Loading document...
==== PAGE 1 ====
STATEMENT OF THE PLANNING AUTHORITY Isle of Man Government EIUk Vnnif/n Planning statement on behalf of Department of Infrastructure Planning and Building Control in respect of a planning application for the Approval in principle for the erection of twenty three dwellings with associated road layout and public open space Former Gas Works Port St Maty Isle Of Man 1M9 5LF Reference 14/0Q357/A Statement prepared on behalf of DOI Planning and Building Control by Miss S E Coriett 8 May 2014 14/00357/A Page 1 of 9
==== PAGE 2 ====
THE SITE 1.1 TTie site defined in red is the site of the former gasworks, a former car park aiongside and the lane which provides access, together with a small section of the roadside to the north of the land serving the site. All of the above lie on the western side of Station Road, which links Four Roads with Port St. Mary. The lane serving the site is presently unmade and is almost 4m wide and has at its eastern end. Port St. Mary Railway Station and its access and parking to the north and the Station Hotel to the south with Ballaghreiney, a modern bungalow, to the west of this. Both the Station Hotel and the Railway Station are handsome buildings: the railway station being a mainly red brick building with yellow brick detailing vertically proportioned and oriel windows and decorative chimneys. The hotel is plainer but still attractive, with a rendered finish, substantial chimneys. 1.2 The car park is an area of around 30m by 40m and was formerly used in association with the hotel. More recently, planning approval was granted for the change of use of the car park, with levelling and landscaping for use by the owners of Ballaghreiney for part of their landscaping business (PA 09/02030) which was not taken up and which has now expired. Planning permission was also granted for the erection of perimeter fencing around the gasworks site (PA 98/01220). The gas works site accommodates the former gas cylinders and various buildings, none of which is currently used. Most of these buildings are brick with sheeted rooft other than a dwelling-type property with a red tiled roof and prominent chimneys. THE PROPOSAL 2.1 Proposed is the principle of the clearance of the site of its structures (which would in itself not require planning permission) and the erection of 23 dwellings with associated roads and open space. The layout provided indicates that the houses would all be 3 or 4 bedroomed and all terraced or end of terrace with a small front and rear garden with part of the front gardens dedicated to one parking space with a second space contained within the property. Public open space is provided in the form of three areas: two abutting two of the plots, the gables of numbers 20, 19 and 1 forming the edge of the public open space. The public open space is described as 2,208 sq m comprising 1,242 sq m of formal space, 414 sq m of children's play space and 552 sq m of amenity space. 2.2 Access to the site would be along the lane: there is no indication on the plans that this will be altered or upgraded in any way. 2.3 New surface water and foul drainage systems would be provided. 3.4 The applicant suggests that whilst the site was not considered and assessed for suitability for residential development in the APS, in their view it would score very highly on the sustainability matrix which was applied to other sites in the area. Nothing is included in the statement to explain how this assessment has been made although they explain that the site is very close to the railway station, a bus route, pub/restaurant, doctor's surgery and numerous shops and other facilities in the village of Port St. Mary PLANNING STATUS AND POLICY 3.1 The site is identified on the APS as Industry. The railway is designated as Railway, Ballaghreiney is designated as Residential and the hotel as Mixed Use - public house. The plan refers to the site at paragraph 5.23.1 as a hazardous one, which is likely to become non- hazardous through the removal of the gas services. No advice is given as to any proposed new use. 3.2 As such, the site is designated for industrial use. Whilst the site is considered as "previously developed", the policies on such sites, General Policy 3c state that 14/00357/A Page 2 of 9 8 May 2014
==== PAGE 3 ====
"Development will not be permitted outside of those areas which are zoned for development on the appropriate Area Plan with the exception of: a) essential housing for agricultural workers who have to live close to their place of work (Housing Policies 7, 8, 9 and 10) b) conversion of redundant rural buildings which are of architectural, historical, or social value and Interest (Housing Policy 11) c) previously developed land which contains a significant amount of buildings where the continued use is redundant; where redevelopment would reduce the impact of the current situation on the landscape or the wider environmental and where the development proposed would result in improvements to the landscape or wider environment". The definition of Previously Developed Land is set out in Appendix 1: "Previously-developed land is that which is or was occupied by a permanent structure, including the curtilage of the developed land and any associated fixed surface infrastructure. The definition includes defence buildings, but excludes,
==== PAGE 4 ====
Environment Policy 7: "Development which would cause demonstrable harm to a watercourse, wetland, pond or dub, and which would not be overcome by mitigation measures will not be permitted. Where development is proposed which would affect a watercourse, planning applications must comply with the following criteria: a) all watercourses In the vicinity of the site must be identified on plans accompanying a planning application and include an adequate risk assessment to demonstrate that works will not cause long term deterioration in water quality; b) details of pollution and alleviation measures must be submitted; c) all engineering works proposed must be phased in an appropriate manner in order to avoid a reduction in water quality in any adjacent watercourse; and d) development will not normally be allowed within 8 metres of any watercourse in order to protect the aquatic and bankside habitats and species". 3.9 The applicant has discussed the development with the DEFA who have indicated that they are not likely to have concern about the development, provided that no pollutants get into the drain. 3.10 Recreation Policy 3 states: Where appropriate, new development should include the provision of landscaped amenity areas as an integral part of the design. New residential development of ten or more dwellings must make provision for recreational and amenity space in accordance with standards specified in Appendix 6 to the Plan." 3.11 Recreation Policy 4 requires that "Open Space must be provided on site or conveniently close to the development which it is intended to serve, and should be easily accessible by foot and public transport". REPRESENTATIONS 4.1 Port St. Mary Commissioners advise that the site has been prone to flooding and that they are unsure as to how and where the affordable housing is to be provided. 4.2 Department of Environment, Food and Agriculture Wildlife Division indicate that prior to the undertaking of any development, a survey for frogs and lizards must be undertaken and appropriate mitigation measures designed and taken accordingly. 4.3 Manx Utilities Authority (Electricity) raises issues relating to existing and proposed supplies, neither of which are material planning considerations in this case. 4,4 Department of Health and Social Care indicate that affordable housing should be provided as part of the development and that as there are no current allocations for new development in Port St. Mary, the provision should be within the site. This would result in some of the units being smaller than shown (2 bed rather than 3 or 4) and made available in the usual way through a legal Agreement. ASSESSMENT 5.1 There are a number of issues to be considered in this case: is the site suitable for residential development_ should the site be reserved for industrial use_ is the density of development acceptable: in this case it will be necessary to consider the visual impact of such development and the parking, access and open space requirements which come along with the scale of development, taking into account the provisions of the Strategic Plan Page 4 of 9 8 May 2014 14/00357/A
==== PAGE 5 ====
and general standards of highway safety and convenience. The highway authority would generally advise on the last points. 5.2 If the answer to any of the above is negative, it is then relevant to consider whether there are any other material considerations which would override these concerns and which would justify an approval of this scheme. Is the site suitable for residential development and should the site be reserved for industrial use 5.3 The site is clearly designated as Industrial which reflects its former use as a gas works. Industrial use generally results in utilitarian style buildings and traffic which involves vans and potentially heavier vehicles, depending upon the nature of the industrial use. The site is alongside important and almost landmark buildings in the streetscene (the railway station and the hotel) and in this respect, the development of utilitarian industrial buildings on the site with the accompanying industrial traffic may not be complementary to the calibre of these buildings and the fact that the railway station attracts visitors who may expect the context of the station to be one of appropriately designed buildings. The views of DED have been sought in this respect and they advise that there is probably no demand to develop new industrial accommodation here, Small scale businesses such as garages are attracted to low quality, existing accommodation, but they have no knowledge of any pressure to develop new Industrial premises. In addition, the Area Plan for the South identifies the existing industrial estates and suggests that further development is accommodated within them. Reserves of industrial land exist in the Ballasalta / Ronaldsway area within existing estates. 5.4 As such, it is considered that there is no demonstrable demand for industrial development and In any case, the visual impact of industrial development here would not result in the required environmental improvement which could be achieved through residential development, in terms of the scale of development and its visual interest and its compatibility with the adjacent residential or commercial buildings, many of which are of interest architecturally and historically. TTie level and type of traffic generated from industrial use is also likely to be incompatible with these other adjacent uses. As such, it is considered that the site is suitable for residential development in principle. Is the density of the development acceptable 5.4 In assessing this, it is appropriate to consider from where the site is visible and by whom. The site is dearly visible from Plantation Road and the lower part of the Howe Road as well as from St. Mary's/Truggan Road. Currently this view is marred by the appearance of the large gas containers which will be removed as part of this development. The remainder of the view is characterised by distinctive large buildings and much smaller, lower buildings of less impressive quality (Baliaghreiney and its outbuildings together with the outbuildings associated with the railway. What is not evident is a concentration of larger buildings as would be the case if this deveiopment of four large building masses which are between 24m and 48m in length. It is also worth bearing in mind that the footprint size, together with the description of the dwellings being at least 3 bedroomed, that the units are likely to be three storey including some parking on the ground floor, it is therefore considered that the density of development is overly great for the site and the proposal would result in an appearance of overdevelopment of the site which would not have a positive impact on the setting of the railway station (which is proposed for Registration on the APS) and the Station Hotel as viewed both from the railway station and further afield from Plantation Road and Truggan Road. 5.5 The number of dwellings would result in a need for the following amounts of public open space: 1242 sq m of formal open space, 414 sq m of children's play space and 552 sq m of amenity space. These categories of open space are described in the strategic plan as follows: 8 May 2014 14/00357/A Page 5 of 9
==== PAGE 6 ====
A.6.1.3 In order to adequately undertake an assessment, it is considered important to have a clear understanding of what is meant by the term "outdoor playing space" and how it differs from "open space". The widely accepted definition of outdoor playing space is: A.6.1.4 An area that is safely accessible and available to the general public, and of a suitable size and nature, for sport, active recreation or children's play. Design of public open space A.6.9 Both formal and informal open space should be designed as an integral part of the development so that it offers recreational value and visual relief and in some cases may provide the main focal point of the development. There is often local opposition to the provision of children's play spaces especially within new residential developments. Therefore it is essential that facilities be designed as part of a comprehensive approach to estate layout, which includes consideration of good neighbourliness, the need for adequate privacy and amenity for the occupiers of dwellings, road traffic and pedestrian activity and community safety. The following are also important considerations in the siting and layout of public open space which should:-
==== PAGE 7 ====
• Golf courses, • Water used for recreation, except where it forms an interactive feature of an outdoor play area, • Commercial entertainment complexes • Sports halls (indoor provision may make a contribution to certain sports, such as badminton, tennis or bowls, and such facilities may be taken into account when assessing whether there is demand for these activities, however with regard to outdoor playing space, such area must be seen as complementary.) • Car parks for non-recreational use. 5.6 The proposal will provide a maximum of 1186 sq m of Public Open Space, under half of the required provision. The applicant has indicated that the development can provide more than the required amount of amenity and children's play space (although the layout seems to indicate that all of the space is in very close proximity to each other and is likely to be all used as play space rather than amenity space which would usually be found in smaller areas within the built development, breaking up the built form and adding visually to the character and appearance of the development). They also indicate that there are formal play facilities in the village in the form of Port St. Mary primary school, the bowling green, Rushen Primary School (most of which, including the buildings is in Rushen, not Port St. Mary) which they feel more than meets the requirement for Formal Open Space. 5.7 It is the case, however that these facilities could be used by every developer of new housing In the area to avoid the provision of additional public open space, and whilst there are limited opportunities for further development in the local area, it is nevertheless relevant to consider whether there is currently sufficient formal open space facilities serving Port St. Mary. No evidence is provided by the applicant, but considering the population of Port St. Mary as somewhere in the region of 2,000 people, the requirement for formal open space is somewhere in the region of 35,000 sq m. In the APS there is a list of community facilities and in the case of Port St. Mary there are the following: the playground alongside Port St. Mary Golf Course, Gansey Point open space the beaches the bowling green the golf course the tennis courts. 5.8 These areas, excluding the golf course but including the space at Scoill Phurt Le Moirrey, amount to around 48,000 sq m but does include areas which are supposed to be included. As such, it is not considered that the lack of provision of the full amount of public open space in this case would warrant refusal of the application, it is relevant to consider the appropriateness of the open space and it is considered that the close proximity of the open space to the proposed houses is likely to result in nuisance and a potential lack of privacy for those dwellings alongside the public open space and as such the provision of public open space is not considered to be adequate to satisfactorily serve the development. 5.8 The development will retain the majority of trees on the site but it should be noted that the houses on plots 10-23 will have existing trees within metres of their rear elevation, in some cases with the canopies actually touching the rear of the buildings. This is likely not only to impact on the outlook and amenities of those properties but also the future request from occupiers of these buildings, to remove the trees. In this respect it is considered that the plans submitted have not demonstrated satisfactorily that 23 dwellings could be satisfactorily accommodated on the site whilst retaining trees of amenity value. 14/00357/A Page 7 of 9 8 May 2014
==== PAGE 8 ====
5.9 Access: there is no submission from the Highways Authority and as such, no recommendations can be made regarding the satisfactory nature or otherwise of the proposed means of access. 5.9 In support of the application, the removal of the gas containers and associated buildings will generally result in a significant and positive benefit to the landscape of the area. However, it is considered that the density of development is too great, taking into account the impact on trees, the layout of the public open space and the visual Impact of the development. It is recommended that the site is considered suitable for residential development but at a significantly lower density - perhaps three large dwellings, well designed to reflect the attractive and important historical and architectural elements of the Railway Station and the Station Hotel. PARTY STATUS 7.1 The local authority. Port St. Mary Commissioners are, by virtue of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) (No 2) Order 2013, paragraph 6 (4) (e), considered "interested persons" and as such should be afforded party status. 7.2 The Highway Authority is granted interested party status under the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) (No 2) Order 2013 paragraph 6 (4) d. 7.3 Department of Environment, Food and Agriculture and Department of Social Care are statutory authorities which raises material planning considerations and as such should be afforded party status under Article 6(4)(c) of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) (No 2) Order 2013. 7.4 Manx Utilities Authority does not raise material planning considerations and as such should not be afforded party status in this case. CONDITIONS If the application Is recommended for approval, the following conditions are recommended to be attached to any decision:
==== PAGE 9 ====
Conditions and Notes for Approval / Reasons and Notes for Refusal C : Conditions for approval N : Notes attached to conditions R: Reasons for refusal O : Notes attached to refusals 14/00357/A Page 9 of 9 8 May 2014
Copyright in submitted documents remains with their authors. Request removal
