Planning Committee Statement

normally be accommodated within a predominantly residential area.

1. Loss of green space:

The site (including the "blue-lined" land) is largely surrounded by built, residential development. To the southwest, there is the landscaped space around Farnhill Manor, quist to the southeast is the corridor of trees along the stream course, but otherwise there is residential dev't which has been erected during the last twenty-five years, this includes and the primary school serving that dev't.

Most of the site is not identified as open space on the Douglas Local Plan, but it nevertheless makes a positive contribution as such to the general amenity of the area. Awareness of the value of such spaces is growing and is greater than it was at the time of the current Local Plan being formulated (the Order was made in 1998).

1. Impact on woodland and ecology:

In response to the earlier planning application (PA 03/816), the Planning Committee received written submissions from the Wildlife and Conservation section on DAFT, the Inland Fisheries section of DAFF, the Manaus Bar Group, and the Manaus Wildlife Farm. It is clear that there is considerable wildlife interest on the land, and that this interest is not confined to either the wet area or the woodland, but also to attaches to the whole area. Whilst these earlier submissions related to a proposal different to that now submitted, insofar as they relate to the ecological interest of the land, they remain material. Copies are therefore attached to this statement.

1. Implications for the dept of the blue-lined land:

The defined site is part only of that which was the subject of 03/816, and

includes only the land on which there would be constructed the "EM1" unit, the access road from Manor Drive, and the drainage arising from these. However, the layout is the same as proposed in the earlier application, except that the EM1 unit would replace 13 of the 33 dwellings then proposed. Whilst the current application does not seek approval for the other 20 dwellings, on the fact that these dwellings could be accommodated and serviced by the proposed dev't is a material consideration.

(10) Access/traffic:

The Highway Authority has accepted that the proposed EM1 unit would not cause traffic congestion in the proposed "estate road", and that the level of traffic generated would also be below the level which would make an unacceptable environmental impact. However, the Authority retains a doubt about the

Potential conflict between the roles of the road as an access route to the ENI unit and its possible role as a residential out de sac.

(19) Drainage:

The Drainage Authority has previously (in respect of FA 63/816) indicated that the itended method of discharging both foul and surface water would be acceptable. In the event of an approval, there would need to be a condition requiring the submission and approval of detailed engineering and drawings and calculations.

Recommendations

1. Whilst there are in this matter several issues of possible contention, the

Planning Committee has concluded that the fundamental issue is whether the ecological interest and value of the site are such that

(2) they are sufficient to warrant protection and safeguarding under the development central processes; and are such that the development now proposed, and/or implied by the application would have an unacceptably adverse effect on that value and interest.

1. The Committee accepts that this value and interest is not identified as

such in the Local Plan, and also accepts that the disposition of construction works on the land has been designed such as to reduce disturbance to those parts of the land having particular interest. However, the Committee has concluded that there would still result in some disturbance, damage, and fragmentation of habitats, and that these habitats are of sufficient value and interest to warrant protection. In so concluding, the Committee has noted that the land also forms part of a

. larger, almost