2.	TCP/09491/H P/00211/02 Parish/Name: Northwood Registration Date: 07/02/2002 - Outline Planning Permission Officer: Mr. J. Fletcher Tel: (01983) 823598 Retention of detached house & pond; outline for 9 houses with access off Venner Avenue & landscaping 52 Venner Avenue, Cowes, Isle Of Wight, PO318AG

Representations

Highway Engineer recommends conditions should application be approved.

Council's Ecology Officer submitted extensive comments relating to the pond on the site and these are summarised as follows:

Pond, although larger in the past, still holds important breeding population of amphibians; being a natural pond and therefore, its retention is essential.

Any layout should avoid any direct harm to the pond along with retention and management of suitable surrounding habitat which serves as an important refuge as a buffer. Suggests that this should be five times the area of the pond and initial proposal was unacceptable from this point of view.

Reference is made to objectors referring to presence of great crested newts in the pond with Ecology Officer suggesting these may have been present when the pond was larger. However, great crested newts are known to occur in Northwood and as these newts are protected under the Wildlife and Countryside Act and also under the Habitats Directive then their presence will influence the layout and design.

Recommends a survey to establish whether or not great crested newts are present on the site with that survey to be carried out by a suitable specialist.

Objectors have referred to range of other species using the area however, Ecology Officer does not believe that any of these introduce additional material constraints to development on the site.

Environment Agency makes reference to the existence of a pond on the site and also refers to the need for an ecological survey of the pond to be carried out for any protected species. They emphasise the need to protect these ecological features.

Agency also makes reference to the need to ensure existing surface water system is capable of accommodating additional drainage and if not, Agency recommends the use of sustainable drainage systems (SUDS) within the development.

Southern Water comment as follows:

Foul Water

"A hydraulic analysis of the existing sewage network system indicates that there is sufficient capacity to accommodate a foul flow no greater than 0.6 litres per second. The connections can be made downstream of manhole reference 5404. Before any connections are made an application form needs to be completed and approved by Southern Water Services".

Surface Water

"A hydraulic analysis of the existing sewage network system indicates there is sufficient capacity to accommodate a surface water flow of 20 litres per second. However, a storm water runoff no greater than 4 litres per second for all storm conditions can be accommodated downstream of manhole reference 6453. Before any connections are made an application form needs to be completed and approved by Southern Water Services".

Council's Tree and Landscape Officer has visited the site and reports there are two oak trees (60 - 70 years old) on the site and suggests that one would be too close to proposed new dwelling and if they are approved it should be removed. Remaining tree should be retained and have a TPO placed upon it.

Application has been the subject of fifteen letters of objection, eight being from residents of Wyatts Lane, two from residents of Wroxall Close, three from residents of Greenways Close and one each from the Isle of Wight Society and the Northwood Community Forum.

The above letters are summarised as follows:

Proposal represents an overdevelopment resulting in a density which is inappropriate for Northwood which local residents considered had the status of a village.

Extensive objection to the encroachment of this proposal on to the existing wedge of open space (Council owned) and therefore the loss of amenity that would result.

Concern that proposal would exacerbate the problems caused to pedestrians and other vehicle users by extensive on-street car parking.

Some letter writers suggest that proposal provides insufficient parking on-site.

Proposal will result in overlooking, loss of privacy etc. to properties both in Wyatts Lane and Wroxall Close.

Reference is made to flooding incidents and capability of surface water drainage system to accept additional drainage.

Extensive concern relating to the pond and the wildlife habitat which uses that pond. Objectors do not consider the applicants have addressed the ecological issues and are concerned that if the pond is to be retained how it will be managed in the long term. Also reference is made to the occupation of the pond by great crested newts.

Writers make reference to the removal of trees which both provided amenity value and screening prior to the submission of the application. Also reference is made to the inadequacy of replacement planting.

Concern existing services will be unable to cater for this proposed development i.e. local shops, schools, etc.

Letter writers note that the property 52 Venner Avenue is to be retained however, they are concerned that this could be replaced in the future by at least two, if not three further dwellings.

Applicant has commissioned a report by consultant entomologist with the contents of that report being quoted as follows:

“The pond which measures 8 metres by 4.5 metres at its maximum point had almost 100% of its surface area covered in common duckweed. This has had the effect of making the entire water body very densely shaded to the extent that there was no submerged aquatic vegetation extant. The only emergent vegetation present was composed of two small areas of yellow iris. The depth of water in the pond was shallow, much of it was around 30 cms in depth and the deeper areas were at most 40 cms in depth. The pond floor was comprised deep 20 cms layer of very soft pungent mud.

In terms of aquatic life, large numbers of water-slater were present. These scavenge on decaying vegetable matter and obviously found the thick silt to their liking. A single damson fly larva was noted but no other invertebrate species were found. There was no evidence of fish being present. In terms of amphibians, the pond was found to contain a common frog and a good number of palmate newt.

Main purpose of the survey was to establish whether or not great crested newts were present on site. No specimens of this species were recorded during my search, furthermore I do not feel that the pond in its current state would support a population of this species. The shallowness of the water, lack of submerged vegetation for egg laying and extremely stagnant nature of the pond are all factors that lead me to believe that the pond is unsuitable for the species in question”.

Letter signed by two residents of Wyatts Lane objecting on grounds of loss of privacy, additional traffic causing hazard at junctions of Wyatts Lane/Venner Avenue and Wroxall Close/Venner Avenue, particularly when children are being dropped off or picked up from school in Wyatts Lane.

Evaluation

No. 52 Venner Avenue and its curtilage located on the northern side of Venner Avenue having a vehicular access off Venner Avenue across an existing wedge of open space. That access is situated approximately 50 metres east of the junction of Venner Avenue with Wyatts Lane almost midway between that junction and the junction of Venner Avenue with Wroxall Close to the east. No. 52 Venner Avenue is an established dwelling two storeys in height. Site itself did accommodate a row of trees along its eastern boundary although the majority of these trees were removed around Christmas 2001. The site also contains a small natural pond adjacent its western boundary. Finally, there is a electrical substation situated abutting the southern boundary of the curtilage of 52 Venner Avenue with that substation encroaching into the open space area as previously mentioned.

Both Wroxall Close and Horseshoe Close are in the form of a fairly high density development being mainly terrace with some semi-detached whilst the character of the development to the west fronting Wyatts Lane is in the main detached houses or bungalows interspersed with a small number of semi-detached houses. Members are also advised of a large area of open space to the east which has provision for play equipment.

In terms of planning history, in October 2001 application was received for the demolition of the existing dwelling and an outline proposal for twelve houses. This application was the subject of extensive level of representation. It is my understanding that the applicant will not be proceeding with this application and it will be withdrawn in the near future.

Proposal seeks outline consent with all matters reserved apart from siting, means of access and landscaping for the erection of nine units in the form of a block for four terraced houses, block of three terraced houses and two detached, along with the retention of the existing property 52 Venner Avenue. In terms of accommodation, schedule is as follows:

6 three bedroomed units (two detached and four terraced).

3 two bedroomed terraced houses.

Proposal results in a density of approximately 38 units per hectare (including 52 Venner Avenue).

Bearing in mind the comments made relating to the replacement of 52 Venner Avenue with further additional development if that was in the form of three additional units the density would increase to 43 units per hectare which I suggest represents the maximum that could be achieved. It is more likely that two units would replace the existing dwelling which would result in a density of approximately 40 units per hectare.

In terms of arrangement of dwellings, proposal indicates a terrace of four units having a north south aspect within the northern half of the site with a further three terrace units having a west east aspect with the rear gardens abutting the eastern boundary. These terrace units would face on to a small courtyard area within which are a total of ten parking spaces. The courtyard area to be accessed off a short cul-de-sac which is to be accessed off Venner Avenue and to be laid out to adoptable standard. The access point off Venner Avenue equates approximately to the existing access that is obviously to be widened to accommodate the new cul-de-sac. The two detached houses have been indicated either side of the access with these two units being in the main located on the area which is currently open space as previously described. The detached unit on the eastern side of the access is elongated in shape and set back from the back of footpath to Venner Avenue by a distance of 4.5 metres widening to 5.5 metres. Detached unit on the western side of the access road has been indicated to be a distance of 2 metres off the back of footpath.

Proposal indicates retention of the pond along with retention of a tree within the proximity of that pond. Proposal provides for extensive landscaping within the site along with retention of the two remaining trees along the western boundary within the new rear garden area of property 52 Venner Avenue.

In planning policy terms site is within the development envelope boundary as defined on the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan where it relates to Cowes. The substantial area of open space to the east of Wroxall Close and Venner Avenue is defined as open space on that map.

National policies are covered in the main within PPG3 – Housing March 2000. The aim of this important document is to encourage Local Planning Authorities to ensure residential developments provide everyone with an opportunity of a decent home by ensuring greater choice of housing with particular reference to housing not reinforcing social distinction. Document emphasises the following:

Provide wider housing opportunity and choice by including better mix and size and type and location of housing.

Give priority to reusing previously developed land within urban areas to take pressures off development of greenfield sites.

Create more sustainable patterns of development ensuring access ability by public transport, jobs, education, health facilities etc.

Make more efficient use of land by adopting appropriate densities with specific density minimums being mentioned as follows:

“Encourage housing development which makes more efficient use of land (between 30 – 50 dwellings per hectare net)”.

Face needs of people before ease of traffic movement in designing the layout of residential development.

Seek to reduce car dependence by improving linkages to public transport between housing, jobs etc and reducing the level of parking. More than 1.5 off-street spaces per dwelling unlikely to reflect Government’s emphasis on sustainable residential development.

Members will be aware of the Housing Survey which has recently been carried out and which provides the Council with detailed information relating to Island wide housing needs. This document will enable the Council to establish where the emphasis should be in terms of housing policies and is therefore a valuable tool in justifying the encouragement of developers to provide a greater mix of house types in order to fulfil that need.

The document has identified a greatest need in low cost market housing and in particular to affordable housing for rent. It makes the following statement:

“There is a need for low cost market housing and planning policies and site development we believe should continue to encourage more smaller dwellings to meet current needs and address the shortage of flats and terraced houses in the existing stock.”

UDP policies which apply are listed below:

Policy G4 – General Locational Criteria for Development.

Policy D1 – Standards of Design.

Policy D2 – Standards for Development Within the Sites.

Policy TR7 – Highway Considerations for New Development.

Policy TR16 – Parking Policies and Guidelines.

Policy U11 – Infrastructure and Services Provision.

Policy L4 - Protection of Open Spaces, Village Greens and Allotments.

Before carrying out a more detailed assessment of the proposal it is important to establish that in the main this is a brown field site within a built up area and therefore the principle of developing the site would be difficult to resist. Therefore, the issues which need to be considered are as follows:

Density, mix and arrangement.

Level of parking provision and its likely impact on the area.

The proposal to retain the pond and future management of that pond.

Loss of the wedge of open space.

Drainage issues.

Trees/landscaping.

Environmental impact issues.

Members will note that the characteristics of the area are well defined being a mixture of high density to low density with the area itself being best described as suburban or urban fringe. Members will also note that the resultant density of this proposal is well within the range suggested within PPG3, i e 30 – 50 units per hectare and this would continue to be the case should there be a future proposal to develop the land on which 52 Venner Avenue stands. There is no sustainable argument in density terms to refuse this application.

In terms of mix of proposals, again the proposal is relatively small in numbers but does provide a mix of two bedroom and three bedroom units. In this regard I refer to the Housing Needs Survey which clearly indicates a need for terraced units with particular reference to two bedroom units. Again this proposal would appear to reflect the needs set out in that survey. Not surprisingly the arrangement of dwellings, although relatively tight, does reflect the current trend towards a semi-courtyard development with the courtyard areas being used for parking. This type of design does provide a sense of place and good levels of surveillance which is the type of development Crime Prevention Officers prefer. Sizes of gardens are fairly minimal, however, similar sized gardens exist both within Wroxall Close development and Horseshoe Close development. With regard to the two detached units, whilst accepting that they encroach upon the open space area they are set at a similar building line to the terrace of units which front Venner Avenue to the east (numbers 44 – 50 Venner Avenue). Also, negotiations have resulted in the units, particularly the unit to the east of the access, being set back as far as possible to still retain open side garden area which will provide visual open space if not usable public open space. These two detached units will provide an entrance to the site and reflect in density terms the lower type of density characteristic of Wyatts Lane.

In terms of the parking provision, proposal does provide a level of parking which entirely complies with the requirements being approximately 1.5 parking spaces per unit, with the two detached units having two parking spaces each. At this level the proposal should not contribute to on-street parking in Venner Avenue although obviously the formation of the new access will take away the ability to park in that road over a section of its length. Members will note that the Highway Engineer is recommending approval to the application.

The main feature of the site is the pond and in this regard Members will note the Entomologist’s report which confirms there are no protected species within the pond. Submitted plans indicate a more formal arrangement around the pond whereas the Ecology Officer is suggesting that this should not be the case and that the pond and its immediate environs should be planted accordingly to encourage further wildlife habitat. I see no great problem with this proposal and if Members are mindful to approve I suggest that this be subject of an appropriate condition. With regard to the pond’s management, applicants are suggesting that this becomes the responsibility of the property owners although they have offered the pond to the Council for adoption making reference to visits by local schools and interested parties as a nature interest. Given that the pond has limited habitat as suggested by the Entomologist this does reduce the ecological value of the pond. It may be that the best way forward is to suggest a further condition requiring a full management programme for the pond.

Other main contentious issue is the loss of the wedge of open space that would occur should this proposal be approved. Obviously the sale of this open space to the developer is a matter for other departments however, the issues relating to planning are relatively clear. Policy L4 seeks to retain areas of open space unless suitable alternative provision is provided. This particular wedge of open space is in the form of grassed area only relatively small in area and provides more visual open space as opposed to usable open space for play etc. It has some importance in terms of the vista when looking eastwards from the junction of Wyatts Lane with Venner Avenue and therefore Members will need to consider whether or not this gives it sufficient importance to resist its loss. The applicant may argue that the creation of the pond and its immediate environs as open space and amenity to this proposed development provides an alternative albeit of a different quality and type of open space provision. One other factor which is of some importance is the substantial area of open space a very short distance to the east which clearly acts as a central community area extensively used by local residents and children. Therefore, the loss of this relatively small wedge shaped area of open space when compared with this substantial area would not be overly significant.

Applicants have adjusted the position of the detached units to keep maximum distance possible off the back edge of footpath, to create visual open space on which they intend to provide extensive landscaping, a facility which does not exist at the moment. Other factor with regard to the open space is that it is currently crossed by an access to no. 52 Venner Avenue being the subject of an appropriate agreement and even if the two detached units were not included in this application additional, albeit a very small area of the open space, will be required to widen the access to achieve an adoptable cul-de-sac access to serve the development. Obviously the feasibility of even this or indeed the scheme currently under consideration will be dependant on the Council selling the land to the developer. In planning terms however, I do not consider that the open space area provides a sufficient level of amenity to warrant resisting this proposal to construct two units on this area as part of an overall development given the circumstances outlined above.

Whilst I recognise the concerns being expressed relating to the ability of existing drainage systems to accept drainage from this site, the comments of Southern Water are self explanatory. These comments do not indicate that this agency envisages a problem in terms of foul drainage and particularly surface water drainage. I have spoken with the Council’s Building Control Department concerning surface water drainage from the houses and they confirm that they would encourage the use of soakaways as a means of surface water disposal, however, this would need to be the subject of a percolation test. The area is a mixture of gravel with underlying clay and it may be the soakaways would be inappropriate. Certainly the existence of the natural pond would suggest that this is the case and therefore the use of sustainable drainage systems may not be possible on this site. This apart however, I am satisfied that there is sufficient evidence to suggest that drainage of both foul and surface water from this site is achievable.

The issue of the removal of the trees is clearly regrettable given that they did provide amenity value. Applicants have explained their removal on the grounds that the trees were either diseased or were of a shape which resulted in strong leans in one particular direction making them unsafe. Obviously this information was unconfirmed with the felling of the trees taking place during the Christmas break. This apart however, the trees were not protected. The end result is the retention of two trees which the Council’s Tree and Landscape Officer has confirmed are in good order and is suggesting that at least one of them should be the subject of a Preservation Order. My own view is that I consider both these trees should be TPO’d and it may be that consideration be given to some surgery to one of them to off-set their effect on any future developments. Second factor is that the proposal does provide for extensive replanting within the site could be covered by suitable conditions. I would particularly make reference to tree planting along and adjacent to Venner Avenue which, providing appropriate species are used, will provide in the long term good quality amenity value. Similarly the issue of landscaping around the pond could be covered by condition and achieve a good quality ecological area.

Finally, with regard to the general environmental impact of this proposal on surrounding dwellings I am satisfied that distances are such as to ensure no undue overlooking or loss of privacy occurs. Obviously development on this site will change the general character of the area. However, the site is generally level and any overlooking will be restricted to first floor bedrooms which would not be considered to be sufficiently significant to warrant a refusal of the application on these grounds. With regard to general ground conditions, again the Building Control Department are not aware of any major problems with regard to this land in terms of foundation construction and would not anticipate any major problem from this point of view.

In summary, whilst I appreciate that there are a number of controversial issues which have been raised as a result of this proposal none of them contains sufficient weight to warrant a refusal. I appreciate that the loss of the highway verge open space does present some difficulty however, I consider Northwood is well blessed with open space with particular reference to the substantial area of open space to the east. Therefore, on this basis I consider the proposal to be acceptable and recommend accordingly.

Reason for Recommendation

Having given due regard and appropriate weight to all material considerations referred to in this report I am satisfied that all the issues relevant to this proposal has been addressed and that the proposal represents satisfactory residential development on a brown field site within the development envelope.

Recommendation - Approval (Revised plans)

Conditions/Reasons:

1	Time limit - outline - A01
2	Time limit - reserved - A02
3	Approval of the details of the design and external appearance of the building(s) and the landscaping of the site (hereinafter called "the reserved matters") shall be obtained from the Local Planning Authority in writing before any development is commenced. Reason: In order to secure a satisfactory development and be in accordance with Policies S6 (Standards of Design), D1 (Standards of Design), D2 (Standards of development within this site), D3 (Landscaping), TR7 (Highway Consideration for New Development) of the IW Unitary Development Plan.
4	Before the development hereby permitted is commenced details of the width, alignment, gradient and drainage of all roads shall be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To ensure an adequate standard of highway and access for the proposed dwellings in compliance with Policy TR7 (Highway Considerations) of the IW Unitary Development Plan.
5	No dwelling shall be occupied until those parts of the roads and drainage system which serve that dwelling have been constructed in accordance with a scheme agreed by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To ensure an adequate standard of highway and access for the proposed dwellings in compliance with Policy TR7 (Highway Considerations) of the I W Unitary Development Plan.
6	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 in compliance with Policy D3 (Landscaping) of the IW Unitary Development Plan.
7	No development shall take place until there has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority a plan indicating the positions, design, materials and type of boundary treatment to be erected. The boundary treatment shall be completed before the dwellings are occupied. Development shall be carried out thereafter in accordance with the approved plans. Reason: In the interests of maintaining the amenity value of the area in compliance with Policy D1 (Standards of Design) of the IW Unitary Development Plan.
8	No development including site clearance shall commence on the site until the existing pond and its immediate surrounding area have been protected by fencing or other agreed barrier such as to enclose all parts of the land hatched on the approved plan. Any fencing shall conform to the following specification: 1.2 metre minimum height chestnut paling to be as 1722 Part 4 standard securely mounted on 1.2 metre minimum above ground height timber posts driving firmly into the ground. Such fencing or barrier shall be maintained throughout the course of the works on the site during which period the following restrictions shall apply: No placement of storage of materials, no placement of storage of fuel or chemicals, no placement or storage of excavated soil, no lighting of bonfires, no physical damage to bark or branches of existing trees within that area, no changes to natural ground drainage in the area, no changes to ground levels, no digging of trenches or services, drains or sewers within the area. Reason: To ensure the pond and its surround is adequately protected from damage throughout the construction period in the interests of amenity.
9	A detailed ecological management plan including long term objectives, management responsibilities and maintenance schedules for the pond and its surrounding area shall be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority prior to the occupation of the development. Any such management plan shall include for the planting of native species appropriate to a pond environment and any such planting being retained and maintained thereafter. Any species removed, dying, being severely damaged or becoming seriously diseased within 5 years shall be replaced by species of a similar size as those originally required to be planted. The agreed management plan thereafter shall be carried out as approved. Reason: To ensure the long term maintenance of the pond and its surrounding area as an amenity and potential wildlife habitat.
10	Visibility splays of x = 2.5 metres and y = 50 metres dimension shall be constructed prior to commencement of the development hereby approved and shall be maintained hereafter, Reason: In the interests of highway safety and to comply with Policy TR7 (Highway Considerations) of the IW Unitary Development Plan.
11	Development shall not begin until details of the junction between the proposed service road and the highway have been approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority; and the building shall not be occupied until that junction has been constructed in accordance with the approved details. Reason: To ensure adequate access to the proposed development and to comply with Policy TR16 of the IW Unitary Development Plan.
12	Provision of turning area - K40