Loading document...
The application site represents a portion of land located off the south east side of New Castletown Road, in between Spring Valley roundabout and the junction with Annacur Lane.
The site includes part of Pulrose Golf Course and part of an adjacent site which is pending consideration for the creation of a residential estate under PA 10/00149/B (a Department application subject to a Section 13 agreement).
Proposed now is the erection of safety fencing to the boundary between the approved residential estate and Pulrose Golf Course.
In the Inspector's report for the previous planning application pending consideration (10/00149/B), it is stated in paragraph 48 that "I would agree that measures would be required to address safety concerns in relation to wayward golf balls in the eastern part of the site. As this could well involve works outside the site, I consider that details of the appropriate measures should form part of a Section 13 Agreement."
The aim of the fencing is to prevent stray golf balls from reaching the proposed dwellings from the 11th green to the east. The proposed fencing would be in three sections. The first section would be to the south of three properties which are currently pending consideration. This fence would measure approximately 25 metres in length. It would be 4 metres high overall, with a 2 metre high fence and 2 metre high netting above. The fence would be positioned a minimum of 10 metres away from the rear elevations of the proposed dwellings.
The second section would be to the east of apartment block F1. This fence would measure approximately 19 metres in length. It would be 6 metres high overall, with a 2 metre high fence and 4 metre high netting above. The fencing would be positioned a minimum of 5 metres away from the eastern windows of the proposed apartments.
The third section would be to the east of apartment block F2 and a car parking area. This fence would measure approximately 31.5 metres in length. It would be 8 metres high overall, with a 2 metre high fence and 6 metre high netting above. The fencing would be positioned a minimum of 5 metres away from the eastern windows of the proposed apartments.
The following previous planning application for the application site is considered relevant in the assessment and determination of this application;
10/00149/B – Pending Consideration (Department Application awaiting a Section 13 agreement) Creation of a residential estate comprising 28 houses and 8 apartments with associated roads and infrastructure. Land at Pulrose Farm, Castletown Road, Douglas
The following previous planning applications for fencing to other parts of Pulrose Golf Course are considered relevant in the assessment and determination of this application;
95/00620/B – Permitted 13.11.95 Erection of boundary fence. Pulrose Golf Course, adjacent to Kewaigue School, Douglas.
04/00541/B – Permitted 29.04.04 Erection of safety fencing. Part of Golf Course, To Side of 90 Springfield Road, Douglas.
04/02356/B – Permitted 17.01.05 Erection of safety fencing. Boundary of Pulrose Golf Course and Heather Crescent, Douglas.
The application site is located within an area designated as part Predominantly Residential Use and part Open Space (Golf Course) in the Douglas Local Plan Order 1998, Map No. 2 (South). The site is not located within a Conservation Area. The line of the fencing would follow part of the boundary between the land designated as Residential Use and the land designated as Golf Course in the Douglas Local Plan.
The relevant planning policy from the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2007 is General Policy 2.
The Department of Infrastructure Highways Division do not object to this application, as there are no traffic management, parking or road safety implications.
Douglas Corporation do not object to this application.
This application has been discussed with the Housing Division of the Department of Social Care, as the proposed dwellings are first time buyer properties. They do not object to the application, but are concerned about the proximity of the proposed fencing to the eastern apartments. They recognise that the affected rooms also have other windows on other elevations. The Department does not wish to delay the application process and is willing to support the application if the planning authority finds it to be acceptable.
No written responses have been received from the general public.
This proposal should be assessed with regard to General Policy 2 part g, which requires development to not adversely affect the amenity of local residents or the character of the locality.
Impact on public amenity;
In terms of the impact on public amenity, the fencing would be positioned along the furthest side of the proposed estate from the main Castletown Road, so the general public views would be minimal. Previous planning applications have been approved for safety fencing around different parts of Pulrose Golf Course. PA 95/00620/B was approved for a 50 foot high (15.24 metres) fence to Kewaigue School, PA 04/00541/B was approved for a fence to match the existing to 90 Springfield Road and PA 04/02356/B was approved for a 3 metre high fence to the rear of houses on Heather Crescent.
The proposed fencing would be partly 4 metres high, partly 6 metres high and partly 8 metres high. There would also be some new planting to the boundary, including trees. The fence would be coloured green, which would perhaps minimise its public impact. Although the fence is considered to be high, it is judged to be acceptable in this location adjacent to a golf course and would not adversely affect the character of the area.
Impact on private amenity;
In terms of private amenity, the purpose of erecting the proposed fence is to protect dwellings which have not yet been given planning permission, as they are currently subject to a Section 13 agreement, which would include the provision of a fence such as this. The proposed fencing would be located to the rear of 3 semi-detached dwellings and along the side of 2 apartment blocks.
The 3 semi-detached dwellings would be plots 26, 27 and 28. The fencing would be positioned along the boundaries of the back gardens and it would be 4 metres high. The minimum distance between the houses and the fencing would be 10 metres. This is considered to be acceptable to residential amenity.
The 2 apartment blocks would include 4 units in each. The fencing would be positioned along the east side of the apartment blocks and it would be 6 or 8 metres high. In apartment block F1 would be units 29 to 32, with 2 units at ground floor level and 2 at first floor level. In apartment block F2 would be units 33 to 36, again with 2 units at ground floor level and 2 at first floor level. The units which are of concern are those closest to the proposed fence on the eastern side, namely units 31 and 32 in block F1 and units 35 and 36 in block F2. The proposed fence would be a minimum of 5 metres away from the eastern lounge windows of these apartments. In the original drawing, the fence was only 1.5 metres away from the windows in apartment block F1. However, following discussions between the planning officers and the agent, the fence has been moved to its new
location. When discussing whether the fence could be moved further away still, it emerged that the ground level of the site slopes down from the level of the apartment blocks to the level of the golf course, by a height up to approximately 2.8 metres. As a result of this, it is considered that if the fencing was moved further away, it would need to be substantially higher to address the change in ground level of the site.
The fencing would be a minimum of 5 metres away from the eastern lounge or bedroom windows of some of the proposed apartments. From viewing the plans for the proposed apartments (see PA 10/00149/B), it is evident that all of these rooms have additional windows to the north or south elevations, which have a clear outlook towards the golf course.
Overall, it is considered that the benefits of the fencing in terms of safety would outweigh concerns about the proximity of the fencing to the units and therefore the distance is considered to be acceptable.
For the above reasons, this proposal is considered to be acceptable and is recommended for approval.
The local authority is, by virtue of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) Order 2005, paragraph 6 (5) (c) and (d), considered an "interested person" and as such should be afforded party status.
The Housing Division of the Department of Social Care should be afforded party status in this instance.
The Department of Transport Highways 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.
Recommended Decision: Permitted
Date of Recommendation: 08.04.2011
C : Conditions for approval N : Notes attached to conditions R : Reasons for refusal
C 1. The development hereby permitted shall commence before the expiration of four years from the date of this notice.
C 2.
This approval relates to the erection of safety fencing to boundary with Douglas Golf Course and approved residential development, as shown in drawing number 1154-62C, date stamped 7 April 2011.
I confirm that this decision accords with the appropriate Government Circular delegating functions to the Senior Planning Officer.
Decision Made : Permitted Date : 12/12/11
Signed : Senior Planning Officer [Signature]
Copyright in submitted documents remains with their authors. Request removal
View as Markdown