**Document:** Officer Planning Report
**Application:** 08/00965/B — Erection of seven dwellings with associated parking and infrastructure
**Decision:** Refused
**Decision Date:** 2008-10-13
**Parish:** Lezayre
**Document Type:** report / officer_report
**Source:** https://planningportal.im/a/85548-lezayre-land-off-crescent-road-dwelling/documents/1558368

---

# Officer Planning Report

## Planning Report And Recommendations [Table omitted in markdown export] ### Considerations [Table omitted in markdown export] ### Written Representations [Table omitted in markdown export] ### Consultations [Table omitted in markdown export]

### Officer's Report

#### The Application Site

The application site is the land off Crescent Road, Ramsey, which is the parcel of land located on the eastern side of Crescent Road. The eastern side of the site is currently developed, and comprises a market garden/nursery. The western part consists of an area of undeveloped land (does not form part of this application).

#### Planning Policy

The application site is within an area of Predominately Residential Use under the Isle of Man Planning Scheme (Ramsey Local Plan) (No. 2) Order 1998, hereafter referred to as the Ramsey Local Plan. The site is not within a Conservation Area.

- The Ramsey Local Plan - Planning Circular 2/99
- The Isle of Man Strategic Plan (20th June 2007); Housing Policy 4, 5 \& 6;

General Policy 2 and Transport Policy

## Planning History

Demolition of existing dwelling and erection of a residential development of seven detached dwellings (adjacent site) - (07/01672/B) - APPROVED

Approval in principle for the development of 34 dwellings with associated parking (07/00388/A) REFUSED on the following grounds:-

1. "The proposed layout would be contrary to Policy R/T/P6 of the Ramsey Local Plan and Recreation Policy 3 of the emerging Isle of Man Strategic Plan (June 2007) in that the development does not provide adequate open space provision within the proposed layout.
2. The proposed development by reason of its design, layout and density will result in an over intensive use of the site:-
i) overdevelop the site resulting in the unacceptable road layout contrary to Manx Road 1 and Transport Policy 4 of the Strategic Plan within the area and result in noise and general disturbance to the amenity of nearby residents; and
ii) parking of private motor vehicles to the front of the majority of the dwellings building line will create a poor outlook for residents and would detract from the amenity of the area.
3. The proposed development makes no provisions for Affordable Housing provisions and therefore contrary to Housing Policy 5 of the Strategic Plan."

Substitution of house types on approved residential development of six detached dwellings (adjacent site) - (03/01676/B) - APPROVED

Demolition of existing dwelling and associated building to form new residential development comprising of 6 detached dwellings (adjacent site) - (02/00932/B) - APPROVED

Approval in principle for erection of either flats or houses or a mixture of both (adjacent site) (00/02447/A) - APPROVED

Construction of implement shed (90/00188/B) - The Nurseries, Queens Grove, Ramsey - APPROVED Erection of pair of 17 metre long growing tunnels (86/01456/B) - Flower Box Nursery, rear of Queens Grove, Ramsey - APPROVED

Erection of three polythene growing tunnels (85/01133/B) - Nursery at the rear of Queens Grove, Ramsey - APPROVED

Erection of glasshouse and two polythene growing tunnels (84/00753/B) - Market Garden, Land at the rear of Queens Grove, Ramsey - APPROVED

PROPOSAL The application seeks approval for the erection of seven dwellings with associated parking and infrastructure. The proposed scheme indicates house types similar in design and finish. Each dwelling would accommodate four bedrooms and all except housing type three would have an integral garage. The application site would be accessed via the proposed estate road approved under planning application 07/01672/B which would assess onto Crescent Road.

### Representations

Ramsey Commissioners have no objection, but make the following observation:-

"The drawings submitted as part of this application indicate that access to the development site is from Crescent Road through land which is indicated as being a development for an additional seven dwellings. Should the site which is the subject of this application be linked with the adjoining site both in terms of vehicular access and drainage as indicated, there would be a requirement for affordable housing as part of this proposal. The Board are concerned that the consideration of each site in isolation avoids the affordable housing provision. It is recommended therefore that, should the adjoining site form part of a planning application within the next twelve months that affordable housing provision for the combined site be implemented.

Insufficient details have been provided as part of this application in respect of drainage issues from this and the adjoining site."

The Department of Transport Highways Division object to the application on the following grounds:"The drawings provided are insufficiently detailed to evaluate the application, including sightlines for the proposed road onto the adopted highway."

The Police Force Architectural Liaison Officer has concerns which can be summarised as; no fencing is indicated to the boundaries of the dwellings which could lead to unauthorised access to the rear of properties; and it is recommended that the fencing and gating should be to a minimum height of 1.5 m to afford a suitable level of security and privacy.

The IOM Water Authority makes no comment on the merit of the proposed development but request that an informative note be attached to any approval decision notice.

The Chief Fire Officer makes no comment on the merit of the proposed development but request that an informative note be attached to any approval decision notice.

The owner/occupier of 41 Queen's Drive West, Ramsey, has commented to the application which can be summarised as; there is an unmade lane running between the back of our house and the site which is subject to deep rutting in wet weather when used by vehicles, the proposal should only have vehicle access via the surfaced road at the front of the houses; and the loss of landscaping due to concrete \& tarmac will effect the water table.

A resident of Seacliffe, Old Castletown Road, Braddan, considers the proposal would overcome the concerns of overdevelopment, but has concerns over the loss of allotments.

## Assessment

The principle of development it is considered to be acceptable. The land is zoned within an area of predominantly residential use and the western part of the land as indicated previously has approval for seven detached dwellings (07/01672/B).

The key issues in this application are:-
- (A) Parking Provision/Road Standards;
- (B) Affordable Housing provision;
- (C) Residential Amenity for Neighbouring Properties; and
- (D) Residential Amenity for Future Occupiers of Dwellings

Parking Provisions / Road Standards 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."

Transport

Policy 7: "The Department will require that in all new development, parking provision must be in accordance with the Department's current standards."

The Highway Division have objected to the application on the grounds that the drawings provided are insufficiently detailed to evaluate the application, including sightlines for the proposed road onto the adopted highway.

An additional concern with the application is that the proposed site cannot be accessed from the public highway (Crescent Road) as indicated on the submitted site plan. The plan shows the estate road adjoining the neighbouring site which has received approval (07/01672/B). However, on these approved plans the estate road does not extend to the edge of the boundary but stops approximately 2.8 metres from the boundary shared with the current application site. Notwithstanding this, the application depends on the adjacent application site, which is not within the ownership of the applicant and therefore the Authority could not attach a condition or enter into a Legal Agreement.

It could therefore be considered premature to approve an application until it has been demonstrated that suitable access arrangements can be provided, which could include the estate road to the adjacent site being finished to the appropriate standards prior to this development commencing. However with the ownership being outside the control of the applicant this may become a difficulty resulting in a "ransom strip".

An additional concern is with regard to the drainage provision for the site in that the proposed plans indicate drainage would be provided through the neighbouring site. Because of concerns indicated above, the application could result in the development not having the required drainage provision.

The parking arrangement for the majority of the dwellings is not clear, no soft or hard landscaping has been indicated and therefore no driveways have been indicated within the plans. It is considered the plans are inadequate to make a proper assessment to whether the site has adequate parking provisions.

Affordable Housing Provisions Housing Policy 5: "In granting planning permission on land zoned for residential development or in predominantly residential areas the Department will normally require that of provision should be made up of affordable housing. This policy will apply to developments of 8 dwellings or more."

The Commissioners have commented that considering this site in isolation, avoids the affordable housing provision from being provided, and therefore the two sites (western site) should be combined. Whilst the Commissioners concerns are relevant, the applicants for each of the developments are different; application 07/01672/B which received approval is within the ownership of "McArd Homes", whilst this application which is under currently under consideration is owner by "Braeside Developments". The previous refused application for the approval in principle for the development of 34 dwellings (both sites) with associated parking (07/00388/A) was an application made by "Forest Homes Ltd". While it may be argued that as the current site has a permission for seven houses it would not be appropriate to secure an affordable housing contribution. However as noted above, this application site relies on access through the adjacent site. Thus the combined development comprises of 14 dwellings in total. In these circumstances it is considered that it would be proper to seek a contribution in line with strategic Plan policy 5 . How this is resolved is a matter between the landowners.

Residential Amenity for Neighbouring Properties As the application site is surrounded by residential properties, it is important to ensure the proposal would not result in an adverse impacts upon the residential amenities of the neighbouring properties.

The two properties most likely to be affected by the development (particularly by the dwelling plot 3), would be the properties "Close Beg \& Fredor", both of which are located on Queen's Grove, north

east of the application site. The proposed gable end wall (plot 3) would be approximately 16 metres from the rear elevation of the two dwellings. The proposed dwelling includes two gable end windows which look towards the two neighbouring properties, however, the existing easterly boundary treatment (bushes/hedgerows approx 2.5 metres in height) would screen any potential views from the proposed ground floor gable window. The first floor window would be a landing window which does not serve a primary habitable room (living room / kitchen), and for these reasons would not result in any significant overlooking. Additionally, due to the distance between the properties and the existing boundary treatments, it is not considered the dwelling proposed on plot 3 would result in any significant loss of light and/or have an overbearing impact upon the neighbouring properties.

Turning to the remaining proposed dwellings, it is considered due to the distance, orientation, existing boundary treatments and design of the proposed dwellings, the development would not result in any significant impacts to the detriment of the residential amenity of neighbouring properties.

Residential Amenity for Future Occupiers of Dwellings The majority of the proposed dwellings are acceptable, all have appropriately sized rear gardens and all have generous internal amenity spaces. However, the relationship between plot 6 and plot 5 is an area of concern.

The proposal as indicated would result in the front elevation of plot 6 being located 5.5 metres from the gable end (southern elevation) of the adjacent property plot 5 . This would be especially noticeable from the ground floor kitchen window (habitable room) and the first floor bedroom window. The closeness would also be apparent when viewing from the ground floor living room window, although this window would not be directly adjacent to the gable end, unlike the two windows indicated above. This relationship would result in a poor outlook for the occupiers of plot 6 as well as the neighbouring property having an overbearing impact given the closeness of the two properties. For this reason it is considered the proposal; would be un-neighbourly a detrimental to future occupiers of plot 6 .

An added concern with this proposed layout, results in plot 6 having direct views into plot 5's rear garden, resulting in a loss of privacy. The living and first floor bedroom windows would be located 4.7 metres from the southern boundary of plot 5 . Due to these reasons, it is considered the proposed layout would result in un-neighbourly development, particularly in this case from overlooking.

## Recommendation

For these reasons given within the report the proposals would be inappropriate in this location and therefore the application is recommended 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: Ramsey Town Commissioners The Department of Transport Highways Division The owner/occupier of 41 Queen's Drive West, Ramsey It is considered that the following parties that made representations to the planning application do not meet the criteria of Government Circular 1/06 and should not be afforded interested party status:- The Police Force Architectural Liaison Officer The IOM Water Authority The Chief Fire Officer Mr Jessopp, Seacliffe, Old Castletown Road, Braddan

## Recommendation

Recommended Decision: Refused

Date of Recommendation: 30.09.2008

### 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 plot layout, particularly between plot 5 and plot 6 , would result in a poor outlook and an overbearing impact, resulting in a detrimental impact upon the residential amenities for future occupiers of the dwelling proposed for plot 6 . Additionally, due to the siting, orientation and proximity of plot 6 in relation to plot 5's rear garden, the proposal would result in a significant amount of overlooking resulting in a loss of privacy and therefore would be unacceptable and an unneighbourly development.

### R 2.

By reason of the only vehicular access to the site being outside the ownership of the applicant, the site cannot provide the necessary access to the development. Additionally, it would be premature to approve this application until it can be demonstrated that the appropriate arrangement for access can be achieved.

### R 3.

The proposed development fails to make adequate provision for affordable housing in accordance with the requirements of Housing Policy 5 of the approved Strategic Plan.

### R 4.

Whist the submitted plans/plots would seem to be able to accommodate the require parking spaces, no details of hard or soft landscaping having been provided and therefore, it is not considered the plans are to an adequate standard to fully assess whether the proposals would comply with Transport Policy 7 as indicated within the Isle of Man Strategic Plan.

### Decision Made :

---

*Data sourced from the Isle of Man public planning register under the [Isle of Man Open Government Licence](https://www.gov.im/about-this-site/open-government-licence/).*
*Canonical page: https://planningportal.im/a/85548-lezayre-land-off-crescent-road-dwelling/documents/1558368*