Loading document...
| Application No.: | 14/00209/B |
| Applicant: | Mr Richard James Morris |
| Proposal: | Erection of three detached dwellings with associated parking |
| Site Address: | Field 434035 Adjacent To Gardenfield And Irwell Malew Road Castletown Isle Of Man |
THIS APPLICATION IS REFERRED TO THE PLANNING COMMITTEE AS THE DEVELOPMENT DOES NOT ACCORD WITH THE DEVELOPMENT BRIEF IN THE AREA PLAN FOR THE SOUTH
1.1 The site is a roughly rectangular shaped piece of land which lies on the northern side of the Steam Railway line and the A5 Bypass road and to the west of Malew Road from which the site is accessed via an unmade lane. To the immediate east of the site there are the remains of greenhouses: to the west is an existing dwelling, Gardenfield and to the north are the rears of two properties which front onto Malew Road - Norville and Mill View.
1.2 The site is approximately 100m long (slightly longer towards the east) and 70m wide and 1.8 acres in area.
2.1 Proposed is the erection of three dwellings. The dwellings are all the same, which is disappointing, but with one dwelling which is handed. Only one set of elevations and plans has been provided but it is not too difficult to envisage what the handed version would look like. The dwellings are fairly plain dormer properties with various sizes of window and rooflights which follow the profile of the first floor walling and lower part of the roof. There is a large feature window in the rear elevation which stretches across the two floors and follows the shape of the projecting gable roof.
2.2 Each property has an integral two vehicle garage.
2.3 The dwellings will be finished in the same materials - slate effect tiles on the roofing, render on the walls and white plastic framed windows and doors.
3.1 The site lies within an area designated on the Area Plan for the South adopted in 2013 as Proposed Residential. The Airport Safety Zone runs through the southern part of the site as shown in the application drawings. There is a development brief within the Written Statement which states the following:
| Case Officer: | Miss S E Corlett |
| Photo Taken: | |
| Site Visit: | |
| Expected Decision Level: | Planning Committee |
3.2 The works to the access referred to at 4 above have been completed.
3.2 The Strategic Plan also makes reference to the following which are considered relevant:
Strategic Aim: to plan for the efficient and effective provision of services and infrastructure and to direct and control development and the use of land to meet the community's needs, having particular regard to the principles of sustainability whilst at the same time preserving, protecting and improving the quality of the environment, giving particular regard to our uniquely Manx natural, wildlife, cultural and built heritage.
Strategic Policy 1: Development should make the best use of resources by: a) optimising the use of previously developed land, redundant buildings, unused and under-used 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 and amenity standards and c) being located so as to utilise existing and planned infrastructure, facilities and services.
Strategic Policy 2: New development will be located primarily within our existing towns and villages, or, where appropriate, in sustainable urban extensions of these towns and villages. Development will be permitted in the countryside only in the exceptional circumstances identified in paragraph 6.3.
Environment Policy 42: 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.
Energy Policy 2: Land within 9m either side of an overhead High Tension power cable will be safeguarded from development.
4.1 Planning permission has been sought for the development of this site, following the publication of the draft Castletown Area Plan. PA 02/2133 proposed the principle of the erection of two dwellings on this site. This was refused at appeal where the Inspector made the following observations: "Given the stage of the Draft Local Plan, I have concluded that significant weight should be given to the proposal to designate the land for two dwellings..." but recommended that the application be refused for reasons relating to inadequate access to the site.
4.2 Another attempt was made to obtain permission for the principle of development of the site for two residential building plots under PA 04/0349 where access was to be onto the By-Pass Road via an existing field gate and across the railway line. This was refused again for reasons relating to access and the Inspector makes the following comments on the Local/Area Plan situation: "The appeal site lies within land presently designated agricultural open space
on the currently adopted Castletown Local Plan (Circular 5/91). However, 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 lane onto Malew Road. The emerging plan is still at a comparatively early stage in the review process and is still available for challenge in whole or in part at an Inquiry. On the other hand the Planning Committee decision not to grant approval in principle is grounded solely on the issue of the access and not the principle of the zoning or prematurity. It may be inferred, therefore that had the proposed development included a satisfactory access, it is likely that approval in principle would have been granted, albeit it subject maybe to conditions aimed at protection of the public safety zone. Whilst Castletown Heritage submits that the proposed development is premature, the Society is not opposed to development of the lands in principle and its concerns relating to visual impact and airport safety are issues that would be addressed through the use of appropriate conditions and approval of the reserved matters. There is no argument here as there was at Cooil Road, Braddan (PA 02/0810) or Clay Head Road, Baldrine (PA 03/0640) that planning permission could prejudice the consideration of a significant issue at an Inquiry".
4.3 Since both of these decisions, planning permission was granted for the principle of two single storey dwellings and widening of the access to the site under PA 06/1597. This permission required that the application for reserved matters must demonstrate parking for at least 2 vehicles per dwelling with turning facilities, visibility splays of 2m by 70m onto Malew Road, the lane between the site and Malew Road is widened and that no development should take place within the public safety zone. The applicant was advised to consult the Airport with respect to the Public Safety Zone.
4.4 Planning permission was sought for the erection of three dwellings (PA 07/1251). This was recommended for refusal but was withdrawn prior to any decision being taken. The suggested reasons for refusal related to the principle of three rather than two dwellings on the site, the fact that all three dwellings were identical and clearly not designed for the plot and would have been unneighbourly to each other.
4.5 Permission was granted for the erection of two identical properties on the site under PA 07/02288. These were the same height as these now proposed but with dormer accommodation with pitched roofed dormer windows and a larger footprint.
4.6 Finally, permission was granted for the erection of two dwellings under PA 11/01505. These were the same two house types, similar to what is now proposed and both positioned at the northern end of the site.
5.1 Castletown Commissioners have no objection to the application but note that the site notice has not been displayed appropriately. The applicant has been advised of this by the planning authority.
5.2 Manx Electricity Authority recommends that there are electricity supplies close to the site but do not specify where, and request consultation regarding the provision of electricity supplies to the dwelling. There does, in fact appear to be a high tension cable running across the site but this is not shown on the drawings. The applicant has been asked to amend and address this.
5.3 Further to the above, the applicant has liaised with the MEA who advise that the overhead supply is low voltage and that they have no objection to the development, advising of their standards in relation to existing supplies.
Indicates that it does not oppose the application subject to no structure being constructed within the visibility splays such that it would be higher than 1.05m above ground level
6.1 There is a requirement in the Area Plan for the South adopted in 2013 as well as the Strategic Plan to make the best use of sites. The Area Plan for the South adopted in 2013 states, "To this end, the Department will ensure that a density level on the sites is realised which makes best use of the available land and seeks to optimise the number of dwellings on the site. This should not be taken to be an opportunity to seek maximisation of the site but more a considered approach to ensuring that the best use is made of the site taking full consideration of all material considerations."
6.2 It is also relevant that the site is largely screened from public view and the exact density of development is unlikely to be fully appreciated other than by those living very close to the site, none of whom have objected. Similarly, no objection has been raised regarding the increase in the number of vehicles using the lane or the access. The Airport has been consulted by the applicant and there is no objection raised in respect of the implications for operational airport safety.
6.3 As such, whilst there is provision within the Area Plan for the South adopted in 2013 for two dwellings only on this site, the application proposes three dwellings which are disappointingly similar in design, but nevertheless have sufficient amenity space and outlook available to them and are otherwise acceptable. On balance, it is considered that the requirement to make the best use of sites should override the development brief requirement for only two dwellings in this case, bearing in mind the otherwise acceptable form of development hereby proposed.
7.1 The local authority, Castletown Commissioners are, by virtue of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) (No 2) Order 2013, paragraph 6 (4) (e), considered "interested persons" and as such should be afforded party status.
7.2 The Highway Authority is granted interested party status under the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) (No 2) Order 2013 paragraph 6 (4) d.
7.3 Manx Electricity Authority raises material concerns and as such should be afforded party status in this case.
Recommended Decision: Permitted
Date of Recommendation: 28.03.2014
C : Conditions for approval N : Notes attached to conditions R : Reasons for refusal
C 1. The development hereby permitted shall commence before the expiration of four years from the date of this notice.
C 2. This approval relates to the erection of three dwellings and associated access and services as shown in drawings Castletown 01/2014 and Castletown 02/2014 both received on 20th February, 2014.
C 3. No structures within the visibility splay may exceed 1.05m in height unless set back by 2m from the carriageway.
N 1. The applicant is encouraged to continue to liaise with the MEA in respect of existing supplies within the site.
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 : _______________ Committee Meeting Date : 14-14-14
Signed : _________________________ Presenting Officer
Further to the decision of the Committee an additional report/condition reason is required. Signing Officer to delete as appropriate ☐ YES ☐ NO
Copyright in submitted documents remains with their authors. Request removal
View as Markdown