Plans for seven houses in Gurnard have once again been turned down.
Previously rejected last year, a second application put forward by Glen Hepburn, of Hepburns Planning Consultancy, have followed the same route, with planning officers finding six reasons to refuse the outline permission.
The application for the housing scheme on Lower Church Road and Cockleton Lane had drawn more than 60 objections from residents, with only three in favour.
Gurnard Parish Council were among those to object, and even called an extraordinary meeting to discuss the application, ultimately deciding the housing would go against the Gurnard Neighbourhood Plan and have a detrimental impact.
Those in favour of the development of all two-bed houses said it would enable young families, some of whom may have lived in Gurnard their entire life, to be able to afford a property in the area.
It had been argued in the most recent planning application, that the reasons for refusal had been overcome.
However, despite the changes, one of the same reasons for refusal given last year has remained - the development would still result in an urbanising impact which would detract from the rural character of the area and, by virtue, its encroachment into the undeveloped nature of the Gurnard Luck Valley.
The proposal also failed to mitigate for affordable housing or the identified impacts to the Solent special protection area.
Concerns were also raised to the archaeological nature of the site as only a desk-based assessment was carried out.
The assessment said there was moderate to high potential of deposits from the Iron Age and Roman date which could be of high significance.
Planning officers said a more in-depth evaluation needed to be done prior to any positive determination of the application.
Areas of the scheme had improved though and overcame the impact on neighbouring properties, due to reorientation and movement of some units.
The applicant does however have the right to appeal the decision to the Planning Inspectorate, should they wish.
House Rules
We do not moderate comments, but we expect readers to adhere to certain rules in the interests of open and accountable debate.
Last Updated:
Report this comment Cancel