Loading document...
Application No.: 14/01370/A Applicant: Mr Adrian Kermode Proposal: Approval in principle for the demolition of existing property and erection of three dwellings addressing siting and means of access Site Address: Quarterbridge House Quarterbridge Road Douglas Isle Of Man IM2 3RL Case Officer : Miss S E Corlett Photo Taken: 08.04.2015 Site Visit: 08.04.2015 Expected Decision Level: Planning Committee
THIS APPLICATION IS REFERRED TO THE PLANNING COMMITTEE AS THE APPLICANT IS A MEMBER OF THE PLANNING COMMITTEE AND DUE TO THE NUMBER OF OBJECTIONS TO THE SCHEME
Preliminary report The Planning Committee visited the site on 25th April, 2015 and viewed the site where the position of the lower two dwellings had been staked out. The position of the stakes was accurate as far as the distance from the side boundaries was concerned but seemed around 2m further to the south than are shown on the plans. The Planning Committee viewed the site also from Brecqhou, Queenscliff, Cronk Coar and Colooneys, the ground floors of all of these properties and the gardens facing the development site.
1.1 The site is the curtilage of an existing dwelling, Quarterbridge House, which lies on the north western side of Quarterbridge Road. The existing dwelling is a modern property finished in a pale orange/yellow facing brick and in a style not unlike a modern church. Access is directly from Quarterbridge Road via a single drive which provides access around the front and side of the property and to parking facilities for a number of vehicles. - 1.2 Quarterbridge Road is characterised by what are mostly detached, substantial dwellings which sit slightly lower on the north western side. There are, however some semi-detached properties on both sides of the road. There is a general building line of around 8-11m but some are much further back than that, and some a little closer to the road. The application property sits in a plot which is wider than most if not all of the other plots on this side of the road, and the existing building is set back from the road by 18m, sitting much lower than its neighbours. The plot is around 46m wide compared with the majority some of which are as slim as 17m. - 1.3 The site slopes downward from the road by around 6m over a distance of 67m. To the north of the bottom of the site is an area of woodland which is owned by the applicant and which extends to the rear of the properties to the west, Brecqhou/Heywood and Dalegarth which both have widths of 17m.
1.7 To the north east of the application site sits a detached dwelling, Queenscliff which sites closer to the road than does Quarterbridge House. This plot is 35m wide. This dwelling sits some 15m from the north eastern boundary with the application site but has planning approval for the erection of a detached garage with living accommodation which would be built much closer - some 1m from the boundary (PA 07/01752/B). This permission has not been implemented and is understood to have lapsed. THE PROPOSAL - 2.1 Proposed is the principle of the demolition of the existing dwelling (which would not in itself require planning approval) and the erection of three dwellings on the site together with the creation of a new access. The applicant has provided details of how three dwellings may be fitted onto the site and the likely amount of space available to each. Access would be provided to all three of the dwellings directly from the main road with a private driveway continuing past the highest positioned house on to the two lower plots. All existing trees and vegetation would be retained along the side boundaries and no development would encroach into the area of woodland at the bottom end of the site. Additional trees and shrubs would be planted along the boundary after discussion with those in the neighbouring properties. The dwellings shown would be slightly wider than Brecqhou/Heywood and Dalegarth but not as large as Queenscliff. The dwellings are also similar in foootprint to St. Jude, Burnside and Pitcairn on Quarterbridge Road and also The Moorings on Eleanora Drive which is perhaps a more imaginative style of dormer property on a footprint of a size similar to what is shown in the submitted plans.
2.2 The application seeks approval for the principle of the demolition of the existing dwelling and its replacement with three dwellings and the details of the access and siting of the dwellings as shown in the submitted plans. PLANNING STATUS AND POLICY - 3.1 The site lies within an area of Residential use on the Douglas Local Plan. The Selborne Drive Conservation Area includes the properties on the other side of Quarterbridge Road from the application site, but does not extend across to the north western side of the site.
3.2 The site lies within an area designated for development and as such there should be a presumption in favour of the development of the site, in a sustainable location within a settlement, in accordance with Strategic Plan Strategic Aim, Strategic Policies 1, 2 and 8, Housing Policy 2 and Spatial Policy 5.
3.3 General standards of development are set out in General Policy 2 which 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:
3.4 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." - 3.5 Whilst the site lies outwith the Selborne Drive Conservation Area, Environment Policy 36 could be said to have relevance:
"Where development is proposed outside of, but close to the boundary of a Conservation Area, this will only be permitted where it will not detrimentally affect important views into and out of the Conservation Area."
3.6 The Selborne Drive Conservation Area identifies a number of important buildings and also the evolution of the area, suggesting that with the ongoing demand for development land, the Trustees of Farrant's Ballaquayle Estate decided to sell off more land which involved famland which gently sloped westward down to Port-e-Chee and the River Glass which had the advantage of enjoying extensive views westweards towards the mountains. It states that the developers seemed to have identified that there was increasing demand for family homes with gardens in an overall greener setting away from the busy town and harbour. The appraisal does not refer to the Quarterbridge Road properties nor any particularly important view out of the Conservation Area at the end of Selborne Drive over or towards the application site. Alexander Drive is referred to at the western end of the Conservation Area and the "welcome green environment after the intensity of the tightly knit terraces nearby".
4.1 The application site has not been the subject of previous applications. There have been other applications for the additional development of existing residential plots on this side of Quarterbridge Road alongside Brook House:
That application was on a site which had a frontage to the road of 46m and which then widened out further into the site. No existing buildings were on this site at the time of the application.
REPRESENTATIONS
5.1 Douglas Borough Council indicates that they do not oppose the application (15.12.14 and 26.03.15).
5.2 Department of Infrastructure Highway Services initially objected to the application on the basis that two entrances as shown on the original plans would not be acceptable in highway safety terms. Following the submission of amended plans showing just one access, Department of Infrastructure Highway Services no longer object to the application (18.02.15) subject to the imposition of the following conditions:
5.3 Objections have been received from parties who live in the following properties who consider the proposal will result in a different sort of development on the site, out of keeping with the area and an over-development of the plot, creating a precedent for further increased development within existing plots, they raise concern about highway and pedestrian safety bearing in mind the additional traffic coming and going and that the site is on the TT Course and close to the junction of Selborne Drive and Quarterbridge Road. Some suggest that there may be covenants on the plots which restrict development to one dwelling each. Some wonder why the existing dwelling is to be demolished as it seems sound question the need for additional dwellings here and express concern at the amount of proposed car parking which seems excessive. Some comment on the fact that the site is close to a Conservation Area and that the development will be contrary to the character of the area which has largely detached or semi-detached houses alongside the road. The area has some nature conservation value which will be diminished by the introduction of housing to the site including registered trees. Some consider that it is important that a mix of different sizes and types of housing is retained within the Island for the mix of residents which we have, including larger houses for senior executives or high net worth individuals.
Tregenna, Quarterbridge Road (16.12.14, 24.03.15 and 26.04.15) Cronk Coar, Quarterbridge Road (17.12.14 and 23.03.15) 44, Selborne Drive (17.12.14 and 20.03.15) Dalegarth, Quarterbridge Road (17.12.14) Bramble Brae, Quarterbridge Road (17.12.14 and 02.03.15) Slegaby Beg, Quarterbridge Road (17.12.14) Struan, Quarterbridge Road (18.12.14) 58, Selborne Drive (18.12.14 and 13.03.15) Watermillock, Quarterbridge Road (18.12.14 and 25.03.15)) Lezayre, Quarterbridge Road (18.12.14 11.03.15 and a letter received on 12.03.15)
Longlast, Quarterbridge Road (18.12.14 and 20.03.15) Pitcairn, Quarterbridge Road (19.12.14) Colooneys, Quarterbridge Road (19.12.14 and 23.03.15) Westbrook, Quarterbridge Road (24.12.14 and 25.03.15) Deeplish, Quarterbridge Road (24.12.14 and 26.03.15) Roundhay, Quarterbridge Road (20.12.14 and 24.03.15) Esholt, Quarterbridge Road (23.12.14 and 20.03.15) The Garth, Quarterbridge Road (17.03.15) Witton, Quarterbridge Road (21.12.15) Conrhenny, 56, Selborne Drive (19.12.14) Edensor, Quarterbridge Road (22.12.14) Greystones, Quarterbridge Road (19.12.14)
5.4 The owners of Brecqhou (15.12.14) object to the application, stating that their view to the north and east would be blocked and the ambience of their property disrupted by noise, light and general pollution and disruption. They suggest that there is an on-going issue with another property in the road which is the subject of proposals for subdivision into a number of units and the approved cat hotel is not being operated in compliance with its conditions but that no action has been taken to address this (without specifying how the operation fails to comply). The proposal would reduce road safety. - 5.5 The owners of Queenscliff reiterate many of the concerns regarding the safety of the proposed access - whether there are one or two points of access, the increase in traffic using the access and the adverse impact the addition of new building would have on their amenities including noise and light pollution(24.12.14 and 25.03.15). They are concerned at the overintensive nature of the development which is not in keeping with the character of the area and do not respect the existing building line. Should approval be granted then this may establish an undesirable precedent for further building creating a much higher density of development than currently exists. - 5.6 Brecqhou lies immediately to the west of the site, Queenscliff immediately to the east, Colooneys on the opposite side of Quarterbridge Road and Longlast on the diagonally opposite corner of Selborne Drive and Quarterbridge Road. - 5.7 MUA asks that the applicant contact them regarding the provision of electricity supplies to the development (05.12.14). This is not a material planning consideration. - 5.8 The Department has received a request from the owners of Colooneys, Roundhay, Cronk Coar, Deeplish, Queenscliff, Brecqhou, Dalegarth, Esholt, and Tregenwa asking for consideration to be given to the extension of the Conservation Area to include the properties on the western side of Quarterbridge Road (16.04.15). The Department has advised that he has passed the matter to the Director of Planning (20.04.15). - 5.9 The advice of DEFA was sought following concerns raised about the impact of the development on trees on the site. They comment as follows (21.04.15):
6.1 The principle of residential development of the site is not in question. The existing dwelling is not considered to be of any particular merit and lacks the character and stature of most of the other properties in the streetscene, almost all of which to the north of the application site, are taller and more noticeable. However there are potential issues in respect of the impact of the additional dwellings on the streetscene, the effect on the amenities of those in neighbouring properties and the amenities of those in the new dwellings themselves and the impact on highway safety. In this case there must be a balance between the promotion of development in a sustainable location and an arguably better use of an underused site against the impact on visual amenity and on local residents, as advised in EP 42. Whilst the presence of a covenant may be an issue for some neighbours, this is not a material planning consideration as it is subject to a separate legal process and is not considered on the basis of material planning considerations, rather the particular aspirations of the person or body who imposed the covenant at the time. Covenants are capable of being lifted subject to the appropriate legal process. Visual impact on the streetscene
6.2 Some of the dwellings on Quarterbridge Road can be seen from further afield - from the approach to the town from Peel Road and to an extent from Tromode Road. However, the location of the application site results in no clear view of the site - either the existing dwelling or what is proposed from these perspectives due to the presence of the existing trees which screen the application property and many of its neighbours from the view from Peel and Tromode Roads. - 6.3 The development will, however have an impact on the streetscene of Quarterbridge Road in that what is currently set back and down from the road would change to a dwelling which is closer and higher. In some respects this results in a development which could be more in keeping with the surrounding built form. The introduction of the access will also open up the public view (and that of some of the surrounding dwellings) down to the woodland with one of the proposed dwellings in the background. The additional dwellings are unlikely to be significantly visible from the public highway or any public perspective such that they would have a detrimental impact on the streetscene. As such it is considered that the principle of the
redevelopment of the site for up to three dwellings would not adversely affect the streetscene or the character of the area as viewed from a public perspective. The character of the housing on Quarterbridge Road changes from tall and substantial dwellings to smaller dwellings which are closer together, around Quarterbridge House where a number of the dwellings to the south west are of a size similar to those proposed in the current application - Pitcairn, Brecqhou, Burnside and St. Jude, Brecqhou and Dalegarth being particularly close to each other. The distance by which properties are set back from the road also starts to change with Bramble Brae being set back significantly further than Rookwood and Thie my Chree being set back by the furthest of all. Whilst none of this is directly comparable with what is proposed here, it does illustrate that the uniformity of the streetscene is virtually non-existent from Quarterbridge House south westwards, adding to the argument that the introduction of additional dwellings on the application site is not detrimental to the character of the area even though it may be different to the existing building form.
Impact on neighbouring residents
6.4 Given the approval granted for the new garage at Queenscliff, it is clear that additional development close to a boundary is not unacceptable in principle. That development would have had no windows on the elevation facing the application site and there are, in any case, trees and vegetation on this boundary which would have mitigated any impact. The main dwelling is much further away and angled such that the view is towards and over the lower end of the application site. It is possible and even likely that the proposed additional dwellings would not be orientated such that they are parallel to each other or the higher dwelling and therefore not looking at or being looked at directly from Queenscliff. The photographs provided by the owners of Queenscliff demonstrate that whilst they are able to see the lower part of the application site from within their property, it is a view down to that part of the site and that any overlooking opportunities would be from Queenscliff to the application properties, not the other way around and if the properties were low profile, they would not need to intrude upon that outlook unacceptably. Simply because something may be seen does not make it unacceptable. It is considered that it would be possible to design new dwellings for the lower part of the garden which have an orientation and profile which would not intrude into the outlook or privacy of those in Queenscliff. - 6.5 The development would introduce built development which is closer to Brecqhou/Heywood. The boundary between the application site and this property is much more open than that between the application site and Queenscliff and it is apparent that the relationship between the application property and Brecqhou and also including Dalegarth which has a rear conservatory which looks out over the rear garden of Brecqhou is a more open one where efforts have not been taken to provide screening such that it is quite easy to see from the application property across the rear garden of Brecqhou to the conservatory at Dalegarth. The introduction of new dwellings will not increase this level of over-looking and a sensitive design and orientation together with new boundary planting could reduce the amount of inter-visibility between the application property and these two properties to the west. As such, it is not accepted that the introduction of up to two additional dwellings in the rear garden area would necessarily lead to a reduction in amenity for the occupants of Brecqhou or Dalegarth such as would justify refusal of the application for that reason. Impact on the amenities of those in the new dwellings - 6.6 The dwellings could be as far apart from each other as 29m (back to back/front) which is in excess of the 20m generally accepted as a minimum distance by which properties which look directly towards each other should be separated. There would be a similar distance between the proposed dwellings and those existing on adjacent sites. The dwellings could be more than 30m from existing properties outside the site. These distances, and the difference in ground levels are such, it is considered to ensure that the privacy of existing and proposed dwellings would remain intact. The proposed lower two dwellings will be close to each other as close as are Brecqhou and Dalegarth but, there are examples of where this is acceptable,
6.11 In conclusion, whilst it is perfectly understandable that neighbours and those in the vicinity may not welcome change - most people don't. However, the Strategic Plan sets out how the Island should manage its change and one of its key principles is to make the best use of un or underused or previously developed land but not where this compromises the standards of good development as set out in General Policy 2. It is believed that the development could be developed in conformity with these principles and as such the
application is recommended for approval. Whilst the application seeks approval for the details of the access and the siting of the dwellings, it should be clear that this relates only to the general siting of one dwelling at the front of the site with two to the rear generally as shown in the drawings. It would be beneficial for the development not to promote three identical or even similar properties with the highest of the dwellings at the front being the largest and most dominant of the properties and the lower two being more modest and designed with careful consideration to preserve the amenities of each other and those properties on each side.
7.1 By virtue of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) (No 2) Order 2013, the following persons are automatically interested persons:
7.2 Manx Utilities Authority (Electricity) does not raise material planning considerations and should not be afforded interested person status in this case. - 7.3 The following residents who have expressed a view are considered to be directly affected by either the additional traffic or the development itself and should be afforded interested person status: Dalegarth Brecqhou Queenscliff Deeplish Cronk Coar Colooneys Longlast Tregenna - 7.4 The following parties are considered to be too far from the site to be directly affected by the site and as such should not be afforded interested person status: Esholt 44, Selborne Drive Bramble Brae Slegaby Beg Struan 58, Selborne Drive Watermillock Lezayre Pitcairn Westbrook Roundhay The Garth Witton Conrhenny Edensor Greystones
Recommendation Recommended Decision: Permitted Date of Recommendation:
27.04.2015
Conditions and Notes for Approval / Reasons and Notes for Refusal
C : Conditions for approval
Reason: To comply with article 14 of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) (No2) Order 2013.
Reason: To comply with the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure)(No2) Order 2013.
accordance with drawing no 2A and the existing access is to be blocked off and no longer used. Reason: in the interest of highway safety
Note: it is likely that the two lower properties will need to be single storey, possibly with dormer accommodation but where any dormer windows face towards the woodland not any existing or proposed dwelling.
Reason: to accord with General Policy 2 of the Strategic Plan.
Note: the applicant should liaise with DEFA in the preparation of this document and observe the principles of BS 5837. Reason: in order to preserve the visual amenities of the area. This approval relates to the drawing 2A received on 26th February, 2015 and 1 received on 2nd December, 2014.
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 : …PER……… Committee Meeting Date:…05.05.2015
Signed :………S CORLETT…………….. Presenting Officer
Signatory to delete as appropriate YES/NO
Copyright in submitted documents remains with their authors. Request removal
