PAPER B2

ISLE OF WIGHT COUNCIL DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE –

TUESDAY 27 AUGUST 2002

REPORT OF THE STRATEGIC DIRECTOR OF CORPORATE AND ENVIRONMENT SERVICES

This application was initially considered by the Development Control Committee at the meeting held on 16 July 2002 when it was decided to visit the site before making a decision.

The site visit took place on 26 July 2002 when Members decided to defer consideration in order to enable negotiations to take place about the proposed development, about a number of issues including the possible future use of neighbouring land and the overall access to the site which is shared by a neighbouring motor repair facility (Binstead Auto Centre).

As a result of this decision the Development Control Manager sent a detailed letter (Appendix A) to the applicant's agent outlining comprehensively the concerns expressed by this Committee and asking him and his client to consider possible amendments to the overall scheme. The response (Appendix B) has come from the applicant, as opposed to his agent, setting out his position and views on the matter and requesting that the application should be determined in its presently submitted form.

The following report is identical to the report submitted to the Development Control Committee (Site Visits) on 26 July 2002 with appropriate amendments detailing the outcome of the unsuccessful attempt to initiate negotiations on this application.

Representations

With regard to originally submitted scheme six letters have been received from local residents objecting to proposal on following grounds:

Loss of trees.

Potential problems relating to drainage of site.

           Potential land stability problems adjoining stream and excessive water flow. 

Overdevelopment of site.

Inaccuracy in respect of boundary identification.

Proximity of new development to existing residential property to north west.

Inappropriate increase in traffic movement onto and from busy road.

Discrepancy in respect of parking allocation.

Following readvertisement two further letters were received again repeating original objections with one writer requesting that site be visited by Members prior to making decision.

Southern Water advise that the point and details of proposed connection to public sewer will require their formal approval. There are no public surface water sewers in the vicinity of site. No surface water should be discharged into public foul sewer as this could cause flooding to downstream properties. Their records show a number of sewerage incidents in the area but they were all blockages mainly on private drainage. This would not indicate a lack of capacity in the area.

Contaminated Land Officer advises that it will be satisfactory to undertake investigations regarding contamination after issue of planning consent. He therefore recommends appropriate conditions should be attached to any consent requiring site investigation report and remediation where necessary prior to development commencing on site.

Environment Agency raises no objection in principle to proposal but recommends condition requiring appropriate investigation to assess degree of contamination of site and determine water pollution potential. They recommend further condition that foul drainage from development shall connect to mains foul sewer.

Council's Tree and Landscape Officer has inspected site and advises that there is one tree worth retaining in south western corner of site.

Following substantial consultation with Highway Engineer further detail recently submitted with application has enabled Highway Engineer to support application subject to imposition of standard conditions.

Evaluation

Application relates to part of former garage workshop associated with Binstead Garage which itself is situated on northern side of Binstead Hill approximately midway between junctions with 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 and a residential property rear of garage premises.

Whilst site itself is not allocated for any specific purpose within UDP, site does lie within development envelope for Ryde 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) situated to side (north west) of existing Binstead Garage complex.

Development would comprise nine dwellings in two terraces with each dwelling having main orientation facing north east - south west. Development proposes five, three bedroom units and four, four bedroom units with parking for some nine vehicles indicated alongside entrance to site.

Turning to more detailed aspects of proposal, whilst two end terrace dwellings are located close to western boundary of site where it adjoins the stream orientation of these properties is such as to prevent any direct overlooking, presenting gable ends to existing development in the Old Forge Close. Distances to remaining properties fronting Binstead Hill and rear of garage are considered sufficient to enable proposed development to be built without having undue adverse impact on surrounding residential occupiers.

Given previous industrial use of site comments of both Environment Agency and Council's Contaminated Land Officer are appreciated and imposition of conditions can satisfactorily overcome this particular constraint. Provision of nine off street parking spaces complies with adopted zonal parking policy for this location.

Whilst existing workshop complex is surrounded by trees/shrubs such specimens are not considered worthy of retention apart from one sycamore in south western corner of site.

It is expected that development will connect to foul sewer system whilst in terms of surface water runoff point should be made that previous impervious surface area of development is significantly less than is currently the case in respect of the industrial workshops and hard surfacing areas. Therefore, surface water runoff from the site should be reduced to reflect the reduction in impervious surfaces. This will drain to the existing stream and in view of the reduced flow from the site no objection can be raised on this particular issue.

Members should appreciate that on land to immediate north of application site application seeking outline consent for eleven dwellings on land adjacent "Pintiles" was refused under delegated powers in May of this year (see attached map for site details). This application (TCP/3886N) sought to utilise the same access point as the current application, however, Highway Engineer was unable to support application on grounds of inadequacy of existing access. At time of this application he advised that application for eight dwellings on site was refused by direction of the Highway Authority in 1985. Approval for two units was subsequently given but it is felt that they represented the limits of what should be allowed with access from the main road at this point. Although garage has lost its fuel pumps probably decreasing vehicle movements in and out, traffic flows on A3054 have increased in past 15 years and circumstances have not materially changed in any other respect. In particular, visibility to west is sub-standard across frontage of Bank Cottages. In accordance with his recommendation application was refused under delegated powers on grounds of increased use of existing access adding unduly to hazards of highway users, unsatisfactory access by reason of unacceptable visibility and fact that proposal made no provision for affordable housing.

Clearly, Highway Engineer maintains his objection to any new development served off the existing access and whilst such access is sub-standard in terms of visibility no reasonable objection can be raised on highway grounds to replacement of industrial workshops with residential as it is likely that vehicle movements would be similar or indeed less than most recent previous use which could recommence at any time.

With regards highway matters agent advises that when active workshops were creating approximately 50 vehicle movements a day with staff, deliveries and vehicle testing and it is unlikely that proposed development of nine houses will significantly impact on that previous situation. Following substantial negotiation with Highway Engineers Department revised plans have been submitted which satisfy Highway Engineer. This information covers issues of kerbs, gradient, surface treatments and surface drainage and Highway Engineer recommends appropriate conditions to cover these matters.

Development represents opportunity in seeking to remove non-conforming user which, given usage involved, had potential to impact on surrounding residential occupiers and whilst agent indicates that some five members of staff were previously employed loss of relatively small scale employment user is not considered to be sufficiently significant to raise a policy objection in respect of seeking to retain employment land.

The various points to be debated, covered in detail in the letter from the Development Control Manager, can be summarised in the following terms:

           •          No objection to loss of buildings previously used for employment purposes in favour of residential redevelopment.

           •          Overall density and arrangement of proposed units on a limited site area where there are a number of semi-mature trees.

           •          Delineation of access/parking area from neighbouring use as a motor repair facility.

           •          Possibility of a more comprehensive development by utilising land presently forming part of the curtilage of Pintiles.

Having read the letter from the Development Control Manager Members will have their own views on the response from the applicant who is clearly indicating that with support from the Highway Engineer and the Planning Officer he is unable to see sufficient justification for further amendments to the submitted scheme and, on that basis, declines the opportunity to negotiate on any of the issues.

Members will have to decide whether the concerns they have raised, if not addressed, should or could amount to sufficient justification for withholding permission. While it is appreciated that the presently submitted scheme may not amount to Members preferred solution for this particular site, there is some difficulty with sustaining a decision to refuse permission when the development is in accordance with the objectives and policies contained in the new PPG3 (Housing) which is consistent with a number of policies contained in the Unitary Development Plan. Consequently, with some reservations, the recommendation to grant conditional approval is maintained.

Reason for Recommendation

Having given due regard and appropriate weight to all the material considerations described in the Evaluation section of this report the redevelopment of this urban brown field site is considered appropriate and consistent with UDP policy concerning housing, access and design policies D1, D2 and TR7.

Recommendation - Approval (Revised Plans)

Conditions/Reasons:

M J A FISHER

Strategic Director

Corporate and Environment Services