Loading document...
The site defined in red represents a parcel of land to the south east of Westham Croft, Westham Cottage and Westham Lodge which are situated on the north eastern side of Arbory Road between Westhill Lodge to the north west, Westham to the north east and The Vicarage to the south east. The area edged red fronts onto Arbory Road although has no access thereto and is bordered to the south east by the entrance to Westham.
The site is almost entirely covered by the canopies of the trees within the site (see aerial photograph) - there is an area at the north western end of the site, closest to Westham Cottage and Westham Lodge which presently accommodates a garage and which has planning permission for car parking in association with Westham Cottage and Westham Croft through the removal of the garage (PA 08/0572). The single tree within this part of the site is shown as being retained within the parking spaces. Work is presently underway on this scheme with the garages having been removed and vehicles are parked in the area around the former garage.
The site is within an area designated on the extant Castletown Local Plan of 1991 as Woodland. This zone extends much wider than the application site and includes the existing access to Westham and the land to the rear, to the rear of Croft House on the Crofts.
In 2001 a draft Area Plan was prepared for Castletown and this identified more specifically those undeveloped areas within the Woodland zone which actually accommodated trees and this identifies two areas within the 1991 Local Plan Woodland as being suitable for the development of dwellings - Areas I and J on the Area Plan, Area I lying to the rear of Westham and being suitable for one dwelling and Area J lying to the rear of The Crofts and being suitable for up to three dwellings. Planning permission has been granted in detail for the single dwelling to the rear of Westham (PA 08/1079).
The draft Area Plan was never progressed to a public inquiry but the draft plan was published as an indication of Departmental thinking at the time. A number of decisions have been taken in respect of the provisions of this plan, including land at Gardenfield, Area L on the plan alongside Malew Football Club, off Malew Road. where an Inspector considering an application for development, notes that the draft Area Plan was in the process of preparation and the extant Local Plan was of a considerable age and recommended that the principle of development was acceptable. PA 02/2133 sought approval in principle for the principle of two dwellings on the site and was refused on appeal for reasons relating to access. The Inspector commented that "significant weight should be given to the proposal to designate the land for two dwellings" on the basis of the stage of the draft plan and rejected a claim
that the proposal was premature as the plan had not been adopted. He recommended that the application be refused on the grounds that the access onto Malew Road was inadequate and incapable of improvement without significant additional changes.
PA 04/0349 proposed the principle of two residential plots on the Gardenfield site with access onto the By-pass. Again, the Inspector notes the emerging draft Area plan and notes that "some 13 years has elapsed since this plan was adopted and therefore its importance has diminished with the passage of time and changing circumstance. The emerging plan for Castletown states that two single storey dwellings may be accommodated on the site outside the public safety zone but this is predicated on improvement of the access and onto Malew Road" (paragraph 18). He then goes on to recommend refusal on the grounds that the proposed access was not acceptable. He noted that the Planning Committee's grounds for refusal did not include any reference to prematurity. This site has subsequently been the subject of a successful full detailed application for two dwellings.
The Department is in the process of preparing an Area Plan for the south of the Island and has completed the preliminary publicity stage.
No applications have been submitted in respect of the application site which is edged in red. Development has been proposed in the area edged blue in the form of the creation of the car parking referred to above and also alterations to the buildings within this application.
Proposed now is the redevelopment of the garage which was the subject of PA 08/0572 to create a new dwelling and the erection of a second dwelling further to the south east within the wooded area. The submitted plan includes a survey of the trees on site and their positions and canopy spread although the aerial photograph and the tree branch spread which was observed on site would suggest that in full leaf the trees provide a full cover of the site with no spaces between the canopies contrary to what is suggested by the submitted plans. The survey provides the species type and the circumference of the trunk but no heights. On site observation would suggest that the trees are of a significant height – up to 12m. The trees include yew, sycamore, elm and ash. Two of the trees are stated as being host to rooks and one tree potentially as a bat roost. Rooks were seen on the officer's site visit, flying over the site but not landing on any of the trees. Two large nests were observed on the trees close to the road.
The application submission includes supporting information and suggests that whilst the site is designated as Woodland, this is an anomaly as permission has been granted for the erection of a dwelling to the rear of Westham (PA 08/1079). The submission acknowledges that the site is part of the garden of Westham Cottage which is designated as Residential on the Castletown Local Plan. No reference is made in the submission to the draft Area Plan, despite weight being placed upon it by Inspectors considering the development of other parts of Castletown. Reference is made to the provisions of the Isle of Man Planning Scheme (Development Plan) Order 1982, despite this being superseded by the Local Plan in 1991. The Isle of Man Planning Scheme (Development Plan) Order 1982 designates the site as Existing Predominantly Residential together with all of the surrounding land excluding the two schools. No Woodland is identified in this area on this plan.
The applicant states that he is "puzzled" that the garden of Westham which was zoned as residential in the 1982 Plan was changed to Private Woodland in 1990 and suggests that the site should have remained Residential like the Vicarage and the current land use on the other side of Arbory Road.
The applicant has further clarified that they hoped to fell, prune and pollard some of the trees prior to the application being determined and a felling licence has been refused. They also confirm that Manx Wildlife Trust have recommended the felling of certain trees due to poor health (numbers 22 and 36). Others, numbers 42, 5, 17, 31 and 29 area described as showing signs of decay although Manx Wildlife Trust do not recommend that these trees are removed and indicate that they may be potential bat roosts and tree numbered 18 which would need to be required to make way for the
development. Manx Wildlife Trust conclude that there is in theory space within the plot to accommodate the construction of a new property (the application is actually for two dwellings) without felling any tress other than those which are already dead or are showing signs of stress and decay. They add that however, any such construction would inevitably fall within the root area of the remaining trees and as such the construction of foundations would impact on the remaining trees through disturbance and damage to the root systems. They also not the potential for shading and potential for risk of damage through storms.
Castletown Commissioners indicate that they do not oppose the application as they consider precedents have been established already for building within the woodland and the site has always been part of the garden of Westham Cottages. They also comment that by reducing the canopy spread will render the street lighting more effective.
Department of Transport Highways and Traffic Division indicate that they have no objection subject to two parking spaces being provided
Manx Wildlife Trust suggest that there is a large rookery in the vicinity of the site and if dwellings are built close to it, there are likely to be issues.
Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry suggest that a bat survey should be undertaken prior to the issue of any approval on this site. They also suggest that there is a question over whether there is sufficient space within the site for two dwellings together with the space necessary for the character, growth, natural appearance and evolution of the woodland to be safeguarded
Stuart Smalley _ Co object on behalf of an unnamed client (who on further inquiry occupies Westham House) on the basis that there will be a loss of amenity through overlooking of his client's garden and damage to wildlife and trees.
The occupants of 42, The Crofts advise that development of this site would be "disappointing" as there is so little broad leaved woodland remaining in the town and that this area contributes to the attractiveness and general character of the properties in the centre of Castletown. They also question the number of trees to be removed and the logistics of actually carrying out the development.
Department of Transport Drainage Division recommend conditions regarding the connection of the development to the main sewerage system with no discharge of surface water to the main foul sewer. The application states that the development will be connected to the main sewer for both surface water and foul discharges so there is no need for a condition relating to foul sewage. However, it is not stated that the surface water will not be discharged to the main foul sewer so a condition to this effect would be required if the application were to be approved.
A resident of Port Soderick recommends that the prevailing land use designation should be respected and that if the developer is not content with this, he should make representations to the Southern Plan. The applicant has indeed made such representations prior to the submission of the planning application. This objector suggests that the proposal is contrary to Environment Policies 3 and 42.
The suggestions about the designation of the site and what it should be designated for perhaps belies a misunderstanding of the character of the area and the need to identify areas which are characterised by trees and are therefore considered to be Woodland in planning terms rather than residential where there would be a presumption in favour of development. There is clearly a significant difference between the character and appearance of the site and the adjacent cottages and the residential development on the southern side of Arbory Road and it is puzzling to imagine why the two areas should be subjected to the same designation. The Strategic Plan contains advice concerning the protection of Woodland, Environment Policy 3 states "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". Environment Policy 42 also adds that "New development in existing settlements must be designed to take account of the particular character and identity, in terms of buildings and landscape features of the immediate locality. Inappropriate backland development, and the removal of open or green spaces which contribute to the visual amenity and sense of place of a particular area will not be permitted. Those open or green spaces which are to be preserved will be identified in Area Plans."
In this case, the 1990 Local Plan attempted to identify the character of the woodland by introducing this designation within the residential area and this was clearly a broad brush approach which excluded existing buildings and spaces within the woodland. The draft Area Plan attempted to look more closely at the woodland areas and to consider whether there were any opportunities for development within the trees and concluded that there were two opportunities - one for a single dwelling to the rear of Westham and the other, the open field to the rear of The Crofts. Indeed it has been demonstrated in the approval of PA 08/1079 that there is sufficient space for the construction of a dwelling to the rear of Westham without damaging any of the trees.
In this case, the submitted plans acknowledge that in order to fit two dwellings onto the site, trees will need to be removed. The existing site layout plan, reference B102 shows seven trees to be removed - three elms, one ash, two sycamores and one conifer which is described as dead. Two of these trees, numbered 29 and 31 (an elm and a sycamore) form a link between the roadside trees and those further into the site and one, numbered 5 is stated as being a potential bat roost and accommodates rooks. The detailed site layout, reference B103 shows also the removal of further trees - numbered 4 (the elm alongside another elm, number 5 which is shown in the existing site plan as being removed) and a small elder which is below the diameter which would establish it as a tree (and therefore would not require permission from Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry for its felling). The canopies of two trees - numbered 6 and 9 are shown on the plans as falling within the footprint of the two dwellings and almost all of the trees on site are considered to be within falling distance of either one or both proposed dwellings. Again, it should be noted that the aerial photograph and the site inspection would suggest that the canopy spreads are greater than are shown on the proposed plans and as such, the canopy spread and therefore root spreads of further trees would be affected by the construction of these dwellings. Furthermore, the proposed access to the second dwellings would cut through the canopy and root spreads of a number of trees and the trunk of tree numbered 16 would be 0.3m from the access which would render this tree - a large ash - unviable if the scheme were to proceed.
As such, the plans demonstrate a failure to appreciate the impact of construction on the existing trees – both in terms of how development whilst being undertaken will affect the trees – if the trees are to be protected in accordance with standard levels of protection, that is, erecting fencing under the dripline to protect the roots, the dwellings and access would simply not be able to be constructed. This does not take account of the need for space within the site for machinery and vehicles to manoeuvre and for materials to be stored. The passage of heavy vehicles over tree roots and the storage of materials can both result in tree loss through root compaction either immediately or in the longer term. Even if the dwellings could be physically constructed, due to the proximity of the trees, it is likely that the darkening effect of the trees, their proximity and potential for falling and the effect of leaf drop and the presence of birds are all likely to further threaten the life of the trees in the longer term.
Also, the proposal to erect a dwelling in the position of the former garage would remove the opportunity for the creation of parking to serve the existing properties - Westham Cottage and Westham Croft, to the detriment of road safety and the amenities of those in these properties.
Whilst the proposed dwellings would be close to the boundary with Westham House, the house itself is some distance from the application site and the existing and potentially additional planting could remove the opportunity for inter-visibility between the garden of Westham House and the new dwellings.
Whilst some of the trees may not be in perfect health, it is unlikely that any woodland comprises trees which are all completely healthy and stress-free, and whilst some trees should be felled due to their health, it does not follow that it is always acceptable to build within the remaining space. In order for woodlands to endure for the benefit of wildlife and the community, trees need to be managed and new trees planted rather than building being introduced whenever spaces occur.
The Department of Transport and the local authority are, by virtue of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) Order 2005, paragraph 6 (5) (c) and (d), considered "interested persons" and as such should be afforded party status.
The occupant of Westham House is immediately alongside the site and as such should be afforded party status in this instance.
The occupant of 42, The Crofts and the resident of Port Soderick are not directly affected by the development and should not be afforded party status in this instance.
Manx Wildlife Trust are not a statutory authority and should not be afforded party status in this instance.
Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry however are a statutory authority and raise material planning concerns and should be afforded party status in this instance.
Recommended Decision: Refused
Date of Recommendation: 06.01.2009
C : Conditions for approval N : Notes attached to conditions R : Reasons for refusal
R 1. The site lies within an area of Woodland on both the extant Castletown Local Plan of 1991 and the draft Castletown Area Plan of 2001. As such, the erection of dwellings within this area would be contrary to the provisions of the prevailing land use document.
R 2. Furthermore, the erection of the dwellings and access would result in the direct removal of established trees to make way for the buildings themselves, further would be lost as a result of the activity involved in the construction and thereafter, the potential for requests for tree felling as a result of the darkening effect of the trees, the inconvenience of leaf drop and birds nesting in the trees and the potential for trees falling, resulting in the diminution or loss of the woodland which would be detrimental to the appearance and character of the area and to the wildlife which it supports. This would also be contrary to Environment Policy 3 of the Strategic Plan which states that
"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". This area of trees is an important landscape feature in this built up area and may support bats which are protected under the Wildlife Act 1990. The development would also be contrary to Environment Policy 42 which presumes against the loss of green spaces within built up areas where these contribute to the amenity of the area.
R 3.
The erection of a dwelling in place of the existing garage would remove the opportunity for off road parking for Westham Croft, Westham Lodge and Westham Cottage. Such parking has approval under the provisions of PA 08/0572.
I confirm that this decision accords with Government Circular No 31/07 (Delegation of Functions to Senior Planning Officer)
Decision Made : Refused Date: 15/1/09
Signed: DByA Senior Planning Officer
Copyright in submitted documents remains with their authors. Request removal
View as Markdown