Date: 7th July 2006
Released by: ANDREW TURNER

Island MP Andrew Turner has called for “greener housing” in plans submitted for East Cowes, and condemned building proposals as showing “continued bias towards old-style greenfield development.”

Responding to recommendations to the Development Control sub-Committee, which will consider major housing applications for the town tomorrow, he said,

“These two massive proposals will affect the Island for generations to come. We badly need greener policies which put housing near to facilities, strengthen our town centres, reduce the need for unnecessary travel, and conserve energy and water, the historic environment and public views.

“These plans do not get sufficiently close to those objectives to be accepted without major amendment, and that approach should be adopted for the Pan extension too.”

Mr Turner went on to criticize the two sets of plans. He called for Barratts’ application to be rejected:

“Barratts’ proposal is the worst kind of identikit estate built on a green-field site, which I thought the council, the Government, and the house-building industry had abandoned long ago in favour of brownfield development. It should be turned down.

“I accept that the site was inserted in the Unitary Development Plan by the old Lib-Dem controlled council in the late 1990s, but ideas about development have moved on a long way since then. The Island Plan says the ‘key issues for East Cowes include encouraging new development to use brownfield sites’ – in other words it is no longer considered acceptable to concrete over green fields when brown-field sites are available.

“At very least any development of these green field sites should

• be prevented until brownfield land is used up, otherwise developers will use the easy sites and leave hollowed out town centres;
• give priority to Islanders when marketing housing,
• be required to have no visual impact on the Osborne Estate or its approaches, and
• achieve a zero environmental footprint.”

Referring to SEEDA’s development, Mr Turner added:

“SEEDA’s proposals have benefited from much wider public consultation and a better understanding of what the Island, and in particular the townsfolk of East Cowes, want. The regeneration of East Cowes is long overdue and some of the proposals will be welcome.

“But there are still some shortcomings on which I hope the Committee will correct:

• Proposals to demolish Seaholme and Columbine Yard – buildings of ‘historic importance’ – should be thrown out, as having ‘adverse impact’ on the town;
• St James’s Church will be adversely affected by the new road – both it and the stone wall alongside Church Path should be protected;
• There is insufficient space for ferry-marshalling. This can only drive traffic back onto the streets of East Cowes and re-open demand for trailer parks on green-field sites;
• The maximum proposed heights of buildings do not respect the existing townscape;
• Existing public slipways should be retained, and informal moorings not displaced by land reclamation.

He concluded,

“This housing is sufficiently near town centre facilities not to generate unnecessary travel, but other ‘zero-footprint’ should be included as conditions. Recently the Development Control Committee has built a reputation for considering with great care the impact of development proposals and I am sure they will try to do so on this occasion, even if it means delaying approval.”

END

Contact: Andrew Turner 01983 530808

Note: Words within single quotation marks (in speech) are taken from the officers’ report.