Loading document...
The site represents a piece of land - roughly one complete field and two fields arbitrarily defined on the southern side and most of the remaining land which lies on the southern side of the A24 highway between Foxdale village and The Eairy to the south west of the narrow road which leads through the Louisa Mine site to the Stoney Mountain Road to the south. The western most part of the site sits opposite Springfield Terrace - a row of mainly detached properties facing south. The site is 4 hectares in size and the part of the site indicated as being developed is 2.2 hectares in size.
The site lies within an area partly designated on the Foxdale Local Plan of 1999 as Predominantly Residential and partly designated as Reclamation. The development brief in the local plan states that
"Any proposal for the development of the site must be accompanied by proposals for the restoration of the Louisa Mine site. The Mine site may only be used, after restoration, as Open Space. Any proposal for development must be subdivided into a number of smaller phases such that control over the timing of the development can be retained by the Planning Committee and the impact of the development on the village can be controlled...development should generally become less dense as it approaches the edges of the site which border open countryside. Here, greater attention should be given to tree-planting to soften the edge of the development. Development of the site must acknowledge the presence and amenities of "Kiondhooag": sufficient space must be afforded to this existing dwelling and in this respect no new buildings may be erected within 30 metres of the dwelling itself...The design of the new buildings should reflect that of the older, more traditional buildings within the village; the use of traditional materials will be encouraged - slate-like roofing tiles, rendered Manx stone walling etc. A variety of complementary styles of building is encouraged" and "Development of the site should include at least one area of open space which could be used for children's play".
In addition to this, the Strategic Plan contains policies which are applicable to this site including specific amounts of measured open space (Recreation Policy 3), affordable housing at a ratio of 25% of the overall housing provision (Housing Policy 5) and the requirement for an Energy Impact Assessment. (Energy Policy 5).
The land to the immediate west is also designated for residential development and subject to the same development brief as the application site.
Planning permission was sought and granted for the principle of landscaping and formation of stock car track under PA 87/1102. permission was then sought and refused for the creation of parking for the cattery on Springfield Terrace (PA 01/0650) but permitted on re-application (PA 02/0609).
The application purports to be a full, detailed application for the layout of plots, roads and sewerage and partial reclamation of the mine workings but contains no information on levels, depth or construction of roads or sewerage or any details of the reclamation of the mine workings other than annotation stating "new culvert constructed" and "existing mine spoil to be removed and area graded to natural ground levels".
The Society for the Preservation of the Manx Countryside and Environment do not object to the application subject to satisfaction of the conditions in the local plan regarding reclamation.
Isle of Man Water Authority recommend the attachment of a standard note regarding the provision of water supplies to the site.
The Isle of Man Fire and Rescue Service recommends the attachment of a standard note regarding the provision of fire hydrants and access for fire appliances.
The occupant of 8, Springfield Terrace objects to the application on the basis that the development strays beyond the area designated for development on the local plan, the density of the development does not become less intense towards the east as is required in the local plan, the omission of the existing mine worker's house from the plans, the adequacy of the existing road network to accommodate the traffic from the proposed development, the omission of reference to the main mine site in the reclamation, the adequacy of the proposed culvert and local services and the cumulative effect of all the current building in the village.
The occupant of Fuchsia House, Springfield Terrace objects to the proposal on the grounds that the density exceeds that advocated in the local plan (8 per acre), the requirement to make provision for
protection of the amenities of Kiondhooag, the requirement to emulate the traditional architecture of the village along with those points already raised by the occupants of 8, Springfield Terrace.
Manx National Heritage echo the concerns raised above and in addition express concern that the mound indicated for removal in the reclamation proposals may be of historical and/or archaeological interest and that the application makes no provision for any investigation of this. They also comment that the quality of plans are more reflective of an application in principle rather than one in detail. They also express concern at the culverting of the stream which could have implications for the ecological value of the watercourse.
The occupants of Rosehill Cottage object to the application on the basis of concerns about parking, the need for this many houses within the village and reference is made to the application for development of the land to the north west (PA 07/0649) which proposed, inter alia, to divert surface water to a culvert on the A24.
The occupants of 5, Springfield Terrace object to the application on the basis of concerns about traffic, the adequacy of the A24 to accommodate the traffic and the proximity of the primary school and query whether the sewerage system can accommodate the sewage from the proposed development.
The owners of 1 and 2, Springfield Terrace object to the application on the same basis as those in 5, Springfield Terrace.
Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry Wildlife and Conservation Office comment that there are orchids recorded on the site which are protected under the Wildlife Act but no specific protection or mention is made of them in the submission or the quality of top soil to be used in the capping.
The occupants of Eairy Mount object to the proposal on the basis of the size of the proposed development, the capacity of the school, road safety and the provisions of the local plan which do not appear to have been complied with.
The occupants of Kionslieau Farm object to the application on the basis of the scale of development, lack of compliance with the provisions of the local plan and implications on road safety.
The occupant of 14, Brookfield Terrace objects to the application on the basis of inadequate infrastructure.
A resident of Port Soderick notes that the site is designated for residential development (in fact not all of it is) but notes that the proposal should contain proposals for reclamation of the mine site and does not do this.
There are two aspects of this application which need to be considered: firstly, is there sufficient information in the application to enable proper and complete consideration of the proposal and secondly, is the proposal acceptable in policy terms, weighed against the policies of the Foxdale Local Plan and the Strategic Plan?
The application purports to be a detailed application for engineering works to create roads and sewers and to reclaim a significant area of land which is known to be contaminated and through which runs at least one water course. The plans do not include any information on the proposed surface of the roads, depth of sewers, levels (existing or proposed) and show the introduction of some tree planting (one tree to the right of the access as one emerges from the site) within the visibility splay.
Details of the reclamation works are limited to annotation on the plan stating that the existing stream will be culverted - no details of the width or construction of the culvert. There are no existing or proposed levels nor information regarding to where the removed material is to be removed. There is no indication of any works other than to the spoil mound, no information on ground conditions or toxicity levels, despite all of the site being acknowledged on the Foxdale Local Plan as being contaminated to varying degrees. The concern about toxicity applies equally to the part of the site which is to be developed which is also identified as being contaminated. This is referred to in the Local Plan (paragraph 3.54 (6) which requires that prior to the commencement of works on site, the site should be tested for contamination. No information on the presences of orchids has been provided in the application.
In terms of compliance with the Local Plan, the area for built development encroaches into the area designated for reclamation in terms of four of the five detached properties at the south eastern side of the site and nine more dwellings encroach into the area shown as to be "Predominantly Landscaping/Planting" on Map 3 accompanying the Written Statement and illustrating those areas within Proposed Residential sites where there are constraints on built development due to landscaping, protecting existing residential amenities or archaeological features etc. As such, within the area designated for development the proposed scheme fails to satisfy the requirements of the Local Plan for decreasing the density towards the east of the site where it borders open countryside.
The house types are generally standard semi-detached and stepped terraced with no indication that there has been any thought to replicate the more traditional architecture of the village, which are generally straight terraced properties and linear development alongside the road. The more modern development within the village takes a form more similar to that proposed in this application. The houses in the line closest to the A24 are backing onto the road, resulting in the rear elevations being most prominent with the likelihood of sheds, conservatories and domestic clutter being erected in the space between the backs of the houses and the road and the possibility of the occupants of these houses asking for intrusive fencing alongside the highway to preserve their private garden space, which would not contribute positively to the streetsce.
The culverting of the stream is likely to result in a diminution of the ecological interest of the watercourse and there is no information to justify these works. Whilst there are some reclamation works shown to the area immediately to the east, this does not constitute all of the Louisa Mine site referred to in the Local Plan as needing to be reclaimed as part of the residential development. An application was submitted for the reclamation of the eastern part of the Louisa Mine site under PA 04/0524 but was refused as "The site forms part of a larger area which is known to have extreme levels of heavy metal contamination. The Foxdale Local Plan 1999 designates the area as being in need of reclamation and states that the area would be suitable for use as 'open space' only.
The application which proposes levelling and filling of the site with inert materials, treatment of the water course and the erection of a dwelling would be contrary to the policies set out in the Foxdale Local Plan 1999 by virtue of
a. the guidelines set out in Policy F/P/E/2 referring to areas where there is a known risk of heavy metal pollution, have not been complied with, b. the erection of a dwelling would be contrary to the prescribed use as 'open space' set out in the Local Plan
Notwithstanding the above, the Planning Committee judges that the reclamation of only part of the area, which is known to be heavily contaminated, would be a piecemeal approach which could harm a future overall strategy to reclaim all of the Louisa Mine Site." In addition there were considered to be inadequate sightlines onto the A24.
The Local Plan requires that there should be at least one area dedicated to children's play. Whilst there is an area shown as Open Space on the plan, adjacent to Kiondhooagh, this represents approximately 900 square metres with a smaller area opposite the end of that cul de sac of a further
220 square metres. The Strategic Plan contains guidance on how much open space a residential development should provide and in this case this could result in 64 square metres of total open space (12 sq. m of children's play space) per two bed house and 96 square metres of total open space (or 18 sq. m of children's play space) for 3 or more bed houses. There appear to be seven 4 bedroomed dwellings in the scheme, seventeen pairs of semi-detached houses which would normally accommodate 3 bedrooms and four terraces of 3 dwellings which could accommodate two bedrooms each. This would result in a total requirement of 882 square metres of children's play space and an overall provision of 4704 sq m of open space in terms of amenity space, formal open space as well as children's play space. As such it would appear that there is sufficient provision in terms of children's play space but little in the way of further amenity space or formal open space.
Finally, there is no mention of either affordable housing or energy efficiency in accordance with Housing Policy 5 and Energy Policy 5 of the Strategic Plan.
The development of the area designated as being suitable for residential development and including the mine site which should be reclaimed, needs a comprehensive approach, incorporating all of the relevant land rather than piecemeal applications for reclaiming parts of the site and developing on others. In this case, the plans are woefully inadequate for a detailed application and propose an unsympathetic development which strays beyond the area allocated for development on the Local Plan and where there is inadequate landscaping to mitigate the impact of the development.
The Society for the Preservation of the Manx Countryside and Environment and the resident of Port Soderick are not directly affected by the development and should not be afforded party status in this instance.
Isle of Man Water Authority and the Isle of Man Fire and Rescue Service raise issues which do not relate to planning issues and as such should not be afforded party status in this instance.
The occupants of 8, Springfield Terrace, Fuchsia House, Springfield Terrace, 5, Springfield Terrace, 1 and 2, Springfield Terrace are all directly opposite the site and as such are directly affected by the application and should be afforded party status in this instance.
Manx National Heritage are a statutory body and raise issues which are material planning considerations and as such should be afforded party status in this instance.
The occupants of Rosehill Cottage, Eairy Mount, Kionslieau Farm and 14, Brookfield Terrace are not sufficiently close to the site to be directly affected by the development and as such should not be afforded party status in this instance.
Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry Wildlife and Conservation Office comment on matters which are material planning considerations and as a statutory department of Government should be afforded party status in this instance.
Recommended Decision: Refused
Date of Recommendation: 19.11.2007
C : Conditions for approval N : Notes attached to conditions R : Reasons for refusal
R 1. The application contains inadequate information to enable full and complete consideration of the detailed matters which are being proposed in this application: in particular, no information is provided on the construction of the road or depth of sewers, levels (existing or proposed), existing and proposed profiles of the mine site, details of the culverting or justification therefor or information on the presence of orchids on the mine site (orchids are protected under the provisions of the Wildlife Act 1990).
R 2. Insofar as may be ascertained from the information provided, the proposed development involves the building of dwellings outside the area which is designated for development on the Foxdale Local Plan 1999. Furthermore, the proposal fails to accord with the provisions of the Local Plan insofar as: a) the development does not become less dense within the area designated for development, towards the east b) there is not the level or amount of landscaping recommended in the Local Plan at the eastern and south eastern boundary of the development site c) the proposal does not include the restoration of all of the Louisa Mine site d) the proposal fails to make provision for the protection of valuable ecological resources within the mine site, including orchids and e) there is no evidence to suggest that the development has been designed to echo the more traditional architecture of the village.
R 3. The proposal fails to make any provision for affordable housing, in contravention of Housing Policy 5 of the Strategic Plan or an Energy Impact Assessment in compliance with Energy Policy 5 of the Plan.
Decision Made : ... Committee Meeting Date : ...
Copyright in submitted documents remains with their authors. Request removal
