Loading document...
Town and Country Planning Consultant Phone/Fax: 01624861560
Planning Committee Secretary, DoLGE, Murray House, Mount Havelock, Douglas
17 FEB 2004
16th February 2004
Dear Madam,
I refer to the notice of refusal of the above application and on behalf of my client, the applicant Mrs Quayle, would submit the following
The site is amongst a group of dwellings known as part of Sulby Bridge at the start of Sulby village at the cross-roads formed by the Narradale Road, Claddagh Road, Sulby Bridge Road and Ramsey Roads Photo 1). It is within the 30 mph limit of the Main Road (TT course) (Photo 2). All the dwellings in the vicinity are set in sizeable gardens.
The houses in the immediate vicinity have existed for a good many years. The Sulby Local Plan boundary chose to ignore them and truncate the village at the Ginger Hall. Having done so it precluded representations being made concerning the inclusion of natural infill sites such as this. The applicants family have owned the ground for many years; now her 4 grandchildren are of any age to buy their own homes but prices and rentals are beyond them - $£ 172,000$ being the asking price for a 2 bedroom terrace house in some cases.
The site slopes down to the north-east and is surrounded by hedge rows with mature trees thus making it one of the least noticeable in the landscape (Photo 3). It is not only part of The Rhullick it is surrounded on both sides by the gardens of adjoining properties Hollybank and Tranquility and faces two others on the opposite side of the road. It will however not affect the privacy or amenity or any of these sites being downhill of The Rhullick and Tranquility and separated in both these cases and from Hollybank by the mature trees in the gardens
While surrounded by hedges and trees on its boundary the rest of the land is simply EB 2004 grass. There is plenty of scope to site a dwelling without affecting the trees ar their root systems (Photo 4).. There is no policy saying that development may not take place in such areas surrounded by trees, merely that the trees themselves should not be cus mment damaged by the development (Isle of Man Planning Scheme (Development Plan) Order 1982 Part 4. Indeed as landscaping utilising trees is a feature designed into most developments or requested by condition it is irrational to refuse a development where such landscaping is in effect already in place.
The Draft Strategic Plan which has now given some guidance for $21 / 2$ years states "Housing Policy 5 In the countryside, infill development within a clearly identifiable group of dwellings may be permitted provided that the proposal does not either extend the group beyond its boundary with the countryside or result in ribbon development or the consolidation of existing ribbon development."
The proposal clearly falls within the above category. While the Area is designated of High Landscape Value and Scenic Significance this is no different from any other site surrounding or within Sulby village. All the sites newly designated for development within the Sulby Village Plan are in areas carrying such designation. The general landscape surrounding those areas had not changed before their designation so the designation per se appears to be of little value in the context of the village per se.
To comply with Department of Transport and Planning Policy concerning the creation of new accesses to or the additional use of existing access to the TT course the actual access is to the minor Narradale Road which forms the west and south-west boundary at a higher level (Photo $5 \& 6$ ) not the main road. This is accepted by the Department of Transport. The conditions imposed by that Department are acceptable to my client.. A dwelling could be split level to best cope with the topography of the land and this proposed access.
I therefore trust that the Planning Committee will see fit to reverse their initial decision and approve this application.
Yours Faithfully Patricia S. Newton
Copyright in submitted documents remains with their authors. Request removal
