DEC Officer Report

PLANNING OFFICER REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Application No.: 21/01217/A Applicant: Mrs Julie Mattin Proposal: Approval in principle for residential development Site Address: Manninagh / Dalveen Bircham Avenue Ramsey Isle Of Man IM8 2LY Head of Development Management: Mr S Butler Expected Decision Level: Planning Committee Recommended Decision: Refused Date of Recommendation: 21.03.2022 _________________________________________________________________ Reasons for Refusal R : Reasons for Refusal O : Notes attached to reasons - R 1. Insufficient information has been provided to demonstrate that the removal and replacement of the existing dwellings would be acceptable due to their positive contribution to the surrounding area and as such is contrary to Strategic Plan Strategic Policy 5 and General Policy 2 (b & c). - R 2. Insufficient information has been provided to demonstrate that the site could be redeveloped without the loss of the existing houses or that, if such loss occurred, the resulting development would result in a net increase in dwellings and as such is contrary to Housing Policy 18. - R 3. Insufficient information has been provided to demonstrate that the site could be redeveloped without giving rise to unacceptable impacts in terms of flooding, and as such is contrary to Strategic Plan policies 10 and 13. - R 4. Insufficient information has been provided to demonstrate that the site could be redeveloped without giving rise to unacceptable impacts in terms tree loss, and as such is contrary to Strategic Plan policy 2 (f). _______________________________________________________________

Interested Person Status

Additional Persons

It is recommended that Manx Utilities should be afforded IPS as they have commented on material issues.

It is recommended that the owners/occupiers of the following properties 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/Occupiers of No.3 Altdale Terrace as they do not satisfy all of the requirements of paragraph 2 of the Department's Operational Policy on Interested Person Status (January 2020). _____________________________________________________________________________

Officer’s Report

THE APPLICATION IS BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMITTEE AT THE REQUEST OF THE HEAD OF DEVELOPMENT MANAGEMENT

1.0 THE APPLICATION SITE - 1.1 The site is a parcel of developed land which accommodates two three storey town houses, Manninagh and Dalveen, and garaging/ warehouses. The site sits to the West of Bircham Avenue directly North of the Bircham Avenue, Lezayre Road and Fairfield Avenue crossroads. - 1.2 The main access point to the separate parts of the site is accessed via Bircham Avenue whereby there is a side access South of Delveen which provides rear access to the other properties and off street parking available in front of the warehouse for three vehicles.

2.0 THE PROPOSAL - 2.1 The application seeks Approval in Principle for area of residential development. Originally the application was stated for 10 properties but after a discussion with the applicant, no details in terms of number of dwellings, design, access etc. is included to be considered at this stage.

3.0 PLANNING HISTORY - 3.1 There application site has been subject to a number of planning applications,

• 3.1.1 PA00/01353/B - Conversion of workshop to dwelling / Permitted
• 3.1.2 PA86/00341/C - Use of premises as garage for repair of motor vehicles / Refused
• 3.1.3 PA86/01105/C - Use of premises for wholesale carpet trade supplies / Application Withdrawn

4.0 PLANNING POLICY - 4.1 The site lies within an area zoned as Predominantly Residential on the Ramsey Local Plan 1998, Map 2. The site is not within a Conservation Area and whilst the Flood Risk Maps show Dalveen, Manninagh and the garaging outside of a flood risk zone, the rear garden and the warehousing is shown within a flood risk zone of High Tidal Zone and as such Environment Policy 10 and 13 are applicable. - 4.2 Given the nature of the application and the land designation there are several relevant policies from the Isle of Man Strategic Plan including;

• 4.2.1 Strategic Policy 1 which sets out that development should be located to make best use of previously developed land, redundant and underused buildings and utilising existing infrastructure,
• 4.2.2 Strategic Policy 5 which seeks that new development, including individual buildings should be designed to make a positive contribution.
• 4.2.3 Strategic Policy 2 which sets out that new development must be in existing settlements unless it complies with GP3.

• 4.2.4 General Policy 2 which sets out detailed "development control" considerations including: …

• (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; …

• (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.

• 4.2.5 Housing Policy 4 which sets out that new housing must be located primarily within our existing towns and villages
• 4.2.6 Housing Policy 18 which states that applications which would involve the loss of existing housing which is fit for habitation or which could be made fit at reasonable cost will not usually be approved unless accompanied by firm proposals for replacement housing.
• 4.2.7 Transport Policy 4 which sets out that new development must be designed to be capable of accommodating vehicle and pedestrian journeys generated by the development in a safe and appropriate manner,
• 4.2.8 Transport Policy 7 which sets out that new development requires parking according to the standards with appendix 7.
• 4.2.9 Environment Policy 10 in connection with Environment Policy 13 which seeks that development is not in a Flood Risk Zone.
• 4.2.10 Environment Policy 13: Development which would result in an unacceptable risk from flooding, either on or off-site, will not be permitted.

4.3 It is also relevant to note that due to the unknown quantity of dwellings Housing Policy 5, which states that in developments of 8 or more, 25% need to be affordable housing would be applicable and Recreation Policy 3 which sets out that new residential development of ten or more houses must make provision for recreational and amenity space in accordance with Appendix 6.

- 5.0 REPRESENTATIONS

5.1 Highway Services have considered the application (18.10.21) and state, "Given that the site has existing dwellings and workshop on site, the traffic movement is unlikely to be significantly different for the residential use and safety risk would be expected to be similar too. Accordingly, Highways Development Control raises no opposition subject to a condition for further details at reserve matters stage to cover: i. Pedestrian and vehicular access and circulation arrangements to Manual for Manx Roads criteria. ii. Bicycle, car and accessible parking assessment on varying from the adopted

standard and criteria iii. Servicing, ad hoc collections and deliveries, including loading, unloading and turning points

• iv. Waste storage and collection v. Swept path analysis vi. Stage 1 Road Safety Audit."

5.2 Ramsey Town Commissioners (20.12.21) - No Objection. - 5.3 The Assistant Tree Officer has written in to state that there are trees on the site of which two situated to the South West corner of the plot they would have no objection to their removal but there is a tree of considerable size further back within the site which would require an Arboricultural Impact Assessment as allowing for its retention (including Root Protection Area) could impact on site layout and that this should be done prior to the determination of this application to demonstrate how the site could be developed without damaging the tree (2.11.21) - 5.4 MUA have written in to states that they have no concerns in principle but would like to discuss the foul and surface water layouts with MU at any reserved matters stage. (16.11.21) - 5.5 An objection was received from No.3 Altdale Terrace (18.10.21) on the basis of parking, streetscene and the layout. Further to discussions with the applicant and a change in the proposal no further comments were received from No.3 Altdale Terrace.

- 6.0 ASSESSMENT

6.1 The main issues to consider in the assessment of this planning application are:

• - change in description and information provided
• - site designation
• - removal of properties
• - flooding
• - trees
• - other matters

- 6.2 CHANGE IN DISCRIPTION AND INFORMATION PROVIDED

• 6.2.1 Due to the information provided within this application and the original proposal, it is necessary to make sure that what is being assessed within this assessment is clearly defined.
• 6.2.2 The original proposal stated "Approval in principle for the creation of ten town houses," having discussed the proposal with the applicant it was decided that the application was just to see whether the principle would be acceptable on the site and that all other aspects such as development amount, style, size and highways would be assessed in a future application.
• 6.2.3 As such whilst there is indicative information supplied within this application it is only the principle of residential on the site which is being assessed.

- 6.3 SITE DESIGNATION

• 6.3.1 As outlined in section 4 of this report, the site is situated within an area designated as "Predominately Residential" on the Ramsey Local Plan 1998. This would support the use for residential development, subject to any infrastructure or environmental constraints or issues.

6.4 REMOVAL OF PROPERTIES

• 6.4.1 When looking at an Approval in Principle application, there are several questions in which need to be asked, with one of the questions being whether the removal of the properties would be detrimental to the surrounding area.

• 6.4.2 Bircham Avenue is a mix of properties with the main underlying theme being three storey dwellings such as the properties of this application and several one/ two storey terraced/ semi-detached commissioner dwellings.

• 6.4.3 The issue with this application, is that whilst initial drawings were included, the applicant did not want these to be accepted as part of this application as they were just giving a general idea of what could go in place, not what would be erected, this means that within this application there is nothing to show what could go in place of the existing dwellings.
• 6.4.4 The existing dwellings add interest to the overall area and have a positive contribution to the surrounding area, the removal of the dwellings would be detrimental to the streetscene.
• 6.4.5 With this in mind it's difficult to assess existing dwellings removal, whilst their removal would not be development (if the whole of the structures were demolished and not just part of them), the re-development of the site with three storey dwellings again might not be acceptable due to several factors (see below).
• 6.4.6 Furthermore, given the other issues on the site (see below) it has not been demonstrated that if the site were redeveloped and the existing houses demolished that the development would lead to a net increase in housing provision and as such may be contrary to the principle of Housing Policy 18.

- 6.5 FLOODING

• 6.5.1 Turning towards Environment Policy 10, which states that if there is a proposal within a flood risk survey that a Flood Risk Assessment needs to be done as per the requirements set out in Appendix 4.

• 6.5.2 The Development Procedure Order indicates that a Flood Risk Assessment (FRA) is required for applications (which includes Approval in Principle applications) within areas identified as being at risk of flooding on the latest maps. It does not set out what information that information a FRA should contain. The Department has published guidance on submitting planning applications which suggests a proportionate approach to flooding (September 2021) which states that for Approval in Principal Applications,

"The amount of information will depend on what matters are reserved, however the application must provide sufficient information to demonstrate how the applicant considers that the site could be made safe, even if the exact measures to be used are to be confirmed in subsequent reserved matters applications".

• 6.5.3 The applicant has stated in their supporting information,

"The properties are close to but not within the flood map areas. To mitigate any potential for the risk of future properties flooding the properties would have ground floor garages and planted areas. This area has never flooded but its close proximity to potential future flooding has been taken into account".

• 6.5.4 As noted previously, part of the site is identified on the latest maps as at risk of flooding. Whilst potentially part of the site could be redeveloped to avoid flooding, the applicant has not provided any information to demonstrate that this could, in principle, give a development that would be acceptable in other respects - not least as such development would likely require demolition of the existing houses (see comments above) and information has not been provided to demonstrate how dwellings with all living accommodation at 1st floor (this appears to be what is suggested) would be appropriate in terms of the street scene.

6.6 TREES

• 6.6.1 Concerns have been raised about the impact of the development on an existing tree which appears to be worthy of retention and no information has been provided which adequately demonstrates how, in principle, the site could be developed whilst retaining this tree (in the long term) - especially when noting the other constraints on the site.

- 6.7 OTHER MATTERS

• 6.7.1 Whilst it is noted that this assessment is not assessing anything other than the principle of development on the site, due to the indicative information and drawings received it would be necessary to put Section 13 agreements upon this application as per Housing Policy 5 and Recreation Policy 3 if ii were approved.

• 6.7.5 As well as the usual AiP conditions (date for commencement, date for submission of Reserved Matters, Matters to be included in RM application) Conditions should also be attached with regards to Highway Services (i. Pedestrian and vehicular access and circulation arrangements to Manual for Manx Roads criteria. ii. Bicycle, car and accessible parking assessment on varying from the adopted standard and criteria iii. Servicing, ad hoc collections and deliveries, including loading, unloading and turning points iv. Waste storage and collection

• v. Swept path analysis and vi. Stage 1 Road Safety Audit).

• 6.7.6 In the event the committee were minded to approve the application, it should be noted that in addition to the S.13 issues (6.7.1) and the conditions (6.7.2) a detailed Flood Risk Assessment and Arboricultural Impact Assessment would be required to be conditioned. CONCLUSION
• 7.1 Whilst the land zoning weighs in favour of the application, but such zoning is not a reason to automatically grant an Approval in Principal. Clearly matters can be reserved, but sufficient information must be provided to demonstrate at least conceptually how a site could potentially be developed without unacceptable impacts in terms of infrastructure/environmental constraints.

7.2 Concerns have been identified on this site in relation to flooding, tree retention and the potential replacement of existing dwellings and insufficient information has been provided to demonstrate how these could be adequately dealt with whilst redeveloping the site - especially noting that a solution to one may worsen the impact on another, or potentially give rise to unacceptable impacts (for example visual amenity/street scene). INTERESTED PERSON STATUS - 8.1 By virtue of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) Order 2019, the following persons are automatically interested persons:

• (a) the applicant (including an agent acting on their behalf);
• (b) any Government Department that has made written representations that the Department considers material;
• (c) the Highways Division of the Department of Infrastructure;
• (d) Manx National Heritage where it has made written representations that the Department considers material;
• (e) Manx Utilities where it has made written representations that the Department considers material;
• (f) the local authority in whose district the land the subject of the application is situated; and
• (g) a local authority adjoining the authority referred to in paragraph (f) where that adjoining authority has made written representations that the Department considers material.

8.2 The decision maker must determine:

• o whether any other comments from Government Departments (other than the Department of Infrastructure Highway Services Division) are material; and o whether there are other persons to those listed above who should 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.

Decision Made : Refused Committee Meeting Date: 28.03.2022

Signed : V PORTER 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 file copy and has been produced in this form for the benefit of our online services/customers and archive records.