Revised planning application for bungalow ‘still totally inappropriate’ says Isle of Wight councillor

The local councillor says the site is still inappropriate for a residence, after the developer who has an enforcement order placed on him submits revised application

The bridleway and flora

Developers are trying again to build a bungalow in Lake after it was refused the first time.

However, the the local Isle of Wight Council member still views it as totally inappropriate for the site

Revised application
Applicants, W S Group, have submitted a revised application for a two-bedroom bungalow on vacant land between the Premier Inn and Broadlea Primary School’s school field in Lake.

The site sits near the recent Merrie Gardens residential development, and in documents, the planning agent said it would be the best use of the land, with a bungalow having less impact on the immediate area.

Earlier application refused
A previous application was refused in November last year for the same type of development on the site as Isle of Wight Council planning officers said it would result in an ‘unacceptable intensification’ for vehicle access on a public right of way, having a detrimental impact on safety.

In the refusal notice, officers said:

“The proposed dwelling, by virtue of its position, scale and design would be an inappropriate and incongruous addition to the site that would fail to enhance the character and context of the area.”

Brading: Still totally inappropriate for a residence
Responding to the current application, 20/01908/FUL, Cllr Paul Brading as ward representative, raised objections with the application, as he had done previously.

He said:

“This site is still totally inappropriate for a residence, being on the side of a public bridleway, a rough unmade road, which already causes big problems for the existing residents, and totally unsuitable any further developments.

“I notice the one change from the refused application is the planned widening of the first part of the bridleway. This area is green growth, which is habitat to animals and should be left alone.”

Brading: Far too close to the primary school
Cllr Brading also said the bungalow would be far too close to the primary school, as it would overlook the playing fields, impacting on the required school privacy.

Lake Parish Council and the Merrie Gardens Residents’ Association have also objected to the development, citing issues with the access, lack of environmental assessment and potential damage to the public footpath.

Enforcement order
Other land nearby, owned by the same people as the site of the bungalow, has recently been subject to a planning enforcement order, where the Planning Inspectorate said it must be returned to its original state.

To view the proposals or comment go to the council’s planning portal.

Comments will be accepted until Friday, 11th December.

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

Image: © Amanda Carey

Any views or opinions presented in the comments below must comply with the Commenting 'House Rules' and are solely those of the author and do not represent those of OnTheWight.

Leave your Reply

8 Comments on "Revised planning application for bungalow ‘still totally inappropriate’ says Isle of Wight councillor"

newest oldest most voted

Can’t see the problem. If they allowed the monstrosity on top of St Boniface downs then surely anything goes. Biosphere indeed!


Are you referring to the conversion of the existing radar station?


Yes. It is a monstrosity and has no place there.


Well that’s your opinion and you’re entitled to it.

But the case was made and successfully so AND it was an existing building, so *something* had to be done with it.

What would you have suggested was done with a building with existing planning that was obsolete and could be re-used?


So you are happy with a Gin Palace million quid holiday home blighting the landscape then? Nothing ‘had’ to be done with it at all. It could have been left as it was and the downs could have continued to be enjoyed by all without a house being added.


Someone owned the site.

They were entitled to realise the value of the site.

It wasn’t a greenfield site.

It already had services to it.

It’s a recycled building, so yes, I’m happy that trades were employed breathing new life into it to create an interesting dwelling for people to see for decades from now.

The only thing that blights it is that it’s been given permission as a holiday home only.

Steve Goodman

Also allowed: the nearby nature reserve land grab by greedy former councillor Neil Hilson.


I assume the huge amount of thumbs down missed the sarcasm. If not then Lord help us!