Last Thursday VB reported disssatisfaction by Island architects and agents at the Isle of Wight council’s approach to the changes in planning policy.
The week before, Bill Murphy, head of planning had stated that “… if an application were to be submitted which effectively sub-divided a garden to create a separate plot there would be an ‘in principle’ policy objection to the application and the local planning authority would refuse it unless the developer could provide evidence that material considerations outweighed the policy objection.”
Claims refuted by council
A group of architects claim that the approach by the Isle of Wight council could cause a massive downturn in construction industry on the Island, by their “misguided, damaging and irresponsible implementation of this policy on the Island”.
Cllr George Brown, cabinet member with responsibility for planning, said: “We categorically refute these claims. The council has acted neither with undue haste, undemocratically and nor have we misinterpreted the change in policy.
“While we fully understand the frustration of those who previously stood to gain financially from schemes involving so-called ‘garden grabbing’, the council must act in accordance with the law and are taking a reasonable and practical approach within the scope of the new regulations.
“The changes – which were introduced to address widely reported public concern over ‘garden grabbing’ – took immediate effect and they did not require transitional arrangements nor consultation. Given the likely impact of the changes, the council has however written to architects and agents alerting them of the national changes.
“This letter made it clear we were NOT saying all applications would be refused. It explained we were, as required, urgently reviewing – on a case by case basis – all applications. While some would be refused, those that comply with the requirements of the changes would be recommended for approval.
“There is no comparison between the schemes covered in the new ‘garden grabbing’ regulations and those at Pan and East Cowes which are on sites dedicated for housing and which bring considerable wider benefits to the Island not least in terms of affordable housing, transport infrastructure and support for local industry.
“It is important to remember that under the planning process, in contested applications, officer recommendation to approve or refuse an application is made to the democratically elected members.
“It is a travesty to suggest that elected members will apply any blanket response to future planning applications. Equally, it would be nonsense to suppose it would make its decisions regardless of the law.”
Clarification of the term ‘in principle’
We asked the council for clarification on Bill Murphy’s case of the phrase ‘in principle’. This is the response we received
The onus is on the applicant to show there was a community benefit that would outweigh the policy objection. Each case would be taken on its merits.
