09/01518/B Planning Officer Report

Application No.: 09/01518/B Applicant: Heritage Homes Ltd Proposal: Erection of a dwelling including garaging, ancillary accommodation and landscaping (comprising amendments to PA 08/02161/B) Site Address: - Plot 3, Ballanard Woods - Ballanard Road - Douglas - Isle Of Man ### Considerations Case Officer: Mr Gary Barr Photo Taken: Mr Gary Barr Site Visit: - Expected Decision Level: Senior Planning Officer ### Written Representations ### Consultations Consultee: Highways Division Notes: Do not oppose Consultee: Douglas Corporation Notes:** No objection.

Officer's Report

The Site

The site represents the curtilage of Plot 3, Ballanard Woods on the Ballanard Road in Douglas. This plot was granted approval under PA 07/01917 for the layout of 21 residential plots and is located adjacent to Ballanard Road, between the residential areas of Highton Wood Hill and The Castleward Green. The proposed dwelling is immediately to the west of the entrance of the estate at field 531750. The site is adjacent to Ballanard Farm and is north west of Cadran Cottage and The Retreat and south of Ballanard House.

The Proposal

The proposed planning application is seeking approval for amendments to the previously approved PA 08/02161 (Erection of dwelling with adjoining garage) which would consist of re-positioning the dwelling (approximately 6m) to the north east. Other alterations include the increase in eave level of the rear annexes, courtyard elevations have been revised, together with alterations to the garage. There would also be windows removed at the ground floor level to the T.V lounge / Den.

Planning Status

The application site is within an area recognised as "Low Density Housing in Parkland" under the Douglas North Local Plan, 1998. In terms of strategic plan policy, the following policies within the Isle of Man are established:

27 November 2009

09/01518/B

of Man Strategic Plan 2007 are considered specifically material to the assessment of this current planning application - Housing Policy 6:

"Development of land which is zoned for residential development must be undertaken in accordance with the brief in the relevant area plan, or, in the absence of a brief, in accordance with the criteria in paragraph 6.2 of this Plan. Briefs will encourage good and innovative design, and will not be needlessly prescriptive".

General Policy 2 states that:

"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."

Environment Policy 7 states:

"Development which would cause demonstrable harm to a watercourse, wetland, pond or dub, and which could not be overcome by mitigation measures will not be permitted. Where development is proposed which would affect a watercourse, planning applications must comply with the following criteria:

• (a) all watercourses in the vicinity of the site must be identified on plans accompanying a planning application and include an adequate risk assessment to demonstrate that works will not cause long term deterioration in water quality;

• (b) details of pollution and alleviation measures must be submitted;

• (c) all engineering works proposed must be phased in an appropriate manner in order to avoid a reduction in water quality in any adjacent watercourse; and

• (d) development will not normally be allowed within 8 metres of any watercourse in order to protect the aquatic and bankside habitats and species".

Low Density Housing in Parkland, Planning Circular 8/89, Paragraph 4, is also considered relevant and states: "Areas proposed for development as Low Density Housing in Parkland may be developed in accordance with the following criteria:- 27 November 2009

09/01518/B

• (a) buildings must be substantial, and designed and finished to the highest quality; and
• (b) each dwelling must be sited, in at least 1 acre ( 0.4 ha ) of its own grounds, such as to sit comfortably and naturally in a landscaped setting which acknowledges existing ground contours and existing trees".

Planning History

The following planning applications are considered relevant in the assessment and determination of this application: PA 84/00344/A - Approval in principle for housing development, Fields 1584, 1585, 1586, 1590 and 1592 - Permitted PA 07/01917/B - Residential estate layout of 21 plots, roads, drains, landscaping and open space Approved at appeal PA 08/02161/B - Erection of a dwelling including garaging, ancillary accommodation and landscaping - Permitted

Representations

Douglas Corporation has no objection with the proposed application The Department of Transport Highways Division do not oppose as it has no traffic management, parking or road safety implications.

Mr. Neil Milsom - Executive Officer - Fisheries (Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry) has commented on the proposed development. Having looked at the drawings he is 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. They have recommended that the applicant or their architect should include a basic method statement based around the points raised below.

1. Concrete, mortar and cement: These substances are highly damaging to the aquatic environment. Please give details relating to the use of these materials and how you intend to prevent their introduction into the watercourse.
2. Other toxic materials: Many common building materials such as paint, solvents, fuels, lubricants etc. may also be hazardous. Please give details relating to their potential use and how you intend to prevent the introduction of these materials into the watercourse.
3. Washings from equipment and works: Although they may be diluted, the washings from cleaning equipment and other works may also contain substances harmful to the aquatic environment. Washings often go unnoticed as the activity may be carried out some distance from the watercourse, however they can flow or percolate into the watercourse causing harm. Please give details as to how such washings are to be managed.
4. Sedimentation: Soil, clay or other similar material may form suspended solids once introduced to the aquatic environment these may have a physical effect on the organisms themselves such as suffocation and may also damage the habitat e.g. the destruction of spawning sites. Please give details as to how the introduction of such material is to be prevented.
5. Contingency \& Education: It is always wise to have contingency measures in place and be aware of what to do and who to contact in the event of an incident. Often simply seeking advice prior to any activity where an element of uncertainty exists can prevent such incidents. Please give details of what measures will be taken to ensure that the workforce is sufficiently aware of the potential hazards to the watercourse posed by the proximity of the works and what to do in the event of an incident arising.

Assessment

The proposed alterations to the dwelling and garage (increase in eaves level of the rear annexes, courtyard elevations have been revised, windows removed at the ground floor level to the T.V lounge / Den etc) would be relatively minor and acceptable.

It is considered that the new siting of the dwelling does not respect the site and its surroundings as it would not sit comfortably or naturally within the landscaped setting or does it acknowledge the existing ground contours. With the dwelling so close to the eastern boundary of the site, this gives the appearance that the dwelling is sitting uneasily within the large application site, with limited landscaping surrounding the property on all four sides. As such, the dwelling does not use the existing contours to its advantage, as the repositioning would consist of excavating a significant area of the bank on the eastern boundary of the site, which would adversely affect the character of the surrounding landscape and resulted in the property being easily viewed from the public thoroughfare. It is regarded that the proposal would be contrary to Low Density Housing in Parkland, Planning Circular 8/89, Paragraph 4, part b.

The previously approved dwelling was situated towards the centre of the plot which would provide future occupiers with sufficient amenity, from the neighbouring properties and from the access road which services the estate. With the dwelling sited only 2.5 m from the boundary (approximately) it does not respect the site and the spaces around them. Due to the significant scale of the dwelling (even though there is a considerable change in ground level) the proposed garage section of the dwelling would be clearly visible from the private access road and entrance of Ballanard Woods; to the detriment of the locality. As such, the re-positioning of the dwelling would increase the overbearing impact the proposal would have on the locality, it would fail to incorporate existing topography and it would reduce the privacy of future occupiers of Plot 3. This would adversely affect the openness of the estate and the character of the locality. It is judged that the proposal would be contrary to General Policy 2, parts b, c, f and g of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan, 2007.

It is acknowledged that the recommendation from Mr. Milsom of the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry that the applicant should include a basic method statement (based around the points which were raised in his correspondence), would be acceptable to mitigate the impact of the dwelling on the adjacent watercourse. If the applicant followed these points, the development should not cause demonstrable harm to the watercourse, which would comply with Environment Policy 7 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan, 2007.

Recommendation

For the reasons stated it is considered that the proposed dwelling would seem inappropriate in this location and would fail to comply with General Policy 2 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan, 2007 and Planning Circular 8/89, Paragraph 4, part b, therefore my recommendation is for a refusal.

Party Status

It is considered that the following meet the criteria of Government Circular 1/06 and should be afforded interested party status:

Douglas Corporation The Department of Transport Highways Division Mr. Neil Milsom - Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry

Recommendation

Recommended Decision: Refused

Conditions and Notes for Approval / Reasons and Notes for Refusal

C : Conditions for approval <br> N : Notes attached to conditions <br> R : Reasons for refusal <br> 0 : Notes attached to refusals

R 1. The proposed development would be contrary to Low Density Housing in Parkland, Planning Circular 8/89, Paragraph 4, part b - by reason that the dwelling would not sit comfortably or naturally in the landscaped setting and it fails to acknowledge the existing ground contours to the detriment of the surrounding landscape.

R 2. The proposed development would be contrary to General Policy 2, Parts b, c, f and g of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan, 2007 by reason that it fails to respect its siting, the existing topography and the spaces around them. As a result this would adversely affect the amenity of future occupiers of Plot 3 and the character of the locality.

I confirm that this decision accords with Government Circular No 10/09, Delegation of Functions (Development Procedure), GC No 11/09 (Advertisements) and GC No 12/09 (Registered Buildings) all to the Senior Planning Officer

Decision Made : Refused Date : Signed : Senior Planning/officer