Loading document...
Application No.: 15/01385/B Applicant: Mr & Mrs Anthony Jones Proposal: Erection of a split level dwelling with associated access Site Address: Plot to rear of Poolaash Tromode Lane Douglas Isle of Man Principal Planner: Miss S E Corlett Expected Decision Level: Officer Delegation Recommended Decision: Refused Date of Recommendation: 26.11.2018 _________________________________________________________________ Reasons for Refusal R : Reasons for Refusal O : Notes attached to reasons - R 1. It has not been demonstrated that there would be a safe and satisfactory access to the site in terms of visibility at the junction of Tromode Lane and Tromode Road where the visibility splays cross land which is not in the applicant's ownership or control. Furthermore, Tromode Lane is narrow with inadequate provision for passing and would not provide a safe environment for pedestrians and cyclists, for whom this would be the only route in and out from the proposed dwelling. The proposal therefore fails to comply with General Policy 2h and j of the Strategic Plan. - R 2. It has not been demonstrated that the development could be implemented and occupied without adversely affecting the stability and health of existing trees whose presence contributes significantly to the character of the area. The proposal therefore fails to comply with General Policy f of the Strategic Plan. - R 3. Notwithstanding the above two concerns, it has not been demonstrated that the development of the plot as shown, due to its width, could be developed without prejudicing the development of the adjacent land, which is also designated for residential use. The development is therefore contrary to General Policy 2k of the Strategic Plan. _______________________________________________________________
It is recommended that the owners/occupiers of the following properties should not be given Interested Person Status as they are not considered to have sufficient interest in the subject matter of the application to take part in any subsequent proceedings and are not mentioned in Article 6(4):
Penhaligon as they have not explained how the development would impact the lawful use of land owned or occupied by them and in relation to the relevant issues identified in paragraph 2C of the Policy, as is required by paragraph 2D of the Policy. _____________________________________________________________________________
1.0 THE APPLICATION SITE - 1.1 The application site is a pan-handle shaped parcel of land located off Tromode Road and immediately behind Quarterbridge Road near to its junction with Bray Hill in Douglas. The site includes Tromode Lane, which is not within the ownership of the applicant, and which for approximately the first 50m is laid with a mixture of compacted soil and some loose gravel; access to a recently constructed "Tromode Lodge" is provided at the end of these 50m, while the remainder of the lane until it joins the larger, rectangular portion of the site is primarily for pedestrian access albeit that for this stretch is rather wider than would be expected for a pedestrian footpath - perhaps just wide enough for a family car. The remainder of the lane is much more typical footpath, which then continues parallel behind the Quarterbridge Road dwellings. - 1.2 The more substantial element of the site, which measures roughly 45m in length and roughly 12m in width, slopes up from the footpath over a short distance. At its northwesternmost edge, where the footpath runs, the site is, at its lowest, 22m above the Datum Point; running across the site, to its southeasternmost edge, the height raises to 28m above the above the Datum Point. - 1.3 Within this steeply sloping site, there are variations in level. There are some trees along the south eastern boundary and trees which are located outside the side but overhang. Poolaash, a dwelling which fronts onto Quarterbridge Road, lies to the south east and is owned by the applicant although it is clear that the site does not comprise residential curtilage or garden land. The site is within a wider area that is of a similar character, though further to the southwest the tree cover quickly becomes dense and views through are impossible. - 1.4 In terms of surrounding uses, detached and semi-detached dwellings line Quarterbridge Road to the southeast and beyond the wider open land discussed above, also line Tromode Road itself to the east and northeast. The land is more open in a northern direction, but planning approval was recently granted under PA 15/01357/REM for a new dwelling in the area. Views through to this site and the grassland surrounding it are readily available through the trees that sporadically line the footpath here.
2.0 THE PROPOSAL - 2.1 Full planning approval is sought for the erection of a dwelling on the site. The design is bespoke to the site although similar to that proposed on the land alongside (see Planning History) and would see fairly significant cut and fill works to result in a split level dwelling over three storeys, stepping down from the top of the site towards the northwest. The proposed dwelling would have an overhanging roof at front and rear, finished in slate, and the walls would be fully timber clad in finish. It would provide four bedrooms along with a number of reception rooms and also a garden room opening out onto the very small garden at the rear. A double garage is shown at the base level. A number of rooflights are shown, and a significant amount of glazing is shown in the gable end elevations, while there would be only a few windows in the side, longer elevations, arranged in a fairly jumbled fashion - albeit one that reflects the need to provide light into the internal rooms. - 2.2 The dwelling's overall footprint measures 25m in length (including a roof terrace) and 9.9m in width, although this excludes the footpaths running either side of the dwelling and which, together, would make the built development some roughly 14m in width.
2.3 Felling licences have been issued for approximately 25 trees on the application site. (The word "approximately" is used because some are clusters and measuring exact numbers is not very easy.) Those that are within the access lane are almost all proposed for removal, with some - including a particularly handsome sycamore - proposed for limbing at a lower level. A number are also proposed for retention. The decisions on these have been made following discussion between the agent, the Forester within the Department, and also a tree surgeon, and the agreed outcome for each tree and cluster of trees has been provided. The approval requires planting, which is not shown on the drawing. - 2.4 A helpful section drawing has been provided with the application, which demonstrates that the ridgeline of the proposed dwelling would sit at a similar level (around 0.4m lower) than the ground floor level of "Moorcroft", the dwelling to the rear and to one side. No information is given in respect of the level of Poolaash which is directly behind the application plot.
3.0 PLANNING HISTORY - 3.1 The site itself has not been the subject of any previous applications considered as being directly material to the determination of the current proposal. - 3.2 Tromode Lodge was approved under PA 04/02347/B. The original application seeking Approval in Principle (03/00100/A) was refused by the Department for the following two reasons:
That decision was appealed against, however, and the Inspector recommended that the refusal be overturned; the Minister agreed. The Inspector commented that, "though the proposed dwelling would only generate a small increase in the number of vehicles using this track, I consider that it is inherently unacceptable as a means of access."
However, he continued that to provide visibility across the entire frontage of just over 20m would make an appreciable improvement, and although to do so would require engineering works those works would satisfactorily overcome the highway objection; some four conditions were attached to the approval notice outlining the requirements in terms of providing and retaining the visibility splay.
The Inspector also concluded that the submitted tree survey showed that the proposed dwelling would be clear of the tree canopy and that those trees proposed for loss would in any case not be especially worthy of protection. He also considered the permeable paving for the access drive would further safeguard the boundary vegetation.
3.3 Also of direct relevance is an application submitted concurrently on a neighbouring area of land immediately southwest of this site. That application (PA 15/01384/B) also seeks approval for a new dwelling of a fairly similar design to that here proposed, via the same access lane, and will be on the same Planning Committee agenda as the current application. The nature of the two schemes is such that the impact of both independently as well as together will need to be assessed.
4.1 The site lies within an area zoned as Predominantly Residential on the Douglas Local Plan, which is not accompanied by an adopted Written Statement.
4.2 The relevant policies from the Strategic Plan are, therefore, General Policy 2, Housing Policy 6, Environment Policy 42, Environment Policy 3 and Transport Policies 4 and 7. The first three policies sets out general development criteria as well as more specific expectations of the design of new dwellings. EP3 requires the protection of important trees and woodland areas, whereas TP4 and TP7 require that new highways should enable journeys generated by development to be accommodated in a safe and appropriate manner, as well as requiring that 2 parking spaces per dwelling can be provided.
5.1 The Department of Infrastructure Highway Services object to the application, stating that the application fails to demonstrate adequate visibility over land in the applicant's control. They describe the access lane as 130m long and serving one property and in order to accommodation additional development it would need to be widened, which has not been shown. In its current form it is unsuitable for providing a safe and convenient access for pedestrians and cyclists (14.01.16). - 5.2 The Forester within the Department initially objected to the application in comments received 14th January 2015. He made the following comments in respect of both the neighbouring applications:
"For both applications there is no evidence that the applicant has carefully considered the constraints imposed by the trees on or adjacent to the site. For a site with trees of this nature any application would have to be accompanied by a full BS5837 survey, tree protection plan and, where works are proposed within RPAs, an arboricultural method statement. Further detail on the requirements within each aspect can be provided if required. Without this information, the assessment of the impact on trees can only be very limited. For this reason alone I would have to object to the approval of this application based on the information currently submitted.
"Access - There a number of large, late-mature broadleaf trees which would be severely impacted by the access required to build and subsequently access these properties. Some of these are 100+ year old trees which are valuable from a landscape, cultural and biodiversity perspective. Trees numbered 2&8 (drawing PTA-135-04) would require the removal of large lower boughs which would leave large wounds in to the main stem and allow the ingress of decay. Even with this pruning, the track would barely be wide enough for the construction access required to build the property. It really hasn't been thought through very well at all. The likely damage to the roots of all the trees along the access road is also a major issue. This includes not only those large trees which have grown up in the track itself but also the trees on neighbouring land to the north (Property known as Stovell). Incidentally, the roots of tree number 2 will have already been damaged by the installation of a concrete platform for an oil tank."
He offered the following specific comments in respect of this application:
"The attached aerial photograph shows the amount canopy cover over the site. This hopefully illustrates the significant conflict that would occur between the house and the trees if you tried to implement the proposed design. The proximity of the trees to the house could lead to pressure to remove the trees due to concerns about safety and structural damage and complaints about nuisance issues such as leaves, honeydew, falling debris and birds. Photo 883 attached shows the extent of the canopy from trees on north-east boundary of the site when viewed from ground level. Significant pruning would be required just to fit the property in to the space available. These are the above ground constraints but there are also significant below ground constraints. As already mentioned the applicant has failed to identify the RPAs of these trees as recommended by BS5837."
The agent was contacted in respect of these concerns.
5.3 Douglas Borough Council offered no objection to the application on 12th January 2016. - 5.4 The owners of Penhaligon on Quarterbridge Road which is at the rear of the property but not directly so, object to the application on the basis that the increase in traffic on the
6.1 The Local Plan zoning is such that the principle of residential development would generally be considered acceptable in this position. However, the issues raised by the proposal are, in many ways, closely related to the principle of residential development here. The key issues the proposal is considered to raise, in no order, are: (a) the impact on trees, (b) the highway access from the site onto Tromode Lane, (c) the acceptability of the use of the access
lane as proposed, (d) the design of the dwelling proposed, (e) the impact from the proposal on neighbouring living conditions, and (f) the cumulative impact of the two dwellings proposed alongside one another.
The impact on trees
6.2 The development would be on a site which has some trees both on and overhanging it and adjacent to the access serving it. It has not been demonstrated that the development could be implemented without significantly altering these trees and whilst the site is designated for development, the heavily treed nature of the site and its surroundings are an important element in its character. The development will result in a threat to these trees not only through the construction of the building but also thereafter where the dwelling may be overshadowed, suffer leaf and limb drop and where trees are within falling distance of the building. Whilst a number of trees have permission for felling, this is conditional upon replanting: no information has been provided other than a planted strip between the properties, this would not constitute the semi native species referred to in the licence and it is difficult to see where such planting could be planted due to the restricted amount of space available. The highway access from the site onto Tromode Lane - 6.3 The advice from the Highway Authority is that the access is not suitable for additional traffic. The measures needed to improve this, if it is within the applicant's control, may well affect the stability and health of the trees. The acceptability of the use of the access lane as proposed - 6.4 The lane is inescapably narrow and could not be widened without purchasing land from one side or the other and also without fairly significant engineering works, especially to the northwest, where there is a very steep drop down from the lane to the land beyond. As such, it will be impossible for construction vehicles, emergency services' appliances and refuse collection vehicles to access the site from this lane, even with the proposed removal of trees. The design of the dwelling proposed - 6.5 The design proposed is unique and bespoke to the site and this is, in principle, always welcome. General Policy 2 requires that the new development should respect "the site and surroundings in terms of the siting, layout, scale, form, design and landscaping of buildings and
the spaces around them", while Environment Policy 42 requires that "New development in existing settlements must be designed to take account of the particular character and identity, in terms of buildings and landscape features of the immediate locality."
6.6 The form of the dwelling sees it stepping down the slope and taking something of a Swiss chalet design with its fully timber-clad finish and slate roof with overhanging eaves. The window arrangement is a little haphazard in the side elevations in particular, and the rooflights also could be more neatly positioned, but this in some ways ties in with the design aesthetic and is in any case not considered to be inappropriate in and of itself. While the scheme could not be said to fit in with the surrounding development, the site is such that it will very much be seen in its own context amongst the trees rather than against the adjacent built environment in any case. - 6.7 The site would have limited garden space but would benefit from open views to the northwest and an open site to the northeast. There would also be outside space in the form of quite sizeable terracing exploiting these views. It is considered the site would have sufficient openness to consider that initial concern regarding overdevelopment would probably not be appropriate. - 6.8 It is therefore considered that the design of the dwelling accords with GP2 and EP42. The impact from the proposal on neighbouring living conditions - 6.9 While General Policy 2 sets out general development criteria in respect of neighbourliness, Environment Policy 42 also presumes against inappropriate backland development, and also provides protection for open or green spaces that contribute to the visual amenity and sense of place of a particular area. - 6.10 The site is open, and green, and there is evidently public use of the path running along the northwestern edge of the site and which is to become the vehicular lane to access Tromode Road. However, it is not readily viewable from further afield and could not be said to offer an especially important space in its wider environment - the fact it is within private ownership also means public uses are unlikely to be possible, while its being zoned as Predominantly Residential on the Douglas Local Plan suggests it has not been previously identified as being especially worthy of protection. There is therefore no objection raised to the loss of the land to residential use. - 6.11 Generally speaking, backland development is not looked favourably upon. However, there are a number points in considering whether or not what is proposed is 'inappropriate' backland development - namely, the access and general relationship between the existing and proposed dwelling. The access to the site has already been addressed. In consideration of the relationship between the existing and proposed dwelling, three key points are sufficient to conclude that the proposal would be acceptable. - 6.12 Firstly, the ridge line of the proposed dwelling would sit roughly 1.6m below the ground floor level of Moorcroft. Secondly, the distance between the properties is a minimum of 40m. Thirdly, there is a small amount of vegetation lining the boundary and within the control of the owner(s) of Moorcroft that would help reduce inter-visibility between the sites. Although there would be a large rear gable window in the proposed dwelling, this actually only serves a void space and would in any case be much lower than the dwelling of Moorcroft. - 6.13 It is therefore considered that the proposal meets the provisions of GP2 and EP42 on these points.
7.1 It can be seen that, although the site is designated for development, the proposal raises a number of issues, including both the access onto the highway as well as the use of the access lane for vehicular traffic - and the impact on the trees, which, even with all of their removal, would still not resolve the access issues. - 7.2 It is considered that both of these reasons would justify refusal of the application together with the size and shape of the site giving rise to a dwelling which would prejudice the development of the surrounding area.
8.1 By virtue of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) (No 2) Order 2013 Article 6(4), the following persons are automatically interested persons:
8.2 The decision maker must determine:
8.3 The Department of Environment Food and Agriculture is responsible for the determination of planning applications. As a result, where officers within the Department make comments in a professional capacity they cannot be given Interested Person Status.
I can confirm that this decision has been made by the Head of Development Management in accordance with the authority afforded to that Officer by the appropriate DEFA Delegation.
Decision Made : Refused Date : 30.11.2018 Determining officer
Signed : S BUTLER Stephen Butler Head of Development Management
Customer note
This copy of the officer report reflects the content of the file copy and has been produced in this form for the benefit of our online services/customers and archive records.
Copyright in submitted documents remains with their authors. Request removal
