Loading document...
Application No.: 21/00961/B Applicant: Department For Enterprise, Motorsport Team Proposal: Creation of a vehicular access Site Address: Lower Playing Field Nobles Park Adjacent To St Ninians Road Douglas Isle Of Man Senior Planning Officer: Mr Jason Singleton Expected Decision Level: Planning Committee Recommended Decision: Refused Date of Recommendation: 17.01.2022 _________________________________________________________________ Reasons for Refusal R : Reasons for Refusal O : Notes attached to reasons - R 1. There is no national over-riding need or rational reason demonstrated within the submission to warrant the creation of something 'temporary' which would not be introducing an element of harm (noted below thematically) to the area on a permanent basis. When cross referenced against Recreational Policy 2 of the Strategic Plan (2016), whilst the loss of open space is minimal, there has been not alternative provision explored or community benefit explored, it could be argued that it could create 'better accessibility'. However it is only for a seasonal use and not necessarily by the community on a continual basis. Also judging by the number of objections received there is little in the way of community gain. As such the proposal would not comply with Recreational Policy 2 as the principle cannot be justified and would equally fail the test of General Policy 2(a), as the land is not zoned for development and would prejudice the use of the open space that General Policy 2(k) seeks to protect. - R 2. The size of the proposed entrance gates and its bell mouth with macadam finish and concrete kerbs is not sympathetic to a park land setting or the character of the area and is considered over development with an adverse impact that affects the character of the setting, contrary to General Policy 2(b&c) of the Strategic Plan (2016). - R 3. The access would be introducing an element of development and use where presently there is none and would be considered to be read at odds with General Policy 2(g) of the Strategic Plan (2016) where the entrance use would affect adversely the amenity of local residents through the comings and goings of vehicles. - R 4. The use of the proposed entrance in a safe and appropriate manner would create an adverse impact on the existing highway or upon those users entering and or exiting the site contrary to the principles of General Policy 2(h&I) and Transport Policy 4 of the Strategic Plan (2016). - R 5. The proposed loss of trees would adversely affect the character and would detrimentally affect the public amenity value of this collection of trees where the proposals do not enhance or protect the landscape quality and nature conservation value to this site and hence the proposal is contrary to General Policy 2(c), Environment Policy 3 and Strategic Policy 4(b) of the Strategic Plan (2016). _______________________________________________________________
Additional Persons
It is recommended that the owners/occupiers of the following properties should not be given Interested Person Status as they are not considered to have sufficient interest in the subject matter of the application to take part in any subsequent proceedings and are not mentioned in Article 4(2):
as they do not clearly identify the land which is owned or occupied which is considered to be impacted on by the proposed development in accordance with paragraph 2A of the Policy; are not within 20m of the application site and the development is not automatically required to be the subject of an EIA by Appendix 5 of the Strategic Plan, in accordance with paragraph 2B of the Policy; as they do not refer to the relevant issues in accordance with paragraph 2C of the Policy and as they have not explained how the development would impact the lawful use of land owned or occupied by them and in relation to the relevant issues identified in paragraph 2C of the Policy, as is required by paragraph 2D of the Policy. _____________________________________________________________________________
THIS APPLICATION IS REFERRED TO COMMITTEE AT THE REQUEST OF THE HEAD OF DEVELOPMENT MANAGEMENT
1.0 THE SITE - 1.1 The application site is a small section of the road side walling to the south of Nobles Park and north of St.Ninians Road. This section is characterised by residential dwellings to the south of the highway and to the north (the application site) is a Manx stone boundary wall approx. 70m in length with a pedestrian gate to the western boundary and to the east a more formal pillared entrance into Nobles Park and the Pavilion. The levels inside the boundary here fall from north to south with the land to the north of the boundary wall and trees laid as grass and used as playing fields with football nets and exercise equipment. - 1.2 Behind the Manx stone wall are a number of very mature trees whose canopies interlink and overhang the roadway. It is noted these trees are registered, as a group referenced; RA2051 that extends parallel to the road and continues to the east and west of the site. - 1.3 Those residential dwellings opposite are noted as Park View; Ballaquayle; Wyndways. The former two are detached dormer bungalows in a traditional 70's style pitch tiled roofs, with
2.0 THE PROPOSAL - 2.1 Proposed is the creation of a vehicle access. On the application form the works are described as; "Create a new junction on St Ninian's Road adjacent to Nobles Park to enhance the facilities in and around the park area and serve to improve the visitor experience for the TT and Manx Grand Prix /Classic TT". - 2.2 The scope of works would see the removal of approx. 8m section of wall and the removal of one of the mature tree (Elm) to create the proposed entranceway. The end of the walls would be formed to make pillars and bi-fold metal gates finished in dark green and would be installed across the width of the entranceway between the newly formed pillars. - 2.3 Part of the entrance would see the installation of hardstanding bellmouth, 6.5m wide x 8.0m long into the site from existing kerb and kerbed with 125mm facing kerbs both sides and finished with DBM / Dense Bitumum Macadam or black Tarmac. Below this it is proposed to use Wrekin 'ProtectaWeb', within root protection zone areas. - 2.4 The applicant notes the following; that the proposed exit would only be used during the TT and MGP/CTT events and it would be closed/locked for the rest of the year and only when there is a traffic management plan in place, with stewards are on site directing vehicles and temporary fencing is erected. This means that vehicles will not be able to deviate from the intended path. This proposed exit is intended for vehicles using the car park only. As large vehicles i.e. HGV's will not be using the exit, there will be no need for extensive pruning of adjacent trees to provide significant height clearance. This design was arrived at through liaison with BB Consulting and Manx Roots. This alignment is thought to be the option with the least impact as it only results in the removal of one tree whereas other alignments required additional trees to be removed. The Department are happy to commit to plant ten trees as an offset for the tree to be removed. - 2.5 Also included is a Tree protection plan and a 13 page Arboricultural Impact Assessment with accompanying Tree Constraints and Tree Impact drawings, identifying the requirement to remove 1no category C wych elm (T09) in order to form the new entranceway. The removal of T09 and the potential premature loss of T08 and T10 should be mitigated with a considered tree planting proposal, this is as a result of the excavation within the root protection areas (RPAs) of 1no category B sycamore (T08) and 1no category B horse chestnut (T10) in order to achieve suitable levels between the existing highway and the open grassed area to the north.
2.6 The proposed replanting is 5No. Himalayan birch approx. 3.5m tall and 5No. Sweet gum
3.1 the land use designation is Open Space with the notation 'P' which corresponds to 'Park' in the Legend on Map 4 Douglas on the Area Plan for the East. The constraints map identifies the area also within an area containing registered trees. - 3.2 Within the written statement the broader application site is mentioned on page 93 where it notes; "Tourism Proposal 5 - The use of Nobles Park to support TT and Manx Grand Prix related uses will normally be supported, while applying the appropriate protection measures to open space and associated leisure and recreational facilities". - 3.3 The site is not identified as being at risk of flooding, or is it identified or adjacent to a designation Conservation Area. - 3.4 The site is within an area of Registered Tree Groups referenced; RA2051. THE ISLE OF MAN STRATEGIC PLAN 2016 - 3.5 The following policies are considered specifically material to the assessment of this application; - 3.6 Strategic Policy 4 (in part) Proposals for development must: (b) protect or enhance the landscape quality and nature conservation value of urban as well as rural areas but especially in respect to development adjacent to Areas of Special Scientific Interest and other designations; - 3.7 General Policy 2 (in part) 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:
3.8 Environment Policy 3 Development will not be permitted where it would result in the unacceptable loss of or damage to woodland areas, especially ancient, natural and semi-natural woodlands, which have public amenity or conservation value. - 3.9 Recreation Policy 2 Development which would adversely affect, or result in the loss of Open Space or a recreation facility that is or has the potential to be, of recreational or amenity value to the community will not be permitted except in the following circumstances:
3.10 Transport Policy 4 The new and existing highways which serve any new development must be designed so as to be capable of accommodating the vehicle and pedestrian journeys generated by that development in a safe and appropriate manner, and in accordance with the environmental objectives of this plan.
4.1 The application site has been the subject of one previous planning application that is considered specifically material to the assessment of this current planning application. - 4.2 06/01995/B - Creation of vehicular access and laying of turf reinforcement mesh to provide temporary car park, to be used during major events. Lower Playing Field Nobles Park Adjacent To St Ninian’s Road, Douglas. REFUSED. - 4.3 This application was refused at officer level and further refused at appeal and the refusal recommendation upheld by the then Minister. The Minister inspector concluded; "The Minister has also noted that some of the proposed works have already been undertaken. In these circumstances, he has directed that, within three months of the date of this letter, the access must be closed off, the boundary wall must be reinstated to match the existing, and the parkland repaired and re-seeded. Failure to comply with this direction will result in consideration being given to enforcement action under part 4 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1999". - 4.4 The appeal inspector in their report dated 19th July 2007 noted the main issues are (a) the principle of development, (b) the visual impact, and (c) highway safety, and concluded within their reports at;
4.5 20/01394/B - Creation of grass-crete roadway and pathway. Nobles Park, Douglas. Approved. The scope of works was mainly contained to north of the Nobles Park and connects onto Glencrutchery Road and internal pathways. - 4.6 13/91530/B - Erection of a temporary 240 bed hotel and marquee for a two week period (Practice and TT Race weeks) on a permanent basis. Approved with conditions limiting the use; "The hotel hereby approved shall not operate for more than 14 days each year and shall not be operated unless in connection with the annual TT event. The hotel building and marquee shall not be erected more than 21 days before the first day that the hotel operates, and shall be dismantled within 10 days of the last day of the hotel's operation. The site shall be restored to its former condition within 1 month of the hotel building and marquee being removed". - 4.7 07/02247/B - Creation of car park (refused at appeal), paving of roads and paths, formation of new pedestrian entrance, rebuilding of stone entrance piers and erection of metalwork arch (Split decision - partially APPROVED at appeal). - 4.8 09/01606/R - Retention of tarmacked area (retrospective). Land Adjacent To Nobles Park Pavilion. Refused at appeal and upheld by the minister on 21 April 2010. Where the
minister agreed with the inspector and also noted the removal of the hardcore and aggregate base and the tarmac surface and returned to grass.
5.0 REPRESENTATIONS (in brief - full reps can be read online) STATUTORY CONSULTEES
5.1 Douglas Borough Council commented (03/09/21) & (05/10/21) to support the application "subject to the applicant submitting an updated tree survey and additional information demonstrating that the proposed work will be carried out in line with the recommendations made by DEFA". - 5.2 Highways Services have commented (01/09/21 & 30/09/21) with no objection. - 5.3 DoI Highways Drainage Response Team have commented (30/09/21) seeking that no run off surface water run-off from the fields above drains on to the highway causing a concern for flooding. A form of private drainage would be required. - 5.4 DEFA Eco-Systems Policy officer Commented (15/09/21) on the benefit of urban trees, the multiple inconsistencies between the supporting drawings and details contained within the tree survey and report. The need for an Arboricultural Impact Assessment and Tree Protection plan needs submitting. The loss of the trees would need a native replanting proposals to comply with Strategic Policy 4. Also there is evidence of bats in the surrounding area so there is potential for them to use the trees on site for either feeding or roosting. A bat survey would be needed. - 5.5 DEFA Arboricultural Officer commented (04/10/21) to object; the inconsistencies between the drawings for tree removal; an up to date and correct AIA and TPP are required; With the removal of one tree, the surrounding trees roots would suffer damage as a result of excavation, compaction and disturbance; The trees either side of the removed tree would need extensive pruning to provide height clearance for vehicles; Concerns for the removal of ANY tree as they form an important visual feature in the streetscene and character of the area; the two veteran beech trees would be at risk of the bell mouth design and its proximity and should be afforded the highest level of protection. The cell web as proposed with its installation would not comply with the guidelines of best practice. Concerns on the level of tree removal, no replacement planting proposed. The existing AiA is wrong and flawed as the RPA have not been offset, Questions the validity of the categorisation of the trees; Tree 16 is not a cat B but needs reviewing. Strongly Objects.
On amended information commented further (10/09/21);
NEIGHBOUR REPRESENTATIONS (in brief)
5.6 There are a number of comments that have been received, who OBJECT to the proposals;
who between them raise the following material planning considerations that have been thematically categorised;
General Development impacts;
6.1 The fundamental issues to consider in the assessment of this planning application are;
6.2 The starting point here is the land use designation, which is designated as open space / parkland for the benefit of the public to enjoy and appreciate. The proposal would only be limited to a small localised area to the south west aspect of the overall site whilst the remaining would remain unaffected and is not proposing a change in how it is used throughout the year. - 6.3 The applicants have expressed that the proposed access would only be used for a temporary period that is specifically limited to correspond to those motorised events during TT and MGP in a calendar year, as an exit only and defined; "to improve the visitor experience". - 6.4 It is noted from the previous planning application noted in para 4.2-4.4 of this report, this application was broadly similar which proposed the creation of a vehicle entrance and only
6.6 The entrance to the park of this highway is legibly at the corner or bend in the road and allows access and egress for all user of the 'park' year round. The proposal (if approved) would undoubtedly alter the character and appearance of the area by introducing an 8.0m gate way where there is presently none and the loss of a mature trees on site which may or may not include the reduction of a tree canopy. This loss of Manx stone walling, whilst small in scale of the overall perimeter wall that runs around Nobles park would be would be considered a detrimental loss to the character and setting of the area. The size of the proposed entrance gates and its bell mouth with macadam finish and concrete kerbs is not sympathetic to a park land setting or the character of the area and is considered over development with an adverse impact that affects the character of the setting, contrary to GP2b,c.
6.7 The proposal, whilst only considered temporary in its use (limited to TT and MGP) would be introducing a vehicle entrance opposite those houses when this is otherwise a quiet leafy green area, irrespective of how often they use the access. The access would be introducing an element of development and use where presently there is none and would be considered to be read at odds with GP2g where the entrance use would affect adversely the amenity of local residents through the comings and goings of vehicles during the day but equally at night (when headlights are on) would be an unwarranted intrusion into the private enjoyment of those dwellings opposite. As it is the proposal would be contrary with GP2g. - 6.8 Highway safety Highway Services have considered the merits of the proposed access to and from the application site from the highway and assessed the radius for vehicle tracking. As the transport professionals their comments are heavily relied upon and it is noted they do not object to this application when assessed against their design criteria. - 6.9 Part of the proposal would see the extension of the existing double yellow lines for approx. 30m (average car length is noted as 6m in the PDO Class 14(g) which could equate to five on street car parking spaces being lost, which is not ideal. Nevertheless, the are no internal tracks or roadways shown / indicated connecting onto this entrance so it is assumed this "roadway" would be provided by temporary access or roadway to provide a stable road access to avoid scaring of the land. - 6.10 It is further noted the proposal is only for car access, however the vehicle tracking drawing (05) shows the tacking of a 16.4m articulated vehicle, which raises queries as to how the access would be used and without a full traffic management and parking strategy leaves us only to assume matters. If the access is only for cars (size wise) the width of the entrance could be significantly less in width. Given the above, it is debateable as to the use and full impact of the proposal on the highway and those using both the highway and proposed access to fully understand the use and its overall impact. Also to be considered is the pavements are used by school children commuting to and from the nearby school, and whilst there are pavements both sides and the proposed use would coincide with school holiday there is an impact upon pedestrian users that is not addressed within the submission. - 6.11 Having considered the highways safety aspect and the use of the proposed entrance in a safe and appropriate manner, it would be considered to have an element of doubt, in that it could create an adverse impact on the existing highway or upon those users entering and or exiting the site, from a planning perspective as is proposed. As such the proposal would be considered to conflict with the principles of Gp2 h&I and TP4. - 6.12 Trees and Bio Diversity The proposal, as indicated on the drawings (ref; Tree Impact) would see the removal of three Elm trees ref; T07,T09,T12. T07 and T12 are Elm trees of a category 'U' and of poor structural and physiological health. Also excavation within the root protection areas of T08 (Sycamore) and T10 (Horse chestnut). The Arboricultural impact assessment notes in their summary; "the
7.1 For the above reasons, the application cannot be supported and is recommended for refusal for five reasons. - 8.0 INTERESTED PERSON STATUS
8.1 By virtue of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) Order 2019, the following persons are automatically interested persons:
I confirm that this decision has been made by the Planning Committee in accordance with the authority afforded to that body by the appropriate DEFA Delegation and that in making this decision the Committee has agreed the recommendation in relation to who should be afforded Interested Person Status.
Decision Made : Refused Committee Meeting Date: 02.02.2022
Signed : J SINGLETON Presenting Officer
Further to the decision of the Committee an additional report/condition reason was required (included as supplemental paragraph to the officer report).
Signatory to delete as appropriate YES/NO See below
Customer note
This copy of the officer report reflects the content of the file copy and has been produced in this form for the benefit of our online services/customers and archive records.
Copyright in submitted documents remains with their authors. Request removal
View as Markdown