DEC Officer Report

Applicant: Mr Robert Hill-Venning Proposal Approval in principle for the erection of a detached dwelling Site Address Land Parcel Adjacent To Ballasalla House Bridge Road Ballasalla Isle Of Man Case Officer : Mr Paul Visigah Photo Taken: 08.01.2020 Site Visit: 08.01.2020 Expected Decision Level Planning Committee Recommended Decision: Permitted Date of Recommendation 19.11.2020

Recommended Conditions and Notes for Approval C : Conditions for approval N : Notes (if any) attached to the 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 14 of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) (No2) Order 2013.

• 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, internal layout, means of access and landscaping (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)(No2) Order 2013.

• C 4. The reserved matters application shall be supported by a tree protection plan, prepared in accordance with the recommendations with British Standard 5837:2012 (Trees in relation to design, demolition and construction). This plan shall provide details of existing trees to be retained, the trees to be removed to facilitate the creation of the site access, and the management approach for the trees on the site. Any retained tree which within five years of the approved development being occupied or completed (whichever is the later) dies, are removed or become seriously damaged or diseased shall be replaced by a similar species, of a size to be first approved in writing by the Department, during the next planting season or in accordance with a programme of replacement to be agreed in writing with the Department.

• Reason: To safeguard the appearance of the development and the surrounding area, and to ensure that replacement tree planting takes place to mitigate the tree removal required to facilitate the development.
• C 5. Detailed drawings of the following shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority within the "the reserved matters" application: site access, internal pedestrian and vehicle areas, car and bicycle parking, waste bin storage and arrangements for collection. The details hereby approved shall be carried out in accordance with that approval. Reason: In interests of highway and road user safety.
• C 6. The Reserved Matters application shall be supported by a Preliminary Ecological Appraisal (PEA), adhering to CIEEM (2017) Guidelines for Preliminary Ecological Appraisal 2nd edition, undertaken by a suitably qualified ecologist and the reserved matters details shall be informed by its findings.

Reason: The land is not currently in active agricultural use and contains some elements of potential ecological interest, including hedging and trees and therefore may have ecological interest that should be protected in accordance with Strategic Plan (2016) Strategic Policy 4 and Environment Policy 4.

Reason for approval: Whilst the proposed scheme does not comply with General Policy 3 and the Southern Area Plan designation for the area, the site is enclosed by the settlement boundary on the north, and an area of Low Density Housing in Parkland (LDHP) on the east and south boundaries, and its position would ensure that it benefits from the existing and planned infrastructure and services for Ballasalla. As such, it is concluded that the planning application accords with the provisions set out in Housing Policy 4, Environment Policy 2, and Strategic Policies 1 & 2 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016.

_______________________________________________________________ Interested Person Status – Additional Persons

It is recommended that the owners/occupiers of the following properties should be given Interested Person Status as they are considered to have sufficient interest in the subject matter of the application to take part in any subsequent proceedings and are mentioned in Article 6(4):

Ballasalla House, off Bridge Road, Ballasalla Hunters Lodge, Bridge Road, Ballasalla Mill Kent, Bridge Road, Ballasalla

as they satisfy all of the requirements of paragraph 2 of the Department's Operational Policy on Interested Person Status (July 2018).

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 6(4):

Stone Mount, Bridge Road, Ballasalla Braddan Lodge, Bridge Road, Ballasalla

as they 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

Procedural Matters Whilst representations have been received from the Owners/Occupiers of The Stables at Ballasalla House, the property is not marked out as a separate dwelling on mapping records, making its status unclear. The only record related to the property is PA 86/00032/B for Alterations to re-roof outbuildings and incorporate two rooflights, Ballasalla House, off Bridge Road, Ballasalla, Malew which was approved by the Planning Committee on 14.02.1986. No application has been submitted for the conversion of the property and as such the status of the property as a separate dwelling within the grounds of Ballasalla House is uncertain. As IPS can only be afforded where information has been provided about how the lawful use of land would be impacted on, it has not been recommended in this case that the Owners/Occupiers of the following property be afforded Interested Person Status: The Stables at Ballasalla House, Bridge Road, Ballasalla, 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.

________________________________________________________________ Officer’s Report

THIS APPLICATION IS REFERRED TO THE PLANNING COMMITTEE AS THE SITE IS NOT DESIGNATED FOR DEVELOPMENT AND THE APPLICATION IS RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL

THE SITE

1.1 The site is a parcel of land (Field 434082) adjacent to Ballasalla House, Bridge Road, which lie on the eastern side of the A5 (Bridge Road). The site has an area of just over 1 acre and there is currently no field gate access into it as access to the site is currently via a timber field access on the land directly northwest which is within the ownership of the applicant. - 1.2 The land sits on the same level as the abutting access which is currently a private track but rises towards the eastern boundary making the land slope westwards. The entire site boundary save the site frontage is lined by a 1.1m hedging and line of trees which runs along the boundary. On the frontage of the site is an 800mm high Manx stone wall which is positioned at the rear of the stone wall. THE PROPOSAL

2.1 The application seeks approval in principle for the erection of a detached dwelling. The application seeks all matters to be reserved and therefore only the principle of residential development is sought under this application and all plans submitted with the application are only indicative at this stage. - 2.2 The applicant has provided additional information which states the following:

• 2.2.1 The approval in principle is for the construction of a four bedroom bungalow giving approximately 4000sqft of living area. The dwelling would include a double garage and conservatory and will be similar in style to the surrounding properties as illustrated in the indicative image provided.

• 2.2.2 Planning approval was previously granted for a house on this location (PA 85/00660/B), although the site is now excluded for development on the current Strategic Plan for the Ballasalla area. However, the proposed location is a few minutes walking distance from the village centre, giving ready access to schools, shops, medical and community facilities. The site is also surrounded by existing and established properties.
• 2.2.3 The site would require levelling and as such the details would be provided when the full application is made. This will be done to reduce the height of the land where the house would be situated so that neighbouring properties would not be significantly overlooked. The spoil will be removed from the site and/or used for landscaping.
• 2.2.4 Monks Walk is connected to the main sewerage system and the same can be done for the new property. However, if this is not practical, a septic tank would be created. These details would be provided in the full planning application.
• 2.2.5 There are a number of well-established trees around the boundary and a small number of young trees towards the front of the property. A survey would be provided when the full application is made. It is not expected that any trees would be felled for construction of the dwelling. For access to the site, two trees by the lane would need to be removed.

2.3 The applicants have also provided additional information in response to Highway Services request for additional information in a letter dated 11 May 2020 which addresses;

• i. access from the property into the private lane
• ii. Access from the private lane onto Bridge Road,
• iii. Transport Assessment PLANNING POLICY

3.1 The application site lies within an area not designated for development and within an area of High Landscape or Coastal Value and Scenic Significance (AHLV) on the Town and Country Planning (Development Plan) Order 1982. On the Area Plan for the South (2013) the site is featured on Map 4 Ballasalla as an area not designated for development. The following policies of the IOM Strategic Plan are considered relevant to the consideration of the application: - 3.2 Environment Policy 1: "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."

3.3 Environment Policy 2: "The present system of landscape classification of Areas of High Landscape or Coastal Value and Scenic Significance (AHLV's) as shown on the 1982 Development Plan and subsequent Local and Area Plans will be used as a basis for development control until such time as it is superseded by a landscape classification which will introduce different categories of landscape and policies and guidance for control therein. Within these areas the protection of the character of the landscape will be the most important consideration unless it can be shown that:

• (a) the development would not harm the character and quality of the landscape; or
• (b) the location for the development is essential."

3.4 General Policy 3: "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 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."

3.5 Housing Policy 1 states that 'The housing needs of the Island will be met by making provision for sufficient development opportunities to enable 5,100 additional dwellings (net of demolitions), and including those created by conversion, to be built over the Plan period 2011 to 2026'. - 3.6 Housing Policy 4: "New housing will be located primarily within our existing towns and villages, or, where appropriate, in sustainable urban extensions(1) 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."

3.7 Strategic Policy 1: Development should make the best use of resources by:

• (a) optimising the use of previously developed land, redundant buildings, unused and underused land and buildings, and re-using scarce indigenous building materials;
• (b) ensuring efficient use of sites, taking into account the needs for access, landscaping, open space(1) and amenity standards; and
• (c) being located so as to utilise existing and planned infrastructure, facilities and services.

3.8 Strategic Policy 2: New development will be located primarily within our existing towns and villages, or, where appropriate, in sustainable urban extensions(2) of these towns and villages. Development will be permitted in the countryside only in the exceptional circumstances identified in paragraph

• 6.3.

3.9 Paragraph 7.34.1

• 7.34.1 Every settlement in the Island has its own individual character and identity which needs to be conserved and enhanced. If such characteristics and qualities are not to be lost, any new development must be appropriate to the locale in terms of scale, siting, design, relationship with other buildings and land uses. Area Plans should identify important spaces within settlements, whether in the form of village greens, squares or areas which simply add to the attractiveness and interest of particular areas which have positive amenity value. It is important to the attractiveness and individuality of centres that over intensive development is avoided as well as the gradual merging of towns and villages in order to preserve a sense of identity and sense of place. In terms of existing settlements, in both rural and urban areas, new development will be expected to follow the following design principles. Development will need to:

• i. be of a high standard of design, taking into account form, scale, materials and siting of new buildings and structures;
• ii. be accompanied by a high standard of landscaping in terms of design and layout, where appropriate;
• iii. protect the character and amenity of the locality and provide adequate amenity standards itself;
• iv. respect local styles; and
• v. provide a safe and secure environment.

"Backland development(2)" (which is development on the land at the back of properties) may also be acceptable in some circumstances, but only if satisfactory access can be achieved and if there is sufficient space to provide adequate amenity for both new and existing adjoining dwellings.

3.10 Strategic Policy 4: Proposals for development must:

• (a) Protect or enhance the fabric and setting of Ancient Monuments, Registered Buildings(1), Conservation Areas(2), buildings and structures within National Heritage Areas and sites of archaeological interest;
• (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; and
• (c) not cause or lead to unacceptable environmental pollution or disturbance.

3.11 Environment Policy 4: 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;
• (ii) proposed or designated National Nature Reserves, or Areas of Special Scientific Interest; or
• (iii) Marine Nature Reserves; or
• (iv) 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.

3.12 Southern Area Plan also indicates that the site is within an area of Undulating Lowland Plain where the following advice is given:

"Castletown and Ballasalla (F7) The overall strategy is to conserve the character, quality and distinctiveness of this open area that contributes to the setting of Castletown and Ballasalla, to enhance the river field pattern and to conserve the aquatic habitat corridor of the Silverburn.

PLANNING HISTORY

4.1 The site has been the subject of a previous planning application which is considered to be relevant to the consideration of the current application. PA 85/00660/B for erection of fourbedroomed dormer bungalow with double garage, Land adjoining Monks Walk, Monks Way, Ballasalla, Malew. This was approved by the Planning Committee on 12.07.1985.

Note: The building was to be erected on field 432737 which was previously joined to the application site field 434082. This application preceded the Area Plan for the South 2013 which has now designated the field as land not zoned for development, although field 432737 for which it was joined is designated as 'Predominantly Residential'.

4.2 PA 84/00461/A for Approval in principle to erection of dwelling, Field 6786, off Bridge Road, Ballasalla, Malew. Approved at Planning Committee on 11.05.1984.

4.2 The following Planning applications within the vicinity of the application site could serve

• as reference for the current application;

• 4.2.1 PA 03/01805/A for Approval in principle for erection of dwelling at Land Forming Part of Mill Kent, (Approved by Planning Committee in February 2004).
• 4.2.2 PA 05/01915/B for Erection of detached dwelling on land adjacent to Mill Kent. Approved. Note: This application allowed for the fragmentation of a large residential site which is in an area classed as land in Existing Low Density Housing in Parkland and significantly reduced the size of the curtilage.
• 4.3 The previous applications for approval in principle which were refused for land to which the site was formerly a part includes:

• 4.3.1 87/04585/A - Approval in principle to the erection of two storey office block and associated car parking, land adjoining Silverburn Lodge, Ballasalla (Refused by Planning Committee on 25.03.1988).
• 4.3.2 98/02065/A - AMENDED PLANS - Approval in principle for residential development comprising 11 dwellings and demolition of public house/restaurant, land associated with The Poachers Pocket (Refused by Planning Committee on 08.10.1999).

• 4.2.3 PA 87/04585/A for Approval in principle to the erection of two storey office block and associated car parking, land adjoining Silverburn Lodge, Ballasalla;

REPRESENTATIONS Copies of representations received can be viewed on the government's website. This report contains summaries only.

5.1 The Department of Infrastructure (DOI) Highways Division who had previously written in to object to the application in a letter dated 21 January 2020 have sent in revised comments in a letter dated 26 October 2020, after receiving additional information from the applicant. The comments: The additional information addresses and provides evidence that:

• o A safe access can be formed at the site with a suitable layout and adequate visibility at 2 x 23m in each direction on removal and / or reduction of the boundary including vegetation and trees to a height not exceeding 0.6m to accord with a low speed and volume route.

• o Passage along for a relatively narrow private lane is unlikely to impede existing users based
• on an assessment of use.

The Applicant has recognised the issues with the junction of Bridge Road and the lane as being below current requirements, but has provided adequate explanation in relation to visibility, speed and flow to justify a relaxation away from the standard visibility of 2.4 x 90m.

Details are absent showing an indicative layout of the internal space within the site. For completeness, the eventual layout should conform to criteria set out in the Manual for Manx Roads at: https://www.gov.im/media/1359885/mfmr-103.pdf and in making a Planning Application - A Guide for Applicants: Supplementary Guidance on Highways Issues at: https://www.gov.im/media/1363894/making-an-application-guidance-highways-issues.pdf

Space would be necessary for:

• o A driveway to cater for pedestrian and vehicle movement; 3.4 m width shared; 2.5m where drive way is separate from a path, unless adjacent to boundaries when the recommended minimum width is 3.0m.
• o Vehicle parking and turning: The submission indicates three parking spaces above the minimum of two required under the car parking standards within the Strategic Plan. Any garage should have internal dimensions based on a standard single 6.0 m x 3.0 m with a minimum door width of 2.4 m to count as parking and storage of bicycle and other items. The recommended distance between the front of any garage and entrance gates is 7.0m. Where entrance gates are not to be erected this distance can be reduced to 6.0m. The minimum recommended length of any parking space within the curtilage is 5.5m.
• o Electric vehicle charging point.
• o Separate bicycle and bin storage, where applicable.
• o Contractor arrangements on construction.

An annotated layout plus explanatory details are necessary for submission at reserve matters stage. Additionally, given that the distances from the public road exceed standards, arrangements for waste bin collection, ad hoc collections and deliveries, and fire and rescue should be addressed and stipulated within any future application.

Accordingly, the additional information is sufficient to overcome the highway objection raised in its response dated 11 May 2020 and for Highway Services to not oppose the proposal subject to conditions to provide necessary details at the reserve matters stage including site access, internal pedestrian and vehicle areas, car and bicycle parking , waste bin storage and arrangements for collection.

Recommendation: DNOC.

5.2 DEFA's Arboricultural Officer has made the following comment regarding the application in a letter dated 10 January 2020: From a tree perspective the open area in the middle of the site, which is unlikely to have any tree constraints, makes it possible to accommodate the type of development described. The edges of the site, however, contain some trees which are likely to be worthy of retention. If the principle of development on this site is approved I recommend that you stipulate that any future reserved matters application is supported by a tree protection plan, prepared in accordance with the recommendations with British Standard 5837:2012 (Trees in relation to design, demolition and construction).

5.3 DEFA's Ecosystem Policy Officer has made the following comments regarding th application in a letter dated 6 November 2020:

Though the fields were mapped as improved in the Isle of Man 1991-1994 Phase 1 Habitat Survey, recent aerial photography shows that this area is potentially ecological interesting as it has not been ploughed or reseeded for at least 20 years and, apart from the north western section nearest the road, the area looks to be relatively untouched. The Ecosystem Policy Team recommend that ecological assessments are undertaken on all land which has not been ploughed or re-seeded for at least 20 years due to the potential for the land to have reclaimed its ecological interest.

Additionally, the field is surrounded by a number of mature trees and hedges which support a variety of native wildlife including bats, birds, invertebrates and other wildlife interest. The Ecosystem Policy Team request that a Preliminary Ecological Appraisal (PEA), adhering to CIEEM (2017) Guidelines for Preliminary Ecological Appraisal 2nd edition, be undertaken by a suitably qualified ecologist prior to the determination of this application.

Should the PEA identify the likelihood for ecological important features or protected species to be impacted then additional surveys will be required and a mitigation plan for their protection during, and after, the development, as well as any necessary compensation and avoidance measures must be submitted to the Department for written approval prior to the determination of the application. The applicant must demonstrate, as per Strategic Policy 4 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016, that the landscape quality and nature conservation value of this area will be protected or enhanced.

5.4 Malew Parish Commissioners have stated that they have no objection to the application in a letter dated 8 January 2020. - 5.5 The Owners/Occupiers of Mill Kent, Bridge Road, Ballasalla object to the application on the following grounds (2 November 2020/6 March 2020/4 November 2020):

• i. Details on Plans are not accurate
• ii. Location of the intended access which would impact on two healthy trees.
• iii. Right of ownership of lane still under contest in courts.
• iv. Poor visibility leaving lane onto Bridge Road and speed of vehicles at the junction which often exceeds 30m/h.
• v. The lane currently serves eight dwellings and not 2 as indicated by the applicant.
• vi. The lane is frequently used by walkers.
• vii. Impact on lane by heavy vehicles
• viii. Approval would be contrary to the area designation on the Area Plan for the South 2013.
• ix. Excavation levels are not indicated and as such overlooking cannot be effectively determined at the moment.

5.6 The Owners/occupiers of Hunters Lodge, Bridge Road, Ballasalla, the abutting property to the east of the application site have made the following comments regarding the application dated 9 January 2020:

We have considerable concerns regarding this application which are as follows; Although this is an application in principle, it is very vague. There are no proper building plans save for a simple sketched outline placed more or less in the middle of the site. The photographic representation of a large bungalow is purely illustrative and may bear no resemblance whatever to the intended build or indeed builds if there were to be an amendment to any such possible permission to allow multiple properties in the future.

The proposed illustration shows substantial bungalow with dormers which would estimate to be

• at least seven or eight meters high. The application plan shows the footprint to be situated at the highest point of this relatively elevated site. This would result in injurious overbearing

aspect with regard to our adjacent property. It is also worth noting that the ground on our side of the substantial stone wall marking the boundary is some 2 or 3 feet below that of the field in question thus further magnifying the effect of overbearance.

Other issues:

• i. Validity of ownership of access lane.
• ii. Increase in vehicles using the application site and accessing the A7 from the lane.
• iii. Impact on private access which is near the junction by the A7.
• iv. The applicant appears to exhibit a "relaxed" view on the need to adhere to stipulations, timing and conditions required by the Planning Committee.

5.7 The Owners/occupiers of The Stables at Ballasalla House, Bridge Road, Ballasalla, a property adjacent to Ballasalla House and shares the same access lane as the application property object to the application on the following grounds (6 November 2020/20 January 2020/13 February 2020):

• i. The proposal would involve felling of registered trees.
• ii. The applicant's statement "that the lane currently provides access to just two properties" is factually incorrect and misleading as the lane supports eight properties.
• iii. Site levels: The profile of the field does not lend itself to a property development and any attempt to levelling could have a significant impact on the surrounding properties in addition to a disruption to the field drainage.
• iv. Sewerage: Given the steep gradient of the land which also slopes towards my property I would strongly object to the installation of a septic tank.
• v. Limitations posed by Deeds.
• vi. Adding another property to the lane would increase the general traffic flow.
• vii. The proposed development site, field number 434082, is excluded from the development zones as scheduled in Map 4 of the Area Plan for the South 2013.
• viii. The building design detracts from the area as it is not in keeping with the characteristics of the adjoining property.
• ix. The proposed entrance is too narrow and would provide insufficient turning for a regular sized car given the narrow single track road and the drain ditches that run either side of the lane.
• x. Location of access.

5.8 The Owners/occupiers of Ballasalla House, Monk Walk, Bridge Road, Ballasalla, object to the application on the following grounds (19 January 2020/6 March 2020/6 November 2020):

• i. Alterations to create the access would require my approval given that I am the owner of the access lane. As the lane is a public right of way, being part of the "Millennium Way", full planning permission would need to be obtained by myself, as the owner of the lane, in order to make or alter any entrances on to such public lanes.
• ii. The applicant has not submitted indicative plans showing how it is proposed to enter the Field both during and after development. I would object to any alterations being made to the access points.
• iii. Adding another dwelling to the lane would increase the general traffic flow. This would have a negative impact on the maintenance of the lane, which forms parts of the "Millennium Way", and would introduce additional parking concerns.
• iv. I would object to any of the hedgerow or large established trees which line the lanes, and that form part of my property, to be altered in any manner.
• v. The field is excluded from development zones in Map 4 of the Area Plan for the South

(2013).

• vi. Due to the gradient of the field, and it being on a higher elevation to my property, my privacy would be significantly impaired by any such property built on the field.
• vii. The building design detracts from the area as it is not in keeping with the characteristics of the adjoining property.

• viii. Restrictions on deeds.
• ix. The applicant's statement "that the lane currently provides access to just two properties" is factually incorrect and misleading as the lane supports eight properties.
• x. Ballasalla House sits below the top level of the Field and therefore would be significantly overlooked by any property built on the Field.

5.9 The Owners/occupiers of Stone Mount, Bridge Road, Ballasalla, objects to the application on the following grounds (20 January 2020):

• i. The proposed development field is excluded from development zones in Map 4 of the Area Plan for the South (2013).
• ii. The applicant has not submitted indicative plans showing how it is proposed to enter the field either during the development or after development.
• iii. The proposed access would impact on registered trees.
• iv. Adding another dwelling to the lane would increase the general traffic flow.
• v. The building design is not in keeping with the characteristics of the surrounding properties.

5.10 The Owners/occupiers of Braddan Lodge, Bridge Road, Ballasalla, (located 75m from the application site) object to the application on the following grounds (24 January 2020):

• i. It does not conform to the development zones as scheduled on Map 4 of the Area Plan for the South.
• ii. It would represent an unwelcomed intrusion of a large unsightly building in a greenfield rural setting adjacent to a national walkway.
• iii. The lane is already in poor condition and would not withstand the traffic required to access the site during construction. The development would require the felling of trees.
• iv. The design itself is large and of a character entirely inappropriate for the location.

ASSESSMENT

6.1 Given the land-use designation and the type of development, the following elements are relevant to consider in the determination of this application;

• i. The principle of the development,
• ii. The highway safety Impacts; and
• iii. Environmental Issues.

- 6.2 PRINCIPLE OF DEVELOPMENT

• 6.2.1 The first and main issue relating to this application is the principle of residential development on this site. As outlined within the planning policy section of this report, the site is situated on the edge of the countryside and on land that is not designated for development on the Area Plan for the South 2013. Albeit, approval was previously granted for residential development on field 432737 to which the site was previously attached as a single field, with field 432737 still classified as predominantly residential on the Area Plan. It is also noted that the application site can also be classed as a sustainable urban extension of Ballasalla, given its location; enclosed by dwellings on the north, east and south, and in a position where it would easily be connected to existing services within Ballasalla. Whilst the Area Plan for the South classifies the site as 'Land not designated for any particular purpose', the proposed residential use for the site would be compatible with surrounding residential uses as it would be difficult to detach the site from the adjoining residential uses which envelopes most of the application site.
• 6.2.2 Based on the foregoing, it is noted that whilst the proposed development would fail to comply with GP3 which guides development in areas not designated for development, consideration should be given to Strategic Policies 1 & 2 which suggests that new dwellings can be located within sustainable extensions of existing settlements and unused lands so as to utilise existing and planned infrastructure, facilities and services. In conclusion, whilst the land has not been designated as a sustainable urban extension on the Southern Area Plan, the

• position of the site in relation to the abutting sites and field 432737 to which the site was previously attached (now designated residential land) indicates that this proposal would represent backland development between residential properties and this site which has the benefit of existing mature landscaping would represent an unobtrusive addition to the locality. Accordingly, given the above reason it is considered that the principle of developing the designated section of the site for residential purposes is acceptable.
• 6.3 HIGHWAY SAFETY/PARKING

• 6.3.1 With regard to impact on Highway safety, it is noted that there is currently a field access to the site via field 432737, although using this site access would require alterations to the size of the access to enable entry for larger vehicles. The applicant has however provided indicative plans to show the proposed location of a new site access that would lead directly to the site. This has been accessed by DOI Highways who are convinced that the principle of siting the access in the proposed location would be acceptable as it provides a safe access with a suitable layout and adequate visibility at 2 x 23m achievable in both direction on removal and / or reduction of the boundary including vegetation and trees to a height not exceeding 0.6m to accord with a low speed and volume route. As such, it is considered that the principle of siting the access as proposed would be acceptable, although the details of the actual siting and layout would be the subject of a reserved matters application which would follow the current application.
• 6.3.2 In addition, it is noted that Strategic Policy 10 recognises the direct link between the location of new development and the transport network, and requires that new development is sited in a sustainable location to minimise private car journeys, make best use of public transport and encourage pedestrian movement; a condition which the current location would comply with given the proximity of the site to a bus transit corridor along the A5 and other built development within the settlement boundary of Ballasalla.

- 6.4 ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES

• 6.4.1 Impact on trees/ecosystem

It is noted that many of the objectors have expressed concern over the removal of trees to facilitate access to the site. This is however, not considered to be of significant concern given that only two trees (as suggested on the supporting information provided by the applicant) would be removed to facilitate the creation of the access. Besides, these trees can be reinstated within the site via a Tree retention Scheme which would ensure protection for other trees not identified to be impacted by the development, in addition to providing for the planting of replacement trees on the site. This position has also been reiterated by DEFA's Arboricultural Officer who has indicated that should approval be granted, a condition requiring a Tree Protection Plan to form part of any future reserved matters application be imposed.

• 6.4.2 Whilst the Ecosystem Policy officer has indicated that a Preliminary Ecological Appraisal be carried out prior to determination of the application, as the mature trees and hedges on the site could support a variety of native wildlife including bats, birds, invertebrates and other wildlife interest, the required condition is not uncommon for an application of this type. It is however considered that only a small section of the hedging and trees would be impacted by the proposed access which would form part of the reserved matters application. As such, the requirement for such a condition would be better suited for the reserved matters application, like the tree protection plan required by the Arboricultural officer as the proposed access and other site details would form the core of a successive reserved matters application for the site. Therefore, a condition would be attached to ensure that the survey is integral to any reserved matters application for the site.
• 6.4.3 With regard to the site area (field), it is not considered that the site is untouched, or that the field is undisturbed to the extent as to possess any ecological value as has been indicated. This is hinged on the fact that the observations during the site visit on 8 January

2020 showed that the site comprises predominantly a turfed field that is currently being managed and tended regularly; a condition that would limit colonisation by plant species through uncontrolled or natural seeding or impede the potential for the land to reclaim its ecological interest. It is however, worth noting that this may not be the case for the hedges and stone walls surrounding the site which may still hold the potential to house biota.

- 6.5 OTHER ISSUES

• 6.5.1 Legal Issues

Another issue that has formed the core of most of the submissions by interested parties on the application relates to deeds and covenants within land agreements. It is however, worth noting that the issue of Covenants or details contained within Deeds are civil legal issues that lie outside the scope of the planning application as land ownership is a civil matter and would hold no weight in the assessment of a planning application. Any determination under the Town and Country Planning Act 1999 can neither create nor detract from land ownerships, any right of way, or other civil legal rights and obligations as may exist between the parties. Considering these bear no weight in a planning decision, the application has been assessed with respect to the aforementioned Strategic Plan policies which set the benchmark for assessing proposed developments without respect given to covenants and agreement which have been referenced.

• 6.5.2 Details of Matters to be determined under current application

As has been previously stated in Section 2 of this report, only the principle of a single dwelling is for consideration now. All details relating to details of siting, design, external appearance of the building[s], internal layout, drainage (foul and surface water), means of access, and landscaping of the site would be considered at a Reserved Matter Application. The issues bordering on the positioning of access discussed within the application are indicative and only offshoots of discussions between Highway Services and the applicant to ensure that there are no unanticipated impacts on Highway safety given that the site currently does not have a direct access. As such, the issues not bordering on the indicative access referred to in representations would be better addressed in the reserved matters application where the representations relating to the access matters would hold weight.

CONCLUSION

7.1 Overall, it is considered the principle of residential development is appropriate on this site for the reason indicated and it is therefore recommended that the application be approved. INTERESTED PERSON STATUS - 8.1 By virtue of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) (No 2) Order 2013 Article 6(4), the following persons are automatically interested persons:

• (a) The applicant, or if there is one, the applicant's agent;
• (b) The owner and the occupier of any land that is the subject of the application or any other person in whose interest the land becomes vested;
• (c) Any Government Department that has made written submissions relating to planning considerations with respect to the application that the Department considers material
• (d) Highway Services Division of Department of Infrastructure and
• (e) The local authority in whose district the land the subject of the application is situated.

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 in Article 6(4) 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 confirm that this decision has been made by the Planning Committee in accordance with the authority afforded to it under the appropriate delegated authority.

Decision Made : Refused Committee Meeting Date: 30.11.2020

Signed : P VISIGAH 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.

Planning Committee Decision 30.11.2020

Application No. : 19/01402/A Applicant : Mr Robert Hill-Venning Proposal : Approval in principle for the erection of a detached dwelling Site Address : Land Parcel Adjacent To Ballasalla House Bridge Road Ballasalla Isle Of Man

Planning Officer : Mr Paul Visigah Presenting Officer As above

Addendum to the Officer’s Report

The Planning Committee declined the recommendation of the Case Officer and refused the application at its meeting of 30th November, 2020 for the following reasons:

• R1: The development would fail to comply with General Policy 3 and Environment Policy 1 of the Strategic Plan as it would constitute development in the countryside on land not designated for development, and would adversely affect the countryside value due to the loss of trees, and impact on the landscape and ecology.
• R2: Insufficient information has been provided to support that the proposed development would not impact on the ecology of the site, and as such the development is considered to be contrary to Environment Policy 4 and Strategic Policy 4 of the Strategic Plan.

Interested Person Status: Whilst it was recommended that the owners/occupiers of the following properties should not be given Interested Person Status: Stone Mount, The Planning Committee deviated from the Operational Policy on Interested Persons with regard to the above property as it felt the property is positioned at the access to the lane with high potential to be impacted by development within the lane. The narrow nature of the access would exacerbate any impacts on Stone Mount due to its proximity to the entrance to the lane.