Some of the residents of Brading got in touch with VentnorBlog a while back and asked for VB to go along to some of the Brading Town Council meetings (get in touch if you’d like the same).
The latest was two weeks ago where we took notes live at the meeting. Following the summary article we published this morning, below are the full notes. We endeavoured to report as accurately as possible. Advance apologies for not knowing all the names of town councillors.
7pm – we’re starting
The recording of the meeting by VB has been accepted
All Brading TC (BTC) can do is give a recommendation.
There are five separate planning applications.
Mayor to ask Cllr Sullivan (head of BTC planning committee) to outline what’s being discussed to night.
Declaration of interests – Cllr Toogood (has left)
Cllr Sullivan: 14 units
Open to public
Public Q: There used to be a garage there selling petrol. Was the tank taken out?
Cllr S: This will be passed on to planning.
Q2: Auction houses need huge amounts of storage – vans dropping off + collecting. Never seen one in a cul-de-sac
Object to the use of the word heritage in planning app.
Cllr S: I think you’re right. Makes it sound better.
Mayor: Surprised that he said Heritage Centre to the CP
Q3: BTC should ask for a s106 to be attached – to ensure commitments are carried out.
Q4: Are the words ‘phase one’ missing from the planning app? He won’t stop at 14 houses.
Cllr S: It’s likely that there will be more, but we’re considering these applications tonight.
Q 5: Disturbed that the applicant is constantly referring to the support of BTC. Not surprised, BTC have mentioned support in past meetings like 26 Nov. 11 Dec – letter from BTC clerk – “we’re engaged in a business plan”. We need an explanation.
Mayor: We’ve had discussions with lots of people. We’re exploring, but there’s no commitment.
Q: Is there a business plan?
Town Clerk: No. It was early thinking, but not developed. What the developer may think is not squared with what we’ve committed.
Mayor: It would be fool-hard for the TC to do anything without the full backing of the Town.
Mayor: Think we should say that we have no intention of doing anything with that building/heritage centre without the full backing of the town.
Q: The planning app says it is. This could sway the planning consideration. Can it be removed from the planning statement? As it’s not true.
Cllr S: it has been used through out the document.
Q: Mr Ball cannot operate a business at a loss, but there are funds available to him. The Island is based on tourism, so this should continue.
Mayor: Reference to Heritage Centre cannot be removed, but we can object to it.
Q: We cannot leave the building rotting, but it shouldn’t be housing. It should provide employment.
Mayor: IWC had a condition that it should have been running for 2 years, but somehow this was removed.
Q: (Sue): Design statement says it was an non-viable business, because of cut in school trips – it then says schools would be of interests to school parties?
Cllr S: Non educational trips (wax works) are being cut, but Heritage Centre could be viewed as educational (although Heritage C isn’t guaranteed)
Q: Can BTC take it over?
Mayor: That is why we expressed an interest.
(Waxworks sign is still there)
Q: The whole of this scheme is ridiculous because access is terrible.
Cllr S: There was access to waxworks. Access statement say 60,000 visitors a year.
Mayor: A company in Ryde (Opus) gives estimates of previous use 20-40 vehicle movement per hour – when developed 11.
Q: When the waxworks ran, very few people use the carpark.
Q: Unless you look at the ins/outs at Bugle car park, you can’t properly gage
Q: Survey has been carried out Quay Lane – 20 vehicle/ hour even at 7am
Q: Does a change from Waxworks to Heritage Museum need planning permission? Or is it a red herring
Mayor: By bringing BTC into this he’s trying to fool you that we’re involved – and it appears that he’s been successful.
Q: Auction house coming and going will generate lots of extra noise. Is there even another need for auction house on the Island – the other two and joined together.
Mayor: We’ve said it was an area for development, but didn’t specify what it was for. Without some development for Brading, we could lose the school.
Another councillor: I run a post office and things are very hard.
Q: Coming back to the planning app – Mr Ball keeps referring to the support of the BTC. It’s a false statement.
Cllr S: We have time to say our points to the planning committee.
Q: There is a playground in the plan – will it be cut off from the Bugle pub? Will he start to run down the Bugle as well – that’s a tourist attraction.
Q: The land registry says the playground is part of the waxworks
Q: Some of these are almost three stories high. Out of character, over looking, loss of light.
-move to discuss houses
Cllr S: Some of the proposed houses are a reasonable size. We should be building ‘lifetime homes’ – it’s a recommendation, but it will become a requirements.
They should also be sustainable build too.
4ft wide toilet – not wheelchair accessible.
The proposed en-suite bathrooms in the four bed houses are very, very small.
Very steep roofs.
Kitchens are 9ft sq – not able to eat in there.
Parking spaces – are literally 1 car – not room to open door.
There’s no clear area where a car would turn around
Very, very badly thought out, badly organised site.
13-14 house is 12 ft wide!
Q: Also most households have two cars.
Q: Duncan Bannatyne is doing a TV show helping town in coastal areas – could we ask/help us what we could do with it?
Q: I called English Heritage about listed buildings and they said they wouldn’t step in until the building was falling down.
Dep TC: IWC can insist that it’s kept in order
Cllr S: Garages are listed as garage/car park – they’re not. They just garages
Q: it’s highly possible that these houses will be second homes – not providing any support to the town
Cllr S: Developer has said 14 homes, poss because he thinks under 15 he won’t have to provide social housing. But anything over 10 house, he’ll have to provide 35% social housing.
Q: We’ve never discussed how much Mr Ball wants for the whole site – so we can run it as a CIC.
Cllr S: It’s not for sale.
Q: Would the road be private or public?
Cllr S: It doesn’t say on the plans
Mayor: BTC been accused of being in cahoots with Mr Ball, so I don’t want to be accused to halting the discussion
Q: I think the area is a registered flood plain
Q: There should be no three story buildings – ruin the roof lines among other reasons
(Applause for letter just read out)
Q: The playground appears in the doc to be new, provided to the town – but it already exists.
The developer owns the Bugle pub, so the fear is that he’ll run it down and replace it with more, yet undisclosed, housing development.
Q: Proposed roof height will ruin the look of the town
Q: Planning app says the new development would output less waste water than that is there already.
Mayor: I personally don’t like what’s proposed – but, I’m also aware that we cannot remain static. The town will slowly die, losing its facilities – doctors, schools, etc.
I suggest that we don’t support this development, but we do support some development.
Another female councillor: too many dwellings. No reference to workshops which had been mentioned before.
Not convinced at job opening for the area. Auction – very specialist skills.
We need an attraction to bring in families.
Too many houses will change the town.
I don’t believe that houses need to be built all over the place.
More thought needs to go into such an important decision.
I think this is a wrong decision
(Lots of applause)
Cllr S: I believe this is in line with what we want for Brading – but there are about 40 things that need to be changed
Cllr Edward: If everyone here make individual comment by the 14th. I’m worried about damage to medieval wall. There will have to be development in Brading. We all need to be involved with this.
Cllr Gardiner: I’m not going to support this, but some development is needed. The whole town said it wanted affordable housing.
Cllr Morris: We can’t accept this, but we must look at it.
Dep TC: If people are going to object, they have to use valid planning reasons.
In particular look at PP 1 + 3 + 4 + 5 + code for sustainable home
Mayor: Suggest that we reject what’s presented here, we still need development
While not objecting to appropriate development in principle on this site ….
Vote: Everyone in favour of rejecting it (with support of people in the meeting)