A 27-house development could be built in a field off Colwell Road on the outskirts of Freshwater.
Colwell Bay View Ltd’s outline application to the Isle of Wight Council for housing on agricultural land next to Spring Hill off Colwell Road would ‘go some way’ towards providing ‘much-needed housing’ in Freshwater, a statement from consultancy Plan Research said.
The document stated 35% of the proposed homes would be ‘affordable housing’, with the scheme also delivering ‘significant wildlife enhancements’ and ‘public footway improvements’.
It said:
“There would be a mixture of smaller and larger housing stock available for affordable rent or purchase, depending on the agreement that the council would make with the applicant.
“Our client believes that the majority of the houses on the site, being two or three bedroomed, would match the evidenced housing need for the West Wight.
“There would be no significant overlooking from the proposed houses to existing dwellings.
“Occupiers of the application site would not have to rely on the private car, and so the site is sustainable.
“Within this application our client has proposed a new pavement which would run along the lane known as Brambles Chine.”
A new pavement would be a ‘significant improvement’ for public footpath users who at present must walk in the carriageway due to farm vehicles and visitors also using the lane, Plan Research added.
Also included in the application is a proposal to ‘widen the carriageway’ at the south end of Brambles Chine, described as a ‘pinch point’, to 6 metres which would allow space for 2 vehicles to pass each other.
The site is ‘within a 2-minute walk’ of the Brambles Corner bus stop and a ‘5-minute cycle ride’ from the centre of Freshwater.
The council’s public consultation on the application will finish on 7th February and a decision is due to be made on 8th April.
Affordable my backside,this was eventually going to come up as the new cul de sac which it will join was supposed to be affordable homes,in the end it was all detached houses for mostly second home owners,this will be the same,on an island with low wages,hardly any jobs,what exactly is affordable these days £100,000? £150,000?
anything else ove rthat is unaffordable and will go to second homeowners,council couldnt care less as its just more stupidly expensive council tax,this will go through,and a certain ex tory councillor who backs on to that field will not be impressed!
Unless these homes are all for social housing
they are not needed.
Why is it always necessary to build on greenfield sites? This is agricultural land which is worth far more for development so farmers happily sell out to developers for a fast buck. The developers then apply for outline planning on the basis of 35% affordable housing and promises of this or that. Once they have the outline permission they apply for variation and suddenly the affordable bit disappears along with the other promised benefits. Before you know it you have a farmer who has made a packet, a developer who has made a packet, greenfield that are grren no longer, the public benefits which have evaporated and expensive houses which help no one living and working locally but simply provides second and holiday homes which contribute little or nothing to the community and certainly houses no struggling, local families.
This argument will rumble on until someone comes up with a credible definition of “affordable”, which the current one definitely isn’t.
A developer who gets PP on the basis of a number of “affordable” homes but who then fails to deliver simply has to deposit some cash with IW Council, who are supposed to use it to build affordable homes themselves. As we all know, they don’t build anything except carparks and toilets, which means that after 5 years the developer gets all his money back. Result: developer gets the expensive houses he wanted in the first place, no affordable homes are built and the Council is blameless.
Can anyone see a flaw in this process?