Planning Officer Concerns Letter

Mr. and Mrs. Casson, Fairfield House, Fairfield Avenue, Ramsey IM8 2LS.

infrastructure

planning and building control bun-troggalys -plannal as gurneil troggal Murray House, Mount Havelock, Douglas, Isle of Man, IM1 2SF. email: [email protected] Tel: (01624) 685906 Fax: (01624) 686443 Director of Planning & Building Control Michael Gallagher, M.R.T.P.I.

13th February, 2012

Dear Mr. and Mrs. Casson,

Re: PA 11/1777 – approval in principle for erection of dwelling, Fairfield House, Fairfield Avenue, Ramsey

I refer to the above application and seek additional comments from you in respect of the views we have received.

As you will know, Department of Environment, Food and Agriculture Fisheries are generally concerned where development will take place within 8m of a watercourse, and this is generally discouraged by Environment Policy 7 of the Strategic Plan which states:

"Development which would cause demonstrable harm to a watercourse, wetland, pond or dub, and which would not be overcome by mitigation measures will not be permitted. Where development is proposed which would affect a watercourse, planning applications must comply with the following criteria:

a) all watercourses in the vicinity of the site must be identified on plans accompanying a planning application and include an adequate risk assessment to demonstrate that works will not cause long term deterioration in water quality; b) details of pollution and alleviation measures must be submitted; c) all engineering works proposed must be phased in an appropriate manner in order to avoid a reduction in water quality in any adjacent watercourse; and d) development will not normally be allowed within 8 metres of any watercourse in order to protect the aquatic and bankside habitats and species".

In this case, discussion with Joy Eaton and Karen McHarg indicate that they will not object to the application provided that no development is undertaken within 5m of the watercourse. I think we will need further information to demonstrate that this is possible: it does not look from the drawings that there is sufficient space to achieve this, particularly in respect of the access road alongside the stream.

This is worsened when tree protection measures are taken into account. These usually require that the dripline of the trees to be retained, is fenced off and there does not look to be enough space left for the works and storage of materials necessary to erect the dwelling, nor for the dwelling itself.

The proximity of the development to the stream is also a significant concern for the Commissioners and I enclose their comments for your response.

In respect of the trees, I have discussed the proposal with the Northern Forester and whilst he has no objection to the removal of the trees to be removed, he is concerned about the proximity of those which are to be retained and the likelihood that the future occupants of the proposed dwelling will seek their removal due to the potential of the trees falling on the property. We generally try to avoid development within falling distance of trees to be retained.

I would be grateful if you could consider this and advise me of your comments in due course. As it stands, I am not sure that there is sufficient information available to demonstrate that the proposal complies with Environment Policy 7 or the advice from Department of Environment, Food and Agriculture Fisheries and Forestry.

Yours sincerely,

Miss Sarah Corlett Senior Planning Officer