19 February 2008 · Committee
Land To Rear Of, Rocklands, Bradda East, Port Erin, Isle Of Man, IM9 6qb
This application sought approval in principle to erect a detached dwelling on land to the rear of Rocklands, a semi-detached house on the northern side of Bradda Road in Port Erin. The site appears to be part of the garden of that property, accessed via a narrow lane, and sits at a higher level than both Rocklands and the neighbouring property Caaghyr. The officer report identified two key planning concerns. First, the access serving the site was considered too narrow and steep to be suitable for a new residential dwelling. Second, the considerable difference in height between the proposed site and the existing properties below was highlighted as a further problem. The application was refused by committee on 19 February 2008, consistent with the officer's recommendation to refuse.
The application was refused by committee on 19 February 2008. The officer report identified two principal concerns: the access to the site was too narrow and steep to serve a new dwelling safely, and the significant difference in height between the site and the existing properties below raised further planning difficulties.
General Policy 2
the principle of the development of a dwelling within an area designated for Residential use should generally be permitted provided that a number of criteria can be satisfied
General Policy 2: 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: (a) is in accordance with the design brief in the Area Plan where there is such a brief; (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; (d) does not adversely affect the protected wildlife or locally important habitats on the site or adjacent land, including water courses; (e) does not affect adversely public views of the sea; (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. 6.3 Development outside of areas zoned for development
General Policies 2h
paragraph 7.7 of the Port Erin Local Plan
referring to paragraph 7.7 of the Port Erin Local Plan which states the parking requirement
rather than in the Area Plan. 32 Dr Kilmurry argued that there were no specific landscape proposals in the Area Plan for Crosby, Glen Vine and Union Mills. However, it seems to me that section 4.7.7 of the Area Plan provides for the conservation and enhancement of the character, quality and distinctiveness of this well-treed valley. Key views there include open vistas toward the Northern Uplands and the upper slopes of Foxdale, as well as glimpses of the urban fringe of Douglas. Howstrake Holiday Camp 33 Allprop Ltd objected to Landscape Proposal 9 and Landscape Character Area E4, on the grounds that no account had been taken of the presence of derelict and vandalised structures associated with the former Howstrake Holiday Camp. They argued that these structures detracted from the landscape of this coastal area, and that their removal and replacement with a small residential development would improve the local scene. 34 I note that the Howstrake Holiday Camp has been disused since 1973. The derelict buildings on the site are visible from the Raad Ny Follan; and, more distantly, from Groudle Glen and the Sea Lion Rocks Tea Room. However, the future of this site was given detailed consideration in the Onchan Local Plan 2000, paragraph 4.13 of which concluded as follows: … the most appropriate option for the Howstrake Holiday Camp site is to designate the land as Open Space. Whilst this does not achieve an instant improvement of the site in visual terms … it does not change what many have become accustomed to see. The Department considers that whilst there may be benefit from tidying up the site and reclaiming part of it, the cost of this is the permanent visual impact of new dwellings on the site where there have been none previously. Few if any headlands in Onchan remain free of development, and bearing in mind its exposed and rural location, the Department considers that this too should remain free from new development. 35 I see no reason to come to any different conclusion, and recommend continued adherence to this established policy. Since 2000, the structures on the site have probably fallen further into dereliction. Eventually they will be reclaimed by nature. There are many derelict building in the Isle of Man. In my view, few of them would warrant any particular reference in the relevant Landscape Character Appraisal. I see no good reason why an exception should be made for the former Howstrake Holiday Camp. CHAPTER 5 - THE NATURAL ENVIRONMENT Objectives 36 Mr A Martin considered that the draft Area Plan failed to quantify potential losses to the natural environment, and weigh these against the need for development. However, it seems to me that, generally, a balanced approach has been adopted. The development plan properly seeks to conserve environmental assets, for instance by protecting the countryside and its ecology. The intention is to contain development within existing built-up areas as far as is possible. However, some limited development on 'greenfield' sites will be necessary, in order to provide for expected growth in population and the economy. The extent of this is a matter for consideration. 37 Manx National Heritage argued that Section 5.3 of the draft Area Plan should include reference to the objective of protecting the cultural environment in rural areas. I agree. I recommend that the words 'and cultural' be inserted after the word 'natural' in Section 5.3 i of the draft Area Plan. Outcomes 38 Manx National Heritage also sought a reference to the protection of the cultural environment in Section 5.4 of the draft Area Plan. I recommend that the words 'cultural assets,' be inserted after the word 'vulnerable' in Section 5.4 iv of the draft Area Plan. Green Gaps 39 Spatial Policy 7 of the Strategic Plan indicates that Area Plans must assess the need for Green Gaps between settlements, to avoid their coalescence. Section 5.15 of the draft Area Plan provides for the establishment of such gaps between Douglas and Onchan; between Laxey and Baldrine; and between Glen Vine and Crosby. Natural Environment Proposals 1 to 3 would impose restrictions on development within the specified gaps, which are shown diagrammatically on the relevant Proposals Maps. However, in my view, these gaps should be shown with precise boundaries, so as to avoid doubt about whether any particular piece of land is within a Green Gap, and therefore subject to the relevant policy restrictions. It is a function of the Area Plan to relate the broad policies set out in the Strategic Plan to precise areas of land. Ideally the boundaries of the Green Gaps should follow features that are identifiable on the ground. However, the local knowledge of Cabinet Office staff is superior to mine, and I leave it to them to identify the appropriate boundaries. 40 Mr D Quirk and J and M Bucknall were concerned that particular areas of undeveloped land between Douglas and Onchan should remain open, including Site OH012 (Blackberry Lane) and the 'land to the west above the
Strategic Plan paragraph 7.4.1
the impact on the landscape (Strategic Plan paragraph 7.4.1 which deals with protection of the areas of High Landscape Value)
tinuing to develop plans for a harbour improvement scheme in Port St Mary (see Tourism Proposal 2). 7.4 Changes to the Highway Network - the potential for new road building in Ballasalla 7.4.1 As noted earlier , the JMP Study (200 7), concluded that in the South, only the A5/A7 junction in Ballasalla had the potential to suffer additional congestion. This was based on the level of development anticipated in the Isle of Man Strategic Plan. The Highway's Division (DoI) has, for some time, identified the future need for a n Urban Primary Distributor Road to by-pass Station Road and Douglas Road between Balthane Corner and Glashen Hill (the 'Ballasalla By -pass') to the east of Ba llasalla to remove anticipated north and southbound traffic on the A5. However, more recent traffic data collected in 201036 has lead to the conclusion that there is no current or short term justification for a By -pass on traffic grounds. Indeed, there is unlikely to be justification for the By-pass on such grounds during the lifetime of the Plan.
