Loading document...
Application No.: 15/00167/B Applicant: Haven Homes Ltd Proposal: Residential development of sixty six dwellings with associated infrastructure, children's play area, landscaping and public amenity space Site Address: Fields 134081, 134083, 134084 & Croftbank Land Off Clifton Drive Ramsey Isle Of Man Case Officer : Mr Edmond Riley Photo Taken: 31.03.2015 Site Visit: 31.03.2015
THE APPLICATION IS TO BE DETERMINED BY PLANNING COMMITTEE DUE TO THE SCALE OF THE DEVELOPMENT PROPOSED.
1.0 THE APPLICATION SITE - 1.1 The application site is a roughly rectangular, but essentially irregular, shaped parcel of undeveloped land that undulates quite significantly across its extent, throughout which are individual trees as well as some larger groupings. It is comprised of three individual fields (nos.
1.2 The land is located southeast off Clifton Drive in Ramsey, and with little to no boundary treatment to its northwestern extent it is very open and visible from the highway, although its full extent is not discernible from any one location given two prominent belts of trees criss-crossing the site to its western and southern sides. - 1.3 To the northeast, northwest and southwest, the site is bounded by residential development, albeit that to the north this appears to be formed by a very large garden associated with the dwelling known as The Rookery. To the southeast, meanwhile, is an open area of land that, as noted, is partly wetland but primarily grazing land for sheep and which forms the open setting for the Grove Museum of Victorian Life, which can be seen from within the site and vice versa. This land is open to the members of the public visiting the Grove.
2.0 THE PROPOSAL - 2.1 Full planning approval is sought for the erection of 66 dwellings on the application site. As a whole, the site would provide for 11 two-bedroomed dwellings, 44 three-bedroomed dwellings, 9 four-bedroomed dwellings and 2 five-bedroomed dwellings. It is proposed that 16 of these would be affordable - the precise requirement would be for 16.5 dwellings - and these would be located in the southwestern corner and along the main access road of the scheme. Eleven of the affordable units would have two bedrooms while the remaining five would have three bedrooms. The twobedroomed dwellings are all of identical design; there are five different designs for the threebedroom dwellings, while the four and five-bedroomed dwellings are each of a single design.
2.2 The dwellings are arranged primarily around the edges of the site, with the public open space and children's play area provided to the southeastern extent of the site. Central within the site is a 'circus' of houses - that is, an access lane ending with a roundabout surrounding a small area of open space and off which six of the four-bedroomed houses and the two five-bedroomed houses would be accessed. - 2.3 The existing bungalow is to be replaced by three dwellings, two of which would be semidetached. - 2.4 The site would have two accesses off Clifton Drive - one to the southwestern end of the site and the other to the northwestern end; the latter would provide access to the 'circus', while the accesses would not themselves join such that the proposal as a whole essentially comprises three cul-de-sacs, one of which (the circus) being considerably the smallest. - 2.5 A number of trees would be planted to mitigate against the loss of those proposed to be removed. - 2.6 The application has been substantiated by a Visual Impact Assessment, an Arboricultural Impact Assessment and an Ecological Assessment, the former being specifically sought by the Department and specifically in respect of the impact of the proposal on the Grove and Thornhill Manor given the wording of the relevant Local Plan Policy (see details in Section 4.1 below). The VIA assesses the impact of the proposal from all likely views into the site, which is welcome although not the reason why it was sought in the first place. A Planning Statement has also been submitted. - 2.7 Additional and amended plans have been received during the application process, which have primarily changed the appearance of those dwellings towards the eastern edge of the site but have not changed the arrangement of the site. These plans have been circulated to the interested parties accordingly, and it may be that verbal updates to Planning Committee are required depending on comments received between the time of writing and the Committee's consideration of the proposal.
3.0 PLANNING HISTORY - 3.1 The site and its surroundings have been subject to some historic planning approvals. Planning application 26496 originally set out the area of Thornhill for residential development in
3.2 The bungalow within the application site was also approved in 1978, under PA 48201. - 3.3 At one point it is understood that the site was mooted as a potential school site for the town, but prior to the Local Plan's adoption this idea was abandoned.
4.1 The site's zoning in the Ramsey Local Plan is not clear. This is a significant issue which was raised during pre-application discussions which the agent has not commented on in his Planning Statement. - 4.2 The policy that appears to apply to the application site is 'R/R/P2 A: Thornhill', and reads as follows:
"Development of this area should be completed using housing of mixed densities, as has happened to date. However, the exception is that area immediately south of Thornhill Manor and west of the Grove House Museum. This area should be used for no more than six houses, sited and designed as such to acknowledge and preserve the setting of Thornhill Manor and Grove House."
It is not clear what is mean by "that area immediately south of Thornhill Manor and west of the Grove House Museum" when referenced against the zoning that Policy 'R/R/P2 A: Thornhill' applies to. Indeed, that area is fully within Field 131137, which forms part of the Grove Museum land use zoning and therefore outside of the current application site. However, the policy is clearly intended to apply to a wider area than this, although it is very difficult to tell what that 'wider area' might be.
4.3 Some research into the evolution of the policy through the various draft iterations of the Ramsey Local Plan was undertaken in an effort to understand the basis of the policy. In the first instance, it is worth noting that 'Policy R/R/P1: Re-Zoning To Open Space' states (in part) as follows:
"The Isle of Man Planning Scheme (Ramsey Local Plan) (No. 2) Order 1998 re-zones the following areas from residential use to open space:
4.4 Several draft versions of the Ramsey Local Plan were prepared, and most of which were consulted upon. There does not appear to be retained written records of the consultation responses. The earliest version of 'R/R/P2 A: Thornhill' was entitled 'Thornhill Park/Clifton Drive/Balleigh Park' and read as follows:
"This area is being developed by a number of parties all of whose sites take access from a single through distributor road. The piecemeal nature of the development has resulted in no structure landscaping, no public open space common to the whole area or any other community facilities. The rolling topography has in fact resulted in the central lowest part of the site remaining undeveloped. Additionally land South of Thornhill - a substantial Georgian house - remains undeveloped. To provide an even greater variety of housing type it is proposed that maximum benefit would be obtained by using this remaining 'parkland' landscape for low density housing and open space. The latter would run adjacent the open fields of The Grove Museum."
4.5 This policy was accompanied by a plan of the area, with Field numbers 134080, 134081,
134082 and 134083 (as well as the single dwelling within the application site) carrying a label reading "develop for very low density housing only (2.5 per hectare)". A quick calculation of the four fields indicates they measure 2.41 hectares in size and, at 2.5 dwellings per hectare, this equates to 6.025 dwellings for the entirety of those fields.
4.6 It is of course true that this was an early draft version of a policy that was never adopted and therefore carries very limited material weight in assessing applications. It does, however, indicate how the policy might have intended to end up. The various drafts between that early version and that eventually adopted did show a general evolution from the one to the other.
4.7 It remains difficult to be clear as to what area should be developed for six dwellings. In all the versions of the policy, it was clear that any development must not visually impact on the Grove or Thornhill Manor, or the setting of the former. This has been a clear theme throughout, and it was considered that in the absence of a clear steer as to the principle of the proposal, the protection of the setting of the Grove in particular should be the most important material consideration. It was on this basis that the Department suggested the applicants have an independent Visual Impact Assessment prepared to substantiate their application. It is considered that a proposal that can be shown to not have a negative visual impact on the Grove and on its setting would be acceptable in principle. Strategic Plan Policy - 4.8 The Strategic Plan contains a number of objectives, paragraphs and policies of relevance. - 4.9 Strategic Policy 1 reads in full: "Development should make the best use of resources by:
4.10 The relevant extract of Strategic Policy 2 reads: "New development will be located primarily within our existing towns and villages...". Housing Policy 4 reiterates this text. - 4.11 The relevant extract of Strategic Policy 3 reads: "Proposals for development must ensure that the individual character of our towns and villages is protected or enhanced by: (b) having regard in the design of new development to the use of local materials and character." - 4.12 The relevant extract of Strategic Policy 4 reads: "Proposals for development must:
4.13 Strategic Policy 5 reads in full: "New development, including individual buildings, should be designed so as to make a positive contribution to the environment of the Island. In appropriate cases the Department will require planning applications to be supported by a Design Statement which will be required to take account of the Strategic Aim and Policies". - 4.14 Strategic Policy 10 reads in full: "New development should be located and designed such as to promote a more integrated transport network with the aim to:
4.15 General Policy 2 reads in part: "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:
4.16 Environment Policy 7 reads in full: "Development which would cause demonstrable harm to a watercourse, wetland, pond or dub, and which could 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:
4.17 Environment Policy 10 reads in part: "Where development is proposed on any site where in the opinion of the Department of Local Government and the Environment there is a potential risk of flooding, a flood risk assessment and details of proposed mitigation measures must accompany any application for planning permission". - 4.18 Environment Policy 42 reads in part: "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". - 4.19 Housing Policy 1 reads in full: "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". - 4.20 Housing Policy 3 reads in full: "The overall housing provision will be distributed as follows:
4.21 Housing Policy 5 reads in full: "In granting planning permission on land zoned for residential development or in predominantly residential areas the Department will normally require that 25% of provision should be made up of affordable housing. This policy will apply to developments of 8 dwellings or more". - 4.22 Recreation Policy 3 reads in part: "Where appropriate, new development should include the provision of landscaped amenity areas as an integral part of the design. New residential development of ten or more dwellings must make provision for recreational and amenity space in accordance with the standards specified in Appendix 6 to the Plan". - 4.23 Recreation Policy 4 reads in full: "Open Space must be provided on site or conveniently close to the development which it is intended to serve, and should be easily accessible by foot and public transport". - 4.24 Transport Policy 1 reads in full: "New development should, where possible, be located close to existing public transport facilities and routes, including pedestrian, cycle and rail routes". - 4.25 Transport Policy 2 reads in full: "The layout of development should, where appropriate, make provision for new bus, pedestrian and cycle routes, including linking into existing systems". - 4.26 Transport Policy 6 reads in full: "In the design of new development and transport facilities the needs of pedestrians will be given similar weight to the needs of other road users". - 4.27 Transport Policy 7 reads in full: "The Department will require that in all new development, parking provision must be in accordance with the Department's current standards". The standard specified in Appendix 7 is as follows:
Typical Residential: 2 spaces per unit, at least one of which is retained within the curtilage and behind the front of the dwelling.
Residential Terraces: 2 spaces per unit, if not within curtilage then located as close to units as possible without compromising residential amenity. Parking spaces should not be provided in front of the dwellings where this would result in a poor outlook for residents and would detract from the amenity of the area.
5.0 REPRESENTATIONS - 5.1 The former Housing Division of Department of Health and Social Care provided a Memorandum dated 18th March 2015. They commented that although the demand for first-time buyer housing is currently being satisfied by other developments, Ramsey Commissioners and Ramsey and North sheltered housing committee have waited lists of 122 and 112 respectively. They therefore request that 16 of the units (rounded down from 16.5) should be provided as affordable homes, and that this should be ensured by way of a Section 13 agreement. - 5.2 The Assistant Forester within the Department of Environment, Food & Agriculture commented on the proposal in correspondence dated 27th February 2015. He made five specific points:
On the submission of an amended Arboricultural report, he commented further on 10th September 2015 as follows:
"Having reviewed the amended 'arboricultural impact assessment' I think points 2, 3 and 4 are still issues.
"Re point 2, the amended arb report acknowledges that it is only 'presumed' that underground utilities will be installed outside of the RPAs. As some point this will need to be confirmed. The installation of utilities within RPAs is very undesirable and as the report suggests, will require 'additional consultation with a qualified arboricultural consultant'. (see sections 6.8 & 6.9 of the report).
"In addition to point 3, I would add that I expect these conifers to have not yet reached their ultimate height. Unless the owner is willing to maintain these trees (at their cost) at a height that allows future residents 'reasonable enjoyment' of their outdoor space you might receive complaints under the Trees and High Hedges Act (2005).
"Other than these points I would like to emphasise the point made in section 8.9 of the arb report:
'The successful retention of trees will be dependent on the implementation of a tree protection scheme. This should include detail of temporary protective fencing and ground protection, a means of undertaking new surface construction, boundary treatment, landscaping and a suitable engineering specification to minimise ground level changes within the rooting areas of retained trees along the eastern boundary. It is recommended that this information be presented in the form of an arboricultural method statement'
"See sections 7.8 - 7.11 of the arb report for detail on what needs to be included. The last point made in section 7.11 is particularly important; this is how they will turn words in to action and is an important aspect of compliance with BS5837.
"For the planting that will be done as part of the landscaping strategy, post-planting management and maintenance will be important for the new planting to survive. This scheme should have a management programme (with budgetary provision) in place for at least 5 years after planting. It should consider the following:
5.3 The Senior Biodiversity Officer within the Department of Environment, Food & Agriculture provided comments on 16th March 2015. He noted that although there was no finding of frogspawn on the site, some has been found just 185m away and so, although neither frogs nor lizards were found during his site visit, "reasonable avoidance measures should still be undertaken to minimise risks to any frogs or lizards that might be found during works on the site".
He also drew attention to two specific elements of the Ecological Assessment submitted with the application.
An invasive species designated under Schedule 8 of the Wildlife Act 1990 (that is, plants that it constitutes an offence to purposefully release into the wild) was discovered. Montbretia should be removed from the site, or at least separated from the works, prior to work commencing in order to avoid their spreading.
Secondly, a lighting plan has been recommended. This should demonstrate how impacts on foraging and commuting bats will be minimised, particularly with respect to the Corsican pines on the site that offer roost potential. There is no such lighting plan submitted as part of the application and, even though the species recorded are more tolerant of lighting than other bat species, the brown long-eared bat that has been recorded nearby is not tolerant of light, and therefore on this basis a lighting plan would be useful. Upon being asked, he advised that a lighting plan would ideally be sought prior to the application's determination.
5.4 The flood risk engineering team within the Manx Utilities Authority requested the applicant provide them with further details - they advised the Department of this on 9th April 2015. Their concerns related to the lack of any flood risk assessment, the lack of any detail in relation to the surface water systems, and the surface water exceedance flow path for the development. Comments were sent to the Manx Utilities Authority's water engineer team for their response; those comments, provided by the agent's flood risk engineer, read as follows:
"As noted in our Planning Statement section 4.7, the final determination of the size of the attenuation required will be dependent on detailed design and the undertaking of extensive on site testing to determine the permeability of the proposed garden soakaways. This detailed design works will be undertaken post planning and details will be provided to MU for their approval in the usual manner. A noted in section 4.5 we have confirmed that surface water flow will be attenuated for a 1in50 year return period. Section 4.7 of our Planning Statement confirms that our initial assessment is a calculated size of the attenuation as 300m3. This initial assessment is based on impermeable run-off from 60% of the dwellings and 100% of the public highway surface. We consider that this is a conservative approach for initial calculations and is sufficient to confirm the viability of the proposals at Planning Stage.
"As noted in section 5.1 of our Planning Statement the site is not identified as at risk of flooding on the mapping issued by MU. As noted in Section 5.3 we are aware that flooding of the highway does occur at the current low spot in Clifton Drive close to proposed Plot 25. From our own investigations locally the flooding occurs to Clifton Drive and then extends west along Romney Wynd following the ground profile. The flooding would appear to be primarily as a result of blocked or ineffective gullies/drainage in the vicinity and it is known that the MU have recently de-silted the surface water culvert below the area. It is the responsibility of MU to ensure that this culvert is well maintained to reduce the risk of localised flooding at this low point. As noted in Section 5.5 of our
Planning Statement, the proposed finished floor levels for Plot 25 and the adjacent plots is 11.4m above datum, this is 470mm above the existing low spot on Clifton Drive. As noted in Section 5.5, in a extreme flooding event (one outside standard design parameters) flood waters will collect at the low spot and then extend west along Romney Wynd following lower ground contours and as has happened in the recent past. Plot 25 and the adjacent properties are therefore adequately protected from localised flooding. We consider that the risk of flooding is appropriately addressed. The gardens associated with the plot 25 and the adjacent plots will be above surrounding road levels and therefore unlikely to be subject to water-logging."
5.5 Manx National Heritage commented on the application, received 17th March 2015. They advise that MNH owns and administers land immediately adjacent to the development site, and advise that that landholding "is used for a variety of purposes connected to the public enjoyment of the museum". They go on to comment on three specific matters:
5.6 The Department has been sent correspondence indicating that the movement of a bus stop outwith the application site to a position away from Plots 1-5 (some of the affordable units) would be acceptable to the Traffic Manager within the Department of Infrastructure. This correspondence was sent to the Department on 10th March 2015. - 5.7 Ramsey Town Commissioners commented on the proposal in correspondence received 25th March 2015. The Commissioners observed that:
5.8 Five private representations have been received from the following addresses:
5.9 The Manx Utilities Authority provided the following comments, received 6th March 2015: "Contact the Manx Utilities, Planning Department (Tel. 687781), to discuss the electricity supply for this application."
6.0 ASSESSMENT - 6.1 There is a very difficult balance to be struck. There clearly is a presumption in favour of new residential development on the site. The issue at hand is what level of development is appropriate. As outlined in Section 4, it is considered that a proposal not likely to have a harmful impact on the setting of the Grove in particular would, in principle, receive officer support. - 6.2 It is perhaps worth reflecting on the Visual Impact Assessment (VIA) in the first instance. They indicate that there is a "Pastoral farmland with a parkland character around the Grove Rural Life Museum", but there are a number of comments in the VIA that cause some concern. - 6.3 The consultants indicate that the site's "present value to the local community is primarily for its role in providing a green setting to development on Clifton Drive and Balleigh Court". This seems
6.5 They continue:
"Receptors [that is, people that can view a site that is proposed to be developed] are considered to be of high susceptibility to change where that are walkers using public footpaths and also walkers and cyclists using the local road network and local residents."
They do not include the Grove as one of the four "Receptors that have the potential to experience the greatest change in their views".
6.6 They further continue:
"6.10 The Grove Rural Life Museum is 100m to the east of the site. The museum is set within mature gardens including mature evergreen trees and shrubs. This vegetation generally encloses the site. Where views out are possible they are across a pastoral field towards development along Balleigh Park. The museum would retain its connection with the adjacent pastoral parkland fields and mature garden vegetation generally would screen the application site".
6.6 VIAs, as a general rule, conclude on the existing sensitivity of a particular landscape or area in order to understand how susceptible to change it is. For example, a poor quality landscape would be viewed as more able to accommodate proposed development than one of much greater visual quality even if the kind of development proposed on both the sites was identical. There is usually an acceptance within the assessment process that there will almost always be some form of impact from a proposed development, and that the magnitude of the effect relates to matters such
6.7 The submitted VIA predicts that the proposed 66 dwellings would result in a Moderate Adverse significance of effects being felt by residents along Clifton Drive and within parts of Balleigh Court, while a Minor Adverse significance of effects would be experienced by the other properties surrounding the site and where views are more heavily filtered, distant or oblique. These areas
6.9 All of this, including the earlier extracts in respect of the Grove, does seem to suggest that MNH's concerns about the consultants' understanding of where MNH's landholding ends are correct. No assessment of the proposed development from within the Grove's lands has been undertaken. The conclusion even without this is that the proposal would have an adverse impact on the landscape as viewed from the Grove itself; the impact from the development on the Grove's setting when within its grounds must be assumed to be greater given that the two areas of land adjoin one another. - 6.10 Further comments were received during the course of the application in respect of this issue from the consultants appointed to consider the visual impact of the proposal, and they indicated as follows:
"Our assessment would remain the same although the change in materials would be of benefit. An assessment of minor adverse significance is very low anyway. The only other judgement would be negligible which would indicate that the development would be barely perceptible in views which even with the change in material we could not argue that it would be barely noticeable."
6.11 Officers considered that the best balance to strike in respect of this issue was to ensure that the new dwellings were designed, finished and coloured in such a way to blend in with the existing tree coverage and long distance views beyond in such a way as to retain some naturalness to the setting of the Grove. This is not necessarily the ideal outcome and there still must be concern that the loss of open land that currently provides some of the setting to the Grove cannot be redeemed through the use of muted colours.
6.12 Manx stone and timber cladding would probably have been the most appropriate way to address this, but the approach taken is one of coloured render and cladding sheets of differing greys. This is not considered inappropriate but does certainly represent a missed opportunity to give the whole scheme a real design 'lift' through the use of natural materials. - 6.13 The focus of Strategic Policy 1 to ensure land is used efficiently is also important to note. The site lies on the edge of and feels a part of the surrounding housing; it is something of a unusual parcel of land to be found within a town and the argument that its development for dwellings at a low density would represent inefficient use of land does hold some weight. - 6.14 Bringing all of the above together, it is considered that an objection to the proposal on grounds of the number of dwellings proposed and the impact they would have on the setting of the Grove Museum would probably be difficult to sustain at appeal. This view has been reached having regard to the proposed finish of the dwellings facing towards the Grove, which will reduce their impact and also not repeat the mistake of the white render finish found on those dwellings to the west and which manifestly ruin the setting of the Grove. The wording of Strategic Policy 1 is clear. Whichever reading of the Local Plan Policy is taken, it is considered that, having particular regard to the circumstances of this case, the expectation that new development should make efficient use of land is judged to outweigh the Local Plan Policy. The site is within one of the Island's main towns and has good access to its services, jobs, shops and also public transport that connects with the wider Island as well. - 6.15 As such, but very much on balance, no objection is raised to the principle of the proposal. What remains for consideration is the detail. In no order, the primary issues are: (a) the design of the proposed dwellings and the site layout; (b) the impact of the new dwellings on existing dwellings' living conditions; (c) the living conditions afforded to the proposed dwellings inhabitants;
6.16 The proposed layout has been approached with some effort to reflect the existing features on the site. However, the layout is not especially different to that shown to officers prior to the application's submission and so it is not known to what extent the extra survey work Arboricultural, Visual Impact and Landscape, and Ecological assessments - has helped to evolve the scheme as a whole, and this is unfortunate.
6.18 The use of a 'circus' layout within the centre of the site, utilising some of the more important tree groupings on the site, is interesting and welcome, although it has not been approached in a way to maximise key views of dwellings and there may result in some unfortunate leftover space between the dwellings and the highway as a result of the layout proposed, contrary to good urban design practice. Moreover, it is considered that the circus' would be improved were it to blend in with the existing vegetation, which could be achieved through the use of appropriate timber fencing rather than the apparent open plan approach proposed. - 6.19 Elsewhere, views through the site along the main routes are long distance, through the site and into the fields beyond, which will create pleasing entrances to the site. - 6.20 The semi-detached rhythm of the proposed dwellings fronting Clifton Drive does not mirror the large bungalow opposite (so large, in fact, that their footprints are larger than the semidetached dwellings together) and nor will the height of these dwellings mirror their existing counterparts. - 6.21 The gardens for the smaller proposed units are generally quite small; in some cases they appear to be smaller than the footprint of the dwelling they would serve. However, concern about
at this time whether or not such a change would be unfortunate, further assessment of this in future would probably be useful and so a condition to this effect would probably not be inappropriate in this instance.
6.23 Around the estate there are several areas of green that would sit between or on the edge of hardstanding areas and which may be rarely maintained as a result. - 6.24 A large area of public open space is overlooked by the side gable of one dwelling although other areas are also more directly overlooked. This public open space is in the corner of the site and does sit alongside the setting of the Grove, which is welcome, but also appears to be located in the proposed position because the site is at its lowest here and is quite marshy. The value of this land from a public accessibility point of view is likely to be limited since it will feel to residents more a part of the land beyond than as part of their own estate. - 6.25 Tandem parking is shown on a number of plots, with parking areas located away from houses in other cases, and this is likely to lead to displaced parking throughout the site and possibly on Clifton Drive itself. While in respect of the latter this is not necessarily of huge concern, the proposed roads within the site are quite tight and, while this will help reduce traffic speeds, may result in highways dominated by cars - potentially to the detriment of the general visual amenity of the site. - 6.26 There is one public footpath that has been extended from the adjacent estate into the proposed layout. - 6.27 Some affordable housing units, to the west of the site, are located immediately adjacent the children's play area and will have an open and pleasant outlook, and ensure that the play area is surveilled, which is welcome. - 6.28 While the use of close-boarded timber fencing might not normally be the best design solution for garden boundaries, the tree presence across the site suggests this to be appropriate on this site. Manx stone walls would have been better, but used throughout the site they may have created in a slightly oppressive experience, especially alongside public open space. Even so, the regimented straight lines proposed for the garden boundaries does not necessarily seem like the best approach to be taken if the intention is to enable the scheme to sit within this natural environment. - 6.29 Although no reference has been made to this, the scheme does not appear to be in significant conflict with any of the 'Secure by Design' principles. - 6.30 While it is not ignored that the site does present many challenges to its redevelopment, the proposed layout is considered to represent a missed opportunity. There has been some effort to reflect both the site's own features and also those nearby, but the proposed site plan reads rather like the design approach has been to set out a layout for the houses based on the site's shape instead of on a good understanding of what the key features of the site are and how these might be best exploited to maximise the site's potential. This is unfortunate.
6.31 However, there remain a number of positive features and also features that are probably the best that the site can allow, and it is considered that an objection to the scheme on this basis could not be justified. - 6.32 The scheme's dwellings have been designed specifically for this site, which as a general principle is always welcome. There are several house types proposed on the estate, one of which is only repeated once, which is quite unusual for volume housebuilding. It is understood that design inspiration for the dwellings has been drawn from the form of the Grove, and in the hipped roofs this is evident. - 6.33 On the whole, the dwellings are fairly unobjectionable without being especially inspirational. They offer good and neat proportions, while the design language of the applicant's schemes elsewhere on the Island in recent times can be perceived. - 6.34 The finishing for the elevations of those dwellings facing towards the Grove to be of the cladding and colours shown on the amended plans should be controlled by condition. Colour is not normally something Planning becomes too heavily involved with as this can appear overly prescriptive and interfering with homeowners' rights. However, in this instance, the impact of the dwellings on the setting of the Grove is considered to be of such importance that a condition to that end would be required in order to make the development acceptable. - 6.35 In terms of this overall issue, the scheme is not considered to be in such conflict with Strategic Policy 5, Environment Policy 42 or parts (b), (f), (l) or (m) of General Policy 2 such as to warrant its refusal. Public Open Space and biodiversity - 6.36 In terms of the public open space provision, the scheme requires 3,366sqm for Formal Open Space, 1,122sqm of Children's Play Space and a further 1,496sqm of Amenity Space. As a whole the total requirement would be 5,984sqm; proposed for the site overall is 5,992sqm. The agent indicates that Ramsey's level of formal open space (generally this is for sporting use) is already of a high level and, in view of the biodiversity interest on the site, the amount of space required for formal open space should be added to that proposed as amenity space. There is some logic to this argument. It is also noted that the Local Authority has not objected to this element of the proposal. - 6.37 In the low-lying part of the site, which is evidently prone to low-level flooding or standing water, the Ecological Assessment notes that this area provides an opportunity to create a pond or other wetland habitat, and designed to benefit wildlife and suitably planted with native aquatic planting species. Although the Planning Statement submitted with the application indicates that a "managed wetland" is accordingly proposed, the details on this are limited. There are some helpful landscape strategy plans, which indicate a general approach along these lines, and are also much more specific with respect to the tree-planting proposed throughout the site, but the application contains insufficient information on which to be certain that such a wetland (even less a 'managed' wetland) will be created here. - 6.38 A condition requiring a biodiversity management plan to be submitted and approved for the wetland habitat would be appropriate in this instance and would, when satisfactorily discharged, balance favourably against the failure of the scheme to provide any formal open space at all. The impact of the new dwellings on existing dwellings' living conditions - 6.39 The site is quite well-removed from nearby dwellings, and is also set down quite significantly from those to the south of the site. As such, the distances between those proposed and the existing is really quite generous and so there is unlikely to be a significantly harmful impact on
neighbouring living conditions. The proposal is therefore considered to comply with part (g) of General Policy 2.
The living conditions afforded to the proposed dwellings inhabitants
6.40 As originally designed, the two largest Plots sat directly behind, and ran the length of, several of the smaller Plots to the southwest, at a short distance and also on a higher topography. This was considered likely to provide an uncomfortable relationship between the two sets of dwellings in respect of both privacy and oppressiveness, and as such a slightly amended scheme was sought. Preferably, these two Plots would have been replaced by those found elsewhere around the central 'circus' and thus really reinforced the sense of place created in that central part of the site. However, the amended design and positioning of the two larger proposed dwellings represents an acceptable compromise. - 6.41 This was the only real concern in respect of relationships between the proposed dwellings on the site. As ever in these circumstances, rather less attention needs paying to such a consideration than where a new dwelling is proposed to be located adjacent an existing dwelling since people purchasing the houses will always need to make something of this judgement themselves. Highway safety and parking - 6.42 General Policy 2 and Transport Policy 7 set out the general requirements in respect of parking standards and highway safety. The submitted plans show visibility splays of 2.4m by 45m in both directions from the two proposed accesses off Clifton Drive itself. These seem appropriate, and, having been on-site, the available visibility in both directions may well be longer distance than this. A condition restricting the height of potential obstructions within the visibility splays shown would be appropriate to apply. - 6.43 The access routes into the site are slightly curved, and will be on undulating land, and these two points serve to mean that visibility along these will be acceptable but also sufficiently broken by changes in direction and topography to ensure that road speeds are kept fairly low. - 6.44 Turning to the parking arrangements proposed, some of which have already been discussed, it is considered that these would be appropriate and would not cause undue harm to highway safety. The tandem parking shown on certain plots would not be ideal, and it is almost inevitable that some people will choose to park on the road, but the roads are wide enough that this should, hopefully, not be on the pavement, which is always a worry. On-street parking will also help to further reduce road speeds. Flooding - 6.45 The site is not in an area at great risk of flooding albeit that the lowest part of the site was seen to be very damp and adjacent to this - even marshy in appearance. However, the comments received from the flood risk engineer appointed by the applicant seems to address the localised flooding / standing water issues, which were also raised by some local residents, and it therefore is concluded that the site is not at so significant risk from flooding as to warrant the application's refusal in line with Environment Policies 7 and 10 and also part (l) of General Policy 2. Possible presence of bats - 6.46 The Senior Biodiversity Officer's comments with regards the potential presence of bats were forwarded to the agent for his consideration. While a condition requiring a bat survey be carried out would not be inappropriate in this instance, should any such survey indicate a need to minimise light pollution in that area of the site near to the bats that are found - or could be found if the
7.0 RECOMMENDATION - 7.1 The proposal, overall, represents an acceptable residential scheme. It has missed several opportunities with respect its layout, house design / finishes, biodiversity maximisation and tree coverage. The principle is considered acceptable on balance. However, it is considered that a fundamental objection to the proposal could not be sustained and the application is therefore recommended for approval. - 7.2 Several conditions, discussed already, are recommended, while a legal agreement pursuant to Section 13 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1999 will also be required in order to ensure the affordable housing provision is adequately made.
8.0 INTERESTED PERSON STATUS - 8.1 By virtue of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) (No 2) Order 2013, the following persons are automatically interested persons:
8.2 In addition to those above, article 6(3) of the Order requires the Department to decide which persons (if any) who have made representations with respect to the application, should be treated as having sufficient interest in the subject matter of the application to take part in any subsequent proceedings relating to the application.
In this instance, it is recommended that the following persons have sufficient interest and should be awarded the status of an Interested Person:
In this instance, it is recommended that the following persons do not have sufficient interest and should not be awarded the status of an Interested Person:
Finally, it is not possible to grant Interested Person Status to Officers within the Department of which the Planning and Building Control Directorate is itself a part, which includes the following:
Recommendation Recommended Decision: Permitted
Date of Recommendation:
14.09.2015
Conditions and Notes for Approval / Reasons and Notes for Refusal
C : Conditions for approval
Reason: To ensure the delivery of affordable housing in accordance with Housing Policy 6 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2007.
Reason: In the interests of the character and appearance of the site and surrounding area, and specifically with reference to the Grove Rural Life Museum.
Reason: To safeguard the areas to be landscaped and the existing trees and planting to be retained within the site.
diseased shall be replaced by a similar species, of a size to be first approved in writing by the Department, during the next planting season or in accordance with a programme of replacement to be agreed in writing with the Department.
Reason: To safeguard the appearance of the development and the surrounding area. Trees both individual and as a group contribute a significant amount to the site in terms of biodiversity and public amenity value; their protection is therefore central to the acceptability of the scheme.
Reason: To safeguard the appearance of the development and the surrounding area. Trees in both individual and as a group contribute a significant amount to the site in terms of biodiversity and public amenity value; their protection is therefore central to the acceptability of the scheme.
Reason: To ensure that sufficient provision is made for off-street parking and turning of vehicles in the interests of highway safety.
Reason: In the interests of ensuring safe pedestrian access to, and movement within, the application site.
Reason: The site is characterised by the trees and greenery intended for retention, and further loss of this could have a harmful effect on the public amenity of the area.
N 1. The applicant should take all reasonable steps to ensure that roads and footways are usable by those who may be occupying the completed houses while construction continues elsewhere on the estate.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------The approval hereby issued relates to the following plans, date-stamped as having been received
I can confirm that this decision has been made by the Interim Director of Planning and Building Control in accordance with the authority afforded to that Officer by the appropriate DEFA Delegation.
Decision Made : Permitted Date : 18.04.2016 Determining officer
Signed : J CHANCE Jennifer Chance Interim Director of Planning and Building Control
Copyright in submitted documents remains with their authors. Request removal
