How the applicants envisioned the site looking

BARING ROAD HOUSING APPLICATION REJECTED FOR A SECOND TIME

Plans for homes on the edge of Gurnard and Cowes have been rejected a second time — for fears it would bridge the gap between the 2.

Overruling planning officers’ recommendation, the Isle of Wight Council’s planning committee earlier this week rejected the development of 6 detached homes, a mixture of bungalows and houses, on Baring Road.

Officers argued the dwellings would not have a ‘significant impact’ on the Jordan Valley and said it could be given conditional permission.

Article continues below this advertisement

The site has been allocated for housing through the draft Island planning strategy and through pre-application discussions between the applicants and the planning authority, planning agents said the council was encouraging them to bring forward the right scheme.

An application for 6 houses was refused for the site previously, due to the housing mix and scale, which led to a new application for smaller homes.

The proposed scheme, planning agent Andrew White said, would not sit awkwardly into the valley, but follow the same boundary lines as the houses already on Baring Road.

Quoting the Planning Inspectorate, Mr White said the development would keep Cowes or Gurnard as separate entities.

Councillor Paul Fuller, for Cowes West and Gurnard, said Gurnard Parish Council’s Neighbourhood Plan was of significant importance in safeguarding the site. He said:

Article continues below this advertisement

“The plan has so far worked well and mitigated against further losses of sites in Gurnard and the community remains hopeful the committee will not allow any further nibbling away of the green space between Cowes and Gurnard.

“I know officers will feel six units in this location will make little difference but this is six units on top of 230 permitted in Gurnard in the last ten years, all before the plan was adopted.”

Questioning the application, Councillor Vanessa Churchman, said:

“What on earth are we destroying a greenfield site for?”

Article continues below this advertisement

She queried who the dwellings would be sold to, saying not enough houses for people who already live on the Island were being built.

Councillor Richard Hollis said the development was an encroachment into the Valley and that he could not see the changes in the plans.

The application was rejected by the committee with 8 votes in favour and 2 abstentions.

The views/opinions expressed in these comments are solely those of the author and do not represent those of Island Echo. House rules on commenting must be followed at all times.
5 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
isle of wighter
isle of wighter
2 months ago

Questioning the application, Councillor Vanessa Churchman, said:

“What on earth are we destroying a greenfield site for?”

……….

I note they did not provide an answer to that question – as the true answer is… to make money for ourselves (the developers, land owners and council), at the expense of the environment

JHVF
JHVF
2 months ago

Just stop building houses. Full stop. Not enough Dentists, Doctors, Hospital beds, Roads etc etc

Oldbutalive
Oldbutalive
2 months ago

Overruling planning officers recommendations!
Does this mean they will appeal and get it overturned?

Walter Sobchak
Walter Sobchak
2 months ago

Smells like electioneering to me. Still let’s hope they continue this new found love of Greenfields after May.

There doesn’t seem to be a Island housing development without a quote from Andrew White attached to it. He must drawing a lot of water round here.

fred
fred
2 months ago

Yay the NIMBY crowd has won again stealing jobs and money from the local community. Next time you see builders at the job centre, you’re to blame. You throttle a cow it’ll stop giving milk and you will stave. But the NIMBY lot are to narrow mined to see that they are killing growth on the island and are ultimately hurting themselves.

Football Betting Site Betway
 

Join our daily newsletter

News, Traffic & Travel Tweets