Loading document...
==== PAGE 1 ====
24/00082/B Page 1 of 13
PLANNING OFFICER REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
Application No. : 24/00082/B Applicant : Dandara Homes Limited Proposal : Erection of thirty one terraced and semi-detached dwellings on the site of previously approved twenty one detached, terraced and semi-detached dwellings Site Address : 1 To 17 Karran Close And 27 To 30 Taggart Close Reayrt Mie Ballasalla IM9 2BP
Planning Officer: Hamish Laird Photo Taken : 28.02.2024 Site Visit : 28.02.2024 Expected Decision Level : Planning Committee
Recommendation
Recommended Decision:
Refused Date of Recommendation: 10.05.2024 __
Reasons for Refusal
R : Reasons for Refusal O : Notes attached to reasons
R 1. The proposed development is unacceptable because it would result in the addition of a further 10 dwellings, up from 21 to 31, on the same site area, via the employment of smaller house types. This would give rise to a cramped appearance and a harder, less convivial character with an emphasis on car parking provision in rows to the front of dwellings, resulting in a vehicle dominated development that would have a harmful impact upon the visual amenity of the streetscene. This would give rise to an unacceptably poor living environment and low level of residential amenity for the occupants of these, and neighbouring properties. The application fails specifically, because:
o Plot B105 - the dwelling would have a cramped appearance on the plot with poorly related amenity space especially to the rear of the dwelling. The rear garden area scales at between 5m and 10m in depth. The garden area to side of garage is poorly related to the dwelling and would be wasted space with minimal amenity value. The dwelling would have a poor relationship with the rear aspects of dwellings to the north at Plots B101 and B102, which would be unacceptably harmful to the outlook from these adjoining properties, and; o Plot B113 - the siting of this proposed dwelling raises similar concerns to those expressed in relation to plot B105. Cramped appearance on the plot, poorly related amenity space especially to the rear of the dwelling - rear garden area scales at between 5m and 10m in depth. The garden area to side of garage is poorly related to the dwelling and would be wasted space with minimal amenity value. The dwelling would have a poor relationship with the rear aspects of the dwellings to the north at Plots B95 and B96 - especially when combined with the siting and relationship of the pair of dwellings at B114 and B115. The B115 dwelling
==== PAGE 2 ====
24/00082/B Page 2 of 13
will appear overbearing in relation to the outlook from the rear of B113; and, would overshadow the rear garden area of Plot B113. The outlook from the front of B114 will appear oppressive owing to the extent of the forward projection of the Plot B113 dwelling; o Plot B120 - this dwelling is sited too close to the site boundary offering a hard edge to the Farmhouse and its grounds to the south. It would also project forward of the attached dwelling at Plot B119 and would appear overbearing in relation to the outlook from the front of B119 and would overshadow its front garden area; o With the exception of the dwellings at Plots B105 and B106, B111-B113; and, Plots B88
This is contrary to the provisions of Policies ST1, ST3, ST5, GEN2, and ENV42 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016.
__
Interested Person Status - Additional Persons
It is recommended that the owners/occupiers of none of the following properties should not be given Interested Person Status as they are considered not to meet the requirement of being located within 20.0m of the site boundary; and, as such do not have sufficient interest in the subject matter of the application to take part in any subsequent proceedings mentioned in Article 4.2:
Derbyhaven Residents' Society Limited, 6 Chapel Court, Derbyhaven, IM9 1UD; 47 Victoria Road, Douglas; 26 Meadow Court, Ballasalla, Isle of Man;
The above persons, therefore, do not satisfy all of the requirements of paragraph 2 of the Department's Operational Policy on Interested Person Status (July 2021).
It is recommended that the following Government Departments should be given Interested Person Status on the basis that they have made written submissions that relate to planning considerations: DOI - Estates and Housing Team; __
Officer’s Report
THE PLANNING APPLICATION IS BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMITTEE BECAUSE A SECTION 13 LEGAL AGREEMENT (DEED OF VARIATION) IS REQUIRED
1.0 THE SITE 1.1 The application relates to the second phase of a three part development for the provision of residential accommodation and a link (Ballasalla) Bypass from Balthane Corner to Glashen Hill in Ballasalla.
1.2 This application was previously considered by the Planning Committee under:
==== PAGE 3 ====
24/00082/B Page 3 of 13
Ref: 19/00137/B - Residential development comprised of 282 dwellings, associated highway and drainage infrastructure and public open space, and the construction of a new by-pass road between Douglas Road and the rear of Railway Terrace to include a new roundabout on Douglas Road and a bridge over the IOM Steam Railway line; and,
22/00139/B - Erection of 107 dwellings (amendment to dwelling types approved under PA 19/00137/B) (see 4.0 planning history) and approved with a number of conditions and subject to a legal agreement for 282 dwellings (phase 1 and 2)
1.3 Subsequently PA Ref: 23/00451/B - for the "Erection of 13 terraced & semi-detached dwellings on the site of 9 previously approved detached & semi-detached dwellings on no.s 19 to 23 & 30 to 33 Faragher Road, and amendments to rear plot boundaries and adjacent footpath, bin collection point & parking spaces for no.s 40 & 41 Faragher Road" was approved by the Planning Committee at its 24/7/23 Meeting, subject to a Revision to the Original S13 Agreement to secure a financial contribution in lieu of on-site Affordable Housing provision with the Decision Notice being issued on 7/12/23.
1.4 Part of the 2019 approval has been implemented (phase 1) to the north of the railway line has been built with many of the dwelling houses sold and now occupied. Also built is the road network and part of the bypass is already under construction and the bridge over the Steam railway underway and functioning. The housing for Phase 2 has not started but the infrastructure for the bypass has been completed and engineering works have begun on site.
1.5 The Isle of Man Steam Railway runs in a shallow cutting to the north of the site boundary. In addition, residential development, with some forming part of Phase 1 and more established dwellings located in Ballabridson lie on the northern side of the railway.
2.0 THE PROPOSAL 2.1 This application seeks permission to alter the house types on certain plots within the area defined as phase 2, "Reayrt Mie", essentially to provide an updated house designs to reflect current demand and availability of building materials. In so doing, it involves the erection of thirty one terraced and semi-detached dwellings on the site of the previously approved twenty one detached, terraced and semi-detached dwellings. The site location is at 1 To 17 Karran Close and 27 To 30 Taggart Close, Reayrt Mie, Ballasalla.
2.2 In a covering letter accompanying the application, the applicant advises:
"Phase 2 of the residential development at Reayrt Mie, Ballasalla, was initially approved under PA 19/00137/B and amended under PA 22/00139/B & 23/00451/B. The 21 dwellings approved within the area which forms the subject of this planning application are predominantly detached, along with two short terraces and a pair of semi-detached dwellings. Overall, Phase 2 includes a range of dwelling types, with demand for terraced and semi-detached houses proving to be the strongest - therefore in order to help meet housing demand it is now proposed to change the dwelling types within the application site to be predominantly terraced units, along with two pairs of semi-detached dwellings (no. 30 Taggart Close is included in the application because of the changes to pot boundaries, rather than the dwelling itself). Needless to say an increase in the number of smaller units within the application site results in a total number of dwellings, in this instance changing from 21 to 31. Whilst demand for 4-be detached dwellings is not as strong as anticipated when PA19/00317/B was prepared there will still be those house types available on other plots within Phase 2.
Phase 2 includes a range of dwelling types, with demand for terraced and semi-detached houses proving to be the strongest - the substitution of 5 detached dwellings (no.s 19 to 23) with 8 no. 3-bed terraced and semi-detached houses will therefore help to meet housing demand. Whilst demand for 4-bed detached dwellings is not as strong as anticipated when PA
==== PAGE 4 ====
24/00082/B Page 4 of 13
19/00137/B was prepared there will still be those house types available on other plots within Phase 2.
The dwelling types now proposed will be finished in similar materials to those previously approved and will not result in adverse change to the street scene or to the character of the development overall. Each dwelling will be provided with 2 off-street parking spaces, and 3 of the dwellings will also have garages. A revised affordable housing contribution will be agreed with the Department and DoI Housing Division. The Reayrt Mie development includes large areas of Public Open Space which exceed the overall amount required under the provision of the IoMSOP. The following table is taken from the Planning Statement which supported the application for Phase 3 of the development (PA21/01262/B):"
OPEN SPACE TOTALS (SQM) REQUIRED
PROVIDED Phases 1 and 2
24,800
34,833 Phase 3
9,472
11,297 OVERALL DEVELOPMENT
34,272 46,130
Using the criteria set down in the IoMSOP the changes now proposed will result in an increase of 15 residents (from 63 to 78), and it can clearly be seen form the table above that this will not result in insufficient open space provision within the overall development."
2.3 It is noted that the proposed house types are all on previously approved 'plots' (2019 approval) and there are no proposed alterations to the infrastructure or landscaping over what was previously approved.
2.4 This proposal for 31 dwellings would be on the site of the previously approved 21 dwellings. The previous PA19/00137/B approval for the site proposed the following House Types: site of the previously approved 5 detached dwellings at Plot Nos. B29, B30, B31, B32 and B33, would now become B29a, B29b, B29c, B30, B31, B32, B33a and B33b and would comprise the Ash3 House Type with Ash 3G - (G-denotes Garage) on plots B29a, B30 and B33b. They would face onto a new road within the development, whilst their rear aspects would face north backing onto the Isle of Man Steam Railway which runs adjacent to the sites northern boundary. This boundary is marked by hedging.
2.4 Second, the 4 No. Ash type, semi-detached dwellings proposed for Plots B40, B41, B42 and B43, would be substituted by 'Birch' type dwellings in a terrace of 5 units. These would be Plot B40 = Birch 3; B41 = Birch 2; B42 = Birch 2; B43a = Birch 2; and, Plot B43b would be a Birch 3 dwelling. The differences between the dwellings are: Birch 2 has 2-beds, whilst Birch 3 has 3-beds.
2.5 The final element of these proposals would be the substitution of the 2 No. car parking spaces for the Plot B51 dwelling, located to the rear of the dwelling being used instead as a Bin Store/collection point of the B44 - B51 dwellings which would be accessible from the rear pedestrian passageway serving the se dwellings, whilst the car parking spaces for B51 would be located to the south-west on the other side of the turning head in this head of cul-de-sac location.
3.0 PLANNING POLICY The land is designated as Proposed Residential, Industrial, Public Open Space, Community facility on Map 4 (Ballasalla) of the Area Plan for the South. The land is also linked to the Written Statement with Notation No.3. The application site is not within a Conservation area, or within an identified area as being at flood risk.
3.1 A previously prepared Development Brief (see PA19/00137/B) for this section of land at para 4.29, identifies the possible uses of the land and that considerations should be given to
==== PAGE 5 ====
24/00082/B Page 5 of 13
the Ballasalla bypass route to the corner of Balthane, the junction details, potential site of archaeological significance, drainage masterplan, and protection to prevent any contamination of the Glashen Stream.
3.2 The following policies from the 2016 Strategic Plan are considered pertinent in the assessment of this application:
Strategic Policy 1 Efficient use of land and resources 2 Priority for new development to identified towns and villages 3 To respect the character of our towns and villages 4 Protection of built heritage and landscape conservation 5 Design and visual impact 10 Sustainable transport 11 Housing Needs
Spatial Policy 3 Identifies those Service Villages 5 Building in defined settlements or GP3
General Policy 2 General Development Considerations
Environment Policy 4 Wildlife and Nature Conservation 42 Respect the local character and identity
Housing Policy 1 General need for additional housing from 2011 -2026 2 Supply of designated housing land available 3 Defined housing provision per area 4 Location of new housing and exceptions 5 Provisions for 25% affordable Housing
Business Policy 10 Retails in designated areas
Recreational Policy 3 Requirement for Landscaped amenity areas 4 Requirement for Public open space 5 Links to the countryside
Community Policy 1 Community provisions and neighbourhood centres 2 Accessibility of community facilities 10 Fire Fighting provisions
Transport Policy 1 proximity to existing public transportation services 2 layouts to link to existing systems 3 No impact or compromise upon existing rail routes 4 Highway Safety 6 Equal weight for vehicles and pedestrians 7 Parking Provisions
Infrastructure Policy
==== PAGE 6 ====
24/00082/B Page 6 of 13
1 Development and Connectivity to IRIS 2 Details of connectivity to IRIS
Energy Policy 5 Energy Efficiency
3.4 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.
4.0 PLANNING HISTORY 4.1 19/00137/B - Residential development comprised of 282 dwellings, associated highway and drainage infrastructure and public open space, and the construction of a new by-pass road between Douglas Road and the rear of Railway Terrace to include a new roundabout on Douglas Road and a bridge over the IOM Steam Railway line. Fields 434764, 434116, 432719, 432607, 432608, 434113, 434114, 434115, 434089, 434090, And 434091 Douglas Road Ballasalla. APPROVED subject to a S.13 legal agreement with 19 Conditions by Planning Committee on 15/07/2019. Most of these conditions relate to the bypass and phase 1 of the development and highways infrastructure. Approved.
4.2 22/00139/B - Erection of 107 dwellings (amendment to dwelling types approved under PA 19/00137/B) (see 4.0 planning history) and approved with a number of conditions and subject to a legal agreement for 282 dwellings (phase 1 and 2)
4.3 21/01262/B - Third phase of development consisting of 128 dwellings, a neighbourhood centre with children's nursery and local shop units, and public open space including a children's playground - Field 434091 & Parts Of Fields 435106 (formerly 432719), 434974 (formerly 434089) And 434090 Adjacent To Railway Terrace, Ballasalla. APPROVED subject to a legal agreement with 14 conditions. Approved
4.4 20/00124/MCH - Minor changes application for PA 19/00137/B involving alterations, traffic calming features, new footpath link and pedestrian link. Field 434764, Douglas Road, Ballasalla. Approved.
5.0 REPRESENTATIONS (in brief - full reps can be read online) 5.1 Malew Commissioners (3/5/23) raises 'no objections'.
5.2 DoI Highways (9/2/24) (comments): - Highways Comments: "The applicant has had pre-app discussions with Highway Services HDC to discuss and amend the site layout design for the intensification of dwellings on the site. The applicant was asked to retain the PROW/active travel route through the site as was previously approved on the site, and to meet Manual for Manx Road (MfMR) standards on street layout, parking and vehicle manoeuvrability.
The layout proposed meets MfMR standards on shared street dimensions, provides adequate parking provision for each dwelling, allows large vehicles to safely manoeuvre through the site, and retains a PROW/active travel route through the site as was previously approved.
Additionally, the applicant should provide within the development EV charging points (passive) for each dwelling with a driveway and allocated spaces in front of dwellings without driveways as per MfMR guidelines - this should be conditioned on permission.
Therefore, taking into account of the above, Highway Services HDC do not oppose (DNOC) the application subject to conditions as set out below.
==== PAGE 7 ====
24/00082/B Page 7 of 13
Planning Conditions: o Site access and layout to: o 01 - Site Layout
o A plan for the TRO parking bays and restrictions on the development site must be submitted and agreed with the planning authority and implemented before first occupation of the site and retained for the lifetime of the development.
o Boundary frontages onto the proposed adopted highway for all dwellings must be no more than 600mm in height and pedestrian inter-visibility for driveways onto path / public road connections of 2 x 2m must be retained without obstructions greater than 600mm in height for the lifetime of the development.
o Gradients: No residential driveways shall exceed gradients of 15% for the first 5.0m. No pedestrian or cycle paths shall exceed gradients of 7%.
o Provision of surfacing for parking and movement areas: Prior to the first occupation of the development, private drives, driveways and associated parking areas, non-residential hardstanding and associated parking areas must be properly consolidated and hard surfaced and drained and maintained in good working order.
o Completion of streets: Before any new proposed buildings on the site are first occupied the roads and footways shall be constructed to an appropriate level from the new buildings to the adjoining street and public highway - to ensure streets are completed prior to occupation and satisfactory development of the site. o Details of secure covered cycle parking for non-garaged dwelling units to accommodate one space per bedroom with details required for approval and provided before first occupation.
o Construction Traffic Management Plan - details required for approval.
o Details of EV charging points to be submitted for approval and implemented before first occupation of the site. Agreements:
o S4 highway agreement required for roads adoption will need
o S13 agreement may need to be altered.
Recommendation: DNOC Code definition: DNOC - Do not oppose subject to condition"
5.3 DoI - Estates and Housing (9/2/24) comments:
"We refer to the aforementioned planning application, and we can confirm that we have looked at the detail of the application and have considered the provision of a 25% Affordable Housing requirement. We have also held preliminary discussions with the applicant.
Current data drawn from Housing Division records for the South of the Island indicates that there are 121 persons on the general public sector waiting list for affordable housing to rent in the South.
There are also 26 persons on the First-time Buyers Register seeking to purchase a first home in the South of the Island. Of this number, 18 are on the Active Purchaser List seeking to purchase a home within the next 12 months. This figure is not indicative of likely final purchases as the ability to progress to completion would depend upon personal circumstances and mortgage ability at point of allocation.
==== PAGE 8 ====
24/00082/B Page 8 of 13
The department would request that consideration be given by the Planning Committee to include a requirement, in respect of any approval granted for this site, for the applicant to enter into a Section 13 Agreement with the Department to provide affordable housing, in this case based upon the calculation of 25% of the ten additional units approved within the application, this would be 2.5 affordable dwellings comprising 2 x 2Bed affordable dwellings and a Commuted Sum in lieu of 0.50 of an affordable unit.
Thank you for giving us the opportunity to comment on the proposal."
5.4 DEFA Ecosystems Policy Team (22/4/24) comments: The Ecosystem Policy Team are glad to see that an Ecological Plan for bat and bird boxes (Drawing no. Balla2_50) has been provided with this application. We are content with the number and type of boxes proposed. However, we would like to request some amendments to the locations, so that the bat boxes are located closer to habitat features and bird boxes are not facing south (birds can overheat in south facing nest boxes). Therefore we would like to request that sparrow nest boxes 1 and 2 are moved to northerly elevations and then bat boxes 1 and 2 can be moved into these vacated locations. We would content for these details to be provided prior to determination, or for a condition to be secured for an updated bat and bird box plan to be provided within the first year following commencement of development.
We can confirm that we are content with the details in the proposed landscape plan (Drawing No. Balla2_30) and request that this is secured via a condition, as well as the standard replanting condition for the replacement of any tree or shrub which dies or becomes damaged within 5 years from the date of planting.
The south eastern boundary of this area contains a number of trees which are to be retained, these will need to be protected from construction activities and therefore we request that a condition is secured for no works to commence unless a tree protection plan, containing details of protective fencing, construction exclusion areas and root protection areas, has been provided to the Department and approved in writing. The development must then be undertaken in full accordance with this plan.
As per the previous approvals for this site (PA 19/00137/B and 22/00139/B), the following condition for the protection of biodiversity should be secured again: Any work including site clearance or soil stripping, shall be undertaken in accordance with the approved Precautionary Working Method Statement (PWMS) with Reasonable Avoidance Measures (RAMS) for lizards, frogs and breeding birds, as previously approved under Condition 15 of PA19/00137/B and undertaken in accordance with those details.
Reason: to ensure that the development complies with Environment Policy 4.
Lastly we request that a condition is secured for no works to commence unless a plan detailing the measures to prevent topsoil, subsoil, overburden or silt and any pollutants or particulates arising therefrom, from washing into the watercourses along with any runoff waters from the site, and the methods employed to control such run-off, has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Department. Such measures shall be put in place, retained and maintained for the lifetime of the construction period of the development.
Reason: For the protection of watercourses and the downstream Langness Marine Nature Reserve"
5.5 Three letters of representation from neighbours/third parties have been received in connection with the application. All raise objection to the proposed development. Concerns raised are:
==== PAGE 9 ====
24/00082/B Page 9 of 13
"Live within the village adding additional housing creates more pressure on facilities that are already stressed and not meeting historical number tenants let alone an increase in numbers Relationship to site: Close to the site" (please elaborate) 26 Meadow Court, Ballasalla.
47 Victoria Road, Douglas. "As Sustainability consultants with Global links to similar groups we have been advocating for over twenty years for the Island to improve the standard of construction. This first major project since the introduction of legislation banning the use of fossil fuel heating systems while complying with the minimum level of current building control standards fails to address the critical needs to improve construction formats to mitigate the effects of climate change.
The developer makes clear in his Energy Impact Statement that he is conversant with the European accepted standards for energy efficient new builds yet cynically rejects them in what can only be construed as a desire to maximise both build density on the site and potential profit. MVHR is the most critical element of Sustainable new build and the failure of the developer to incorporate this into the project with continued reliance on some unstated level of air tightness and natural ventilation condemns the future occupants of these units to both poor internal air quality and significant loss of expensive thermal energy from the over large heat pumps required to meet the demands of naturally ventilated units. Our project at Clarecourt Gardens Victoria Road Douglas proved conclusively that units can be built to Passive House standard quickly and within current construction budgets yet little interest has been shown by the Islands developers or IOMG.
This project proves conclusively that IOMG must legislate for the necessary standards to bring us in line with countries like Germany and Sweden if the Island is to achieve its Carbon reduction goals. Our Swedish partner the architect and physicist Hans Eek recently completed the first units in the world to exceed Carbon Neutral and is available to continue advising the IOMG as he did during his visit of 2009 as a direct result of which the Janet’s Corner passive houses were built. We must reject this scheme. Relationship to site: Special Interest Group"
Derbyhaven Residents' Society Limited, 6 Chapel Court, Derbyhaven, IM9 1UD
Kindly note that the Derbyhaven Residents' Society (DRS) object to the above-mentioned planning application for the following reasons:
In this regard, it is useful to briefly set out some of the history of the ongoing silt problem as well as the correspondence to date:
a. A large amount of silt discharge was first reported at the end of 2020 and beginning of 2021. This was brought to the attention of both DEFA and Malew Commissioners at the time. A copy of DRS's emails dated 19 January 2021 and 18 May 2021, together with Elizabeth Charter's email dated 20 January 2021 are attached hereto as "A", "B" and "C" respectively.
b. On 7 and 17 July 2023, DRS made submissions to the Planning Department in relation to Dandara's planning application 23/00168/B for the construction of 45 industrial units at Balthane, DRS concerns being largely centred around the impact of the proposed development on the water quality of the Ronaldsburn. A copy of this correspondence is attached as "D" and "E" respectively.
c. On 11 July 2023 DRS dispatched correspondence to the EPU raising concerns of the discharges into the Derbyhaven Bay. A copy of this correspondence is attached hereto as "F".
==== PAGE 10 ====
24/00082/B Page 10 of 13
d. DRS received a reply from the EPU on 12 July 2023 stating that the EPU would do a site inspection. A copy of this correspondence is attached hereto as "G".
e. That there is an ongoing problem with the silt discharge in Derbyhaven Bay was highlighted by Manx National Heritage on 14 July 2023 in their consultation document regarding the erection of 45 Industrial Units in Balthane. A copy of this document is attached hereto as "H".
f. Again, on 10 October 2023 DRS reported silt in the watercourse to the EPU, the EPU responded on even date with feedback and raised that should there be silt DRS need to report it promptly. This correspondence is attached hereto as "I".
g. On 19 and 20 October 2023 and after rainfall, there was again silt in the watercourse, and this was reported immediately and marked as high importance. This was only responded to on 27 October 2023 where a Ms Bridgens provided us with feedback. A copy of this correspondence is marked as "J".
h. On 31 October 2023 DRS asked follow-up questions to regarding the mitigation and monitoring procedures. A copy of this email is attached hereto as "K".
i. A reply to this email was received on 7 November 2023 from. A copy of this correspondence is marked as "L".
j. A consultation was then held between DRS and Jason Moorhouse MHK where the silt issue was raised with him. Mr Moorhouse then raised this matter with Claire Barber, MHK for DEFA. A copy of such correspondence and the reply from the EPU is attached hereto as "M".
k. DRS then replied to this correspondence and raised ongoing concerns and queries regarding inter alia the nomenclature of the watercourses. A copy of this correspondence (sans annexures) is attached hereto as "N".
l. No response has been received to date regarding the concerns and queries.
m. On 7 February 2024 there was again silt streaming into the Derbyhaven Bay. This was raised with the EPU once again. A copy of the correspondence and annexures is attached hereto as "O".
n. The EPU acknowledged receipt of the complaint, but no further feedback has been received. Such acknowledgment is attached as "P" hereto.
From the above and the annexures attached hereto it can be seen that DRS have ongoing concerns and queries regarding the level of silt concentrations in the watercourses as well as the lack of suitable preventative measures being used by the Developer. The silt in the Bay occurred as recently as the evening of 28 February 2024. Further, Redacted 5 we still do not have clarity as to where the water sampling takes place and / or the revision of the Inland Water map to include the Ronaldsburn. This is the principal water course in the area and the one that is most likely to be impacted by poor water quality as a result of discharges from Reayrt Mie and in turn, may have an adverse impact on the Langness, Derbyhaven and Sandwick ASSI.
DRS therefore urge the Planning Committee to defer the decision on this application until such time as the issue of the silt has been adequately addressed and resolved.
==== PAGE 11 ====
24/00082/B Page 11 of 13
" In granting planning permission on land previously zoned for residential development or now considered suitable for residential development or in predominantly residential areas the Department will normally require that (at least) 25% of provision should be made up of affordable housing (or a commuted sum be paid as an equivalent contribution to affordable housing elsewhere on the Island) . This policy will apply to developments of 8 dwellings or more."
DRS query the lack of affordable homes in this development, whether 25% of these homes have been allocated towards affordable housing and whether the policy is being implemented within the development as a whole, having special regard to the Island-wide problem of a lack of affordable housing as well as the drive to encourage young professional families to relocate to the Isle of Man."
6.0 ASSESSMENT 6.1 The proposal is relatively straightforward and has been submitted to reflect market demand for housing types that would see a smaller, different style of property on the same plots as previously approved for larger, dwellings comprising 12 detached units; 6 semi- detached units; and, 3 terraced units. The current proposal would provide 21 terraced units in 2 terraces of 4 units; 5 terraces of 3 units; 2 pairs of semi-detached units; 1 x separate semi- detached unit (attached to a dwelling off-site); and, 3 units at plots B113 to B115 comprising a pair of semis and a linked unit (effectively an offset terrace of 3 units). The overall design of the dwellings would be reflective of what has previously been approved and used in phases 1 and 3 of the proposal and the choice of materials would be reflective of this also.
6.2 The principle of the proposal is accepted given the sites planning history, however, the appearance and character of this part of the development would change substantially compared with the more spacious layout previously approved by the 19/00317/B permission. The addition of 10 dwellings, up from 21 to 31 on the same site area, and the employment of smaller house types, would give rise to a cramped appearance and a harder, less convivial character with an emphasis on car parking provision in rows to the front of dwellings, resulting in a vehicle dominated development that would have a harmful impact upon the visual amenity of the streetscene and is considered to be unacceptable. Specific concerns are:
o Plot B105 - cramped appearance on the plot, poorly related amenity space especially to the rear of the dwelling - rear garden area scales at between 5m and 10m in depth. Garden area to side of garage is wasted space. Poor relationship with the rear aspects of dwelling to the north at Plots B101 and B102 and; o Plot B113 - similar concerns to plot B105. Cramped appearance on the plot, poorly related amenity space especially to the rear of the dwelling - rear garden area scales at between 5m and 10m in depth. Garden area to side of garage is wasted space. Poor relationship with the rear aspects of dwelling to the north at Plots B95 and B96 - especially when combined with siting and relationship of the pair of dwellings at B114 and B115. The B115 dwelling will appear overbearing in relation to the outlook from the rear of B113 and overshadow the rear garden of Plot B113. The outlook from the front of B114 will appear oppressive owing to the extent of the forward projection of the Plot B114 dwelling; o Plot B120 - this dwelling is sited too close to the site boundary offering a hard edge to the Farmhouse and its grounds to the south. It would also project forward of the attached dwelling at Plot B119 and would appear overbearing in relation to the outlook from the front of B119 and would overshadow its front garden area; o All the parking is out front - only 2 of the Larch dwellings have garages at plots B105 and B113, the other 29 units have dedicated parking spaces. This would result in a vehicle dominated development that would have a harmful impact upon the visual amenity of the streetscene; o In particular, the parking spaces serving Plots B109 to B120 are located - 7 each side - directly opposite each other in a cul-de-sac. This creates a very poor, vehicle dominated
==== PAGE 12 ====
24/00082/B Page 12 of 13
environment - overall the revised layout is dominated by parking provision resulting in a poor living environment for the occupants of all these dwellings.
6.3 There are no outstanding issues raised with any drainage, flooding or highway safety aspects of the proposal. No objections have been raised by the ecosystems Policy Team subject to conditions being imposed in the event of an approval being granted. This proposal would not alter the affordable housing provision or open space requirement already approved.
Affordable Housing 6.4 The previously accepted S.13 was slightly updated to ensure that the previously accepted affordable housing of 20 dwellings on site with a commuted sum of £23,500 per unit paid in lieu of the remaining 50.5 units and £11,750.00 for half a unit of affordable housing, was secured. However, the sum payable in lieu of an AH unit has increased since April 2023, and is now charged at £40,000.00 per equivalent AH unit. The overall increase is for ten houses house above what was previously approved. This would alter the overall provision of houses and the requirement for affordable housing under Policy HP5. The proposal offers 2 No. additional Affordable Housing Units and 0.5 of an AH unit secured as a commuted sum, which in this case would equate to £20,000.00.
6.5 In addition to the above, this application is proposing 10 additional housing units as well as a change of house types. This application would be giving a fresh approval for these parts of the site. Therefore a Deed of variation of the original Section 13 Legal Agreement would need to be undertaken.
6.6 With regard to the affordable housing and the increase of ten additional dwellings on site, this could be addressed through a Deed of Variation / an amendment to the S.13 legal agreement from the 2019 (original) application. Essentially based on that signed agreement, 2 AH units would be provided and a commuted sum of £20,000.00 would be payable, in this instance, to the Public Estates & Housing Division, and would be compliant with Housing Policy 5 which required 25% of affordable housing.
6.8 Whilst the proposals would offer 2 additional AH units and a commuted sum of £20,000.00 which would make the proposal Policy H5 compliant, this does not outweigh the concerns expressed above relating to siting, layout, design, density and neighbour amenity concerns.
7.0 CONCLUSION 7.1 It is considered that the 24/00082/B application would result in an overly cramped layout, and if developed as now proposed, would result in quite a different form of development to that previously approved by the 19/00317/B permission. When taken in conjunction with the 23/00451/B permission which added an additional 4 dwellings by making the units smaller (up from 9 units to 13) at Plots B26 - B39 to the north, all bounding the railway, with underlying concerns that Dandara will keep coming back to add more units onto the site and overall it would be very different form of development to that which was originally approved.
7.2 As such, it is recommended that the planning application be refused for the reasons given above.
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;
==== PAGE 13 ====
24/00082/B Page 13 of 13
(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.
8.3 The Department of Environment Food and Agriculture is responsible for the determination of planning applications. As a result, where officers within the Department make comments in a professional capacity they cannot be given Interested Person Status. __
I confirm that this decision has been made by the Planning Committee in accordance with the authority afforded to that body 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 : Refused Committee Meeting Date: 20.05.2024
Signed : H LAIRD 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.
Copyright in submitted documents remains with their authors. Request removal