-
Paper B - 1
PAPER B ISLE OF WIGHT COUNCIL PLANNING COMMITTEE - TUESDAY, 24
MARCH 2009 REPORT OF THE HEAD OF PLANNING SERVICES WARNING
1. THE RECOMMENDATIONS CONTAINED IN THIS REPORT OTHER THAN PART
1 SCHEDULE AND DECISIONS ARE DISCLOSED FOR INFORMATION PURPOSES
ONLY.
2. THE RECOMMENDATIONS WILL BE CONSIDERED ON THE DATE
INDICATED
ABOVE IN THE FIRST INSTANCE. (In some circumstances,
consideration of an item may be deferred to a later meeting).
3. THE RECOMMENDATIONS MAY OR MAY NOT BE ACCEPTED BY THE
PLANNING COMMITTEE AND MAY BE SUBJECT TO ALTERATION IN THE LIGHT
OF FURTHER INFORMATION RECEIVED BY THE OFFICERS AND PRESENTED TO
MEMBERS AT MEETINGS.
4. YOU ARE ADVISED TO CHECK WITH THE DIRECTORATE OF
ENVIRONMENT
AND NEIGHBOURHOODS (TEL: 821000) AS TO WHETHER OR NOT A DECISION
HAS BEEN TAKEN ON ANY ITEM BEFORE YOU TAKE ANY ACTION ON ANY OF THE
RECOMMENDATIONS CONTAINED IN THIS REPORT.
5. THE COUNCIL CANNOT ACCEPT ANY RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE
CONSEQUENCES OF ANY ACTION TAKEN BY ANY PERSON ON ANY OF THE
RECOMMENDATIONS.
Background Papers
The various documents, letters and other correspondence referred
to in the Report in respect of each planning application or other
item of business. Members are advised that every application on
this report has been considered against a background of the
implications of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998 and, where
necessary, consultations have taken place with the Crime and
Disorder Facilitator and Architectural Liaison Officer. Any
responses received prior to publication are featured in the report
under the heading Representations. Members are advised that every
application on this report has been considered against a background
of the implications of the Human Rights Act 1998 and, following
advice from the Head of Legal and Democratic Services, in
recognition of a duty to give reasons for a decision, each report
will include a section explaining and giving a justification for
the recommendation.
-
Paper B - 2
LIST OF PLANNING APPLICATIONS REPORT TO COMMITTEE - 24/03/2009
01 P/01784/07 TCP/17909/U Bembridge Refusal Page 6 Bembridge Marina
car park, Embankment
Road, Bembridge, Isle of Wight Demolition of w.c's, showers and
office; construction of 4 storey 69 bedroom hotel to include
conference/breakfast facilities, restaurant, splash pool and roof
top bar; public w.c's and showers for harbour use; parking and
alterations to vehicular access (readvertised application)
02 P/01919/07 TCP/27927/A Lake Conditional
Permission Page 16 Land north of Whitecross House including
part of Whitecross Lane/Newport Road and part of Merrie Gardens
Farm, Newport Road, Sandown, Isle of Wight Outline for
industrial/business and residential development and alterations to
vehicular access to include provision of a roundabout at Newport
Road junction (additional information) (readvertised
application)
03 P/00856/08 TCP/27560/B Bembridge Refusal Page 29 Bembridge
Harbour, Embankment Road,
Bembridge, Isle of Wight Installation of piles and sewage system
for 33 houseboats; provision of a boardwalk and repairs to the
embankment (revised scheme)
04 P/01195/08 TCP/23248/B Nettlestone &
Seaview Split decision
Page 39 Land between Yellow Sands and Commodores Court, Duver
Road, Seaview, Isle of Wight Construction of 15 beach huts with car
and dinghy park; vehicular access (revised scheme)
http://www.iwight.com/council/departments/planning/appsdip/AppDetails3.aspx?frmId=15591http://www.iwight.com/council/departments/planning/appsdip/AppDetails3.aspx?frmId=17627http://www.iwight.com/council/departments/planning/appsdip/AppDetails3.aspx?frmId=17244http://www.iwight.com/council/departments/planning/appsdip/AppDetails3.aspx?frmId=17525
-
Paper B - 3
05 P/02417/08 TCP/25113/H Cowes Conditional
Permission Page 51 Bridge House, Baring Road, Cowes, Isle of
Wight, PO31 8DB Demolition of existing property; pair of
semi-detached houses with parking, (revised scheme)
06 P/02418/08 CAC/25113/G Cowes Conditional
Permission Page 75 Bridge House, Baring Road, Cowes, Isle of
Wight, PO31 8DB Conservation Area Consent for demolition of
existing property; pair of semi-detached houses with parking,
(revised scheme)
07 P/02658/08 TCP/17383/D Shorwell Conditional
Permission Page 77 New Barn Farm, Newbarn Lane, Shorwell,
Newport, Isle of Wight, PO30 3JJ Demolition of redundant farm
buildings; part conversion, part new build proposal to create
accommodation and support facilities for use as seasonal shooting
lodge and tourism accommodation; construction of new farm building;
courtyard parking (revised description) (readvertised
application)
LIST OF PLANNING APPLICATIONS REPORT TO COMMITTEE - 25/03/2009
08 P/02599/08 TCP/26116/C Ryde Conditional
Permission Page 93 Land between Node Close and Rotary
Court and north of Southfield Gardens, Ryde, Isle of Wight
Residential development comprising 4 terraces of three houses and
one detached bungalow (13 in total) with parking and access road
(aorm) (further revised scheme)
http://www.iwight.com/council/departments/planning/appsdip/AppDetails3.aspx?frmId=18481http://www.iwight.com/council/departments/planning/appsdip/AppDetails3.aspx?frmId=18482http://www.iwight.com/council/departments/planning/appsdip/AppDetails3.aspx?frmId=18693http://www.iwight.com/council/departments/planning/appsdip/AppDetails3.aspx?frmId=18637
-
Paper B - 4
09 P/00049/09 TCPL/27471/H Ryde Conditional Permission
Page 105 Ryde School, 7 Queens Road, Ryde, Isle of Wight, PO33
3BE Demolition of no's 11 and 15 Queens Road; proposed construction
of 2 storey building to provide additional school facilities;
internal alterations to Westmont; alterations and rear extension to
Art and CDT building; new access road off Queens Road, car park and
additional parking bays; landscaping (revised scheme)
10 P/00054/09 LBC/27471/G Ryde Conditional
Permission Page 130 Ryde School, 7 Queens Road, Ryde, Isle
of
Wight, PO33 3BE LBC for demolition of no's 11 and 15 Queens
Road; proposed construction of 2 storey building to provide
additional school facilities; internal alterations to Westmont;
alterations and rear extension to Art and CDT building; new access
road off Queens Road, car park and additional parking bays;
landscaping (revised scheme).
11 P/02114/08 LBC/28174/N Ryde Conditional
Permission Page 134 The Roundhouse, 61 George Street, Ryde,
Isle of Wight, PO33 2EN LBC for removal of part of winderstair
between 1st & 2nd floors and replacement landing and retention
of internal alterations relating to flats 6 and 7 layouts;
replacement railings and gate and restoration of wall (revised
scheme) (readvertised application)
12 P/02567/08 TCP/01003/C Nettlestone &
Seaview Refusal
Page 149 Kings Reach, Duver Road, Seaview, Isle of Wight
Alterations and 1st floor extension to provide additional living
accommodation
http://www.iwight.com/council/departments/planning/appsdip/AppDetails3.aspx?frmId=18746http://www.iwight.com/council/departments/planning/appsdip/AppDetails3.aspx?frmId=18747http://www.iwight.com/council/departments/planning/appsdip/AppDetails3.aspx?frmId=18930http://www.iwight.com/council/departments/planning/appsdip/AppDetails3.aspx?frmId=18633
-
Paper B - 5
13 P/02593/08 TCP/00886/L Wootton Conditional
Permission Page 156 Land at and rear of 25 and 27 High
Street,
Wootton Bridge, Ryde, Isle of Wight, PO33 3LJ Pair of
semi-detached houses with parking, (revised scheme)
http://www.iwight.com/council/departments/planning/appsdip/AppDetails3.aspx?frmId=18616
-
Paper B - 6
01 Reference Number: P/01784/07 - TCP/17909/U Parish/Name:
Bembridge - Ward/Name: Bembridge North Registration Date:
20/07/2007 - Full Planning Permission Officer: Mr J Mackenzie Tel:
(01983) 823552 Applicant: Maritime & Leisure Investments Ltd.
Demolition of w.c's, showers and office; construction of 4 storey
69 bedroom hotelto include conference/breakfast facilities,
restaurant, splash pool and roof top bar;public w.c's and showers
for harbour use; parking and alterations to vehicularaccess
(readvertised application) Bembridge Marina car park, Embankment
Road, Bembridge, Isle Of Wight, PO35 The application is recommended
for Refusal
REASON FOR COMMITTEE CONSIDERATION This is a major application,
particularly controversial with conflicting policy and other
considerations. MAIN CONSIDERATIONS The main considerations
relevant to the determination of this application are considered to
be:
• Principle of the development of a hotel on this site and in
this location. • Tourism considerations and the possible
contribution the development would
make towards the quality of the tourism offer. • Whether the
proposals have satisfied the Sequential Test due to the site’s
location within a Flood Zone. • Possible impacts on the
surrounding area with specific reference to nature
conservation and the scheduling of adjoining land. • The scale,
mass, height and character of the development in this context. •
Impacts on adjoining properties and land uses. • Matters relating
to access and parking. • Pollution and drainage considerations.
1. Details of Application 1.1 This is a full application with
all matters included for consideration and an application which
has been accompanied by an Environmental Statement. 1.2 The
proposal seeks to demolish the existing building and erect a hotel
comprising 69
bedrooms, conference and breakfasts rooms and to incorporate
public toilets and showers for continued use by the Harbour users
at ground floor with a rooftop restaurant, bar and open air splash
pool.
1.3 In plan form the site layout shows the building would have
overall dimensions of 50m x 19m
and situated approximately parallel to the river at a distance
of approximately 11.5m from the concrete edged quayside and
approximately 3m back from the front boundary of the site onto
Embankment Road.
1.4 The submitted plans show:
http://www.iwight.com/council/committees/Planning%20Committee/24-3-09/Maps/P%2001784%2007.mht
-
Paper B - 7
• Ground floor to include nineteen guest bedrooms,
breakfast/conference room
facilities and an office forming part of the reception and
entrance lobby situated in the south-east corner of the
building.
• First floor includes 23 bedrooms of which three are shown as
family rooms and all of which contain en-suite facilities.
• Second floor shows 25 guest bedrooms, again three of which are
family rooms and all of which contain en-suite facilities.
• Third floor contains an outdoor splash pool (1.2m deep) and a
restaurant with approximately 92 covers and associated facilities
including a bar, kitchen, stores, and toilets.
• Fourth floor plan is essentially a roof terrace incorporating
an additional 24 covers and is restricted to the southern half of
the building within a fully glazed curtain wall, oval in plan form
enclosing that additional facility.
1.5 Essentially the building has five floor levels but with the
upper two floors restricted to the
southern half of the building in an oval plan form. The overall
height above existing ground level would be 14.5m at its highest
point, the majority of the building being no higher than 10.7m
above existing ground level.
1.6 This is a modern, contemporary design, steel-framed and clad
mostly in glass but with
vertical panels through the elevations finished in white
cladding with each floor level depicted with feature courses
running horizontally throughout the whole of the elevations,
corresponding also with balcony levels. Each bedroom incorporates
curved balconies, the balustrading of which is shown in glazed
panels with stainless steel handrails and uprights and the building
incorporates a number of significant design features including a
ground floor to roof height obscured glass block wall at the
entrance on the south-eastern elevation and a curved glass feature
wall at the north-eastern end reminiscent of the stern of a ship.
The entrance feature, from ground floor to roof level, is topped by
a mono-pitched and curved green roof of lightweight appearance and
the same form is used for the upper terraced area above the
restaurant.
1.7 Access to the site is proposed to be from Embankment Road at
the extreme south-eastern
end of the site, approximately opposite the existing access used
for the maintenance vehicles connected with the sluice gates to the
Yar Bridge located just to the south-west of the site.
1.8 Access is also available off Latimer Road at its
south-eastern extent adjacent to development
known as North Quay and a new bridge link adjacent to the
existing pedestrian bridge over the river. This vehicular bridge is
intended for emergency access.
1.9 Car parking is proposed to be in two areas, one on each side
of the Harbour. From a
southern side the area between existing residential development
fronting Embankment Road and the Harbour providing space for a
total of 43 vehicles with a further 27 spaces (making a total of
70) on the North Quay section of the site between the water and the
apartments known as Selwyn Court.
2. Location and Site Characteristics 2.1 The site has an overall
area of approximately 0.5ha and forms a complex shape,
essentially
in two tracts, one located on each side of the river where it
joins the limit of the Harbour. 2.2 The southerly section is ‘T’
shaped with overall dimensions of approximately 125m x 60m and
which is currently mostly gravelled finish but accommodating a
single, detached building located in the north-western part of the
site, the former Harbour office but which now is used
-
Paper B - 8
for an office use unconnected with the Harbour. However, the
building still incorporates toilet and shower facilities for
yachtsmen at ground floor level. It is a timber finished building,
two storeys in height, with a substantial pitched roof.
2.3 The northerly section of the site is very roughly ‘U’ shaped
with overall dimensions of
approximately 95m x 40m with an access onto Latimer Road at its
western end and wrapping round Selwyn Court to the east. This area
is of a gravel finish and the two are linked currently by a
pedestrian bridge.
2.4 The site has a frontage to Embankment Road of approximately
25m and separates South
Quay, three blocks of three storey houses fronting the
embankment from Embankment Road. To the west of the site and to the
north of the site are three storey buildings of modern but varying
appearance, some with mono-pitched roofs, some with traditional
gabled roofs and, beyond, development three storeys in height under
flat roofs whilst on the southern side of Embankment Road the land
is entirely undeveloped, open countryside. South Quay has planning
permission for an additional storey and pitched roof.
2.5 The site is currently used by the office but essentially for
car parking in connection with the
Marina and also provides access to the adjoining residential
development to the east.
3. Relevant History None relevant. 4. Development Plan Policy
4.1 National Planning Policy
4.1.1 Good Planning Guide on Planning for Tourism – supports the
establishment of high quality accommodation in order to diversify
holiday types and to extend the holiday season.
4.1.2 PPS25 – Development and Flood Risk – sets out the criteria
for determining location
for development in terms of flood risk, the emphasis being on
avoidance of sites but in the event that a Sequential Test shows no
other sites available for the proposed development seeks to
establish an exceptions test subject to proposals to mitigate flood
risk.
4.1.3 PPS9 – Biodiversity and Geological Conservation – sets out
the criteria for
determining impacts on sites of varying nature conservation
importance and the need to protect such areas from adverse effects
of development.
4.1.4 PPS23 – Planning and Pollution Control – draws attention
to the need for seeking
developments which eliminate or minimise pollution potential,
dealing with contamination and impacts on areas and adjoining
development from excessive levels of noise and light pollution.
4.2 Regional Planning Policy None specific to this proposal. 4.3
Local Planning Policy
-
Paper B - 9
4.3.1 Unitary Development Plan/Island Plan
• G1: Development Envelopes • G4: General Locational Criteria •
G5: Development Outside Defined Settlements • G11: Coastal
Development • D1: Standards of Design • D14: Light Spillage • E3:
Change of use of Employment Land • C11: Sites of Local Importance
for Nature Conservation • TR7: Highway Considerations for New
Development • TR16: Parking Policies and Guidelines
4.3.2 Supplementary Planning Guidance
Not applicable.
5. Consultee and Third Party Comments
5.1 Internal Consultees
The Highway Engineer is satisfied with the proposed means of
access and egress from the site and with arrangements for emergency
vehicles and is satisfied with parking arrangements.
5.1.2 The Assistant Director of Economic Development, Tourism
and Partnerships supports the
concept of the proposed hotel providing it achieves a minimum of
three stars and is targeted at private rather than group
tourism.
5.2 External Consultees
5.2.1 Southern Water confirms that there is currently inadequate
capacity in the local sewerage system but that off-site works would
be required to provide adequate capacity for the development.
Accordingly recommends conditions to require a scheme to be
designed and approved before works commence and preclude occupancy
until an agreed scheme is operational.
5.2.2 Environment Agency – objections were originally received
from the Environment
Agency relating to pollution but moreover relating to
development within the flood plane and vulnerable use within a
Flood Risk Area and, in addition, raising concerns over means of
escape in the event of a flood occurrence. The Agency points out
that, despite the steps taken to raise the ground floor to a height
above ordnance datum newlyn and to provide a safe means of escape
to the north over the bridge towards Latimer Road, that the
building would be liable to flooding in the year 2060 due to sea
level rise and climate change. Following receipt of further
information the Environment Agency has removed its objection on
grounds of pollution subject to certain safeguards including the
imposition of planning conditions in the event approval is granted.
However, the Agency retains its objection on the latter issue. The
issue of pollution can be adequately covered by conditions.
5.2.3 Natural England objects to the development considering it
is likely to have a
significant effect on the Solent and Southampton Water
SPA/Ramsar site alone and in combination with other plans or
projects. NE confirms that an Appropriate
-
Paper B - 10
Assessment is required to be carried out on the grounds of
potential pollution sources, disturbance to waders and waterfowl
and that inadequate information has been brought forward to enable
an Appropriate Assessment to be made taking this and other projects
into account. In addition the nearby Duver which is SSSI may be
adversely affected due to disturbance.
5.3 Parish/Town Council Comments St Helens Parish Council
objects to the proposals on grounds of an intrusive development
which would have a serious and adverse effect on neighbouring
properties; that increased traffic would create additional highway
hazards, particularly in Latimer Road, and that the impact of the
proposal would be seriously detrimental to the environment and
surrounding areas.
5.4 Third Party Representations
5.4.1 A petition of 231 signatories objecting to the proposed
development on grounds of
adverse visual effect on the natural beauty of the area and the
increase in traffic on the surrounding roads has been received.
5.4.2 330 letters of objection from local and Island residents
and from writers with mainland
addresses have been received. 6. Evaluation
6.1 Principle
6.1.1 The site is outside of the designated development envelope
adjoining the south-eastern boundary of St Helens settlement,
however Policies G4 and G5 of the UDP relating to General
Locational Criteria and Development outside Defined Settlements
respectively allow for appropriate developments outside defined
development envelopes and, particularly, appropriate rural tourism
development is expressed in Policy G5. This current application
seeks to redevelop a ‘brownfield’ site, a site hitherto used for
car parking, for Harbour related activities including the former
Harbour Office for Harbour related accommodation in the form of a
Harbour hotel. It is a development which is very closely associated
with the Harbour and sited close to existing built development,
mostly residential uses which are of a compatible description.
6.1.2 This is a development which seeks to provide high quality
tourist accommodation
specifically in an area where recreation (i.e. boating) takes
place in a desirable tourist area with links to the Harbour and
recreation as well as the very substantial RSPB Nature Reserve
situated to the south and in an area with good communications
including the highway network, footpaths and other activities. The
Council’s Tourism Futures Document as well as the Good Tourism
Guide both seek to provide high quality accommodation rather than
purely the maximum amount of bed spaces.
6.2 Flooding
6.2.1 The site is in an area which is currently not susceptible
to flooding from tidal or fluvial
sources but is identified as being within the flood level
anticipated for the year 2060. It is usually the case that in such
areas the Environment Agency and local planning authorities
practice in respect of development in Flood Zone 3 areas is a
policy of avoidance, especially for more vulnerable uses. However,
if uses are justifiable in the
-
Paper B - 11
Flood Zone then a Sequential Test is carried out to see where
possible alternative sites exist which might be safer and less at
risk from flooding either in the short or long term.
6.2.2 A Sequential Test has been carried out by the agent and
submitted as part of the
information for consideration. The principle of this Sequential
Test is that it seeks to justify the choice of the application site
for a Harbour-side hotel, a use directly connected with the
Bembridge Harbour. As such, sites which are distant from the
Harbour would not fulfil the primary purpose and so the Sequential
Test has been restricted to areas around the Harbour within easy
reach. Sites around the periphery of the Harbour are extremely
restricted and it is fair to say that they would be limited to
either end of the embankment since the land on either side of the
embankment is either Harbour or low lying land already flooded or
under nature conservation designations. The Sequential Test whilst
restricted to the Harbour environments concludes that there is not
another site upon which such a development could occur.
6.2.3 This Sequential Test has been carried out as previously
stated, restricted to the
Harbour environs rather than a much wider scope since such a
hotel would not be Harbour related if significantly divorced by
distance from the Harbour facility. Officers consider that the
Sequential Test is satisfied.
6.2.4 Having established the principle of the use of the site
via the Sequential Test the
applicants continue to justify the development under an
Exceptions Test and in so doing point out that:
• Land levels and accesses would be raised well above the 50
year
SLR predicted heights to bring the hotel above the vulnerable
flood levels.
• The operational lifespan of the hotel would be time limited to
2057 via a condition or 106 legal agreement.
• The site is the closest viable site to higher ground (Flood
Zone 1) escape in the event of flood emergency.
• Flood emergency procedures would provide extra safety should
an event occur. This plan and the team implementing it would
actually improve safety in the event of flooding for nearby
residents in the adjoining South Quay and people using
houseboats.
• The adjacent Harbour-side embankment road dwellings would have
emergency flood egress, where currently there is none.
• Compliance with the Exception Test criteria could be built
into planning conditions.
• The proposed development would not adversely affect land
drainage or coastal flood defences or water courses.
6.2.5 Whilst a hotel use is a form of residential use, it is not
considered as vulnerable as
individual dwellings since a management protocol can be
instigated and, uniquely, a time limited permission is advocated by
the applicants such that if sea level rise occurs as predicted, in
50-60 years the use of the hotel would cease. This does not occur
for residential uses since they are not commercial businesses which
can discount investment over a period of time which a hotel
can.
6.3 Natural environment consideration
6.3.1 The site is not within but does abut the following
designations:
• The Solent and Isle of Wight Lagoons SAC.
-
Paper B - 12
• Solent and Southampton Water SPA/Rawsar site. • SSSI. • RSPB’s
Brading Marshes Reserve.
Concerns have been raised by Natural England regarding impacts
of the development on the sensitive areas adjoining, essentially
through disturbance. This concern culminates in the need to carry
out an Appropriate Assessment in parallel with the determination of
the planning proposal, both of which investigate the potential
impacts and potential mitigation sufficient to offset adverse
impacts.
6.4 Scale, mass and character
6.4.1 The proposed building would be essentially on four floors
but there are two areas of the proposed building which reach five
storeys. The detached building would be of contemporary design
having little in common with the surrounding development except for
the form which it takes. The character of the area is mixed without
a common design theme but it contains mostly terraces of building
blocks of significant length and height. To the east of the
proposed hotel site are two terraces of three storey houses under
flat roofs; however westernmost block of these and the closest
block to the proposed hotel has planning permission for an
additional storey and roof. This building is approximately 9m away
at its closest point but sited in a right-angles relationship on an
access running south-west to north-east. The residential
development situated on the west and north sides of the river which
mark the edge of the designated development envelope and situated
on ground at a similar level are situated between 30 and
approximately 100m distant. The design of these properties is also
mixed with some flat roofed, three storey properties, some two and
three storey mono-pitched contemporary designed dwellings and
terraces of three storey, traditional ridged roof units situated on
the north side of the river. This would be a uniquely designed
building and is not of residential character but clearly a
commercial character building, one which would dominate the
location due to its unique design and scale. However, that being
said, due to the distances involved the scale and massing of the
building are not considered to be out of keeping with this area and
in terms of consolidation this development is not beyond the limits
of existing residential development since the properties known as
South Quay extend some distance along Embankment Road adjoining the
Harbour and well outside the designated development envelope.
6.5 Design and visual impact
6.5.1 This would be a contemporary designed building with echoes
of a maritime character. The adjoining buildings were, when
constructed, considered to be of a contemporary design and,
therefore, it is felt that this proposed building is one of ‘its
time’. The design is unique and incorporates curved features in
terms of balconies and curtain walls, a modern building making its
own statement. However, as it is proposed to be constructed on a
gap site between existing buildings, albeit outside the development
envelope, it could be seen as being within the built environment
rather than in an isolated position in an open landscape. This is a
proposed four/five storey building on a site of low lying and flat
land and it is inevitable that development on this site would be
visible for some considerable distance especially distant views
from the Harbour and from a southerly direction over Brading
Marshes and Bembridge Down. However, contained within the existing
built form the hotel would be seen as consolidating development
rather than extending it.
6.6 Impact on adjacent uses
-
Paper B - 13
6.6.1 The nearest buildings are located on Embankment Road and,
at the closest point, a distance of 8m is shown on the plan from
the easternmost part of the proposed hotel to the western end of
the terrace of properties known as South Quay. The main aspects to
these properties are facing north and south and there are no main
windows in the gable end fronting the site. Distances of between
30-100m exist to those properties to the west and north, distances
which are considered to prevent overlooking or overshadowing. In
terms of noise emanating from the building the only likely source
of this is from the rooftop restaurant and terrace together with
the splash pool. It is considered that this aspect could be
adequately covered by conditions controlling the use of the splash
pool to acceptable hours of the day, restricting live or recorded
music or other broadcasts within the hotel and controlling light
pollution, also by way of a condition. Concerns have also been
raised over cooking smells from the kitchens and the exhaust of
extracted fumes etc. at roof level and, again, conditions are
considered to be appropriate in order to control any such emissions
ensuring nuisance does not occur. That being said, the prevailing
wind from a south-westerly direction is likely to blow fumes
towards the Harbour and the Solent.
6.7 Access and parking
6.7.1 A vehicular access to the site, which is predominantly
gravelled finish, already exists off Embankment Road and it is from
this direction which the main access remains. However, as part of
the scheme it is intended to install a new bridge from South Quay
to North Quay over the canalised river, adequate for both patrons’
vehicles and emergency vehicles and there is already vehicular
access off Latimer Road to the site. The plans show a total of 70
car parking spaces, 43 on the South Quay side of the Harbour with a
further 27 on the northern side of the Harbour between the Harbour
and Selwyn Court, the residential development facing onto the
Harbour. The Highway Engineer considers the access provision in
terms of visibility to be satisfactory and the level of car parking
also to be adequate.
6.8 Pollution and drainage
6.8.1 A Contamination Report was provided with the application
and being a ‘brownfield’ site with previous dockside uses but which
has been capped with hardsurfacing for many years and the fact that
much of the site remains hardsurfaced, the Environment Agency
considers the pollution issue to have been adequately dealt with
and could be controlled by conditions to deal with any pollutants
or contaminants found during the construction process.
6.8.2 Surface water drainage can be dealt with satisfactorily by
drainage into the river so
long as interceptors are used as needed to ensure no pollution
from car parking areas occurs and attenuation to ensure that
surface water run-off is not concentrated in any sensitive
positions. Conditions can be imposed to ensure a satisfactory
scheme is both possible and implemented.
7. Conclusion and Justification for Recommendation 7.1 The
establishment of a new hotel, described as a Harbour-side hotel, in
a location such as
proposed is considered acceptable in principle and current UDP
policy supports such provision and is further supported by the
Council’s desire to improve the quality of tourist product and to
encourage accommodation of a high standard. The design of this
contemporary building is suggested to be in character with the
maritime connections of the location and bearing in mind the
existing, adjoining residential developments is not felt out of
keeping. In terms of visual impact the site is adjoined by
residential development of a similar
-
form i.e. terraces of three storey buildings and bearing in mind
the adjoining building to the east has a valid permission for an
increase in height of another floor and roof the visual impact is
not considered great bearing in mind its siting close to the
envelope of St Helens.
7.2 The two main determining factors are the issue of flood risk
and the possible impacts on
matters relating to nature conservation potentially generated by
disturbance due to the operation of a hotel in the location
proposed. The proposal addresses the flooding issue by proposing
raising ground floor level to that which would be safe until the
year 2057 (according to predicted sea level rise) and by limiting
the permission voluntarily to that temporary period of
approximately 50 years. In addition, satisfactory means of escape
are proposed by the replacement of the bridge with a vehicular
bridge which would also provide a means of escape for existing
properties currently without such provision.
7.4 In terms of nature conservation implications, Natural
England has acknowledged that the site
itself is not within the sensitive, designated areas but
adjoining and is concerned that disturbance may occur due to
increased levels of activity at the site. However Natural England
is not satisfied that sufficient evidence has been put forward to
conclude that an Appropriate Assessment would conclude that the
development as proposed would not result in significant adverse
effects on the sensitive sites the Council is not in a position to
grant planning permission. Therefore the proposals are recommended
for refusal.
8. Recommendation 8.1 Refusal. 1 The site lies nearby a
Classified Special Protection Area under Directive 79/409 on
the
Conservation of Wild Birds adopted on 2 April 1979 and of Wild
Fauna and Flora adopted on 21 May 1992 and a RAMSAR site listed
under the Convention on Wetlands of International Importance
Especially as Waterfowl Habitat 1973] and the development as
proposed, without adequate and substantiated mitigation to offset
the perceived significant impacts, would have an adverse effect on
the integrity of the International Nature Conservation Site and
would be contrary to Policy CP 7 Landscape, Biodiversity and
Geodiversity of the Submission Core Strategy of the Emerging Island
Plan and contrary to PPS 9 Biodiversity and Geological
Conservation.
Paper B - 14
-
02 Reference Number: P/01919/07 - TCP/27927/A
Parish/Name: Lake - Ward/Name: Lake South Registration Date:
07/08/2007 - Outline Planning Permission Officer: Miss S Wilkinson
Tel: (01983) 823552 Applicant: W S Group Outline for
industrial/business and residential development and alterations
tovehicular access to include provision of a roundabout at Newport
Road junction(additional information) (readvertised application)
land north of Whitecross House including part of Whitecross
Lane/Newport Roadand part of Merrie Gardens Farm, Newport Road,
Sandown, Isle Of Wight, PO36 The application is recommended for
Conditional Permission
MAIN CONSIDERATIONS The main considerations relevant to the
determination of this application are:
• Policy implications resulting from the change of use of
employment land to residential use.
• Impact on the character of the area, which is one of a range
of uses. • Impact on neighbouring properties, specifically
Whitecross House, The Cottage and
Blackpan House. • Suitability of highway access and the free
flow of traffic on the A3056 Newport Road.
REASON FOR COMMITTEE CONSIDERATION This is a major application
of Island-wide significance.
1. Details of Application 1.1 The application comprises three
separate proposals which are inextricably linked. The
proposals seek outline consent for an industrial or business use
development, a residential development comprising approximately
fourteen units, and proposed alterations to the highway
incorporating a new roundabout at the junction between Newport Road
and Whitecross Lane. All matters would be dealt with in detail as
part of future reserved matters applications.
1.2 The proposed residential element of this scheme is intended
to enable and bring forward the industrial development on a parcel
of land to the rear of Merrie Gardens Farm on the north side of
Newport Road. This parcel of land is allocated for employment in
the Unitary Development Plan but has as yet not been developed due
to complexities with the current access arrangements.
1.3 The third and final element of the scheme incorporates a
roundabout at the junction of Whitecross Lane and Newport Road
which seeks to overcome the previous highway objections to
accessing of this allocated site.
1.4 The development has been submitted as a single outline
application. It is intended to establish the principle of allowing
the partial development of an employment allocation for
Paper B - 15
http://www.iwight.com/council/committees/Planning%20Committee/24-3-09/Maps/P%2001919%2007.mht
-
Paper B - 16
housing in order to achieve the industrial proposals. The
applicants have sought to provide the case for the housing based on
the need for extensive highway works required in order to access
the site.
2. Location and Site Characteristics 2.1 The two parcels of land
to which the application relates are bisected by Newport Road,
with
the entrance to the proposed industrial land adjacent to the
existing Whitecross Lane. 2.2 The proposed residential element of
the scheme would be located on a parcel of land on the
west side of Whitecross Lane adjacent to the existing Spithead
Business Park. This site is currently a parcel of unkempt grassland
of approximately 0.30ha with a frontage of approximately 85m
adjacent to Whitecross Lane, approximately 100m south of the
junction with Newport Road. The land is currently allocated for
employment use.
2.3 The proposed industrial development is located on the
northern side of Newport Road to the rear of Merrie Gardens Farm
Cottage, a Listed Building. The eastern boundary is shared with the
Coachhouse, Greenfields and Black Plan Cottage.
2.4 The existing area is a mix of industrial and residential
development with Whitecross Lane representing a transition line
between the existing residential estate to the east and Spithead
Business Park to the west. The land to the north of Newport Road is
currently a mix of employment land, retail in the form of
Morrison’s Supermarket, and open countryside.
3. Relevant History 3.1 P/00804/97–TCP/22253: An application
seeking outline consent for four houses with access
off Whitehouse Lane was refused in September 1997 and dismissed
at appeal. The reasons for refusal related to loss of employment
land and the policy objections.
3.2 P/01615/99–TCP/22253/A: An outline application for a
residential unit was withdrawn on land adjacent Whitecross House,
Whitecross Lane, Sandown.
3.3 P/00526/01-TCP/22253/B: An application for the erection of
four industrial units to form a total of nine units with associated
parking, 1.3m high fencing and landscaping on the parcel of land on
the east side of Whitecross Lane was approved in June 2001.
4. Development Plan Policy 4.1 National Planning Policy The
following National Policy Guidance and Statements are considered
relevant.
4.1.1 Planning Policy Statement 1: Delivering Sustainable
Development emphasises that Planning Authorities should create more
sustainable communities. One of the suggested ways of dealing with
this is through the effective use of design. The emphasis of PPS1
in terms of design is that of a shift away from the traditional
assessment of “demonstrable harm” and a move towards “enhancement
and improvement”. “Good design should contribute positively to
making places better for people. Design which is inappropriate in
its context or which fails to take the opportunities available for
improving the character and quality of an area and the way it
functions, should not be accepted.” There are also links to
“promoting and
-
Paper B - 17
reinforcing local distinctiveness” and “responding to local
character and context”. “Design which fails to take the
opportunities available for improving the character and quality of
an area should not be accepted.” This statement clearly defines the
shift in emphasis with regards to design, away from levels of
demonstrable harm, towards enhancement and improvement.
4.1.2 PPS3: Housing
4.1.3 Planning Policy Guidance 4: Industrial and Commercial
Development and Small Firms (PPG4) emphasises that economic growth
and high quality environment have to be pursued together; the
importance of locational factors with particular emphasis on raw
materials and suppliers’ links with other businesses, the workforce
catchment area and various transport considerations.
4.1.4 Planning Policy Guidance 15: Planning and the Historic
Environment provides
guidance for the identification and protection of historic
building, conservation areas and other elements of the historic
environment.
4.2 Regional Planning Policy
4.2.1 Regional Planning Guidance 9: South - East encourages
economic success throughout the region, through improving the
quality of the environment, management of natural resources, and
providing opportunity and equity for the regions population.
4.2 Local Planning Policy Unitary Development Plan/Island
Plan
The following Unitary Development Plan policies are applicable
in this case:
• G4: General Locational Criteria: offers criteria (a-l) which
development must comply with in order for it to be considered
appropriate. This includes matters of landscaping, transportation,
nature conservation, topography, views, setting of prominent
buildings and landmarks and respecting sites of historic
interest.
• D1: Standards of Design: requires development to “maintain, or
wherever
possible enhance, the quality and character of the built
environment”. It goes on to note that “Planning applications will
be expected to show a good quality of design” and offers criteria
for the assessment of proposals. These include scale, massing,
form, siting, layout and detailing.
• E3: Resist the Development of Allocated Employment Land for
Other Uses: states
that planning applications which protect or enhance the
employment use of existing and allocated employment land and
premises will be approved. The policy also outlines instances where
changes of use may be exceptionally permitted.
• TR7: Highway Considerations for New Development: offers two
limbs to be
satisfied in order for new development to be considered
appropriate. Firstly development must provide safe movement within
the site and secondly, it must deliver safe new junctions and
access to the existing highway network.
• TR16: Parking Policies and Guidelines: seeks to reduce
dependency on the
private car and makes it possible for development to reduce car
parking to the operational minimum. Appendix G notes that one
assigned car parking space per
-
Paper B - 18
four units for visitors is allowed as a maximum. The site falls
within a Zone 4 settlement where between 0% and 100% of the maximum
non-operational parking standards apply.
4.3 Island Plan Core Strategy (Submission) – December 2008
• SS1: Spatial Strategy: the overall strategic development
strategy is for economic led regeneration which focuses the
majority of development within and around the Key Regeneration
Areas and smaller Regeneration Areas, creating strong, sustainable,
cohesive and inclusive mixed communities.
• SS2: Locational Strategy: the main focus for locational
strategy is economic-led regeneration and the creation of
sustainable communities. The location strategy for the Island will
concentrate development in the Key Regeneration Areas of the Medina
Valley, Ryde and The Bay, with smaller proportion of development in
the smaller Regeneration Areas of West Wight (Freshwater and
Totland) and Ventnor. Priority will be given to the re-use of
‘brownfield’ land.
• SS3: Spatial Strategy for the Medina Valley: The Medina Valley
Key Regeneration Area includes the triangle of settlements and land
between Newport, Cowes and East Cowes. Through this policy the
Council and its partners aim to provide employment development on
the strategic allocations at Kingston, and Osborne Works, in East
Cowes, Pan, in Newport and Three Gates Road, Cowes
• SS7: Employment Development: In addition to the currently
available employment allocations, at least 10ha of additional land
will be allocated and brought forward in the period up to 2011,
with an additional 15ha allocated and brought forward 2011-2026, in
line with Policy SS2 – Locational Strategy. At least 10ha of the
additional land allocated and brought forward will be to provide
office and general workspace developments. Proposals that bring
forward the currently available employment allocations for
employment use will be supported.
5. Consultee and Third Party Comments
5.1 Internal Consultees 5.1.1 The Council’s Policy Team has
confirmed that although policies highlighted the need
to protect allocated employment plan, there are current
implementation problems with the allocation of Merrie Gardens
industrial development due to the limitations of the current road
network, and therefore the proposed development, although seeing a
loss of employment land, would ensure that other allocated land can
be brought forward.
5.1.2 The Highway Engineer is satisfied with the outline details
of the proposed junction
arrangement and has recommended conditions should the
application be approved. Additional comments are outlined within
the evaluation of this report.
5.1.3 The Council’s Crime Design Prevention Adviser confirms
that the principles of the
development are acceptable and that the roundabout will improve
road safety, although they would not normally comment in any
greater detail on outline applications.
5.1.4 Conservation and Design is satisfied that the principle of
development is acceptable
to the setting of the Listed Building, Merrie Gardens Farmhouse
and the design of any
-
Paper B - 19
any reserved matters would be a key consideration to the setting
of the Listed Building.
5.1.5 In order to gain the required visibility for the access to
the site a section of the
boundary wall to the listed building would need to be reduced in
height. These works are subject to a separate listed building
consent.
5.1.6 The Council’s Ecology Officer highlights issues which will
need to be taken into
consideration in any layout at reserved matters stage. These
issues include the need for a survey of protected species and the
location and protection of a stream and native tree belt at the
north-west boundary of the site.
5.2 External Consultees
Southern Water has outlined the position of a public sewer close
to the boundary of the site and highlight that at reserved matters
stages they would require capacity studies.
5.3 Parish/Town Council Comments
Lake Parish Council objects to the proposal on grounds that can
be summarised as follows:
• Contrary to policy. • Drainage has not been fully addressed. •
No details of the cost of the electrical sub-stations or siting of
same. • Roundabout has not been environmentally assessed in line
with Policy TR8 (The
Environmental Impact of New Infrastructure Schemes).
5.4 Third Party Representations
Eight letters of objection have been received from local
residents, the issues raised within which can be summarised as
follows:
• Precedent of developing on an employment site. • Road
improvements are not considered sufficient to cope with increased
volume of
traffic. • Detrimental impact on environment and residents of
the area. • Increase in traffic levels. • Increase in vehicle
emissions. • Increase in industrial pollutants and noise. •
Increased factors of risk in road safety. • Further delays and
congestion. • Increased pressure on drainage and sewage networks. •
Impact on the quality of life. • Contrary to policy. • Questions
over the need for further housing. • Consideration of Listed
Building. • Living conditions for future occupants. • Possible loss
of school crossing patrol. • Access to housing from Whitecross
Lane. • Development of ‘greenfield’ land. • Need for additional car
parking due to distance from town centre. • A possible further
decline in wildlife and birds. • Badgers. • Trees.
-
Paper B - 20
• Pedestrian safety. • Proposed industrial development should be
housing. • Impact on current balance between housing and industrial
land. • If it is not economically viable to bring forward the
industrial land then it should not
be developed. 6. Evaluation 6.1 The determining factors in
considering this proposal are considered to be as follows:
• Policy implications. • Impact on the character of the area. •
Impact on neighbouring properties. • Highways.
6.2 Policy Implications
6.2.1 The proposed residential element of the application is
located on a parcel of land that
has been the subject of other similar applications, which have
been previously refused. However, the site has never been
previously linked with the industrial development to the rear of
Merrie Gardens Farm. The site is allocated for employment uses but
remains undeveloped due to the high cost of the road improvements.
The applicant has put forward both a financial justification as to
why development of the industrial land would be unviable without
the residential element of the scheme. This documentation has been
examined by the Council’s own quantity surveyors who have confirmed
that the calculations put forward are accurate with relation to the
likely costing for the site.
6.2.2 An Employment Land Demand Study was undertaken as a
background document to
the Core Strategy. This report concluded that:
“All allocated and non-allocated employment site should be
safeguarded for employment sites on the Island….
A total of 20ha to 25ha of additional employment land should be
allocated. Of this 1/3 should be suitable for office use. Around
10ha of newly allocated employment land should be readily available
for development.”
However due to the current access restrictions to the Merrie
Gardens site due to necessary highway works and junction
improvements the site can not currently come forward without
considerable capital outlay.
6.2.3 PPS3: Housing highlights the acceptability of alternative
uses of employment land if
they are not required. Although the land to which the housing
relates could meet some of the demand and is therefore ‘need’, the
loss of such land to allow the opening up of a larger site area
that could see a more holistic development of the northern side of
Newport Road.
6.2.4 Policy E3 highlights that the change of use of employment
land will not be permitted
unless it would not prejudice the ability of the area to meet
local employment needs. It is considered that as the loss of the
parcel of land off Whitecross Lane would allow a larger area of
employment land to come forward, which would otherwise remain
undeveloped, due to the restrictive nature of the current highway
access. Therefore,
-
Paper B - 21
the loss would not prejudice the ability to meet the need in the
area as without the road improvement the larger site would remain
undeveloped.
6.3 Impact on the character of the area
6.3.1 The sites are located within a mixed use area of retail,
employment and residential.
The application seeks outline consent only and therefore the
design, scale and massing of both the residential and the
industrial units are reserved for later determination. The land to
the rear of Merrie Gardens is allocated for employment uses and
therefore the principle of this use is established. It is
considered that this would not impact upon the character of the
area, subject to design details.
6.3.2 The proposed residential site is on the west side of
Whitecross Lane. This would be a
continuation of residential use of this side of Whitecross Lane
which comprises four dwellings. The remainder of the western side
is commercial use dominated by Spithead Business Centre. The
eastern side of the Lane is solely residential use. Although the
design and siting of the units would be a key consideration at
reserved matters stage, it is considered that the residential use
of this parcel of land would not have a detrimental impact on the
character of the area.
6.3.3 The area is currently mixed uses; an industrial estate,
housing and Superstore. The
area is considered to be urban in character and as such the
proposed road improvements would be in context of the area.
6.4 Impact on neighbouring properties
6.4.1 The use of the parcel of land accessed off Whitecross Lane
for residential development would be more harmonious with the
neighbouring properties than development of this site for
industrial purposes. The design and layout of this site would need
to ensure that no overlooking or overdominance results from the
development.
6.4.2 Concerns were raised in the previous application for
residential development of this
site and the relationship with the Spithead Business Centre and
the possible implications that the existing use would have on the
proposed residential properties. However, as the applicant owns
Spithead and the current uses of the units along this boundary are
B1 (light industrial), which are not compatible with residential
areas, he would be satisfied with a legal agreement to regularise
uses to ensure residential amenity is protected. The Spithead
Business Centre currently has no restrictive conditions. This could
improve the circumstances for existing residents, as currently an
alternative occupant of the units could undertake a more antisocial
use on the site.
6.4.3 The industrial units to the rear of Merrie Gardens are
proposed to be used for light
industrial purposes and therefore should not impact upon the
amenities of any neighbouring residential properties. A carefully
designed layout and landscaping scheme could reduce the risk of
impact.
6.4.4 Merrie Gardens Farmhouse currently sits to the front of
the proposed industrial land and is itself allocated for employment
use. Although the scheme does not incorporate the existing
building, it would allow for an improved access, which would in
turn result in potential use and therefore its possible
restoration. The development itself could be designed and
landscaped in order to keep any impact on the listed property
minor. The proposed access road would pass alongside the building,
but it is not considered that this would have a significantly
detrimental impact upon its setting.
-
Paper B - 22
6.5 Highways
6.5.1 Design Manual for Roads and Bridges Volume 6 section 2
part 3, TD16/07 describes the “General Principles” of a roundabout
as follows;
“The principle objective of roundabout design is to minimise
delay for vehicles whilst maintaining the safe passage of all road
users through the junction. This is achieved by a combination of
geometric layout features that ideally matched to the flows in the
traffic streams, their speed and to any local topographical or
other constraints such as land availability that apply. Location
constraints are often the dominating factor when designing
improvements to an existing junction particularly in urban areas.
“
The design of the proposed 32m ICD four arm roundabout will
comply with the requirement of TD16/07, TSR&GD 2002 and Isle of
Wight Council Engineering Services Standard detail regarding street
lighting, drainage, and footway and carriageway construction.
6.5.2 The applicant’s consulting engineers Mayer Brown evaluated
both junction
signalisation and roundabout options taking into account the
projected and existing traffic flows using design tools such as,
for roundabouts ARCADY (Assessment of Roundabout Capacity and
Delay) and for signalised junctions Oscady Pro (Optimised Signal
Capacity & Delay). Having carefully analysed the junction
capacity and the proposed use of the Merrie Gardens site the 32m
ICD four arm roundabout has been proposed.
6.5.3 The proposed installation of the four arm roundabout (32m
diameter) at the junction
of Newport Road and Whitecross Lane has been evaluated by the
Highways Engineering section of Mayer Brown and supported by
Highways Officers from both Engineering Services and Planning
Services and is considered to be the best option to allow the free
flow of traffic along Newport Road and allows for the reinstatement
off the right turn from Whitecross Lane on to Newport Road and
allows access and egress to the land to the north of Newport Road
known as Merrie Gardens Farm, Appendix B E5 (17)Island Development
Plan.
6.5.4 The Southern arm of the proposed roundabout will connect
directly on to Whitecross
Lane which will allow for the future removal of the existing e
traffic regulation order banning right turns onto Newport Road.
This will in turn reduce the “U” turning traffic onto the
“Morrison” roundabout freeing capacity at peak times.
6.5.5 As part of the proposed works the carriageway on
Whitecross Lane will be widened to
7.2m in width and a new 1.8m wide (minimum) footway constructed
along side from the existing 7.2 m wide section of Whitecross Lane
adjacent to Merrie Gardens down to the proposed 32m ICD four arm
roundabout. The provision of the footway will allow of a continuous
link along the Western side of Whitecross Lane leading onto Newport
Road.
6.5.6 The carriageway widening to 7.2m will tie into road
widening works already
undertaken by the Isle of Wight Council Engineering Services and
will allow for the future removal of existing 6ft 6ins traffic
restriction. The removal of the restriction would reduce the number
commercial vehicle having to use the Lake Road /Sandown Road/
Newport Road signalised junction and would free up capacity at this
busy junction.
6.5.7 The existing junction from Whitecross Lane to Newport Road
has a no right turn TRO.
-
Paper B - 23
This TRO would be able to be revoked and the associated signage
removed. The ability of traffic to make a right using the proposed
roundabout circulatory will in turn reduce the amount of traffic
having to use the “Morrison” roundabout which suffers from a
perception of both overcapacity and of being dangerous.
6.5.8 An analysis of recorded accident data as shown that the
“Morrison “roundabout has
had no personal accident injuries recorded in the past three
years which substantiates that while there is a perception of
danger is it unfounded. The removal of “U-turning” traffic due to
the introduction of the roundabout will only go to improve this
situation.
6.5.9 The junction of Newport Road and Whitecross Lane shows one
slight injury due to the
crossing patrol operator being struck by a car mirror as being
the only recorded injury within the past three years.
6.5.10 The proposed housing will front Whitecross lane with
fourteen car parking spaces and
a turning area being proposed at the rear. A dropped crossing
will be provided at the access to the housing linking to the new
section of footpath with a pedestrian refuse at the junction with
Newport Road to provide a pedestrian crossing point. The proposed
parking area is served off the existing Spithead Business access,
this access is compliant with the requirement of DMR&B Volume 6
TD42/95 table 7/1 which is a higher standard than Manual for
Streets.
6.5.11 Along with the submission of the detailed design drawings
for written highway
approval there will be a road safety plan in accordance with the
Isle of Wight Council’s Road Safety Plan, Road Safety Audit Policy
& Procedures Appendix 3.
6.5.12 A Section 278 Agreement will be entered into for all
works to be carried out on the
adopted highway details of the agreement and procedure to be
provided by Engineering services, Isle of Wight Council.
6.5.13 The vertical and horizontal alignment will be in
accordance with the requirements of
Design Manual Road & Bridges Volume 6 Roundabout Geometry TD
16/07 & TA 78/97, road markings and traffic signs will be in
accordance with Traffic Signs & General Directions 2002.
6.5.14 The carriageway and footway construction and materials
will in accordance with the
Isle of Wight Council Standard Construction Detail, and will be
subject to a Section 278 Agreement for the works on the highway and
a Section 38 Agreement for off site works to be adopted by the Isle
of Wight Council.
6.5.15 Before any work commences on site a pre-contract meeting
in accordance with
Construction Design & Management Regulations 2007 will be
held between the developers and appointed Council Officers to
review and approve Works Programme, Traffic Management Plan ,Health
and Safety Plan & Utilities Plant Diversions.
7. Conclusion and Justification 7.1 A condition has been
recommended requiring the entering into of a Section 106
Agreement
to:
• Regularise the use of the units along the eastern boundary of
the adjoining Spithead Business Park to B1 (Light Industrial)
use.
• Completion of a Section 278 agreement for roundabout and
access points.
-
Paper B - 24
• A phasing programme to ensure the housing development at the
same time as the road improvements to ensure suitable access is
achieved into the industrial land.
The recommendation is put forward on balance and is based on the
‘enabling’ justification for the employment land to be brought
forward. It is essential that all three elements of the proposal
are linked to ensure the industrial land is brought forward.
7.2 Having given due regard and appropriate weight to all
material considerations referred to in this report, it is
considered that by allowing a small area of land to be lost to
residential, it will allow for the more significant employment site
to come forward which would otherwise remain vacant.
8. Recommendation Conditional Permission Conditions/Reasons: 1
Application for approval of the reserved matters shall be made to
the Local Planning
Authority before the expiration of three years from the date of
this planning permission. The development hereby permitted shall be
begun before the expiration of two years from the date of approval
of the final approval of the reserved matters or, in the case of
approval on different dates, the final approval of the last such
matter to be approved. Reason: To comply with Section 92 of the
Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended) and to prevent the
accumulation of unimplemented planning permissions.
2 Before any works or development hereby approved is commenced
on site details relating to the layout, scale, appearance, access
and landscaping of the site shall be submitted to, and approved by
the Local Planning Authority. These details shall comprise the
‘reserved matters’ and shall be submitted within the time
constraints referred to in Condition 1 above before any development
is commenced. Reason: To enable the Local Planning Authority to
control the development in detail and to comply with Section 92 of
the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended).
3 Approval of the details of the siting, design and external
appearance of the building(s), the means of access thereto 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 the Site), D3 (Landscaping), TR7 (Highway
Consideration for New Development) of the Isle of Wight Unitary
Development Plan.
-
Paper B - 25
4 Development permitted by this planning permission shall not be
initiated by the undertaking of material operations as defined in
Section 56 (4) a-d of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 in
relation to the development until planning obligations pursuant to
Section 106 of the said Act relating to the land has been made and
lodged with the Local Planning Authority and the Local Planning
Authority has notified the person submitting the same that it is to
the Local Planning Authority's approval. The said obligation shall
stipulate a development programme to ensure that all aspects of the
development are undertaken and bought forward and details of those
units within Spithead that shall be used for B1 (Light Industrial)
and B8 (Warehouse/Storage) only. Reason: In order to ensure that
the development of the employment element and highway improvement
of the scheme is undertaken in accordance with Policy E3 (Change of
Use of Employment Land) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development
Plan.
5 No development shall take place until a detailed scheme
(including calculations of capacity studies) for foul and surface
water drainage from the site, have been submitted to and agreed
with the Local Planning Authority in writing. Any such agreed foul
and surface water disposal system shall indicate connections at
points on the system where adequate capacity exists to ensure any
additional flow should not cause flooding or over load the existing
system, if necessary on alternative system for the disposal of
surface water shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the
Local Planning Authority. Reason: To ensure an adequate system of
foul and surface water drainage is provided for the development
incompliance with PPG23: Planning and Pollution Control and PPG25:
Development and Flood Risk
6 The development hereby permitted shall not begin until a flow
analysis has been submitted for the approval of the Local Planning
Authority in writing. Reason: In the interest of highway safety and
to comply with Policy TR7 (Highway Considerations for New
Development) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.
7 Development shall not begin until details of the design,
surfacing and construction of any new roads, footways, accesses and
car parking areas, together with details of the means of disposal
of surface water drainage therefrom have been submitted to and
approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Development
shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.
Reason: To ensure an adequate standard of highway access and
drainage for the proposed dwellings and to comply with Policy TR7
(Highway Considerations) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development
Plan.
8 No building shall be occupied until the means of access
thereto for [pedestrians and/or cyclists] has been constructed in
accordance with the approved plans. Reason: To ensure adequate safe
provision of facilities for pedestrians and cyclists wishing to
gain access to the site and to comply with Policy TR6 (Cycling and
Walking) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.
9 No building shall be occupied until the means of vehicular
access thereto has been constructed in accordance with the approved
plans. Reason: To ensure adequate access to the proposed
development and to comply with Policy D1 (Standards of Design) of
the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.
-
Paper B - 26
10 Any reserved matters application shall be submitted with an
Ecology Report undertaken by a suitably qualified person to assess
the impacts of the development and any necessary mitigation to
protect any protected species and natural features on site.
Reason: In the interest of nature conservation and the character
of the area and to comply with PPS9: Biodiversity and Geological
Conservation.
-
03 Reference Number: P/00856/08 - TCP/27560/B
Parish/Name: Bembridge - Ward/Name: Bembridge North Registration
Date: 22/04/2008 - Full Planning Permission Officer: Mr J Mackenzie
Tel: (01983) 823552 Applicant: Bembridge Harbour Improvements Co.
Ltd Installation of piles and sewage system for 33 houseboats;
provision of aboardwalk and repairs to the embankment (revised
scheme) Bembridge Harbour, Embankment Road, Bembridge, Isle Of
Wight, PO35 The application is recommended for Refusal
REASON FOR COMMITTEE CONSIDERATION This is a major application
and particularly contentious, involving several conflicting policy
considerations and the need for the Council to carry out an
Appropriate Assessment as the competent Authority. MAIN
CONSIDERATIONS The main considerations relevant to the
determination of this application are as follows:
• The principle of perpetuating and increasing the numbers of
houseboats. • The susceptibility of the site to flooding. • The
sensitivity of the site and the proposed development in terms of
nature
conservation and impact on the sites of importance. • The visual
impact of the proposed engineering works, additional houseboats and
the
raised walkway. • Pollution implications of the proposals. •
Matters relating to access and parking.
1. Details of application 1.1 There are four main elements
involved in this scheme, namely:
• The installation of piles for the mooring of 33 houseboats
which amounts to an additional seven in the location close to the
existing.
• The provision of a boardwalk to run parallel to the existing
pavement to provide a means of escape in the event of a flood.
• Engineering operations to the embankment. • The installation
of a new foul sewage system to serve the 33 houseboats.
1.2 The plan shows 37 Oak piles to be driven into the foreshore
in positions between 3m and
36m from the water’s edge in positions to enable the secure
mooring of 33 houseboats of which currently there are 26 located
between a concrete slipway at the western extent of the site and a
landing stage on the east, a stretch approximately 400m apart,
situated at the sharp bend in the Embankment.
Paper B - 27
http://www.iwight.com/council/committees/Planning%20Committee/24-3-09/Maps/P%2000856%2008.mht
-
Paper B - 28
1.3 The proposed boardwalk would be approximately 225m in length
stretching from the western
extent eastwards coincident with the lowest length of the
pavement and roadway and would be constructed in timber
approximately 1.5m in width overall; timber posts driven into the
ground, connected by horizontal rails and decking boards with a
single three railed balustrade on the sea side, the top rail being
a maximum of 1.1m above the deck level. Deck level is proposed to
be 3.4m above ordnance datum and due to existing pavement, road and
embankment levels, and the height of the deck above varies from 0 -
0.35m. The balustrading on the northern side would be punctuated by
gated pedestrian accesses only coinciding with the entrances to the
houseboats. The stated purpose for the raised walkway is to
facilitate emergency pedestrian escape in the event of flooding,
the height of 3.4m being set by the anticipated 1 in 200 flood
event.
1.4 The engineering operations proposed are intended to fill the
gaps between parts of the
existing sea wall where weak or eroded embankment exists. These
engineering operations relate to six lengths as follows:
• Area 1 is 10m in length located at the extreme western end of
the site currently
comprises a 1.4m high concrete ‘sandbag’ wall which is currently
eroding. The proposal is to excavate 1.3m from the wall and fill
with ‘no fines’ concrete and set large rocks at a level of 30
degrees.
• Area 2 is shown as a length of 22.5m near the western end,
currently an unprotected length of grass verge and embankment
falling into the foreshore and the proposal is to excavate and lay
gabions to a height similar to the existing pavement and to
backfill with selected material capped by turf.
• Area 3 is shown as a 6m open length of wall which is currently
unstable and the proposal is to remove the wall and replace with
gabions, backfill soil and turf the area behind bringing the level
graded up to pavement level.
• Area 4 is shown to be 13.2m of unprotected embankment and
verge replaced with gabions to just below pavement height,
backfilled and finished with soil and turf.
• Area 5, situated towards the eastern end, is shown to be a
13.5m long section of unprotected bank and is proposed to be
excavated with gabions installed and the area behind backfilled
again with selected materials and topped with soil and turf.
• Area 6 is shown on the plan to be at the easternmost end of
the site, a length of 60m of currently unprotected embankment
wherein it is proposed to excavate and lay gabions with a backfill
of selected material finished in soil and turf.
1.5 The proposed engineering works are intended to prevent
continued erosion of the
embankment but with permeable materials to allow saline
permeation into brackish lagoons on the southern side of the
embankment.
1.6 The installation of a foul sewage system comprising a link
to each of the houseboats
culminating in a pumping station situated approximately midway
in the run of houseboats, pumping foul sewage to a mains sewer
located to the north close to Bembridge Sailing Club, a distance of
approximately 700m overall.
2. Location and Site Characteristics 2.1 The application relates
to a length of foreshore of approximately 400m situated around
the
bend at the southern extent of Bembridge Harbour. Within this
length of foreshore there are currently 22 houseboats of various
sizes and types and the majority of which are buoyant although it
is acknowledged that some do not float. The lowest part of the
pavement is shown as 3.05m above ordnance datum at a point directly
opposite the junction of Embankment Road with the private road
entering Embankment Road on its southern side at the apex to
the
-
Paper B - 29
bend. Road levels are slightly below pavement level with the
lowest point being 2.92m above ordnance datum.
2.2 The Embankment forms the road connection between St Helens
and Bembridge and also the
sea defence, separating Bembridge Harbour from Brading Marshes.
There is sporadic development on the southern side of Embankment
Road with large gaps between developments which are mostly
employment and marine related uses.
3. Relevant History 3.1 A Lawful Development Certificate for 34
houseboats refused in March 2006 on grounds of
insufficient evidence. 3.2 Lawful Development Certificate for
one specific houseboat (Bryher) issued in May 2008. 4. Development
Plan Policy 4.1 National Planning Policy
4.1.1 PPS7 – Sustainable Development in Rural Areas
4.1.2 PPS23 – Planning and Pollution Control
4.1.3 PPS25 – Planning and Flood Risk 4.2 Regional Planning
Policy None specific to this proposal. 4.3 Local Planning
Policy
4.3.1 Unitary Development Plan/Island Plan policies
• G5: Development Outside Defined Settlements • G11: Coastal
Development • D1: Standards of Design • H9: Outside Development
Boundaries • TR7: Highway Considerations for New Development
4.3.2 Core Strategy Policies
• CP 6: Sustainable Development • CP 9: Flood Risk
4.3.3 Supplementary Planning Guidance None.
4.4 Other Council Strategies
East Yar Coastal and Fluvial Strategy – advocates ‘hold the
line’ approach to be adopted in the Bembridge Harbour vicinity.
-
Paper B - 30
5. Consultee & Third Party Comments 5.1 Internal
Consultees
5.1.1 Council’s Ecologist recognises that Natural England’s
objection to the scheme would trigger the requirement for an
Appropriate Assessment as NE considers the proposed development may
have a significant effect on the Solent & Southampton Water
SPA/Ramsar alone and is likely to have a significant impact in
combination with other plans or projects. This advice triggers the
requirement for the Planning Authority, as a Competent Authority,
to carry out an Appropriate Assessment as required by Regulation 48
of the Habitats Regulations 1994, in accordance with the Habitats
Directive (Council Directive 92/43/EEC).
The purpose of the Appropriate Assessment is to ascertain
whether or not the project would have an adverse effect upon the
European nature conservation site, in which case the development
could not legally proceed.
This is a complicated process, further complicated by the need
to take into account the ‘in combination’ impacts of the many other
completed and proposed projects within Bembridge harbour. The
process has to be carried out in consultation with Natural England
and should reach a conclusion which they find acceptable.
Work on the Appropriate Assessment has been progressing with
Natural England when a final formal response to the application was
received from the Environment Agency on 09 January 2009 maintaining
their objection as detailed below. Accordingly an Appropriate
Assessment has not been concluded.
5.1.2 Highway Engineer considers there to be no implications.
5.1.3 Environmental Health Officer offers no adverse comment. 5.2
External Consultees 5.2.1 Natural England (NE) objects to the
application pending the result of an Appropriate
Assessment. NE considers that the development may have a
significant effect on the Solent and Southampton water SPA/Ramsar
alone and is likely to have a significant effect in combination
with other developments. Accordingly points out that before
Planning Permission can be granted an Appropriate Assessment must
be carried out.
5.2.2 RSPB raises serious concerns due to potential impact on
the Solent and
Southampton water SPA and Ramsar. 5.2.3 Hampshire and Isle of
Wight Wildlife Trust also objects supporting Natural England’s
position. 5.2.4 Southern Water raises no objection but wishes
confirmation that the disposal will be
to a private waste water treatment works or septic tank. 5.2.5
Environment Agency objects to the application on grounds that the
works involve
building over a flood defence/sea wall which would restrict
essential maintenance and emergency access to the sea wall.
However, EA points out that if the applicants entered into a legal
agreement to enable the EA to remove the works as and when
necessary to effect repairs etc. without compensation then EA would
accept such an agreement advising of the imposition of planning
conditions on any consent.
-
Paper B - 31
5.3 Parish Council comments No Parish Council comments received
at the time of writing. 5.4 Third Party representations
5.4.1 Chairman of Bembridge Harbour Trust supports the
installation of proper sewage disposal but suggests that such an
installation should not be dependent upon any increase in
houseboats and does not support the increase. More houseboats will
reduce safety and amenity; that the houseboat sizes are
uncontrolled which has an adverse effect on Harbour birdlife and
visual intrusion. Additional houseboats would generate more parking
and traffic.
5.4.2 A letter from the Secretary of Bembridge Harbour Users
Group objects to the
increased number of houseboats; doubts the practicality of the
scheme and its timescale. The letter argues that some of the
moorings being offered as mitigation have not been used for some
years. Argues that previous permissions for parking provision have
not been implemented and an increase in houseboats would mean an
increase in ad hoc parking and associated highway hazards.
Summarises by supporting the installation of a sewage system but
objects to the complication and reliance on its installation on
additional houseboats being provided and accordingly urges
refusal.
5.4.3 Three letters of objection have been received from local
residents arguing that:
• The proposal should be in three separate applications. •
Possible adverse effect on Special Protection Areas and
Conservation
Areas. • Inadequate information on possible impacts to species
of interest.
The letters argue that there have never been 34 houseboats in
the Harbour and that
until the mid-1950s there were only sixteen and that an
additional ten have been introduced since 1990 totalling 26, six of
which have been introduced in the last three years. Point out that
ten of the houseboats currently are not buoyant, that some are
nearly derelict and are unsightly. That currently the drainage
regime is a serious health hazard, also suggesting that their
replacement with new houseboats should be postponed until the
sewage system has been implemented.
6. Evaluation 6.1 The works proposed would have significant have
implications regarding nature conservation
due to the perceived effects of the insertion of piles the
mooring of additional house boats, gabion boxes (which in effect
reclaim a cumulative area of intertidal mud) and disturbance to
feeding waders and Members are reminded that an Appropriate
Assessment needs to be carried out as part of any planning process
in parallel with the Planning Application. The principles of the
four elements of this application are quite different and are
separated for clarity.
6.1.1 The application seeks to increase the numbers of
houseboats by seven as it appears
that there are either 26 houseboats or potential moorings in
existence. For clarification, planning permission is not required
to moor houseboats but planning permission is required to install
the facilities for mooring, such as piles, piers, etc. In addition
the application seeks consent for a time limited period of 60 years
by which
-
Paper B - 32
time it is anticipated that, in practical terms, due to rising
sea levels the mooring of houseboats would not be a practical
proposition.
6.1.2 The boardwalk is proposed to be timber structure
comprising timber posts driven into
the ground with an overall height to the handrail of a maximum
of 1.45m above ground level. This would account for the standard
height of the handrail and the maximum height of the deck above
ground level of 0.35m. The principle of providing this 1.5m wide
boardwalk is to enable safe escape during a flood event and bearing
in mind its height and position, its appearance would be consistent
with a roadside fence or hedge. The reason for its requirement is
considered acceptable in principle.
6.1.3 The various engineering operations including the
installation of stone gabions is
intended not to reclaim land but to halt continued erosion in
selected areas where such tidal action is taking place. None of the
works are above ground level and although infilling behind the
gabions is proposed, the land is only proposed to be raised
sufficiently to accord with existing ground level. The results of
such proposed engineering operations would form a continuous but
permeable structure marking the edge of the foreshore and
embankment and, in principle, is acceptable.
6.1.4 Improvements to the foul drainage system involve the
connection of all of the
houseboats, both existing and proposed, to a central pumping
station which would run north-easterly to a connection with the
mains and situated beneath the raised walkway and latterly below
ground level to a connection. An improvement in drainage is
considered appropriate in principle.
6.2 Flooding
6.2.1 Apart from twelve of the existing houseboats which are
non-buoyant, the flooding issue does not affect houseboats as they
will ride on the tide open flow and with the provision of the
raised walkway to a height of 3.4m above ordnance datum a means of
escape will be available until approximately 2068 although it is
acknowledged that leases enable the mooring of houseboats until
2104. Accordingly, in terms of flood risk, the time limited
permission for houseboats/moorings is acceptable provided the
necessary means of escape is installed and retained. Conditions
attached to a planning permission could effect additional control
over the houseboats and any replacement vessels.
6.2.2 The purpose of the boardwalk is to ensure a satisfactory
form of escape during a
flooding event so the flooding implications are nil. 6.2.3 As
previously described the engineering operations proposed are aimed
at those
areas where there is currently inadequate tidal defence which
results in erosion of the embankment caused by tidal influences
within the Harbour. The installation of gabions in those
susceptible areas will ensure that up to a given date, erosion and
possible breach of the embankment will be countered whilst
maintaining a satisfactory form and levels in relation to the
surrounding land.
6.3 Nature Conservation issues
6.3.1 The proposed piles, 38 in number, are proposed to be 350mm
square and therefore, even cumulatively, the loss of foreshore in
terms of its area is very low. That being said, mitigation of this
loss is proposed to be offset by the removal of a number of timber
piles elsewhere in the Harbour in order to ensure inter-tidal mud
flats are not lost as a result. In addition, it should be borne in
mind that in approving additional piles for moorings, effectively
seven additional houseboats could be provided, the
-
Paper B - 33
size of which is not controllable but the areas of inter-tidal
mud sterilised will be significantly increased. Further mitigation
is offered in the Design and Access Statement to offset this loss
but as the Appropriate Assessment has not been concluded, it is not
possible to judge if this is adequate.
6.3.2 The raised boardwalk refers only to approximately 225m of
the embankment varying
in height from 0 – 0.35m and is proposed to be constructed using
comparatively minor building works, timber posts driven into the
existing bank, currently dry land rather than foreshore and is
thought to have no significant nature conservation implications.
The boardwalk runs parallel to the existing pavement and thus will
not generate additional levels of pedestrian traffic and adjoins
that land occupied by the houseboats, and although closer to the
foreshore than the pavement, is unlikely to generate a significant
lev