66378

==== PAGE 1 ====

                                      21/01435/B                                     Page  1  of  13

PLANNING OFFICER REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Application No. : 21/01435/B Applicant : Allprop Limited Proposal : Variation of condition 2 of PA 19/01061/B for the variation of condition 2 of PA 15/00636/A approval in principle for the erection of a dwelling, to extend the period of approval for a further 2 years Site Address : Former Howstrake Holiday Camp King Edward Road Onchan Isle Of Man IM3 2JP

Principal Planner: Mr Chris Balmer Photo Taken : Site Visit : Expected Decision Level : Officer Delegation

Recommendation

Recommended Decision:

Permitted Date of Recommendation: 16.03.2022 __

Conditions and Notes for Approval

C : Conditions for approval N : Notes attached to conditions

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 26 of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) Order 2019

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) Order 2019.

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

==== PAGE 2 ====

                                      21/01435/B                                     Page  2  of  13

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.

C 6. Prior to any works commencing on site the access and visibility splays on drawing no 28538-2001-03 rev A (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 blocked 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.

C 10. 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 visual amenity and ecological value.

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.

==== PAGE 3 ====

                                      21/01435/B                                     Page  3  of  13

Reason: In the interest of visual amenity.

C 12. The application for Reserved Matters must include an up to date ecological survey of the site. The ecological survey shall identify matters of ecological interest within the site and measures to mitigate ecological impacts where appropriate, including a timetable for their implementation. The applicants are recommended to discuss such survey with the Senior Biodiversity Officer of Department Environment, Food and Agricultures.

Reason: To provide adequate safeguards for the ecological species existing on the site.

C 13. For the avoidance of doubt no approval is hereby given for the indicative layout of the dwelling, a helicopter landing pad or ancillary guest accommodation as shown on drawing GHIM02/P001 or any office use (Class 1.2 or 2.1).

Reason: The application seeks approval for a single dwelling and the proposed features have not been considered. Further no detailed plans have been provided of these to fully consider.

This application has been recommended for approval for the following reason. It has been previously assessed that the development proposed for a single dwelling only is acceptable without causing undue harm to local residential amenity and also without causing undue harm to the natural environment, visual amenities of the street scene or cause undue harm on public amenity. No significant material circumstances have altered since the original approval in principle was issued. The only difference relates to the Area Plan for the East being adopted, not designating the site for development; albeit this essential remains the status quo i.e. the previous land use designation under the Onchan Local Plan also didn't designated it. Accordingly, whether the application is currently considered and determined under the previous Onchan Local Plan or under the current Area Plan for the East the issues and polices remain the same.

Plans/Drawings/Information;

This approval relates to the submitted documents and drawing all received on 07.12.2021 and email dated 03.03.2022.

__

Interested Person Status - 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):

The Owner/occupant of Digby house, Glen Road, Laxey

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

__

Officer’s Report

1.0 THE SITE

==== PAGE 4 ====

                                      21/01435/B                                     Page  4  of  13

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 for variation of condition 2 of PA 19/01061/B (expired 27.11.2021 but application was made before this date) for the variation of condition 2 of PA 19/01061/B approval in principle for the erection of a dwelling, to extend the period of approval for a further 2 years.

2.2 This application does not require to Planning Committee as the application is identical to the previous application which was approved by the Planning Committee.

2.3 The applicants previously have advised that; "Our concern is that we have a small but dedicated team and should any of the team contract Covid-19 it could very easily cause us to miss the current deadline. I would note that we are currently progressing the design with the client. I have included our current plans & elevations (indicative) for information purposes to show where we are up to in terms of design. We also still need to add input from various consultants such as the LVIA (Landscape Visual Impact Assessment), CGI visualisations & Landscaping. All of which will have to be co-ordinated into our submission. It should also be noted the additional complication of the LVIA requiring boat hire.

We would therefore ask for your consideration of an extension to this current application. Please note that payment for this extension will be made by the client."

3.0 PLANNING POLICY 3.1 In terms of local plan policy, the application site is not designated for development under the Area Plan for the East 2020. The site is not within a Conservation Area or a Flood Risk Area.

3.2 In terms of strategic plan policy, the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016 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."

==== PAGE 5 ====

                                      21/01435/B                                     Page  5  of  13

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 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.

==== PAGE 6 ====

                                      21/01435/B                                     Page  6  of  13

4.5 Planning application 94/00816/B sought approval for the erection of hotel with associated parking. This application was refused in 1994.

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."

4.8 Planning application 15/00636/A sought approval in principle for the erection of a residential dwelling with ancillary staff and office accommodation addressing siting and means of access. This was approved 28.08.2015.

4.9 Planning application 17/00910/B sought variation of condition 2 of PA 15/00636/A for the approval in principle for the erection of a dwelling, to extend the period of approval for a further 2 years. This was approved 19.10.2017.

4.10 Planning application 19/01061/B sough variation of condition 2 of PA 17/00910/B for the variation of condition 2 of PA 15/00636/A approval in principle for the erection of a dwelling, to extend the period of approval for a further 2 years. This was approved 27.11.2019.

5.0 REPRESENTATIONS 5.1 Onchan Commissioners (received on 11.01.2022) recommend approval, subject to a condition to satisfactory preliminary ecology appraisal. Further they comment that no further extensions will be supported.

5.2 Highway Services make the following comment (24.12.2021 & 07.03.2022); "Highways Development Control notes the reissue of the site notice notified on 22 December 2021 and makes no further comment on this proposal. The response on 16 December 2021 remains valid."

5.3 Ecosystem Policy Team (DEFA) make the following summarised comments (22.12.2021); The Ecosystem Policy Team consider that the original ecological report is out of date (being done 7 years earlier) and a new assessment is required; and We request that the survey reports are submitted prior to determination in line with best practise, which is referred to in Section 9.2.4 of the British Standard Biodiversity - Code of Best Practise for Planning and Development (BS 42020:2013).

5.4 The Owner/occupant of Digby house, Glen Road, Laxey (03.02.2022) comments that the pool within the site has become of interest to BMX groups who used it as an attraction and any new scheme should try to retain it.

==== PAGE 7 ====

                                      21/01435/B                                     Page  7  of  13

6.0 ASSESSMENT 6.1 The application is to vary a condition that seeks to restrict the time limit for the implementation of the application. This would have the effect of adding an additional four years to the time in which the permission should be implemented.

6.2 The principal issue in the assessment of this application is whether there have been any material changes, in planning terms, since the application was last approved; for example policy changes, a change to the land use designation, new or altered legislation, or site circumstances that would lead to a different decision being made.

6.3 Since the initial approval there have been a material planning change; the Area Plan for the East has been adopted and supersedes the Onchan Local Plan. The Isle of Man Strategic Plan policies has not been superseded and therefore continue to comprise the Development Plan. There have not been any relevant appeal decisions that indicate a different approach to those policies should be taken and no new legislation has been brought into force.

6.4 For information the complete Planning Officers Assessment from applications 19/01061/B & 17/00910/B) is included in full below;

"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.

==== PAGE 8 ====

                                      21/01435/B                                     Page  8  of  13

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 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.

==== PAGE 9 ====

                                      21/01435/B                                     Page  9  of  13

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."

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

==== PAGE 10 ====

                                      21/01435/B                                     Page  10  of  13

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.

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

==== PAGE 11 ====

                                      21/01435/B                                     Page  11  of  13

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 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."

==== PAGE 12 ====

                                      21/01435/B                                     Page  12  of  13

OTHER MATTERS 6.29 Comments from the Ecosystem Policy Team are noted that the submitted ecological survey report is now out of date and a new one should be proposed. However, in this case it is considered a condition could be attached which requires this, especially as all matters are to be considered at the reserved matters application stage and any ecologic findings can be fully addressed at that details stage.

7.0 CONCLUSION 7.1 It has been previously assessed that the development proposed for a single dwelling only is acceptable without causing undue harm to local residential amenity and also without causing undue harm to the natural environment, visual amenities of the street scene or cause undue harm on public amenity. No significant material circumstances have altered since the original approval in principle was issued. The only difference relates to the Area Plan for the East being adopted, not designating the site for development; albeit this essential remains the status quo i.e. the previous land use designation under the Onchan Local Plan also didn't designated it. Accordingly, whether the application is currently considered and determined under the previous Onchan Local Plan or under the current Area Plan for the East the issues and polices remain the same.

7.2 Accordingly, it is considered for those reasons it is appropriate to approve the variation of condition 2 and extend the approval for a further two years, and that the other conditions previously attached to that approval be carried forward here, should this recommendation be accepted.

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: (a) the applicant (including an agent acting on their behalf); (b) any Government Department that has made written representations that the Department considers material; (c) the Highways Division of the Department of Infrastructure; (d) Manx National Heritage where it has made written representations that the Department considers material; (e) Manx Utilities where it has made written representations that the Department considers material; (f) the local authority in whose district the land the subject of the application is situated; and (g) a local authority adjoining the authority referred to in paragraph (f) where that adjoining authority has made written representations that the Department considers material.

8.2 The decision maker must determine: o whether any other comments from Government Departments (other than the Department of Infrastructure Highway Services Division) are material; and o whether there are other persons to those listed above who should be given Interested Person Status

8.3 The Department of Environment Food and Agriculture is responsible for the determination of planning applications. As a result, where officers within the Department make comments in a professional capacity they cannot be given Interested Person Status. __

I can confirm that this decision has been made by the Head of Development Management in accordance with the authority afforded to that Officer by the appropriate DEFA Delegation and that in making this decision the Officer has agreed the recommendation in relation to who should be afforded Interested Person Status

==== PAGE 13 ====

                                      21/01435/B                                     Page  13  of  13

Decision Made : Permitted Date : 16.03.2022

Determining officer

Signed : S BUTLER

Stephen Butler

Head of Development Management

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.