Approval in principle for the erection of a dwelling, land at

Why Was This Refused?

• ✓Site designated as Open Space/Agricultural in the Braddan Plan
• ✓Roadside frontage not built up, so natural infill argument not accepted
• ✓Significant gaps would remain between the proposed dwelling and neighbouring houses
• ✓Department of Transport concerns over unresolved sightline requirements
• ✓Development considered to set an undesirable precedent in this location
• ✓precedent
• ✓The site is within an area designated as Open Space/Agricultural on the extant and emerging Braddan Plan.
• ✓The site is not "natural infill" as suggested by the applicant as the roadside frontage is not built up and there would be significant gaps between the houses either side.
• ✓It will also not consolidate or contribute to the existing grouping of building centred around the Oakhill/Port Soderick junction as suggested.
• ✓Development has been resisted here in the past within the emerging plan although proposed by the previous owner of Ellenbrook Farm, not this applicant.
• ✓The development is unwarranted and would establish a very unfortunate precedent.
• ✓DoT do not support the development of the site as the information to assure them that sightlines could be provided to their satisfaction have not been provided.

This application sought approval in principle to erect a single dwelling on a field on the northern side of the A25 Old Castletown Road, between Ellenbrook Farm and Woodville, near Oakhill Bridge in Braddan. The committee refused the application in October 2004. The officer's report identified that the site falls within land designated as Open Space/Agricultural under both the existing and emerging Braddan Plan. The applicant argued the site represented natural infill and would contribute to the existing building grouping near the Oakhill/Port Soderick junction, but the officer rejected both arguments, noting the frontage is not built up and significant gaps would exist between the proposed house and its neighbours. The Department of Transport did not support the proposal because the applicant had not provided sufficient information to confirm that required sightlines could be achieved. The officer also noted that development had previously been resisted on this site and that approval would set an unfortunate precedent.

The committee refused approval in principle for a new dwelling on this site. The land is designated as Open Space/Agricultural in the Braddan Plan, and the officer found it did not qualify as natural infill because the roadside frontage is not built up and there would be noticeable gaps between neighbouring properties. The Department of Transport also did not support the proposal as adequate sightlines had not been demonstrated.

Policies Assessed (3)

Documents (40)