Computer keyboard with shift key replaced by the words 'planning'

Planning rejection for new flats at former Sweet Charlie’s site highlights living condition issues

A proposal for three ‘affordable’ new flats at the site of a once popular Isle of Wight dessert shop has been refused.

Council planners turned down Mr K. Hang’s application for the construction of three self-contained homes at  21–22 High Street in Newport, a building that used to house Sweet Charlie’s which closed in 2023.

The three flats
The proposed flats have between one and three bedrooms, a kitchen and lounge area, a bathroom and a hallway.

Plans also include an en-suite bathroom in two of the units.

One of the flats would be installed on the building’s first floor which currently lies empty, with the others in other parts of the building.

Noise from commercial activity
In an email to County Hall’s planning department last month, the environmental health officer said,

“Considering the applicant has not satisfactorily demonstrated any potential occupiers would be satisfactorily protected from external commercial noise and that an acceptable level of amenity can be achieved, I must advise of my objection.”

Refusal
Among the council’s objections to the development, it states

“The proposed development would result in substandard residential units and poorly arranged accommodation for reason that they would lack sufficient amenity space and be subject to noise and disturbance from adjacent licensed premises and especially late-night entertainment venues, which would result in poor living conditions for the occupants.”

Affordable residential units
Statements submitted as part of Mr Hang’s application said,

“This proposal will provide three additional affordable residential units. The proposal will create those additional dwellings without disturbing the adjoining properties.

“The site is located within the High Street and will have the benefit of convenient shopping. Public transport is directly adjacent giving an alternative to the use of a motor vehicle.

“This proposal will aid the Island in meeting the stipulated housing target as set out in the Island Plan.”

Support from local council
A spokesperson for Newport and Carisbrooke Community Council (NCCC) previously said,

“We note that it is a brownfield site and therefore support redevelopment as it will have no impact on loss of greenspaces or wildlife habitats.

“NCCC supports the mixed use of existing properties in the centre of town and encourage additional much needed housing.

“No parking provision is proposed or able to be proposed in this application, but we note that it is compliant with the recommendations of Island Roads.

“The design and appearance of the three proposed units seems to be in keeping with the existing frontages, although NCCC are concerned that the layout of the units – with bedrooms located on the busy street – could be improved.

“NCCC wish to support this application for additional housing but raise concerns about the impact on the quality of life for future residents due to the location in a busy nightlife area and are concerned about the layout of the units.”


This article is from the BBC’s LDRS (Local Democracy Reporter Service) scheme, which News OnTheWight is taking part in. Some alterations and additions may have been made by OnTheWight. Ed

Advertisement
Subscribe
Email updates?
2 Comments
oldest
newest most voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
GarageElfinIOW
11, December 2023 2:47 pm

Whilst I accept development can cause issues with flooding there are some fundamentals that need addressing. Water moves top the lowest point and in some case takes with it whatever is in the way. A lot of the islands flooding is simply due to poor drainage that is to say that water is not collected and funnelled from the higher ground to the lower ground. It has… Read more »

RootDown'92
11, December 2023 3:36 pm

Its very evident that the extremes of weather that have been predicted for decades are starting to arrive on our shores. Climate change was always going to create this situation and we must now look at the future with a sense of dread and face the fact that our financial and human resource needs to be directed in a ‘war effort’ to mitigate and prepare. Meanwhile we… Read more »

Angela Hewitt
Reply to  RootDown'92
12, December 2023 7:37 am

Who exactly is using this fossil fuel?

Snowwolf1
Reply to  Angela Hewitt
12, December 2023 10:45 am

Indirectly everyone, even the suppliers of gas and electricity.

peterspink10
11, December 2023 5:51 pm

I agree with Councillor Lilley, although I think the moratorium should be in respect of development within 1 mile of the entire coastline of the Island. I also support delaying the Draft Island Planning Strategy. It is ‘crazy’ to determine where we are going to build houses for the next 15 years without taking into account recent events. Peter Spink.

ThomasC
Reply to  peterspink10
11, December 2023 6:49 pm

So keen to keep that complete set of local policies off the table, aren’t you, Peter? So keen to keep enabling developers to build wherever they fancy, based on National Policy that enables them to claim ‘local need’, rather than allowing the IWC to put policies in place to protect the Island. It’s almost as if your actions are carefully designed to allow barely-controlled development to continue,… Read more »

peterspink10
Reply to  ThomasC
11, December 2023 9:03 pm

I know that you can see me Thomas C .
Unlike you I am happy to give my name rather than hide behind a pseudonym.
Tell me who you are and then I will answer your nonsensical comments. Peter Spink

ThomasC
Reply to  peterspink10
16, January 2024 8:11 pm

‘ThomasC’ is hardly a pseudonym, except to the terminally unimaginative and here you are. Thanks for your previous comment though – it means a lot to me and you.

Angela Hewitt
Reply to  ThomasC
12, December 2023 7:39 am

So Thomas C, you think the Island will still be here in 100 yrs time if climate change carries on the way it is

elemental
Reply to  Angela Hewitt
12, December 2023 11:22 am

It’s more a question of whether IOW would still be inhabited, I feel.

Rhos yr Alarch
11, December 2023 9:13 pm

Agreed; but ill-concealed upstream developments also need a re-think, in the catchment areas of watercourses draining down to the coast…

manfredmann
12, December 2023 1:57 am

Councillor Lilley is absolutely right, so is Councillor Spink. This is not a political issue this is something that will have an impact on everyone regardless of political persuasion or wealth. “Extreme” weather events are becoming normal. We need to look very hard at where houses are built. It is absolute folly to continue to earmark green field sites for development. Green fields act as natural flood… Read more »

Angela Hewitt
12, December 2023 7:35 am

I have noticed that when there have been road improvements “resurfacing” the height of these roads have been significantly increased. Outiside my own home is a clascic example. Doesn’t this create dams everywhere?. Infact don’t housing developments create dams. Drainage MUST now be a significant part of every planning application including road improvements – although island roads doesn’t need planning permission for all the potential damage it’s… Read more »

chippy2
Reply to  Angela Hewitt
12, December 2023 6:08 pm

i agree that drainage should feature in planning applications. In my experience it is already included. When we extended our house nearly 20 yrs ago we were not allowed to discharge roof or driveway water into the sewer. I would be one of the last to make excuses for Southern Water but many of the older properties in our village do just that with the result that… Read more »

elemental
12, December 2023 11:37 am

The only housing genuinely needed IOW, are adequate rental properties, built & managed by local Councils, to help people transition people from the always insecure, often unsafe & inevitably overpriced, properties in the unregulated private renting racket. With less private tenancies required, that property would be freed up for those able & willing to purchase. We do not need newbuild detached houses on sterile estates & until… Read more »

ovener
12, December 2023 12:23 pm

£250,000,000 spent so far on sending no-one to Rwanda. £93,000,000 cut in financial support for the Island since 2015 (supported by Seely) We desperately need homes and infrastructure. We need more NHS dentists, GPs and hospital capacity Yet our Tory MP is only concerned with disciplining a black female member of the royal Family. Where is the Island Deal Bob? I’ll be voting Labour next time. At… Read more »

chas3
13, December 2023 9:08 am

Climate change has been a continuous process for Millions of Years with the Island , no matter what we try to do we can’t stop it , may as well ban Volcanoe Eruptions ! . This is a special place and building more Houses will make things worse……how long before the Holiday Homes fall into the sea at Atherfield Bay ? Very sad for all those affected… Read more »

reCaptcha Error: grecaptcha is not defined