REPORT OF THE DIRECTOR OF CORPORATE AND ENVIRONMENT SERVICES TO DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE
SITE INSPECTION – 28 MARCH 2003
|
1. |
TCP/13319/R P/02247/02 Parish/Name: Newchurch Registration
Date: 03/01/2003 -
Full Planning Permission Officer: Mr. J. Mackenzie Tel: (01983) 823567 Demolition of
buildings; conversion of buildings and construction of new buildings to form
a "Victorian Theme Park", including a museum, shop, tearooms,
toilets, exhibition and display areas and associated facilities; formation of
vehicular access and parking Holliers Farm,
Branstone, Sandown, PO360LT |
REASON FOR COMMITTEE CONSIDERATION
The application is a major submission where they are a
number of significant issues to be resolved.
PERFORMANCE INFORMATION
This is a major application and the reason for the
delay in processing is the lack of Highway Engineer's observations and heavy
case load carried by Officer.
LOCATION & SITE CHARACTERISTICS
This application relates to the former Holliers Farm,
the premises formerly owned and run by the Isle of Wight College as an
agricultural educational establishment. It encompasses a large tract of land
comprising 33.5 hectares of land with a
substantial frontage to the A3054 from a point opposite Branstone Farm in the
north westerly direction almost to Jubilee Nurseries, a distance of about 340
metres except for an access to a residential property situated close to the
main complex of buildings. The site reaches, at its eastern most extent, almost
to Princelett Shute and almost to Bathingbourne Farm at its western extent and
approximately 700 metres in a southerly direction.
The vast majority of the land is open, relatively flat
and undeveloped, field boundaries being marked by hedgerows but in the
southwestern extent of the site there are ponds at a lower level.
All of the buildings are situated in a central complex
close to the A3054 and comprise a mix of steel framed agricultural type
buildings clad in mostly timber and corrugated sheet steel and, in addition,
there is a two storey brick work building close to the front of the site and,
immediately to the east, a temporary portacabin style building single storey
with a flat roof. The southern most buildings are timber framed and clad. There
is also a polytunnel towards the western end of the complex.
The southwestern side of the A3045 is open
agricultural land and with the exception of the Holliers Farm buildings there
are 3 dwellings in close proximity on this side of the road. These are located
immediately adjoining the northwestern boundary, a property located to the east
of the complex with a short access track off the A3045 and, further to the
southeast, another dwelling again accessed off the main road by a
narrow track, both of these properties are completely
surrounded by the land comprised in Holliers Farm. There are also dwellings on the northern side of the road and
further to the east adjacent to Branstone Farm.
RELEVANT HISTORY
Various applications between 1974 and 2001 relating to
developments at Holliers Farm to be used in connection with the former
educational use.
DETAILS OF APPLICATION
Proposal seeks to change the use of the buildings and
land to a Victorian themed park.
It is intended to close off the existing vehicular
access which is presently situated immediately in front of the existing
buildings and open a new access in a position approximately 18 metres to the
northwest linking with a car park and coach parking area sufficient for
approximately 8 coaches and 57 cars. Plans show the existing two storey brick
building to become a museum, the buildings immediately behind it and a new
construction, to be used for craft workshops and display whilst the main
buildings located on the western side to be used as an exhibition, cinema,
lecture hall with an entrance building and shop located at its southwestern
end. The courtyard in between and surrounded in proposed to be a landscaped,
cobbled courtyard.
The existing buildings are proposed to undergo
significant changes including a covered link between the two buildings nearest
the front of the site with the top halves of many of the buildings being re
clad and either substantially rebuilt or new buildings erected, including a tea
room and cook house, the tea room taking the form of a large glass house
structure, the cook house being constructed in masonry with a glazed link
through to the tea room.
It is proposed to use rough brick work finished to the
lower part of the walls with vertical timber stained boarding above to those
buildings which are to be reworked, with green corrugated sheet roofing.
Additional information supplied regarding the details
of the operation show that it is intended to operate between 0900 hours to 1800
hours in high season between Easter and October and seven days a week, and
otherwise 1000 to 1600 hours, five days a week for the remainder of the
year. The numbers of employees at the
venue will be twelve, full time.
At this stage only informal activities are anticipated
outside of the buildings and courtyard area where patrons will take informal
walks through a Victorian garden and longer distance walks over the site; it is
anticipated that there will be pony trap rides around the site and that other
activities may take place within the courtyard, for example a juggler, magician
and street theatre.
The coach park will hold a maximum of 8 coaches but it
is anticipated that there will be approximately 4 or 5 there at any one time
with varying levels of car parking up to the maximum of 57.
At this stage it is estimated that the maximum number
of patrons per day could be about 800 and it is hoped that an open top bus may
be used to bring patrons from Sandown to the site and return them after their
visit. The shop is anticipated to sell souvenirs, gifts, craft goods and other
tourist type goods and the cafe is likely to sell cold foods such a sandwiches,
cakes but to serve teas, coffees and other soft drinks. In addition, once a day a Victorian lunch
will be served (such as rabbit stew).
The activities are said to be special effects and demonstrations within
the buildings which will not generate any significant noise. The inside of the buildings will be lined
with sound absorbent material. A letter
of explanation is appended at the end of this report.
Letter from applicant's solicitor (which was
appended to the report and included on the agenda on 18 March together with the
Development Control Manager's response).
Copy of a letter from Southern Tourist Board
supporting the project and the way in which the project fits with other
agencies including DEFRA. Essentially
this letter supports the principle rather than the detail but points out the
location is on a key holiday route on the Island.
DEVELOPMENT PLAN/POLICY
Members will appreciate that Section 54A of the
Town and Country Planning Act 1990 clearly establishes that the policy
document, in this case the Isle of Wight UDP is the main factor against which
all proposals should first be considered and that, unless there are material
reasons for doing otherwise, applications should be determined in accordance
with policy.
Strategic policies, contained within the Isle
of Wight Unitary Development Plan
include:
S1 - new
development will be concentrated within existing urban areas.
S2 - development
will be encouraged on land which has been previously developed (brownfield
sites), rather than undeveloped (greenfield) sites. Greenfield sites will only be allocated for development where
they are extensions to urban areas and where no suitable alternative brownfield
site exists.
S3 - new
developments of a large scale, will be expected to be located in or adjacent to
the defined development envelopes of the main Island towns of Cowes/East Cowes,
Newport, Ryde and Sandown/Shanklin.
S4 - the
countryside will be protected from inappropriate development.
S5 -
proposals for development which on balance (bearing in mind all the part 2
policies), will be for the overall benefit of the Island, by enhancing the
economic, social or environmental position will be approved, provided any
adverse impacts can be ameliorated.
General and specific policies include:
Policy G1
expects the development to be located within settlements and that land outside
the boundaries is considered countryside.
Policy G4
sets out the general locational criteria for development supporting new
development provided it harmonises with its surroundings, creates an
interesting and attractive environment with proper regard to access traffic
including access by foot, cycle and public transport; maintains and enhances
the interests of nature conservation and environmental protection; is
sympathetic to the character and materials of its surroundings.
Policy G5
relates to development outside defined settlements, stating that exceptions may
be permitted if a rural location is required and the development is of benefit
to the rural economy, is well designed and landscaped and should be development
connected with agriculture, forestry or related ancillary activities; that it
is recreation or sports activities appropriate to the countryside; an
appropriate rural tourism development and other exceptions cited.
Policy D1
relates to standards of design, expecting visual integrity of the site,
sympathy in terms of scale and materials, siting and layout; that development
should be compatible with surrounding buildings and uses in terms of height,
mass and density, does not detract from the reasonable use and enjoyment of
adjoining buildings.
Policy D3
relates directly to landscaping which should reflect the existing features,
character and locality with adequate landscaping with the need to continue
maintenance.
Policy E1
sets out the Council's desire to promote and encourage employment uses in
appropriate locations on allocated land within or adjacent to existing
settlements so as to reduce the need to travel to work by car.
Policy E8
allows for some employment related development on land outside development
boundaries where it is of benefit to the rural economy where the built
application is for the reuse of a suitable agricultural or other appropriate
rural building and where the development is associated with an existing farm
complex and employment operation is compatible with and complimentary to that
use.
Policy T1
supports the extension of the tourist season.
Policy T2
supports tourism related developments subject to satisfactory design, access,
parking and landscaping.
Policy T7
sets out sites suitable for tourism related development, for example Shanklin
Esplanade, Battery Gardens, Sandown Bay Leisure Centre, The Old Reservoir and
Los Altos Park and Culver Parade and land at Yaverland.
Policy T9
refers to small scale rural tourism, ancillary to an existing farming operation
such as farmhouse accommodation or a change of use from residential properties
to hotels or restaurants, or the conversion of suitable farm or rural buildings
that are directly related to existing heritage and landscape qualities of the
area.
Policy C1
sets out the need to maintain and protect the landscape, development of which
may affect the landscape character and overall distinctiveness of the area.
Policy C17
states that planning applications for the reuse and adaptation of rural
buildings for employment, recreational or tourism purposes will be approved,
provided that:
a) the
building is of substantial, sound and permanent construction and is
structurally capable of reuse and adaptation without major or complete
reconstruction;
b) proposed
conversion respects local character, building styles and materials and would
not entail any loss of significant archaeological or architectural features
both internal and external, which contribute to the character of the building
and its surroundings;
c) the
traffic generated by the new use can be safely accommodated by the site access
and local road system and there is sufficient room within the curtilage for
servicing and vehicle parking without detriment to the visual amenity of the
area;
d) no new
fences, walls or other structures associated with the use will be erected if
they would harm the amenity of the area;
e) if within
an agricultural holding it will not lead to the erection of new buildings and
conditions or agreements are applied prohibiting further extensions,
alterations or outbuildings;
f) approval
may be subject to reduced time limits for implementation, so that any
structural survey remains relevant;
g) the form,
bulk and general design of the building are in keeping with its surroundings.
PPG7 relates to countryside and the rural
environment detailing the need to preserve the countryside and supports rural
tourism.
PPG21
relates to tourism and gives advice on Government support for tourism.
CONSULTEE RESPONSES
Environmental Health Officer recommends the hours
limited to 0800 to 1900 hours on Mondays to Fridays and 0900 to 1400 hours on
Saturdays and prohibit it on Sundays and Bank Holidays in order to protect the
amenity of neighbouring properties.
Recommendation for refusal from Highway
Engineers, on grounds that:
·
No assessment as specified in UDP Policy TR4 has
been submitted.
·
Essential improvements to the adjacent bus stops
have not been considered.
·
Proposed right hand turn lane is inadequate (too
short).
·
Proposed carriageway widening would encroach
upon highway ditch.
·
Inadequate signage.
·
Access road, width and kerb radii inadequate.
·
Car park layout unsatisfactory.
It would appear that, with correct
considerations, most of these details and objections could be overcome with
substantial engineering works.
County Ecology Officer confirms that he could
find no evidence of protected species using the buildings. Acknowledged the existence of a barn owl box
in one building but that it is not used.
Birds nests were evident and the modern roosts are such that the
buildings are unsuitable for use by bats.
Observed two old ash trees which are valuable for wildlife, stating that
they should be retained with appropriate action taken if birds or bats are
found. Acknowledges that the
application is a large area of farmland containing hedges, ponds and marsh and
that badgers are known to be present.
Considers that, in the event of planning permission being granted a
detailed landscaping scheme should be submitted and approved by the Planning
Authority which should take account of public access routes and existing
ecology sensitive areas and their enhancement.
Rights of Way Section do not foresee any difficulties
and have informed the applicants of the existence of the rights of way and the
need to ensure they remain undamaged and open.
PARISH/TOWN COUNCIL COMMENTS
None received at the time of writing.
THIRD PARTY REPRESENTATIONS
CPRE point out development would result in the loss of
agricultural land and buildings and that the application has insufficient
information properly to assess the implications with regard to viability and
clarification of the proposed uses.
Ramblers Association raise concern that rights of way
are not shown on the plans and there may be a possible adverse affect on them.
IOW Observatory raise question of lighting and
consequent light pollution.
Seven letters of objection from local and Island
residents objecting on grounds of inadequate and dangerous access on a fast
piece of road; that noise generated by the activities especially at weekends
and evenings would be unacceptable; adverse effects on rights of way; adverse
effects on habitats for fauna presently using the site; increased traffic
exiting onto a dangerous and fast piece of highway; inappropriate development
in the countryside are site which is outside any designated development
envelope concluding that such a development would be contrary to policy;
visually intrusive development; overlooking of adjoining properties and loss of
agricultural land and buildings.
Island Tourist Industry Association supports the
proposal stating that proposal fits into Regional Spatial Strategy, that it
forms first class example of diversification from a non economical farm to a
tourist attraction offering thirty full time jobs. It forms a major investment on the Island which fits with the
Tourist Development Plan and that this unique attraction with funding from
DEFRA and praise by English Nature.
CRIME & DISORDER IMPLICATIONS
Relevant Officer has been given opportunity to comment
but no observations have been received.
EVALUATION
In essence this application seeks to use the former
teaching farm buildings and land as a tourist attraction, a site which is
located within the predominantly rural and agricultural landscape.
Determination therefore turns on matters relating to policy and principle,
access considerations; affect on the area generally and, more specifically, the
effects on neighbouring properties.
Section 54A of the Town and Country Planning Act
1990 states that developments should be judged against the policies of the
Development Plan and should be determined in accordance with that Plan unless
there are sustainable and substantial reasons for departing from that
document.
Policy S1 requires that new development will be
concentrated within existing urban areas and Policy S2 allows for the reuse of
brownfield sites but Policy S3 requires that new development of a large scale
will be expected to be located in or adjacent to the defined development
envelopes of the main Island towns so that Policy S4 can protect the
countryside from inappropriate development.
Policy S5 supports developments which, on balance (bearing in mind all
the part 2 policies) will be for the overall benefit of the Island.
This site is outside of the existing urban
areas, in an area of open countryside.
New developments which require a rural or countryside location can find
support within S5 and the more detailed policies of the Plan. This is a tourism development and does not
need to be located in a rural area,
indeed it would be better located in a more sustainable position within the
tourism areas identified in the UDP so that it draws on a much more
conveniently located patronage rather than in a more isolated location.
The general policies may support some development
in such areas but only if they are necessarily located and do not create
adverse impacts in the landscape or in terms of access traffic and are visually
sympathetic in their setting. Policy G5
supports those developments connected with agriculture or recreation and
sports, it is simply that those activities could not be carried out within the
urban area and do need a countryside location.
This enterprise does not need to be located in a rural area and a
departure from local planning policy is not warranted.
Any development which is carried out within or
outside of the development envelope should not impact unacceptably on adjoining
properties and Policy D1 seeks the achieve development which is sympathetic and
design in visual terms but also seeks to ensure that such activities do not
detract from the reasonable use and enjoyment of adjoining buildings. In this instance the level of activity
likely from such a tourist development will impact on the adjoining or nearby
properties and would therefore be contrary to Policy D1(H).
Policy E1 supports developments which generate
employment in appropriate locations and, of course, any tourist development is
likely to be an employment generator, albeit on a comparatively limited
scale. The principle of this development
is not in dispute and, naturally the generation of employment would be
welcomed. However, its location as an
employment generator should be, according to Policy E1, within or adjacent to
an existing settlement so as to reduce the need to travel to work by car,
similarly, in this location not only the employees but the patrons would need
to travel to the site. If located on an
allocated tourism site it would be more easily accessible for patrons.
Policy E8 supports employment generated in the
countryside providing they are the reuse of a suitable agricultural or other
appropriate rural building or where the development is associated with an
existing farm complex. Policy E8
supports the development provided that it is a suitable building and Policy C17
relates directly to the reuse of rural buildings which will be discussed later.
Policies T1 and T2 support tourism related
development, especially those which will extend the season which can be taken
as including indoor facilities but PPG21, in promoting the tourist industry
points out the objective is to achieve "sustainable development" that
serves the interest of both economic growth and conservation of the environment
and, of course, where employment is generated for a greater length of time,
such impacts on winter unemployment are of course welcomed.
In stating that the principle of development is
welcomed, which it is, the location chosen is felt inappropriate and Policy T7
sets out several general locations where extensive areas of land have been
allocated for tourism developments and, in the current context, Shanklin
Esplanade, Battery Gardens, Sandown Bay Leisure Centre, Old Reservoir and Los
Altos Park and especially Culver Parade and land at Yaverland are considered
particularly appropriate for the proposal.
These sites are considered key sites where the Council aims to encourage
tourism development and the promotion of tourism facilities.
Policy T9 relates to small scale rural tourism
where ancillary to an existing farming operation but relates mainly to
accommodation as it supports expansion of an existing hotel or guest house or
farmhouse accommodation or ancillary accommodation for tourists within an
existing establishment.
Policy C1 seeks to preserve the landscape
character and although the site is not located within an Area of Outstanding
Natural Beauty, it is an open landscape where long distance views from and to
the site are available.
PPG7 states that "priority now is to find
new ways of which in the quality of the whole countryside, whilst accommodating
appropriate development, in order to compliment the protection which
designations offer. The Countryside
Commission and English Nature have analysed the distinctive features of the
English Countryside (including the Isle of Wight) in both landscape and nature
conservation terms, identifying areas (or zones) of cohesive character, which
can be described in terms of their landscape character, sense of place, local
distinctiveness, characteristics of wildlife and natural features and the
nature of change".
Policy C17 relates directly to the reuse and
adaptation of a rural building for employment, recreational or tourism purposes
and therefore, in principle it may seem appropriate to use this complex of
buildings for a tourism use.
Policy C17 contains caveats which states that
the building should be of substantial, sound and permanent construction and
structurally capable of reuse and adaptation without major or complete
reconstruction. These buildings are all
modern, that is to say post 1919. They
are steel framed and clad with profiled sheeting on both the roofs and much of
the sides with some walls in masonry of limited height. The plans suggest that, only the essential
skeleton of the building will be used, much of the cladding replaced or covered
over and therefore the adaptations are major.
Furthermore many of the buildings are to be
demolished, some being replaced with new structures and of the approximately
1,260 square metres of buildings to remain on the site, approximately 490
square metres will be new build or replacement buildings. This represents a figure of nearly 40% of
rebuild with only just over 60% of existing buildings remaining of which all
will be substantially altered.
Policy C17 also expects the conversion to
respect local character, styles and materials and that the traffic generated
can be safely accommodated by the site access and local road system with the
provision of parking and turning without detriment to the visual amenity of the
area. Extensive alterations will need
to be made to the road layout to accommodate a right turn lane into the site
with a new access and substantial car and coach parking area to accommodate the
patrons. Policy C17 also requires that
the form, bulk and general design of the buildings are in keeping with its
surroundings. This substantial
development which is supportable in principle is, in my view, proposed on the
wrong site and in the wrong buildings and whilst being contrary to Policy C17
will impact on many of the other policies mentioned above.
The majority of these buildings are steel framed and
of comparatively modern construction. They are of little architectural merit
but the adaptation is proposed to be carried out by erection of some buff
facing brick walls to half height and timber, vertical stained cladding above
with natural or corrugated steel roofs with the intention of unifying all the
buildings in this particular colour/finish scheme. The buildings would,
however, retain their basic agricultural appearance and style but it is
inevitable but that the character of the buildings will alter since the
additions to the complex of buildings include the covered link incorporating a
small 'bell tower' and the new glass house styled cafe and new cook house, all
of these policies offer some degree of support subject to provisos which
mitigate against adverse effects and therefore determination of the application
in terms of policy needs to be carefully considered.
In terms of access, the change of use as proposed is
inevitably going to result in an increase in use. Hitherto access to the
teaching unit involved a lesser number of persons accessing and leaving the
site, persons who would have been familiar with the attributes of access. The
new use would involve access by persons unfamiliar with the access and would
involve the manoeuvring of coaches into and out of the site. The new use will
also involve the increased frequency of visits but, in favour of the
development, the access point has been moved approximately 80 metres to the
west. This would enable improved visibility in both directions and includes the
removal of a substantial length of hedgerow to improve visibility. Such a
removal, if permitted or required would need to be accompanied by reinstatement
in a more suitable position farther back into the site to ensure a character of
this area is not significantly adversely affected.
The increased use of the access and its resiting
closer to residential property is likely to result in disturbance to properties
on the northeastern side of the A3054 but the degree of additional disturbance
will be exacerbated by the hours of operation.
All policies mentioned above stress the importance of
the need to harmonise any development into an area. Policy G5, whilst stating
that development may exceptionally be permitted in the countryside (in a rural
location) if it is of benefit to the rural economy, as well designed and
landscaped, is of an appropriate scale if it is an appropriate rural tourism development.
However such developments will not be acceptable where it would cause the loss
of the best and most versatile agricultural, horticultural or forestry land or
reduce the quality of the environment and landscape. Similarly T1 and T2 also
seek to minimise any detrimental or adverse impact. Policy C17 allows for
adaptation of rural buildings for recreational purposes so long as
environmental or detailed factors are satisfied such as adequate access and
parking facilities can be provided and other structures associated with the use
should not harm the amenity of the area. The proposed use must generate higher
levels of traffic, drawing on at least Sandown and Shanklin tourists if not
Island wide tourists, encouraging additional use of a private car rather than
public transport and it may be more appropriate if such a use were sited on
those areas which have been designated for tourism developments in the UDP.
Increased vehicle activity, noise and light pollution, especially if the
opening hours are long are all likely to impact on the character of this area.
Turning to affect on neighbouring properties, there
are probably 9 residential properties in relatively close proximity to the
complex of buildings which would be adversely affected by any increase in noise
or light pollution, especially if external activities took place and the
opening hours were extended into the evenings. The two properties which are
most likely to be affected are the cottage situated adjoining the northwestern
boundary, some 80 metres from the car park and Purbeck House located only 20
metres from the nearest building, a new structure proposed to be used for craft
workshops and display. In addition the manoeuvring of vehicles the manoeuvring
of vehicles, including coaches around and in and out of the car park onto the
highway is likely to result in disturbance to properties immediately opposite
the site. Increased noise levels from the site, especially from external
activities or noisy internal activities if the buildings are not insulated
correctly will inevitably impact on other residential properties further
afield.
It should be remembered that there are public
footpaths which traverse the site, one of which passes the complex of buildings
in extremely close proximity. Bearing in mind it is the applicants declared
intention to operate pony rides throughout the open fields attached to the
complex of buildings there may be some conflict with preventing unauthorised
access. However, the applicants have been advised of the need to maintain free
passage along the footpaths so that the rights of way could not be blocked.
In summary it is acknowledged that UDP policies
partially support such a proposal, given the appropriate site. However, taking
the implications of the proposals as a whole, bearing in mind the proposed
activities, the details of the conversion, the significant amount of new
buildings and degree of refurbishment, the increase in vehicular access and
egress to and from the site, the sites relative isolation from its main source
of patronage and the implications of sustainability, I consider the site to be
inappropriate for the proposed use which would be more appropriately sited in
the tourism area of Sandown or Shanklin rather than in open countryside.
Accordingly I consider the proposal would be contrary to Policy C17 and T2
where such new facilities should be located in sustainable locations. Similarly
the proposal would be contrary to G5 as it is felt that in this rural location
the site is particularly visible and the development and its associated
activity would reduce the quality of the environment and landscape. I would
therefore conclude that the development is inappropriate and should be refused.
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
impact this development might have on the owners/occupiers of other property in
the area and other third parties have been carefully considered. Whilst there
may be some interference with the rights of 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
Whilst there is a presumption in favour of development
in the interests of the Council's desire to promote tourism and to generate
employment it is felt that, in this instance, the location of the proposed use
is inappropriate bearing in mind the level of activity likely to take place on
site and the resultant effect on adjoining properties. The conversion of this
complex of buildings including the erection of new, additional buildings of
substantial scale would not be consistent with Policy C17 (Conversion of Barns
and Other Rural Buildings) nor consistent with Policies T2 and G5 of the Isle
of Wight Unitary Development Plan.
RECOMMENDATION
- REFUSAL
Conditions/Reasons:
|
1 |
The proposal represents the introduction of a
substantial tourist attraction in a rural area and the physical impact of the
use would conflict with the Local Planning Authority's intention to protect
the natural beauty of the landscape and therefore would conflict with
policies C1 (Protection of Landscape Character), G2 (Consolidation of
Infilling of Scattered Settlements Outside Development Envelopes) and G5
(Development Outside Defined Settlements) of the Isle of Wight Unitary
Development Plan. |
|
2 |
On the basis of the information available the Local
Planning Authority is not satisfied that the buildings are structurally
capable of retention and refurbishment and therefore any works required to
retain the structures would be likely to result in new buildings rather than
conversion of existing structures and would therefore be contrary to Policy
C17 (Conversion of Barns and Other Rural Buildings) of the Isle of Wight Unitary
Development Plan. |
|
3 |
The
introduction of a Victorian Themed Park as proposed would introduce a level
of activity which would generate significant levels of noise pollution to the
detriment of the nearby residential properties and would therefore be
contrary to Policy D1 of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan. |
Strategic Director
Corporate and Environment Services