Loading document...
Application No.: 17/00462/B Applicant: Foxfield Ltd Proposal: Construction of 7 bungalows and 6 garages, including vehicular access Site Address: Land adjacent to Ginger Hall Hotel Ballamanagh Road Sulby Isle of Man Case Officer : Mr Chris Balmer Expected Decision Level: Planning Committee Recommended Decision: Permitted Date of Recommendation: 02.02.2018 _________________________________________________________________
C : Conditions for approval N : Notes attached to conditions
Reason: To comply with article 14 of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) (No2) Order 2013 and to avoid the accumulation of unimplemented planning approvals.
Reason: To safeguard the areas to be landscaped and the existing trees and planting to be retained within the site.
This approval relates to the submitted documents and drawings reference numbers, 5 (3 plans), 6, 10 (Plot 6), 12 (Plot 5), 13 (Plot 7), 14 REV A (Plot 4), 15 REV A (Plot 3), 16 REV A (Plot 2), 17 REV A (Plot 1), 18 (garage block detail), 28, 40 REV A, GH02, GH03, 100 REV E, Tree Survey and Report prepared by Manx Roots Tree Management (dated 15th September 2017) and Preliminary Drainage Calculations prepared by Structural Engineering Services Ltd received on 21st April 2017, 18th May 2017 & 20th September 2017 and 5th December 2017.
_______________________________________________________________ Interested Person Status – Additional Persons
In accordance with Article 6(3) of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure)(No2) Order 2013 and paragraph 2(1) of Government Circular No. 01/13, the following persons who have made representation to the planning application are not considered to have sufficient interest in the subject matter of the application to take part in any subsequent proceedings relating to the application:
The Manx Utilities Authority - Electricity The Manx Utilities Authority - Drainage
The owners/occupiers of Esfahan, Ballamanagh Close, Sulby The owners/occupiers of Glion, Ballamanagh Close, Sulby The owner/occupier of 41 Carrick Park, Sulby _____________________________________________________________________________
THE APPLICATION IS BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMITTEE DUE TO THE HISTORY OF THE SITE, AS THE COMMITTEE HAS PREVIOUSLY CONSIDERED A SIMILAR SCHEME AND AS THE APPLICATION IS RECOMMEND FOR AN APPROVAL CONTRARY TO THE RECOMMENDATION OF THE LOCAL AUTHORITY
1.0 SITE - 1.1 The application relates to land adjacent to the Ginger Hall Hotel, Ballamanagh Road, Sulby. The site is located to the eastern edge of the village of Sulby. The site is currently only accessed from River Meadowland, a rural lane passing along the south side of the village. The entrance to the site is from the north side of the lane, not far from the junction with Ginger Hall corner. - 1.2 The site is bounded on its north side by the rear of a row of detached bungalows on Carrick Park. On the east side, the site extends to the west side of the A3 main road and then tapers inwards where it adjoins the Ginger Hall Hotel and its car park. To the south is River Meadowland Lane. On the west side, the site adjoins the rear of two detached houses on a small residential cul-de-sac to the west. - 1.3 The site has an area of approximately 0.55 hectares (ha) and is broadly square shaped although it tapers inwards on its south east side. The site is undeveloped land and is mostly overgrown. There are a number of trees and bushes along the west boundary. The site falls in a north westerly direction towards the rear of the houses on Carrick Park. There is a low fence on the north side and the site is relatively open to the rear of the properties on Carrick Park. There is a drainage ditch on the inside of this north western perimeter of the site which then runs underneath the A3 main road to the east. On the east side, next to the Ginger Hall Hotel, there is a high fence. On the south side, next to River Meadowland Lane, is a roadside lane with a field gate where the access to the development will be located.
2.0 PROPOSAL - 2.1 The application seeks approval for erection of a development of seven detached dwellings with associated garages. The properties are mainly single storey detached bungalows, Plots 1 to 5 each having a similar styles two bedroom properties, the exception would be Plot 7 which would have the same footprint and height, but include two dormer windows within the rear elevation. Plot 6 is a smaller two bedroomed single storey detached bungalow. Plots 1 to 6 would all be served by a new tarmac road which forms a cul-de sac. This new road accesses directly onto the Lezayre Road (A3). Plot 7 would not be served by this cul-de-sac and would have its individual access onto the Ballamanagh Road, which is an existing access (southern boundary) which was created for previous housing schemes on this site, where the majority of dwelling would have used this access. All the dwellings except the smaller dwelling on Plot 6 would have a single detached garage.
3.0 PLANNING POLICY - 3.1 The land is zoned under the Sulby Local Plan Order 1998 as being 'Predominately Residential Use & Woodland'. The site is not within a Conservation Area, nor is it within an area zoned as High Landscape Value or Coastal Value and Scenic Significance. - 3.2 Due to the site's location, land use designation and the type of development proposed, the following Planning Policies from the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016 and Sulby Local Plan 1998 are relevant when determining the application:
3.3 Strategic Policy 1 states: "Development should make the best use of resources by:
3.4 Strategic Policy 2 states: "New development will be located primarily within our existing towns and villages, or, where appropriate, in sustainable urban extensions(2) of these towns and villages. Development will be permitted in the countryside only in the exceptional circumstances identified in paragraph 6.3." - 3.5 General Policy 2 states: "Development which is in accordance with the land-use zoning and proposals in the appropriate Area Plan and with other policies of this Strategic Plan will normally be permitted, provided that the development:
3.6 Housing Policy 1 states: "The housing needs of the Island will be met by making provision for sufficient development opportunities to enable 6000 additional dwellings (net of demolitions), and including those created by conversion, to be built over the Plan period 2001 to 2016." - 3.7 Transport Policy 4 states: "The new and existing highways which serve any new development must be designed so as to be capable of accommodating the vehicle and pedestrian journeys generated by that development in a safe and appropriate manner, and in accordance with the environmental objectives of this plan." - 3.8 Sulby Local Plan (NO.2) Order 1998 - Development Brief states: "3.15. It is recommended that the development of this area shall be undertaken in accordance with the following brief.
4.0 PLANNING HISTORY - 4.1 The following previous planning applications are considered relevant in the assessment and determination of this application:-
14/01198/B - Erection of a development of five detached dwellings with associated garages. The application was approved.
12/01125/B - application for six dwellings refused in January 2013. The grounds for refusal were:
5.0 REPRESENTATIONS - 5.1 It should be noted that there have been two sets of amended plans advertised. - 5.2 Lezayre Parish Commissioners have recommended an refusal to the application for the following reasons:-
(05.01.18) - Previous comments still stand.
(09.05.17) - Permission exists for 5 dwellings already, to stretch it to 8 is considered an overdevelopment of the site; vehicular access should not be from the TT course; Local plan indicates only two dwellings with access from the Claddagh Road (B8); concerns of number of connections to the foul sewer the site; and tree planting previously shown has now disappeared.
5.3 Highways Services raised a number of questions in relation to the initial scheme of 8 dwellings. However, following the amended plans and reduction to 7 dwellings they make the following comments: "02.02.2018 - Following receipt of amended drawing no 28 dated 29/09/17 Highway Services does not oppose this application subject to the following conditions:
Reason: To ensure that the strategic plan car parking standards are met in the interest of highway safety.
Reason: To ensure adequate pedestrian and vehicular access to each dwelling in the interest of highway safety."
5.4 Manx Utilities - Drainage have no objection to the proposal and confirm that all plot levels (14.9.2017 & 01.02.2018) are acceptable to MUA flood risk management.
5.5 Manx Utilities - Electric has no objection to the proposal but seek the applicant to contact them MU as there are known underground cable/overhead cables in the area (12.05.2017). - 5.6 Arboricultural Officer - DEFA initially objected to the initial scheme for 8 dwellings as one of the dwellings was located within an area designated as "woodland" on the Sulby Local Plan and would have potentially impacted the trees within this area or would have increased the likelihood of future occupants seeking the trees to be removed. Accordingly, extensive discussions where had with the applicant has amended the scheme, reducing the number of dwellings to seven and also submitted a tree report in response. Accordingly, the Arboricultural Officer makes the following comments (02.02.2018) in relation to the current scheme:
"The revised site layout is acceptable and the existing tree protection scheme (submitted Sep 2017) is still relevant and adequate. To ensure the protective fencing is installed correctly please can you apply the following condition:
Before any development or construction work begins, a pre-commencement meeting shall be held on site and attended by the developer's appointed arboricultural consultant, the site manager/foreman and a representative from the Department to discuss details of the working procedures and check that all tree protection measures have been installed in accordance with the approved tree protection plan. The development shall thereafter be carried out in accordance with the approved details or any variation as may subsequently be agreed in writing by the Department."
5.7 The Inland Fisheries Development Manager - DEFA have no concerns, but indicate that general care needed to avoid sediment or washings from the site being washed into the ditch (04.05.2017). - 5.8 The Senior Biodiversity Officer - DEFA - Initially raised concern with the proposal as it may result in the loss of a number of trees designated in an area of woodland and therefore requested additional information to indicate whether the trees would or wouldn't be removed as this could impact potential bat habitat. Further recommends a bat survey be undertaken (19.05.2017). Acknowledges that a tree survey has been provided and that the roadside trees are to be retained which protects the tree avenue habitat corridor as requested. He does indicate that some trees are being removed, and while he does not object this is caveat that checks are made and no bat roosts are found in these trees (22.12.2017). - 5.9 The Isle of Man Fire & Rescue Services seeks the applicants to contact tem before any works commence to discuss the provision of fire hydrants and access for fire appliances
5.10 The owner/occupier of Glion, Ballamanagh Close, Sulby (received on 14.05.2017 &
03.01.2018) has objected to the application which can be summarised as; overdevelopment of the site; no up to date plans and elevations submitted; drainage also seems to be from an earlier scheme; highway safety concern soft of access for plot 6 impacts emergency services vehicles during racing periods; while tree survey has been prepared no consideration for the protection of well-established trees on our property; impact upon our privacy, noise, artificial light and pollution from vehicles will all impact our property due to turning circle adjacent to our property; if prosed drainage works do not work it will cause flooding to my property; exiting timber posts in the shared boundary are in a poor condition and previous applications for five and six dwellings where refused.
5.11 The owners/occupiers of Esfahan, Ballamanagh Close, Sulby (05.01.2018) have made the following comments which can be summarised as; plans are inaccurate as the bungalows proposed are not correctly shown on the new site plan; overdevelopment of the site; introduction of dormer is against the spirit of previous applications and increase chances of overlooking; potential loss of bus stops; increase traffic flows in an area congested, especially during racing periods; increase likelihood of flooding on Carrick Park from water runoff from development; loss of trees; the position of the dwelling on Plot 7 two metres from the boundary will result in a loss of sunlight; moving the property away from our property would reduce the need to remove trees, reduce noise disturbances, reduce light pollution, cause less pollution from neighbouring car lights/noise; and increase the amount and type of landscaping which could be planted; dwelling on Plot 7 will have little sun light due to existing trees; existing fence along boundary is in poor condition; and re-positing of Plot 7 requires the removal of five additional trees. Further comments (19.05.2017) have also been made of the previous scheme (now superseded), although the following is still relevant; There has been a total of 12 applications on this site since 1988 a number refused for less dwellings and it appears that the Planning Department resistance has been worn down by a determined developer, but at what cost to the community; planning fees should be introduced which accurately reflects time and resources; and the planning process regarding notifying interested parties also needs reviewing, it seems hit and miss if you are near a development whether or not you become aware of the application.
5.12 The owner/occupier of 41 Carrick Park, Sulby, has objected to the application which can be summarised as (02.08.2017); concerns of flooding not from Sulby River but from surface water from storm water from the fields at the side of the Ballamenagh Road which runs across the road into the site; new dwelling will suffer from this surface run off as owners of fields are unwilling to act; and houses on flood plains will not be given flood insurance.
6.1 The following material planning issues should be considered:
Principle of Residential Development
6.2 As indicated within the 'Planning Policy' section of this report, the site is designated for residential development; therefore it is considered that the principle of residential development is acceptable. Number of Dwellings within the Application Site - 6.3 The previous Planning Inspector when considering application 13/91035/B for five dwellings accepted that whilst the Sulby Local Plan limited the site to have only two dwellings, a previously approved application (11.00155/B) had allowed four dwellings on the site. The Inspector also considered that the site was in a sustainable location within a village, and the proposed development of five dwellings would make good use of under-used land, therefore according with Strategic Polices 1 and 2 and Housing Policy 4. It was concluded that in principle five dwellings on this site was acceptable, which was also considered acceptable under the last application approved (14/01198/B). - 6.4 However, this application now proposed seven dwellings; which if approved, would be the most number of dwellings allowed on the site. It should be noted that the site has been identified as being within a sustainable location within the village and is designated for residential development. Further the IOM Strategic Plan 2016 indicates with Strategic Policy 1 that development should make the best use of resources by using unused and under-used land and buildings. Accordingly, while this is an increase on what has previously been approved and what the Sulby Local Plan sought; it is not an automatic reason to refuse the application. Character and appearance - 6.5 An application for six dwellings (12/01125/B) was refused on the grounds of the dwelling number and layout resulted in a cramped feel and also the access did not provide the required visibly for the number of dwellings. The next application for five dwellings was also refused 13/91035/B for the same reasons. - 6.6 This applications layout and appearance is considered a significant improvement over these two previous refused applications. This is mainly achieved with the alteration of the main access to the site, moving from the narrow Ballamanagh Road where the majority of applications had proposed to access from, and creating a new access onto the Lezayre Road (A3) which would serve six out of seven proposed plots. This has enabled the applicant to create a much improved layout, albeit with an increased number of dwellings. - 6.7 This new proposal does involve the alteration of the plots so that all the front elevations face onto/towards the main estate road/cul-de-sac. Each dwelling would have front, side and
6.15 Arguably, one of the main issues with this current proposal is the inclusion of a new vehicular access onto the Main Road (TT course) which would serve the dwelling within plot 5 only. This new access would be located adjacent to the Ginger Hall Pub car park. The access would provide the required visibility splays of 2.4m by 90 metres in both directions. It is noted that the visibility from this access is greater than the required 90 metres in both directions. Accordingly, in terms of visibility the access would be acceptable. - 6.16 When this new access onto the Lezayre Road was proposed previously, Highway Services raised concern, as it would result in the creation of an additional access onto a 'primary distributor route'. Highway Services have indicated previously that the policy is against new frontage access onto primary distributor routes in towns and a presumption against new on strategic routes in rural areas or district distributors in towns. The reason is that these routes are primarily for through traffic and each access point provides a possible conflict point due to turning vehicles. Each conflict point increases the risk of collisions or delay along these routes. Furthermore, they indicate that they try to locate access points onto local residential roads or collate them together so that a single access serves several properties. Accesses onto these higher level routes also require longer visibility splays as drivers have a longer reaction time when travelling on commuter type routes rather than residential roads. - 6.17 Whilst the Planning Directorate acknowledges the reasoning for not wishing new access on 'primary distributor routes', in this case there are considered arguments for allowing the proposed access, as stated previously within application 14/01198/B. Firstly, the access is within Sulby Village where a number of existing road junctions and residential access in the immediate locality to the site. Accordingly, the character of the area is one where a number of accesses are and persons travelling along this stretch of road would be aware of persons potentially wishing to turn in or out of their access/junction. Second, the site is immediately adjacent to the Ginger Hall Pub car park which has two points of access onto the same Lezayre Road and again persons would be aware of potential from traffic to turn or exit from. Thirdly, the site is within a 30mph zone, between two bends and therefore traffic speeds are relatively low. Fourthly, the access meets the requirement for visibility when exiting the site; but it is also important to note that persons travelling along the Main Road from either direction of the access, would have good visibility of the access and any vehicle exiting/turning in or from the access. Accordingly, whilst the proposal would result in a new access onto a 'primary distributor routes', for the reasons given, it is not considered the access would have a significantly adverse impact upon highway safety to all road users to warrant a refusal. - 6.18 An additional benefit, is that only a single dwelling would utilise the existing Ballamanagh Road access which has visibility splays of 2.4m x 19.5m visibility splays can be achieved in a south-westerly direction (i.e. when leaving the site looking towards the Claddagh Campsite), whilst splays of 2.4m x 36m can be achieved in a north-easterly direction (when leaving the site looking towards the Ginger Hall Pub). Permission (11/00155/B) has been granted for four dwellings to utilise this access. - 6.19 It should be noted that this existing current entrance to the site was undertaken as approved in application 99/02118/B, which was for two dwellings. That application, which has been formally commenced by the construction of this access, considered the matter at length and was approved with required visibility splays of 2.4m x 2.4 m. This access has been started, although the tarmac has not been laid. This provides very little visibility. - 6.20 Overall, it is considered both accesses would be acceptable and therefore considered to comply with General Policy 2 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan. Drainage Issues
6.21 One main concern from a number of nearby residents relates to concern of the soakaways/surface water drainage which could lead to future flooding of the surrounding area. - 6.22 MU have previously had detailed discussions with the applicant during the consideration of this and the previous applications. These applications were not refused on drainage issues. - 6.23 The applicant has once again employed Structural Engineering Services Ltd to carry out drainage calculations for the proposal. The surface water is indicated as being collected in a piped system and then discharged into the existing drainage ditch located along the North West site boundary. The report also indicates that the existing drainage ditch to the north is to be cleaned out and its profile regularised. The discharge will be via a vortex device and retention pipes. Vortex flow control devices use an air-filled core to limit the volume of water flow to a designed constant rate while the head builds up. They are constructed with stainless steel with no moving parts and operate by directing the flow to rotate inside a cylindrical vessel towards a central outlet. This generates a vortex with an air filled core which allows the openings to be larger than the equivalent conventional orifice, reducing the likelihood of blockages. As the cross-sectional area of the outlet of the Hydro-Brake Flow Control can be up to six times that of the equivalent orifice plate, maintenance is far easier and there is much less risk of blockage. - 6.24 A surface water retention device (oversized pipes or culvert sections) is also proposed in conjunction with the Vortex discharge device to restrict outfall to 3.8L/s, in compliance with Manx Sewers. - 6.25 The report has also indicated that during the detailed design stage (Building Regulations Application) exploratory methods of reducing the volume of attenuation by utilising soakaways, swales, permeable paving and the collection and recycling of roof drainage (rain water harvesting),will be examined. - 6.26 This method of drainage has previously been approved under application 11/00155/B and 14/01198/B, albeit for four & five dwellings not seven. However; this scheme was again submitted as part of the last application for five dwellings where the Inspector stated: "In reaching that view I have taken into account all other matters raised, including neighbour's comments about drainage. However, in my view, this is something that could be resolved by a planning condition" - 6.27 The Inspector recommended the following condition:
"No development shall commence of the ditch until details of surface water drainage, including arrangements for the drainage of the ditch on the north west boundary of the site and a programme for implementation, have been first submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority, the development shall not be carried out unless in full accordance with the approved details."
6.28 Manx Utilities - Drainage have considered the information submitted and the scheme and indicated that they have no objection and confirm that all plot levels (14.9.2017) are acceptable to MUA flood risk management. Potential Impacts upon Neighbouring Residential Amenities - 6.29 The main issues to consider regarding the impacts upon neighbouring amenities are
6.30 Visiting the site and considering the plans it is considered given the design, size, height and distance to proposed dwellings would be from neighbouring properties, the proposal would not result in significant impacts to warrant a refusal. The existing boundary treatments and
Potential impacts upon trees
6.32 There was initially concern with the application which proposed eight dwellings, which included a dwelling projecting into an area of the site designated as woodland (south section of site which runs parallel with the Ballamanagh Road). This concern was shared by the Arboricultural Officer of DEFA. Following this the applicant reduced the number of dwellings, and ensured the dwelling closest to the trees in question, within the woodland area, was sited further back into the site (Plot 7) away from the trees of importance and their canopy spread. Furthermore the applicant employed a qualified arborist who produced a report, identifying which existing trees needed to be removed (total of four), two of which are irrespective of this application and two are required to facilitate the scheme, but not regarded of high quality. The trees of importance are being retained and these are the trees which run along the roadside boundary of the site. The Arboricultural Officer of DEFA has considered the additional information and the amended plans and raises no concerns, subject to conditions. - 6.33 There are also a number of opportunities for additional tree planting/landscaping within the woodland area and within the rest of the site and therefore it is recommend than a landscaping condition be attached to any approval. Other matters - 6.34 The application also proposes to erect a render walling/pillars with wrought iron railings above, along the north-east boundary of the site which adjoins the car park of the Ginger Hall Pub car park. This is considered acceptable, and a visual improvement over the existing 2m high timber fence which was approved under previous schemes. Along the northeast boundary of Plot 5 it is proposed to erect a 1m high stone wall. Again this is considered appropriate and in keeping with the area.
7.1 Based on the information provided as part of this application, it is judged that the proposal would comply with the majority of the relevant planning policies indicated within the Sulby Local Plan Order 1998 with the exception of paragraph 1 of the Development Brief which states; "The residential development of this area shall be limited to a maximum of two detached dwellings and Vehicular access for any residential development shall be from the B8". - 7.2 It is also considered that the proposal would comply with the relevant planning policies, (particularly, Strategic Policies 1 & 2) of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan. Due to the inconsistency between the provisions of the Strategic Plan and the provisions of the Sulby Local Plan the formers policies are the prevailing policies to consider. - 7.3 The proposals would provide a suitable layout for the estate, have no significant impacts upon neighbouring amenities; provide dwellings of an acceptable design in this area, and provided access which would not adversely impact upon highway safety Accordingly, the application is recommended for an approval.
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 Planning Committee must determine:
I confirm that this decision has been made by the Planning Committee in accordance with the authority afforded to it under the appropriate delegated authority.
Decision Made : Permitted Committee Meeting Date: 12.02.2018 Signed : C Balmer Presenting Officer Further to the decision of the Committee an additional report/condition reason was required
YES/NO
Copyright in submitted documents remains with their authors. Request removal
