104210

==== PAGE 1 ====

                                      18/00134/B                                     Page  1  of  4

PLANNING OFFICER REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Application No. : 18/00134/B Applicant : Marbeg Properties Ltd Proposal : Erection of a detached dwelling Site Address : Plot 3 Adjacent To Arbory Vicarage Main Road Ballabeg Castletown Isle Of Man IM9 4BT

Principal Planner: Miss S E Corlett Photo Taken : 19.02.2018 Site Visit : 19.02.2018 Expected Decision Level : Officer Delegation

Recommendation

Recommended Decision:

Refused Date of Recommendation: 30.11.2018 __

Reasons for Refusal

R : Reasons for Refusal O : Notes attached to reasons

R 1. The development as proposed, by virtue of its design, position and orientation of internal rooms and light thereto, would have a harmful impact on the future retention of the trees to the rear and side, which are of amenity value and should be retained. The development is thus contrary to GP2b, c, f and g of the Strategic Plan.

__

Interested Person Status - Additional Persons

None __

Officer’s Report

THE SITE 1.1 The site is a piece of land situated to the rear of the former Arbory Vicarage on the northern side of the A5 Main Road which links Ballabeg with Colby. The plot is an approved one of three with one of the other two approved properties having been constructed and the other commenced. No work has commenced on the development of this plot.

1.2 The ground slopes upward from the road to the north and there are trees along the rear and side boundaries of this plot.

THE PROPOSAL

==== PAGE 2 ====

                                      18/00134/B                                     Page  2  of  4

2.1 Proposed is the erection of a dwelling on this plot. The dwelling is a two storey building with a projecting, two storey section at the front. The roof will be slated and the external walls finished in sand/cement render which will be painted. The window frames will be finished in gray plastic and there will be three large patio doors on the ground floor of the rear elevation.

2.2 The plans include a portrayal of the existing trees on site: there are nine - macrocarpa, 2 poplar and 6 sycamore. The trees are category U, B and C. The plans include root protection areas (RPAs) for each of the trees, all of which are shown to be retained. The RPAs do not intrude upon the footprint of the proposed dwelling although those of A U and B category sycamore are very close.

2.3 The dwelling will have an area of gravel hardstanding alongside to the south which will accommodate two vehicles. Whilst there is insufficient space within the plot to turn a vehicle, the dwelling sits alongside the turning head for the two properties where a vehicle could be reversed to access or egress the plot.

PLANNING POLICY 3.1 The site lies within an area designated on the Area Plan for the South as Residential. It also lies within the proposed Conservation Area for the village. This has not been progressed since the adoption of the Area Plan in 2013.

3.2 The development should accord with General Policy 2 of the Strategic Plan which provides general advice on development proposals which are consistent in terms of land use, with the prevailing land use designation on the development plan:

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; (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".

3.3 Environment Policy 3 presumes against the loss of or damage to woodland areas, especially ancient, natural and semi-natural woodlands, which have public amenity or conservation value.

PLANNING HISTORY 4.1 The overall area has been the subject of applications for residential development in the form of the principle of three new dwellings - 10/00137/A. This was followed by the details of two of the dwellings - 10/01244/B and 10/01245/B both of which have been commenced and plot 1 has been completed. Planning approval was granted for the erection of a dwelling on plot 3, the current application site, but this has now lapsed without having been implemented (10/01246/B).

==== PAGE 3 ====

                                      18/00134/B                                     Page  3  of  4

REPRESENTATIONS 5.1 Highway Services did not oppose the original plans submitted subject to a condition which requires the car parking to be provided prior to the occupation of the property (28.02.18).

5.2 Arbory Parish Commissioners wished to be advised of what the changes had been made to the plans and reiterated their previous comments on the site (23.08.18).

5.3 Various comments have been made by the Arboricultural Officer of DEFA, all expressing concern at the impact of the dwelling on the trees. Initially these comments were concerned about the lack of information on exclusion zones and prevention of damage to the trees during construction, however, following amendments being made to the scheme, these comments relate solely to the impact of the development on the trees as a result of them being close to the rear of the property and the impact from this on the outlook from the property, resulting the dwelling being hemmed in by the trees and with the house having a relatively generous garden but with only a small area that receives sunlight at any one time and the shading effect of the existing trees is likely to lead to future pressure to remove of prune them and for that reason, he believes that the proposed development will not achieve a harmonious relationship between the trees and the dwelling (21.11.18).

ASSESSMENT 6.1 The principle and appearance of and means of access and parking for the dwelling are considered acceptable and are not objected to by any relevant authorities with expertise in these areas, or in fact anyone. The single area of concern is the impact of the proposed dwelling on the trees which surround it and this is only in terms of the impact on those living in the house as it has been demonstrated that it would be possible to erect the dwelling without necessarily damaging the trees, although a tree protection plan would be required to be submitted and approved before the development commences, identifying appropriate tree protection areas (TPAs) and that the development is undertaken in accordance with these details.

6.2 There is concern, however, from the Government Department with responsibility for forestry and arboricultural advice that the dwelling will have an adverse impact due to the design of the proposed dwelling which features patio doors and provides the main amenity outlook from the property, these patio doors serving the breakfast room, dining area and living room and being the only means of light and outlook from these windows. The applicant's view is that as the garden lies to the north and west of the house, there will be limited sunlight impact from the trees other than perhaps a little overshadowing from one tree in the late evening. They point out that the house generally faces south east and it itself naturally prevents sunlight from entering the back garden area. They suggested a layout which turned the property through 90 degrees but the Arboricultural Officer suggests that this does not overcome his concern.

6.3 The advice of the Arboricultural Officer is that it would be possible for a dwelling to be designed for the site which would not pose such a threat to the future of the trees, where the principal outlook from habitable rooms was not towards the trees, which are close to the building. It could also be, in his view, that the parking or at least some is contained within an integral garage, thus providing more space for the dwelling to be moved further from the trees. To do this, it may be the case that the property is smaller and contains fewer bedrooms however, the site's constraints merit a particular approach and perhaps a compromise on the size of the property, to be successful.

CONCLUSION 7.1 It is considered that the development as proposed, by virtue of its design, position and orientation of internal rooms and light thereto, would have a harmful impact on the future retention of the trees to the rear and side, which are of amenity value and should be retained. The development is thus contrary to GP2b, c, f and g of the Strategic Plan.

==== PAGE 4 ====

                                      18/00134/B                                     Page  4  of  4

7.2 If the application is approved, conditions should be attached to require a tree protection plan prior to the commencement of works and that the parking is provided prior to the occupation of the dwelling and the parking is retained as such thereafter.

INTERESTED PERSON STATUS 8.1 By virtue of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) (No 2) Order 2013 Article 6(4), the following persons are automatically interested persons: (a) The applicant, or if there is one, the applicant's agent; (b) The owner and the occupier of any land that is the subject of the application or any other person in whose interest the land becomes vested; (c) Any Government Department that has made written submissions relating to planning considerations with respect to the application that the Department considers material (d) Highway Services Division of Department of Infrastructure and (e) The local authority in whose district the land the subject of the application is situated.

8.2 The decision maker must determine: o whether any other comments from Government Departments (other than the Department of Infrastructure Highway Services Division) are material; and o whether there are other persons to those listed in Article 6(4) who should be given Interested Person Status.

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.

Decision Made : Refused Date : 05.12.2018

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.