Loading document...
==== PAGE 1 ====
24/91339/B Page 1 of 10
PLANNING OFFICER REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Application No. : 24/91339/B Applicant : PNJ Properties Limited Proposal : Construction of 3 No. dwellings with associated car parking Site Address : Former Manx Motor Museum Main Road Glen Vine Isle Of Man IM4 4BG
Planning Officer: Russell Williams Photo Taken : Site Visit : Expected Decision Level : Officer Delegation
Recommendation
Recommended Decision:
Refused Date of Recommendation: 19.02.2025 __
Reasons for Refusal
R : Reasons for Refusal O : Notes attached to reasons
R 1. The combined effect of the 1.5 storey building height, inclusion of dormer windows, canopy porches and lack of symmetry in the fenestration arrangement creates a visually poor development that fails to reinforce local character and distinctiveness. The general appearance of the proposed development will detract from the character and appearance of the street scene within the settlement. The proposals represent poor design and conflict with Strategic Policy 5, General Policy 2, Environment Policy 42 and the Residential Design Guide.
R 2. The erection of 3 dwellinghouses on the site represents a cramped form of development, with limited private amenity space and an unsuitable relationship with the adjoining garage building, the effect of which would be the creation of poor living conditions for future residents due to the lack of natural daylight and outlook to habitable rooms and private amenity space. The proposals therefore conflict with General Policy 2 (h).
__
Right to Appeal
It is recommended that the following organisations should NOT be given the Right to Appeal:
DOI Highways: No objection
DOI Highway Drainage No objection
DOI Flood Risk Management: No objection
==== PAGE 2 ====
24/91339/B Page 2 of 10
Ecosystem Policy Team: Objection addressed by refusal decision
Marown Parish Commissioners: Objection addressed by refusal decision __
Officer’s Report
1.0 THE SITE 1.1 The application site is located immediately west of Main Road to the northern end of Glen Vine village. The site is part of the former Manx Motor Museum which has since been demolished.
1.2 The site comprises an area of hardstanding with conifer trees and timber fencing creating an enclosed yard area backwards of the highway, with a deep verge to the site frontage.
1.3 The site is bounded to the west by a large private garage building that has pebble dashed lower walls and grey profile sheeting to the upper walls and roof. There is a detached dwelling to the north and residential properties to the south.
1.4 The site includes an existing access and parking area to the south that is partially laid to tarmac and used for some informal open storage.
2.0 THE PROPOSAL 2.1 The application seeks permission for the erection of a terrace of 3 no. two bedroom dwellings. Each dwelling will have a hallway, lounge, kitchen, study and wet room at ground floor with two bedroom, an en-suite and family bathroom at first floor.
2.2 The dwellings will be 1.5 storey in scale with rooms within vaulted roofs containing dormer windows to the front and rear. The building will be finished externally with white render to the walls and slat roofs. Solar panels are proposed to the rear elevation of each dwelling.
2.3 Each dwelling will have pedestrian access to the front, off Main Road, together with rear garden access. The site frontage will be enclosed by 600mm high brick walls. The garden to plot 1 will measure approximately 5.1m (d) x 7.0m (w) while the gardens to Plots 2 and 3 will measure 3.7m (d) x 7.0m (w). All 3 gardens back directly on to the side wall of the neighbouring garage building. 6 parking spaces are provided to the southeast of the proposed dwellings.
2.4 The Agent for the application submitted a response to consultee comments on 14 February 2025.
3.0 PLANNING POLICY 3.1 The site lies within an area designated as Predominantly Residential on the Area Plan for the East. The site is not within a Conservation Area, Area of High Landscape or Coastal Value and Scenic Significance or a Flood Risk Zone.
3.2 3.2 Strategic Policy 1: "Development should make the best use of resources by: (a) optimising the use of previously developed land, redundant buildings, unused and under- used land and buildings, and re-using scarce indigenous building materials; (b) ensuring efficient use of sites, taking into account the needs for access, landscaping, open space(1) and amenity standards; and (c) being located so as to utilise existing and planned infrastructure, facilities and services."
==== PAGE 3 ====
24/91339/B Page 3 of 10
3.3 Strategic Policy 2: "New development will be located primarily within our existing towns and villages, or, where appropriate, in sustainable urban extensions (2) of these towns and villages. Development will be permitted in the countryside only in the exceptional circumstances identified in paragraph 6.3."
3.4 Strategic Policy 4 (in part): "Proposals for development must: (b) protect or enhance the landscape quality and nature conservation value of urban as well as rural areas but especially in respect to development adjacent to Areas of Special Scientific Interest and other designations; and (c) not cause or lead to unacceptable environmental pollution or disturbance.
3.5 Strategic Policy 5: "New development, including individual buildings, should be designed so as to make a positive contribution to the environment of the Island. In appropriate cases the Department will require planning applications to be supported by a Design Statement which will be required to take account of the Strategic Aim and Policies."
3.6 Strategic Policy 10: New development should be located and designed such as to promote a more integrated transport network with the aim to: (a) minimise journeys, especially by private car; (b) make best use of public transport; (c) not adversely affect highway safety for all users, and (d) encourage pedestrian movement
3.7 General Policy 2 of the Strategic Plan is considered applicable, which states: "Development which is in accordance with the land-use zoning and proposals in the appropriate Area Plan and with other policies of this Strategic Plan will normally be permitted, provided that the development: (a) is in accordance with the design brief in the Area Plan where there is such a brief; (b) respects the site and surroundings in terms of the siting, layout, scale, form, design and landscaping of buildings and the spaces around them; (c) does not affect adversely the character of the surrounding landscape or townscape; (d) does not adversely affect the protected wildlife or locally important habitats on the site or adjacent land, including water courses; (e) does not affect adversely public views of the sea; (f) incorporates where possible existing topography and landscape features, particularly trees and sod banks; (g) does not affect adversely the amenity of local residents or the character of the locality; (h) provides satisfactory amenity standards in itself, including where appropriate safe and convenient access for all highway users, together with adequate parking, servicing and manoeuvring space; (i) does not have an unacceptable effect on road safety or traffic flows on the local highways; (j) can be provided with all necessary services; (k) does not prejudice the use or development of adjoining land in accordance with the appropriate Area Plan; (l) is not on contaminated land or subject to unreasonable risk of erosion or flooding; (m) takes account of community and personal safety and security in the design of buildings and the spaces around them; and (n) is designed having due regard to best practice in reducing energy consumption."
3.8 Environmental Policy 22 states: "Development will not be permitted where it would unacceptably harm the environment and/or the amenity of nearby properties in terms of: i) pollution of sea, surface water or groundwater; ii) emissions of airborne pollutants; and iii) vibration, odour, noise or light pollution."
==== PAGE 4 ====
24/91339/B Page 4 of 10
3.9 Environmental Policy 23 states: "When considering alterations and improvements to existing facilities the Department will require that consideration be given to the potential adverse impact of the proposed changes to existing neighbours."
3.10 Environment Policy 42 states that "New development in existing settlements must be designed to take account of the particular character and identity, in terms of buildings and landscape features of the immediate locality. Inappropriate backland development, and the removal of open or green spaces which contribute to the visual amenity and sense of place of a particular area will not be permitted. Those open or green spaces which are to be preserved will be identified in Area Plans."
3.11 Housing Policy 4: "New housing will be located primarily within our existing towns and villages, or, where appropriate, in sustainable urban extensions of these towns and villages where identified in adopted Area Plans..."
3.12 Transport Policy 4: "The new and existing highways which serve any new development must be designed so as to be capable of accommodating the vehicle and pedestrian journeys generated by that development in a safe and appropriate manner, and in accordance with the environmental objectives of this plan."
3.13 Transport Policy 7 states: 'The Department will require that in all new development, parking provision must be in accordance with the Department's current standards.'
4.0 OTHER MATERIAL CONSIDERATIONS 4.1 None.
5.0 PLANNING HISTORY 5.1 02/01168/B - Erection of replacement storage maintenance garage to rear of Glen Vine Motor Museum - Permitted 28 October 2002.
6.0 REPRESENTATIONS 6.1 The following Statutory Consultees have been consulted and their responses can be summarised as follows:
Marown Parish Commissioners - The Commissioners considered the above Planning Application at their meeting held on Wednesday 18 December 2024. The Commissioners resolved to OBJECT to the application on the following grounds: o There are concerns about the access onto the main road o There are also concerns regarding the risk of flooding, so a survey should be carried out
DOI Highway Services - After reviewing this Application, Highway Services HDC finds it to have no significant negative impact upon highway safety, network functionality and/or parking as the existing access is suitable for the proposals and the site provides visibility to 43m in either direction (for a 30mph speed limit urban road), while two parking spaces are provided off- street for each dwelling, subject to access and parking layout, bin storage and cycle storage on the approved plans being conditioned to be implemented before first occupation and retained thereafter.
DOI 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. Recommendation: There is not sufficient details of the sites surface water drainage system and the applicant is required to demonstrate compliance with the clause above
Ecosystem Policy Team - Objection due to lack of information
==== PAGE 5 ====
24/91339/B Page 5 of 10
The Planning Statement makes reference to the requirement for the removal of trees and a leylandii hedge to facilitate the development. However, no replanting is proposed to mitigate against the loss of these features. Though the leylandii hedge is likely providing nesting, roosting and sheltering habitat for birds and other wildlife, we would have no objection to its removal should new hedge planting be provided as mitigation, ideally with native or other well established species. Likewise, new trees should be planted to mitigate the tree loss. In this location smaller stature trees with known benefits for wildlife would be appropriate. We request that landscaping plans are provided prior to determination of this application to ensure that there will be no net loss for biodiversity on site and for compliance with Strategic Policy 4 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016 "Proposals for development must: (b) protect or enhance the landscape quality and nature conservation value of urban as well as rural areas". We request that these details are provided prior to determination to ensure that any replanting is proportionate to that which is to be lost. Should this application be approved despite our objection we recommend that conditions are secured for: o No works to commence unless a soft landscaping plan has been provided to Planning and approved in writing, for the planting to be undertaken as per this plan, and for the replacement of any planting which dies or is removed within the first 5 years of completion of the development.
Flood Management - Defer - The proposed site of the construction of the three cottages is in an area that suffers from surface water flooding. FRM will require a Flood Risk Assessment before any further comment.
6.2 No representations have been received from members of the public.
7.0 ASSESSMENT 7.1 The key considerations in the determination of the application are:
o Principle of development; o Design & impact upon the character and appearance of the area o Residential Amenity o Transport and Highway Safety o Flood Risk o Ecology & Trees
PRINCIPLE OF DEVELOPMENT 7.2 In the Adopted Isle of Man Strategic Plan (2016), Strategic Policy 2 prioritises the location of new development within existing towns and villages. Spatial Policy 5 goes on to confirm that "New development will be located within the defined settlements."
7.3 Housing Policy H4 states that: "New housing will be located primarily within our existing towns and villages, or, where appropriate, in sustainable urban extensions of these towns and villages where identified in adopted Area Plans."
7.4 The application site is located within the contiguous built-up area of Glen Vine and is surrounded by residential properties. Having regard to the above policies, the site is located within an accessible and sustainable location where the principle of residential development is supported by both Strategic Plan Policies and the Area Plan for the East. A residential use on the land would be compatible with the "Predominantly Residential" designation and new housing on the land is a use that would be compatible with adjoining land uses.
7.5 Having regard to the above considerations, and subject to an assessment of material considerations, it is accepted that the principle of development on the site is acceptable and compliant with the aforementioned Strategic Plan and Area Plan policies.
==== PAGE 6 ====
24/91339/B Page 6 of 10
DESIGN & IMPACT UPON THE CHARACTER AND APPEARANCE OF THE AREA 7.6 The application site comprises a road frontage plot of land that is currently enclosed with mature Leylandii trees and timber fencing, with an industrial style building to its rear. Either side of the site and on the opposite side of the highway are a mix of traditional and non- traditional style dwellinghouses, together with areas of tree and hedgerow planting that combine to create a simple but relatively attractive street scene along the A1. The immediate setting is strongly characterised by traditional, rural style dwellings with linear plan forms, steeply pitched slate roofs, symmetrical fenestration and broad width chimney stacks.
7.7 Given that the proposed development will introduce new built form in a prominent position along the roadside frontage, it is important to assess the ability of a site to accommodate and deliver a development that will not adversely impact upon the character and appearance of the area. In this regard, General policy 2 states that development will normally be permitted where it: (c) does not affect adversely the character of the surrounding landscape or townscape;
7.8 Environment Policy 42 sets out the policy approach to new development within existing settlements. It states that: "New development in existing settlements must be designed to take account of the particular character and identity, in terms of buildings and landscape features of the immediate locality. Inappropriate backland development, and the removal of open or green spaces which contribute to the visual amenity and sense of place of a particular area will not be permitted."
7.9 The supporting text to Environment Policy 42 at paragraph 7.34.1 states that ""Infill development" (in the sense of filling a small gap in an otherwise built-up frontage) may be acceptable in built up areas, but the value of spaces between buildings should not be underestimated, even in small settlements."
7.10 The application is supported by design drawings that propose the erection of a terrace of three dwellings on the site, which would front onto the highway with small gardens to the rear and parking to the south.
7.11 Having regard to the design of the proposed dwellinghouses, it is noted that the scale is set at 1.5 storey's with a low eaves level and rooms within the roof space, served by dormer windows to the front and rear. The dormer windows are offset from the position of the ground floor windows to the front elevation and small porch canopies are also included.
7.12 While it is noted that a small section of the dwelling to the north is 1.5 storey in scale, the proposed 1.5 storey scale of the dwellinghouses is considered to be at odds with the immediate setting. It is unclear why 2 storey dwellings are not proposed for the site, which would be reflective of local character. Due to the proposed height of the dwellings, it is has been necessary for the proposals to include dormer windows to the front, roadside elevation of all 3 units. Such features are generally absent within the street scene along the A1, where dwellings are generally 2 storey, or single storey some distance away from the site and in an area that is visually unrelated to the application site.
7.13 As with the proposed dormer windows, the inclusion of pre-fabricated canopy porch roofs to the front elevations do not add anything to the design quality of the proposed dwellings.
7.14 It is considered that the combined effect of the 1.5 storey building height, inclusion of dormer windows, canopy porches and lack of symmetry in the fenestration arrangement creates a visually poor development that fails to respect or relate in any way to the character or appearance of the locality. The general appearance of the proposed development will detract from the street scene within the settlement. The proposals are not, therefore,
==== PAGE 7 ====
24/91339/B Page 7 of 10
considered to represent good design and conflict with Strategic Policy 5, General Policy 2, Environment Policy 42 and the Residential Design Guide.
RESIDENTIAL AMENITY 7.15 Any development must ensure that it has an appropriate relationship with and does not undermine the amenity standards of adjoining or nearby properties, including amongst other considerations the provision of natural light, outlook, privacy and quiet enjoyment.
7.16 The siting of the proposed development is not considered to result in any unacceptable impacts upon the amenity of residents or their properties in the immediate setting of the site.
7.17 Notwithstanding the above, it is also important for new development proposals to provide suitable amenity standards for future residents. This includes ensuring that the relationship with any adjoining land use is compatible, that the dwellings will benefit from suitable natural light, outdoor private amenity/garden space, parking provision and bin storage facilities.
7.18 General Policy 2 (h) states that development proposals must "provide appropriate amenity standards itself..."
7.19 As demonstrated on the proposed Site Plan, the proposed dwellinghouses will benefit from rear gardens, enclosed by 1.8m timber panel fencing, along with the wall of the adjoining garage building to the west. The rear yard areas are limited in depth to 5.1m to Plot 1 and 3.7m to Plots 2 and 3. The overall space provided to the private gardens is very limited and would need to include a cycle store as indicate don the Site Plan, which further reduces the useable area. Such limited outdoor amenity space is considered to be substandard.
7.20 The quality of enjoyment of the small rear gardens will be severely reduced by the lack of natural daylight and outlook, which will be severely restricted by the adjoining garage building, which will tower over the gardens.
7.21 The adjoining garage building will also harm the outlook and provision of natural daylight to habitable rooms to the rear of the proposed dwellinghouses.
7.22 The above matters are considered to result in extremely poor living conditions for future residents and the lack of suitable amenity is considered to represent poor design, in conflict with General Policy 2 (h).
TRANSPORT AND HIGHWAY SAFETY 7.23 General Policy 2 (i) requires, inter-alia that development will provide safe and convenient access for all road users and that road safety or local traffic flows are not unacceptably effected. Transport Policy 4 requires new development to be capable of accommodating by safe vehicular and pedestrian journeys while Transport Policy 7 requires parking provision to meet current standards.
7.24 The application provides 6 parking spaces for the 3 dwellinghouses, with cycle storage indicated to the rear gardens. This provision meets the minimum standard set out in Appendix 7 of the Strategic Plan.
7.25 The proposed parking area will be served by an existing access off the A1. Visibility across the road frontage appears to be relatively unrestricted and the access is within a 30mph zone.
7.26 It is noted that Marown Commissioners have raised objections regarding the safety of the proposed access, however, DOI Highway Services have confirmed that the proposed access
==== PAGE 8 ====
24/91339/B Page 8 of 10
arrangements and parking provision will not adversely impact upon highway safety and the DOI raise no objection as a consequence.
7.27 The site is located in a location that is accessible to pedestrians and also to local bus services which will encourage modal shift away from a dependence upon the motor car for accessing day to day services.
7.28 Comments received from highways Drainage are noted but it is to be acknowledged that the parking provision will be on an area of land laid to hardstanding already and that land is seen on site to slope away from the highway rather than towards it. Surface water will not, therefore, be discharged onto the public highway.
7.29 The proposed development will not give rise to a significant increase in vehicle movements over the access, the use of which is not considered to represent an unacceptable risk to the safety of road users. The proposals therefore comply with General Policy 2 and Transport Policies 4 and 7.
FLOOD RISK 7.30 The application site is located within Flood Zone 1 and is not at risk from flooding associated with fluvial, tidal or reservoir sources.
7.31 The site is, however, located within an area at high risk from surface water flooding, with that risk being 3% or 1 in 30 years. Flood Management have requested that a Flood Risk Assessment be submitted but such is not included within the application. Marown Parish Commissioners also object due to flood risk concerns.
7.32 General Policy 2 (i) states that development will be permitted if it is not subject to unreasonable risk of flooding. Environment Policy 10 sets out the requirements for an FRA and Environment Policy 13 states that "development which would result in an unacceptable risk from flooding, either on or off-site, will not be permitted."
7.33 Appendix 4 to the Strategic Plan sets out that an FRA is required when a development is at risk from fluvial or tidal flooding. The absence of an FRA for a development at risk of surface water flooding does not give rise to a conflict with Environment Policy 10.
7.34 In the absence of a Flood Risk Assessment, it is noted that the sw flow path follows the fall in levels from the northeast, across the A1 and over the application site before continuing south and southwest.
7.35 The highway is set at a level of approximately 101.19AOD and the finished floor levels of the dwellings are shown at 1.1.65, approximately 450mm above the road level. The FFLs are therefore raised above existing ground levels. Additionally, the frontage of the site will be enclosed by a 600mm high brick wall without break across the frontage. The wall will act as a barrier to any surface water flows towards the properties, with flows most likely moving south of the site as is indicated on the flood map.
7.36 Having regard to the above, the proposed dwellings are unlikely to be impacted by surface water flows in the event of a flood occurring. Whilst objection might be raised, the level of risk and associated harm is considered to be low and so no objection is raised in this instance.
ECOLOGY & TREES 7.37 Save for the presence of Leylandii trees to its boundary, the application site is generally laid to areas of tarmac and compacted stone hard standings. It therefore has very limited ecological value, save for the habitat provided by the trees for nesting birds.
==== PAGE 9 ====
24/91339/B Page 9 of 10
7.38 It is noted that the Ecosystem Policy Team object to the development due to the failure to replace the trees being removed. Whilst there is little to no scope for planting replacement hedgerow or trees within the three proposed plots there is some space to the yard area within the red line of the application site. The agent has suggested compensatory planting in the grounds of 1 Kelly Close which the applicant also owns, but this is not part of the application site and not considered appropriate or deliverable.
3.39 As such, if permission were forthcoming then a condition could be applied requiring the approval of replacement planting, which would suitably address the objection raised.
8.0 CONCLUSION 8.1 The principle of residential development on the site is acceptable and it is acknowledged that impacts upon highway safety, flood risk and ecology could be suitably managed.
8.2 However, the proposed design scheme would cause unacceptable harm to the appearance of the street scene and is at odds with prevailing character of the built environment within the immediate setting. The fail to reinforce local character and distinctiveness and the design is considered to conflict with Strategic Policy 5, General Policy 2, Environment Policy 42 and the Residential Design Guide.
8.3 Additionally, the development of 3 dwellinghouses on the site represents a cramped form of development, with limited private amenity space and an unsuitable relationship with the adjoining garage building, the effect of which would be to deliver poor living conditions for future residents. The proposals therefore conflict with General Policy 2 (h).
8.4 Having regard to the above, it is recommended that planning permission be refused.
9.0 RIGHT TO APPEAL AND RIGHT TO GIVE EVIDENCE 9.1 The Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) Order 2019 sets out the process for determining planning applications (including appeals). It sets out a Right to Appeal (i.e. to submit an appeal against a planning decision) and a Right to Give Evidence at Appeals (i.e. to participate in an appeal if one is submitted).
9.2 Article A10 sets out that the right to appeal is available to: o Applicant (in all cases); o a Local Authority; Government Department; Manx Utilities; and Manx National Heritage that submit a relevant objection; and o any other person who has made an objection that meets specified criteria.
9.3 Article 8(2)(a) requires that in determining an application, the Department must decide who has a right to appeal, in accordance with the criteria set out in article A10.
9.4 The Order automatically affords the Right to Give Evidence to the following (no determination is required): o any appellant or potential appellant (which includes the applicant); o the Department of Environment, Food and Agriculture, the Department of Infrastructure and the local authority for the area; o any other person who has submitted written representations (this can include other Government Departments and Local Authorities); and o in the case of a petition, a single representative.
9.5 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 the Right to Appeal.
==== PAGE 10 ====
24/91339/B Page 10 of 10
I can confirm that this decision has been made by the Head of Development Management in accordance with the authority afforded to that Officer by the appropriate DEFA Delegation and that in making this decision the Officer has agreed the recommendation in relation to who should be afforded interested person status, and/or rights to appeal.
Decision Made : Refused Date : 27.02.2025
Determining Officer Signed : S BUTLER
Stephen Butler
Head of Development Management
Customer note
This copy of the officer report reflects the content of the office copy and has been produced in this form for the benefit of our online service/customers and archive record.
Copyright in submitted documents remains with their authors. Request removal