Loading document...
Application No.: 23/01345/A Applicant: Mr Jon Joughin Proposal: Approval in principle for the construction of new housing Site Address: 60 Victoria Road Douglas Isle Of Man IM2 4HQ Planning Officer: Russell Williams Expected Decision Level: Planning Committee Recommended Decision: Refused Date of Recommendation: 16.10.2024 _________________________________________________________________ R : Reasons for Refusal O : Notes attached to reasons Reasons for Refusal - R 1. The size, shape and layout of the site together with the lack of suitable amenity space for occupiers indicate that the proposal is inappropriate back land development and overdevelopment of the site which would be harmful to the character of the townscape. As such it is considered contrary to General Policy 2c and Environment Policy 42 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016. - R 2. The proposal is also contrary to General Policy 2 b in that it does not respect the site and its surroundings in terms of layout, form, design and the landscaping of the buildings and the spaces around them. Furthermore, it would result in the loss of important green open space to a cramped form of development, at odds with visual amenity in the area. - R 3. The application fails to demonstrate how the principle of a safe vehicular access can be designed to serve the proposed residential use of the site by four dwellinghouses. The development would lead to an intensification in the use of a substandard access with visibility restricted at the junction with the public highway such that the safety of road users would be harmed should the development proceed. The proposal therefore fails to comply with General Policy 2 (h) (i) and Transport Policy 4, 7 of the Strategic Plan and would result in an unacceptable harmful impact upon highway safety.
_________________________________________________________________ Interested Person Status
It is recommended that the owners/occupiers of the following properties should be given Interested Person Status as they are considered to have sufficient interest in the subject matter of the application to take part in any subsequent proceedings and are not mentioned in Article 4(2):
Owner/occupant 56 Victoria Road, Douglas Owner/occupant 2 The Hollows, Douglas
Sterling Property Management Company Limited - Elm Tree House, Douglas Owner/occupant 73 Saddle Mews, Douglas Owner/occupant 33 Raad Roagan, Peel
As they satisfy all of the requirements of paragraph 2 of the Department's Operational Policy on Interested Person Status.
It is further recommended that the following should not be given Interested Person Status as they are not considered to have sufficient interest in the subject matter of the application to take part in any subsequent proceedings and are not mentioned in Article 4(2):
Owner/occupant 52 Victoria Road, Douglas
As they are not within 20m of the application site and the development is not automatically required to be the subject of an EIA by Appendix 5 of the Strategic Plan, in accordance with paragraph 2B of the Policy.
_________________________________________________________________ Officer’s Report
1.0 THE SITE - 1.1 The application site comprises a combination of vehicle parking and driveway, double garage and domestic gardens associated to the property known as 60 Victoria Road, Douglas. It is understood that part of the gardens owned by no. 58 are also included within the application site. - 1.2 The existing driveway, parking area and garage are accessed off Victoria Road, to the outside of a slight curvature in the alignment of the adopted highway. Space for two vehicles is provided clear of the highway serving no. 60. - 1.3 The application site has a varied topography, with land falling to the east and away from Victoria Road, onto a lower area of grassed lawns that are approximately 9.0m below the level of the adopted highway. The lawns continue to descend eastwards away from Victoria Road. The site sits at a much higher level above Empress Drive and properties built at the bottom of the retaining walls to the eastern boundary of the site. - 1.4 The areas of lawn form a linear grouping of open space to the rear of properties on the eastern side of Victoria Road. Those properties that back onto the open space, which forms privately owned garden areas without boundaries, comprise of two storey semi-detached dwelling houses with enclosed gardens to the rear and then the open lawn areas adjoining "formal" gardens paces. The site is bounded by fencing and overgrown walls with groups of mature trees to the north and east. - 1.5 Properties along Victoria Road do not generally benefit from off road parking, save for no. 60 and the application site.
2.0 THE PROPOSAL - 2.1 The application seeks Approval in principle with all maters reserved to the erection of 4 no. dwellinghouses. - 2.2 Matters relating to siting, internal layout, drainage, design, access, landscaping and appearance are all reserved for future approval. - 2.3 The application form indicates that 11 parking spaces would be provided within the site. New service connections to gas, electricity, water and telecommunications would be required.
3.0 PLANNING POLICY LOCAL PLAN - 3.1 The site lies within an area designated as "Mixed Use" on Map 4 of the Area Plan for the East. The site is not within, Area of High Landscape or Coastal Value and Scenic Significance or a Flood Risk Zone. The site lies adjacent to the Douglas Promenades Conservation Area. - 3.2 Strategic Policy 1: "Development should make the best use of resources by:
3.3 Strategic Policy 2: "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." - 3.4 Strategic Policy 4 (in part): "Proposals for development must:
3.5 Strategic Policy 10: New development should be located and designed such as to promote a more integrated transport network with the aim to:
3.6 General Policy 2 of the Strategic Plan is considered applicable, 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:
3.7 Environmental Policy 22 states: "Development will not be permitted where it would unacceptably harm the environment and/or
the amenity of nearby properties in terms of:
3.8 Environmental Policy 23 states: "When considering alterations and improvements to existing facilities the Department will require that consideration be given to the potential adverse impact of the proposed changes to existing neighbours." - 3.9 Environment Policy 42 states that "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." - 3.10 Housing Policy 4: "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…" - 3.11 Transport Policy 4: "The new and existing highways which serve any new development must be designed so as to be capable of accommodating the vehicle and pedestrian journeys generated by that development in a safe and appropriate manner, and in accordance with the environmental objectives of this plan." - 3.12 Transport Policy 7 states: 'The Department will require that in all new development, parking provision must be in accordance with the Department's current standards.'
4.1 The application site has been subject of the following historical planning applications: 91/00134/A - Approval in principle for erection of dwelling - Refused on Review 99/01793/A - Approval in principle for residential development - Withdrawn - 5.0 CONSULTATIONS
5.1 Douglas Borough Council - The Council appreciates that this is not a full planning application however we would kindly raise a couple of matters that need to be considered. Any bin storage area must be large enough to include the storage of both residual waste bins and recycling receptacles as well as being easily accessible for the Council's waste service team to collect. Access to any new housing development must also be to a standard to allow the Council's waste services vehicles to safely enter and exit the development and any driveways/highway constructed must be to the standard to accommodate the Council's heavy goods vehicles. With regards to access to the proposed housing, the Council would have reservations over the driveway becoming an adopted highway and that any highway within a future development should remain private and that the installation of any street lighting and the maintenance of open space would be the responsibility of the developer.
The application form and cover letter have stated that only approval in principle for the general creation of the dwellings is sought at this stage, with all other matters including means of access reserved for full detailed application. However even at this stage, in order for Highways to accept approval in principle for the application, it will need to be shown that safe access and egress can be achieved. Access is to be taken off Victoria Road via an existing vehicular access. Despite using an existing vehicular access, the development will bring substantial intensification of use. It will need to be demonstrated that a suitable visibility distance can be taken achieved from the access location. Visibility should be provided from a 2.4m setback distance from the centre of the access, taken to the nearside kerbline in both directions. Further details of the access arrangements are required. The redline boundary stops short of the apparent highway boundary, indicated that no alteration will be proposed. Improvement to the pedestrian footway and kerbline will be required in order to provide safer and more accessible movement across the new road junction. There may be a need to have a landing area on the development side prior to a vehicle crossing the footway, in order to prioritise pedestrian movement and ensure pedestrian visibility. The creation of an additional four dwellings off an existing access will require a Road Safety Audit to be included in the submission of a full planning application. The creation of four dwellings is below the threshold for Department of Infrastructure road adoption, therefore the road will remain private. A private residential road should be a minimum of 5m in width when accessed off a district road like Victoria Road. This width should be maintained for a minimum of 6m from the junction. Sufficient carriageway width for two-way traffic or single vehicle traffic with passing places must be provided. If the road is not proposed as shared surface, a separate 2m pedestrian corridor should be proposed. Whilst again not considered at this stage, the applicant is advised that suitable drainage proposals will be necessary to prevent any surface water discharge onto the highway, or an unacceptable amount of discharge from the highway into the site. In addition, any existing highway drainage must be retained, or suitable proposal for alteration agreed with Highways Drainage. Swept path analysis has shown that a refuse vehicle can enter, turn and exit the site in a forward gear. Turning provision will also be suitable for personal vehicle use. The application has provided eleven vehicle parking spaces on site, exceed in the minimum requirement of two per dwelling, resulting in visitor parking inclusion. The applicant is advised that bicycle storage should be provided for each dwelling in a secure and covered area at a rate of one space per bedroom. Highway Services DC request the following to be provided in order to establish whether the proposed location of access is acceptable in principle: o Visibility splays from a 2.4m setback to the nearside kerbline in both directions;
and for a plan to be provided containing construction exclusion areas for the protection of surrounding habitat.
6.1 Objections have been received from 6 residents/interested parties and can be summarised as follows: Owner/occupant 52 Victoria Road, Douglas
There is no need for further housing in this area. Redevelopment of properties in the area should be encouraged, which will help the area. The road is one of the busiest in Douglas. Where would additional residents park? Impact upon house and privacy with views by the dwellings being built. They would have a line of sight into our house.
Owner/occupant 56 Victoria Road, Douglas
Highway safety - The access point is on a dangerous bend where there have been accidents. Adding residential properties here and demolishing the garage and parking spaces will exacerbate safety risks to pedestrians and drivers. Topographical challenges - The land is significantly lower than the services in the road which poses challenges, especially sewage. Pumping sewage would be impractical and lead to environment and logistical issues. Restrictive covenant (non-planning matter) - The land is subject to a private restriction preventing it being built on. Access limitations and impact - The access is at odds with a right of access that benefits residents. Detrimental Impact - Development would impact upon quality of life of neighbouring residents, increasing noise, causing loss of privacy, outlook and negatively impacting upon enjoyment of gardens.
Owner/occupant 33 Raad Roagan, Peel Loss of green space and impact upon ecology. Adverse impact upon mature trees and RPA Tarmacing gardens will increase impermeable surfaces increasing flooding; run off will be diverted to drains that may already be under pressure from heavy rain. Access is onto a dangerous part of road and will increase the risk of accidents. Adverse impact upon privacy and tranquillity of remaining gardens, especially no's 54 and 56. Owner/occupant 73 Saddle Mews, Douglas The access would result in more vehicles entering a busy main road on a bend. These gardens were never intended to be built upon - there is a covenant. The houses were built by my Grandmothers family on an old market garden site and only made possible by shoring up land. Building a road between the levels would cause subsidence. The lane behind the wall at the rear of the gardens has been closed for some time now and I'm worried that the additional weight of housing could cause subsidence affecting the bottom of my property. Owner/occupant 4 Elm Tree House & 2 The Hollows
Concern over ground stability and impact to the rear of Seaview Hotel, in Empress Drive. Should any subsidence occur due to excess water runoff, there could be a threat of injury or death to persons inside the property. Excess water runoff could occur following heavy rain down the driveway; a lack of natural drainage, potential failure of any electrical pump.
Concern over the long term impact upon the sycamore trees. Bin store offers potential visual harm and to attract vermin. Increase in noise to neighbouring residents and Seaview Hotel. Lack of parking for 60 Victoria Road leading to extra parking on the carriageway and bus route.
Sterling Property Management Company Limited - Elm Tree House, Douglas The land is not zoned for any development. Whilst we have no objection to the principle of such a development - as immediate neighbours we would expect reassurances that any development will not impact on the privacy or access to The Hollows site. Concern over access as indicatively demonstrated not being safe to serve the site. The driveway will be laid to a very steep gradient. Is it practical to have the access adjacent to that serving the 10 dwellings at The Hollows and Marathon Court Nursing Home? No reference to parking for 60 Victoria Road being provided. The bin store to the side of the existing dwelling - how will residents access their bins and recycling? Haul it up the access road? No drainage details are provided. Pumping effluent could be noisy or will septic tanks and soakaways be used? Additional surface water runoff from hard surfaced driveways a concern. Concern over impact upon trees along our boundary - turning areas and buildings seem to coincide with the canopy and root protection areas. Damage to trees and the boundary wall could occur. Will ecology be considered?
7.1 The application site is centrally located within the contiguous built-up area of Douglas and is close to the area defined as the "town centre". The application site is located on land that is designated as a "Mixed Use" on Map 4 of the Area Plan for the East.
7.2 Paragraph 9.11.2 of the Area Plan for the East provides guidance on development within "mixed use" areas. It advises that: "Development types within areas of mixed use generally comprise a variety of different but compatible uses. Appropriate new uses may include a mix of shops and some services (financial and professional), food and drink, office and light industry, research and development, tourist and residential uses, and other uses such as clinics or health centres, childcare or education, community facilities, and places of assembly and leisure. Uses which are not compatible with residential development will generally not be supported within the areas of mixed use." - 7.3 In the Adopted Isle of Man Strategic Plan (2016), Strategic Policy 2 prioritises the location of new development within existing towns and villages. Spatial Policy 5 goes on to confirm that "New development will be located within the defined settlements." - 7.4 Housing Policy H4 states that: "New housing will be located primarily within our existing towns and villages, or, where appropriate, in sustainable urban extensions of these towns and villages where identified in adopted Area Plans." - 7.5 Having regard to the above policies, the application site is located within an accessible and sustainable location where the principle of residential development is supported by both Strategic Plan Policies and the Area Plan for the East. A residential use on the land would be compatible with the "mixed use" designation and new housing on the land is a use that would be compatible with adjoining land uses, (subject to further assessment). - 7.6 Objectors have stated that there is no requirement for further housing in the area, however planning policy clearly indicates that in sustainable locations and within existing towns and villages, new housing will be supported in order to meet the identified housing need for the Island.
7.7 Having regard to the above considerations, and subject to an assessment of material considerations, it is accepted that the principle of development on the site is acceptable and compliant with the aforementioned Strategic Plan and Area Plan policies. IMPACT UPON THE CHARACTER AND APPEARANCE OF THE AREA - 7.8 Whilst it is acknowledged that the application seeks approval in principle only, it is still necessary to assess the ability of a site to accommodate development without adversely impacting upon the character and appearance of the area. In this regard, General policy 2 states that development will normally be permitted where it: (c) does not affect adversely the character of the surrounding landscape or townscape; - 7.9 Environment Policy 42 sets out the policy approach to new development within existing
settlements. It states that: "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."
7.10 The application site, as described at paragraphs 1.3 and 1.4, comprises an area of informal lawns in the ownership of no's 58 and 60 Victoria Road. The site, together with those open areas of lawn to the rear of no's 50 - 60 Victoria Road, form a relatively large area of green open space within the urban environment, creating an visual break between built form. - 7.11 The pattern of development, or urban grain, in the area is largely characterised by welldefined semi-detached dwellings fronting onto Victoria Road, smaller terraced properties along Castle Mona Avenue and large, terraced and semi-detached properties at Empress Drive. Save for The Hollows to the north, in the immediate vicinity and wider area surrounding the application site the character of residential development is for there to be active road frontages with well-proportioned gardens and areas of open space. - 7.12 The location of the application site is such that it would be considered as "backland" development, sitting on open ground to the rear of dwellings fronting onto Victoria Road. Paragraph 7.34.1 of the Strategic Plans states that in regard to backland development: ""Backland development" (which is development on the land at the back of properties) may also be acceptable in some circumstances, but only if satisfactory access can be achieved and if there is sufficient space to provide adequate amenity for both new and existing adjoining dwellings." - 7.13 Environment Policy 42 is clear that inappropriate backland development and the removal of open or green spaces will not be permitted. Paragraph 7.34.1 guidance also refers to backland development only being acceptable in "some circumstances". - 7.14 The application site is assessed as comprising an important area of green open space within an area otherwise dominated by built form. The gardens to the rear of properties along Victoria Road are important spaces for the amenity of residents and for also maintaining open breaks within the townscape. The loss of these open spaces, which are by no means prevalent in the area, would lead to a permanent change in the character of the area and alter the way in which residents experience the local environment. The loss of the green open space to backland development would harm visual amenity and the character of the area. - 7.15 The application is supported by an indicative site layout plan that indicates how four dwellings and 11 parking spaces with turning could be accommodate don the site. However, the indicative layout represents a cramped form of development at odds with the pattern of development and character of the area. The plots and dwellings would be smaller than those along Victoria Road and have narrow and modest gardens.
7.16 The development would require a significant amount of engineering operations to construct both the access road, parking spaces and dwellings. Such would be visible from Victoria Road, with the existing garage removed. Dwellings being set at a much lower ground level to the highway would appear out of keeping with visual amenity. - 7.17 In addition to what would represent an unacceptable loss of green open space, the development of up to four dwellings on the site, access drive and parking/turning areas would fail to deliver active road frontages, which will be at odds with the pattern of development and prevailing character of the surrounding townscape. - 7.18 Overall, it is considered that residential development on the site would represent an unacceptable backland development, at odds with the prevailing residential pattern of development in the area and harmful to the character of the townscape. It would result in the loss of important green open space to a cramped form of development, at odds with visual amenity in the area. The proposals are therefore considered to conflict with General Policy 2 (c) and Environment Policy 42. ACCESS AND HIGHWAY SAFETY - 7.19 The application does not seek detailed approval of access to the development, with these matters being reserved for subsequent approval should Approval in Principle be given. Notwithstanding, it is important that the principle of access is established at this stage in order to ensure that a satisfactory and safe development can be delivered. - 7.20 General Policy 2 requires, inter-alia that development will provide safe and convenient access for all road users and that road safety or local traffic flows are not unacceptably effected. Interested parties have raised objections regarding the safety of the proposed access. - 7.21 The application is supported by an indicative site layout plan and details of how access onto Victoria Road could be secured. As noted by the DOI Highways response, various issues exist with the indicative access design, position of the red line in relation to the adopted highway, width of the driveway and drainage. - 7.22 The Highway Officer correctly identifies that the red line boundary of the application site does not extend up to and include the boundary with the adopted highway. As such, it would not be possible to secure improvements and alterations to the existing access, in order to create a new junction into the site, private access and driveway to serve the development. Similarly, visibility splays would be located outside the red line area and such could not be controlled by condition, even at the detailed approval stage, as such would fall outside the red line area. - 7.23 The DOI Highway Officer has requested further details be submitted to confirm whether the location of the access is acceptable in principle. The applicant/agent has not responded with any amended details despite being invited to do so and so it is not possible, at this stage, to confirm whether there is a reasonable likelihood of access being deliverable to serve the proposed development in a safe manner. It is therefore the case at present that the uncertainty around the ability to deliver a safe access to the site has not been demonstrated in principle. - 7.24 Based upon the submitted information, the development would lead to an intensification in the use of a substandard access with visibility restricted at the junction with the public highway, such that the safety of road users would be harmed should the development proceed. The proposal therefore fails to comply with General Policy 2 (i) and would result in an unacceptable harmful impact upon highway safety. RESIDENTIAL AMENITY - 7.25 General Policy 2 (g) states that development will normally be permitted provided that "does not affect adversely the amenity of local residents or the character of the locality."
7.26 Neighbouring residents have objected to the development siting, among other matters, adverse impacts upon privacy, outlook and tranquillity. - 7.27 The backland position of the application site is such that the existing dwellinghouses at 58 and 60 Victoria Road. The indicative site layout, which could reasonably change prior to the detailed design stage, indicates how 4 two storey dwellings could be positioned on the site together with parking, turning and access. - 7.28 Details relating to the detailed design of the development are subject to further approval. Notwithstanding, it is acknowledged that the indicative details which show two pairs of semidetached, 2 storey dwellings located on land at the rear of Victoria Road, would give rise to a loss of privacy upon adjacent gardens. However, proximity to the rear elevations of existing dwellings exceeds 30 metres and so loss of privacy to habitable rooms is unlikely to occur. - 7.29 Regarding other impacts of the development upon residential amenity, the submitted indicative layout does give rise to concerns over the impact of noise and vibration upon the amenity of existing dwellinghouses, as well as light from vehicles at night. This impact could ultimately change should revisions be made at the final, detailed design stage and so whilst concerns of neighbouring residents are acknowledged, the impact of development upon neighbouring amenity is a matter that should be assessed fully at the detailed design stage. TREES & ECOLOGY - 7.30 Concerns have been raised by objectors that the proposed development might adversely impact upon the health of the mature line of Sycamore trees that are positioned along the northern boundary of the site. - 7.31 Environment Policy 3 seeks to prevent the unacceptable loss of or damage to woodland areas, especially ancient, natural and semi-natural woodlands, which have public amenity or conservation value. - 7.32 The indicative site plan shows the access drive being partly within the canopy spread of some trees and it is recognises that the Root Protection Areas of the trees are likely to extend beyond the canopy. The construction of the access drive, which will involve significantly excavation, will undoubtedly have an impact upon the RPAs and health of the trees. The Sycamore trees are considered to provide public amenity value, but are not Registered Trees or a Registered Tree Area. - 7.33 The application is not supported by an ecology survey and it is recognised that Environment Policy 4 affords protection to flora and fauna. The application site is primarily a grassed area with trees and some informal hedgerows. The ecological value of the site is considered to be limited and such is confirmed by the Eocsystem Policy Team, who have not requested further ecological evaluation of the site. - 7.34 The Ecosystem Policy Team have reviewed the proposals and do no object to the development, subject to the submission of a detailed arboriculture impact assessment and other conditions at the detailed design stage. Despite objections, this is considered to be a reasonable approach as the layout and position/construction of the access drive may well change from its indicative form as submitted. - 7.35 At this Application in Principle stage, it is considered that objecting the development due to a possible adverse impact upon trees would be unreasonable and such an assessment could be made at the detailed design stage when engineering operations and the design proposals are finalised. HERITAGE - 7.36 The application site is located immediately adjacent to the Douglas Promenades Conservation Area, with part of the Conservation Area's boundary being located immediately to the eastern boundary of the application site. The Conservation Area is located on land and
7.46 For the reasons set out in this report the application fails to demonstrate in principle that it would be served by a safe vehicular access and it is not demonstrated that the existing access can be made safe. - 7.47 Overall the development fails to comply with Strategic Plans, Environment Policy 42, General Policy 2 and Transport Policy 4 and so having regard to the above considerations, it is recommended that approval in principle be refused.
8.1 By virtue of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) Order 2019, the following persons are automatically interested persons:
8.2 The decision maker must determine:
8.3 The Department of Environment Food and Agriculture is responsible for the determination of planning applications. As a result, where officers within the Department make comments in a professional capacity they cannot be given Interested Person Status.
I confirm that this decision has been made by the Planning Committee in accordance with the authority afforded to that body by the appropriate DEFA Delegation and that in making this decision the Committee has agreed the recommendation in relation to who should be afforded interested person status and/or rights to appeal.
Decision Made : Refused Committee Meeting Date: 09.12.2024
Signed : R WILLIAMS 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 below Customer note This copy of the officer report reflects the content of the office copy and has been produced in this form for the benefit of our online service/customers and archive record.
Copyright in submitted documents remains with their authors. Request removal
