More work is needed on the Isle of Wight Council’s controversial 15-year planning strategy, it has been agreed.
Following a 3-hour meeting last month, where ultimately no decision was made about the future of the draft Island Planning Strategy (DIPS), councillors reached a middle ground at a meeting last night (Wednesday).
In a motion originally posed by Councillor Chris Jarman, the cabinet member for strategic finance and transformational change, the DIPS will now head back to the council’s executive to address the concerns.
Amending the motion last night, with support from other councillors across the chamber, 10 objections were highlighted in the DIPS — which would set the council’s housing targets, outline employment space and create new planning policies.
The objections included:
- A clear commitment the council would use land it owns to build social homes affordable to Islanders as part of its housing company.
- A split in housing developments where affordable housing is delivered — of which 80% should be rented and 20% allocated as shared ownership.
- A time limit of 6 months for legal agreements to be signed or permission would be refused.
- The DIPS to be brought back to full council no later than April 2023.
- The need to recognise local energy security and provide a future feasibility study into the generation of geothermal energy on the Island.
- The use of contemporary and accurate data regarding housing needs, population growth and age profile demographics.
- A definition of affordable rented housing based on not more than one-third of the net average local monthly earnings.
The leader of the council, Councillor Lora Peacey-Wilcox, now has 60 days to either submit a revised DIPS and the reasons for the changes or inform full council of reasons why cabinet disagrees with the points.
Councillor Jarman said the list was not directing cabinet to take specific action but were points for them to consider and work out the best way forward.
Reacting to the motion, Councillor Paul Fuller, the lead member for planning and housing, said it was quite heartening to hear the discussions that have taken place across the council since the last meeting and they were now at a stage where it can be moved forward.
Abstaining from the vote, Councillor Julie Jones-Evans said she feared the motion would not move the council forward and was concerned it would just end up in a situation where people were still not happy with the changes. She said by sending the DIPS back for more work, it would be another year the Island would not be protected and it would be open season for developers.
Councillor Richard Quigley was concerned councillors were just finding different ways to build less housing and said a real shift in attitude was needed to give Islanders a chance at having their own front door.
I’m glad there has been a shift in attitude. The island needs very careful consideration when it comes to building affordable housing. The location and numbers are vital. This is all the island needs, affordable housing for island residents only. Not masses of new homes bought up by mainland buyers looking to get rich quick by renting them out as holiday homes or Air B&Bs.
This Council must realise the entire island infrastructure will not cope with100s of unnecessary homes creating additional waste of all sorts, additional road traffic, longer waiting times to see a GP or Dentist, more strain on our struggling one and only hospital.
It has got to reach a point when ‘enough is enough’.
Generally I agree, but holiday homes and AirBnBs don’t put much strain on GP and dentist services as the people renting them will generally only use those those services in emergencies. For most condition they will use their own GP at home.
People moving here to retire, however, do put an inordinate strain on those services. Older people are generally in poorer health. An average 30 year-old will visit a GP 3 or 4 times a year. This increases to 5 or 6 by the age of 60, 8 by the age of 70 and 10 by the age of 80. So 10 years after a 60 year-old moves to the Isle of Wight they are putting twice the burden on GP services as a 30 year-old.
But I agree, we should only be building affordable homes for young islanders.
Not always true… I am 70 years old and have seen a Doctor, once in the last ten years, yet many younger are regular seeing their doctors, or visiting hospital…. Only visit i had was for a blood test. So your facts are nearly completely wrong.
So because you, personally, have only seen a doctor once in the last 10 years that makes everything I said “nearly completely wrong”?
I know a bloke who was killed by a falling tree, Best cut them all down as trees are obviously extremely dangerous.
Good for you Sir. You are obviously in fine health.
You are talking out of your backside many over 70’s have not seen a doctor for years including me. On the other hand i know youngsters that are constantly at their
doctors with minor ailments
smiffy is all full of sympathy, inclusivity and sensitivity, right up until you challenge the narrative and don’t support smiffy’s view- then like any other leftie, they get all upset and suddenly become, unsympathetic, exclusive and insensitive.
Do two old farts haven’t seen a doctor in years and that’s absolute proof the Smiffy is wrong, is it?
Never mind the actual data collected in actual doctors surgeries that shows otherwise.
I am not convinced that there is any importance being made of this planning strategy when we are told up to 60 days before another version. And April 1st? before presenting it to full council.
Councillor Richard Quigley was concerned councillors were just finding different ways to build less housing.
Quigley is clearly in favour of the destruction of greenfields, destruction of the natural habitats of birds, insects and wildlife, the permanent destruction of trees and plant life, the concreting over of the island and for what – more money in the pockets of developers
this guy shouldn’t be let near the reigns of power anywhere
“Councillor Richard Quigley was concerned councillors were just finding different ways to build less housing and said a real shift in attitude was needed to give Islanders a chance at having their own front door.”
Funny how quoting out of context can be misleading, isn’t it?
He wants more housing that is affordable by Islanders rather than the stuff that is aimed at 2nd homers, Holiday let investors and well-off incoming retirees.
As for Quigley himself? A sound businessman who inspires far more confidence than Seely ever does. Would make a decent constituency MP who would put people before his political career.
still says the same thing – wants more houses, rather than reduce the impact on the environment by addressing the causes of over population and no, quigley is not a sound business man – he is labour and by definition keen to spend more of other peoples money than the tories do – hence why they are unelectable.
He runs two successful businesses. How many does Seely run? How many has Seely he ever run?
How many have you run?
As for the oft repeated lie that Labour can’t be trusted with money:
Best we not mention the money the Tories spaffed up the wall on unsuitable PPE during the Covid pandemic, eh?
Or the £30 billion Truss cost the country in the couple of weeks she was in charge?
Or the £42 billion they are continuing to spaff on the unwanted HS2 vanity project.
Or the fact that our debt is currently running at over 100% of GDP. The last time is was that high was 1960. Worse, when the current clowns took over in 2010, it was 69% and has increased almost every years since then.
yawn, boring socialist claptrap from smiffy as usual- isn’t there some futile cause for you to champion somewhere.
just reread history and you will see labours hopeless record – was it not liam byrne, the labour mp who left that note for the incoming administration “sorry, there is no money left”
hopeless socialist drivel, from a hopeless socialist
UK national debt is now over 100% of GDP. The last time it was that bad was 1960. When the Tories took over it was 60% and has risen almost every year since.
Government debt was £995 billion when the Tories took over. It’s now well over £2 trillion. Labour (you know, the ones you accuse of spending all the money) kept it below £500 billion almost all of the time they were in power.
the drivel is yours. Utter cobblers not backed up by any evidence. Put up or shut up.
Also, you were asked a question. What are your business credentials. We already know Seely has none and I strongly suspect you are similar.
genuine isle of wighter….the labour party have an absolutely shocking record on financial management…I trust you recall the winter of discontent and going cap in hand to the IMF for cash, when they wrecked everything.
Labour are unelectable because they only care about spending other peoples money…they have a verifiable track record and their policies are not aligned with what the majority of the country want.
also…if.you expect wighter to publish actual facts about his or herself on a public message board, then you aren’t thinking straight.
wighter may be direct, but is rarely wrong
You are 100% right smiffy. The tories need to go, this council need to go and Seely needs to go.
I’ve met both Seely and Quigley.
Seely always comes across as somewhere between used car salesman and pantomime villain while Quigley is always affable and seems genuinely friendly.
Obviously we don’t have any proof as to how well Quigley would perform as our MP or whether he would put us before his party if push came to shove.
We do know that Seely will always vote in the interests of both his party and his political career as he has done so on every single occasion where there was a conflict between than and our interests (sewage in the sea being the most notable recently).
This is rule no 1 in the councillors with vested interests in building companies and housing development. Without a signed off strategy anyone can apply for planning permission even in areas that are not considered suitable, when the council object, the developer goes to appeal stating that the island does not have a signed of strategy and they invariably win.Anyone who th9nks the strategy will be signed off by early next year is deluded.
Now this is a problem now, because they will surmise average local monthly earnings from all of HAMPSHIRE… NOT just the Isle of Wight…. because we are part of Hampshire. Higher pay for similar jobs on the mainland..
Build a tunnel….so that more people can commute at a fair price, not having to rely on cancelled ferries.. and the high costs.. then would be better jobs here too..
No! I can’t agree with your ‘build a tunnel’ comment. Sorry. People move to the IOW to get away from all the hustle and bustle and madness of the mainland.
Though now, crime has increased massively in the last 4/5 years it’s getting ridiculous.
Are they even considering adequate healthcare? They should be applying the Goverment’s own ratios of Doctors Etc against the population figures. (At present we are way off those ratios)
The data is the most important part of this, and there doesn’t seem to be anything being done about this. Over half on the housing waiting list need flats not houses, so why are all these housing estates being built. Madness.
Without proper data, builders always call the shots.