27 November 2009 · Senior Planning Officer (delegated authority under Article 3(13) of the Town and Country (Development Procedure) Order 2005)
3, Ballanard Woods, Ballanard Road, Douglas, Isle Of Man, IM2 5pq
The application sought approval for amendments to planning permission 08/02161/B for a dwelling with garaging, ancillary accommodation, and landscaping on Plot 3 in the Ballanard Woods residential estate off Ballanard Road, Douglas.
Click a button above to find applications similar to this one.
See how this application compares to similar ones — policies, conditions, and outcomes side by side.
The officer considered the amendments relatively minor in design terms (eaves increases, elevation revisions, window removals) but unacceptable due to the 6m northeast repositioning towards the easter…
Housing Policy 6
Requires residential development in zoned land to follow area plan briefs or criteria in para 6.2, encouraging good/innovative design. Mentioned as strategically material but not directly tested in assessment.
General Policy 2
Requires development respecting site/surroundings in siting/layout/scale/design/landscaping (b), not adversely affecting landscape/townscape character (c), incorporating topography/trees (f), and not harming local residents' amenity/locality character (g). Failed due to poor eastern siting (2.5m to boundary), bank excavation visibility, garage prominence from road, reduced occupier privacy/amenity, and locality overbearing impact.
Environment Policy 7
Prohibits harm to watercourses without mitigation; requires risk assessment, pollution measures, phased works, 8m buffer. Satisfied with DAFF method statement addressing concrete/sediments/toxics/washings/contingency near adjacent watercourse.
Low Density Housing in Parkland, Planning Circular 8/89, Paragraph 4
Requires substantial high-quality buildings on ≥1 acre (0.4ha), sited to sit comfortably/naturally in landscaped setting acknowledging contours/trees. Failed as repositioned dwelling sat uneasily with limited surrounds, ignored contours via eastern bank excavation, visible from road/thoroughfare.
Do not oppose has no traffic management, parking or road safety implications
No objection
Satisfied that the proposed works should have a minimal impact on the watercourse provided that good working practice is observed, and therefore DAFF would have no objections to the development. Recommended a basic method statement.
Fisheries (DAFF) has no objection provided good working practices are observed and a basic method statement is submitted addressing watercourse protection. Highways Division does not oppose due to no traffic management, parking or road safety issues. Douglas Borough Council has no objection.
Key concern: potential pollution of watercourse from construction activities including cement, toxic materials, washings and sedimentation
Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry (Fisheries)
Conditional No ObjectionHaving looked at the drawings I am satisfied that the proposed works should have minimal impact on the watercourse provided that good working practice is observed, and therefore the Department would have no objections to the development.; I would recommend that the applicant or their architect should include a basic method statement based around the above.
Conditions requested: applicant or architect to include a basic method statement based around points on concrete/mortar/cement use, other toxic materials, washings from equipment, sedimentation, and contingency/education measures
Highways Division
No ObjectionDo not oppose has no traffic management, parking or road safety
Douglas Borough Council
No ObjectionDouglas Corporation have no objection to the proposals listed below.
The original application 09/01518/B for erection of a dwelling including garaging, ancillary accommodation and landscaping (amendments to PA 08/02161/B) was refused on 27 November 2009. Heritage Homes Ltd, part of Dandara Group, appealed on 10 December 2009, requesting a procedure other than written representations, likely leading to an inquiry. The appeal process was initiated with notifications to parties including the Department of Local Government and the Environment and Highways Division, and the Council was requested to submit a statement of case by 12 January 2010. The appeal was withdrawn by the appellants before that date. Consequently, the original refusal decision stands.
Precedent Value
This appeal sets no substantive precedent due to withdrawal before any hearing or decision by an independent inspector. Future applicants should note that appeals can be withdrawn at any stage, preserving the original refusal without further scrutiny.
