Plans for a new housing development in Gunville on the outskirts of Newport have finally been given the green light by the local authority — 14 months after they were previously rejected by the Council.
Over 2 applications, 149 houses can be built on land off of Arthur Moody Drive and Forest Hills over the project’s lifespan, although final details for 113 of the properties will still need to be approved at a later date. Full permission has been granted by the Isle of Wight Council’s planning committee for the other 36 houses.
Of the 149 homes, 52 properties will be designated as affordable.
The application was first heard by the planning committee last August but was thrown out due to concerns over access and the impact on the local highway.
Developers behind the scheme, DN Associates, carefully addressed the concerns and submitted revised plans this April. They hoped to address concerns including updated transport data and a new access point through the neighbouring Ash Lane scheme. As a result of the changes, Island Roads, as highways authority, accepted the proposals and gave provisional support.
Objections were still received, however, over the highways impact and the introduction of double yellow lines around the current estate which would see on-street parking removed and replaced by parking spaces in the new development.
Representative of Newport and Carisbrooke Community Council, Councillor Matthew Ambrosini, said the changes had been framed as a silver bullet but in actual fact achieved very little, requiring unfair double yellow lines to impact current residents and spread the negative impact onto another area of Gunville.
Ward councillor, Councillor Joe Lever, said nothing about the application had addressed the council’s previous concerns and he viewed the latest plans as a roll of the dice.
Planning committee member, Councillor Geoff Brodie, said it seemed to him people were more concerned about where they were going to park their car instead of whether other people could have a roof over their head. He said the council would build on brownfields but was going to have to bite the bullet and address the housing need by building on greenfields.
Cllr Brodie said previous issues had been addressed and he proposed to approve the applications.
Planning permission was agreed with 5 votes in favour and 3 against.
Sandown’s Councillor Debbie Andre said a recent study showed some of the Island’s current housing stock was substandard and this was an opportunity for new homes to be built to modern standards.
This Council don’t seem to care about our one and only struggling hospital. Our outdated sewage treatment works. Road infrastructure will become clogged. Yeah, keep on building. Hopefully these homes will be affordable and for islanders only?????
It’s utterly tragic, Sunshine. With people like Brodie about, the Island will surely soon become a concrete jungle. And don’t hold your breath on the affordability/Islander-only front!
Building on and therefore destroying greenfield land? Utterly tragic . . .
So if every single house doesn’t go to island families cllr Brodie has missled the planning committee and the electorate about the need for housing on the island!
Therefore I assume he will resign or be sacked?
As for cllr Andre’s statement about current housing stock being substandard, what is the point of the council giving fat juicy contracts to housing associations? Surely failing to maintain to a livable standard is in breach of the contract?
Grow a pair you useless twats and sort out the existing housing rather than oh let’s bulldoze more green!
Geoff Brodie, says address the housing need by building on greenfields.
and there you have it, this old relic wants to import more and more people to the island and steadily concrete it over, destroying natures ability to remove CO2 from the atmosphere, destroying natures ability to provide the habitats for creatures and over burdening infrastructure
perhaps if the island wasn’t accepting immigrants, asylum seekers, benefit claimants moving here at taxpayers expense, second home owners and air bnb – then we wouldn’t have a housing issue.
the councillors are only interested in lining their own pockets at the expense of the environment – brodie needs sacking immediately for encouraging the destruction of the environment
How are any of these people you mention going to afford to buy one of these homes?
they don’t – the housing associations lease them off the owners and then put their tenants in – I lived in a building a few years ago, where the flats were owned by different people – one flat was let to the housing association on a 25 year lease – they dumped any deadbeat in it they wanted.
And a hospital? And GP’s that actually work or does that not matter?
‘People are more concerned over where they are going to park their cars rather than other people having a roof over their heads’? Dramatic or what? But basically a load of cobblers. Why should anyone give up where they park their vehicle so a developer can make money? If we are to believe the hype, then we will all be getting on the buses (remember we didn’t need trains did we) those buses of course that run sporadically outside the main towns. Those well off will be sitting smugly in their ‘ever ready cars’ and the rest of us, the majority, will have to either walk or use a normal car. So don’t tell people that a car is a luxury and you should thank the lord you have somewhere to park it. The majority of us rely on our cars for everything
Brown envelopes obviously got bigger …..
Honestly not even worth telling them the problems, they know already!!!!!!
But don’t give a monkeys…..
Look how we have been treated re floating bridge fiasco ….
Honest and transparent lol , they wouldn’t know honesty if it slapped them in the face ….
More of the Sam old bull …..
What is this about the need to build go greenfield sites. It is a total fallacy, there is enough brownfield land around which is not fully utilised, and loads of empty and run-down properties already in existence in our towns and industrial estates which lend themselves to being re-purposed for housing.
Not only is greenfield land protected, but a lot of existing buildings can be converted with much less environmental impact than demolition and building from new. Also our towns would be revitalised and look less like war zones, many are a disgrace, and seriously harm our Tourist image.
The intelligent , informed and logical individuals like Joe Lever and Matthew Ambrosini seem to be bulldozed out of the way. Greenfield land is essential.
It also begars belief that greenfield sites are even being considered when there is planning permission already given for “banked up” sites. These should be used up first, or the planning application withdrawn. The Island is being ruined. So sad.
Clearing old brownfield sites of contamination and old building materials is expensive, far easier to build on nice clean fields, the wrong policy but then neither of us are in the council. At least we can sleep easily at night knowing its not us ruining the environment.
Stupidity. That’s 149 additional families to add to Newport’s single GP’s Surgery which is already grossly overloaded. When will the ‘authorities’ join the dots and wake up. There is a government approved ratio of population to medical facilities and the Island, especially Newport, is far from conforming to that required ratio.
Excellent, I can use my privileged position to buy more homes to let out at three times what a mortgage would cost the dirty working class. How dare they think they have the right to buy their home, don’t they know I have money to make.
Do our councillors think through what they say “Sandown’s Councillor Debbie Andre said a recent study showed some of the Island’s current housing stock was substandard and this was an opportunity for new homes to be built to modern standards.” So the council have yet undisclosed plans to remove substandard housing, or is it a silly sound byte to ensure people think building inappropriate houses is a positive idea.
island teenagers are growing up and new they need homes its not overlanders that need homes its island kids. we don’t need 149 we need 1149
Obviously raised the required backhander to keep the council sweet this time around ….sod everyone else already living up there !
Lymington Hospial will be pleased
So the housing stock on the Island is sub standard, this being an excuse to build another 149 houses. Maybe this fantastic council would care to advise us, the general public, which 149 sub standard houses are going to be demolished. Thought not.
Another 35,000 folks have already arrived illegally this year and the home office are busy hoovering up hotel accommodation, social and private rental properties to house them in the manner to which taxpayers can only dream of (but are paying for) – that’s on top of the million they let in legally last year (7 times the whole population of the Isle of Wight) – they won’t stop building when you need at least 300,000 new homes every year to house the people they are importing
It’s just unbelievable.
Knowing certain folk who work for the council, I am reliably informed (as if it isn’t blatantly obvious already) that infrastructure is a complete non-issue when planning for developments like this are being considered. Lack of capacity at St Mary’s hospital, lack of capacity at GP surgeries, the well documented situation with availability of NHS dentists, water and sewerage systems straining under current pressure, let alone with the addition of all these new homes. The island, traditionally an employment black spot.
Real world issues that the council refuse to recognise!!
Shame they couldn’t have found some rate newts or dragonflies on the site in Gunville. Probably the only way to stop this development.
I hope all those that have posted on here have put their objections to the council.
Absolutely…….even though I knew I was banging my head against a wall.