SITE CHARACTERISTICS
Medina High School is located on Fairlee
Road, Newport approximately 1.5 kilometres from Coppins Bridge roundabout. In
addition to the main school buildings, the site accommodates a leisure centre
and theatre. The area to the front of the site is predominantly residential
with the private hospital to the north and open land and the river Medina to
the west. The land on which it is proposed to build the classroom block rises
from the level of the road within the site to an apex leveling out to provide
an area of relatively flat land.
RELEVANT HISTORY
TCP 22460/C consent was granted for
two double mobile classrooms in April 2001.
TCP 22460/E consent was granted for
a double mobile classroom in October 2003.
DETAILS OF THE APPLICATION
Consent is sought for a single
storey building to provide four new classrooms and associated accommodation.
The application has been amended in order to protect a willow tree and the
hedgerow running along the boundary, as well as minimising risk of no damage to
a tree within a neighbouring garden.
DEVELOPMENT PLAN/POLICIES
Relevant policies of the Unitary
Development Plan are considered to be as follows:
S6
- Development will be expected to be of a high standard of design
G4
- General Locational Criteria
D1
- Standards of Design
D2
- Standards of Development within the site
U5
- Schools Provision
TR7
- Highway Considerations for New Development
CONSULTEE RESPONSES
Highway Engineer
recommends conditions should application be approved regarding to the provision
of bicycle parking.
The Council's Ecology
Officer has been told by owners of neighbouring property that he has seen slow
worms in his garden and advises that, slow worms receive limited protection
under the Wildlife and Countryside Act. The site may well be used occasionally
by slow worms for bathing but moan grassland does not provide a habitat in
which they can live. Consequently, he does not consider that they are a
material consideration in relation to this development.
PARISH/TOWN COUNCIL
COMMENTS
Not applicable
THIRD PARTY REPRESENTATIONS
A letter of objection has
been received from a property to the east of the proposed site objecting on
grounds that can be summarised as follows:
Impact on oak tree within
his land
Impact on wildlife
Invasion of privacy by
increased noise and light
Position of building
providing area for students to congregate creating a further invasion of
privacy.
CRIME AND DISORDER
IMPLICATIONS
No crime and disorder
implications are anticipated
EVALUATION
The application seeks
consent for a new block of four classrooms and associated accommodation. The
principle planning issues to consider in respect to this development relate to
the effect of the building on neighbouring properties.
The site of the proposed
classroom runs alongside the two existing mobiles on site on an area of land in
close proximity to the main school building. The proposed building would be
single storey with a design more modern but incorporating the main details of
the existing building on site.
The land has a change in
gradient and is therefore not used as part of the sports ground and is
presently an area of open grassland within the school complex. Development on
this part of the site would not have a detrimental effect on the open nature of
the site.
Following objections from
a neighbouring property with regard to the proximity of the development to the
rear boundary, having possible privacy implications and an impact on the
wildlife and trees in the area, the application has been amended in order to
move the development away from the boundary hedgerow. Although it was not felt
that there would be significant damage to any tree on a neighbouring site, the
relocation of the building was sought in order to minimise the impact of the
development on a willow within the school premises and the boundary hedgerow
itself. In order safeguard the potential on the site for possible future
development and to comply with Policy U5 (School Provision) of the Isle of
Wight Unitary Plan, the classroom has moved to the side away from the willow
and due to the shape of the site this will bring the classroom away from the
boundary.
HUMAN RIGHTS
In coming to this
recommendation to grant planning permission consideration has been give to the
rights set out in Article 8 (Rights to Privacy) and Article 1 of the First
Protocol (Right to Peaceful Enjoyment of Possessions) of the European
Convention on Human Rights. The impacts of 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 a new block of four classrooms and associated
accommodation as proposed would not have a detrimental impact on the
environment, neighbouring properties, or detract from the visual amenities of
the area. In this regard the proposed development complies with the policies
set out in the Unitary Development Plan.
RECOMMENDATION
- APPROVAL
Conditions/Reasons:
|
1 |
Time limit - full -
A10 |
|
2 |
Notwithstanding the
details on the approved plans no development shall take place until details
of the materials and finishes, including mortar colour to be used in the
construction of the external surfaces of the development hereby permitted
have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning
Authority. Development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved
details. Reason: In the interests of the amenities of the
area and to comply with policy D1 (Standards of Design) of the IW Unitary
Development Plan. |
|
3 |
The use hereby
permitted shall not commence until a space has been laid out within the site
in accordance with details that have been submitted to and approved by the
Local Planning Authority in writing for bicycles to be parked. The space
shall not thereafter be used for any
purpose other than approved in accordance with this condition. Reason: In the interest of
highway safety and to comply with policy TR7 (Highway Considerations for New
Development) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan |
|
4 |
No development
including site clearance shall commence on the site until all (trees/shrubs
and/or other natural features), not previously agreed with the Local Planning
Authority for removal, shall have been protected by fencing or other agreed
barrier (along a line to be agreed in writing with the Local Planning
Authority. Any fencing shall confirm to the following specification: 1.2 m minimum height
chestnut paling to BS 1722 Part 4 standard, securely mounted on 1.2 m minimum
above ground height timber posts driven firmly into the ground/or 2.4 metre
minimum height heavy duty hoardings securely mounted on scaffold poles, or
other method of agreed protection which forms an effective barrier to
disturbance to the retained tree). Such fencing or barrier
shall be maintained throughout the course of the works on the site, during
which period the following restrictions shall apply: a)
No placement or storage of material. b)
No placement or storage of fuels or chemicals. c)
No placement or storage of excavated soil. d)
No lighting of bonfires. e)
No physical damage to bark or branches. f)
No changes to natural ground drainage in the area. g)
No changes in ground levels. h)
No digging of trenches for services, drains or sewers. i)
Any trenches required in close proximity shall be hand dug ensuring
all major roots are left undamaged. Reason: To ensure that trees,
shrubs and other natural features to be retained are adequately protected
from damage to health and stability throughout the construction period in the
interests of amenity. |
|
5 |
In this condition
"retained hedge or hedgerow" means an existing hedge or hedgerow
which is to be retained in accordance with the approved plans and
particulars.
Reason: To ensure the continuity of amenity
afforded by existing hedges or hedgerows and to comply with policy D1
(Standards of Design) of the IW Unitary Development Plan. |
|
8. |
TCP/22587/C P/01959/04 Parish/Name: Newport
Ward: Newport North Registration Date: 05/10/2004 -
Outline Planning Permission Officer: Mr. J. Fletcher Tel: (01983) 823598 Applicant: Heritage Properties Demolition of building; outline
for residential development of 20 flats in 2 blocks Xtreme Play, The Old
Drill Hall, Drill Hall Road, Newport, PO305AA |
REASON FOR COMMITTEE
CONSIDERATION
The local Member,
Councillor Julian Whittaker, has an interest in the application site which
prevents him from dealing with this application under delegated procedure.
PROCESSING INFORMATION
This is a major
application which will have taken 15 weeks to the date of the Committee
Meeting. The application has exceeded the prescribed 13 week period for
determination of major planning applications due to the need for committee
consideration.
LOCATION AND SITE
CHARACTERISTICS
Drill Hall Building
located on the north eastern side of Drill Hill Road almost opposite the
junction of Clifford Street with Drill Hall Road. Building has a current use as
an indoor play/activity centre being known as Xtreme Play.
A general character of
Drill Hall Road is traditional long established dwellings furnished in brick
under pitched slated roofs.
RELEVANT HISTORY
None in respect of
redevelopment of the site.
DETAILS OF APPLICATION
Outline consent is sought
including siting with all other matters being reserved for future approval. The
proposal indicates demolition of existing building and replacement with two
blocks of flats, one block located on the frontage adjacent to the footpath to
Drill Hall Road and the second block to the rear abutting the public car park.
The front block provides a total of 10 flats (6 one bed, 3 bedsits and 1 three
bed) with the rear block providing a further 10 flats (3 one bed, 6 two bed and
1 three bed). The internal open space between the two blocks is in the form of
a communal garden area and site entrance is via a footpath off Drill Hall Road
adjacent to the northwestern boundary where it abuts the boundary to the
property number 20 Drill Hall Road.
Blocks provide a total of
four storey accommodation with the third storey being in the form of a steeply
pitched element finished with flat roof set back from the main three storey
element which is finished in a parapet wall.
The current proposal
continues the traditional theme with use of Georgian sash window and projecting
bays but the proposal is terminated at second floor level by a parapet wall
construction with the top floor as previously described. The proposal includes
for a railed boundary treatment along the back edge of the footpath in Drill
Hall Road.
Although applicants have
not indicated material finishes in view of the predominance of brick finish in
Drill Hall Road a similar finish would be appropriate for these buildings.
The proposal provides for
zero parking and in this regard it is important to appreciate the location of
this site in relation to the Drill Hall Road public car park with the rear part
of the site directly abutting that car park.
DEVELOPMENT PLAN/POLICY
National Policy covered
in PPG3 – Housing March 2000 which emphasizes the following:
Provide wider housing
opportunity and choice by including better mix in size type and location of
housing.
Give priority to reusing
previously developed land within urban areas to take pressures off development
of green field sites.
Create more sustainable
development ensuring access by public transport, jobs, education and health
facilities.
Make more efficient use
of land by adopting appropriate densities of 30 to 50 units per hectare with
higher densities being appropriate where sites are near transport nodes and
town centres.
Document advises that new
housing development should not be viewed in isolation but should have regard to
immediate buildings and wider locality.
More than 1.5 parking
spaces per dwelling is unlikely to reflect Government’s emphasis on sustainable
residential development.
List of Relevant
Policies:
S1 – Strategic Policy
S2 – Strategic Policy
S7 – Strategic Policy
G1 – Development
Envelopes for Towns & Villages
G4 – General Locational
Criteria for Development
D1 – Standards of Design
H4 – Unallocated
Residential Development to be restricted to defined settlements
H5 – Infill Development
H6 – High Density
Residential Development
TR16 Parking Policies and
Guidelines
U2 – Ensuring adequate
educational, social and community facilities for future population
CONSULTEE RESPONSES
Highway Engineer
recommends appropriate conditions and also makes reference to the fact that the
site is within Zone 2 and therefore subject of the Transport Infrastructure
Payment of £750 per unit.
Environmental Health
Department have no adverse comment but flags up the need for sound insulation
to be considered carefully at the Building Regulation Stage.
Councils Contaminated
Land Officer recommends appropriate conditions should application be approved.
Environment Agency
recommends appropriate conditions requiring a scheme to be submitted in respect
of disposal of foul and surface water drainage
PARISH/TOWN COUNCIL
COMMENTS
N/A
THIRD PARTY
REPRESENTATIONS
Application subject of 9
objections (1 letter, 8 emails) one being from a commercial resident of
Riverway Industrial Site, remainder being from immediate area as follows:
9.
4 from Drill Hall Road residents 1 being from neighbouring property
10. 1 each from Alderbury
Road, Wilver Road, Caesars Road, Hurn Street and
Clifford Street
Points raised as follows:
·
1 objector considers proposal represents town cramming.
·
Main concerns relate to the failure of the application to provide
on-site parking
with resultant pressures on local on street parking which is already at
saturation point.
·
Resultant level of traffic movement and on-street parking result in
hazards to
road users with particular reference to children and the elderly.
·
Neighbouring property owner concern regarding likely disturbance to the
living environment caused by demolition and building work.
·
Concern that the proposal will have an unacceptable environmental impact
on the neighbouring property.
·
The loss of Xtreme Play represents the loss of a valuable community
facility.
·
Current use of Xtreme Play results in regular illegal parking on street
and concern that this proposal will continue that trend.
CRIME & DISORDER
IMPLICATIONS
No crime and disorder
implications envisaged.
EVALUATION
This is an outline
application seeking to establish the principle of replacing the current
substantial building with two blocks of not dissimilar mass and scale but
providing residential accommodation as opposed to the former community uses.
Application has been accompanied by elevational plan although the only detail
matter to consider at this stage is siting. These elevational plans provide an
indication of both height and mass but also the likely architectural
appearance.
Main consideration is
that of principle which I consider to be acceptable. The site itself is sited
on the edge of the town centre within the older established residential part of
the town and stands between existing long established residential developments.
Given all these circumstances residential is the obvious alternative use for
the site.
Second consideration
therefore is whether or not the density of development and therefore the mass
and height of the development is acceptable in this location. Again the sites
location edge of town centre would suggest that it is highly appropriate for
flatted development being within easy walking distance of the town centre and
bus services. Also the mix of accommodation fully accords with national and
local policies and would assist in providing much needed accommodation of this
type.
Most controversial issue
referred to in letters of objection is the failure of the proposal to provide
any on-site car parking. Again in policy terms it would be unsustainable to
refuse the application on this basis. It would be the norm to expect this type
of development in this location not to provide parking. The existing building
and the various uses to which it has been put to have never had the facility of
parking and yet must have been a source of traffic generation.
Second issue with regard
to this matter is the sites location virtually abutting and in some cases
adjoining a public car park. This type of location accords with draft interim
planning guidance with the close location of a public car park resulting in a
circumstance where zero parking would in this instance would be acceptable.
Third factor of
significance is the type of accommodation being proposed with in excess of half
of the units providing only one bedroom accommodation and apart from one three
bedroom unit the remainder are all two bedroom units. (12 one bedroom, 7 two
bedroom and 1 three bedroom) Apart from this type of accommodation being ideal
for this location within walking distance of town centre and public transport
facilities this level of accommodation is more likely to attract a lesser level
of car ownership than would a three-bedroom accommodation unit. Obviously there
are no guarantees on this statement but anybody purchasing or renting the
accommodation would be aware of the zero parking situation.
Despite the fact that
this is by far the most critical issue of concern I am entirely satisfied that
this is in accordance with policy and could not be sustained as a reason for
refusal. Finally with regard to this issue I make reference to a similar zero
parking scheme albeit for a modest development of two semi-detached properties
at the western end of Clifford Street which was refused on the grounds of the
failure to provide parking and the resultant pressures on off street parking
provision contrary to Officer Recommendation but was allowed on appeal.
Inspectors reasoning was that “on-street parking is constrained and so
development without on site parking is unlikely to cause additional
congestion”. Reference was also made to the easy walking distance to the town centre
and bus routes. (Site is further away from the town centre than the current
application) and therefore the inspector considered that there were realistic
alternatives to reliance on the private car for occupiers. Inspector also
considered that the small size of the houses would attract non-car owning
households. I consider that this decision is indicative of the difficulty that
would occur in sustaining failure to provide car parking as a reason for
refusal in this case.
Other concerns by local
residents are noted much of which can be addressed by way of condition with
particular reference to impact on the neighbouring properties. In this regard
the submitted indicative plans indicate the windows within the elements of the
proposed buildings which face adjoining gardens will have high level windows
and are restricted to a small number of bedrooms in any event.
In general I consider the
proposal is intensive in nature but given the current total site coverage by
the existing building and its existing height and mass this proposal does at
least split into two buildings thus providing some space between and whilst the
loss of the current community use is regrettable the buildings location within
a predominantly residential area would make it difficult to resist that use.
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
Having given due regard
and appropriate weight to all material considerations, I consider the proposal
to be acceptable both in terms of principle and in terms of the siting of the
blocks subject to appropriate conditions and significantly subject to financial
contributions in respect of transport infrastructure payments and educational
contributions.
RECOMMENDATION - APPROVAL
(Subject
to a Section 106 Agreement covering financial contributions towards transport
infrastructure and Education payments).
Conditions/Reasons:
|
1 |
Time limit - outline -
A01 |
|
2 |
Time limit - reserved -
A02 |
|
3 |
Approval of reserved matters -
A03 |
|
4 |
No building hereby
permitted shall be occupied until space has been laid out on site and in
accordance with details that have been submitted and approved by The Local
Planning Authority in writing for 20 covered bicycle spaces. Space shall
thereafter be retained and maintained for that purpose. Reason: To ensure that adequate
provision for the parking of bicycles in accordance with Policy TR6 (cycling
and walking) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan. |
|
5 |
Prior to the
commencement of any works authorised by this consent conditions survey of the
public footway running the full length of the site between the south-western boundary
of the site and its junction with Drill Hall Road shall be carried out under
parameters agreed in advance with the Local Planning Authority and prior to
the occupation of the dwellings hereby approved a further condition survey
shall be undertaken and any damage to the footway attributable to the
construction traffic in connection with the approved development shall be
rectified by the developer in accordance with a scheme agreed with the Local
Planning Authority. Reason: To ensure an adequate
standard of access to the properties in accordance with Policy TR7 (Highway
Considerations for New Development of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development
Plan). |
|
6 |
No development shall
take place until the details have been submitted to and approved in writing
by the Local Planning Authority in respect of the boundary treatment between
the site and the adjoining property 20 Drill Hall Road. Any such detail shall
indicate the width and height of any existing boundary walls to be retained
and shall also indicate the design materials and type of new boundary walls
to be erected along this boundary. Any such agreed boundary treatment shall
be carried out in accordance with the approved details prior to occupation of
any of the flats hereby approved. Reason: In the interests of
maintaining the amenity value of the area and to comply with Policy D1
(Standards of Design) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan. |
|
7 |
No Development Shall
take place until details have been submitted to and approved in writing by The
Local Planning Authority of the positions, design, materials and type of
boundary walls to be erected where the site abuts the Drill Hall Road public
car park. The agreed boundary walls shall be completed prior to occupation of
the flats hereby approved. Development shall be carried out in accordance
with the approved details. Reason: In the interests of
future occupiers of the flats and maintaining the amenity value of the area
to comply with D1 (Standards of Design) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development
Plan. |
|
8 |
Any first, second, or
third floors north west facing windows shall either be high level or contain
fixed obscure glazing in the lower half. Any such windows shall be retained
and maintained thereafter and shall not be altered without the prior written
consent of the Local Planning Authority. Reason: In the interests of
the amenity of the adjoining property in compliance with Policy D1 (Standards
of Design) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan. |
|
9 |
No development shall
take place until a detailed scheme including calculations and capacity
studies have been submitted to and agreed with the local planning authority
indicating the means of foul water disposal. Any such agreed foul water
disposal system shall indicate connections at points on the system where
adequate capacity exists to ensure any additional flows do not cause flooding
or overload existing systems. Such agreed details shall be implemented before
the first unit of accommodation is occupied. Reason: To ensure an adequate
system of foul water drainage is provided for the development in compliance
with Policy U11 (Infrastructure and Services Provision) of the Isle of Wight
Unitary development Plan. |
|
10 |
None of the flats
hereby approved shall be occupied until details of any lighting to be
installed in respect of the internal courtyard area has been submitted to and
approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Such lighting scheme
shall be carried out in accordance with agreed details and shall ensure that
light spillage is minimized to not unreasonably affect neighbouring
properties. Reason: In the interests of
the amenities of the area in general and neighbouring properties in
particular in compliance with Policy D14 (Light Spillage) of the Isle of
Wight Unitary Development Plan. |
|
11 |
Notwithstanding the
information indicated on the submitted plans flats 9 and 10 shall not be
provided with a south western facing balcony and flats 13 and 14 shall not be
provided with a north eastern balcony. Reason: In the interests of
the amenities of the adjoining property in compliance with Policy D1
(Standards of Design) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan. |
|
12 |
No part of the
development hereby permitted shall commence until there has been submitted to
and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority: j)
A desk-top study documenting all previous and existing land uses of
the site and adjacent land in accordance And, unless otherwise agreed
in writing by the Local Planning Authority, k) A site investigation
report documenting the ground conditions of the site and incorporating
chemical and gas analysis identified as appropriate by the desk-top study in
accordance with BS10175: 2001 – “Investigation of Potentially Contaminated
Sites – Code of Practice”; l)
A remediation scheme to deal with any contaminant including an
implementation timetable, monitoring proposals and a remediation verification
methodology. The verification methodology shall include a sampling and
analysis programme to confirm the adequacy of decontamination and an
appropriately qualified person shall oversee the implementation of all
remediation. The construction of
buildings shall not commence until the investigator has provided a report,
which shall include confirmation that all remediation measures have been
carried out fully in accordance with the scheme. The report shall also
include results of the verification programme of post-remediation sampling
and monitoring in order to demonstrate that the required remediation has been
fully met. Future monitoring proposals and reporting shall also be detailed
in the report. Reason: To protect the
environment and prevent harm to human health by ensuring that where
necessary, the land is remediated to an appropriate standard in order to
comply with Part IIA of the Environmental Protection Act 1990. |
|
9. |
TCP/26665 P/02271/04 Parish/Name: Bembridge
Ward: Bembridge North Registration Date: 29/10/2004 -
Full Planning Permission Officer: Miss. P. Smith Tel: (01983)
823570 Applicant: Mrs D A Lacey Single storey extension to form
replacement porch/utility area & shower room 2 Kings Close, Bembridge, Isle Of
Wight, PO355NX |
REASONS FOR COMMITTEE CONSIDERATION
Report has been requested by Local
Member, Councillor Barbara Clough as she firstly raises concerns that the
extension will be out of keeping with adjacent properties having a detrimental
impact upon the street scene, and secondly that as it protrudes beyond the
existing porch, the extension will seriously impact upon the amenity of nos. 1
and 3, particularly introducing a tunnel effect on the passage leading to the
rear garden of no. 3.
PROCESSING INFORMATION
This is a minor application, the
processing of which will have taken 11 weeks to the date of the committee
meeting. The application has exceeded the prescribed 8 week period for the
determination of planning applications due to the need for committee
consideration.
LOCATION AND SITE CHARACTERISTICS
Application relates to a mid
terraced house located within a small cul-de-sac running parallel with Kings
Road. The property fronts Kings Close with a 1 metre wall marking the boundary
of Kings Close with Kings Road. The property is visible from Kings Road.
Properties within the area have a mixture of porch and canopy additions to the
front elevations.
RELEVANT HISTORY
None.
DETAILS OF APPLICATION
Consent is sought for the
construction of a single storey extension to the front elevation of 2 Kings
Close. The extension projects 1.5 metres forward of the existing front
elevation, set back by half a metre from the boundary with number 1, and
extending the remaining width of the front elevation. The proposed extension is
shown to be constructed of brick work to be painted to match the existing property
with a Cambrian slate roof. The proposal will not impinge on any existing
parking or turning area.
DEVELOPMENT PLAN/POLICY
The site is located within the
development envelope of Bembridge as defined within the Unitary Development
Plan. Relevant policies of the plan are considered as follows:
S6 All
Development will be Expected to be of a High Standard of Design
D1 Standards of Design
G4 General Locational
Criteria for Development
H7 Extension and
Alterations of Existing Properties
CONSULTEE RESPONSES
Highway Engineer raises
no comment.
PARISH/TOWN COUNCIL
COMMENTS
The Parish Council have
commented that the Committee feel it is impossible to judge the impact on
neighbouring dwellings from the drawings supplied and make no recommendation in
the absence of further drawings.
THIRD PARTY
REPRESENTATIONS
The application has attracted one letter of objection. The points raised are summarised as follows:
·
Loss of light to neighbouring properties.
·
Loss of visual amenity.
CRIME AND DISORDER
IMPLICATIONS
No crime and disorder
implications are anticipated.
EVALUATION
Determining factors in
considering this application are the impact upon the amenities of the adjoining
properties and the impact upon the character and appearance of the surrounding
area.
Regarding the impact on
neighbouring properties, the main area of the objector's concern relates to the
potential for loss of light to the ground floor windows of the adjoining
properties. It is concluded that after applying the 45º rule, as set out in the
Isle of Wight Council Supplementary Planning Guidance 'Extending Your Home',
the proposal is acceptable in terms of loss of light and aspect in relation to
the adjoining properties.
The extension replaces an
existing front porch and is of modest size, projecting 1.5 metres from the
existing front elevation. The surrounding properties have differing front
elevations incorporating a mixture of porches and canopies, therefore there is
no apparent prevailing pattern of development. The proposal, is therefore
considered not to adversely impact on the aesthetics of the area, and is
considered to be of an appropriate size, scale and design in keeping with the
existing property and surrounding properties in accordance with Policy D1
(Standards of Design) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.
HUMAN RIGHTS
In coming to this
recommendation to grant planning permission consideration has been given to the
rights set out in Article 8 (The Right to Privacy) and Article 1 of The First
Protocol (The Right to Peaceful Enjoyment of Possessions) of the European
Convention on Human Rights. The impact this development might have on the
owners/occupiers of other properties in the area and other third parties have
been carefully considered. Whilst there may be some interference with the
rights of these people this has to be balance 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 the 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
to and appropriate weight to all material considerations referred to in this
report, I am satisfied that the proposed extension represents an acceptable
form of development and that the proposal will not detract from the character
of the locality or amenities of adjoining neighbours.
RECOMMENDATION -
APPROVAL
Conditions/Reasons:
|
|
The development hereby
permitted shall be begun before the expiration of 5 years from date of this
permission. Reason: To comply with Section 91 of the Town and
Country Planning Act 1990. |
|
|
The materials to be
used in the construction of the external surfaces of the extension hereby
permitted shall match those used in the existing building. Reason: In the interests of the amenities of the
area and to comply with policy D1 (Standards of Design) of the IW Unitary
Development Plan. |