Loading document...
==== PAGE 1 ====
20/00245/B Page 1 of 14
PLANNING OFFICER REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Application No. 20/00245/B Applicant : David And Wendy Davies Proposal Creation of new vehicular entrance, and construction route across field Site Address Field 312711 Balladoyne Farm Main Road St Johns Isle Of Man
Case Officer :
Mr Paul Visigah Photo Taken :
19.03.2020 Site Visit :
19.03.2020 Expected Decision Level Planning Committee
Recommendation
Recommended Decision: Permitted Date of Recommendation 12.08.2020
Conditions and Notes for Approval
C : Conditions for approval N : Notes attached to conditions
C 1. The development hereby approved shall be begun before the expiration of four years from the date of this decision notice.
Reason: To comply with Article 26 of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) Order 2019 and to avoid the accumulation of unimplemented planning approvals.
C 2. No development may be commenced nor any equipment, machinery or materials be brought onto the site for the purposes of the development until suitable protective fencing has been erected in the location shown on the approved drawing No. 02 to form a Construction Exclusion Zone ('CEZ'). Within the CEZ nothing shall be stored, placed or disposed of above or below ground, the ground level shall not be altered, no excavations shall be made, no mixing of cement or use of other contaminating materials or substances shall take place, nor shall any fires be lit. The implemented CEZ shall be maintained until the access is no longer required or the time limit specified in Condition 5 has expired.
Reason: To safeguard the existing trees and planting to be retained within the site.
C 3. The means of vehicular access to and from the site shall be only as shown on the approved plan Drawing nos. 01 rev A and 02.
Reason: To ensure the free and safe use of the highway.
C 4. Prior to any other works commencing on site other than the tree protection measures referred to in condition 2, the access and visibility splays on drawing no 02 date stamped 07/07/2020 shall be constructed and remain free from obstruction thereafter.
==== PAGE 2 ====
20/00245/B Page 2 of 14
Reason: In the interests of Highway Safety
C 5. Construction traffic must use only the temporary access indicated on drawing nos. 01 rev A and 02; this temporary access must within 3 months of residential development within Area 1 or at a time two years from the commencement of the use of the access, must be closed off and the route restored to agricultural field. The affected grass and hedges shall be restored, and any hard surfaced area introduced removed and land restored to agricultural field. The access may only be used and available for use to facilitate the development of fields 312909 and 314758.
Reason: The access is acceptable only for a temporary period because it meets a specific short- term need.
C 6. No development shall be commenced until a method statement and mitigation for tree protection has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Department. Such a scheme shall include details of all walls, fences, trees, hedgerows and other planting which are to be retained; details of all new walls, fences and other boundary treatment and finished ground levels; the location of grassed areas details of the hard surface treatment of the open parts of the site and a programme of implementation.
All works on the site shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details. The works shall be carried out prior to the commencement of any part of the development or in accordance with the programme agreed in writing with the Department. Any trees or plants indicated on the approved scheme which, within a period of five years from the date of planting, die, are removed or become seriously damaged or diseased shall be replaced during the next planting season with other trees or plants of a species and size to be first approved in writing by the Department.
Reason: To safeguard the areas to be landscaped and the existing trees and planting to be retained within the site.
N 1. The applicant needs to enter a section 109A Highway Agreement in order for the access to be constructed onto the abutting highway.
This application has been recommended for approval for the following reason. It is considered that the planning application is in accordance with General Policy 2 and Environment Policy 35 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016, and Policies OS/P/1, OS/P/2 and RES/P/1 of the St Johns Local Plan 1999. It is therefore recommended that the planning application be permitted.
Plans/Drawings/Information;
This decision relates to the following plans, documents and drawings:
Photographs, Date stamped as received on 4th March 2020.
01 rev A - Site and Location Plan, And;
02 - Entrance Details, Date stamped as received on 7th July 2020. __
Interested Person Status - Additional Persons
==== PAGE 3 ====
20/00245/B Page 3 of 14
None __
Officer’s Report
THIS APPLICATION IS REFERRED TO THE PLANNING COMMITTEE AS THE SITE IS NOT DESIGNATED FOR DEVELOPMENT AND COULD BE CONSIDERED TO BE CONTRARY TO THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN
THE SITE 1.1 The site is a parcel of land which lies to the south of the A1 Peel to Douglas Road. To the east of the site is Balladoyne Farm, a traditional farmhouse with its gable to the road. To the west is Westville, a relatively modern property whose curtilage extends around half way down the application site. Balladoyne Farm is also owned by the applicant.
1.2 The frontage to the site is approximately 63m long and the site is around 86m long. The frontage is formed by a low hedge and stone wall which presently has daffodils, brambles and hawthorn within and behind it. There are two gates into the field, one at the western end of the frontage and the other to the east. This land is currently used for agricultural/equestrian purposes.
1.3 To the south of the site is land, together with the land to the rear of Balladoyne Farm which is identified on the St. John's Local Plan as being suitable for residential development of 6 dwellings. The development brief for this site also requires that construction traffic associated with its development must not use Balladoyne estate (see below). There have been various attempts to gain permission for the use of Balladoyne estate road for construction traffic as well as land to the south of the village post office (see Planning History).
THE PROPOSAL 2.1 The application seeks approval for creation of new vehicular entrance, and construction route across field. The proposed works would involve: i. Creating a new site entrance that would be 23m wide and enable entrance and exit from the field. The access will meet Highway requirements for location and sightlines (2.4 x 45m). ii. The existing NW corner of the site will be raised 1m with soakaway which was approved in a previous application (PA 01/00960 for infilling of corner of field 2853). iii. The creation of temporary construction route that would be 5m wide and run from the new entrance to the existing gate to the approved shelter (PA 11/01710/B) which is within an area designated for residential use (Area 1).
2.2 Supporting information has been provided by the applicant who indicates that proposal is same as that approved under PA/15/00345/A which expired in July 2019, although there has been some modification which involves moving the route further away from Westville an equidistant from the highway. It also indicates that there would be a method statement and mitigation for tree protection. The applicant has also indicated in the submitted plans that the existing trees, shrubs and wildlife corridor on the western boundary of the site will be protected during all phases of the construction. This supporting information clearly stipulates that the construction route is to land zoned for development within Area 1 to which they are tenants in common.
PLANNING POLICY 3.1 The site is identified in the St. John's Plan which was adopted in 1999 as Open Space and within the proposed village Conservation Area. This field is specifically referred to within paragraph 3.1 as one which was specifically designated as Open Space from its previous designation as Residential, in order to acknowledge its contribution to the amenities of the village by being open and affording views of Slieau Whallian in the background and also offers a welcome break in development along the roadside at this point in the village. A policy is
==== PAGE 4 ====
20/00245/B Page 4 of 14
included which presumes against any development which would adversely affect the southerly open countryside views from Peel Road (OS/P/2).
3.2 The local plan also contains a policy that is considered to be relevant to the application given that the proposed temporary access would serve a site zoned for development: "POLICY: OS/P/1 "Other than those areas specifically designated for development or zoned predominantly residential on the proposals map, no areas of open space shall be developed".
3.3 Within the local plan is a development brief for Area 1 which is the land to the south of the application site:
"POLICY: RES/P/1 2.11 RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT SHALL BE PERMITTED WITHIN DEVELOPMENT AREA 1 IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING DEVELOPMENT BRIEF. Development Brief a. The maximum number of units which may be developed on this site is six (6). b. All dwellings shall be single storey (dormer accommodation will not be permitted). c. No detailed application for development of any dwelling will be approved until such time as a detailed application for the installation of roads and sewers together with the indication of plots and landscaping, has been approved by the Planning Committee. d. The application for the development of the site must include an indication of the temporary route to be used by construction traffic and such route must not be through the Balladoyne estate. Such a temporary route must be removed and the site made good when construction works are completed. e. Permanent access to the site after the development is completed may be taken through the Balladoyne estate. f. No development may commence until the applicant has secured the implementation of a programme of archaeological work in accordance with a written scheme of investigation which has been submitted to and approved by the Department. Such a scheme must be included as part of any detailed application for consideration and the applicant is strongly recommended to consult Manx National Heritage in this respect. g. Whilst field 9378 (that immediately behind Balladoyne Farmhouse) has been included within the development area, this land may only be used or developed in association with the existing adjacent properties (Balladoyne Farmhouse, "Allo" and 11, Balladoyne Estate and the building known as the Methodist Church) and may not be used for the erection of any new dwellings."
3.4 The Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016 also contains some policies which are considered to be specifically material in the assessment of the planning application:
3.5 General Policy 2
"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.
==== PAGE 5 ====
20/00245/B Page 5 of 14
(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;
3.6 Environment Policy 35: Within Conservation Areas, the Department will permit only development which would preserve or enhance the character or appearance of the Area, and will ensure that the special features contributing to the character and quality are protected against inappropriate development.
3.7 It will also be vital to consider the Inspectors Report for PA 11/01710/B which granted approval for the use of part of Field 312909 (the abutting site on the southern boundary) for the Field shelter which is within Area 1. Also, the appeal for the alternative access for the field shelter site (PA 14/01419/B) would be considered vital in the assessment of the application.
3.7.1 Inspectors Report (PA 11/01710/B) for Erection of a horse field shelter together with fencing and an access gate.
"Assessment and conclusions 11. The main issue is the effect that the proposed development would have on the future development of the site for housing. It would appear that the other disagreements between the appellant and the applicant relate to land ownership and access issues which are not relevant material planning considerations.
Although the site is zoned residential and planning permission has been granted to the appellant for a small residential estate on the land (11/00690/B), these works have not yet commenced. The current use of the site is agricultural and at the time of my visit the area to the north of the site was being used for grazing of sheep.
The proposal is modest in size and it would not have any detrimental impact on the character or appearance of the countryside and this part of St Johns in terms of citing, design, size or finish. I agree, therefore, with the planning Authority stance that it fully accords with Environment Policy 21 of the IOMSP.
A planning permission on a specific site does not preclude other applications being made for development on the same site. Any such application needs to be considered on its merits and this is the situation in relation to this case. The use of the land for stabling does not rule out the future residential development and there are no objections on planning grounds for the shelter. The land is currently in agricultural use and it could well be that the permitted scheme is not implemented or even that further applications are made for residential development of the land.
In the meantime and in conclusion, therefore, I find that there are no reasons on planning grounds why the proposal should not be allowed. A granting of permission for the shelter will not affect the planning rights of the appellant or anyone else with an interest in the residential plots. If there are serious land ownership and access issues then these are matters for the respective owners and developers to resolve between themselves.
Recommendation 16. I recommend that the appeal be dismissed and that the decision of the Planning Authority be upheld."
3.7.2 Inspectors Report (PA 14/01419/B) for Creation of a temporary construction access
"Assessment and conclusions
==== PAGE 6 ====
20/00245/B Page 6 of 14
43. The principle of the development is acceptable in land use terms. Area 6, through which the access would pass, is designated for residential use in the SJLP. Furthermore, the purpose of the proposed construction traffic route is to access another designated housing site at Area
There is no dispute between the parties, therefore, regarding the principle of the construction traffic access route.
The main issue relates to whether or not this particular proposal would have a detrimental effect on highway safety along this part of Station Road.
I agree with PBCD that the starting point for consideration relates to the previous applications, taking into account any changes in the material planning considerations since 2011. The Applicant stresses that there is an extant conditional approval in place for both a construction traffic access and a permanent access into Area 6 (albeit for just 2 dwellings) and that this is a significant material consideration in support of this proposal. I agree. But the Appellant and objectors, on the other hand, consider that the previous decisions, as well as a more up-to-date traffic and parking situation in this part of St Johns, support their case.
Turning to the previous Inspector's Report for the 6 plot application on Area 1 (Appeal AP 11/0140; PA 11/00690/B), the Inspector had no reason to doubt (in February 2012) the claim by local residents that traffic levels had increased in recent years. This was stated to be in part because of the new school.
Since then, over the last 6 years, other changes in St Johns, including the referred to increase in use of Green's Café; the new 'Culture Vannin' facility; the development of the Old Police House and the reported increase in trade of the Central Store and Post Office are all stated to have increased traffic and parking along Station Road. References are also made to the number of commuters from Peel using the road, as well as previous road closures which have added to the traffic situation in St Johns.
In 2012 there had been no evidence of traffic surveys or parking along Station Road, and I have not been provided with any such details in relation to this appeal. However, from all of the evidence it seems to me that, on the balance of probabilities, traffic levels are most likely to have increased since 2012 and parking in the vicinity of the Post Office continues to be an issue. This was evident from my inspection of the site and the surrounding area. It was particularly evident in front and to the south of the Post Office and at the junction of the wider part of the appeal access and Station Road.
Despite the enormous Department car park to the west of Station Road, during my site visit I noted that it was hardly in use (just 3 cars). There were, however, cars parked in the legally designated spaces in front of the Post Office and to the south of the Post Office where the appeal site is at its widest. I also noted vehicles accessing the rear of the Post Office and the garages to the other properties. At the same time the Row through to the Main Street was clearly in use behind these properties.
Along other sections of Station Road, including just to the south of Greens Café (on the corner), there were cars parked illegally on the double yellow line, as well as one car parked on the west side of the road. These were clearly causing congestion and whilst I was there a bus had difficulty in freely passing along the road in front of the Post Office. Overall, therefore it is evident that this section of Station Road can be heavily congested and that parking appears to be an ever increasing problem, as referred to by the owner of the store and the Post Office.
The previous Inspector found that highway conditions were already dangerous in 2012 and that construction vehicles would increase that danger. Having considered the present situation I agree with the previous Inspector that the risk of an accident at the junction is 'too real and serious' to be tolerated for the length of time (18 months) that it might take to
==== PAGE 7 ====
20/00245/B Page 7 of 14
construct the 6 dwellings on Area 1. I do not consider that any phasing of the works could improve the situation.
I acknowledge that the visibility splays of 2m x 36m have been achieved and that the lowering of the wall to the south has made these possible. These are significant material considerations which have changed since 2012. However, it is still the case that when leaving the site and egressing on to Station Road, the legally parked cars in front of the Post Office obscure the view to the north, resulting in vehicles having to edge out slowly to ensure that there is no danger from traffic travelling south towards the bridge.
As the previous Inspector indicated 'this is dangerous' especially taking into account the fact that, within the visibility splay, there is the Store and Post Office and a footpath that is regularly used by schoolchildren. To the south, although not so much of a visual hazard, the lamp post, electricity pole and services box also affect the open view along the line of visibility. Thus, although the situation has been improved since 2012 and the DIHS find the access suitable, I consider that the maximum number of dwellings which the access should serve is two and not six.
There is a significant difference in my view in a construction access that is for just two dwellings and one which serve a small estate of 6 dwellings. Despite it being for a limited period of up to 18 months, I consider that the risks of increasing the usage of the Station Road access for construction traffic from two to 6 dwellings is too great a risk to take along this particularly congested part of the road. Thus, what was unacceptable in 2012 (as an access to Area ! for 6 plots) in terms of highway safety, in my view is even more unacceptable in 2018, despite the approvals on Plots 1 and 2 of Area 6 and despite the improved visibility splays.
In reaching my conclusion I have taken into account the proposed use of a 'banksman' which can be normal for construction sites. However, such a person has no legal right to direct or redirect either traffic or pedestrians. In my view there are too many uncertainties about using a 'banksman' in this particular location. It is far from clear how effective such a person would be in securing highway safety for pedestrians and drivers alike. With regard to the proposed conditions restricting times of delivery, this could be difficult to enforce and it seems that such a person would need to be present at the junction whenever the site was open, rather than just when deliveries might be expected.
Another material consideration which has changed the situation from that in 2012 is the one referring to an alternative access to Area 1. When the PC made its decision in 2014 for this proposal, it was on the basis that there appeared to be no other alternative access to Area 1. However, Outline Planning Permission was granted under PA15/00345/A for an access road off Main Road St Johns into Area 1.
Although this was in outline only and there could be issues of visibility along the Main road, there is clearly an alternative access in principle which would avoid unacceptable levels of construction traffic accessing the 6 plot Area 1 site via the Station Road access. It would appear that at present there are insurmountable issues regarding land ownership and rights of access to both Areas 1 and 6. However, these are not material planning considerations. But, what is now evident is that there is a possible alternative access to Area 1, which was not the case when the PC made its decision.
Conclusion 58. Like the previous Inspector I consider that this proposed temporary construction traffic access for the 6 plot site (Area1) would have a materially adverse effect on highway safety conditions in Station Road, St Johns, to the detriment of the safety of pedestrians and vehicle users. I find the proposal to be contrary to criteria (h) and (i) of Policy GP2 of the IOMSP.
==== PAGE 8 ====
20/00245/B Page 8 of 14
Recommendation 59. I recommend that the appeal be allowed; that the decision of the Planning Committee is overturned and that planning approval be refused for the reason set out below. If the Minister does not agree with my recommendation I consider that the conditions proposed in the PBCD Report should all be imposed. These are set out in the attached Schedule.
Reason for Refusal: The proposed temporary construction traffic access would have a materially adverse effect on highway safety conditions in Station Road to the detriment of pedestrians and vehicle users. The proposal is contrary to General Policy 2, criteria (h) and (i) of The Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016.
PLANNING HISTORY 4.1 Approval in principle was granted for construction of a temporary access road for construction traffic to Field 312711 which is the application site in July 2015 under PA 15/00345/A. Note: The works contained within this application are similar to the works within the current application, besides the route being moved further from Westville (The current proposal is an improvement on the approval in principle approved in 2015.
4.1.1 Relevant conditions within the above application are: "4. The application for reserved matters must include a detailed design that addresses the following issues: the access road shall be of sufficient width to accommodate access by an HGV when there is an HGV waiting to exit the site; the radius of the access shall permit all turning manoeuvres to be carried out within the appropriate traffic lane and the site without blocking oncoming traffic; visibility of at least 40m shall be available in each direction; wheel washing facilities to prevent deposit of debris on the highway.
Reason: to ensure minimal impact on the traffic flow and highway safety of the adjacent highway network.
Reason: in the interests of the amenities of the area.
Reason: in the interests of the amenities of the village."
4.2 Other applications have been submitted for the development of the land and for means of access for construction traffic on sites within the vicinity of the application site. These are:
4.2.1 PA 14/01419/B for the creation of a temporary construction access on land to the south of the village post office. This was approved on 26th February, 2015 but refused on appeal in November 2018 (See section 3.7 of report).
4.2.2 PA 11/00690/B proposed the residential estate layout of six plots, roads and sewers including temporary construction access to site off Station Road. This was refused at Appeal on 2nd April, 2012. This refusal related to the unacceptability of the access for reasons of highway safety.
==== PAGE 9 ====
20/00245/B Page 9 of 14
4.2.4 PA 11/00241/B proposed the estate layout for two detached dwellings and garages with associated access road, drainage and other services and access for construction traffic to adjacent land on the land to the rear of Westview. This was approved at Appeal on 2nd April 2012, subject, inter alia to a condition which prevented the use of this site for construction access for vehicles associated with the development of Area 1.
4.2.5 PA 08/01842/B for the erection of dwellings to plots 2, 4 and 6, refused at Appeal on 15th July, 2009. This was considered at the same time as PAs 08/02117/B for plot 3, 08/02137/B for plot 5 and 08/02143/B for plot 1. Concerns were expressed at the impact of the development of plots 1, 2 and 3 due to their impact on the view from the village but all of the applications were refused for the reason that there was not in place any provision for access or roads, considering the requirements of the local plan.
4.2.6 PA 08/01510/B for the residential layout for six dwellings with layout of plots, roads and sewers and was refused at Appeal on 15th July, 2009 for reasons that there was no security about the means of access into the site for construction traffic in accordance with the provisions and requirements of the local plan.
4.2.7 PA 06/00371/A for approval in principle for a residential development of six dwellings. This was approved at Appeal on 2nd January 2007 subject to a condition which required that "Construction traffic must use only the temporary access indicated on drawing no. 4043/2; this temporary access must be removed and the land over which it passes must be restored to its current condition within one month of the completion of building operations; details of this access and the arrangement must be included in the application for Reserved Matters." This construction access is as is now proposed in the current application.
4.2.8 PA 19/01324/B for Erection of a detached dwelling at Field 314758, Main Road, St Johns. The application was refused on 18 June 2020 and is currently the subject of an appeal.
The application was refused for the following reasons: R1: The application fails to comply with the specific development brief for this area as required by the St Johns Local Plan 1999 and the principle is therefore contrary to Res/P/1 of the St John's Local Plan 1999 and fails General Policy 2 a, g, h, i, j and k of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016.
R2: The application fails to demonstrate safe highway construction access contrary to Res/P/1 of the St John's Local Plan and General Policy 2 g, h and i of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016.
The German Parish Commissioners made the following comment regarding the application: Whilst my Commissioners have no particular objection to the application, they were under the impression that no planning approvals will be given until the situation with regard to putting the access roads into the site has been addressed and the roads have been installed. Before any approval of this application is considered the Commissioners would like some clarification on this matter.
REPRESENTATIONS Copies of representations received can be viewed on the government's website. This report contains summaries only.
5.1 The Department of Infrastructure (DOI) Highways Division had previously written in requesting additional information with the following comments in a letter dated 15 May 2020:
From previous applications it was understood that the requirement for the proposed vehicular access and construction route were for temporary purposes to facilitate nearby development.
==== PAGE 10 ====
20/00245/B Page 10 of 14
The description suggests otherwise and should be clarified. Notwithstanding, an indicative corridor alignment is shown with no details of the layout to verify the provision of safe access and egress, including for the access its visibility splays of 2.4 x 49m in each direction, corner radii and form of construction to cater for heavy goods vehicles. No mud or debris must track onto the highway and the means of prevention should be provided. A separate permission is necessary under s109(A) Highway Agreement is necessary for the works to connect to the highway. A 4m width construction route is adequate and its position suitable subject to vegetation and amenity issues. Should this be of a temporary nature, then details of the duration of construction and subsequent reinstatement to tis former conditions are necessary. Accordingly, there is insufficient detail to demonstrate that the proposed development will not be detrimental to satisfactory functioning of the highway and highway safety contrary to Strategic Plan Policy T4. Should the Planning Authority be minded to approve the following to apply: a) Details of Vehicular Access and Construction Route- Development shall not commence until a plan showing details of the proposed vehicular access and construction route to the site has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority. The access and construction route shall be constructed as approved and retained for the lifetime of the development. Reason: To ensure the free and safe use of the highway.
b) Provision of Vehicular Visibility Splays - Prior to the commencement of the use hereby permitted, a visibility splay measuring 2.4m x 49m shall be provided as measured to back from the centre line of the access point and extending along the nearside carriageway edge to each side of the access and such splays shall have no obstruction exceeding a height of 1.05m above the level of the adjacent carriageway. Reason: In interests of highway safety.
c) Means of Preventing Mud on Highway - Equipment to enable mud and grit to be removed from the wheels, tyres and underside of vehicles prior to their entering the public highway shall be provided and utilised in the position shown on the approved plan and maintained in working order at all times when traffic is leaving the site. The site access road shall be maintained in a clean condition at all times when traffic is leaving the site. Reason: To ensure that mud is not deposited on the road in the interests of amenity and highway safety. d) Temp Use
d) Land to be Discontinued and Land Restored - The use hereby permitted shall be discontinued and the land restored to its former condition as the details of which shall have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority as described in the direction attached to this permission on or before ddmmyyyy. Reason: In the interests of amenity.
Advisory: i. Highway Works In order to discharge condition (...) of this permission it is necessary to obtain separate Highway Authority approval of the specification and construction details and enter an agreement under s109(A) of the Highways Act 1986.
5.1.2 Upon receipt of additional information, the Department of Infrastructure (DOI) Highways Division have written in to indicate support for the application with the following comments in a letter dated 15 July 2020:
The additional details and revisions overcome the highway concerns raised on 15 May 2020 by showing the requirements for the proposed access, including the layout with a 5.5m approach to allow two-way passing reducing to a 4m construction route. Acceptable visibility splays are indicated at 2.4x 49m in each direction. A swept path analysis provides tracking for a large vehicle demonstrating that such vehicles can turn into and out of the junction. A wheel wash
==== PAGE 11 ====
20/00245/B Page 11 of 14
facility is to be provided within a layby adjacent the construction route to prevent mud and debris being deposited onto the carriageway. A s109(A) Highway Agreement is necessary for works in the highway. Other traffic management measures may be necessary to aid access and egress, such a temporary traffic signals that can be addressed post planning consent.
The access and construction route are taken as temporary facilities, and should be reinstated by a set out date, occupation or similar.
Accordingly, the revisions are satisfactory to raise no significant highway safety or efficiency issues to allow Highway Services to raise no opposition subject to conditions for access, visibility, construction route and wheel wash in accordance with drawing no's: 01 rev A and 02. Additionally, for the reinstatement of the access and construction route and an advisory for a s109(A) Highway Agreement.
5.2 The German Parish Commissioners have stated that they have no objection to the application in a letter dated 12 August 2020.
ASSESSMENT 6.1 The key issues in this case are the principle of the proposed development, potential visual impact of the proposed works to the street scene and area as well as the possible highway safety issues.
6.2 The principle of the development
6.2.1 In considering the justification for the development, it is noted that what is proposed would provide a temporary means of access to the Area 1 (which has been designated for a maximum of six residential developments) as it is clear that there is currently no means of access available to the applicants to enable construction work for development of the sites within Area 1. The principle is considered to be acceptable in land use terms as the site for which the temporary access would serve is zoned for residential development.
6.3.2 Whilst a similar application for a temporary access via the site has been refused in a recent application (PA 19/01324/B), that approval was for a permanent access to serve a residential dwelling, and as such it is noted that the refused application is considerably at variance with the current application. Moreover, approval has been granted for approval in principle for the access under PA 15/00345/A to allow temporary access road for construction traffic to Field 312711 (within Area A) which the current application seeks. Although the approval was in principle, there has not been significant change within the locality and in terms of the planning policy framework, which should result in a different conclusion being reached.
6.3.3 Likewise, it is not considered that the appeal decision regarding PA 14/01419/B would serve to hinder the proposed development given that the inspector clearly acknowledged the acceptability of the principle to create access to Area 1, but challenged creating the access through Station Road which was not considered suitable due to the existing levels of congestion which would result in unacceptable highway safety conditions to the detriment of the safety of pedestrians and vehicle users. As such, it is considered that there is a genuine need for the access and the principle of creating the temporary access through Peel Road is acceptable and would facilitate the development of Area 1.
6.3 Visual impact
6.3.1 With regard to the visual impact of the proposed development, it is noted that the introduction of an access in the location proposed would have a visual impact on the area, albeit this impact is considered to be acceptable given that vehicular access to fields are not uncommon within the St. John's section of Peel Road. Besides, this access would be a temporary access which would be removed and the area restored after the construction work
==== PAGE 12 ====
20/00245/B Page 12 of 14
on the abutting field has been concluded. Therefore, a condition would be sufficient to ensure that the use is allowed within a stipulated time frame after which the access shall be removed and the boundary on this section of the road restored.
6.3.2 As well, the location for development is not considered to cause major harm to the character and appearance of the street scene and is deemed to be in keeping with the character and appearance of the locality which comprises a mix of residential properties and open fields provided with access gates. As such, it is considered that the proposed access, which would only be temporary, complies with GP 2 (c) and (g).
6.4 Highway Impact 6.4.1 Whilst the proposed access would be a conspicuous addition to this section of Peel Road within St. Johns, it will have a significantly diminished impact on highway safety when compared to other temporary construction access routes that have been proposed for the area as there is no pedestrian footway on this side of the road; thus pedestrians will come into much less contact with the construction traffic. Moreover, the provided swept path analysis shows that construction vehicles would easily enter and exit the site without significantly affecting the flow of traffic on the highway.
6.4.2 Given that the volume of traffic from and into the site would be considerably high once the construction works within Area 1 commences, it is imperative that such an access should be safe in terms of pedestrian and vehicular movements and as such it is particularly important that the Department of Infrastructure Highway Services are supportive of the scheme. As such, the current support provided by the Department of Infrastructure Highway Services after rigorous reviews of the proposal is an indication that the proposed access is considered to be safe and suitable for the location.
6.4.3 Overall, it is considered that the level of development contained within the proposal is in keeping with the character of the site and the area, with suitably limited impact on the locality. As such the proposal does not adversely affect public or private amenity or the Proposed Conservation Area and is therefore in accordance with the aforementioned policies. It is also considered that the application should be approved subject to conditions regarding highway safety, protection of trees, and the restoration of the application site to agricultural field after construction work has been concluded with permanent residential access provided through Balladoyne estate as suggested in paragraph (e) of Policy RES/P/1 (Development Brief for Area
CONCLUSION 7.1 Whilst the details contained within the proposed development are similar to the approval in principle (PA 15/00345/A) which has now lapsed, it is a significantly improved proposal given that the development would be pushed further away from the boundary with Westville and the trees on the western boundary; would have an improved access with better visibility and wheel washing facilities to prevent deposit of debris on the highway; in addition to only being used and available for use to facilitate the development of fields 312909 and 314758.
7.2 The proposal would not unacceptably harm the characteristics of the existing site or the character of its surroundings and would not result in a significant adverse impact upon highway safety. The proposal is therefore in accordance with General Policy 2, Environment Policy 35 and St. John's Local Plan.
INTERESTED PERSON STATUS 8.1 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);
==== PAGE 13 ====
20/00245/B Page 13 of 14
(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.
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 above who should 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 : Permitted Committee Meeting Date: 24.08.2020
Signed : P VISIGAH Presenting Officer
Further to the decision of the Committee an additional report/condition reason was required (included as supplemental paragraph to the officer report).
Signatory to delete as appropriate YES/NO See below
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.
==== PAGE 14 ====
20/00245/B Page 14 of 14
PLANNING COMMITTEE DECISION 24.08.2020
Application No. : 20/00245/B Applicant : David And Wendy Davies Proposal : Creation of new vehicular entrance, and construction route across field Site Address : Field 312711 Balladoyne Farm Main Road St Johns Isle Of Man
Planning Officer : Mr Paul Visigah
Presenting Officer As above
Addendum to the Officer’s Report
Approved subject to the correction of a typo in Condition 6.
Copyright in submitted documents remains with their authors. Request removal