Loading document...
==== PAGE 1 ====
15/00636/A
Page 1 of 14
PLANNING OFFICER REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Application No. : 15/00636/A Applicant : Allprop Ltd Proposal : Approval in principle for the erection of a residential dwelling with ancillary staff and office accommodation addressing siting and means of access Site Address : Former Howstrake Holiday Camp King Edward Road Onchan Isle Of Man IM3 2JP
Case Officer : Mr Chris Balmer Photo Taken : 24.06.2015 Site Visit : 24.06.2015 Expected Decision Level :
Planning Committee
Officer’s Report
1.0 THE SITE 1.1 The application site comprises of a parcel of land that is located at Howstrake in Onchan which is to the east of King Edward Road. The site previously contained a holiday camp and derelict remnants of that previous development remain (an outline of history of the site is set out with the planning policy section of this report).
2.0 PROPOSAL 2.1 The application seeks approval in principle for the erection of a residential dwelling with ancillary staff and office accommodation addressing siting and means of access.
3.0 PLANNING POLICY 3.1 In terms of local plan policy, the application site is located within a wider area of land that designated as i) open space; and ii) ecological interest/semi natural vegetation under the Isle of Man Planning Scheme (Onchan Local Plan) Order 2000 Map No. 1. The site is annotated as area 5 on the local plan and is specifically referred to within Planning Circular 1/2000 (the written statement that accompanies the local plan) at paragraphs 3.13, 4.8, 4.9, 4.10, 4.11, 4.12 & 4.13.
3.2 Paragraph 3.13 states: "The Howstrake Holiday Camp (Area 5) has a previous history as having been used for tourism and is in dire need of attention and restoration. The 1989 Onchan Local Plan provided for the development of the site for tourism with some residential: however this policy was accompanied by a provision which permitted a five year period for an application to be approved in detail for such a development: failing this the site would revert to having an accepted use as Open Space where development would not be approved. Since that five year rule became applicable the site has remained derelict with the buildings falling further into disrepair and the site remaining as unattractive as it has been for the previous decade and before. The Department initially considered that rather than the site remaining derelict and unattended, some development may achieve the restoration of the site for the benefit of all who may view it. However, after careful consideration, the Department considers that the benefits of restoring some of the site would be outweighed by the permanent presence of buildings on the site, in a position where such buildings have not been for considerable time. The Department is aware this is one of the few headlands in Onchan which has not been subject to development and as such, the Department would wish to continue
==== PAGE 2 ====
15/00636/A
Page 2 of 14
the policy contained in the previous Onchan Local Plan that, having failed to secure a detailed approval for a sympathetic development on the site within the five year life of the previous local plan, that the site return to Open Space. The Department would encourage the possible future use of the site for purposes of Public Open Space with provision of a public right of way through to Groudle Beach and Glen."
3.3 Paragraph 4.8 states: "This site lies alongside the King Edward Road just to the south east of the Groudle Holiday Village. The site once accommodated a holiday camp but the site has long since been used as such: latterly the buildings have fallen into disrepair and dereliction and when viewed from the King Edward Road, Groudle headland or the Ballameanagh Road do little to contribute positively to the appearance of the coastline."
3.4 Paragraph 4.9 states: "The Onchan Local Plan adopted by Tynwald in 1989 included a policy which indicated that the site may be suitable for the development of tourist accommodation but required that a detailed application was to be approved within five years of the adoption of the plan or the site was to revert to a status of Open Space with a presumption against development. No detailed approval was granted. The Department resolved in the first draft of the revision of the local plan to identify development opportunities in order to achieve some tidying up of the site. The Department has received views on this proposal and has reviewed its initial decision in the light of these comments."
3.5 Paragraph 4.10 states: "The Department reconsidered the options which could be pursued with respect to this site: the stance of designation of the site for Open Space could be continued (see also paragraph 2.7) which would have the advantage of protection of the site from the development of new buildings which would limit the visual intrusion on views of the site and limits any destruction of habitat for wildlife (the site is valuable for ecology - see Section 10 Open Space and Nature Conservation). The downside of this policy is that it is unlikely that the existing unsightly buildings would be removed or tidied up without some incentive and that the current state of affairs would continue indefinitely."
3.6 Paragraph 4.11 states: "Another option would be to continue the zoning of Tourism on the site and restrict development on the site to that area which is already built upon. This would have had the advantage of tidying up the site and possibly securing a public right of way across the site, thus presenting some opportunity for public amenity. The drawbacks of this policy include a risk that nothing would happen on the site, bearing in mind the changing nature of tourism and that the site would continue to deteriorate as it has for the past decade or so. Also, any new development would be likely to have a significant visual impact and may have had an adverse impact on the wildlife of the area."
3.7 Paragraph 4.12 states: "A further alternative option would be to encourage a limited amount of residential development on the site instead of tourist accommodation. This may have the advantage of limiting to a smaller area the part of the site to be built upon and which may secure a better style of development. Disadvantages include a possible detrimental impact on ecology from domestic curtilages and constant human presence on the site and the obvious visual impact of houses on the coast where there has been none previously."
3.8 Paragraph 4.13 states: "It is concluded that the most appropriate option for the Howstrake Holiday Camp site is to designate the land as Open Space. Whilst this does not achieve an instant improvement of the site in visual terms which was the option preferred by the Department in the first draft and something to which the Inspector hearing the public inquiry would aspire, it does not change what many have become accustomed to see. The Department considers that whilst there may be benefit from tidying up the site and reclaiming part of it, the cost of this is the permanent visual impact of dwellings on the site where there has been none previously. Few if any of the headlands in Onchan remain free from development and, bearing in mind its exposed and rural location, the Department considers
==== PAGE 3 ====
15/00636/A
Page 3 of 14
that this too should remain free from new development. The Department would encourage use of the site as Public Open Space with public rights of way through the site to Groudle Glen and the beach."
3.9 Planning Circular 1/2000 also includes two policies that are considered specifically material to the assessment of the planning application.
3.10 Policy O/RES/P/22 states: "Outside those areas designated for residential development new dwellings will generally not be permitted within the Local Plan area. This applies particularly to the rural part of the district where the countryside is already protected by Planning Circular 1/88 the provisions of which will continue to be applied. In addition it should be noted that the countryside in its entirety within the district is designated by the Local Plan as of high landscape value and scenic significance in accordance with the provisions of the Island Strategic Plan Eastern Sector (Planning Circular 9/91)."
3.11 It should be noted that Planning Circular 1/88 has been superseded by the publication of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2007 and that the Island Strategic Plan Eastern Sector (Planning Circular 9/91) was time limited for five years and is now expired.
3.12 Policy O/NC/P/2 states: "In order to preserve the areas of interest for nature conservation within the study area, there will be a general presumption against any development which would have an adverse impact or effect on any area of ecological interest including both those identified in this document and others which may be subsequently identified as of interest or value to nature conservation."
3.13 In terms of strategic plan policy, the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2007 contains the following policies that are considered specifically material to the assessment of this current planning application.
3.14 General Policy 3 states: "Development will not be permitted outside of those areas which are zoned for development on the appropriate Area Plan with the exception of: (a) essential housing for agricultural workers who have to live close to their place of work; (Housing Policies 7, 8, 9 and 10); (b) conversion of redundant rural buildings which are of architectural, historic, or social value and interest; (Housing Policy 11); (c) previously developed land(1) which contains a significant amount of building; where the continued use is redundant; where redevelopment would reduce the impact of the current situation on the landscape or the wider environment; and where the development proposed would result in improvements to the landscape or wider environment; (d) the replacement of existing rural dwellings; (Housing Policies 12, 13 and 14); (e) location-dependent development in connection with the working of minerals or the provision of necessary services; (f) building and engineering operations which are essential for the conduct of agriculture or forestry; (g) development recognised to be of overriding national need in land use planning terms and for which there is no reasonable and acceptable alternative; and (h) buildings or works required for interpretation of the countryside, its wildlife or heritage."
3.15 Environment Policy 1 states: "The countryside and its ecology will be protected for its own sake. For the purposes of this policy, the countryside comprises all land which is outside the settlements defined in Appendix 3 at A.3.6 or which is not designated for future development on an Area Plan. Development which would adversely affect the countryside will not be permitted unless there is an over-riding national need in land use planning terms which
==== PAGE 4 ====
15/00636/A
Page 4 of 14
outweighs the requirement to protect these areas and for which there is no reasonable and acceptable alternative."
3.16 Environment Policy 4 states: "Development will not be permitted which would adversely affect: (a) species and habitats of international importance: (i) protected species of international importance or their habitats; or (ii) proposed or designated Ramsar and Emerald Sites or other internationally important sites. (b) species and habitats of national importance: (i) protected species of national importance or their habitats; (iii) proposed or designated National Nature Reserves, or Areas of Special Scientific Interest; or (iv) Marine Nature Reserves; or (v) National Trust Land. (c) species and habitats of local importance such as Wildlife Sites, local nature reserves, priority habitats or species identified in any Manx Biodiversity Action Plan which do not already benefit from statutory protection, Areas of Special Protection and Bird Sanctuaries and landscape features of importance to wild flora and fauna by reason of their continuous nature or function as a corridor between habitats. Some areas to which this policy applies are identified as Areas of Ecological Importance or Interest on extant Local or Area Plans, but others, whose importance was not evident at the time of the adoption of the relevant Local or Area Plan, are not, particularly where that plan has been in place for many years. In these circumstances, the Department will seek site specific advice from the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry if development proposals are brought forward."
3.17 Housing Policy 4 states: "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: otherwise new housing will be permitted in the countryside only in the following exceptional circumstances: (a) essential housing for agricultural workers in accordance with Housing Policies 7, 8, 9 and 10; (b) conversion of redundant rural buildings in accordance with Housing Policy 11; and (c) the replacement of existing rural dwellings and abandoned dwellings in accordance with Housing Policies 12, 13 and 14."
4.0 PLANNING HISTORY 4.1 The application site has been subject of a number of previous planning applications that are considered specifically material to the assessment of this current planning application:
4.2 Planning application 86/00317/A sought approval in principle to develop A) part of site for residential use and b) part of site for tourist use. This application was refused in 1986.
4.3 Planning application 87/00637/A sought approval in principle to development of land to form 12 residential plots and 25 self-contained tourist chalets. This application was refused in 1987.
4.4 Planning application 88/04256/A sought approval in principle to 150-bedroomed hotel/conference/health facilities and 200 residential units. This application was approved in 1989.
4.5 Planning application 94/00816/B sought approval for the erection of hotel with associated parking. This application was refused in 1994.
==== PAGE 5 ====
15/00636/A
Page 5 of 14
4.6 Planning application 94/00817/A sought approval in principle for the erection of 200 dwellings. This application was refused in 1994.
4.7 Planning application 09/01041/A sought approval in principle for the erection of a detached dwelling. This application was refused in 2009 for the following reasons: "R 1. The proposed development represents unwarranted development that is contrary to the land use designation of the application site as i) open space; and ii) ecological interest/semi natural vegetation under the Isle of Man Planning Scheme (Onchan Local Plan) Order 2000 Map No. 1 and the presumption against the development of such areas set out within Planning Circular 1/2000 and the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2007. Specifically, the proposal is contrary to the provisions of Policy O/RES/P/22 and Policy O/NC/P/2 of Planning Circular 1/2000 and the provisions of General Policy 3, Environment Policy 1, Environment Policy 4 and Housing Policy 4 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2007.
R 2. Notwithstanding the first reason for refusal the planning application a) fails to demonstrate that minimum visibility splays of 2 x 36m can be achieved from the application site onto the adjoining highway; and b) does not provide sufficient information regarding the means of surface water and foul sewage disposal from the application site."
5.0 REPRESENTATIONS 5.1 Onchan Commissioners (received on 01.07.2015) recommend approval subject to conditions requiring the submission for full planning permission be limited to single storey construction taking into consideration the topography of the site, and that the proposals are visually sympathetic to the location.
5.2 Department of Infrastructure Highway Services do not oppose the application (received on 20.07.2015) subject to the following conditions/comments:
"The proposed access meets current standards; the proposed traffic signs to diag 506.1 are not appropriate for use at a private access and should not be included.
If the application is to be approved the following conditions should be included:
Reason: In the interests of Highway Safety
Reason: In the interests of Highway Safety
Reason: to ensure adequate car parking is available on site"
5.3 Manx National Heritage (received on the 07.07.2015) make the following comments: "By and large, Manx National Heritage extends a cautious welcome to the more sensitive approach adopted by the applicant to development of this site. We appreciate the early contact made with Manx National Heritage to discuss the options and acknowledge the difficulties with maintaining the site in good order. It is clear that design, scale and massing of
==== PAGE 6 ====
15/00636/A
Page 6 of 14
the proposed development will be important considerations for the applicant and we look forward to seeing a detailed scheme which reconciles residential occupation of the site with the surrounding open and semi-natural coastal landscape.
We note that the Manx Wildlife Trust ecological survey of the site found no immediate concerns from a biodiversity point of view. However, the Trust advocated a precautionary approach for site clearance work in order to identify and make provision for any protected species which may use the site from time to time, for example bats and nesting birds. MNH supports this view and would also prefer landscaping proposals to be carefully organised to avoid a too formal approach which we believe would be unsuitable in this coastal landscape.
If possible, we would appreciate an opportunity before development (if approved) to carry out a walk-over site survey in order to record and photograph the existing structures.
Lastly, if this application is approved, we suggest that the landscape design phase presents an opportunity to discuss with the owner the possibility of upgrading and extending the coastal footpath past or through the property. Manx National Heritage would be happy to assist with discussions if required."
5.4 Department of Environment, Food and Agriculture - Forestry & Lands Directorate make the following comments (received on 30.06.2015): "I note the record of a lizard caught by a magpie (see Ecological Report) and can clarify that this was from grid reference SC417778 on 3/5/2005, but there is a more recent record of direct relevance, coming from the site itself and indicating a breeding colony there: SC418778, 14/9/2007, 9 adults and 5 juveniles of 2007 basking by the road and amongst old holiday camp buildings, up to SC419779.
A fuller assessment of the lizards, on site and along the roadside, is necessary, with plans to cater for their ongoing protection on the site. Lizards can be difficult to survey and though surveys were undertaken on four days (the minimum if absence is to be indicated), the previous record suggests that they are indeed present but were not visible during the surveys. I didn't see the dates and weather conditions during survey, which are highly relevant, but it is still possible to miss lizards on such a series of visits, especially if there is good basking weather prior to the visits. It may be possible to move ahead by accepting/assuming their presence and planning accordingly, but I don't accept that they are absent from the site.
Also, I note the inclusion of a helicopter pad and point out that there are gull colonies along the coast in this area and therefore any plans for aerial access should take account of the likelihood of birds flying up, causing a strike risk, which would benefit neither party. I imagine that a helicopter pilot could take account of this by planning appropriate approach routes and heights but this must be considered when planning the position and approaches for a landing pad.
Birds on site during the botanical survey were noted but bird data from the island's database have not been included, nor a full survey made on this now wild site. I recommend getting a report from Manx BirdLife, showing the records available for this site. At the same time, the applicant should check whether choughs (Schedule 1) nest in the close vicinity.
Note, specially protected birds are on Schedule 1 of the Wildlife Act, and animals on Schedule 5 (erroneously referenced in the report). Lizards are a Schedule 5 species, with protection, along with their places of shelter and protection. I expect that a plan will be required to cater for lizards in any development on this site.
==== PAGE 7 ====
15/00636/A
Page 7 of 14
I see that the site has been put forward as part of a proposed Wildlife Site which is 'pending' discussions with a landowner. I therefore assume that it fits the criteria and therefore the relevant policy should be taken into account."
5.5 Manx Utilities Authority - Electricity make no comments on the merits of the application but ask for an informative note be attached to any approval (received on 20.07.2015).
6.0 ASSESSMENT 6.1 It should firstly be noted that the information provided with this current application, compared to the refused application in 2009 is vast. The previous application (09/01041/A) was extremely limited. The previous application comprised a location plan that defined the application site in red, a set of completed forms, a small supplementary statement that expanded on the questions contained within the application form and a number of photographs of the site. It should also be noted that the location plan showed an indicative dwelling, but which was not to scale. That application was not taken to an appeal. The current is supported by more comprehensive information and has been subject to some pre- application dialogue with 3rd parties.
6.2 Given the land-use designation and the type of development the following elements are relevant to consideration in the determination of this application; (a) principle of development and potential impact upon the visual amenities of the area; (b) potential impact upon highway safety; (c) potential impact upon the ecology of the area; and (d) potential impact on historic structures.
PRINCIPLE OF DEVELOPMENT AND POTENTIAL IMPACT UPON THE VISUAL AMENITIES OF THE AREA 6.3 The starting point for any development within the countryside (i.e. open space not designated for development) is General Policy 3 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan. This policy states that development will not be permitted outside of those areas which are designated for development on the appropriate Area Plan. However, this policy does list possible exceptions for new development in the countryside.
6.4 Fundamentally, in terms of planning policy there is a long established presumption against new residential development in the countryside/land not designated for development. As identified earlier within the planning policy section of this report, this presumption against is set out in two different ways. Firstly, the site where the proposed dwelling would be sited is not zoned for residential development under the Onchan Area Plan Order 2000. Secondly, General Policy 3 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan, states that in such areas new dwellings will generally not be permitted.
6.5 The proposed dwelling do not serve a viable agricultural holding nor replace an existing dwelling and therefore fails these potential exceptions for development in the countryside. Accordingly, the application could be refused for these reasons.
6.6 However, General Policy 3 paragraph c is potentially most relevant for this application. This policy relates to previously developed land which contains a significant amount of building; where the continued use is redundant; where redevelopment would reduce the impact of the current situation on the landscape or the wider environment; and where the development proposed would result in improvements to the landscape or wider environment. It is arguably this policy which is key in the determination of the application.
6.7 It is clear from the Onchan Local Plan, as indicated within the Planning Policy section of this report, that the Planning and Building Control Directorate (then referred to as the Department) did consider the possibility of developing the site, as the site under the 1989
==== PAGE 8 ====
15/00636/A
Page 8 of 14
Onchan Local Plan was designated for development for tourism with some residential; however, a five year period was imposed on the site for a application in detailed to be approved on the site. An Planning application (88/04256/A) sought approval in principle for a 150-bedroomed hotel/conference/health facilities and 200 residential units and this application was approved in 1989, the same year the 1989 Local Plan was adopted. However, a detailed scheme for this or any other development did not occur and the site designated reverted to Open Space and as it has remained since.
6.8 It is accepted by The Onchan Local Plan that the site has; "...fallen into disrepair and dereliction and when viewed from the King Edward Road, Groudle headland or the Ballameanagh Road do little to contribute positively to the appearance of the coastline". However, there are also comments within the plan that a scheme for limited amount of residential development on the site instead of tourist accommodation could have been undertaken, which has the benefit of securing a better style of development. The disadvantage of this route of development could be the possible detrimental impact on ecology from domestic curtilages and constant human presence on the site and the obvious visual impact of houses on the coast where there has been none previously.
6.9 The final conclusion of the Onchan Local Plan finally indicates that; "The Department considers that whilst there may be benefit from tidying up the site and reclaiming part of it, the cost of this is the permanent visual impact of dwellings on the site where there has been none previously. Few if any of the headlands in Onchan remain free from development and, bearing in mind its exposed and rural location, the Department considers that this too should remain free from new development. The Department would encourage use of the site as Public Open Space with public rights of way through the site to Groudle Glen and the beach."
6.10 It is clear the Planning Directorate when coming to this final conclusion when preparing the Onchan Local Plan, gave consideration for the site potentially being developed either for tourist purposes or a limit amount of residential dwellings (i.e. more than one), but both considered having the drawbacks of the potential impact upon the ecology or the visual impact; although it was accepted in both options had the potential to tidying up the site and to secure a better style of development. A potential argument for the current scheme is when the Onchan Local Plan was being prepared; a scheme had not been prepared showing how development could have appeared on the site and does not appear to have considered the potential for just one dwelling, rather a number of dwellings.
6.11 As indicated within paragraph 6.6 of this report, there is the provision for developing on sites within the countryside which are accepted as being "previously developed land".
6.12 The definition of this is term within Appendix 1 of the IOM Strategic Plan states: "Previously-developed land is that which is or was occupied by a permanent structure, including the curtilage of the developed land and any associated fixed surface infrastructure.' The definition includes defence buildings, but excludes: o Land that is or has been occupied by agricultural or forestry buildings. o Land that has been developed for minerals extraction or waste disposal by landfill purposes where provision for restoration has been made through development control procedures. o Land in built-up areas such as parks, recreation grounds and allotments, which, although it may feature paths, pavilions and other buildings, has not been previously developed. o Land that was previously-developed but where the remains of the permanent structure or fixed surface structure have blended into the landscape in the process of time (to the extent that it can reasonably be considered as part of the natural surroundings). There is no presumption that land that is previously-developed is necessarily suitable for housing development nor that the whole of the curtilage should be developed."
==== PAGE 9 ====
15/00636/A
Page 9 of 14
6.13 The applicants indicate that in terms of redundancy the site for tourist purposes ceased in 1973 and has since remained closed and become redundant and derelict. These comments are accepted and it is considered the site is clearly redundant. In terms of the amount of built development on the site currently there are currently two existing single storey buildings, the largest measuring approximately 47 metres in width and 7 metres in depth with a pitched roof and the second building measuring approximately 36 metres in width and 6 metres in depth with a flat roof. There is also the original outdoor swimming pool complex (swimming and paddling pool) which has an overall width of approximate 30 metres and length of 12 metres. Between and surrounding the buildings are a number of concrete hard surfaces and foot/road ways serving the accommodation blocks and also some which runs up the hillside from the former camp site to the King Edward Road, one of which runs adjacent to the existing bus shelter, which is now in a poor state of repair and closed off. There are also a number of smaller structures such as; a tennis court, boundary fencing, internal fencing, steps, drainage systems and terracing of the grounds. All of these buildings are apparent from public views, mainly from the King Edward Road. From these views the site appears in a poor state of repair, derelict and has an adverse impact upon the visual amenities of the area. More distant views of the site can be seen from the north of the site, across the valley, from Ballamenagh Road and the Groudle Glen Railway. From these distant views the buildings and certainly the areas of hard surfacing are less visible and has less of a visual impact than views from King Edward Road. The applicant has submitted a series of photo-montages to illustrate these impacts.
6.14 The submission includes indicative plans of how the footprint of the dwelling could positioned. It should be noted and be made very clear, the Planning Directorate when considering the submitted plans and visualisations are being considered as indicative plans only.
6.15 Early discussion with the applicant's agent, prior to the application being submitted, discussed the type/design of dwelling which was considered to be potentially most suitable for this site and potentially comply with planning policy. It was considered a more traditional design approach (i.e. Manx vernacular/Georgian) would be unsuitable for this site and would potential result in a dwelling being very apparent within the countryside. Accordingly, it was considered a more contemporary approach would be better suited which could be designed with the contours of the land - the site being on a hillside with potentially large amounts of glazing, natural roofing (sedum roof) and finished with dark materials could help to blend the property with the surrounding landscape. Following these discussions the applicants have chosen the more contemporary approach, in their indicative illustrations submitted with the application.
6.16 Whilst this application is in principle only and no detailed design of the dwelling has been submitted, the applicants within the design principles have indicated that any detailed development would ensure that a design that is of high quality reflecting Howstrakes location, and ensure the built form responds to the existing topography and land form. This would be undertaken by maintaining development at single storey level, progressively stepped into the landscape. The proposal would also maximise the reuse of existing cleared, graded and platformed land. Furthermore they indicate that to minimise the visual exposure of built form through terraced, stepped and variable building massing appropriately integrated with landform, topography and vegetation.
6.17 The scheme would also include the demolition of all existing derelict buildings, existing tree cover will be extended; boundary treatment will be restored to traditional stone wall along King Edward Road, replacing existing poorly maintained post and wire fencing; sea views will be maintained; and the proposed dwelling will be integrated into the landscape reducing visual impact.
==== PAGE 10 ====
15/00636/A Page 10 of 14
6.18 Arguable the main issue of this proposal is whether the proposed works would reduce the impact of the current situation on the landscape or the wider environment; and where the development proposed would result in improvements to the landscape or wider environment as indicated by General Policy 3. The difficult in considering this proposal against this criteria, is the fact there are no detailed designs, only indicative proposals/photographs. Originally when the application was submitted the supporting report made mention to a floor area of the new building and also included the amount/type of accommodation which could be accommodated. This did raise concern, as referring to a specific floor area at an approval in principle stage could allow the acceptance of a dwelling of such a size, without knowing at this stage the detailed design. Accordingly, all mention of the site and type of accommodation has been removed from the application and this application does not considered a dwelling of a specific size. However, the applicants have indicated on drawing 28538-02 a minimum area for development (shaded in blue) and a maximum indicative area for development (shaded in orange). What is considered is whether the principle of a dwelling with ancillary office accommodation could be accommodated on this site, in accordance with planning policy. In this case it is consider whether a single dwelling could be accommodated on the site, using the design principles indicated by the applicants, including appropriate well designed landscaping, which could all result in reducing the impact of the current situation on the landscape and the wider environment and result in improvements to the landscape and wider environment. It is considered this scheme presents the opportunity for the development of a bespoke dwelling incorporating a very high quality exemplar standard of design which the Planning Directorate would seek for any future detailed application, should the approval in principle application be approved.
6.19 It is considered the majority of the development should be located within the area shaded blue on drawing 28538-02, given this is the area where the majority of existing built development exists and to ensure any potential development is contained rather than expanding into areas which are mainly undeveloped. Furthermore, it should be noted that this permission is only for a single dwelling, and it is highly unlikely more than this would be considered acceptable. Accordingly, a condition should be attached which requires the majority of development be contained within the minimum development area. The reasons for this view are that any additional dwellings would likely increase the need for potentially more vehicular access; driveways; built development due to additional dwellings; garages; larger areas of landscaped gardens, and together with the domestic paraphernalia that could be anticipated to accompany additional dwellings all of which would potentially have a greater visual impact and go beyond the requirements of General Policy 3 paragraph c.
6.20 A new access would also be proposed which would be located approximately 180 metres to the north of the smaller of the two existing buildings which form the centre of the former campsite and where the potential siting of the new dwelling would likely be located. This new access would introduce a vehicular entrance which does not currently exist along this stretch of the King Edwards Road. The existing vehicular entrance to the site is to the southern corner of the site, on a bend along the King Edward Road, adjacent to the existing disused bus shelter. This existing entrance would be blocked off with a low level Manx stone wall. Overall, whilst the new access will have a visual impact it is not considered the impact would be so great to warrant a refusal, especially as it would provide a much safer access to the site. The likely driveway again could utilise the contours of the site and with well- designed and sensitively designed landforms/landscaping could be undertaken to ensure the driveway would have little visual impact to the area. It is also noted that the existing driveway and footpaths serving the site would be removed and therefore the potential impact of the new access would be negated by this.
POTENTIAL IMPACT UPON HIGHWAY SAFETY
==== PAGE 11 ====
15/00636/A Page 11 of 14
6.21 The proposed access was discussed prior to the application being submitted and following discussions between the applicant's agent and Highway Services. This access would provide the required visibility splays in both directions and accordingly Highway Services have no objection, subject to the conditions listed within the representations section of this report, which from a planning point of view, raises no concerns and should be attached to any given approval.
POTENTIAL IMPACT UPON THE ECOLOGY OF THE AREA 6.22 A concern was raised during the Onchan Local Plan process about re-developing the site, and a reason why the site wasn't designated for development, related to the potential damage to the ecology of the site if it were developed. This was also a reason for the refusal of the previous application 09/01041/A given the site is within an area designated as ecological interest/semi natural vegetation.
6.23 Due to this the applicant's agent contacted Manx Wildlife Trust to undertake a survey of the site and surrounding area. Following this a detailed Ecological Survey report was prepared and produced as part of the applicants planning application. The survey included the likelihood of bats, owls and various birds from nesting within the site, namely the existing buildings. It was concluded that it was no activity of such nesting within the buildings, although whilst visiting the site it was observed that Blackbirds, Wren, Shell duck, Meadow Pipit and hearing gull could be nesting around the site.
6.24 A survey for frogs was also undertaken but no evidence of frogs was found.
6.25 The report also undertook a survey for the Common Lizards, which historically a record exists of a common lizard being taken by a magpie from the Howstrake Camp Site. However the exact location for this record is currently unclear. Overall, no evidence (four visits) of lizard activity was encounter within the site. In conclusion it is indicated within the report that the site is used by individual animals from time to time and a precautionary approach should be taken if any existing buildings are to be demolished.
6.26 The report also concludes that the habitats/plant species within the site are not regarded as being particular significant or rarity within the Isle of Man.
6.27 Comments received from the Wildlife Division (DEFA) indicate that they considered there are potential lizards on the site and could have been missed by the reporter of the Ecologic survey. It is considered at this stage from the evidence produced; it is considered a single dwelling on the site could be accommodated without significantly affecting the ecologic of the site. Condition/s could be attached which required further site investigations and surveys be undertaken and such information be produced at any future Reserved Matters Stage.
POTENTIAL IMPACT ON HISTORIC STRUCTURES 6.28 Although of historical interest, the buildings have not been suggested or assessed for potential registration. However, Manx National Heritage has requested that a photographic survey and record is made of the existing structures. This can be dealt with by way of a condition.
7.0 RECOMMENDATION 7.1 For these reasons the proposal is considered to comply with the relevant polices of the Strategic Plan and therefore recommended for an approval.
8.0 PARTY STATUS
==== PAGE 12 ====
15/00636/A Page 12 of 14
8.1 By virtue of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) (No 2) Order 2013 as modified by the Transfer of Planning and Building Control Functions Order 2015, the following persons are automatically interested persons: (a) The applicant, or if there is one, the applicant's agent; (b) The owner and the occupier of any land that is the subject of the application or any other person in whose interest the land becomes vested; (c) Any Government Department that has made written submissions relating to planning considerations with respect to the application that the Department considers material; (d) The Highways Division of the Department; and (e) The local authority in whose district the land the subject of the application is situated.
8.2 In accordance with Article 6(3) of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure)(No2) Order 2013 and paragraph 2(1) of Government Circular No. 01/13, the following persons who have made representation to the planning application are considered to have sufficient interest in the subject matter of the application to take part in any subsequent proceedings relating to the application:
Manx National Heritage
8.3 In accordance with Article 6(3) of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure)(No2) Order 2013 and paragraph 2(1) of Government Circular No. 01/13, the following persons who have made representation to the planning application are not considered to have sufficient interest in the subject matter of the application to take part in any subsequent proceedings relating to the application:
Manx Utilities Authority - Electricity
8.4 The Department of Environment, Food and Agriculture - Forestry & Lands Directorate are part of the Department and should not be given party status.
C10. The details of the landscaping of the site to be provided as part of the Reserved Matters application should take account of the ecological value and natural landscape of the site and as such should avoid any large area of formal gardens.
Reason: In the interest of environmental and visual amenity.
C 11. The application for Reserved Matters must include a visual impact assessment, not only from the land, but also as viewed from the sea.
Reason: In the interest of visual amenity.
Recommendation
Recommended Decision:
Permitted Date of Recommendation: 17.08.2015
Conditions and Notes for Approval / Reasons and Notes for Refusal
==== PAGE 13 ====
15/00636/A Page 13 of 14
C : Conditions for approval N : Notes attached to conditions R : Reasons for refusal O : Notes attached to refusals
C 1. The development hereby approved shall be begun either before the expiration of four years from the date of this approval or before the expiration of two years from the date of approval of the last of the reserved matters.
Reason: To comply with article 14 of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) (No2) Order 2013.
C 2. Application for approval of the reserved matters shall be made to the Department before the expiration of two years from the date of this approval and thereafter the development shall only be carried out in accordance with the details as approved.
Reason: To avoid the accumulation of unimplemented planning approvals.
C 3. Approval of the details of siting, design, external appearance of the building[s], internal layout, landscaping of the site (hereinafter called "the reserved matters") shall be obtained from the Department in writing before any development is commenced.
Reason: To comply with the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure)(No2) Order 2013.
C 4. The application for reserved matters must include a detailed survey of all existing trees on site within the development area together with a method statement for the protection of all existing trees on site which are to be retained. The existing trees must be protected by the erection of fencing at an adequate distance from the tree trunk and during construction and demolition works the protected areas must remain free from vehicles and materials in order to protect the tree roots. Any work necessary within the protected area must be detailed in the method statement. The development must be undertaken in accordance with the method statement.
Note: the applicant should liaise with the Forestry Directorate, Department of the Environment, Food & Agriculture in the preparation of this document and observe the principles of BS 5837.
Reason: in order to preserve the visual amenities of the area.
C 5. The dwelling must be predominantly single storey and all built development forming the dwellinghouse, excluding the access and driveway, should be kept within the "minimum development area" (shaded in blue) as shown on drawing 28538-02.
The applicant is strongly recommended to discuss any Reserved Matters application with the Planning Directorate prior to submission.
REASON: in order for the dwelling to fit comfortably and unobtrusively into the landscape, it is important that it is a low lying development utilising the topography of the site to reduce the height and mass of any dwelling.
==== PAGE 14 ====
15/00636/A Page 14 of 14
C 6. Prior to any works commencing on site the access and visibility splays on drawing no 28538- 2001-03 rev A date stamped 05/06/15 (or subsequent drawing approved by the Planning Authority) shall be constructed and remain free from obstruction thereafter.
Reason: In the interests of Highway Safety
C 7. Prior to any works commencing on site all existing vehicle accesses shall be permanently stopped up.
Reason: In the interests of Highway Safety
C 8. The development hereby approved shall not be occupied or operated until the parking and turning areas have been provided in accordance with the approved plans. Such areas shall not be used for any purpose other than the parking and turning of vehicles associated with the development and shall remain free of obstruction for such use at all times.
Reason: To ensure that sufficient provision is made for off-street parking and turning of vehicles in the interests of highway safety.
C 9. No development shall commence until a full and comprehensive photographic survey of the existing buildings/site; has been submitted to and agreed in writing by the Department. The applicant is advised to consider the Planning Directorates advice leaflet on historic building photographic surveys.
Reason: In order to retain a record of the site in the interests of local history.
--
This approval relates to drawings reference numbers 28538-02, 28538-2001-003 REV A and 28538-03, Transport Considerations, Road Safety Opinion, Utilities Infrastructure Technical Report, Ecological Survey, all received on 5th June 2015 and the drawing reference number 28538-04 and the Planning, Design and Access Statement (both received on 29th July 2015 and 28538-01 REV received on 24th August 2015.
I confirm that this decision has been made by the Planning Committee in accordance with the authority afforded to it under the appropriate delegated authority.
Decision Made : Approved Committee Meeting Date: 24.08.2015
Signed : Mr C Balmer Presenting Officer
Further to the decision of the Committee an additional report/condition reason was required (included as supplemental paragraph).
Signatory to delete as appropriate YES/NO See paragraph 9 above.
Copyright in submitted documents remains with their authors. Request removal