Loading document...
==== PAGE 1 ====
18/00269/B Page 1 of 8
PLANNING OFFICER REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Application No. : 18/00269/B Applicant : Shearwater Limited Proposal : Erection of boundary wall and associated landscaping Site Address : Site Of Former Grand Island Hotel Bride Road Ramsey Isle Of Man
Principal Planner: Mr Chris Balmer Photo Taken : 31.05.2018 Site Visit : 31.05.2018 Expected Decision Level : Planning Committee
Recommendation
Recommended Decision:
Refused Date of Recommendation: 19.09.2018 __
Reasons for Refusal
R : Reasons for Refusal O : Notes attached to reasons
R 1. By reason of its height, position and length the boundary walling has introduced an incongruous and intrusive feature in the street scene that is detrimental to the visual amenities of the locality and harms the character and quality of the rural setting and the site. As such, the proposal fails to accord with the provisions of General Policy 2, Environment Policy 42 and Strategic Policy 5 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016.
__
Interested Person Status - Additional Persons
None __
Officer’s Report
THIS APPLICATION IS RECOMMENDED TO BE CONSIDERED BY THE PLANNING COMMITTEE AT THE REQUEST OF THE HEAD OF DEVELOPMENT MANAGEMENT
1.0 THE SITE 1.1 The application site is the curtilage of the former Grand Island Hotel which is accessed from Bride Road, Ramsey. The former hotel has been demolished and the site cleared and two dwellings approved under application 15/01064/B (nine dwellings) have been commenced. The site extends to approximately 3.7 acres.
1.2 The site sits in a commanding position overlooking Ramsey Bay. Vollan Crescent runs along the southern boundary of the site before turning southwards. From the corner of Vollan Crescent and the Promenade there is a clear view of the site which rises in a series of terraces
==== PAGE 2 ====
18/00269/B Page 2 of 8
with steps through the middle before flattening out to a plateau towards Bride Road. From Bride Road the site is also clearly visible having a backdrop of mature trees. On the other side of Bride Road, directly opposite the site are Vollan Farm and The Coach House. A further very prominent view of the site is also achieved from the area around the junction of Vollan Crescent and Bride Road which has clear views.
1.3 Recently the applicants have erected a 1.7m high block work wall along the entire western boundary fronting onto Bride Road and have also damaged the roadside trees. This application deals with these retrospective works, it should be noted that retrospective applications will be dealt with on their planning merits. The applicant will neither gain advantage nor be disadvantaged by the fact that the application is retrospective.
2.0 THE PROPOSAL 2.1 The application seeks approval for the erection of a boundary wall and associated landscaping. The wall would be finished in a mixture of painted render and stone cladding to intermitted pillars. The wall would range in height from 1.65m up to 1.92m. The pillars would have a height of approximately 2m.
2.2 The scheme involves the removal of all existing boundary trees (total of approx. 20, of these 17 are Horse Chestnut Trees) and 15 new Hornbeams trees replanted. The replanting of the landscaping would be set behind the new boundary wall.
3.0 DEVELOPMENT PLAN POLICIES 3.1 The Ramsey Local Plan designates the application site as being Predominantly Tourism and Leisure. The site is not within a Conservation Area.
3.2 Strategic Policy 5 states: "New development, including individual buildings, should be designed so as to make a positive contribution to the environment of the Island. In appropriate cases the Department will require planning applications to be supported by a Design Statement which will be required to take account of the Strategic Aim and Policies."
3.3 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: (a) is in accordance with the design brief in the Area Plan where there is such a brief; (b) respects the site and surroundings in terms of the siting, layout, scale, form, design and landscaping of buildings and the spaces around them; (c) does not affect adversely the character of the surrounding landscape or townscape; (d) does not adversely affect the protected wildlife or locally important habitats on the site or adjacent land, including water courses; (e) does not affect adversely public views of the sea; (f) incorporates where possible existing topography and landscape features, particularly trees and sod banks; (g) does not affect adversely the amenity of local residents or the character of the locality; (h) provides satisfactory amenity standards in itself, including where appropriate safe and convenient access for all highway users, together with adequate parking, servicing and manoeuvring space; (i) does not have an unacceptable effect on road safety or traffic flows on the local highways; (j) can be provided with all necessary services; (k) does not prejudice the use or development of adjoining land in accordance with the appropriate Area Plan; (l) is not on contaminated land or subject to unreasonable risk of erosion or flooding; (m) takes account of community and personal safety and security in the design of buildings and the spaces around them; and (n) is designed having due regard to best practice in reducing energy consumption."
==== PAGE 3 ====
18/00269/B Page 3 of 8
3.4 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."
4.0 PLANNING HISTORY 4.1 The following previous planning applications relating to this site are judged to be the most relevant:
4.2 15/01064/B - Erection of nine detached dwellings with associated landscaping and access - approved subject to the following condition which are relevant to this current application:
"C 8. Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (Permitted Development) Order 2012 (or any Order revoking and/or re-enacting that Order with or without modification), no fences, gates, walls or other means of enclosure shall be erected or placed within the curtilage of any dwelling house forward of any wall of that dwelling house which fronts onto a highway, without the prior written approval of the Department.
Reason: To control development in the interests of the amenities of the surrounding area.
C 12. Prior to the commencement of any excavation or building works on site an updated arboricultural report should be submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning and Building Control Directorate. The arboricultural report should address each of the following points: a. Tree Removal - The arboricultural report should contain a site plan overlaid with the position of all the trees on site and the indicative crown spread for each tree or group of trees. Trees to be removed and trees to pruned should be clearly identifiable. b. Tree Constraints - The arboricultural report should contain a tree constraints plan in accordance with BS5837:2012, Section 5.2. c. Tree Protection - The arboricultural report should contain a tree protection plan in accordance with BS5837:2012, Section 5.5. d. Tree Planting - The arboricultural report should contain a tree planting plan in accordance with BS8545:2014.
Reason: To safeguard existing trees, maintain tree cover in the area and enhance the landscape
C 13. No retained tree shall be cut down, uprooted, destroyed, pruned cut or damaged in any manner during the development phase and thereafter within 5 years from the date of occupation of the building for its permitted use, other than in accordance with the approved plans and particulars or as may be permitted by prior approval in writing from the Planning and Building Control Directorate.
Reason: To safeguard existing trees to be retained
C 14. Prior to the commencement of any excavation or building works on site an Arboricultural Method Statement for any construction activity which is to take place within the Root
==== PAGE 4 ====
18/00269/B Page 4 of 8
Protection Area of a tree (or trees) to be retained shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning and Building Control Directorate. The Arboricultural Method Statement shall be written in accordance with section 6.1 of BS5837:2012. The Arboricultural Method Statement shall be adhered to in full, and be subject to pre-arranged supervision by a suitably qualified and pre-appointed tree specialist. This condition may only be fully discharged on completion of the development subject to satisfactory written evidence of contemporaneous supervision and monitoring of the tree protection throughout construction by a suitably qualified and pre- appointed tree specialist
Reason: To safeguard existing trees to be retained."
4.3 This application was approved on the basis that the majority of road side trees, fronting onto Bride Road where being retained, being rated by the applicants own tree reports as being Category B and C in the main, with a grouping of trees to the southwest corner of the site being Category A rating, given their collective nature and positive amenity value in the street scene. All these trees are now proposed to be removed.
5.0 REPRESENTATIONS 5.1 Ramsey Town Commissioners have no objection (received on 23.04.18).
5.2 The Highways Services of the Department of Infrastructure made the initial comments (received on 30.04.2018): "The proposal is for a site boundary wall and to replace the planting approved under planning permission 15/01064/B which was for the erection of 9 detached dwellings with associated landscaping and access.
The highway response for the 15/01064/B planning approval specified that the access shown on the site plan (drawing no. WJ_098-0010 rev a dated 27/08/2015) should be constructed with the visibility splays remaining unobstructed thereafter. That site plan did not include any site boundary treatments on the development frontages above 1m in height.
The current application states that a stone wall at least 1.7m in height is proposed and is presently under construction along the site frontage with Bride Road. The drawings submitted show that this wall is within the highway visibility splay areas of the site access junction of the new road with Bride Road that is serving the new dwellings. For the 30mph speed limit of Bride Road, highway visibility splays of 2.4m x 43m are required in both directions within which nothing can be above 1m in height, including all site boundary treatments and planting. The boundary wall therefore needs to be either reduced to a maximum height of 1m, or repositioned to be behind the visibility splay areas, with immediate effect as the proposal is unacceptable, unsafe and could lead to road traffic accidents.
A revised site plan to scale is needed to show the full visibility splays with the wall repositioned or reduced in height accordingly. Further information on visibility splays can be found in Standard Construction Detail SD022 on the Isle of Man Government website or in the UK's Department for Transport 'Manual for Streets' documents.
Highway Services oppose the application as it has an adverse impact on highway visibility and is detrimental to highway safety. The revisions stated above would need to be made to make the proposals safe and satisfactory in highway terms."
5.3 Amended plans have been submitted in respect to the concerns raised, but do show visibility splays of 2.4m x 43m. However, no formal comments have been received by Highway Services at the time of writing this report, and it is hoped comments will be provided at the Planning Committee Meeting.
==== PAGE 5 ====
18/00269/B Page 5 of 8
5.4 Arboricultural Officer - The Forestry, Amenity and Lands Directorate - DEFA make the following comments (received on 12.04.2018):
"The trees that have been damaged on this site, and are now being considered for removal, are prominent in the local landscape and make a significant contribution to the amenities of the area.
The agent's statement acknowledges the breach of the extant planning approval (15/01064/B) and the need to find a satisfactory resolution and my comments are made in this context. Whilst it is regrettable that the actions taken to date have left the trees in a state where they are no longer worth retaining, I appreciate that each application should be judged on its merits and the facts available at the time it is submitted. Please note that these comments are made without prejudice to the current investigation in relation to on-going breaches and the damage that has occurred to the existing trees.
Given the current condition of the trees and the prognosis for them, as confirmed by Mr Brooker's letter (addressed to Shearwater Ltd), I could not object to the removal of these trees. The replanting proposal that is part of this application will contribute to remedying the situation and is welcomed. The fastigiate hornbeams will be well suited to the site and character of the area and, if the soil amelioration, planting and aftercare is implemented as per the report's recommendations, I would expect them to successfully establish within 5 years.
I recommend that you consider applying the following conditions:
The soil amelioration and tree planting shall be carried out in accordance with the BS8545:2014 Mitigation Planting Plan submitted by Manx Roots Tree Management in support of the application. Any trees which, within a period of 5 years from their planting, die, are removed, or, in the opinion of the Department, become seriously damaged or diseased shall be replaced as is reasonably practicable or in the next planting season with others of similar size, species and number as originally approved, unless the Department gives written consent to any variation.
Reason: to ensure the provision, establishment and maintenance of a reasonable standard of landscape in accordance with the approved designs.
Evidence that post-planting maintenance has been undertaken, as detailed in the BS8545:2014 Mitigation Planting Plan, submitted by Manx Roots Tree Management, shall be submitted to the Department by the 31st October each year for the first 3 years after planting has taken place.
Reason: to ensure that the tree planting required to mitigate the tree loss included in this proposal successfully establishes and achieves independence in the landscape."
6.0 ASSESSMENT 6.1 It is considered the principle material planning matters which need to be considered are:
o Potential impact upon the visual amenities of the area by the loss of trees and erection of boundary wall; and o Potential Impact upon Highway Safety
POTENTIAL IMPACT UPON THE VISUAL AMENITIES OF THE AREA BY THE LOSS OF TREES AND ERECTION OF BOUNDARY WALL 6.2 In terms of background it is perhaps important to note the Planning Directorate's assessment of the application for approval in principle to demolish existing hotel and creation of 68 apartments contained in three buildings (10/01269/A). The reporting officer for this application stated:
==== PAGE 6 ====
18/00269/B Page 6 of 8
"It is perhaps important to note at this stage, that any future planning application/s for the re- development of the site, the Planning Authority will require a building of 'Landmark Status' given the demolition of the Grand Island Hotel, which certainly, albeit to a lesser extent in recent times, still has a 'Landmark Status' and very prominent location.
It should also be indicated that given the proposed current layout of the three residential blocks, all of which will be apparent from public views, the Planning Authority will also be seeking a high quality design with high quality finishes to all public visible elevations."
6.3 The Officer also stated in his report: "The views of the site from the west of the site; when travelling along the Bride Road immediately adjacent to the western boundary of the site, are characterised by mature trees and mature hedgerows which currently gives a natural tunnelling affect when entering or exiting Ramsey. A new substation has recently been constructed, in connection with PA12/01041/B, to the north-western corner of the site. From this view it is proposed that the majority of the roadside trees are to be retained. There is the potential for additional planting of trees along this boundary via condition being attached to any approval..."
6.4 A note was attached to the approval notice which highlighted these points and the 'Landmark' quality of the site and the Planning Directorate is once again seeking a development of a landmark quality. This is impacted as the development not only includes the actual buildings but overall development as a whole.
6.5 This, as well as significant concerns of its character and appearance in the street scene, is why the new proposed boundary walling along the entire western roadside boundary with Bride Road cause significant concerns in terms of its visual impact. The roadside boundary treatments when travelling along Bride Road are of grass banks, hedgerows or even in the more development sections of Bride Road to the southwest of the site; they are small walls with landscaping above. In fact the Grand Island site did have partial walling (approx 1.5m in height) in parts (corner of Bridge Road with Vollan Crescent), albeit large sections had a dwarf wall with landscaping above. However, there are no examples of boundary walling of this height and length in the immediate area and potentially in such a rural locations on the Island. The boundary walling as proposed would have a very harsh and stark appearance, its significant length immediately onto the highway; and its height (1.7/2m), all of which results in a significant and intrusive impacts to the character and quality of the of the area/street scene and would be wholly out of keeping.
6.6 The site sits essential on the edge of Ramsey, and is very much of a "rural" feel and appearance, with a "natural tunnelling" of the trees acting as a gateway in or out of Ramsey, rather than appearing as being in a town centre or built up location. Due to this when the original application for nine house was considered, the fact the large number of existing boundary trees/vegetation where being retained, with no hard boundary features, the Department considered this "rural" feel and appearance would be retained, especially by passer-by of the site and this would add to the quality of the development and set it aside form general housing developments. However, this cannot be said now.
6.7 The Planning Officer considering the previous application made the following comments in relation to this matter:
"6.17 Some category B & C trees would be removed along the western boundary to increase the existing entrance of the site, but again the category A trees along this boundary would be retained and be unaffected by the development.
6.18 Should the application be approved a condition should be attached for tree protection methods and an arboricultural method statement as outlined in paragraph 5.5 of this report.
==== PAGE 7 ====
18/00269/B Page 7 of 8
6.19 In conclusion, with the relevant tree protection measures in place it is considered the proposed scheme could be implemented without impact upon the majority of trees within the site."
6.8 However, following the applicants failure to construct their approved development for nine houses (PA 15/01064/B) in accordance with the tree protection plans and attached conditions (see section 4.2) and erect an approximate 1.7/2m high boundary wall without planning permission, essentially on top of the existing tree roots, it has now been accepted by the Arboricultural Officer and the applicants Tree Consultant (Manx Roots) that the existing trees are unlikely to survive.
6.9 The applicants Tree Consultant states: "All of the trees contained within these groups have most likely sustained direct root damage as a result of excavation for the new walls. Increases and decreases in soil levels and soil compaction around the root plates of each tree is evident. The recent pruning work carried out was severe and has left asymmetric crowns containing large pruning wounds, Due to the level of seaward exposure experienced by these trees, it is likely that the combination of severe pruning and root damage will weigh too heavily on the trees' energy reserves and will most likely result in die-back symptoms over the next three to five years. Any trees which may recover will most likely produce dense epicormic regrowth from around the recently formed pruning wounds. Any such regrowth may be weakly attached and prone to failure, or result in a dense, unattractive crown on the side of the new properties."
6.10 Further he states: "The removal of the trees as described above will have a significant arboricutural and visual impact. Although the trees were identified as having low individual value in the initial survey, the resulting loss of overall canopy cover for the site is estimated at 30%. The most notable visual impact will be that from Bride Road and the junction with Mooragh Promenade.
The accompanying replanting proposal aims to mitigate these impacts and, in the long-term, provide a more visually attractive tree population than already exists. The proposed line of fastigiated Hornbeams will extend further to the Southwest than the existing tree line, thus increasing the treed frontage, and will provide an easy to manage, formal landscape feature. In addition to the new trees, proposed soft landscaping elsewhere on the site will also offset the resulting loss of canopy cover...".
6.11 A concern with the walling is that even with the tree/soft landscaping proposed, these (Hornbeam) have a more vertical proportion compared to the existing Horse Chestnut trees which have a more even spread and form the existing natural tunnelling affect when passing the site. Further, the majority of the proposed vegetation will be screened by the walling given its height and solid construction and therefore views from the Bride Road will likely always be of a large expanse of walling of a significant height, which in turn would be out of keeping and appear intrusive, and is incongruous when compared with the boundary treatment of other roadside properties in the vicinity and therefore detrimental to the visual amenities of the street scene, failing the requirements of GP 2, EP42 and StP 5 of the IOMSP.
6.12 While it would appear the loss of trees needs to be accepted, it does not mean the walling needs to be. The Department has tried to negotiate with the applicants to try come to a mutual solution; however, the applicant has been unwilling to alter the height of the wall, albeit has included pillars to the scheme and a mixture of stone cladding and render in terms of finish. However, the proposal currently under consideration is not one the Department can support for the reasons given.
POTENTIAL IMPACT UPON HIGHWAY SAFETY 6.13 Following the submission of an amended plan, which appears to demonstrate visibility splays of 2.4m x 43m can be achieved in either direction. However, at the time of writing tie
==== PAGE 8 ====
18/00269/B Page 8 of 8
port the Department had not had formal confirmation from Highway Services on this matter and therefore it is hoped that Highway Services will be able to update the committee at the Planning Committee meeting in relation to this matter. At this stage it is not consider highway matters as a reason to refuse the application.
7.0 RECOMMENDATION 7.1 For the reasons set out above, proposal is considered contrary with the relevant polices of the Strategic Plan and is therefore recommended for REFUSAL.
8.0 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 confirm that this decision has been made by the Planning Committee in accordance with the authority afforded to it under the appropriate delegated authority.
Decision Made : ...Refused... Committee Meeting Date:...01.10.2018
Signed :...C BALMER... Presenting Officer
Further to the decision of the Committee an additional report/condition reason was required (included as supplemental paragraph to the officer report).
YES/NO
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