Eton College withdraws Isle of Wight homes plan

It follows the Isle of Wight Council's refusal of another housing application on the field above, stopping a potential 17 houses from being built.

Oliver Boulter, the council's strategic manager for planning and infrastructure, confirmed Eton's application for nine houses on the locally beloved Donkey Field was withdrawn at the request of planning agents, Fowler Architecture & Planning, last week.

A spokesperson from Headland Consultancy, on behalf of the college, declined to comment.

Read more about the college's housing plan here.

The housing proposed by Eton College for the Seaview site. (Picture: Fowler Architecture and Planning)

The application had received more than 150 objections since it was submitted, including from Isle of Wight MP Bob Seely and Nettlestone and Seaview Parish Council, expressing concerns about greenfield development and access to the site.

Read more:

• It's an Eton Mess —objections flood in for homes plan
• Dismay as elite Eton College cuts down historic oak

It was primarily issues with access, which would be via Seagrove Manor Road and Seagrove Farm Road, that caused an application for eight houses on land at Seagrove Farm Road, the field above, to be refused.

The developments would have shared the same access road, leading from one to the other.

The proposed housing on both sites in Seaview. (Picture: Fowler Architecture and Planning)

Nettlestone and Seaview Parish Council said in its objection the two developments would triple the traffic movements on Seagrove Manor Road, which was already 'very narrow and difficult to negotiate'.

Island Roads had recommended refusal to both developments on that basis with the access to the development called unsatisfactory with unacceptable visibility and width.

While the future of Eton's application is unknown, the applicants for the other eight houses can, if they wish, appeal the decision to the Planning Inspectorate.

Read more about those plans here.

In the decision notice, however, Mr Boulter said the application was not considered to be a sustainable form of development and while pre-application advice has been sought, with further information submitted, it did not overcome planning concerns.