Loading document...
| Application No.: | 14/00295/A |
| Applicant: | Yorkfields Limited |
| Proposal: | Approval in principle for residential development of the site with full details of the means of access into the site |
| Site Address: | Fields 333135, 33500, 334998 And 334999 Land Opposite Springfield Terrace Foxdale Isle Of Man |
THIS APPLICATION IS REFERRED TO THE PLANNING COMMITTEE AS THE APPROVAL IS SUBJECT TO A LEGAL AGREEMENT IN RESPECT OF THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING AND DUE TO THE OBJECTIONS TO THE APPLICATION INCLUDING THAT FROM THE LOCAL AUTHORITY
1.1 The site defined in red is a parcel of land situated on the southern side of the A24 road which links the Eairy with Foxdale village. The site is presently undeveloped and slopes upward towards the south by around 11m over a distance of around 180m. The site edged red is around 5 acres (1.98ha). There is also another plan which shows an area edged blue is part of an area which was the subject of a previous application, PA 12/01053 for the erection of a dwelling with associated landscaping and restoration works relating to ground which has previously been identified as contaminated as a result of previous mining activities.
1.2 The site has a frontage to the A24 of around 176m. On the northern side of the road from most of this frontage are residential properties - 1 - 9 Springfield Terrace, some semi-detached and mostly detached dwellings. Number 9 has associated with it boarding kennels on the land alongside the dwelling. To the west of Springfield Terrace is a developing estate of 31 dwellings known as Springfield Rise - a development amounting to approximately 9 dwellings per acre. Kiondhooag, a detached dwelling with associated stabling lies to the south west. The site also includes a small building to the east of the site which is to be reconstructed as an electricity substation, the details of which are not provided in this application.
2.1 Proposed originally was the development of roads, sewers and plots for residential use on the land. In total 47 plots were shown with indicative house footprints on them: terraces of three on plots 12-21, 34-47 and detached houses on the remainder. The plots became larger in width southwards within the site and the plots on the eastern side of the central estate road were shown slightly wider than those to the west with two large units either side of the entrance from the A24.
2.2 An 2700 sq m area of Open Space, assumed to be Public Open Space was shown in the southern corner of the site.
| Case Officer : | Miss S E Corlett |
| Photo Taken : | 16.04.2014 |
| Site Visit : | 16.04.2014 |
| Expected Decision Level : | Planning Committee |
2.3 The scheme shows the introduction of a new access from the A24 - a highway 5.5m wide with visibility splays of 2m of 70m. The scheme also provides a footway along the full length of the site.
2.4 The existing watercourse will be culverted with a concrete channel lined with "concrete canvas" on which plants can grow and spread.
2.5 The information submitted with the application in respect of contamination - namely "Land at Foxdale Isle of Man Contamination Review and remedial Strategy" dated November, 2010 draws upon information and data from two previous detailed studies of the site - The Wolverhampton Polytechnic Report of 1991 and the earlier study by Richards Moorehead and Laing in 1986. Further reference is made to the RPS study in 1989, the Smith grant Partnerships report in 1994 and the Wardell Armstrong Mining Desk Study report in 2008. No further more up to date sampling has been undertaken as part of this application. The report explains the impacts and constraints of contamination by heavy metals. It recommends that detailed geo-environmental site investigation, geophysical investigation and inspections and testing of soil cover and depth be undertaken.
2.6 Following discussions with the applicant and concerns raised in respect of the provision of some detailed information on plots but without full details of the sizes, heights and finishes of the properties thereon, it was determined that a more appropriate way forward would be for the application to be simply for the principle of the residential development of the site with the means of access provided but all other matters - siting, number of dwellings, location of open space, design and landscaping to be reserved for future consideration by way of an application for these matters.
3.1 The site is within a wider area that also extends to the west which is designated as Predominantly Residential. This designation includes land to the west which is not within the site which is presently undeveloped fields. A development brief accompanies the designation, in the Written Statement, Planning Circular 5/99. The Local Plan also refers to density at paragraph 3.11 which states "At the density recommended by the Sector Plan of 8 dwellings per acre, the current land use designations could result in a further 119 more dwelling units added to the village, if all approvals and zoned land are developed in full". The specific development brief for the site is as follows:
3.51 The Department is aware that the ownership of this land extends further east to include the area known as the Louisa Mine site. It is considered that the development of some of this area, opposite Springfield Terrace to "Kiondhooag" would not be detrimental to the policy of containing new development within an established village perimeter. However, it has been stated that there should not be any further estate-type development within the village and that development should be restricted to small-scale pockets of land within the village's natural boundary. Whilst within the visual boundaries of the village, the site represents approximately seven acres - not necessarily a small-scale site. It should also be borne in mind that the school's capacity is already limited.
3.52 The Department considers, however, that as the current land-ownership extends beyond the area indicated as being potentially suitable for residential development and includes the Louisa Mine site, then this may present a valuable opportunity by which to secure the reclamation of the mine site for the benefit of the village as a whole. As such, if a proposal for residential development were accompanied by a proposal for the reclamation and restoration of the Mine site, then development of the site for residential purposes may be considered favourably by the Department.
3.53 It should be noted that development of the site will not be permitted to commence until such times as the Louisa Mine site has been reclaimed and restored in a safe and attractive manner, to the satisfaction of the Department of Local Government and the Environment.
3.54 It is considered appropriate therefore that development of the site may be permitted in accordance with the following development brief:
3.2 In addition to the provisions of the local plan, the Strategic Plan, which was adopted after the local plan, contains the following policies which are considered relevant to the consideration of this application: the site lies within an identified settlement and the site is designated for development so the polices relating to sustainably located development are taken to be satisfied:
General Policy 2 states: "Development which is in accordance with the land use zoning and proposals in the appropriate Area Plan and with other policies of this Strategic Plan will normally be permitted, provided that the development:
a) is in accordance with the design brief in the Area Plan where there is such a brief; b) respects the site and surroundings in terms of the siting, layout, scale, form, design and landscaping of buildings and the space around them; c) does not affect adversely the character of the surrounding landscape or townscape; d) does not adversely affect the protected wildlife or locally important habitats on the site or adjacent land, including water courses; e) does not affect adversely public views of the sea; f) incorporates where possible existing topography and landscape features, particularly trees and sod banks; g) does not affect adversely the amenity of local residents or the character of the locality; h) provides satisfactory amenity standards in itself, including where appropriate safe and convenient access for all highway users, together with adequate parking, servicing and manoeuvring space; i) does not have an adverse effect on road safety or traffic flows on the local highways; j) can be provided with all necessary services; k) does not prejudice the use or development of adjoining land in accordance with the appropriate Area Plan; l) is not on contaminated land or subject to unreasonable risk of erosion or flooding; m) takes account of community and personal safety and security in the design of buildings and the spaces around them; and n) is designed having due regard to best practice in reducing energy consumption."
3.3 Transport Policy 4 states: "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." The applicant has submitted an amended plan which includes traffic calming elements, following discussion with the Highways Authority.
3.4 Environment Policy 7: "Development which would cause demonstrable harm to a watercourse, wetland, pond or dub, and which would not be overcome by mitigation measures will not be permitted. Where development is proposed which would affect a watercourse, planning applications must comply with the following criteria:
a) all watercourses in the vicinity of the site must be identified on plans accompanying a planning application and include an adequate risk assessment to demonstrate that works will not cause long term deterioration in water quality; b) details of pollution and alleviation measures must be submitted; c) all engineering works proposed must be phased in an appropriate manner in order to avoid a reduction in water quality in any adjacent watercourse; and d) development will not normally be allowed within 8 metres of any watercourse in order to protect the aquatic and bankside habitats and species."
3.5 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 applicant indicates that the provision of affordable
housing has been discussed with DSC and "the present preference is for a commuted payment".
3.6 Recreation Policy 3: "Where appropriate, new development should include the provision of landscaped amenity areas as an integral part of the design. New residential development of ten or more dwellings must make provision for recreational and amenity pace in accordance with standards specified in Appendix 6 to the Plan."
3.7 Recreation Policy 4: "Open Space must be provided on site or conveniently close to the development which it is intended to serve, and should be easily accessible by foot and public transport."
3.8 Appendix 6 of the Plan sets out the standards for the provision of Open Space in association with residential developments. This requires that open space is provided at the following rates: For a one bedroomed unit 27 sq of formal open space, 9 sq m of children's play space and 12 sq m of amenity space (a total of 48 sq m). For a two bedroomed property 36 sq m of formal space, 12 sq m of children's play space and 16 sq m of amenity space (a total of 64 sq m) and for properties with three bedrooms or more, 54 sq m of formal open space, 18 sq m of children's play space and 24 sq m of amenity space (a total of 96 sq m). Assuming that the nine terraced dwellings are two bed and the other 38 are three or more beds, this would result in an overall requirement for 2376 sq m of formal, 792 sq m of children's play and 1056 sq m of amenity space - 1848 sq m excluding the formal open space.
3.9 As there have been incidences of flooding within the village, it is relevant to consider Environment Policies 10 and 13:
Environment Policy 10 states: "Where development is proposed on any site where in the opinion of the Department of Local Government and the Environment there is a potential risk of flooding, a flood risk assessment and details of proposed mitigation measures must accompany any application for planning permission. The requirements for a flood risk assessment are set out in Appendix 4."
Environment Policy 13 states: "Development which would result in an unacceptable risk from flooding, either on or off-site, will not be permitted." The applicant states that the clearing and cleaning of existing watercourses and the provision of a concrete lining thereof will "alleviate virtually all flooding in the area" and that only a small part of the site is liable to flood which is related to incapacity of the existing culvert and also that flooding in this site does not lead to flooding in the wider area.
3.10 Strategic Policy 1 which states: "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".
3.11 Foxdale is identified as a Service Village where "Area Plans will define the development boundaries of such villages so as to maintain and where appropriate increase employment opportunities. Housing should be provided to meet local needs and in appropriate cases to broaden the choice of location of housing." Whilst not an Area Plan (as the Foxdale Plan was introduced under legislation which referred to local not area plans), the provisions of the Foxdale Plan are applicable in this case in terms of the site being identified as suitable for residential development.
4.1 Planning permission was granted for the remediation of the land to the north east through PA 12/01053: the application site abuts this and the area defined in blue is part of the land to be reclaimed as part of the 2012 application.
45.2 Planning permission was refused for the layout of road, plots and 48 dwellings under PA 13/0054. The reasons for refusal were as follows:
R 1. It is not possible from the information submitted within the application to be satisfied that an acceptable form of development could be provided on this site, which would result in an acceptable streetscent and where each dwelling would have satisfactory levels of amenity and parking space available to it.
R 2. It is also not possible to assess whether the development would result in an acceptable decrease in density such that the development would comply with the requirements of the local plan. Whilst the plots may be larger, the larger plots are more likely to accommodate larger properties resulting in a similar density of built development in ratio to plot size to that of the smaller plots.
R 3. It is not possible in the absence of house types to determine the impact on the main road and whether there is sufficient depth within the roadside plots to result in a development which will present an interesting and attractive streetscent at the entrance to the village. The development provides for plots alongside the main road which are in the main significantly more dense than the development on the opposite side of the road.
R 4. The public open space is proposed partly on land which is not designated for development and as such the development now spreads beyond the area indicated as suitable for development on the Foxdale Local Plan.
REPRESENTATIONS
5.1 Department of Environment, Food and Agriculture Fisheries Division have been informed by the applicant that the existing stream will not be diverted into the new one until the concrete cloth lining has fully cured and as such DEFA has no objection to the scheme but would appreciate being informed with works are to commence and that appropriate mitigation (sedimats) is agreed with the Fisheries Officer and installed prior to the diversion of the water into the new watercourse.
5.2 The owner of Fuchsia House on Springfield Terrace, opposite the site, indicate that he has no objection to the development of the site for residential purposes but does express concern at the fact that parts of the development fall within areas which are shown in the Local Plan as for landscaping and that the overall density exceeds the 8 per acre advocated in the Local Plan. No more than 23 dwellings should be allowed in accordance with this. He feels that the proposal will result in an abrupt edge to the village and a density which is out of character with the village, particularly as viewed from higher ground. The dwellings should be traditional in design and character. No details are provided of phasing. He suggests that the development should include the undergrounding of the overhead power cables.
5.3 Patrick Parish Commissioners indicate that they object to the application on the basis that not all of the land within the site is designated for development, they consider that the maximum number of dwellings for the west of the Island has already been reached and as such there is no requirement for these dwellings. They see that public open space is provided within the development but no proposal for recreation facilities. They consider that there could be benefit from combining the proposed recreation facilities for this development and
those for the land to the west. They also believe that the development could result in flooding due to the poor condition of the river banks and bed elsewhere along the watercourse.
5.4 The owners of the land alongside express concern not about the development itself, but about the fact that their land which accommodates the proposed drainage outlet has not been acknowledged in the application or the ownership certificate. This has been addressed in amended plans.
5.5 Department of Environment, Food and Agriculture Wildlife Division express some concern about the adjacent land edged in blue in respect of potential impact on nature conservation but has had confirmation from the applicant that no works are proposed in this area as part of this application.
5.6 The owner of Eairy Mount which is some 400m to the east, object to the application on the basis that there are to be buildings in areas shown in the local plan to be landscaped and suggest that the development is premature pending a more up to date plan (Western Area Plan) based upon updated calculations for housing need. He also expresses concern that the T junction at the meeting point of the A3 and A24 has still not been resolved, despite being identified as a serious problem. He refers to existing problems of flooding and drainage and notes that the development across the road has created two larger higher value properties at its entrance, which is a positive design element which is not reflected in the current application. He notes that there is no design statement as part of the application. He expresses concern that whilst the houses at the front of the site have been turned around so that the front elevations face the road, the front gardens are larger than the rear and may result in paraphernalia such as washing lines and children's play equipment being erected and kept here to the detriment of the appearance of the village. Also these plots appear to have pedestrian access to the pavement of the A24 which could encourage vehicles to stop on the main road which could be detrimental to road safety. He notes the open culvert in the front gardens of the properties at the front and considers that the density of development is too great. Following the submission of further plans, this party notes that the surface water is to be discharged into a system which is partly to be repaired by others with no information to confirm that this work is proposed or likely to happen.
5.7 Department of Economic Development in respect of their responsibility for minerals, refer to reference in the application to the Potts Shaft and to a circular concrete structure which the 2008 Wardell Armstrong report suggests is a cap sealing that shaft. They suggest that there is some doubt about this assumption. They advise that during site visits to identify possible mine features ahead of Jamie Cubbon's development of other land in the vicinity, Pete Geddes was minded to consider that the concrete was associated with a pumping mechanism that was once connected to the Louisa Shaft. If that is correct, then it is recommended that the developer carefully investigates as the shaft must lie somewhere close (between the concrete circle and the concrete columns to the west?), and it should be assumed has not been capped. They recommend that the developer must notify the DED of the intention to undertake any drilling or exploratory work where drilling is to be in excess of 15m below the surface (in accordance with Section 10 of the Minerals (Amendment) Act 2006. In the event that planning permission is granted, they recommend that the developer should make contact with the DED to advise of the nature and commencement of ground investigations and to provide details of the proposed treatment works to the Potts Shaft (if any); and to provide details of the actual location of the shaft.
5.8 Manx Utilities Authority (Electricity) seeks consultation regarding the provision of electricity supplies to the development. This is not a material planning consideration.
5.9 Manx Utilities Authority (Drainage) has no objection to the application provided that the appropriate information is provided in respect of the watercourse diversion and culverting.
They recommend that no adoption of the drainage system will be put into place until at least 50% of the proposed dwellings have been completed and occupied.
5.10 Manx National Heritage notes that the development will contribute to visually eradicating the remains of mining in this part of the Island and recommend that the applicant survey and photograph/record the industrial remains surrounding Pott's Shaft and will be pleased to provide a brief for this. They also suggest that some consideration is given to interpretative boards and information on the mining history of the site for the public benefit.
5.11 David Anderson MHK considers that the development is contrary to the provisions of the Local Plan in terms of the disregard for planting and landscaping to soften the impact of the development.
5.12 DEFA Fisheries has no objection to the application provided that they are advised when development is to commence and appropriate mitigation against adverse impact on the watercourse is agreed with them and installed prior to works commencing.
5.13 The owner of 8, Springfield Terrace has commented on earlier applications and is disappointed that he has had to submit further comments, particularly as he was advised that his original comments would be carried through to any further applications on the site. He is concerned that the site boundary is slowly moving eastwards and now includes their car park. He is frustrated by the submission of plan after plan and is concerned that this is a means for wearing people down and obtaining approval. Plots are shown where the local plan indicates there should be landscaping and density is not in accordance with what the local plan set out.
6.1 The site is identified as being suitable for residential development, and whilst the Foxdale Local Plan sets out a general density of 8 dwellings per acre, this is relatively low and could conflict with the requirement of the Strategic Plan's policy to encourage the optimum and efficient use of sites although this should not mean that a development which appears out of place or which provides for a cramped environment within the development, should be allowed. In this respect, as is noted by some local residents and the local authority, it would not appear that a lot of attention has been paid to landscaping within the site, with the annotated trees having very limited canopy spreads and their proximity to each other and to proposed dwellings likely to be unviable. It is clear however, that there is space between plots 11 and 38 for more planting than is shown, softening the edge of the development as seen from higher ground and from the approach from the Eairy. In any event, the applicants have amended the proposal so that it is now one in principle and the number of units and location of plots is not being sought in this application.
6.2 The critical issues at this point is whether the principle of development is acceptable, whether the access is suitable and whether the site can be drained of foul and surface water and whether the development will result in flooding issues.
6.3 There is no indication from the Drainage Authority that the site cannot be drained satisfactorily of either surface or foul water and whilst the disposal of surface water will depend upon work outside of the site, much of this is controlled by the Manx Utilities Authority (Drainage) and will be required prior to any occupation of the dwellings and potentially prior to the construction of any of the dwellings which have yet to be proposed. There is no indication from the Manx Utilities Authority (Drainage) that the development will result in flooding. However, it is not clear how the site will be drained if existing culverts or pipes need upgrading, expanding or replacing and they are not within the applicant's ownership or control. This detail can be provided as part of the reserved matters.
6.4 It is clear that the site can be accessed satisfactorily and that it can be developed for residential purposes. It is recommended that the application is approved but only for the
principle of residential development of the site and with the access as shown in the submitted drawing. The application for the reserved matters - the internal roads, sewers, public open space and the position and details of the dwellings, should demonstrate that more planting than is shown along the eastern boundary of the plot, that dwellings which look directly towards each other have at least 20m between them and each dwelling has at least two car parking spaces which are a minimum of 5m by 2.5m (ideally they should be 6m by 3.25m).
6.7 It is important that not only is public open space provided but that it is suitable for use by the intended population of the development and in this respect it is important that the public open space is laid out with the inclusion of children's play facilities as well as general amenity space. This should be controlled by a condition. The provision and maintenance of the play equipment is often the function of the local authority after agreement with the developer as to what equipment is to be provided and where.
6.8 It is also important that affordable housing is provided in association with the development. As the total number of dwellings is not known, bearing in mind the concerns regarding the soft edge, the separation distances and tree planting, it is considered inappropriate to require that a decision on this application is deferred until such times as a legal agreement is in place to determine and ensure the provision of affordable housing. It should be noted within the conditions of any approval that affordable housing will be required at the ratio of 25% of the number of plots approved.
6.9 Finally, the industrial heritage of the area is interesting and unique to the Island and whilst the development of this site and the land to the east and north east will visually improve the appearance and character of the whole area, it will result in the potential loss of visual reminders of the history and evolution of the village. As such, a project to interpret this and to provide information for the public would be commendable, although not specifically related to this particular site. The local authority and Manx National Heritage are encouraged to liaise in respect of this.
7.1 The local authority, Patrick Parish 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 Department of Infrastructure Highway Services is granted interested party status under the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) (No 2) Order 2013 paragraph 6 (4) d.
7.3 Department of Environment, Food and Agriculture and Department of Economic Development, Manx National Heritage and Manx Utilities Authority (Drainage) are statutory authorities who raise material planning considerations and as such should be afforded interested party status in this case.
7.4 Fuchsia House and number 8, Springfield Terrace are directly opposite the site and the owners of the land alongside and should all be afforded interested party status in this case.
7.5 Fairy Mount is some distance to the east and is not considered directly affected by the proposal and should not be afforded interested party status in this case.
7.6 Manx Utilities Authority (Electricity) does not raise material planning considerations and as such should not be afforded interested party status in this case.
7.7 David Anderson MHK is not directly affected by the proposal and as such should not be afforded interested party status in this case.
Recommended Decision: Permitted
Date of Recommendation: 07.08.2014
C: Conditions for approval N: Notes attached to conditions R: Reasons for refusal O: Notes attached to refusals
Details of the siting, design, external appearance, internal layout and landscaping (hereinafter called "the reserved matters") shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority before any development is commenced and thereafter the development shall only be carried out in accordance with the details as approved.
Reason: To comply with the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure)(No2) Order 2013.
Application for approval of the reserved matters shall be made to the Planning Authority 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.
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.
This approval relates to the principle of the residential development of the site and the construction of access from the A24 for a distance of 20m into the site, as shown in drawing 1400/01/01 revision A received on 20th May, 2014.
REASON: whilst the layout shows plots, it has not been demonstrated that the plot development as shown will result in a soft edge to the development as required by the Foxdale Local Plan and that there is acceptable separation distances between the properties and the proposed tree planting. As such, no approval is hereby granted to the number or layout of plots as shown.
C 5.
Any residential development on the site must demonstrate that affordable housing is provided at a ratio of 25% of the overall number of plots.
REASON: to accord with Housing Policy 5 of the Strategic Plan.
C 6.
No development may commence on site until such times as there is in place an approved facility of disposing of surface water from the site, including any works which may be required to be undertaken off site by third parties.
REASON: the approved plans show there to be remedial works carried out off site by third parties in order for the proposed diverted watercourse to be effective.
C 7.
Any residential development on the site must be designed such as to provide a softer edge to the east of the site than is shown with more space dedicated to tree planting within the red line area and more space around each tree than is shown on the submitted drawings to ensure that trees are not inappropriately close to proposed dwellings such as would threaten the long term future of the tree.
N 1.
The applicant is advised to consult Manx National Heritage in respect of any industrial archaeological interest within the site, prior to the commencement of works to ensure that any features of interest are recorded.
This approval relates to
Drawing 1400-01-01 Revision A received on 20th May, 2014.
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: A. Committee Meeting Date: 19.8.14. Signed: S. S. M. O. U. L. E. T. 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