Loading document...
Application No.: 22/00241/B Applicant: Mr Brian Douglas Proposal: Erection of a detached dwelling with improvements to existing vehicular access Site Address: Fy-Yerrey Ballanard Road Abbeylands Isle Of Man IM4 5EA Senior Planning Officer: Mr Jason Singleton Expected Decision Level: Officer Delegation Recommended Decision: Refused Date of Recommendation: 25.07.2022 _________________________________________________________________ R : Reasons for Refusal O : Notes attached to reasons Reasons for Refusal - R 1. The proposal is not within a named settlement in accordance with the settlement hierarchy and would encourage unsustainable development. Accordingly it is contrary to Strategic Policy 1, 2, 3 and 10. Also Spatial Policies 1,2,3,4 of the Strategic Plan. - R 2. The proposal is not of a nature which would be supported in the countryside under those policies which set out the exceptional forms of development which would be allowed in the countryside. Furthermore, it has not been demonstrated that there is an overriding national need and a site for which there are no reasonable and acceptable alternatives. Therefore the proposal is considered to undermine General Policy 3 and Housing Policy 4, of the Strategic Plan, which seeks to protect the countryside for its own sake. - R 3. The application site is not zoned for development and is within an area of countryside. The creation of a new residential dwelling in an area not zoned for development would result in an inappropriate development in the countryside contrary to Environment Policy 1 of the Strategic Plan. - R 4. The design, size and scale of the proposed dwelling, and its finishes, are not sympathetic to the rural character of the area and is considered over development with an adverse visual impact that affects the character of the setting, contrary to Strategic Policy 5 and General Policy 2 (b & c) of the Strategic Plan. - R 5. The potential for the loss of trees on site could adversely affect the character and would detrimentally affect the amenity value of trees where the proposals do not enhance or protect the landscape quality and nature conservation value to this site and hence the proposal is contrary to Environment Policy 3 and Strategic Policy 4(b) of the Strategic Plan (2016).
_______________________________________________________________ Interested Person Status – Additional Persons
None _____________________________________________________________________________
1.0 THE SITE - 1.1 The application site is within the residential curtilage of Fy-Yerrey, Ballanard Road, Abbey lands. The existing property is set back within the site with two entrances (in and out) serving the dwelling. The dwellinghouse is a single storey property with a hipped roof. To the East of the house is a large garden area (looking at the aerials) that is now a hardstanding area of gravel. The context of the application site is essentially the front garden to the dwelling house. - 1.2 The context of the site is surrounded to the north and west with additional dwellings (predominately single storey) namely 'Glen Trac' and 'The Spinney' which forms a small collection of three properties in an otherwise rural area. The collection of three houses are adjacent to a water course to the south (at a lower level) and with mature trees encompassing the site. To the highway area, mature trees lining both sides of the road. - 1.3 Ballanard Road is broadly characterised as sporadic development when travelling out of Douglas towards the junction of St. Georges Bridge that has small pockets of residential development, generally traditionally designed (reflecting the age of construction) with green gaps of mature landscaping between with the density of the built development that dwindles
2.0 THE PROPOSAL - 2.1 Proposed is the erection of a detached two storey dwellinghouse within the ground of Fy-Yerrey. The proposed dwelling would be sited to the East of Fy Yerrey within the (front) gardens and adjacent to the highway of Ballanard Road that sits to the East. - 2.2 The property would measure a footprint of 11m wide x 10m long and an eaves height of 5m and as shallow pitched roof with an overall ridge height of 6m. The design has taken a contemporary approach and the vertical elements would see a finished of painted render and accent areas using anthracite colour 'Marley Cedral' Lap weather boarding and dark grey stone cladding panels. The roof would be a shallow pitch using a seamless zinc roll roofing system with aluminium fascia/ guttering details. The design incorporates large amount of glazing across both floors to the south and west elevations and limited fenestration details to the east and north. - 2.3 Internally the property would offer an upside down living arrangement that would see the ground floor being used for sleeping accommodation (3 bedrooms 3 en-suite bathrooms) and on the first floor an open plan arrangement offering a kitchen / dining room and a separate lounge and W/c.
3.1 The application site is not within any formal designated area for development on the Area Plan for the East 2020, essentially 'white land' but the houses area plotted on the Map. The landscape proposals map identifies the area as within a 'designated wildlife area'. - 3.2 It is to be noted the land to the immediate south of the application site and the adjacent river is a larger area of land that is referenced as DH010 (Northwest of Johnny Watterson's Lane) which is a Strategic Reserve Site for Predominately Residential. However, until the Strategic Reserve Release Mechanism Proposal 1 (SRRM Proposal 1) is undertaken, the site is not designated for development. - 3.3 The site is not within a Conservation area, nor are there any registered trees on site and the site is not identified as being within a flood risk area. The river to the south (and the gorge it sits within) is identified as a flood risk area. The site sits at a higher level and not affected by this. - 3.4 The 2016 Strategic Plan contains the following planning policies that are considered pertinent in the assessment of this application; - 3.5 The Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016 contains the following policies that are considered specifically material to the assessment of this current planning application: - 3.6 Strategic Policy;
3.7 Spatial Policy;
3.8 General Policies;
3.9 Environmental Polices; 1 Protection of the countryside
3.10 Housing Policy;
3.18 Transport Policies;
4 Highway safety
3.19 The Strategic Plan (2016) states at paragraph 4.3.8 for LOCAL DISTINCTIVENESS; - 3.20 The strategic plan gives guidance on the interpretation of;
"Infill development(1)" (in the sense of filling a small gap in an otherwise built-up frontage) may be acceptable in built up areas, but the value of spaces between buildings should not be underestimated, even in small settlements.
3.21 Definition of Previously Developed Land from Appendix 1 of the Strategic Plan Other Material Considerations - 3.22 Planning Circular 3/91 - Guide to the residential development in the countryside. - 3.23 Residential Design Guide (2021) This document provides advice on the design of new houses and extensions to existing
property as well as how to assess the impact of such development on the living conditions of those in adjacent residential properties and sustainable methods of construction.
4.0 PLANNING HISTORY - 4.1 The application site has no planning history that is considered relevant to this application.
5.0 REPRESENTATIONS (in brief, full reps on line) Statutory Consultees; - 5.1 Onchan District Commissioners - (06/04/22) with no objection. - 5.2 Highways Services - (22.03.22) No objection subject to the inclusion of a condition; "for the layout to be accord with Drawing no's: 1625.2 and 3". - 5.3 DoI Flood Risk Management - (21.03.22) Seeks completion of a "Application for consent for works affecting watercourses" form prior to determination. - 5.4 DEFA Forestry - (12.04.22) Object to the widening of the driveway and the impact on the existing trees (Cat B - Sycamore) and its roots. Alternatively if approved a suitably worded condition as supplied below;
"Prior to the commencement of the development hereby approved an Arboricultural
Method Statement (AMS), adhering to the recommendations of BS5837:2012 (Trees in relation to design, demolition and construction - recommendations), shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Department. The AMS should confirm what protection measures are going to implemented, how and when they are they are going to be implemented, and how arboricultural site monitoring will take place throughout the construction process, in sufficient detail to provide a high level of confidence in the outcome for retained trees. The agreed protection measures and construction methods shall be adhered to in full…… Reason: to provide a level of technical detail sufficient to provide a high level of confidence in the outcome for retained trees on the site".
5.5 DEFA Inland Fisheries (06.05.22) No objection. - 5.6 There has not been any comments from the neighbouring properties.
Principle
6.1 The starting point here is the land designation, it is clear from the Area Plan for the East, the application site is within a rural and protected part of the countryside where any development is strictly controlled and the site is not allocated for development. - 6.2 In considering this application, Strategic Policy 2 and Spatial Policy 3 identify areas of development to be located, generally within existing towns and villages, it cannot be said that this site sits within a defined areas and is very much part of the rural countryside as previously identified and would be contrary to those policies. - 6.3 The site does sit on a service road where there are some residential dwellings along its length and easily accessible from the highway. Given the broad location of the site and its location, it does sit within a remote part of the countryside where there are no provisions for accessible public transport. The nearest town would be Douglas or Onchan and the nearest service village is Union Mills. As such this aspect would be contrary to Strategic Policy 10 (a)(d). - 6.4 When considering Strategic Policy 2 and Spatial Policy 5 that directs development to designated towns or villages, development in the countryside is only permitted in exceptional circumstances, which is detailed in General Policy 3 and cross referenced in Spatial Policy 5. - 6.5 The proposed development does not come within any of those exceptional circumstances. In particular, it would not entail the provision of essential housing for an agricultural worker, or the conversion of a redundant rural building. There is no evidence of any building having taken place on this land. The proposed development would not entail the replacement of an existing dwelling. Neither would it be required for the working of minerals, or for agricultural or forestry operations. It is not considered that it would serve any over-riding national need - the need for it is essentially personal to the appellants. Finally the proposed dwelling is not required for the interpretation of the countryside, or its wildlife or heritage. When conjointly assessed against Spatial Policy 5 and Strategic Policy 2 and Strategic Policy 10 of the Strategic Plan it is considered that the proposal would not be deemed a sustainable location for 'development' and would be contrary to those policies. - 6.6 Given the nature of the site and its proximity to other dwellings, though could be given to GP3(c) where consideration could be given for previously developed land and also referred to in Strategic Policy 1(a) to optimise the use of such land. For an exception to be made through Gp3c there needs to be a significant amount of buildings; and; their continued use is redundant; and; where development would reduce the impact of the current situation of the landscape or wider environment; and where development would result in improvements to the landscape or wider environment. - 6.7 In this instance, there is not a significant amount of buildings on site to be replaced and would have been the former garden to Fy Yerrey. As there is none, it would not necessarily be compliant in these terms with the definition or would adhere to that of Gp3(c) for previous developed land. As such the proposal cannot be considered to comply with GP3c. - 6.8 The test is whether the proposal for a new dwelling here would be an improvement on the landscape and wider environment and whether an overriding exception can be found under Ep1 to offset development in the countryside as an over -riding national need in land use terms where there is no reasonable and acceptable alternative. This concludes the application is to be assessed for the creation of a new residential property in the countryside. - 6.9 To summarise, as identified earlier within the planning policy section of this report, this presumption against is set out in four different ways; the application site is not zoned for residential development under the Area Plan for the East; Secondly, General Policy 3 of the Isle of Man Strategic plan, states that in such areas new dwellings will generally not be permitted; Thirdly, the site is not identified in an Area Plan being a town, village, or within a sustainable
6.12 Visual Impact The proposal would be introducing an element of built development on site where at present there is none. Environment Policy 1 of the Strategic Plan provides that, in the absence of an over-riding national need, development which would adversely affect the countryside will not be permitted. There is no avoiding the fact that the proposed property in terms of its siting, scale, massing, height and finishes could be visible from the highway but could also be read in the same residential context of the existing three other properties. - 6.13 Those nearest residential properties (noted above) that would be considered to be the 'character of the streetscene' are only bungalows and this property would clearly be seen as dominant property on the landscape and within "the streetscene" and being of a contemporary design would exacerbate the situation being two stories. It is acknowledged in the design, the overall height has incorporated a shallow pitch rolled zinc roof which further clarifies the extent of the visual impact of the proposal and the rational to keep the overall profile low to minimise the built form. - 6.14 Given the close proximity of the three neighbouring properties and their respective curtilages, consideration could be given to Section 7.34 of the Strategic Plan, which applies to existing settlements, indicates that 'infill development' may be acceptable in built-up areas. However, the application site is not within an existing settlement as identified in Appendix 3 of the Strategic Plan. Those settlements must have the characteristics of towns or villages, and be served by mains drainage systems. The site does not qualify on either count (proposal utilises a Klargester Bio-disk sewerage treatment plant to serve the proposed dwelling). There is no
6.19 In terms of Fy-Yerrey, the nearest elevations would be 15m with the proposed building
at a higher level. The overall impact here would be less than that on Glen Trac but would still have an impact all the same on the future occupants given the close proximity. It is noted we have not received any objections or comments from the adjoining neighbours. On balance, the introduction of a new built form will change the outlook from both properties but wouldn't be considered to have a detrimental impact on either property and these aspects could be considered to be in accordance with General Policy 2(g).
6.20 Highway Safety The application site already features two existing accesses that already serves the site. Highway Services have considered the merits of the proposal, access to and from the site from the highway noting the proposed visibility splays, as well as parking and highway safety. As the transport professionals their comments are heavily relied upon and as they do not object, the proposal would be considered to align with the principles of Transport Policy 4 and 7 in terms of highways safety. - 6.21 Trees and Ecology The comments from the Forestry are noted and their level of objection rests on the impact of the proposals on a category B trees (Sycamore) through the widening of the driveway and on the trees roots system. It is noted on the drawings that widening would be in close proximity and would inherently place the tree to a degree at risk. The proposed building is also adjacent to a mature Ash tree, as noted on the drawings. - 6.22 As the site is adjacent to a defined Wildlife Area (Tromode Dam and River Glass) in the Area Plan for the East (Map1a) Environmental Constraints, consideration has to be given to the
7.1 On balance it is judged, the proposal is contrary to those aforementioned Policies of the Strategic Plan and does not meet the tests for exceptional development within the countryside.
7.2 It is therefore concluded that the planning application is recommended for refusal. - 8.0 INTERESTED PERSON STATUS
8.1 By virtue of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) Order 2019, the following persons are automatically interested persons:
8.2 The decision maker must determine:
8.3 The Department of Environment Food and Agriculture is responsible for the determination of planning applications. As a result, where officers within the Department make comments in a professional capacity they cannot be given Interested Person Status.
I can confirm that this decision has been made by the Head of Development Management in accordance with the authority afforded to that Officer by the appropriate DEFA Delegation and that in making this decision the Officer has agreed the recommendation in relation to who should be afforded Interested Person Status
Decision Made : Refused Date : 28.07.2022 Determining officer
Signed : S BUTLER Stephen Butler Head of Development Management
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.
Copyright in submitted documents remains with their authors. Request removal
