166084

==== PAGE 1 ====

                                      22/00682/REM                                     Page  1  of  14

PLANNING OFFICER REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Application No. 22/00682/REM Applicant : Lee Raybould Proposal Reserved Matters application to PA No 21/01435/B for the erection of a dwelling and associated ancillary accommodation Site Address Former Howstrake Holiday Camp King Edward Road Onchan Isle Of Man IM3 2JP

Case Officer :

Mr Toby Cowell Photo Taken :

Site Visit :

Expected Decision Level Planning Committee

Recommendation

Recommended Decision: Permitted Date of Recommendation 12.05.2023

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. 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 extension, enlargement or other alteration of the dwelling(s) hereby approved, other than that expressly authorised by this approval, shall be carried out, without the prior written approval of the Department.

Reason: To control development in the interests of the amenities of the surrounding area.

C 3. The development hereby approved shall not be occupied or operated until the means of vehicular access has been constructed in accordance with the approved plans, and shall thereafter be retained for access purposes only.

Reason: In the interests of highway safety.

C 4. No development shall commence until a schedule of materials and finishes and samples of the materials to be used in the construction of the external surfaces of the dwelling, including all hardsurfacing within the site, have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Department. The development shall not be carried out unless in accordance with the approved details.

Reason: In the interests of the character and appearance of the site and surrounding area.

==== PAGE 2 ====

                                      22/00682/REM                                     Page  2  of  14

C 5. Prior to the occupation of the development hereby permitted, all hard and soft landscaping shall be carried out in strict accordance with the approved details as referenced on the following drawings; P04-D01 RevA, P04-D02, P04-D03, P04-D04 RevA and P04-D05. 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 ensure the provision of an appropriate landscape setting to the development and in the interests of biodiversity.

C 6. Prior to the commencement of development, including construction and enabling works, a Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP) shall be submitted in writing to the Department for approval. The CEMP shall include the following: o Precautionary Working Method Statements for common lizards, common frogs, bats and breeding birds. o Working methods to ensure that Wildlife Act 1990 Schedule 8 plants are not spread. o Measures to be put in place for the protection of the surrounding habitats during construction, including protective fencing and construction exclusion areas. o Measures to be taken to prevent water, sediment and pollution runoff from site, including measures to prevent the degradation of the neighbouring Douglas Bay Marine Nature Reserve and measures for the avoidance of light pollution onto surrounding habitats.

All works shall be undertaken in full accordance with the approved details.

Reason: In the interests of biodiversity.

C 7. Prior to the commencement of development, including demolition, construction and enabling works, a Preliminary Roost Assessment shall be undertaken on building B2 (as referenced within the MWT's Bat Survey Report), to check its suitability for hibernating bats, and the results submitted to the Department in writing for approval. Should the assessment determine that hibernating bats are likely to be present then hibernation surveys will be required, together with further avoidance and mitigation measures. All works must then be undertaken in full accordance with any additional specified avoidance and mitigation measures as agreed by the Department.

Reason: In the interests of biodiversity.

C 8. Prior to the commencement of development, including construction and enabling works, a common lizard habitat management plan shall be submitted in writing to the Department for approval. This plan shall include a management regime for the lizard habitat management areas and details of how the 4 lizard hibernacula (as shown on the Landscape Masterplan) are to be created. All works must then be undertaken in full accordance with this plan.

Reason: In the interests of biodiversity.

C 9. No permanent outdoor lighting shall be installed until a sensitive low level lighting plan, following best practise as detailed in the Bat Conservation Trust and Institute of Lighting Professionals Guidance Note 8 on Bats and Artificial Lighting (12th September 2018), has been submitted in writing to the Department for approval. All works must then be undertaken in full accordance with this plan.

Reason: In the interests of biodiversity.

==== PAGE 3 ====

                                      22/00682/REM                                     Page  3  of  14

C 10. Prior to the commencement of development, including construction and enabling works, an Invasive Species Management Plan shall be submitted in writing to the Department for approval. All works must then be undertaken in full accordance with this plan.

Reason: In the interests of biodiversity.

C 11. Prior to the commencement of development, including construction and enabling works, a bat and bird box plan, containing details including the location, specifications and timing of installation, of bat and bird boxes that are to be erected on the new buildings, shall be submitted in writing to the Department for approval. All works must then be undertaken in full accordance with this statement.

Reason: In the interests of biodiversity.

C 12. Prior to the commencement of the development hereby approved, details shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by the Department which set out details of the type of glass or barrier to be used in all glass balustrades. The works shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details and retained thereafter in perpetuity.

Reason: To ensure that the details are appropriate to reduce the risk of bird strike.

N 1. This decision notice relates to a Reserved Matters approval pursuant to Approval In Principal application 15/00636/A as varied by planning application 21/01435/B. For the avoidance of doubt all conditions that apply to 21/01435/B and those on this decision notice apply to the development and should be read in conjunction with one another.

N 2. FOR YOUR INFORMATION Please be aware that a ban on the installation of fossil fuel heating systems in any new building(s) and or extension(s), will come into force on 1st January 2025.

You therefore are encouraged to ensure that your proposed development includes alternatives to fossil fuel heating systems if you believe that such works will not be completed by that date.

To this end, if you propose an alternative, such as air source or ground source heat pump(s), or any other heating system that would require planning approval, the details of this should be addressed now. This may require you to resubmit your planning application to accommodate the alternative permitted heating system proposed.

This application has been recommended for approval for the following reason. The proposed development is considered to constitute a high standard of design which would add a greater degree of visual interest in the context of the immediate landscape and seascape, whilst improving biodiversity across the site and bringing a neglected, redundant site back into use. The proposals would afford future occupants a very high standard of living, without detriment to the amenities of surrounding residential properties, nor give rise to a material impact upon the safety and convenience of the local highway network. The proposals are therefore considered to be compliant with Strategic Policy 5, General Policies 2 and 3, Environment Policies 1 and 2, and Housing Policy 14 of the Strategic Plan (2016).

Plans/Drawings/Information;

This approval relates to the following drawings and documents referenced;

Arboricultural Impact Assessment (Manx Roots, Mar. 2022) Bat Report (MWT, Sept. 2022) LVIA Part 1 (Pegasus, Nov. 2021) LVIA Part 2 (Pegasus, Nov. 2021)

==== PAGE 4 ====

                                      22/00682/REM                                     Page  4  of  14

LVIA Part 3 (Pegasus, Nov. 2021) P000 - Mood Board P012 - Access Road P102 - Floor Level 01 P101 - Floor Level 02 P100 - Floor Level 03 P103 - Roof Plan P104 - Proposed Elevations P105 - Sections P200 - Tree Terracing Preliminary Ecological Appraisal Report (MWT, Nov. 2021) TS100222 - Tree Constraints Plan (Manx Roots, Feb. 2022) TR100332 - Tree Impact Plan (Manx Roots, Mar. 2022) Received 16.06.22

Lizard Report (MWT, Nov. 2022) Received 21.11.22

P04-D02 - Planting Plan 1 P04-D03 - Planting Plan 2 P04-D05 - Planting Plan 4 Received 24.04.23

P04-D01 RevA - Landscape Masterplan P04-D04 RevA - Planting Plan 3 Received 09.05.23

A9000 Rev02 - Summer House Plans Received 10.03.23

P010 RevA - Location Plan P011 RevA - Site Plan Received 12.05.23

__

Interested Person Status - Additional Persons

None. __

Officer’s Report

THIS APPLICATION HAS BEEN REFERRED TO PLANNING COMMITTEE DUE TO THE SITE'S PREVIOUS HISTORY AND ON THE ADVICE OF THE HEAD OF PLANNING AND BUILDING CONTROL

1.0 THE SITE 1.1 The application site comprises of a parcel of land that is located at Howstrake in Onchan which is to the east of King Edward Road. The site previously contained a holiday camp and derelict remnants of that previous development remain, including some built structures and hardstanding.01

2.0 THE PROPOSAL 2.1 The application seeks approval for the Reserved Matters following the initial Approval in Principle for the erection of a dwelling and ancillary staff/guest/office accommodation originally

==== PAGE 5 ====

                                      22/00682/REM                                     Page  5  of  14

granted under PA 15/00636/A, with the time period for the submission of a Reserved Matters application subsequently extended 3 times under PA's 17/00910/B, 19/01061/B and 21/01435/B.

2.2 The detailed proposals the subject of this application relate to the erection of a sizeable flat-roofed single-storey dwelling of an irregular footprint with accommodation provided on 3 levels in line with the downward sloping topography of the site from west to east. The dwelling would benefit from an attached garage providing parking provision for 8 vehicles which, together with a corresponding wing of the property, would partially enclose a courtyard and vehicle turning area. The property is completed with various external terraced areas, together with a tennis court.

2.3 The property incorporates substantial elements of glazing, whilst utilising a combination of stone, timber and bronze panelling, bronzed aluminium framing, timber soffits and bronze fascia's, with frameless glass balustrades. The proposals include a sedum roof across the entirety of the dwelling, with a formal hard and soft landscaping scheme having been included with the proposals.

2.4 From a landscaping perspective, the proposals include substantial tree planting within immediate proximity to the dwelling, a roof garden atop 'level 03', a sunken gravel garden, water features, pathways and additional outdoor seating areas. Substantial mitigation tree planting is proposed within and outside of the defined red line area of the application site, with designated areas for lizard habitat management within the wider grounds of the site.

2.5 The proposals further include the erection of a single-storey flat roofed summerhouse to the north-east of the dwelling, which affords provision for ancillary guest and staff accommodation, accessed via a small track leading back to the dwelling and an additional parking area for 4 vehicles. The development further includes provision for a new sweeping vehicular access from King Edward Road, completed with a stone wall and electric gate at the junction.

3.0 PLANNING HISTORY 3.1 The application site has been subject of a number of previous planning applications that are considered specifically material to the assessment of this current planning application:

3.2 Planning application 86/00317/A sought approval in principle to develop A) part of site for residential use and b) part of site for tourist use. This application was refused in 1986.

3.3 Planning application 87/00637/A sought approval in principle to development of land to form 12 residential plots and 25 self-contained tourist chalets. This application was refused in 1987.

3.4 Planning application 88/04256/A sought approval in principle to 150-bedroomed hotel/conference/health facilities and 200 residential units. This application was approved in 1989.

3.5 Planning application 94/00816/B sought approval for the erection of hotel with associated parking. This application was refused in 1994.

3.6 Planning application 94/00817/A sought approval in principle for the erection of 200 dwellings. This application was refused in 1994.

3.7 Planning application 09/01041/A sought approval in principle for the erection of a detached dwelling. This application was refused in 2009 for the following reasons:

==== PAGE 6 ====

                                      22/00682/REM                                     Page  6  of  14

"R 1. The proposed development represents unwarranted development that is contrary to the land use designation of the application site as i) open space; and ii) ecological interest/semi natural vegetation under the Isle of Man Planning Scheme (Onchan Local Plan) Order 2000 Map No. 1 and the presumption against the development of such areas set out within Planning Circular 1/2000 and the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2007. Specifically, the proposal is contrary to the provisions of Policy O/RES/P/22 and Policy O/NC/P/2 of Planning Circular 1/2000 and the provisions of General Policy 3, Environment Policy 1, Environment Policy 4 and Housing Policy 4 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2007.

R 2. Notwithstanding the first reason for refusal the planning application a) fails to demonstrate that minimum visibility splays of 2 x 36m can be achieved from the application site onto the adjoining highway; and b) does not provide sufficient information regarding the means of surface water and foul sewage disposal from the application site."

3.8 Planning application 15/00636/A sought approval in principle for the erection of a residential dwelling with ancillary staff and office accommodation addressing siting and means of access. This was approved 28.08.2015.

3.9 Planning application 17/00910/B sought variation of condition 2 of PA 15/00636/A for the approval in principle for the erection of a dwelling, to extend the period of approval for a further 2 years. This was approved 19.10.2017.

3.10 Planning application 19/01061/B sought variation of condition 2 of PA 17/00910/B for the variation of condition 2 of PA 15/00636/A approval in principle for the erection of a dwelling, to extend the period of approval for a further 2 years. This was approved 27.11.2019.

3.11 Planning application 21/01435/B sought variation of condition 2 of PA 19/01061/B for the variation of condition 2 of PA 15/00636/A approval in principle for the erection of a dwelling, to extend the period of approval for a further 2 years. This was approved 16.03.2022.

4.0 PLANNING POLICY 4.1 The application site falls within the open countryside and is not zoned for any specific development in the Area Plan for the East 2020, whilst also falling within an Area of High Landscape Value.

4.2 The following policies from the 2016 Strategic Plan are considered pertinent in the assessment of this application;

Strategic Policy 2 Priority for new development to identified towns and villages 3 To respect the character of our towns and villages 5 Design and visual impact

Spatial Policy 5 Development only in countryside in accordance with General Policy 3

General Policy 2b,c,g General Development Considerations 3 Exceptions to development in the countryside

Environment Policy 1 Protection of the countryside 2 Areas of High Landscape Value

==== PAGE 7 ====

                                      22/00682/REM                                     Page  7  of  14

Housing Policy 4 Exceptions to allowing new housing in the countryside 14 Siting, size and design of replacement dwellings in the countryside

Transport Policy 4 Highways safety

7 Parking

Infrastructure Policy 5 Water conservation and management

4.5 Residential Design Guide (2021) This document provides advice on the design of new houses and extensions to existing property as well as how to assess the impact of such development on the living conditions of those in adjacent residential properties and sustainable methods of construction.

5.0 REPRESENTATIONS 5.1 Onchan District Commissioners - Recommend the application be approved, subject to the recommendations requested by the Ecosystems Policy Team. (26.07.22)

5.2 Highways Services - The proposal raises no significant road safety or highway network efficiency issues. Accordingly, Highway Services Development Control raises no objection to the proposal, subject to vehicular access arrangements to accord to Drawing No. GHIM02/P012, with the omission of the junction warning signs to Diagram 506.1. The Applicant is advised that a S109(A) Highway Agreement is needed after the grant of planning consent, where a Road Safety Audit will also need to be submitted. (20.07.22)

Highways note the amendments made to the below panning application and advise no further comments to add to those made 20/07/2022. (13.03.23)

5.3 Highways Drainage - Allowing surface water runoff onto a public highway would contravene Section 58 of the Highway Act 1986 and guidance contained in section 11.3.11 of the Manual for Manx Roads. Please provide confirmation of compliance with the above requirements. (17.02.23)

5.4 Ecosystems Policy Officer - Note that further surveys are required in respect to:

• Preliminary bat roost assessments and follow up surveys for buildings identified as having potential to support roosts.
• Inspection of bat roost potential of any mature trees due to be felled.
• Common Lizard survey.
• Breeding bird survey if plans extend to the cliffs in the vicinity of the site (i.e. roads and helipad).

A condition was attached to PA 21/01435/B, for this reserved matters application to be accompanied by a detailed survey of all existing trees on site within the development area together with a method statement for the protection of all existing trees on site which are to be retained. We cannot see that this has yet been provided and we also believe that an accurate landscaping plan should be provided prior to determination of this application. Because of the location of this application on an area of semi-natural habitat, we request that species native to the island are utilised in the landscaping. (15.07.22)

The Ecosystem Policy Team can confirm that the Manx Wildlife Trust's Preliminary Ecological Appraisal Report (PEAR), dated November 2021, their Protected Species Report: Bats, dated September 2022, and their Protected Species Report: Common Lizards, dated November 2022, are all in order and that a suitable level of assessment has been undertaken. The new dwelling is proposed for an extensive area of semi-natural habitat which is not zoned for residential

==== PAGE 8 ====

                                      22/00682/REM                                     Page  8  of  14

development in the area plan for the east (as far as we can see). The Manx Wildlife Trust identified a number of ecological features as constraints to the development of the site for which avoidance, mitigation and compensation measures are required.

Although the agent has confirmed that the plans for the site no longer include the building of a helipad, and updated site plans have been provided which reflect this change, we notice that the helipad is once again shown on the Landscape Masterplan dated 17/04/23 (Drawing No. 2023 P 04-D01). We have previously raised our concerns regarding the proposal for a helipad in the area, which relate to the proximity and potential negative impacts on sea cliffs with a seabird colony and which are recognised by BirdLife International as part of the Isle of Man Sea Cliffs Important Bird Area, though this is not a formal designation, and safety concerns regarding use of a helicopter close to this colony.

Additionally, we are concerned with some of the details on the landscape proposals. The Landscape Specification Notes on Planting plan 3 of 4 (Drawing no. 2023P04-D04) makes reference to the importation of topsoil and seed to create wildflower seed areas, and then 2 paragraphs are included about the creation and maintenance of coastal meadow areas. However, there is no other reference to these coastal meadows in any of the other documentation, in particular they are not shown on the Landscape Masterplan.

We do not agree with the creation of coastal meadow areas because there is already nice semi- natural grassland habitat on site which should be entirely retained and protected apart from where the house, formal ground and tree planting is to take place, and because this will require importation of wildflower seed from the UK, which often contain non-native species and sometimes invasive species. If the intention was to create the meadow areas in the areas proposed for lizard habitat management areas, then again this is not appropriate because the placement of topsoil and modification of the habitat will be detrimental to lizards. Apart from this, we are generally content with the areas proposed in the Landscape Masterplan for tree planting and lizard habitat management, but think the lizard management area could be extended further to the north and west.

Therefore, we request that updated landscaping proposals, removing reference to the creation of coastal meadow areas or a helipad, are submitted to Planning prior to determination of this application. If there are any other drawings which make reference to the creation of the helipad these should be updated and submitted to Planning prior to determination of the application also. The Ecosystem Policy Team also request that various conditions are secured on approval to ensure that there will be no net loss for biodiversity on site. (04.05.23)

The Ecosystem Policy Team can confirm that we are now content with the updated landscaping details contained in the Landscape Masterplan (Drg. No. 2023P04-D01, Revision: A, dated 17/04/23) and Planting Plan 3 of 4 (Drg. No 2023P04-D04 Revision: A, dated 17/04/23), in which all references to the creation of a helipad and coastal meadow areas have been removed. (09.05.23)

5.5 Forestry Officer - This proposal is highly likely to involve the removal of multiple trees in order to facilitate the new driveway. In order to properly assess this application, I request that additional arboricultural information is provided including: an arboricultural impact assessment; tree removal plan; tree protection plan for retained trees; and a detailed mitigation planting plan. A condition was attached to PA No 21/01435/B (of which this is a reserved matters application for) stating: The application for reserved matters must include a detailed survey of all existing trees on site within the development area together with a method statement for the protection of all existing trees on site which are to be retained, and thus the information requested above should already have at least been partially provided. (12.09.22)

I am concerned that the arboricultural impact assessment has under-estimated the amount of impact here, the area of vegetation to be removed has been shown as just that of

==== PAGE 9 ====

                                      22/00682/REM                                     Page  9  of  14

the final position of the driveway, however, working areas will likely be needed either side of the driveway, and, as displayed on the 'Access road' there will be a large 'retaining structure' on the embankment, vegetation removal will also be required in this section. The likely impact will therefore be significantly greater than that which is presented on the submitted plans.

That being said, vegetation cover at the site is extensive and, if the application is approved with the provision of a sufficient tree planting/ ecological mitigation plan as a condition, I would have no objection. (11.10.22)

6.0 ASSESSMENT 6.1 The principle of development has already been established through the previous grant of an Approval in Principle. The main issues to consider in the assessment of this planning application solely relate to reserved matters identified within the decision notice for the approval in principle, which include the following:

• Design, visual impact and landscaping (STP5, GP2, EP1, 2, HP14)
• Residential amenity (GP2, g, h)
• Highways and parking (TP4, 7)
• Other matters (RDG, EP22, CP7, 11 and IP5)

6.2 DESIGN, VISUAL IMPACT AND LANDSCAPING 6.2.1 The proposals relate to the replacement of non-residential buildings with a dwelling in an area not zoned for residential development in accordance with an adopted Area Plan. Whilst there is no policy within the Strategic Plan which specifically fits this particular form of development, it is considered that Housing Policy 14, relating to the design of replacement dwellings in the countryside, is of the most relevance.

6.2.2 Housing Policy 14 requires replacement dwellings in the countryside to not be substantially different to the existing in terms of siting and size, unless changes of siting and size would result in an overall environmental improvement. Likewise, the design of dwellings should be in accordance with the principles of Planning Circular 3/91, whilst not being greater that 50% of the external floor area of the original building. Exceptionally however, permission may be granted for buildings of innovative, modern design where this is of high quality and would not result in adverse visual impact; designs should incorporate the re-use of such stone and slate as are still in place on the site, and in general, new fabric should be finished to match the materials of the original building. Likewise, consideration may be given to proposals which result in a larger dwelling where this involves the replacement of an existing dwelling of poor form with one of more traditional character, or where, by its design or siting, there would be less visual impact.

6.2.3 In this instance, the proposed dwelling would significantly exceed a 50% uplift in floor area above the existing buildings present on the site. However, it is noteworthy that substantial areas of hardstanding within the site following previous demolition of much of the original built development remain, with development spread throughout a large portion of the wider site. Planning permission was originally granted in Principle on the basis that the proposals would amount to the redevelopment of previously developed land, the principle of which is deemed acceptable in accordance with General Policy 3. Moreover, whilst not formally approved, the indicative layout for the dwelling shown within the original permission was considered to be appropriate, with built development required to be located in the defined 'development areas' shown on the approved site plan. Indeed, the proposed development largely follows the footprint and siting of the original buildings and remaining areas of hardstanding.

6.2.4 The existing buildings still present on site are in a severely dilapidated condition with the site having long been redundant for its original use. Whilst the proposed dwelling is clearly not traditional in its appearance and in conformity with the design principles of 3/91, the principle of introducing a dwelling of an innovative, modern design is supported by HP14, provided this

==== PAGE 10 ====

                                      22/00682/REM                                     Page  10  of  14

would be of a high quality and not result in an adverse visual impact. Indeed, it is noted that the officer report for the latest Approval in Principle considered that:

"6.15 Early discussion with the applicant's agent, prior to the application being submitted, discussed the type/design of dwelling which was considered to be potentially most suitable for this site and potentially comply with planning policy. It was considered a more traditional design approach (i.e. Manx vernacular/Georgian) would be unsuitable for this site and would potential result in a dwelling being very apparent within the countryside. Accordingly, it was considered a more contemporary approach would be better suited which could be designed with the contours of the land - the site being on a hillside with potentially large amounts of glazing, natural roofing (sedum roof) and finished with dark materials could help to blend the property with the surrounding landscape. Following these discussions the applicants have chosen the more contemporary approach, in their indicative illustrations submitted with the application.

6.16 Whilst this application is in principle only and no detailed design of the dwelling has been submitted, the applicants within the design principles have indicated that any detailed development would ensure that a design that is of high quality reflecting Howstrakes location, and ensure the built form responds to the existing topography and land form. This would be undertaken by maintaining development at single storey level, progressively stepped into the landscape. The proposal would also maximise the reuse of existing cleared, graded and platformed land. Furthermore they indicate that to minimise the visual exposure of built form through terraced, stepped and variable building massing appropriately integrated with landform, topography and vegetation."

6.2.4 It is noteworthy that the detailed proposals put forward as part of this Reserved Matters application follow the abovementioned design principles which, whilst not formally approved at that time, were considered to be the most appropriate way forward for redeveloping the site.

6.2.5 With respect to the visual impact of the development upon the wider landscape and seascape, this consideration was, quite naturally, left largely open-ended with respect to the assessment of the Approval in Principle application, with the following commentary of note provided in the previous officer report:

"In this case it is to consider whether a single dwelling could be accommodated on the site, using the design principles indicated by the applicants, including appropriate well designed landscaping, which could all result in reducing the impact of the current situation on the landscape and the wider environment and result in improvements to the landscape and wider environment. It is considered this scheme presents the opportunity for the development of a bespoke dwelling incorporating a very high quality exemplar standard of design which the Planning Directorate would seek for any future detailed application, should the approval in principle application be approved."

6.2.6 The site forms a notably prominent location, with any development to be clearly visible within the context of seascape views to the east, together with more modest land based views to the north and south-west. The application is accompanied by a comprehensive Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment (LVIA) which, due to the topography of the site and existing vegetation, concludes that views of the development from publicly accessible location would be extremely limited. Indeed, the LVIA considers that views from outside of the site would typically be from close proximity and occasional, particularly within the context of King Edward Road and to the north of the site across Groudle Glen. Likewise, the report considers that due to the nature of views in the area and the scale of the proposals, the proposals will generally form a small proportion of views and in most cases will be incidental to wider views, particularly as mitigation planting matures over time. The highest level of effect is judged for receptors at sea resulting in a moderate, adverse effect. However, once beyond 0.5km the proposed development will form a small proportion of the views, where views are focused on the wider

==== PAGE 11 ====

                                      22/00682/REM                                     Page  11  of  14

seascape and the coastline as a whole. For each of the assessed receptors, by Year 15, effects are generally judged to be neutral, whereby any negative effects of the proposed development are balanced by the beneficial effects of the development.

6.2.7 The report further considers that, whilst the proposed development would clearly give rise to a significant amount of visual and landscape change within the site itself, the proposals are of a high quality which would bring a neglected site back into use. Moreover, the proposals seek to retain and augment existing landscape features, with additional mitigation by way of substantial tree planting further proposed that will serve to integrate the development into its surroundings.

6.2.8 Upon assessment of the scheme and its likely visual impact, officers are in general agreement with the findings and conclusions of the submitted LVIA. Due to the downward sloping nature of the site with substantial mature vegetation already in existence, built development already present within the site is only marginally visible upon passing within the context of King Edward Road. Views into the site are however currently of derelict buildings and hardstanding, which notably detract from the site's appearance. By contract, the proposed scheme, whilst resulting in additional built development, is considered to be of a very high quality which, when integrated with additional mitigation tree planting and the formal landscaping scheme, would positively enhance the site's character and appearance in the context of the immediate streetscene.

6.2.9 Similarly, longer distance views of the site from Groudle Glen and the closest section of the Raad Ny Foillan coastal path are also available. Again, whilst the proposed development would be partially visible within this context, views would be largely intermittent and fleeting. Longer term, the maturation of mitigation planting and landscape would likely further reduce the perception of the development from these particular vistas. In any case, the development is considered to be of a high quality and a statement piece of architecture which represents a significant improvement to the current situation.

6.2.10 The submitted LVIA has, correctly, identified that the development would pose the greater impact upon views to the east in the sea. At a greater distance, there is little doubt that the development upon entry to the island by ferry, for example, would be read within the context of wider development in Onchan and around the bay in Douglas. It is unlikely that the proposals would therefore appear unduly prominent in this wider context, with the eye likely to be drawn to development within Douglas and Onchan itself. Upon closer proximity, and as noted in the LVIA, the visual impact of the development would naturally appear more prominently on a parcel of land that, whilst developed, is largely derelict and overgrown. Again however, the high quality design of the proposals which successfully integrate with the site's topography, together with varied and comprehensive complementary landscaping, would ensure the proposals would not result in a negative visual impact. On the contrary, the proposals are considered likely to appear visually striking by introducing a greater degree of interest and articulation to this prominent parcel of land, as opposed to a detrimental visual impact upon the wider landscape.

6.2.11 In light of the above assessment, the proposals are considered to amount to a very high quality of design which successfully integrate with the site's topography, whilst being complemented by a comprehensive landscaping scheme including significant levels of mitigating tree planting which have been found acceptable by the Ecosystems Policy Team. Whilst the proposals notably amount to a significant uplift of floor area and footprint relative to the existing level of development on site, this is balanced against the quality of the design proposals and improvement of the site's biodiversity, together with giving rise to an overall visual improvement following removal of the existing derelict structures.

6.2.12 In this instance therefore, and whilst not completely applicable due to the absence of a current dwelling, the proposals are considered to comply with the general requirements applied

==== PAGE 12 ====

                                      22/00682/REM                                     Page  12  of  14

by Housing Policy 14. In particular, the development would deliver a high quality and visual striking dwelling that boasts strong eco-credentials, including a substantial improvement to the site's biodiversity, whilst bringing a long derelict site back into use.

6.3 RESIDENTIAL AMENITY 6.3.1 Due to the isolated nature of the site and substantial distance from other residential properties within the built-up area of Onchan to the west and Groudle Glen to the north; the proposed development would pose no material impact upon residential amenity. Likewise, the development would afford future occupants with a very a high standard of living, including a generous associated garden area. The proposals are therefore compliant with General Policy 2 (g) & (h) of the Strategic Plan.

6.4 HIGHWAYS AND PARKING 6.4.1 No objections have been raised by Highways Services with respect to the proposals, which would incorporate on-site parking provision for in excess of 10 parking, with clear space for vehicles to safely manoeuvre within the site. Likewise, visibility splays evidenced on the submitted site plan with respect onto the main road have already been approved at the Approval in Principal stage.

6.5 OTHER MATTERS 6.5.1 The proposed works comprise a single dwelling, and are not considered to pose any issues with respect to respect of criminal actively or spread of fire. The new dwelling would be served by a soakaway for surface water drainage and utilise a biodisc system for the disposal of foul sewerage, which are considered acceptable. Comments from Highways Drainage with respect to potential discharge of surface water onto the highway are noted. However, due to the site's sloping topography, this is not considered to present an issue in this instance. Matters relating to ecology and arboriculture are considered to be acceptable, as noted by the latest responses from the relevant consultees, subject to the attachment of further conditions to any subsequent approval.

7.0 CONCLUSION 7.1 The proposed development is considered to constitute a high standard of design which would add a greater degree of visual interest in the context of the immediate landscape and seascape, whilst improving biodiversity across the site and bringing a neglected, redundant site back into use. The proposals would afford future occupants a very high standard of living, without detriment to the amenities of surrounding residential properties, nor give rise to a material impact upon the safety and convenience of the local highway network. The proposals are therefore considered to be compliant with Strategic Policy 5, General Policies 2 and 3, Environment Policies 1 and 2, and Housing Policy 14 of the Strategic Plan (2016), and recommended for approval.

8.0 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); (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.

==== PAGE 13 ====

                                      22/00682/REM                                     Page  13  of  14

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.

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 Planning Committee in accordance with the authority afforded to the it by the appropriate DEFA Delegation and that in making this decision the Committee has agreed the recommendation in relation to who should be afforded Interested Person Status.

Decision Made : Permitted Committee Meeting Date: 22.05.2023

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).

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 ====

                                      22/00682/REM                                     Page  14  of  14

PLANNING COMMITTEE DECISION 22.05.2023

Application No 22/00682/REM Applicant Lee Raybould Proposal Reserved Matters application to PA No 21/01435/B for the erection of a dwelling and associated ancillary accommodation Site Address Former Howstrake Holiday Camp King Edward Road Onchan Isle Of Man IM3 2JP Planning Officer Mr Toby Cowell Presenting Officer Mr Chris Balmer Addendum to the Officer Report

Conditions added to update the recommendation

C 13. Prior to the commencement of the development hereby approved, details shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by the Department a scheme which sets out the roadside boundary details (not timber fencing) along the King Edward Road. This approved scheme shall be completed in full prior to the occupation of the dwelling and retained thereafter.

Reason; In the interest of the visual amenities of the area.

C14. Prior to the commencement of the development hereby approved, details shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by the Department a scheme which sets out the non- reflective glazing to all glazing to the eastern elevation of the dwelling. This approved scheme shall be completed in full prior to the occupation of the dwelling and retained thereafter.

Reason; In the interest of the visual amenities of the area.