Officer Report Recommendation Refusal

acknowledged as poor, semi-improved grassland with scattered scrub and whilst not a priority in ecological terms is the type of habitat which supports invertebrates and nesting birds although they are not aware of records of lizards on the site. They recommend that the area around the formal recreation area would benefit from being as natural as possible with mowing kept to a minimum and native trees and shrubs planted for their nature conservation value. There has been evidence of fodder or fuel stacks which are rare in indicating former agricultural activity. As such, it is important that in the development of the site, if this were to be forthcoming, that an archaeological watching brief and appropriate recordings undertaken at the developer's expense and that this is taken into account in any detailed scheme. 27. A resident of Douglas objects to the application objects to the application on the basis that the site is not designated for development and previous efforts to remove illegally deposited material will be wasted if buildings are now constructed on it. This development would be contrary to Environment Policy 1 of the Strategic Plan. ### Assessment 28. The issues to be considered are as follows: 1) is any part of the site suitable for residential development bearing in mind that the front part of the site is designated as Existing Residential? 2) should all of the site be considered suitable for development? 3) should any affordable housing be required on site? 4) should the full complement of open space be required to be provided on site? 5) if development is considered to be acceptable in principle, are there constraints which need to be introduced to the approval - such as the form of development bearing in mind the proximity to existing nearby residents and the adjacent countryside? 29. In terms of assessment of whether any the site should be considered suitable for residential development, there is residential use on part of the site in the form of Furness Cottage. The site was also used in its majority for either residential, commercial or parking purposes in connection with the use of the two buildings. As such, considering this and the hard surfaced nature of the majority of the site, it is considered that the part of the site designated as Residential is suitable and appropriate for the principle of residential development. 30. In terms of whether all of the site is suitable for development, the applicant has made reference to the availability of housing on the Island, particularly in the east of the Island where the application site sits for the purposes of Area Plans and housing need assessment. They acknowledge that the requirement for the east is projected to be met within the forecast period up to 2016, they indicate that very little of this is made up from housing provided in Santon. They consider that the existing site is unsightly and that the development will improve its appearance, thus overcoming the concerns expressed in EP 2. 31. They also indicate that there are very little, if any opportunities for affordable housing to be provided in Santon. 32. Whilst this is factually correct, it is relevant to consider why additional land has not been identified as suitable for residential development in Newtown and whether there is a reason why additional development would not be considered suitable here. It does not follow that simply because Newtown is identified as a settlement, that unspecified numbers of housing would be considered acceptable as a right. The settlement has little in the way of amenities: there was a post office further to the south which is no longer operational. Planning permission has been granted for additional use of one of the properties in Ballanoa Meadow as a hairdresser's (PA 12/01266/C) and a hair dresser's, beauty salon, gym, bar and restaurant at Mount Murray Country Club. Other than this, there is nowhere where a resident could buy a pint of milk or newspaper without having to use public transport or their private motor vehicle and the closest school facilities are at Kewaigue. In the consideration of the application (PA 12/00533) for the erection of a dwelling on a site within Mount Murray which was indicated as suitable for a shop in its original layout in the early 1990s, the site had been available for commercial development since then with no implementation and in that decision, it was indicated how many facilities in the area had closed down – the filling station, school, post office, public house and Methodist Church. 33. As such, it is difficult to accept that the site is located within a sustainable location and if that is the case, that the extension of the existing residential area, could be accepted as a sustainable urban extension as provided for in the Strategic Plan. This leads back to the designation of Newtown in the Strategic Plan as not being a service village, but one that should maintain its existing settlement character and only being suitable for development which meets "local needs for housing and limited employment opportunities." 34. The development of this site would not accord with the definition of a sustainable urban expansion as it is not part of a planned expansion of the settlement and could be viewed as premature pending the formulation of the plan for the east which will look again at the requirement for housing and other development and with a much wider range of alternatives in the eastern area, many of which may be closer and more conveniently placed in respect of existing and planned services and amenities than is this site. The Strategic Plan sets out that Area Plans will define the boundaries of the settlements and this also adds weight to the argument that the proposal is premature of such an exercise being carried out. It should be noted that whilst the definition of sustainable urban extensions refers to cities and towns, as there are no official cities on the Island, this can be taken as referring to settlements which may be smaller than a true town or city. 35. They also indicate that if permission were given for the development of the part of the site which is designated as Existing Residential then this would leave an area of tipped material with little prospect of improvement. They consider that the development will result in an improvement to the landscape, as is referred to in general Policy 3 as it applies to previously developed land, with which the applicant accepts this site does not comply. 36. As has been pointed out by the objectors, it is difficult to accept that planning permission should be granted because the site has been allowed to fall into a state of poor maintenance and where there has been illegal tipping. There is no provision for this to justify development in undesignated areas. The condition of the site is not widely publicly visible and as such, the impact of the tipped ground is limited from a public perspective to how the level of the site sits in relation to the land on each side. This difference is only likely to be emphasized if built development were to be introduced to it and the increased height of the new properties would be particularly noticeable above the level of the Ballanoa Meadow housing as viewed from the Moaney Road to the north and the Clannagh Road to the north of that. 37. It is accepted that there would be some benefits from the proposed development: there would be housing which could go towards the general housing need although this argument is weakened by the fact that the number of dwellings predicted as being required in the east by 2016 will be exceeded. The fact that this housing will increase Santon's contribution to this is also difficult to accept as an over-riding argument as Santon is a largely rural and where its settlement is not considered to be sustainable. 38. If housing is to be considered acceptable on the site, there should be at least 25% of the housing provided on an affordable basis as recommended by the Department of Social Care on the basis that the housing will be contributing to the overall housing stock and particularly in Santon where there is not a particularly high level of social or affordable housing stock (Ballanoa Meadow was approved prior to there being a requirement for the provision of affordable housing). 39. The proposal will provide the full amount of open space required in accordance with the Strategic Plan and will also provide facilities which are not already provided within the settlement and at the present time are unlikely to be provided in any other form. 40. If development is to be considered appropriate on this site, the shape of the site brings little in the way of opportunities for a particularly imaginative layout. However, in order to provide an appropriate edge to the village, it is important to avoid a uniform line of the rear of a row of houses on the southern boundary which would not present a welcoming view of the settlement from this direction. The layout should also acknowledge the difference in levels between the site and Ballanoa Meadow and avoid dwellings being built along the boundary such as would overlook overlooking and a diminution of privacy of these existing dwellings. 41. There is no predominant style of dwelling or building within the settlement, which has evolved over time and with a variety of different styles and finishes. What would be important is to create a sense of place with a distinct style of dwelling which complements the location but does not draw particular attention of the passer-by. 42. As noted by Manx National Heritage, there is scope for providing a habitat for invertebrates and birds through an appropriate landscaping scheme. ### Summary 43. The scheme would bring some benefits to the area in the form of additional housing and increased play and recreation facilities. However, the site is not considered to be a sustainable one which is suitable for significant additional housing in terms of its designation in the Strategic Plan and the simple absence of amenities and facilities. As such, and compounded by the fact that the site is not designated for development, it is not considered appropriate to prejudice the area plan for the east by considering that Newtown is suitable for further expansion of this scale or to consider that this is the site for such an expansion, were it to be considered appropriate in principle. The development would as such be contrary to the provisions of the Strategic Plan, particularly Strateic Policy 2, General Policy3, Spatial Policy 4 and Environment Policies 1 and 2. 44. Added to this, the site is higher than the surrounding land and any built development would have a visual impact as viewed from the south and north which, in the absence of a supporting land use designation is not considered acceptable. This is further supported by the overall absence of demonstration of need for further housing in the east, or any over-riding justification for any additional housing to be located in Newtown. 45. Whilst there should have been an assessment of the watercourse/drain to the south, as identified by DEFA, the drain is significantly lower than the site and measures could be put in place to prevent significant impact on this sufficient to warrant refusal of the application. ### Party Status 46. The local authority, Santon Parish Commissioners is, by virtue of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) Order 2005, paragraph 6 (5) (d), considered an "interested person" and as such should be afforded party status. 47. The Isle of Man Water and Sewerage Authority, Department of Social Care, Department of Environment, Food & Agriculture and Manx National Heritage are statutory authorities which raise material planning concerns and should be afforded party status in this case. 48. The owner of Ballavartyn Cottage has land which is immediately alongside the site and should be afforded party status on this basis. 49. 1, Ballanoa Meadow is not immediately alongside the site and separated therefrom by the remainder of Ballanoa Meadow. AS such they are not considered to be directly affected by the proposal and should not be afforded party status in this case. 50. The Department of Transport Highways and Traffic Division is now part of the Department of Infrastructure of which the planning authority is part. As such, the Highways and Traffic Division cannot be afforded party status in this instance. 51. The resident of Douglas is not directly affected by the proposal and should not be afforded party status in this instance. ### Recommendation Recommended Decision: Refused Date of Recommendation: 01.02.2013

Conditions and Notes for Approval / Reasons and Notes for Refusal

C : Conditions for approval N : Notes attached to conditions R : Reasons for refusal

• : Notes attached to refusals

R 1. The scheme would bring some benefits to the area in the form of additional housing and increased play and recreation facilities. However, the site is not considered to be a sustainable one which is suitable for significant additional housing in terms of its designation in the Strategic Plan and the simple absence of amenities and facilities. As such, and compounded by the fact that the site is not designated for development, it is not considered appropriate to prejudge the area plan for the east by considering that Newtown is suitable for further expansion of this scale or to consider that this is the site for such an expansion, were it to be considered appropriate in principle. The development would as such be contrary to the provisions of the Strategic Plan, particularly Strategic Policy 2, General Policy 3, Spatial Policy 4 and Environment Policies 1 and 2.

R 2. the site is higher than the surrounding land and any built development would have a visual impact as viewed from the south and north which, in the absence of a supporting land use designation is not considered acceptable. This is further supported by the overall absence of demonstration of need for further housing in the east, or any over-riding justification for any additional housing to be located in Newtown.

I confirm that this decision has been made by the Planning Committee in accordance with the authority afforded to it under the Town and Country (Development Procedure) 2005

Decision Made : ... Committee Meeting Date : ...

Signed : ... Presenting Officer

Further to the decision of the Committee an additional report/condition reason is required. Signing Officer to delete as appropriate YES/NO