PAPER B2
SCHEDULE OF
APPEALS
1. NEW LEGISLATION
New
legislation which came into effect on 5 September 2003 reduces the time limit
for appeals from six months to three months.
This change in the time limit shall not apply to planning applications
made before 5 September 2003.
2. NEW APPEALS LODGED
TCP/25595 Mr C
Piper and Mrs P Bonsu against refusal of outline for detached house and
formation of vehicular access, land adjacent Marshlands, Afton Road,
Freshwater.
TCP/25353 Mr and
Mrs G Hernes against refusal for two storey side extension at 4 Chapel Road,
Binstead, Ryde.
TCP/25361 Mr M
Darch against refusal of outline for house, land rear of 7 Upper Hyde Lane,
Shanklin.
TCP/25621 Mr J
Foreman against refusal for alterations and first floor and two storey
extensions, at 3 Moon Close, East Cowes.
TCP/13631/B The Eaton
Partnership against refusal for two storey building to provide five flats
including one flat within roof space and parking and formation of vehicular
access, land adjacent 17-18 Winchester Close, Newport.
3. HEARING/INQUIRY DATES
No new dates
to report
4. REPORT ON APPEAL DECISIONS
(1)
TCP/25355 Mr R Taylor
against refusal for the formation of a vehicular access at 6 Garfield Road,
Ryde.
Officer Recommendation: Refusal
Committee Decision: Refusal
(Part 1) - 21 February 2003
Appeal Decision: Dismissed - 18 August 2003
Main issues of the case as identified by
the Inspector:
·
The effect of
the proposed development on highway safety
·
The effect of
the proposed development on the character and appearance of the Ryde
Conservation Area
Conclusions of the Inspector:
·
The use of
the proposed hardstanding would cause hazard to road users because of the
absence of turning facilities on site
·
Proposal
would be contrary to Policy TR7
·
The
hardstanding presents a utilitarian surface to the front of the house obscuring
any features of interest
·
The proposed
development would be visually damaging to the street scene and detract from the
overall appearance of the Conservation Area
·
The proposed
development would neither preserve nor enhance the character and appearance of
the Conservation Area and would be contrary to Policy B6
.........................................................................................................................................................
(b) TCP/1458/H Ryde Golf Club against refusal for a
mobile home for employee of Golf Club on land at Ryde Golf Club, Binstead Road,
Ryde
Officer Recommendation: Refusal
Committee Decision: Refusal (Part 1) - 6
November 2002
Appeal Decision: Dismissed - 21 August
2003
Main issues of the case
as identified by the Inspector:
·
Whether the proposal conflicts with policy to protect the countryside
from inappropriate development.
·
If so, whether there are any material considerations sufficient to
outweigh such conflict.
Conclusions of the
Inspector:
·
The proposal would introduce a substantial domestic element into the
group of buildings whose appearance is compatible with their grounds management
function and thus the rural setting
·
Without special justification the proposal would conflict with UDP
Strategic Policy S4
·
The golf course is particularly vulnerable to unauthorised incursion
·
There would only be very limited views of the vulnerable areas from the
site of the proposed mobile home
·
The deterrent effect of the presence of a staff member within the
proposed mobile home would be limited
·
Random patrols of the golf course would be more effective and could be
undertaken without a person living at the site
·
Whilst the proposal is small in scale and ancillary to the existing golf
course use there is no evidence that alternative measures have been considered
·
The proposal is not essential and necessary to the successful operation
of the golf course
·
The proposal would conflict with UDP policies H9 and G5
.........................................................................................................................................................
(1)
TCP/24747/A Mr A Naylor against
refusal of outline for residential development, land adjacent Pine View, Rew
Street, Cowes
Officer Recommendation: Refusal
Committee Decision: Refusal
(Part 1) - 20 November 2002
Appeal Decision: Dismissed - 21 August 2003
Main issues of the case as identified by
the Inspector:
·
The effect
the proposal would have on the character and appearance of the surrounding
countryside
·
The effect of
the proposed development on the safety of users of Rew Street
Conclusions of the Inspector:
·
The proposed
residential cul-de-sac would have a suburban character at odds with the rural
nature of the surroundings
·
The existing
open gap between the dwellings to the north and south of the site would be
substantially diminished by the introduction of the proposed buildings,
roadway, parked cars and domestic paraphernalia
·
The
development would consolidate the present sporadic development in the immediate
area and diminish the rural character
·
The site is
not a small gap in an otherwise built-up frontage and the proposal does not
meet any of the specific policy requirements for development outside
development boundaries
·
The proposed development would unjustifiably harm the character and
appearance of the surrounding countryside and conflict with UDP policies
·
Visibility southwards along Rew Street from the proposed access may well
become inadequate
·
There would be an unacceptable risk to the safety of users of Rew Street
and the proposal would conflict with UDP Policy TR7
.........................................................................................................................................................
(4)
TCP/19269/D Mr S Read
against refusal for the siting of a mobile home for use as holiday
accommodation at Fairfields Farm, Stroud Wood Road, Ryde
Officer Recommendation: Refusal
Committee Decision: Refusal
(Part 1) - 8 November 2002
Appeal Decision: Dismissed - 21 August 2003
Main issues of the case as identified by
the Inspector:
·
Whether the
proposal conflicts with policy to protect the countryside from inappropriate
development
·
If so,
whether there are any material considerations sufficient to outweigh such conflict
·
Whether the
proposal would create a precedent for similar proposals and if so the
cumulative effect of such development on the area
Conclusions of the Inspector:
·
The proposal
is small scale and ancillary to the existing agricultural enterprise and the
retention of the development for holiday use could be controlled by a planning
condition
·
There is no
evidence of a clearly identified and unsatisfied demand or necessity for the
holiday accommodation
·
The proposal
would be of no benefit to the rural economy or rural employment
·
The proposed
mobile home would appear incongruous with the existing farmhouse and associated
agricultural type buildings and would reduce the quality of the landscape
·
There has
been no adequate demonstration that the use would be essential to the operation
of an approved tourist use
·
Although the
proposal would accord with Policy T3 this would be outweighed by it being in
contrary to G5, H9 and T9 of the UDP
·
The proposed
development would not have set a precedent of sufficient weight to inhibit the
determination of another planning application on its own merits
............................................................................................................................................................
(e) TCP/2210/B N W Corbin Ltd
against refusal for demolition of existing bungalow and new residential
development of two detached and ten semi-detached houses with parking and
access at 33 Newport Road, Cowes
Officer Recommendation: Refusal
Committee Decision: Refusal (Part 1) - 28
February 2003
Appeal Decision: Dismissed - 22 August
2003
Main issues of the case
as identified by the Inspector:
·
The effect of the proposed development on the character and appearance
of the area
·
The effect of the proposed development on the living conditions of the
occupiers of adjoining properties in terms of outlook and overlooking
Conclusions of the
Inspector:
·
The appeal site takes its character from the adjoining bungalows, most
of which have fair sized gardens
·
The proposed development of three storey houses would be inappropriate
in this context and amount to considerable overdevelopment of the site
(estimated to be sixty six units per hectare)
·
The proposed development would seriously harm the character and appearance
of the area and be contrary to Policy D1
·
The proximity of the proposed development to neighbouring properties
would result in an unacceptable degree of overlooking and overshadowing
·
Whilst recognising a need for higher residential densities this should
not be achieved at the expense of the living conditions of existing residents
·
Three storey development on this site would be overbearing to a degree
which recent nearby development is not
·
The proposed development would have an unacceptable effect on the living
conditions of occupiers of adjoining dwellings in terms of outlook and
overlooking and would be contrary to policies B1 and H6
.........................................................................................................................................................
(6)
TCP/17270B Mr D Ruddell against
refusal for demolition of garage and the erection of two detached houses and
garages on land to the rear of Avalon, Heathfield Road, Bembridge
Officer Recommendation: Refusal
Committee Decision: Refusal
(Part 1) - 29 January 2003
Appeal Decision: Dismissed - 22 August 2003
Main issues of the case as identified by
the Inspector:
·
The effect of
the proposed development on the character and appearance of the area
·
The effect on
the living conditions of the occupiers of adjoining properties in terms of
outlook and noise
Conclusions of the Inspector:
·
The
established character of the area is one of single storey dwellings in large
plots
·
The proposed
development would comprise two fairly large two storey houses on relatively
small plots
·
The tandem
two storey development would be inappropriate in itself and would compromise
any future planned development of the area between Steyne Road and Heathfield
Road
·
PPG3 -
Housing encourages the most efficient use of previously used land but this must
be considered in conjunction with the need to respect the character and
appearance of the existing residential areas
·
The proposed
two storey development would be out of keeping with the surrounding area and
contrary to policies G4, D1 and D2 of the UDP
·
The proposed
houses would be excessively overbearing in relation to the rear gardens of the
properties to either side
·
The proposed
access passing the side of Avalon would cause disturbance and nuisance
affecting the occupiers of this property and the neighbouring property of
Elstead
·
The proposed
development would have an unacceptable effect on living conditions of the
occupiers of adjoining properties in terms of outlook and noise and would be
contrary to Policy D1
.........................................................................................................................................................
(g) TCP/25388 Mr and Mrs M Price against refusal for
two storey extension to provide additional accommodation at 26 Oxford Street,
Northwood, Cowes
Officer Recommendation: Refusal
Committee Decision: Refusal (Part 1) - 21
February 2003
Appeal Decision: Dismissed - 27 August
2003
Main issue of the case as
identified by the Inspector:
·
The effect of the proposed development on the character and appearance
of the surrounding urban area
Conclusions of the
Inspector:
·
The street scene on the northern side of the road is predominantly made
up of Edwardian style semi-detached houses
·
The spaces between these properties are wide and approximately the same
in size
·
The spaces give the street scene a striking and attractive rhythm and
create an open spacious appearance
·
The proposed development would be in part of the gap between 24 and 26
Oxford Street
·
The proposal would seriously detract from the present sense of
spaciousness of the street scene
·
Given the general uniformity of the gaps in the street scene on the
northern side of Oxford Street it would be difficult for the Council to resist
applications for similar developments were the appeal to be allowed
·
The proposal would seriously harm the character and appearance of the
surrounding urban area and be contrary to UDP policies G4, B1 and H7
.........................................................................................................................................................
(h) TCP/15133/G Mr R Ruffell against refusal for a terrace
of four houses with access off Buckingham Road, land adjacent Ryde Court, St
Thomas Street, Ryde
Officer Recommendation: Refusal
Committee Decision: Refusal (Part 1) - 29
January 2003
Appeal Decision: Dismissed - 27 August
2003
Main issues of the case
as identified by the Inspector:
·
The likely effect of the proposed development on the character and
appearance of the Conservation Area and the setting of nearby Listed Buildings
Conclusions of the
Inspector:
·
Despite the somewhat neglected appearance, the site makes a positive
contribution to the character and appearance of the area and to the setting of
the nearby Listed Buildings by way of the views that are afforded across the
site and the feeling of spaciousness
·
The stone boundary wall is a characteristic feature of the area
·
The proposed terrace would appear both intrusive in the views across the
site and uncomfortable and out of place in its relationship with the Listed
Building at Ryde Court
·
Much of the boundary wall would be lost and its alignment along
Buckingham Road would be changed
·
These alterations would be regrettable in respect of their effect on the
character of the area
·
The proposed scheme would be in conflict with policies G1, D1, D2, B2
and B6 of the UDP
·
There would be overlooking between Ryde Court and the proposed new
terrace which would not be wholly satisfactory
.........................................................................................................................................................
(i) TCP/3756/B Mr G Palmer against refusal of outline
for alterations and single storey extension to existing bungalow and
alterations to vehicular access with four detached bungalows, garages, parking
and access road, land at and the rear of Tintern, Alverstone Road, Apse Heath
Officer Recommendation: Refusal
Committee Decision: Refusal (Part 1) - 20 November 2002
Appeal Decision: Dismissed - 2 September
2003
Main issues of the case
as identified by the Inspector:
·
The effect of the proposed development on the character and appearance
of the area
·
The effect on the living conditions of the occupiers of adjoining
properties
·
The effect of the proposal on highway safety
Conclusions of the
Inspector:
·
The proposal would result in backland development at a relatively high
density which would have a suburban character out of keeping with the
appearance of the area
·
No justification has been put forward for the exceptional consideration
and the proposed development does not meet any of the criteria for new
residential development which might exceptionally be permitted
·
The proposed development would have a harmful effect on the character
and appearance of the area having regard to restrictive policies relating to
development in the countryside
·
Despite the proposed landscaping measures, the noise and disturbance
caused by traffic generated by four dwellings would impact considerably on the
adjoining property to the north east and would detract from the occupiers
reasonable enjoyment of that property
·
A long narrow driveway would be likely to result in hazardous situations
where a vehicle attempting to enter the driveway would be forced to wait on the
highway for another vehicle attempting to emerge from it
·
Despite the long sight lines it would not be possible to provide a
visibility splay on the north east side with resulting hazard for road users,
particularly pedestrians using the footway
·
The present location of a bus stop adjacent to the driveway and another
on the opposite side of the road compounds the potential dangers
·
The proposed development would cause hazard to road users and be
contrary to policies D1 and TR7
........................................................................................................................................................
(j) TCP/20230/E
CAC/20230/F Mr C Brougham against
refusal of planning permission and
Conservation Area Consent for the demolition of the existing building and
construction of a four storey building to provide eight flats, two three storey
buildings to each provide three flats (fourteen flats in total), site of garage/car
repair/car sales fronting both The
Strand and East Street, Ryde
Officer
Recommendation: Refusal (both
applications)
Committee
Decision: Refusal (both
applications) (Part 1) - 13 February 2003
Appeal
Decisions: Dismissed
(both appeals) - 4 September 2003
Main issue of
the case as identified by the Inspector:
·
The effect of the proposed development on the character and
appearance of the Ryde Conservation Area and the adjoining Grade II Listed
Buildings
·
The effect on the living conditions of future occupiers
Conclusions of
the Inspector:
·
The wall along the appeal site frontage is of some historic
and visual interest in the views along The Strand and provides some continuity
between the buildings on either side.
·
The proposed scheme would not appear comfortable in itself or
as part of the street scene
·
The blocks fronting The Strand would be overdominant in their
relationship to the buildings on either side
·
The harmful effect would be emphasised by details of the
design such as the pointed features on
the roof of the four storey block and the UPVC windows
·
The development would also have a somewhat cramped appearance
in the relationship between the blocks fronting onto The Strand and that facing
onto East Street
·
The outlook from some rooms would be very restricted, there
would not be ready access to the refuse store and there would be very little
amenity space around the blocks for the use of future occupants
·
The proposals would constitute an unsatisfactory
overdevelopment of the site, harmful to the character and appearance of the
Conservation Area, the setting of the nearby Listed Buildings and the amenities
of future occupants
·
The approval would be contrary to UDP policies D1, D2, B2, B6
and H6
·
Although not raised in the objection by the Council, the
development would be likely to contribute significantly to parking difficulties
in the area
..........................................................................................................................................................
Copies of the
full decision letters relating to the above appeals have been placed in the
Members Room. Further copies may be
obtained from Mrs J Kendall (extension 4572) at the Directorate of Environment
Services