On Air Now Nick Osborne 10:00am - 3:00pm Tate Mcrae - Greedy Schedule

No 'Extraordinary Reasons' To Refuse It Sees Ryde's West Acre Plans Approved

Councillors stuck to their guns last night (Tuesday) in a vain attempt to find a reason to refuse the latest major Ryde housing development.

The 473-home Westridge Farm scheme was given conditional approval at the Isle of Wight Council’s planning committee meeting after councillors debated the ‘head versus heart’ decision.

However, attempting to go against officers’ recommendations, Cllrs Claire Critchison, Warren Drew, Chris Jarman and John Medland spent nearly an hour searching for a material planning condition that could be used to turn down

With the Isle of Wight Council failing to meet planning targets, the planning authority has to presume in favour of development unless there is something materially wrong with the application.

Planning officer Sarah Wilkinson said: “We are not looking for an extraordinary justification to approve the development we are looking for an extraordinary reason to refuse it.”

Some of the suggested reasons for refusal, and the advice given to them by planning officers, are listed below:

  • Human Rights — Cllr Jarman worried the rights of many were overlooking the rights of a few but planning officers said they had considered it in their reasoning but must be balanced against other planning conditions in the acceptability of the scheme.
  • Impact of traffic — the council cannot go against a national model used to determine the potential increase in traffic, which found it would not have an impact, unless they had evidence to suggest otherwise.
  • Standards of living and housing density — the number of dwellings per hectare is below the national standard with the green open space proposed larger than other developments approved.
  • Lack of sustainable features — the property specifications meet building regulations and there is nothing that requires developers, Captiva Homes, to go above them.
  • Environment — It is not a designated site recognised under the planning policy, so would be a ‘dangerous policy’ to reference.
  • Farming — Ms Wilkinson said: “Policies do no protect farming” and advised against referring to farming in any refusal.

Councillors tried to refer to the newest version of the Island Planning Strategy, which will go out to consultation at the end of July, but the council’s strategic planning officer Ollie Boulter said he would ‘completely advise against attaching weight to policies of an emerging local plan that is in such early stage of its infancy’.

He said: “I do not think refusal based on emerging policies would be sustained and I would even go so far to say it would be considered to be unreasonable behaviour in a planning appeal.”

Ultimately, Cllr Jarman proposed refusal on the basis it would lose area of pasture land and historic landscape which would have an impact on the heritage and culture of the area.

The vote fell with four aside but with Cllr Geoff Brodie having the deciding as vote as chair the application was refused.

Cllr Brodie said when councillors decided to go against officers recommendation they needed a reason that was sustainable and defensible should the decision be appealed to the Planning Inspectorate.

He said while planning officers were doing everything they could to find a reason that would hold up, despite significant warnings, councillors were ‘not helping them’ and it was a ‘desperate’ attempt.

Cllr Brodie said on the planning committee it is always about making a balanced judgement and while he may not take pleasure in the decision sometimes ‘you have to do the right thing’ by providing affordable housing for more Islanders, ‘the greater good’.

Reacting to the decision,

The Island's MP Bob Seely said:

“Respectfully, I disagree with the decision. We have all promised to oppose inappropriate large-scale, low-density, greenfield development - just like Westridge.
 
"I thank those councillors on all sides who tried to find grounds to object. There were reasons for refusal, although I accept that this could have been challenged on appeal.
 
“The claim that Westridge represents sustainable development is utterly laughable. It is just yet another car-dependent, low-density, greenfield development that will stress our infrastructure, our services and quality of life in the east of the Island. It is the definition of unsustainable.
 
“It is clear that we need to prepare the Island Plan as urgently as possible because we need to have more power to block developers and their agents doing lasting damage to the Island, against the wishes of communities.
 
“I want to reassure people that I will continue to do what I can to ensure that the housing that is built is for Islanders, on brownfield sites, in existing communities, in appropriate amounts. Sadly, I do not have the power to oppose these dreadful developments but rely on Councillors’ good sense. I will also fight as hard as I can to ensure that new national planning laws primarily serve communities’ needs, not developers'.
 
“We need housing, but in modest numbers, for Islanders, in towns and on brownfield sites. What we do not need is unsustainable, car-dependent, low density, urban sprawl around our towns, of which Westridge is a prime example, which does permanent and lasting harm to our environment.
 
“I will be talking to Councillors and Officers about potential next steps. We cannot normalise low density greenfield development.”

More from Isle of Wight News