DEC Officer Report

Application No.: 22/01428/A Applicant: Mr Scott Wilson Proposal: Erection of detached dwelling to the rear of No. 11 Ballanard Road, New Dwelling to be serviced via Terance Avenue Site Address: 11 Ballanard Road Douglas Isle Of Man IM2 5HP Planning Officer: Mr Paul Visigah Photo Taken: 25.04.2023 Site Visit: 25.04.2023 Expected Decision Level: Officer Delegation Recommended Decision: Refused Date of Recommendation: 24.05.2023 _________________________________________________________________ Reasons for Refusal R : Reasons for Refusal O : Notes attached to reasons - R 1. Due to the overall density of development, layout of the site, design and landscaping of the building and the spaces around them, coupled with the quantum of development on the broader site area, it is considered that the proposal would result in a visual overdevelopment of the site. The scheme would also result in significant loss of an established green corridor which has public amenity value and contributes to the character of the site and locality. It is, therefore, considered that the development would result in a particularly noticeable intrusive backland development within the site when viewed from the surrounding area, and would have a deleterious impact on the application site and the character and appearance of the area and the context of this part of Douglas, which is defined by detached buildings laid out within large curtilages with mature landscaping, thus failing to comply with Environment Policy 42, General Policy 2 (b, c, f & g), and Strategic Policy 3(b) of the Strategic Plan. - R 2. Due to the separating distance between the new dwelling and existing dwelling at Creggan Ashen, 11 Ballanard Road, the position of new fenestrations to habitable rooms on the proposed dwelling, and the nature of boundary treatment between both properties, it is considered that there would be unacceptable levels of overlooking from the first floor rear bedroom windows of the existing dwelling at Creggan Ashen, 11 Ballanard Road, resulting in significant adverse impacts upon the residential amenities of the occupants of the new dwelling, contrary to General Policy 2 (g) of the IOM Strategic Plan 2016 and the principles set out in the Residential Design Guide. - R 3. It has not been demonstrated that the development could be undertaken without creating significant adverse impacts on the ecology of the site or biodiversity as it has not been established that the recommended ecological mitigation could be secured as conditions of - approval. The development would also result in the loss of a significant section of the existing green corridor on this part of the locality which has ecological and environmental benefits for the microclimate and biodiversity. It is therefore, considered that the intensity of the development coupled with the inability to implement all recommended mitigation measures for the development within the current scheme to address biodiversity concerns would be contrary to the requirements of General Policy 2 (d), Strategic Policy 4 (b) of the Strategic Plan, as well as Strategic Objective 3.3 Environment (b), and habitat loss action 21 of the IoM Government Biodiversity Strategy. - R 4. Whilst the site is within an area designated for Residential use on the Area Plan for the East, the development will result in the loss of a mature tree on site, with potential to impact on tree root areas for neighbouring trees, without adequate provision made for their protection and replacement planting within the site, whilst encouraging further removal of trees, resulting in significant adverse impacts on the character and appearance of the site and area. The proposal is, therefore, contrary to General Policy 2 (f) and Environment Policy 3. _______________________________________________________________

Interested Person Status – Additional Persons

It is recommended that the following Government Departments should not be given Interested Person Status on the basis that although they have made written submissions these do not relate to planning considerations:

Manx Utilities Authority Drainage

It is recommended that the owners/occupiers of the following properties should be given Interested Person Status as they are 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):

Hillcrest, 9 Ballanard Road, Douglas; Uplands, 7 Ballanard Road, Douglas; Far End, 15 Terence Avenue, Douglas; 13 Terence Avenue, Douglas;

as they satisfy all of the requirements of paragraph 2 of the Department's Operational Policy on Interested Person Status.

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):

Tedslair, 21 Terence Avenue, Douglas; 110 Port E Chee Avenue, Douglas; 4 Terence Avenue, Douglas; 22 Terence Avenue, Douglas; 20 Terence Avenue, Douglas; 11 Terence Avenue, Douglas;

as they are not within 20m of the application site and the development is not automatically required to be the subject of an EIA by Appendix 5 of the Strategic Plan, in accordance with paragraph 2B of the Policy _____________________________________________________________________________

Officer’s Report

1.0 THE SITE - 1.1 The application site is the residential curtilage of 11 Ballanard Road, Douglas, which is a two-storey four bedroom detached house with integral garage located on the western side of Ballanard Road. - 1.2 To the southwest end of its large garden is a flat roofed detached garage which is accessed via Terence Avenue located to the south of the rear garden. A public footpath which connects Terence Avenue to Highcroft Avenue and Bray Hill situated south of the application site runs along rear boundary of the application site and the dwellings situated southeast of the application site. - 1.3 The dwelling has mature landscaping comprising trees and high hedges running along the large sections of the boundaries of the rear garden. - 1.4 The street scene along Ballanard Road and Terence Avenue where the property sits are defined by two storey detached and semi-detached dwellings situated within medium to large sized curtilages. The architectural styles on both street scenes are predominantly of the 1920's era. The large rear gardens of the properties situated west of Ballanard Road (which includes the application site) have significant mature landscaping which forms a green corridor stretching from the boundary with Port E Chee Road to the rear of the properties along Bray Hill.

2.0 THE PROPOSAL - 2.1 This planning approval is sought for Erection of detached dwelling to the rear of No. 11 Ballanard Road, New Dwelling to be serviced via Terence Avenue. This Approval in Principle seeks to address siting, landscaping, Design, Means of Access, Internal Layout, External Appearance and Design. - 2.2 The new dwelling which would be erected within part of the existing rear garden to 11 Ballanard Road which measures about 392.8sqm would be a single storey dwelling with internal layout comprising an open plan lounge/kitchen/dining area, two ensuite bedrooms, utility room, hallway with storage and W/C, and an integral single garage. - 2.3 The site layout would provide for the dwelling, two onsite parking spaces beside the integral garage, a rear garden area with patio at the rear of the dwelling which would be separated by an existing 1.8m timber fence. The existing garage and boundary wall to the south of the site would be demolished.

2.3 The proposed dwelling which would be 5.9m tall from the ground level to the top of its roof ridge to the ground level (2.5m to the eaves), would have its external walls finished in a combination of Sand/cement render painted white, stone cladding and Cedar Cladding or similar, while its roof would be finished in smooth black concrete roof tiles. All the windows would be Anthracite Grey uPVC units, the front door would be Anthracite grey composite door, while the folding doors would be Anthracite Grey aluminium door. The soffits and soffits would be white PVC units. - 2.4 The scheme would include ecological elements in the form of new boundary hedging to be made up of hazel, Beech and Holly; planting of new bushes/shrubs to consist of broom, Guelder rose, Honeysuckle, Spindle, Rose Sherard's downy Rosa canina, & Rose burnet; creating an area for new rockery and planting to be of herb species and to include lavender, rosemary, thyme, oregano and marjoram. Further ecological works would include installing a bee box fixed to the fence and directly adjacent the new rockery/planting area, as well as the installation of new bat brick and bird boxes on the external elevation of the new dwelling. Two new trees; a new Silver Birch and a Crab Apple tree are to be planted on site. Also proposed is a new offsite mitigation planting along the northern boundary of the new dwelling and rear of

Creggan Ashen (11 Ballanard) to be formed from Holly, Hazel, Beech, Broom & Rowan in alternate planting.

2.6 The applicant has provided a planning statement which sets out the following: Details on the proposed scheme; the intention to integrate renewable and efficient use of energy, approaches to support wildlife on the site including trees, eco-habitats, and off site ecological mitigation; reference to planning policy; and photographs which show the existing site context. - 2.7 The scheme is accompanied by Percolation test results prepared by Map Groundworks Ltd, which states that the percolation test was carried out on 2 test holes on the plot. It concludes by stating that the result is this is acceptable.

3.0 PLANNING POLICY - 3.1 The site lies within an area designated as Predominantly Residential Use on the Area Plan for the East (Map 4 - Douglas) and the site is not within a Conservation Area. There are no registered trees on site, and the site is not within a registered tree area. The site is also not prone to flood risks. - 3.2 In terms of strategic plan policy, the Isle of Man Strategic Plan contains the policies that are considered specifically material to the assessment of this current planning application:

• 3.2.1 Strategic Policy 1 states: "Development should make the best use of resources by:

• (a) optimising the use of previously developed land, redundant buildings, unused and under-used land and buildings, and re-using scarce indigenous building materials;
• (b) ensuring efficient use of sites, taking into account the needs for access, landscaping, open space and amenity standards; and
• (c) being located so as to utilise existing and planned infrastructure, facilities and services."

• 3.2.2 General Policy 2 states: "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:

• (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;

• 3.2.3 Housing Policy 4 states: "New housing will be located primarily within our existing towns and villages, or, where appropriate, in sustainable urban extensions of these towns and villages where identified in adopted Area Plans: otherwise new housing will be permitted in the countryside only in the following exceptional circumstances:

• (a) essential housing for agricultural workers in accordance with Housing Policies 7, 8, 9 and 10;
• (b) conversion of redundant rural buildings in accordance with Housing Policy 11; and
• (c) the replacement of existing rural dwellings and abandoned dwellings in accordance with Housing Policies 12, 13 and 14."

• 3.2.4 Housing Policy 6 states: "Development of land which is zoned for residential development must be undertaken in accordance with the brief in the relevant area plan, or, in the absence of a brief, in accordance with the criteria in paragraph 6.2 of this Plan. Briefs will encourage good and innovative design, and will not be needlessly prescriptive."
• 3.2.5 "Environment Policy 42 states: New development in existing settlements must be designed to take account of the particular character and identity, in terms of buildings and landscape features of the immediate locality. Inappropriate backland development, and the removal of open or green spaces which contribute to the visual amenity and sense of place of a particular area will not be permitted. Those open or green spaces which are to be preserved will be identified in Area Plans."
• 3.2.6 Environment Policy 3: Development will not be permitted where it would result in the unacceptable loss of or damage to woodland areas, especially ancient, natural and semi-natural woodlands, which have public amenity or conservation value.
• 3.2.7 Transport Policy 7: "The Department will require that in all new development, parking provision must be in accordance with the Department's current standards. Typical Residential: 2 spaces per unit, at least one of which is retained within the curtilage and behind the front of the dwelling."
• 3.2.8 Transport Policy 1: New development should, where possible, be located close to existing public transport facilities and routes, including pedestrian, cycle and rail routes.
• 3.2.9 Strategic Policy 10: New development should be located and designed such as to promote a more integrated transport network with the aim to:

• (a) minimise journeys, especially by private car;
• (b) make best use of public transport;
• (c) not adversely affect highway safety for all users, and
• (d) encourage pedestrian movement

• 3.2.10 Environment Policies 4 and 5 seek to protect the ecology of sites and important habitats.

3.4 Other policies within the Strategic Plan which are considered relevant in the assessment of the proposal are;

• 3.4.1 Community Policy 10: Proposals for the layout and development of land will be permitted only where there is provided proper access for fire-fighting vehicles and adequate supplies of water for fire-fighting purposes.
• 3.4.2 Community Policy 11: The design and use of all new buildings and of extensions to existing buildings must, as far as is reasonable and practicable, pay due regard to best practice such as to prevent the outbreak and spread of fire.
• 3.4.3 Infrastructure Policy 5: Development proposals should incorporate methods for water conservation and management measures to conserve the Island's water resources.

• 3.4.4 "Backland development" (which is development on the land at the back of properties) may also be acceptable in some circumstances, but only if satisfactory access can be achieved and if there is sufficient space to provide adequate amenity for both new and existing adjoining dwellings.
• 3.5 The following parts of the Area Plan for the East Written Statement are also considered relevant to the proposed scheme:

• 3.5.1 Section 6.5: Ensuring the efficient use of land and buildings "6.5.1 The density of development should be in keeping with the character of the local area. Higher densities will be more appropriate in the central areas of Douglas, Onchan, Laxey and Union Mills. Much of Douglas' celebrated seafront contains four and five storey hotels and apartment blocks which provide a distinctive visual image of the Capital and a highly practical form of space conscious living for a modern town.

• 6.5.2 Lower densities may be considered more acceptable in instances where there are site specific constraints, a need to provide additional levels of infrastructure or where the current character or appearance of the area necessitates a development of a lower density.
• 6.5.3 The subdivision of buildings for residential use can provide an appropriate source of housing and can lead to the more efficient use of existing buildings. Subject to other Strategic Policies, as well as the Proposals in this Plan, particularly in relation to amenity and the design of any alterations to allow the subdivision, such proposals will be supported.
• 6.5.4 In recent years, the Douglas town centre in particular has lost some of its population. The town effectively empties after the working day. Historically, people lived above the work spaces of shops, offices and workshops in Douglas creating a vibrancy that is perhaps lacking today. This Plan encourages the reintroduction of people living in the mostly vacant floors above the town's shops and offices12. More people living in the town will, it is hoped, create a more vibrant environment which will have a positive impact upon the day time and particularly, the night time economy within the town and will also enable us to respond to changes in new and emerging working patterns."

• 3.5.2 Section 6.6: Principles of good design

• 6.6.1 In the Strategic Plan, Strategic Policy 5 states that 'New development, including individual buildings, should be designed so as to make a positive contribution to the environment of the Island'.
• 6.6.2 A positive contribution means making places which are attractive and safe areas to live, work and invest in. In order to achieve this, it is essential that detailed design proposals be based around an understanding of constraints and opportunities of the site and that the proposal responds positively to local context, in terms of its scale, form, layout, materials, colouring, fenestration and architectural detailing.
• 6.6.3 This, in turn, depends on good understanding of the local character of the individual settlements in the East. Local character is defined by the natural and physical features of an area, including its topography, the pattern of streets and public spaces, the street scene, the density of development, the scale and form of buildings and the materials used in construction.
• 6.6.4 Housing developments have been criticised in recent decades for their uniform and standardised appearance. In order to avoid creating homogeneous and sterile neighbourhoods, developers will be encouraged to incorporate a mix of property types of a varying scale, utilising a range of complementary materials wherever possible.

• 6.6.5 Similarly, the layout of development should encourage integration with surrounding areas and not be inward facing. Regarding extensions, it is recognised that the use of alternative materials and detailing in extensions and alterations can, in some case, enhance the character of an existing building and/or the surrounding area.
• 6.6.6 The layout, orientation and design of buildings can reduce the need for energy consumption by maximising the potential to secure the benefits energy provides e.g. heating, lighting and cooling, through alternative means. Where layout, orientation and design is not constrained or dictated by other factors i.e. by the character of the surrounding area or the juxtaposition of adjacent buildings, applicants for planning approval will be encouraged to demonstrate how the design of the development has reduced the need for energy consumption.

• 3.5.3 Urban Environment Proposal 3: "Development proposals must make a positive contribution to local character and distinctiveness. Traditional or contemporary approaches may be appropriate, depending upon the nature of the proposal and the context of the surrounding area."

- 4.0 OTHER MATERIAL CONSIDERATIONS

- 4.1 RESIDENTIAL DESIGN GUIDE (2021)

• 4.1.1 Whilst not adopted planning policy, DEFA's Residential Design Guide (2021) is a material consideration in the assessment of this application as, "It is intended to apply to any residential development within existing villages and towns, including individual houses, conversions and householder extensions." Section 3.1 refers to local distinctiveness, 6.3 relates specifically to driveways and front gardens, and 7.0 deals with Impact on neighbouring properties are particularly relevant.

4.2 IOM BIODIVERSITY STRATEGY 2015 TO 2025

• 4.2.1 The strategic aims (In part):

• o Managing biodiversity changes to minimise loss of species and habitats.
• o Maintaining, restoring and enhancing native biodiversity, where necessary.

• 4.2.2 Habitat loss actions "21. DEFA will continue to promote a policy of 'no net loss' for semi-natural Manx habitats and species and ensure that unavoidable loss is replaced or effectively compensated for."
• 5.0 PLANNING HISTORY

5.1 There is no previous application for the site considered materially relevant to this application. - 6.0 REPRESENTATIONS Copies of representations received can be viewed on the Government's website. This report contains summaries only.

6.1 Representation from the Department of Infrastructure (DOI) Highways Division confirms that the proposal raises no significant road safety or highway network efficiency issues. Accordingly, Highway Services Development Control raises no objection to the proposal subject to all vehicular access arrangements to according to Drawing No. 105. (21 March 2023).

6.2 DEFA Ecosystem Policy Team have made the following comments regarding the application (24 March 2023):

• o Based on the updated details and level of mitigation that is proposed including native boundary hedging and tree planting, the creation of the rockery, and installation of bird, bat and bee boxes, the Ecosystem Policy Team remove their objection to the application.

• o They note that they are still not supportive of the principle of using established urban garden spaces as places for new housing.
• o They request that should the application be approved, the following conditions should be imposed:

• - Tree and hedge planting to be undertaken as per the Proposed Site Planting Plan although they would wish to see greater levels of detail about this at the detailed application stage, including number of trees and shrubs to be planted;
• - The rockery to be created as per the Proposed Site Planting Plan;
• - The bee box to be installed as per the Proposed Site Planting Plan;
• - Hedgehog 'thoroughfares' to be created within the fence line as per the Proposed Site Planting Plan;
• - The bird and bat boxes to be installed as per the proposed elevations (Drawing Title Planning in Principal for the erection of a detached dwelling. Drawing No. 102).
• - Additionally, a condition/agreement should be secured for the off-site hedge planting and installation of bat and bird boxes at Creggan Ash.

• o They note that they would object to this application should any of the above conditions not be secured on approval.

6.3 DEFA Forestry has made the following comments regarding the application:

• 6.3.1 Consultation Comments received 27 April 2023: o With regard to the trees, the proposal is feasible. However, a protection plan which may need to be accompanied by some minor tweaks to the proposed site plan in order to accommodate the rooting areas of trees on neighbouring properties should be provided prior to the determination of the application as it may be necessary to make minor changes to the proposed site plan.
• 6.3.2 Consultation Comments received 4 May 2023:

• o It seems that the planning statement states that there are no trees on site. There does seem to be, however, a beech tree in the western corner of the site. This tree has not been approved for removal.
• o Furthermore, the planting plan states that a crab apple tree will be planted at the position of this beech tree, this would be unfeasible with the retention of the beech tree.
• o These issues should be addressed in the protection plan I previously recommended.

• 6.3.3 Since the receipt of the DEFA forestry comments which are on the online file for the application, no additional tree information has been provided by the applicants.
• 6.4 Manx Utilities Drainage has made the following comments regarding the application:

• 6.4.1 Consultation comments received 26 January 2023:

• o Further to our telephone conversation this morning please be advised that we have no separate surface water drainage in the area. Therefore, we will not allow the SW into the combined system.
• o If soakaways are going to be used, you will need to demonstrate that the ground is suitable for a soakaway by carrying out a percolation test. We will need to see a copy of this before we can support the application.

• 6.4.2 Following receipt of the percolation test results, Manx Utilities Drainage have made the following comments in their letter dated 26 April 2023: o Manx Utilities Authority has assessed the above planning application and would like to advise you that the Authority has no objection to the application subject to the following condition/s:-

• - There must be NO discharge of surface water (directly or indirectly) from this proposed development to any foul drainage system(s) so as to comply with the requirements of Manx Utilities and the Sewerage Act 1999.
• - The proposed dwelling must be connected to the public sewer(s) in a manner acceptable to Manx Utilities. All drainage works must conform to the requirements of "Manx

Sewers for Adoption", any necessary CCTV surveys are to be carried out at the developer's expense.

6.5 Douglas Borough Council has indicated in their consultation comments dated 17 March 2023 that the Council's waste services team is currently looking at the application to ascertain the suitability of any bin and recycling storage for the proposed development. They note that they will provide comments on the application in due course. No further comments have been received as at the time of drafting this report. - 6.6 The owners/occupiers of the following properties have made written representations on the application:

• 1. Hillcrest, 9 Ballanard Road, Douglas (14 Dec 2022/6 February 2023/25 March 2023/28 February 2023;
• 2. Uplands, 7 Ballanard Road, Douglas (14 Dec 2022/19 March 2023);
• 3. Far End, 15 Terence Avenue, Douglas (15 December 2022);
• 4. Tedslair, 21 Terence Avenue, Douglas (27 December 2022/6 February 2023/7 February 2023/29 March 2023);
• 5. 110 Port E Chee Avenue, Douglas (13 January 2023/9 March 2023);
• 6. 4 Terence Avenue, Douglas (18 January 2023/30 March 2023);
• 7. 22 Terence Avenue, Douglas (30 January 2023);
• 8. 20 Terence Avenue, Douglas (31 January 2023);
• 9. 13 Terence Avenue, Douglas (29 March 2023); and
• 10. 11 Terence Avenue, Douglas (30 March 2023).

• 6.6.1 They object to the application on the following grounds:

• o Poor display of site notice (yellow notice only placed on Terence Avenue - none by the main entrance to 11 Ballanard Road);
• o Privacy concerns;
• o Loss of light;
• o Adverse impact on outlook;
• o Loss of garden of these properties would upset the significant green corridor that currently exists in this urban area for wildlife survival, and can only have a negative impact;
• o Removal of a significant number of trees on site resulting in impacts on bats since tree removal;
• o Potential for future removal of trees on the site;
• o Noise impact from proposed development;
• o Impact of construction traffic;
• o Loss of green space and impacts on natural ecosystems on the site.
• o Adverse impact on driveway access;
• o Road safety concerns for children living within Terence Avenue;
• o Impacts on on-street parking;
• o Increased volume of traffic along Terence Avenue;
• o The 'newer modern' style does not fit with the dominant residential style of Terence Avenue;
• o Disruptions to flow of traffic during emergency situations;
• o The drawings submitted are misleading and incomplete;
• o Issues with failing boundary wall;
• o Impact on property values;
• o Reference is made to the potential impact of the new entrance on the abutting lane;
• o Potential impact on surface water drainage in the area;

• 6.5.2 In response to the comments from the neighbours, the applicant's agent has made the following comments in their correspondence dated 30 January 2023:

• o Privacy

• Although the full design of the new dwelling has not been detailed or agreed it is proposed that the dwelling is only a storey and a half with no windows/dormers from any of the habitable rooms on the first floor looking towards the boundary with No.9 Ballanard Road. However, there may be a requirement for some Roof lights along this elevation to provide natural light to the upstairs living accommodation. On the ground floor it is proposed that the boundary is delineated using soft planting or timber fencing this would also protect the privacy of No.9 from the ground floor elevation.
• o Light Overshadowing and loss of light to the neighbouring property was discussed with the client during the initial design briefing and as a result it was agreed that the proposed dwelling should be a dormer style bungalow or similar, in order to mitigate any detrimental effect to No.9. There are large Conifer trees approx. 8m high on the boundary with No.12 which would be well above the ridge of the proposed property and therefore it is not anticipated that this development would have any negative effect on the light received by No.9.
• o Outlook The height of the new dwelling is a storey and a half, and in the full application more details will be provided surrounding the boundary treatment which will be either soft planting or fencing or mixture of both to all boundaries, to not only provide privacy for the neighbouring properties but also my client. However, it is worth noting that the outlook or view of the neighbouring property is not a material planning matter.
• o Environment/Wildlife The trees previously removed from the site were done under license issued by DEFA at the time with no concerns raised. The remaining shrubbery is low level grass, weeds and bushes which can be remove if the client wished to as part of a garden renovation, therefore should have negligible impact on the outcome of this assessment. If required the client would be amenable to installing bat/bird boxes on the property if a suitable location is identified.
• o Noise/Traffic No. 11 Ballanard road already has access from Terence Avenue and has the ability to park in the associated garage building to the rear of the property which is currently in regular use, and therefore we do not perceive splitting the site to form a new dwelling would increase the number of possible vehicle movements on Terence Avenue. Additional concerns were raised regarding the parking of vehicles associated with the development, it is anticipated that the site will have sufficient hardstanding to accommodate parking and manoeuvring space for two vehicles plus a garage, and therefore unlikely to result in additional on road parking. The existing access to the site has poor visibility to its left hand side, and the proposed new development would see a significant improvement in safety with its increased visibility as a result of the removal of the existing Rear/ Proposed Front Boundary wall in favour of either low level walling or planting. While we appreciate that noise and traffic from construction can be disruptive for neighbouring properties, it is not material planning matter and therefore should not be considered as one.

- 7.0 ASSESSMENT

7.1 The fundamental issues to be considered in the assessment of the current application are:

• a. Principle of developing the site for the proposed use;
• b. The potential visual impact on the site, street scene and townscape;
• c. Impacts on Parking and Highway Safety;
• d. The potential impact on neighbouring properties;
• e. Impact on future occupiers;
• f. Ecological Impacts;
• g. Impact on trees; and
• h. Drainage issues

7.2 Principle of Development (STP 1, SP2, HP4, & HP 6)

• 7.2.1 In assessing the principle of the proposed development, it is considered that the site is zoned for residential use which implies that the use of the site for residential purposes would be compatible with adjoining uses and conform to the general use of the area.

• 7.2.2 The site is also within the settlement boundary and adjacent to and surrounded by existing residential dwellings; conditions which would ensure that residential development here broadly aligns with Strategic Policy 1 and Housing Policy 4. Whilst there is no presumption that land that is previously-developed is necessarily suitable for housing development nor that the whole of the curtilage should be developed, it is considered that the principle of utilising the site for residential development would be complimentary to the dominant residential use within the locality.
• 7.2.3 It is vital to note that the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016 seeks to locate new housing and employment close to existing public transport facilities and routes, or where public transport facilities are, or can be improved, thereby reducing the need to use private cars and encouraging alternative means of transport, and it is considered that the site would meet this goal given its proximity to existing routes within Douglas. While this does not signify a presumption in favour for all forms of housing development, it points to the fact the proposal would generally accord with the Strategic Plan goals for new housing on the Island. Therefore, in terms of the acceptability of the use of the site for residential development it is concluded that the proposal basically accords with the goals of Strategic Policy 1 and Housing Policy 4 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016.
• 7.2.4 Based on the foregoing, it is considered that as the application aligns with the zoning of the area within the Area Plan for the East, and the development of the site for residential purposes would be acceptable in principle. It is, however, worth noting that the factors highlighted above do not in any way denote automatic approval for residential use of the site, given that the development of the site would have to be appropriate for the existing site character, character of locality and not result in adverse impacts on other attributes of the site, such as biodiversity, access and highway issues, drainage, flood potential and/or neighbouring amenity. Therefore, it still remains necessary to assess the proposed development against other relevant planning policies and the physical constraints of the application site.
• 7.2.5 Whilst the planning application seeks approval in principle, it does seeks to address matters such as siting, landscaping, Design, Means of Access, Internal Layout, External Appearance and Design, and all these would be considered at this stage.

7.3 Visual Impact on the Site and Street Scene (GP 2, STP 3, EP 42, Sections 6.5 & 6.6 of TAPE, & RDG 2021)

• 7.3.1 In terms of the size (footprint) of the dwellings and relationship with the spaces between the buildings which serve to define the character of the area, it is considered that the density of the development would be at variance with the immediate vicinity, particularly the properties on the western side of Ballanard Road which are set within large grounds with large landscaped gardens enclosed by mature landscaping (which the property forms a group with).
• 7.3.2 The following data for the sites that border the application site on the western side of Ballanard Road gives context to the fact that the proposal would be at variance with the existing density in the area. The values show that the development would result in a significantly high density in an area of medium to low density:

• a. Mount View, 3 Ballanard Road: Site area - 464.8sqm, 21.5% built coverage, and dwelling density - 8.7 dwellings per acre.
• b. The Mulberries, 5 Ballanard Road: Site area - 1,302.3sqm, 11.5% built coverage, and dwelling density - 3.1 dwellings per acre.
• c. Uplands, 7 Ballanard Road: Site Area - 644.8sqm, 15.5% built coverage, and dwelling density 6.3 dwellings per acre.

• d. Hillcrest, 9 Ballanard Road: Site Area - 823sqm, 12.2% built coverage, and dwelling density 4.9 dwellings per acre.
• e. Dean Field, 13 Ballanard Road: Site Area - 709.6sqm, 27.4% built coverage, and 5.4 dwellings per acre.
• f. Auldyn, 15 Ballanard Road: Site Area - 705.7sqm, 13.5% built coverage, and 5.7 dwellings per acre.
• g. Hillcroft, 17 Ballanard Road: Site Area - 823sqm, 12.15% built coverage, and 4.9 dwellings per acre.
• h. Creggan Ashen, 11 Ballanard Road (Application site as existing): Site area - 801.1sqm, 15.9% site coverage, and 5 dwellings per acre.
• i. Proposal after site is subdivided into two dwellings: Total built coverage (existing and proposed) would be 34.8%, while the Gross dwelling density for the site would be 10.1 dwellings per acre. It should be noted that the Gross residential density for the area is 5.2 dwellings per acre, while the average built coverage is 16.2%. These values double the values currently obtainable for the area.

• 7.3.3 It should be noted that Paragraph 6.5.2 of the Area Plan for the East Written Statement is clear that "Lower densities may be considered more acceptable in instances where there are site specific constraints... (as is the case with the current application where there is a need to protect the green corridor that defines this part of Ballanard Road and the ecological benefits these offer, as well as the general character of the area), …or where the current character or appearance of the area necessitates a development of a lower density (as it is with this part of Ballanard Road defined by large dwellings set within large landscaped grounds). In fact, paragraph 6.5.1 clearly articulates that "Higher densities will be more appropriate in the central areas of Douglas, Onchan, Laxey and Union Mills", and this is further reinforced by Paragraph

• 6.5.4 which seeks to keep higher densities within Town centres, particularly in Douglas.
• 7.3.4 In addition, Paragraphs 6.6.2 and 6.6.3 in promoting the tenets of good design stipulates that proposals should be designed around an understanding of constraints and opportunities of the site and that the proposal should respond positively to local context, in terms of its scale, form, layout, materials, colouring, fenestration and architectural detailing, and notes further that "local character is defined by the natural and physical features of an area, including its topography, the pattern of streets and public spaces, the street scene, the density of development, the scale and form of buildings and the materials used in construction."

• 7.3.5 The factors highlighted in 7.3.1 to 7.3.3 above do not in any way factor in distances between buildings or the landscaping of buildings and the spaces around them; factors which are also vital in the assessment of the visual impacts and impacts of development on the character of the site and locality. In reviewing this element of the proposal, it is considered that the development would remove a significant portions of a vital garden area which contributes to the character of the site and serves to define the character of this part of Ballanard Road. It should be noted that the rear garden and the neighbouring rear gardens contribute to the identity of the area and this is clearly evident on current and historic aerial photographs for the locality.
• 7.3.6 Additionally, it is not considered that the contemporary design of the new dwelling and the single storey layout of the dwelling would be in keeping with the character of Terrence Avenue from which the new dwelling would be approached. Whilst the proposed hipped roof design will be in keeping with the dominant hip roof design of the properties here, the area (Ballanard Road and Terence Avenue) is characterised by two storey 1920's detached and semi-detached dwellings with red and brown roof finishes, and there is no mix of dwelling types here. As such, it is not considered that the current design fails to fit with the character of the locality.

• 7.3.3 Overall, it is considered that although the proposed development would not be noticeable from the street scene of Ballanard Road, being situated within the rear garden, the proposed change would be particularly noticeable from the street scene of Terence Avenue and the adjoining public footpath to the rear of the application site and is not judged to respect the character of the site and area. Therefore, it is considered that the scheme would alter considerably this part of the locality and result in detrimental impacts on the character of the locality and townscape. Therefore, it is judged that the proposal would be contrary to General Policy 2 (b, c, f, & g), Environment Policy 42, Strategic Policy 3 (b), and Sections 6.5 & 6.6 of the Area Plan for the East.

7.4 Impact on Highway Safety (General Policy 2h & I, TP's 1, & 7, & SP 10)

• 7.4.1 In terms of impacts on highway safety, it is considered that the access alterations including visibility would be appropriate for the site and the single dwelling proposed for the site, and would offer safe access onto the existing highway and as such is acceptable.

• 7.7.2 With regard to off road parking, the dwellings would have at least 2 spaces provided within the site, which would meet the requirements of Transport Policy 7 as stipulated within Appendix 7 of the IOMSP. Additionally, on-street parking is tolerated on first come first served basis and there is no guarantee of parking outside one's own property, and as such drivers are required to park in accordance with the IOM Highway Code. Moreover, the site is within walking distance to public transport corridors within Douglas which increases the public transport options available to future occupants.
• 7.7.3 The matters related to the increased volume of traffic along Terence Avenue are noted. However, as the development is for the residential use of a single dwelling, it is not considered that any impacts that result in this case would be any different from the vehicular use associated with other properties situated along Terrence Avenue. The issue with the development impacting on driveway access is also noted. Notwithstanding, the road is for access and passage and the new access does not exceed the application site boundary onto adjoining sites. As such, it is not considered that there are concerns in this regard.

• 7.7.5 Besides, Highway Services have assessed the proposal and find it to have no significant negative impact upon highway safety, network functionality and /or parking, and raise no objection to the proposal subject to all vehicular access arrangements according to Drawing No. 105. Therefore, it is considered that this element of the scheme complies with the requirements of the aforementioned policies.

7.5 The Potential Impact on Neighbouring Properties (GP 2 & RDG 2021)

• 7.5.1 In terms of the potential impact upon neighbouring properties, it is considered that the site abuts four neighbouring properties; Deanfield 13 Ballanard Road to the northwest, Hillcrest, 9 Ballanard Road to the southeast, 15 Terence Avenue to the southwest, and the existing dwelling Creggan Ashen 11 Ballanard Road to the northeast. However, given the proposed building's height and single storey layout, the intervening vegetation and existing boundary treatments, distance between the proposed dwelling and neighbouring properties, and the position of fenestrations it is not considered that the development would pose concerns to nearby dwellings in terms of overlooking, loss of light and overbearing impacts.

• 7.5.2 Other matters which have been raised by neighbours such as noise from construction, impact of construction traffic, road safety concerns for children, disruptions to flow of traffic during emergency situations as a result of construction activities, issues with failing boundary wall, and impact on property values are all noted. However, as these matters are not material planning considerations and could be addressed via other legislations, they are not considered as being relevant to the current application.

7.6 Impact on Future Occupiers (GP 2 and RDG 2021)

• 7.6.1 With regard to amenity provisions for the future occupants of the new dwelling, GP2 (h) requires development to have satisfactory amenity standards in itself. In this case, the proposed two-bedroom dwelling would have outdoor amenity space appropriate for the scale of the dwellings and the number of bedrooms given that it would have a garden area measuring about 80sqm. The utility of the rear garden of the new dwelling would however be impeded given that there would be significant overlooking from the first floor rear bedroom windows on the existing dwelling at 'Creggan Ashen', 11 Ballanard Road, which would offer elevated views (from habitable rooms) at a distance of about 13.3m and over the entire rear garden which is the only outdoor private amenity area for the proposed dwelling. As such, it is not considered that the amenity space provision in terms of private outdoor garden space provision would meet the requirements of General Policy 2 (h).

• 7.6.2 Beside the impact of the outdoor amenity spaces, overlooking views would also be achievable into the rear bedroom windows on the proposed dwelling from the first floor bedroom windows on 'Creggan Ashen', 11 Ballanard Road.

• 7.6.2 Therefore, it is considered that although the internal accommodation, parking and turning areas, as well as outlook from the primary rooms would be appropriate, the provided outdoor provision in form of the garden area, and rear bedrooms on the new dwelling would be overlooked considerably by the existing dwelling at 'Creggan Ashen'. As such, it is not considered that the total amenity provision would be adequate for the new dwelling given the significant overlooking that would result, particularly as the new garden area and bedrooms would have almost no actual or perceived privacy due to the separating distance that would be less than 20m from the existing windows that serve habitable rooms at 'Creggan Ashen'.
• 7.6.3 Granting a 1.8m fence exists on this boundary and it is proposed that new hedging would be planted within the rear boundary of 'Creggan Ashen', this is a long term mitigation which may or may not offer the screening required. Besides, there is no guarantee that future owners of 'Creggan Ashen' would want hedging on this boundary. As such, it is not considered that this diminishes any concerns in terms of amenity provisions for the new dwelling.

7.7 Impacts on Biodiversity (GP2, EP4 & EP5) 7.7.1 In terms of potential impacts on site ecology and protected species resulting from the proposed development, it is considered that the demolition of the garage on site to facilitate the new development holds potential to result in impacts on site biodiversity. Also, the removal of trees that have already taken place on site with limited room to fully integrate replacement tree planting holds potential to result in detrimental impacts on biodiversity.

• 7.7.2 Whilst the proposal is supported with ecological mitigation which would serve to minimize any loss of biodiversity that would result from the current development, it is not considered that all elements of the ecological mitigation would be achievable, particularly as some of the proposal would be outside the planning unit for the current application, with no guarantee to future owners/occupiers of the existing dwelling at 'Creggan Ashen' would favour such schemes in the future. It should be noted that the DEFA Ecosystem Policy Team has clearly indicated that they would object to this application should any of the above conditions not be secured on approval. In this case, as it is not guaranteed that all the recommended conditions could be secured for the reasons articulated above, it is not considered that the requirements of Environment Policies 4 and 5 could be achieved in this case.

• 7.7.3 It is also important to note that the existing garden serves as an extension of a green corridor which would serve to facilitate the migration of ecological species along this part of Ballanard Road, with the introduction of the new built form serving to truncate this transitioning corridor. Moreover, garden offer significant ecological and environmental benefits; such as carbon sequestration, serving as soil binders, controlling flood spread in the area, and as habitat for species in the area. As such, the removal of large section of the garden area and

its replacement with about 282sqm of hard surfaces would considerably deplete the amount of green space resulting in significant adverse impacts.

7.8 Impact on Trees (GP 2, EP 42, EP 3)

• 7.8.1 In terms of impacts on trees, it is noted that the DEFA's Arboricultural Team has reviewed the application and whilst they note that the scheme is feasible in terms of tree impacts, they request that the scheme would need to be supported by a protection plan which may result in minor tweaks to the proposed site plan in order to accommodate the rooting areas of trees on neighbouring properties, and which should be provided prior to the determination of the application.

• 7.8.2 Further to the issue highlighted above, there is also concern from the Arboricultural team that a beech tree in the western corner of the site which has not been approved for removal is indicated to be replaced by a Crab Apple tree on the planting details (Drawing No. 106); an element of the scheme which is considered to be unfeasible, particularly as it conflicts with the retention of the beech tree at this location. As such, the Forestry Team has requested that these issues be addressed on a tree protection plan submitted in support of the application. However, no further tree information has been provided since the Arboricultural Consultation comments were made public on 27 April 2023 and 4 May 2023.

• 7.8.3 Therefore, given the importance of trees in maintaining the character of the area, in addition to maintaining the identity of this part of Douglas whose character and identity in terms of buildings and landscape character is defined by large buildings laid out within large curtilages with mature landscaping, it is considered that the development would result in adverse impacts on a tree within the site and encourage further removal of neighbouring trees contrary to the principles advocated by Environment Policies 3 and 42, and General Policy 2 (f), particularly as no tree protection information has been provided by the applicants.

7.9 Drainage (GP 2l).

• 7.9.1 With regard to drainage for the site, it is considered that the proposal includes a drainage management scheme for the site area, supported by percolation tests and which has been assessed by MUA Drainage, who have stated that they do not oppose proposal. Thus, it is considered this element of the scheme is acceptable and complies with the relevant sections of the Strategic Plan.

- 8.0 CONCLUSION

8.1 The following issues weigh in favour of the proposal; the zoning of the area for residential development, the acceptable highway safety and drainage elements, as well as the acceptable impacts on neighbouring amenity.

8.2 Equally, the potential adverse impacts upon the visual amenities of the area and townscape, the inability to effectively implement all elements of the ecological mitigation, the adverse impacts on the amenities of future occupiers of the new dwelling, as well as the lack of tree information all weigh against the proposal.

8.3 Overall, it is considered that whilst there are a number of factors which weigh in favour of the proposal, the need for developments to respect the character of the locality to which it is to be established, the lack of acceptable outdoor amenity provision, and lack of information to ensure the protection of trees within the site and adjoin properties, the application is recommended for refusal, as it would fail the requirements of General Policy 2 (b, c, d & g), Environment Policies 4, 5 and 42, and Strategic Policy 3(b), and Sections 6.5 & 6.6 of the Area Plan for the East. - 9.0 INTERESTED PERSON STATUS

9.1 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.

9.2 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

9.3 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 a Principal Planner 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: 13.06.2023 Determining officer

Signed : C BALMER Chris Balmer Principal Planner

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.