Frosty Reception For Conservation Area Plans In Niton

Thanks to Retired Hack for this report from Monday night’s Niton parish meeting. In his own words. Ed

Frosty windowIsle of Wight Council plans to create a Conservation Area (CA) in parts of Niton have been given a frosty reception by villagers.

Formal consultation on the scheme won’t begin until the New Year, but this week the Council sent an officer to a parish council meeting to extol the virtues of CAs.

The idea is to preserve the character of the built environment, but this is done by making householders apply for planning permission for things everyone else is allowed to get on with without interference.

Examples are replacing doors and windows – wood is good, uPVC less so – making hard-standings for cars, work on fences, hedges and trees, putting up satellite dishes, changing exterior paint colours, and any kind of demolition.

“Houses are there to be lived in, not looked at”
One Nitonite at the meeting said: “I think the poor lady turned up thinking she was doing us a favour, but the reaction was fairly uniformly negative. The general feeling was that houses are there to be lived in, not looked at, and in the end all these extra restrictions are going to cost money.

“People put in uPVC windows because they’re the most cost-effective way of keeping the weather out and fuel bills down. CAs have to be exempted from the insulation rules under Building Regs because single-glazed wooden windows are so inefficient.”

CAs help IWC meet Government targets
The Niton resident went on, “And we had to tell her that in Niton, we need satellite dishes to get DAB radio because there’s no normal signal.”

“Some of us have tried hard in the past to get the IW planning people to enforce the present rules, and frankly it’s been a bad joke. Now they want to take a lot more powers.

“Apparently the Council is supposed to meet Government targets in setting up these schemes – we get points, explained the lady – but what’s the point on coming to a place like Niton and trying to micro-manage the way we live?”

Image: Uberculture under CC BY 2.0

Advertisement
Subscribe
Email updates?
7 Comments
oldest
newest most voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
keith hibdige
5, July 2011 2:47 pm

sad to hear of events like these,but,as stated health and safety plus supervision issues come to mind.

Adam
5, July 2011 2:54 pm

Looking at the planning decision and comments online, I believe this is a justified decision. Possibly the land owners could reapply in the future, but with a slightly altered layout, ie. the play area nearer the pub, maybe use it as an opportunity to remodel the car park and facilities

Sandown Sally
5, July 2011 3:14 pm

I’m always suprised how many older people object to the innocent sound of children playing. How sad.

To my sentimental ears, the sound of children playing is one of the best in the world.

People in Arreton have a track record for disliking all noise, remember the motorcross?

Steve The YAK
5, July 2011 3:21 pm

The right decision has been made. If I lived there the playground would not be a problem. But the coaches would! Coach drivers and operators should not be allowed to leave the coaches engines ‘ticking over’ in order for the air conditioning to work. All of us have experienced the diesel exhaust fumes ‘stinking us out’ as we wait for the ferry in our cars. It serves… Read more »

Steve The YAK
Reply to  Steve The YAK
5, July 2011 3:30 pm

V.B. Your story is slightly biased and presented with an unfair summary of facts. This was in order to get angry responces from the likes of Sandown Sally who obviously did not read the reasons for the rejected planning application, before submitting her comment. Please don’t misunderstand me though..I love your work.

Sally Perry
Admin
Reply to  Steve The YAK
5, July 2011 5:07 pm

I have re-read the article and can’t see where the unfair summary of the facts are. We have laid out the sequence of events, then stated that some parents were unhappy about it and have also provided the reasons why there were objections from neighbours (along with a link for further detail). I’m struggling to see how that could be viewed as being unfair??? Thanks for the… Read more »

kat collins
5, July 2011 3:32 pm

In years gone by when childrens activities were not available in villages the community would pull together,the local post office was where you might also be able to buy tea and cake aswell as a stamp,if there wasnt a hall then a local resident may give over their front room for Scouts or Guides meeting,and the local pub offering a childrens play area for the village children… Read more »

Gemma Lawrence
5, July 2011 3:39 pm

Just to clarify the playground has been objected but in it’s place will be the coach park to enable another 3 coaches. I for one would rather have a playground at the back of my garden then having coaches with their engines on.

Nimby
5, July 2011 4:11 pm

The Island Nimbys strike again. There aren’t many play areas on the Island & to lose one is a real shame for the local area. I’m afraid I point the finger at some of the old generation, the same ones who will complain when bored kids start causing trouble. I heard recently the new playarea in Shorwell is under threat & equipment may be removed, other play… Read more »

Cath
Reply to  Nimby
5, July 2011 6:21 pm

Sad to lose a kids playground but I’d argue the point that ‘There aren’t many play areas on the Island’. Certainly in the east of the Island there’s plenty to choose from – I can name 5 or 6 within easy reach of where we live, plus of course whole areas of the Island (the beaches for instance) are playgrounds for children. Still sorry to see it… Read more »

Gemma Lawrence
5, July 2011 4:42 pm

The reason this has upset so many people at the school is they feel cheated as no one was made aware of these decisions until it was too late. According to planning the public order was placed last year back in July 2010, No one from the school was informed no one as of yet have claimed to see the notice regarding the removal of the playground… Read more »

School parent
5, July 2011 5:52 pm

Very sad that once again children are not allowed to play in outdoor spaces. We often use the car park at arreton barns to stop congestion at School lane and walk past the duck pond to and from school. The children really enjoy a 10 minute play in the playground before heading home. I can not understand the rejections to the playground. Maybe the IOW council should… Read more »

Caragh
5, July 2011 7:25 pm

I find the fact that anyone can call the noise of children playing ‘incessant’ sad, if you live in a tourist area by a school a tourist ground like the barns filled with coaches daily and nightly live music and choose to live there I find it very sad you can feel the need to complain about a squeaking swing or children playing really above everything else… Read more »

fairypants
5, July 2011 7:26 pm

i use that park and always supervise my own child and i dont think i have ever seen any children that do not have a parent or carer looking after them. will the complainers start objecting to the overexcited old ladies who wander in and out of the lavender shop chatting loudly about their purchases? i doubt it, but i would be interested in the councils response… Read more »

Gemma Lawrence
5, July 2011 9:19 pm
John
5, July 2011 9:34 pm

Not a good move for the physical health of the children and now for the villagers who have more chance of being knocked down by a coach and a great deal more chance of being regularly fumigated by their unhealthy particulate diesel fumes. Sometimes, I get the impression that the planning office just make these orders for demolition out of spite and to teach people a lesson,… Read more »

James P
Reply to  John
6, July 2011 3:34 pm

“a genuine mistake about planning permission” Oh yeah? If Andy Gibbs, who is a developer among other things, really doesn’t know about planning regulations by now, he shouldn’t be running a chain of pubs! The issue here is not the removal of a play area for school children – they have only been using it for a few months as a side-effect of the parking relief offered… Read more »

wabbit
Reply to  James P
6, July 2011 4:12 pm

If its not legal its not legal (simples)
If I choose to drive at 40 mph in a 30 mph zone I expect to be caught one day.They have been caught.

Mike Judge
Reply to  James P
6, July 2011 4:33 pm

Blimey, are you always this curmudgeonly? I wouldn’t want to live near you with noisy children.

wabbit
Reply to  Mike Judge
6, July 2011 4:58 pm

I think James P should throw a few cans of Special Brew over the fence every night,let the little buggers get drunk,pee there pants and let them sleep outside in pools of vomit.

James P
Reply to  Mike Judge
6, July 2011 9:10 pm

Always. Ask my girlfriend. :-)

Gemma Lawrence
Reply to  James P
6, July 2011 9:13 pm

I find the comment about Andrew Gibbs’s (tat) as you so nicely put it a tad offensive, it comes across on more then one occasion that this situation is a personal one which is a real shame, Arreton barns provide’s entertainment for tourist and islanders and also children or it did. He should of applied for planning permission and he should of gone through the correct procedure… Read more »

James P
Reply to  Gemma Lawrence
6, July 2011 10:36 pm

If you think the word ‘tat’ is ill-chosen, I suggest you come and look at the old gypsy caravan and the threshing machine in the car park, not to mention the disintegrating cider barrels! The playground has been there for two years, but the school children have only been using it since parents were encouraged to use the car park. I don’t think many parents walked their… Read more »

James P
Reply to  Gemma Lawrence
6, July 2011 10:45 pm

“business is business I guess” Indeed. If Mr Gibbs was really interested in providing amenities for the local children, he would relocate it (after consulting the authorities and maybe even the residents) but apparently it doesn’t even get used very much, because according to the appeal document (para 3.6) “the wealth of distractions for children on [the] site results in a lower level of sustained use than… Read more »

princess
Reply to  James P
6, July 2011 9:45 pm

drunk youngsters hanging about the play park at night. get serious. its not exactly a hot spot for teenagers , they would have a bit of a trek just to hang around the swings of arreton. methinks you are making things up just to support your own ridiculous whinge.

James P
Reply to  princess
6, July 2011 10:29 pm

Of course, I dreamed the whole thing and the tins were imaginary…

It didn’t happen often, I grant you, and they weren’t usually drunk, but they were using the playground at night, which we had been assured was not feasible. If it had been in view of the pub (as it was supposed to be for supervisory reasons) then the problem wouldn’t have occurred.

pink
Reply to  James P
7, July 2011 7:12 am

And now it didnt happen often? Why all the fuss then? This is such a personal vendetta against the owner of the barns. Diddums.

robin
6, July 2011 10:16 pm

personally i would like him to build more so called tat shops on his premises. it keeps the the grey brigade entertained and contained in one area . hopefully a shop selling isle of wight whistles can be opened just by james p garden.

James P
Reply to  robin
6, July 2011 10:48 pm

“isle of wight whistles”

I doubt we could hear them over the car alarms…

Steve The YAK
Reply to  James P
7, July 2011 12:26 am

I like James P. He’s a man of intelligence with a sense of humour. I think that most of you are misguided and that Andrew Gibbs is the villain of the peace! …read the facts again, and try to work out who is telling the truth and who is ‘inventing’ the truth.

pink
Reply to  Steve The YAK
7, July 2011 7:16 am

Hmm, got his friend to write this did he?

James P
Reply to  pink
7, July 2011 7:59 am

No.

Gemma Lawrence
Reply to  Steve The YAK
7, July 2011 1:56 pm

Why is Andrew the villian???? I see a man who put’s on loads of local events for Arreton and the community such as the sweetcorn faye and the firework displays and not to mention the Christmas functions, He and his wife also does a hell of a lot for charity on the Island, most recently the auction at the Bargemans rest which raised a lot of money… Read more »

wabbit
Reply to  Gemma Lawrence
7, July 2011 2:09 pm

He is not really a villian,he has just broken the law by not getting the planning permission.

James P
7, July 2011 7:57 am

Thank you, Steve. I have nothing against Mr Gibbs, personally (I hardly know him) but if someone erected a tower next to your boundary and overlooking your garden, without permission, and then refused to remove it for two years, you might feel a bit miffed. I’m sorry the school children are now denied a play area, but that wouldn’t be the case if it were simply moved,… Read more »

wabbit
Reply to  James P
7, July 2011 8:27 am

Everyone has the right to respect for his private and family life,his home and his correspondence.
Article 8 Human Rights Act 1998.

Mum
Reply to  wabbit
7, July 2011 1:49 pm

Firstly, the playground is not illuminated therefore unless the “youth!” are of the rabbit variety, I struggle to see how they can see the play equipment at night to use. (Who are these “Arreton Youths” anyway?). If you look at the photographs on line you will clearly see there is no opportunity for children to look into residents gardens. In fact the photos were taken with an… Read more »

wabbit
Reply to  Mum
7, July 2011 3:00 pm

So you do not support British Law.The bottom line is the playground was built without planning permission,thus breaking a civil law.

Gemma Lawrence
Reply to  wabbit
7, July 2011 3:21 pm

So when Andrew puts in a new application for the playground that’s not near your property is that the end of the complaints to Arreton barns???? As like I stated before there have been forwarded complaints not just regarding the play area??? So will this be the end of it all????

James P
Reply to  wabbit
8, July 2011 12:16 pm

“So when Andrew puts in a new application for the playground that’s not near your property..” No objection from me, as I’ve already said. Putting in the application first would be a novelty, though – much of the development next door (e.g. the museum) was done first and permission applied for retrospectively. The 6m high pirate ship mast that has gone up recently hasn’t got it either,… Read more »

kaka
Reply to  James P
7, July 2011 3:43 pm

so why invent all the other rubbish if your only problem was the tower?

wabbit
Reply to  kaka
7, July 2011 4:29 pm

Law is the real issue.Why have a police force or a prison system when you can break the laws willy nilly on the Island.It did not have planning permission SIMPLES.

Ann W
Reply to  kaka
7, July 2011 8:43 pm

“why invent all the other rubbish”

I haven’t invented anything.

James P
Reply to  Ann W
7, July 2011 8:46 pm

And neither have I!

tea drinker
7, July 2011 1:39 pm

Speaking as a parent whose children regularly use the playground we have always been grateful to both the local reisdents and the barns. Drop off and pick up time are usually hectic due to the lack of parking at the school and a little understanding has gone a long way. I think much of the dismay from the parents arises from the fact that at no time… Read more »

Steve The YAK
Reply to  tea drinker
7, July 2011 2:20 pm

Arreton Barns is a fantastic place. I use it a lot, and I nearly always take my visitors there for a meal and/or a drink. I love walking around the ‘tat’ ( I got loads of tat myself!)and the pond area and visiting the church inside and out) I regularly use the White Lion as well (it’s a great pub). I think that Andrew Gibbs has done… Read more »

Mum
7, July 2011 4:35 pm

Of course I support British Law. It’s the ridiculous comments about squeaky swings, incessant noise from children laughing and the incomprehensible suggestion that children can see into the neighbouring property that make me cross. The neighbour has completely fabricated the truth and told out and out lies. It was only removed because some numpty in Planning took on board the crazy complaint made by the neighbour.

wabbit
Reply to  Mum
7, July 2011 5:05 pm

The numpty is one who built it without planning!If it was your child that fell off the swing broke its neck and had to be in a wheelchair for the rest of its life.You then took legal action to be told the play area did not have planning permission.Whey hey big compo pay out after you have spent 200k and the case would take 4-8 years to… Read more »

Gemma Lawrence
7, July 2011 5:40 pm

That is true I guess….but why then when he did go down the correct route of applying for planning did the appeal get thrown out????? I have read the minutes from the parish meetings and the objections that were placed before the appeal where used again against the final decision….thus seeming very unfair. Not one person from the school was given the opportunity to have their say… Read more »

Mum
7, July 2011 7:03 pm

I go back to the [part of comment removed by moderator] who live in the properties. Don’t hide now behind planning permission etc people. [part of comment removed by moderator] As “wabbit” says SIMPLES (although I think the grammar needs correcting!)

James P
Reply to  Mum
7, July 2011 8:50 pm

Liars, eh? My solicitor will be in touch shortly…

Arthur Grabbit
Reply to  Mum
7, July 2011 8:52 pm

My esteemed client, Mr P, demands satisfaction. Shall we say blunderbusses at dawn?

wabbit
Reply to  Mum
8, July 2011 6:59 am

Grammar,an optional extra when edjakated on the Island.

Ann W
7, July 2011 8:37 pm

May I just remind the parents on here that it was the local residents and the parish council who fought to keep the school open when the IW council wanted to close it three years ago…

http://tinyurl.com/2zsabz

Mum
Reply to  Ann W
7, July 2011 8:43 pm

And? off on a tangent…

Ann W
Reply to  Mum
7, July 2011 8:48 pm

Because you wouldn’t have a school if a huge collective effort by the locals, governors and parish council hadn’t prevented its closure!

Mum
Reply to  Ann W
7, July 2011 9:04 pm

Don’t really think that’s the issue for discussion here but thanks anyway.

Gemma Lawrence
Reply to  Ann W
8, July 2011 8:11 am

Ann w I really admire this as Arreton is an amazing school and a worthy one at that and it humbles me knowing the community, parents,teachers,and residents pulled together to make their voices heard, as a mum I am proud of the school to which my child attends and could not ask for anymore out of a school. It still begs the question that if you are… Read more »

Sailor Sam
7, July 2011 9:33 pm

Mmm, just stumbled across this. I wonder how long James P has lived next to the attraction? I visit the place regularly (at least once a week) and have never seen any ‘youths’ drinking from tins or ‘playing’ on the play equipment which I would add, was a wooden construction which in my opinion blended in well with the surroundings. I was certianly happy for my 7… Read more »

James P
Reply to  Sailor Sam
7, July 2011 10:01 pm

“I wonder how long James P has lived next to the attraction?”

11 years. Before the original Barn burned down.

Tim S
7, July 2011 9:51 pm

It’s sad and worrying but perhaps not suprising to read the ‘anti’ comments here. In a world full of wars and violence, economic depression and more,with people with real problems to complain about, why are people complaining about a children’s playground. You should take a deep breath and long hard look and listen to yourselves. The sound of a few young children innocently enjoying themselves is one… Read more »

fairypants
Reply to  Tim S
7, July 2011 10:22 pm

well said. but i think these complainers are inside their own little bubbles of self. me, me, me, me.

Steve The YAK
Reply to  fairypants
8, July 2011 12:35 am

Blunderbuses at dawn! Oh, no! Surely we’ll need three more parking spaces for them? Oh well, we’ve got rid of the playground, but at least we’ll have more of the ‘Grey Pound’!

Steve The YAK
Reply to  Steve The YAK
8, July 2011 12:39 am

Steve The YAK, you’re nothing but a (part of the comment removed by moderator) and I think that you should (part of the comment removed by moderator) !!

James P
Reply to  Steve The YAK
8, July 2011 9:49 am

I think you might be on to something there, Steve… A.Gibbs (for it is he): We need to attract more visitors, more coachloads of retired people – they come out of season and spend money! Lackey: Wazzat, boss? I can’t hear you over the car alarms and Isle of Wight whistles you ordered. AG: I said we need to get more old people – we need a… Read more »

dennis
Reply to  James P
8, July 2011 7:04 pm

yep, from this comment it is really showing that you just have an issue with everything Andrew does.

Arthur Grabbit
Reply to  James P
9, July 2011 12:40 am

Dennis – I was trying to lighten the tone! Now I know how comics at the Glasgow Empire felt…

http://tinyurl.com/627995b

James P
Reply to  James P
9, July 2011 8:04 pm

Sorry Dennis – Uncle Arthur’s been babysitting, and I didn’t realise he was still logged in. God knows what else he’s been looking at…

Gemma Lawrence
8, July 2011 7:28 am

Oh dear, once again like all these situations it has become personal Steve the yak comments been removed John p claiming to involve his solicitor it’s like children in a playground…..hmm

Arthur Grabbit
Reply to  Gemma Lawrence
8, July 2011 8:13 am

I think Sal and Simon got planning permission for this one. And who’s John P? :-)

Sally Perry
Admin
Reply to  Gemma Lawrence
8, July 2011 8:56 am

We have not removed part of Steve The Yak’s comments, he did it himself. He was trying to be humourous I think ;-)

Gemma Lawrence
Reply to  Sally Perry
8, July 2011 9:09 am

Oh lol…are we allowed to have one and giggle ever so slightly as don’t want to offend anyone or get in trouble with a solicitor :p

Sally Perry
Admin
Reply to  Gemma Lawrence
8, July 2011 9:12 am

We all love a laugh (especially on a grey wet day like today), it’s the personal insults that get moderated out.

Arthur Grabbit
Reply to  Gemma Lawrence
8, July 2011 12:21 pm

“don’t want to offend anyone or get in trouble with a solicitor”

That’s a pity – I need the work. There must be someone I can sue.. :-(

O. Verner
8, July 2011 9:03 am

Absolute disgrace…we see again a complete lack of understanding of tourist needs by a mainland based firm who turn this down…however the same firm let the ‘rape’ of Cowes seafront continue to provide 2nd homes for DFT’s…shocking,truly shocking!

James P
Reply to  O. Verner
8, July 2011 9:35 am

Er, wrong thread?

Steve The YAK
Reply to  O. Verner
8, July 2011 9:49 am

Well, I’ve had a cup of tea with my Nan, and I’ve done my breathing exercises, so here goes:- Well done V.B. (Simon and Sally) this is such a good site, and I love the responses, however, I don’t like the willful nastiness generated by people who don’t really have an axe to grind — they’re just nasty people. That’s why my comments are either ‘just my… Read more »

James P
8, July 2011 10:02 am

Thanks, Steve – I quite agree. Your comments help to lighten the debate, but some people are so eager to say their piece that they don’t appear to read what they’re replying to!

Not all seem to understand the TIC comments, either – perhaps we should use smileys more.. :-)

reCaptcha Error: grecaptcha is not defined