Officer Report

Application No.: 15/01392/A Applicant: Mr Alan Cope Proposal: Approval in principle for four detached dwellings with associated parking addressing siting and means of access Site Address: Land Adjacent To Brookfield Court Claughbane Drive Ramsey Isle of Man Case Officer : Mr Chris Balmer Photo Taken: 05.01.2016 Site Visit: 05.01.2016 Expected Decision Level: Planning Committee

Officer’s Report

THE PLANNING APPLICATION IS BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMITTEE AT THE REQUEST OF THE DIRECTOR OF PLANNING AND BUILDING CONTROL DIRECTORATE

1.0 SITE - 1.1 The site represents a parcel of undeveloped land adjacent to Brookfield Court, Brookfield Avenue, Ramsey located on the eastern side of Claughbane Drive and south of Brookfield Court. - 1.2 The site currently has a 1 metre high timber fence which runs along the north, south and western boundaries of the site. The character of the site is open space, made up of grasses and Willow plants. - 1.3 A public footpath runs along the northern boundary of the site providing pedestrian access from Claughbane Drive and Laurys Avenue. - 1.4 To the north, east and south of the site there are residential properties. To the west is Claughbane Drive and on the opposite side of the road is an area of public open space, which was provided as part of 'The Pavilion's' residential development to the west. Accordingly, when travelling along Claughbane Drive the application site and the 'The Pavilion's' open space provide a collective green space, between the surrounding existing residential development and on either side of Claughbane Drive.

2.0 PROPOSAL - 2.1 The application seeks approval in principle for residential development to provide four detached dwellings with integral garaging.

3.0 LAND USE ZONING / PLANNING POLICIES - 3.1 The application site is within an area recognised as being an area of "Predominately Residential", under the Ramsey Local Plan. The site is not within a Conservation Area. - 3.2 In terms of strategic plan policy, the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2007 contains the following policies that are considered specifically material to the assessment of this current planning application:

3.3 Strategic Policy 1 states: "Development should make the best use of resources by:

• (a) optimising the use of previously developed land, redundant buildings, unused and underused land and buildings, and re-using scarce indigenous building materials;
• (b) ensuring efficient use of sites, taking into account the needs for access, landscaping, open space(1) and amenity standards; and
• (c) being located so as to utilise existing and planned infrastructure, facilities and services."

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 Environment Policy 42 states: "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. Inappropriate backland development, and the removal of open or green spaces which contribute to the visual amenity and sense of place of a particular area will not be permitted. Those open or green spaces which are to be preserved will be identified in Area Plans." - 3.6 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:

• (a) is in accordance with the design brief in the Area Plan where there is such a brief;
• (b) respects the site and surroundings in terms of the siting, layout, scale, form, design and landscaping of buildings and the spaces around them;
• (c) does not affect adversely the character of the surrounding landscape or townscape;
• (d) does not adversely affect the protected wildlife or locally important habitats on the site or adjacent land, including water courses;
• (e) does not affect adversely public views of the sea;
• (f) incorporates where possible existing topography and landscape features, particularly trees and sod banks;
• (g) does not affect adversely the amenity of local residents or the character of the locality;
• (h) provides satisfactory amenity standards in itself, including where appropriate safe and convenient access for all highway users, together with adequate parking, servicing and manoeuvring space;
• (i) does not have an unacceptable effect on road safety or traffic flows on the local highways;
• (j) can be provided with all necessary services;
• (k) does not prejudice the use or development of adjoining land in accordance with the appropriate Area Plan;
• (l) is not on contaminated land or subject to unreasonable risk of erosion or flooding;
• (m) takes account of community and personal safety and security in the design of buildings and the spaces around them; and
• (n) is designed having due regard to best practice in reducing energy consumption."

3.7 Housing Policy 4 states: "New housing will be located primarily within our existing towns and villages, or, where appropriate, in sustainable urban extensions(1) of these towns and villages where identified in adopted Area Plans: otherwise new housing will be permitted in the countryside only in the following exceptional circumstances:

• (a) essential housing for agricultural workers in accordance with Housing Policies 7, 8, 9

and 10;

• (b) conversion of redundant rural buildings in accordance with Housing Policy 11; and
• (c) the replacement of existing rural dwellings and abandoned dwellings in accordance

with Housing Policies 12, 13 and 14."

3.8 Ramsey Local Plan - Policy R/R/P3: Infill/Backland Sites states; "Within areas zoned for Predominately Residential use there will be a general presumption against the development of those sites which provide attractive, natural "breathing" spaces between established residential buildings.

These sites will often include trees, mature landscaping, or simply green space. Any possible development of such sites should form the subject of consultation with the Office of Planning prior to the submission of any application."

4.0 PLANNING HISTORY - 4.1 The following previous planning applications are considered relevant in the assessment and determination of this application: - 4.2 Approval in principle for residential development to provide four detached dwellings with integral garaging - Land Adjacent To Brookfield Court, Brookfield Avenue, Ramsey - 08/01795/A REFUSED AT APPEAL for the following reasons:-

1. "It is considered that the piece of land referred to in this application creates a "breathing space", the development of which would remove an area of open space which was included in the original layouts for the area, and contributes to the visual amenity of the street scene. The loss of this land would result in a loss of open space to the detriment of current residents. It has been established that the building of dwellings should be directed to sustainable locations and the Department is currently undertaking new area plans for the whole island, which will consider the potential need for additional housing. Since the area plans have not been established and are still on going and since not all of the smaller "breathing spaces" have been developed, the release of this site for housing is considered premature at this stage as, in the absence of it being proven that there is a need for the proposed housing that could not be met on a preferable site, the proposed development would be contrary to Policy R/R/P3 of the Ramsey Local Plan (Planning Circular 2/99), Environment Policy 42 and General Policy 2 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan (June 2007)."

4.3 Approval in principle for erection of six houses - 01/02334/A - land adjacent to Brookfield Court, Brookfield Avenue, Ramsey - REFUSED AT APPEAL for the following reasons:-

1. "Although the site is within an area designated for predominantly residential use by the Ramsey Local Plan, it is an area of amenity space which was included in the original layouts for the area as open space, and which acts as a breathing space in a built up area; development of the site as proposed would thus result in a loss of open space to the detriment of current residents, and would be contrary to the provisions of Policy R/R/P3 of the Ramsey Local Plan."

4.4 Approval in principle for erection of seven houses - 01/00402/A - land adjacent to Brookfield Court, Brookfield Avenue, Ramsey - REFUSED AT REVIEW for the following reasons:-

• 1. "Although the site is within an area designated for predominantly residential use by the Ramsey Local Plan, it is an area of amenity space which was included in the original layouts for the area as open space, and which acts as a breathing space in a built up area; development of the site as proposed would thus result in a loss of open space to the detriment of the current residents, and would be contrary to the provisions of Policy R/R/P3 of the Ramsey Local Plan.
• 2. There is insufficient car parking provision indicated on the submitted plan as to accommodate the demand likely to be created by the proposed development, and would thus result in parking outside the site and on the access lane to the detriment of other road users."

4.5 Development of phase 4 sheltered housing scheme, erection of 11 houses, Ballastowell Gardens, Claughbane, Ramsey - 88/01809/B - APPROVED - 4.6 Erection of 28 No. houses and three blocks of garages, Phase 3, Ballastowell Gardens, Ramsey - 88/01263/B - APPROVED - 4.7 Construction of Phase 2 Development including roads, sewers and 16 no. dwellings and warden's house, Ballastowell Gardens, Claughbane, Ramsey - 88/00470/B - APPROVED - 4.8 Layout of Phase 1 roads, plots and sewers of a 5-Phase development, Ballastowell Gardens, Claughbane, Ramsey - 87/01193/B - APPROVED

4.9 Construction of dwelling units 1-20, comprising Phase 1 development, Ballastowell Gardens, Claughbane, Ramsey - 87/01191/B - APPROVED - 4.10 Approval in principle to erection 65-75 sheltered accommodation units with roads, car parking and landscaping, Ballastowell Gardens, Claughbane, Ramsey - 87/00310/A - APPROVED

5.0 REPRESENTATIONS - 5.1 The Ramsey Commissioners have objected to the application for the following reasons (received on 22.01.2016):"Whilst it is appreciated that this application is in principle only, it is considered that the number of properties and the layout is considered to be an over-intensive use of the site and would result in a poor streetscape for this prominent site. The proposed layout of Plots 3 and 4 would constitute a tandem development with shared access off the Ballastowell Gardens access road.

Whilst not shown as part of this application, an existing sewer passes through this site and development cannot be permitted whilst the sewer remains in close proximity to the proposed development."

5.2 DOI Highways Services have deferred from making a decision (received on 04.01.2016) for the following reasons:"Awaiting further information from the applicant regarding the visibility splays from the proposed accesses onto the Highway, Splays of 2.4 x 36 metres are required over land within the ownership of the applicant.". - 5.3 Manx Utilities - Drainage have objected to the application (received on 04.01.2016) which can be summarised as; the site is congested with both foul and surface water sewers which will impact upon the position of the four dwellings and the application does not contain any proposals on how these sewers will suitably diverted to meet with Manx Utilities current requirements. - 5.4 The owner/occupier of 12 Brookfield Court, Brookfield Avenue, Ramsey, has objected (received on 26.01.16) to the application: proposals will cause even more flooding to what has occurred and which has increased since the Pavilions has been built on the other side of the road it has got far worse. - 5.5 The owner/occupier of Knock E Dhooney, Smeale, Andreas, has objected (received on 21.01.16) to the application; whilst not a neighbour I drive past the site daily to visit parents at Brookfield Nursing & Residential Home which adjoins the site; road safety concerns of access onto the road which serves the nursing home has at best only 20 metres visibility to the left; also concerns of the access onto Claughbane Drive due to congestion of road and parked vehicles; Concerns of flooding from surface water which already occurs, which sometimes makes the roadway (Claughbane Drive/Brookfield) too difficult or impassable; with the removal of the existing vegetation and replacement with the dwellings, the surface water from this site will run straight off rather than percolate slowly; the site is one of the few open green spaces within the built environment and breaks up the dense housing, especially on the eastern side of Brookfield; and concerns of the placing of the site advertisement notice. - 5.6 The owners/occupiers of 1 Greenside Court, Brookfield Avenue, Ramsey have objected (received on 21.01.16) to the application; there is already significant drainage problems in the area due to excessive surface water runoff, at least 3 events last year and the further reduction of any land for soak away would further compound the problem; the site is an over development of the site and some of the dwellings have 'postage stamp' areas of grass; there is a long established bus stop recognised by residents and the bus company in the area of the traffic calming/road sign it is important this is retained; concerns of daylight for the residents of Brookfield Court; the residents of the area regularly park on the road in the area of the site and it is a very significant issue, for example each property has 2 cars you need to consider an extra 8 cars by the development; and no

• objection against the development of the land but would question whether four properties is acceptable due to issues mentioned.
• 5.7 The owner/occupier of 23 Laury's Avenue, Ramsey, has objected (received on 20.01.16 and

• 06.01.16) to the application: several applications in the past 27 years all of which have been refused on the basis that development of the land would be detrimental to the area; low level of natural breathing spaces in the general area around Claughbane Drive; surface water run-off and sewerage drains in this area are diabolical, the proposed development would connect into existing systems which are already inadequate to cope with the existing problems; flooding of the adjacent highway is common; nothing has changed in the last 27 years, either to the land, policies, drainage etc; the proposed tree planting is insufficient as proposed; the proposed car parking spaces at the back of the properties will cause nuisance and fumes into the gardens of Nr 22 and 23 Laury's Avenue gardens; the land used to be played on by local children till the applicant fenced off the whole site; There is land in Ramsey allocated for Residential development which has not yet been developed; plenty of housing for sale in Ramsey and there is no need for further housing; since the permissions was given on the adjacent site for 15 flats the traffic levels have increased and parking is a real issue at all times; highway safety concerns of additional traffic; concern of position of site notice; and the site should be kept as open space and breathing space rather build up an already congested area.

5.8 The owners/occupiers of 22 Laury's Avenue, Ramsey, have objected (received on 18.01.16) to the application: several applications in the past 30 years all of which have been refused on the basis that the land is designated as breathing space and green belt; no policy change in 5 years; drains cannot currently cope never mind more development on the site; highway safety concerns; and as stated by the Planning Inspectors report last time "use of land at the present time would be premature" therefore surely this situation has not changed. - 5.9 The owner/occupier of 5 Brookfield Court, Brookfield Avenue, Ramsey, has objected (received on 12.01.16) to the application: numerous applications in the past 30 years all of which have been refused; land is prone to flooding of the area as drains cannot cope with the surface water as it is; any development would increase traffic in an already congested area; the proposed tree planting would obscure light from Brookfield Courts flats and therefore detrimental to the residents of the said flats; and the area has been zoned as breathing space/green belt. - 5.10 The owner/occupier of 25 Fairway Drive, Ramsey, has objected (received on 06.01.16) to the application: the site remains the only remaining area of green open space ion the entire estate and has been in the past forms a natural breathing space, its loss would be detrimental to the estate in general; highway safety concerns relating to proposed accesses and use of Claughbane estate road which has speed humps, parked vehicles and bus stops in the area of the accesses; since the last application in 2008 the area in question floods during the sort of extreme weather events we are now experiencing; the existing surface water drainage in this area cannot currently cope and the proposed development will add further surface water and additional road drainage into the existing system and exacerbate the flooding problems; since the last application the owner has fenced the area off and allowed it to overgrown into a sea of weeds and brambles in a perceived effort to make it look unsightly as possible and annoy the residents of the neighbourhood.

6.0 ASSESSMENT - 6.1 Given the land-use designation and the type of development the following elements are relevant to consideration in the determination of this application; (a) principle of development and the potential impact upon the visual amenities of the area; (b) potential impact upon neighbouring amenities; (c) potential impact upon highway safety; and (d) Potential drainage/flooding concerns.

PRINCIPLE OF DEVELOPMENT AND THE POTENTIAL IMPACT UPON THE VISUAL AMENITIES OF THE AREA

6.2 The first and main issue relating to this application is the principle of residential development on this site. From studying the previous applications, especially the appeal decisions for application 01/02334 and 08/01795/A, it was concluded by the Appeals Inspector for PA 01/02334 that:-

"In principle I accept that the land could be developed in a manner that would have little impact on the residential amenities of the properties in Laury's Avenue due to the topography of the site. There would be much greater impact on some of the flats at Brookfield Court. There is land in Ramsey allocated for residential development and not yet developed and I am not persuaded therefore that there is an overriding need for the release of this site. The piecemeal erosion of these small breathing spaces, which do contribute positively to the residential environment, is in my opinion undesirable in such circumstances. I have noted that the Strategic Plan is only at the draft stage. Any reconsideration of the use of land at the present time would in my opinion be premature."

6.3 Since this previous refused application, the Strategic plan has been adopted (June 2007). Within this document Strategic Policies 1 & 2 require that new dwellings be located within existing sustainable settlements. - 6.4 The Inspector for application PA08/01795/A states: "Policies in both the Ramsey Local Plan and the Strategic Plan are opposed to the loss of open or green space which contribute to visual amenity or sense of place. More weight should be given to the recently approved Strategic Plan than to the 10 year old Ramsey Local Plan. This 2007 plan states in paragraph 7.34.1 that Area Plans should identify areas which have positive amenity value and which add to the attractiveness and interest of a local area." - 6.5 The Inspector goes on to comment: "This site currently has positive amenity value. It looks like a very small meadow. It is reasonably well maintained by the owner. It adds to the attractiveness and interest of Claughbane Avenue and the surrounding area. Almost any well maintained open space in urban areas provides pleasant and welcome breaks from development. This particular open space makes a useful contribution to the visual amenity of this part of Claughbane Drive. Loss of this open space just amounts to a serious planning objection. This case is finely balanced.

Whether the site would merit inclusion in the North Area Plan as an important open space is impossible to predict in the absence of any accurate assessment of housing demand and simply and in the absence of how open space would be assessed in that new plan. If that plan did not designate the land as important open space, it would be difficult to resist suitable housing development on the site."

6.6 In conclusion the Inspector comments: "The next step is to consider if there are any special reason which could outweigh the planning objection. None were submitted. Insufficient evidence of any compelling housing need to develop the site was submitted. It follows that the appeal should fail." - 6.7 Again, the applicant has neither commented on this matter nor produced any evidence to demonstrate that there is a shortfall of housing demand in Ramsey and therefore the site should be developed on this basis. - 6.8 In terms of evidence, Planning Policy every year undertake an update of both the Residential Land Availability Study (RLAS). The residential study monitors the rate at which housing is being completed across the Island. This provides valuable data on where there is land still available for housing. The last study was undertaken and published last year (10th July 2015) where was found that:

• "The North has the largest amount of available land at 60.5 hectares, followed by the West at 35.2 hectares and the South at 30.69 hectares. The East has the least amount of available land at 14.7 hectares."
• 6.9 More specific to Ramsey there are a number of planning approval which are extant for large scale housing developments, which are in the process of being undertaken and/or have yet to commence. These being land at Poylldooey/Ballachrink (West Ramsey), at Ormly Hall- Royal Park (north Ramsey, south of former Grand Island site) and recently completed development along The Crescent (south Ramsey). It should be noted that these approved developments have a mixture of house types and are not just one type.
• 6.10 It should be noted planning approvals have been given in the past for developing land designated for development, but arguable 'natural breathing spaces' within Ramsey.
• 6.11 The first area was the land at the junction of May Hill and Glen Elfin Road, Ramsey (04/02353/A), which initially was refused due to over development. However, the Appeal Inspector considered Policy R/R/P3 and stated that "there is logic in attempting to use suitable remaining urban land rather than continuing to expand into rural areas" and continued on to state that they were "aware of the presumption against developing such land as set out in Policy R/R/P3 of the Local Plan, but given the condition of the site and its location within an urban area, I support the principle of developing the site with housing.". It should be noted that this site was significantly smaller (376sqm approx) than the current application site (1872sqm).
• 6.12 There have been further parcels of land, mainly the land adjacent to Summerland and Parsonage Road where a number of plots (1500sqm in total) have been granted planning approval for dwellings (two have been competed for a number of years and a further plot is currently under construction). However, there are differences between these plots and the application site; firstly the application was larger, but also it was considered by the Planning Directorate and Inspectors that allowing dwellings on these sites of open space would not have an adverse impact upon the properties along Summerland, or detract from their contribution to the street scene. The Inspector for application 08/01795/A was aware of these applications when making his decision. As indicated in these applications each application needs to be judged on its own merits and what may be acceptable on one site, may not be acceptable on another. This statement is once again relevant to this current application.
• 6.13 A point which has not been strongly made previously, is that the site formed a small part of the overall site to develop Ballastowell Gardens to the southeast of the site. Under planning application 88001809/B this area was approved as being a landscaped area and a condition of that approval stated: "C 17. The area of land adjacent to Claughbane Drive is to be landscaped in accordance with a proper landscaping scheme no future applications for buildings on this site will be considered."
• 6.14 Whilst in legal terms you cannot prevent any person from making a planning application, and therefore the condition stated is not correct on this point, it is very clear the intentions of this approval was to ensure this site was landscaped, and retained for this purpose in the future as part of the overall development.
• 6.15 Visiting the area the site still provides a breathing space, which does contribute positively to the residential environment. In addition, in this instance it is considered the application site provides a more natural 'breathing space' between the established residential buildings, and the housing estates of Claughbane Drive and Claughbane Avenue, compared to the other sites indicated within this report. The importance of maintaining the local plan presumption against development is therefore considered to be clearer.
• 6.16 Accordingly, it is considered there is a significant amount of land still available which has extant approvals in the north of the Island and Ramsey. Given this and that no evidence has been

submitted by the applicant to suggest there is a current shortage of housing land in the area, it is considered once again the proposal would not provide sufficient reason to outweigh the planning objection in terms of the loss of the natural breathing space and the positive visual amenities this area givens between existing built development.

POTENTIAL IMPACT UPON NEIGHBOURING AMENITIES

6.17 The second issue relates to the potential impact of the development upon the residential amenities of neighbouring properties. The application is for approval in principle only, and therefore full plans have not been submitted. Indicative plans show how four dwellings could be arranged within the site. At this stage due to there being no detailed drawings, it is not possible to make a full assessment of the potential impacts upon the neighbouring residential properties. However, from studying the indicative plans, whilst the size of the dwelling in relating to Plot 1 appear too large for the plot, it is considered at this stage, that a scheme could be implemented for four dwellings which would provide acceptable amenities for future occupiers of the proposed dwellings, whilst not having a significant impact upon the residential amenities of the neighbouring properties. POTENTIAL IMPACT UPON HIGHWAY SAFETY - 6.18 A number of concerns have been raised in relation to the additional traffic generated by the proposed four dwellings and whether the existing highway network can accommodate this increase in traffic. Highway Services have raised no objection to the proposal on this ground. Furthermore, this has not been a refusal reason for the last planning application 08/01795/A. Accordingly, given these points, but especially given that no concerns have been raised by Highway Services; it is not a significant reason to warrant a refusal on these grounds. - 6.19 Highways have sought visibility splays of 2.4 x 36 metres over land within the ownership of the applicant. All but one of the accesses can provide the required splays. The exception is Plot 1 which would have a small section of the splay run over the public footpath and a small section of the concrete hardstanding fronting Brookfield Court to the north of the site. Whilst it could be argued that works at Brookfield Court could be undertaken (wall/structures etc), it is unlikely any works above 1.05 metres would be permitted or could be undertaken under Permitted Development. Furthermore such works would impact upon the visibility splay of Brookfield's own access; and therefore it is reasonable to conclude it is in the interests of the owners/occupants of Brookfield to retain the status quo/not undertaken works which would block visibility. For these reasons it is considered the proposals would not have a highway safety impacts to warrant a refusal on this ground. - 6.20 In terms of parking arrangements; the application is only an approval in principle, a full assessment cannot be made. However, the indicative plans do show possible driveway layouts / turning areas and also state that each dwelling would have two off road parking spaces and tuning provision for each dwelling. These provisions would be in accordance with the Isle of Man Strategic Plan parking standards. POTENTIAL DRAINAGE/FLOODING CONCERNS - 6.21 Evidence submitted by local residents indicate there is drainage concerns in the area, namely from surface water runoff and what appears to be the inadequacy and/or blocking of existing drainage system. Comments have been received from Manx Utilities - Drainage, objecting to the application due to the number of both foul and surface water sewers which run throughout the site which will impact upon the position of the four dwellings and the application does not contain any proposals on how these sewers will suitably diverted to meet with Manx Utilities current requirements. There is no specific planning policy which relates to this type of issue. If this application was approved, Building Regulations would consider this issue in further detail and the applicant would also need permission from Manx Utilities to alter/divert any foul or surface water drain. Accordingly, whilst this is clearly an issue the applicant needs to address, it is considered there is other legalisation/mechanisms which would deal with this matter.

- 7.0 RECOMMENDATION

7.1 It is an undeniable fact that the piece of land referred to does create a "breathing space", the development of which would remove an area of open space which was included in the original layouts for the area, and contributes to the visual amenity of the street scene. The loss of this land would result in a loss of open space to the detriment of current residents and visitors of the area. It has also been established that the building of dwellings should be directed to sustainable locations. However, the evidence from the Planning Policy section and current outstanding planning applications, that there is clear still sufficient residential land available in Ramsey and the North of the Island and as the applicant has provided no conflicting evidence to the contrary; once again it is considered premature at this stage to develop the site as proposed and therefore the development would be contrary to Policy R/R/P3 of the Ramsey Local Plan (Planning Circular 2/99), Environment Policy 42 and General Policy 2 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan (June 2007). - 8.0 INTERESTED PERSON STATUS

8.1 By virtue of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) (No 2) Order 2013 as modified by the Transfer of Planning and Building Control Functions Order 2015, the following persons are automatically interested persons:

• (a) The applicant, or if there is one, the applicant's agent;
• (b) The owner and the occupier of any land that is the subject of the application or any other person in whose interest the land becomes vested;
• (c) Any Government Department that has made written submissions relating to planning considerations with respect to the application that the Department considers material;
• (d) The Highways Division of the Department; and
• (e) The local authority in whose district the land the subject of the application is situated.

With effect from 1 June 2015, the Transfer of Planning & Building Control Functions Order 2015 amends the Town and Country Planning Act 1999 to give effect to the meaning of the word 'Department' to be the Department of Environment, Food and Agriculture unless otherwise directed by that Order.

8.2 In line 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 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 - Drainage

The owner/occupier of 25 Fairway Drive, Ramsey The owner/occupier of 5 Brookfield Court, Brookfield Avenue, Ramsey The owners/occupiers of 22 Laury's Avenue, Ramsey The owner/occupier of 23 Laury's Avenue, Ramsey The owners/occupiers of 1 Greenside Court, Brookfield Avenue, Ramsey The owner/occupier of 12 Brookfield Court, Brookfield Avenue, Ramsey

8.3 In line 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 owner/occupier of Knock E Dhooney, Smeale, Andreas

9.0 SUPPLEMENTARY REPORT At the Planning Committee meeting held on the 29th February 2016, the Planning Committee determined to refuse the planning application for the reason recommended, together with an

additional reason which addressed the concerns raised by the Drainage Division of the Manx Utilities Authority. Recommendation Recommended Decision: Refused Date of Recommendation: 19.02.2016

• R 1. It is considered that the piece of land referred to in this application creates a "breathing space", the development of which would remove an area of open space which was included in the original layouts for the area, and contributes to the visual amenity of the street scene. The loss of this land would result in a loss of open space to the detriment of current residents. It has been established that the building of dwellings should be directed to sustainable locations and the Department is currently undertaking new area plans for the whole Island, which will consider the potential need for additional housing. Since the area plans have not been established and are still ongoing and since not all of the smaller "breathing spaces" have been developed, the release of this site for housing is considered premature at this stage as, in the absence of it being proven that there is a need for the proposed housing that could not be met on a preferable site, the proposed development would be contrary to Policy R/R/P3 of the Ramsey Local Plan (Planning Circular 2/99), Environment Policy 42 and General Policy 2 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan (June 2007).
• R 2. Insufficient information has been provided to determine whether the siting of four dwellings as proposed would not impact upon the foul and surface water sewers which run through the site.

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 : Refused Committee Meeting Date: 29.02.2016

Signed : C Balmer Presenting Officer

Further to the decision of the Committee an additional report/condition reason was required (included as supplemental paragraph to the officer report).

Signatory to delete as appropriate YES/NO See supplementary report at paragraph 9.0

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.