PAPER D

NEWPORT PARISH
COUNCIL
PLANNING AND LICENSING
COMMITTEE
www.newportwight.org.uk

MINUTES OF A MEETING OF NEWPORT PARISH PLANNING AND LICENSING

COMMITTEE HELD ON THURSDAY, 17th MARCH 2011, AT THE RIVERSIDE CENTRE,
NEWPORT, ISLE OF WIGHT, COMMENCED AT 6.30PM

Councillors Present : Shirley Smart (Chairman), Tony Coburn, Mary Craven, Steve Falla,
Terry Goldstone, Lois Prior and Peter Whiteman.

Public: 0
Clerk: Chris Hougham

PUBLIC QUESTION TIME

None

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

P/537 APOLOGIES

Debbie Dixcey.

P/538 DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST

Cllrs. Peter Whiteman and Terry Goldstone declared a general personal interest on the
basis that he is employed in the building industry.
Cllr. Peter Whiteman declared a specific personal interest in Agenda Item 7(6)
Cllr. Tony Coburn declared a personal interest in Agenda Item 7(7)
Chairman Shirley Smart declared a personal interest in Agenda Item 7(8)

P/539 MINUTES OF THE LAST MEETING AND MATTERS ARISING

The minutes of the last meeting held on 3rd March 2011 were agreed and signed as a
correct record. The Assistant Clerk updated Members on the latest position on certain
related matters.

P/540 LICENSING APPLICATIONS

There were no new licensing applications.

P/541 RECENTLY LODGED APPEALS AND LATEST DECISIONS

There were no new appeals lodged or appeal decisions.

P/542 PLANNING APPLICATIONS

PAPER D

P/00197/11, P/00198/11 & P/00199/11… former Whitecroft Hospital, Sandy Lane

Members were fully briefed on the background to this application in terms of the
approved development brief for the site; the permission granted in 2006, and the
implications of that approval, and this latest detailed submission. The matter was
debated for a considerable period of time. Members took the following view on the
fundamental aspects of the proposed development.

 In terms of location, appearance and value to the built heritage this is a unique
site. While it is clear that it is not ideally suited to residential development in an
unsustainable location outside the development envelope boundary Members
accept the basic premise agreed in 2006 that the retention and refurbishment
of the original buildings, including the listed clock tower, is the principal
determining factor.
 Members feel that the work carried out in connection with the extant
permission is, at best, disappointing in design terms and detracts from the
appearance of the original buildings and their setting. Consequently they
support the demolition of these partially completed buildings in favour of the
submitted scheme that represents a significant improvement on the present
situation in terms of layout and external appearance, subject to the use of
quality matching materials.
 Members do not have an issue with the modest increase in numbers of units;
the move from flatted accommodation to more individual houses or the new
modern design units around the periphery of the site.

That said, Members had a number of concerns about matters relating essentially to
planning gain, particularly the provision of affordable housing, and other issues relating
to access/traffic generation, community facilities, landscaping/planting and protection of
wildlife. It is apparent that biggest issue is affordable housing and while Members
accept that this isolated location is not best suited to sustainable affordable homes they
feel that any resolution on this matter should start from the base point of the need for
30% provision overall, either ‘off site’ or in the form of a substantial financial
contribution. Members would prefer to see a separate site in a more sustainable
location developed by the applicants in partnership with a (local) registered social
landlord. The less desirable option is for straightforward financial contribution and, in
this context, Members wish to know how this will be calculated and the agreed amount,
with assurances that it will be ring fenced and used for affordable housing in the
Newport area other than the Pan Meadows site. Members feel because of the location
of the site that the provision of community facilities on the site will be vital and in this
respect feel that an area for allotment use, on site or nearby, would be positive step.
Members also seek assurances on the future use of Sandy Lane and how this will be
controlled; they are concerned about the possible use on non-indigenous species as
part of the accompanying landscaping scheme and the apparent absence of essential
survey work on protection of wildlife including protected species. On the latter points it is
assumed that the Tree Officer and the Ecology Officer will be consulted and involved
with the processing of the application.
Quite clearly from the above although the Parish Council has no fundamental objection
to the application(s) but require clarification and assurances on a variety of important
issues. Consequently, until we are in receipt of these critical details, Members decided
to OBJECT to the application on grounds of inadequate information.

P/00250/11…104 Worsley Road

 PAPER D

Members had NO OBJECTION to this application.

P/00160/11…Cliftongrade Ltd, Stag Lane

In light of the allocation in the UDP, the previous approval, the recent upgrading of Stag
Lane and the character of the area Members could see NO OBJECTION to this
application.

P/00179/10…Site of old pavilion, Seaclose Park, Fairlee Road

Members had NO OBJECTION to this application.

Members asked for an indication of when the application for the partial demolition of the
fire damaged pavilion and its replacement with a temporary portakabin will be
submitted.

P/00194/11…Little Fairlee Farm, Mews Lane

Members are fully conversant of the requirements of this kind of submission and the
fact that the decision has to be made on factual evidence. While Members are unable to
offer any evidence to the effect that the converted building has not been used
continuously as a permanent dwelling for more than ten years the view is that the Case
Officer should be seeking further evidence from the applicant that goes beyond the
sworn affidavits; the view was that utility bills and suchlike may provide the
incontrovertible evidence that should be required.

P/00078/11…Briddlesford Lodge Farm, Briddlesford Road

Members are prepared to raise NO OBJECTION SUBJECT TO the imposition of

appropriate conditions in terms of the access arrangements, the finish/colour of the new
building, landscaping/planting and control over use of the building being suitable for a
rural location.

P/00156/11…490 Newport Road

Members have NO OBJECTION to this application.

P/543 PLANNING NOTICES

The Committee noted that no recent decisions had been received.

ANY OTHER PLANNING RELATED MATTERS

Pan Meadows Development….Street Names

Members were updated on the final decision in respect of the street naming on the first
part of the overall development on Pan Meadows. The decision received a mixed
reception for Members in terms of the actual names and the methods adopted in terms
of the consultation particularly with local residents on the neighbouring Pan Estate.
Members were generally pleased that a few of the suggestions put forward by the
parish Council were taken on board but also thought that a number of the names were
rather obscure and/or not overly relevant to the local historical theme.

QUESTIONS FROM THE COMMITTEE

TC asked if members were aware of the number of trees that have recently been felled
and removed at the Mount Joy site at Whitcombe Road. CH advised that he would
PAPER D

make enquiries. He also asked (again) about the seemingly increasing number of buses
(moss Group) on the site and whether Planning Services remained convinced that this
doesn’t represent any form of breach of planning control.

SF asked if Members were aware that MacDonald’s was presently closed undergoing
internal refurbishment.

LP asked if we had been able to ascertain the situation in respect of the use of the
forecourt area at Temptations as a vehicle hard standing. CH said he would raise the
matter with Planning and Engineering Services.

PW took the opportunity to update members on the position in respect of the NPC
planning application for the bird hide and the fact that a decision had been taken on the
advice of CH to withdraw the application because of the opposition to the scheme from
various Council Officers and what was considered to be an unreasonable request on
the part of Natural England for additional specialised information. Members agreed that
since the Parish Council was promoting and financing the project the response, despite
positive and encouraging comments at the pre-submission stage, was disappointing

MC asked if Members were aware of the current situation in respect of the licensing
application that is due in connection with the Isle of Wight Festival and her intention to
consult with local residents prior to the Parish Council formulating a formal response.
MC advised that PW and herself had a meeting with the local IWC Member (Cllr. Dawn
Cousins) on 7th March 2011 and that just a few days later it was revealed that the
application, still not submitted, would be seeking approval for up to 90,000 spectators
(and support staff, caterers etc) at the event this year. There was widespread
dissatisfaction within the Committee about the situation and the delay in submission
when the event is scheduled to take place in less than three months time.

CLOSE OF MEETING

The next meeting was confirmed as Thursday 17th March 2011 at 6.30pm.
The meeting closed at 7.37pm.

.....................................................................................................................Chairman