Officer Report

Application No.: 15/00095/A Applicant: Hartford Homes Ltd Proposal: Approval in principle for erection of eight detached dwellings addressing siting, means of access, and landscaping including the creation of a new area of public open space Site Address: Fields 534051, 534052 & 534053 Next To Castleward Green Ballanard Road Douglas Isle Of Man Case Officer : Miss Jennifer Chance Expected Decision Level: Planning Committee

Officer’s Report

THE APPLICATION IS TO BE DETERMINED BY THE PLANNING COMMITTEE AT THE REQUEST OF THE HEAD OF DEVELOPMENT MANAGEMENT

Site

1.1 The application site is a 7.5 hectare plot that lies north east of Castleward Green. - 1.2 It is currently open pasture with rough grassland/scrub dissected by two well established hedgerow field boundaries. The composition of the hedgerows is generally gorse towards the eastern half of the site gradually changing to more wooded shrub/tree species of ash, sycamore and buckthorn. The hedgerows range in height from 2.5m up to 9m. The vegetation cover changes from grassland scrub to an unmanaged copse of trees between 711 m tall. Around the perimeter of the site the northern and western boundaries consist of dense broadleaf woodland planting with an average height of between 15-20m - 1.3 The site has a fall in levels from Ballanard Road in the east, to the west of about 16m from about 69m AOD to 53m AOD. The proposal

2.1 The application seeks Approval in Principle for the development of 8 dwellings, with matters relating to siting, means of access and landscaping to be determined now. Matters relating to design, external appearance and internal layout would be determined as part of a Reserved Matters application. - 2.2 The application shows assess to be gained by a single point off The Castleward Green, which is a residential road leading to Ballanard Road. A landscaping scheme was submitted showing some hedgerows and trees to be retained. The design objectives of the scheme are to minimise impact on surrounding countryside; assimilate development into the surrounding rural setting; protect the rural character of Ballanard Road; retain and enhance as much of the existing vegetation and field boundaries as is practical; enhance the amenity value of the

• site; provide bio-diversity gain and provide areas for habitat creation; establish a structural landscape utilising both landform and planting; and using ecological design principles with emphasis on diverse habitat creation.
• 2.3 The application proposes a linear area of public open space along The Castleward Green road, bisected by the access road to the application site. It is proposed that is would contain a combination of mown grass, paved seating areas and footpaths with tree, shrub and woodland buffer planting.
• 2.4 Whilst the application is supported by a landscape strategy, it does not contain a survey of the existing trees on site, the application form noting that there would be no trees on site that might be affected by the proposal.
• 2.5 The application also states that there would be no proposed changes in levels, despite the fact that the site has a drop of 16m over a distance of 180m.
• 2.6 The applicant has suggested that if approved a monetary contribution to affordable housing would be made. Planning History

3.1 In 2004 the Department of Local Government and the Environment submitted a planning application proposing residential development comprising 177 dwellings with associated roads sewers and landscaping on Fields 534051, 534052 & 534053, Ballanard Road, Douglas(PA 04/00966/B). - 3.2 In February 2005 an Inquiry was held into the application and another one that also proposed residential development. The applications were a response to an urgent and identified need for the provision of First Time Buyer and Public Sector homes on the Island. As a direct response to that situation it was the will of Tynwald that Development Orders were brought forward to provide development at prices able to be afforded by young people and families; this was in advance of the provision of Area Plans that were being suggested in the then draft Strategic Plan. One of those sites was the current application site and the proposal was for 177 dwellings ranging from 2 bedroom apartments to 5 bedroom detached homes of which 89 were to be for first time buyers. In his conclusions the Inspector found that the Ballanard Road site was clearly in the countryside and well beyond the built-up area of Douglas; he found that in the vicinity of the site, the character of the road changes to that of a rural locality with limited sporadic development. He found that the facilities in terms of shops, schools etc were limited, and due to the nature of the roads and footways, few people would walk or cycle. Accordingly he found that it could not be regarded as an urban extension or sustainable location. The inspector also noted that at a density of 23 dwellings per hectare it was an inefficient use of land (officer's emphasis). - 3.3 The application was refused following the Inquiry on 11th March 2005. The reason for refusal was as follows:

"The site is not zoned for residential development in the Local Plan, and is within open countryside in a location which would encourage the use of private car rather than provide persuasive opportunities for people to use other modes of transport; the traffic generated by the development would add traffic to a road of rural character where there are a number of hazards already; these shortcomings are not overcome by the affordable housing benefits that the development would bring."

3.4 In 2007 planning approval was sought on this site for the development of 12 houses, in a similar layout to that proposed as part of this application (07/02358/B). The application

• was refused by the Planning Committee of the time and that decision was upheld by the Minister in June 2009 in accordance with a recommendation to do so by an appeal Inspector.
• 3.5 The appeal inspector concluded that;

• i) the proposal was not a sustainable form of housing due to its location, lack of facilities, limited level of public transport and poor footpath connections;
• ii) the development of housing would cause significant harm to the character and appearance of this part of Douglas, extending an already substantial protrusion of the urban area into the countryside;
• iii) the argument that the properties would provide housing for high net worth individuals did not represent an overriding national need in land-use planning terms. The applicant has not undertaken a full and proper examination as to whether there are any reasonable alternatives. Whilst the applicants had listed various sites, this assessment had not been carried out in the same rigorous manner that occurs under an Area Plan procedure. The Inspector suggests 'it would be quite wrong and contrary to the objectives of planning legislation adopted by Tynwald and the government to make housing for high net worth individuals an exception to normal planning policy and considerations in the circumstances of this appeal';
• iv) the most proper and reliable way in which future development proposals for the area should be assessed or located would be by way of the provision of an Eastern Area Plan.

3.6 The application was refused for the following reason:

"The proposed development would be on land that is zoned as Open Space in Agricultural Use in the Douglas Plan and is not in an area intended for residential purposes. There are not at this time reasons sufficient to make an exception to General Policy 3 of the Strategic Plan on the grounds of national need for the provision of housing for high net worth individuals. Furthermore, the availability of reasonable and acceptable alternatives for such development has not fully and properly been carried out. It would therefore be premature to permit the proposed development on land not intended for development in advance of a full siteselection process that will be carried out as part of the preparation of the Eastern Area Plan."

Development Plan Policies

4.1 The site is located within an area zoned as an area of Open Space in Agricultural Use in the Douglas Local Plan 1998. - 4.2 Within the adopted Isle of Man Strategic Plan, it is considered that the following policies are relevant in the consideration of this application: - 4.3 Strategic Policy 1 seeks to ensure that development makes the best use of resources by optimising the use of previously developed land, unused and under-used land and buildings, ensuring efficient use of sites and being so located as to utilise existing and planned infrastructure, facilities and services. - 4.4 Strategic Policy 2 directs new development to being 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. (which is General Policy 3 set out below) - 4.5 Strategic Policy 10 seeks to locate and design new development so as to promote an integrated transport network to minimise journeys, especially by private car; make best use of public transport; not adversely affect highway safety for all users, and encourage pedestrian movement.

4.6 Strategic Policy 11 and Housing Policy 1 set out the general goal of providing opportunity to enable 6000 dwellings to meet the island's needs upto 2016. - 4.7 Spatial Policy 5 requires that new development will be located within the defined settlements and that development will only be permitted in the countryside in accordance with General Policy 3. - 4.8 General Policy 1 sets out that the determination of matters under Part 2 (Development Control) and Part 3 (Special Controls) of the 1999 Town and Country Planning Act shall have regard to the provisions of the Development Plan and all other material considerations. - 4.9 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." - 4.10 General Policy 3: (Paragraph 6.3) "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(1) 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."

4.11 Housing Policy 2 sets out that the Department will seek to ensure an adequate supply of housing land and will keep under review land that is allocated for residential development to ensure that the land is available for development, to enable the number of dwellings to be built that are set out in Housing Policy 1. Where it appears to the Department that land that is allocated for development in a Local Plan or an Area Plan is not available for development, then it will consider, through a review of the Area Plan, making alternative land available and retaining the unavailable land in a land-bank for possible future development. In doing so, the Department will have regard to any phasing proposals for the development of land that are identified in the Area Plan. - 4.12 Housing Policy 3 gives the spatial distribution of housing to be 2,500 dwellings in the East of the Island. - 4.13 Housing Policy 5 requires that affordable housing should be provided at a proportion of 25% on developments of 8 or more houses on all land zoned for residential development.

4.14 Transport Policy 1 seeks to ensure that new development be located close to existing public transport facilities and routes, including pedestrian, cycle and rail routes. - 4.15 Transport Policy 4 requires that the new and existing highways which serve any new development to be designed so as to be able to accommodate the vehicle and pedestrian journeys generated by that development in a safe and appropriate manner. Representations

5.1 DOI Highway Services (23 February 2015): Do not object subject to a condition that the new junction has the required visibility splays in accordance with Manx Roads of 2.4m by 35m. - 5.2 Douglas Corporation (20 February 2015): Object on grounds that the site is not zoned for residential development and that further investigations of the ecology of the site are needed before planning permission is granted. - 5.3 The resident of 7 The Castleward Green (25 February 2015) objects on the following grounds:

• o Site has poor natural drainage and has potential to cause flooding by run-off;
• o Enormous homes may create even darker aspect to the rear of our house that at present where lights needed in the north facing rooms;
• o The site is zoned for agriculture and is used as such so it is not out of date;
• o The argument regarding HNW homes is the same as 5 years ago. There is no such pressing and urgent need. The Treasury Minister admitted that the number of HNWIs reached their peak in 2008 and have fallen steadily since.
• o Same argument was used to justify 22 huge homes along the road at Ballanard Woods. Work commenced in August 2008 and to date only 4 have been built and the site is closed and in a dreadful mess. If the argument that the plots are too small then surely the developer would have built less houses on larger plots;
• o The applicant has other large sites suitable for HNWI houses including one at Port Soderick which is still for sale;
• o Other properties have remained for sale with no credible offers for some time;
• o Concern that site would commence and then remain vacant for many years, developers can always argue that the next site is better than the ones they already have, it is land-banking;
• o Ballanard Road has seen increase in traffic over years as a result of new developments and to avoid Quarterbridge;
• o The site has a variety of flora and fauna.

5.4 Owners of 10 The Castleward Green (via advocates)(27 February 2015) raise concerns regarding drainage and other matters (not set out) resulting from the proposed development. For reasons of proximity to the development and lack of data on how the development will directly impact services running through the property, the owners wish to reserve their rights on the matter and request Interested Party Status. They note that previous applications have been refused, and foul drainage was a concern in the latest one. - 5.5 Residents of 5 The Castleward Green (25 February 2015) offers the following comments: o Site should never be developed for reasons previous Inspectors have set out;

• -'further … development on the periphery of Douglas is to be avoided';
• -'(the site) is within open countryside, in a location which would encourage the use of

the motor car….it would add traffic to a road of rural character where there are a number of hazards already';

• o If building is permitted this proposal would be the most satisfactory as it is for very low density housing on substantial plots with landscaping and new open space;
• o This is the last open space left in Douglas and marks the Division between it and Onchan Parish;
• o Hartford Homes said cycle lanes existed on this road suggesting that residents could cycle to Douglas. In 15 years rarely seen any;
• o Bus service was removed several years ago;
• o The speed limit at the site is a 40mph zone not a 30 as the application suggests;
• o The site is currently perfect for insects, birds and wildlife;
• o At previous DLGE Inquiry it was acknowledged that the site would qualify as a wildlife site on the basis of its neutral grassland content and that the woodland on the western boundary of the site and on the steep slope of the valley floor are eligible for wildlife status;
• o Attention is drawn to the Ballanard Woods site of which only 4 properties have been sold;
• o It is a welcome green lung for Douglas.

5.6 Residents of Vejle, Ballanard Road (26 February 2015): No objection to the layout, but this will depend on the style of houses if approval is given. The open space should not be left unattended and wild. Assessment

6.1 In dealing with an application for planning approval the Department has a statutory duty under Section 10 (4) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1999 to have regard to the provisions of the Development Plan, which in this case is made up of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2007 and the Douglas Local Plan 1998,as well as other material considerations. - 6.2 Whilst the Douglas Plan may be rather old, it remains the adopted Local Plan until such time as is superseded. - 6.3 The site lies within open countryside not designated for development. As such, the application is clearly contrary to many policies of the Strategic Plan, namely Strategic Policies 1 and 2, Spatial Policy 6, Environment Policy 1 and General Policy 3. - 6.4 Whilst General Policy 3 sets out instances where development might be acceptable in the countryside, none of these are developments that the application proposes. - 6.5 Consequently, the presumption must be against approval unless there are material considerations that indicate otherwise. Environment Policy 1 and General Policy 3 state that such reasons much be of over-riding national interest and also state where no reasonable or practical alternative is available. The applicants argue that the provision of more executive homes is a key element of the overall package in attracting inward investment which is a national need in planning terms. Need - 6.6 The applicant has argued that there is a need for the type of property it is proposing as there is only one other alternative development site in the entire Eastern Area. - 6.7 The application submission argues that the IOM Strategic Plan supports the provision of 'sufficient housing…to meet the demand arising from population growth and changing household sizes, whilst also providing a choice of sites in terms of location, type and size…' - 6.8 It indicates that 'The Economic Development (Department) supports providing residence for single high net worth individuals at say £20m property value. We are proposing homes for 8 families at, say, £4m plus each, which would equate to total property value in excess of

• £32m. Eight executive families are likely to contribute significantly to the Isle of Man economy. The tax contribution from 8 high earning executives could exceed the capped tax contribution from one high net worth individual.'
• 6.9 The supporting statement continues to say 'There would be nothing preventing high net worth individuals occupying these properties. Not every HNWI wants a country estate. Many are used to being near town and 3-4 acres is adequate. By the time the dwellings are fully bespoked the value of the properties could easily exceed £6m.'
• 6.10 In response to these points, the first thing is that the reporting officer knows of no approved Government document that expressly states that the Economic Development Department (DED) supports providing residences for single high net worth individuals (HNWI). All formal Government policies relating to the development of the Island are set out in the Strategic Plan and there is no policy to that effect.
• 6.11 The argument put forward by the applicant claims that DED supports providing residences for single high net worth individuals is not credited to any particular Government source, it is difficult to know i) which Government Policy supports the applicant's claims and the status of such a policy in the determination of planning applications; ii) what type of High Net Worth Individual it is hoped to attract; iii) what size or type of property would meet the demand; iv) whether there is a demand and v) what that level of demand might be.

6.13 At this time, as far as planning officers are aware, there remains no planning policy definition of a HNW individual and there is no data to state how many such people are arriving or leaving the Island. It has been argued that HNWI are those people who meet the Tax Cap, but this is a formal Government defnition. If it is those who qualify for a Tax Cap, the application does not state how many people on the Island qualify, or whether this number is increasing or decreasing. - 6.14 Furthermore, it is interesting that whilst the application states that DED supports providing residences for single high net worth individuals at a value of £20million, the application is not proposing that. The justification for the application presupposes that the sole reason for attracting HNWIs is for their individual tax worth and therefore the eight houses proposed would equal that and would contribute significantly to the Isle of Man economy. If this is the case then any multiple of the number of houses regardless of size, type or tenure would result in a certain level of tax return. It is doubtful that the sole reason for attracting HNWIs is their tax contribution. Certainly for other applications that have been submitted, the benefits appeared to be attracting those people who were likely to bring their businesses to the Island and therefore generate employment, which is a very different concept than attracting them to pay tax. The generation of tax from occupants of new dwellings cannot be the basis of approving planning applications otherwise this could be the case for all residential development and as such would undermine the Government's spatial strategy. - 6.15 To support their submission, the applicants have provided a letter from Chrystals estate agents. They state that the upper end of the market choice is more limited with the majority of the second hand properties being dated in appearance or lacking the desired layout of accommodation and plot size. They state that elements of the existing stock are over-priced. They find that buyers of higher value property have greater demands on location and quality and whilst some prefer to be in the countryside, others value convenience close to town but at the same time requiring the space and quality associated with high end properties. They have specific requirement for state of the art specification with price being less critical for the right product in the right location. They find that with the lack of good quality stock, applicants are reluctant to commit to the Island and find plenty of choice in other jurisdictions such as Jersey, Guernsey and Switzerland. They wish to cater for high end purchasers who i)

• demand high quality property; ii) can't or don't wish to wait for planning permission to modify existing properties; iii) do not want to refurbish a second hand property; and iv) like the benefits offered by a new property for example the 10 year warranty. The proposal is to build the external envelope of the houses and market the properties to include an internal design and fit out to the purchaser's specification. Chrystals state that this is exactly what this sector of the market is looking for.
• 6.16 Although Chrystals give their views of the demands of HNW, other developers and estate agents have different views on what type of properties meet that market, notably Cowley Groves estate agents refer to properties over £1m as meeting that market.
• 6.17 On a quick perusal of the internet in March 2015, there are a considerable number of homes for sale on the island priced at over £1million (@30), as well as a high number over £3million (@10), including some that are for sale at about £4million and above. Some of these are second hand properties, some are properties that have received planning approval but are to be built only once a buyer is found.
• 6.18 Reference was made to the 'plenty of choice in Jersey, Guernsey and Switzerland.' A quick internet search again in March 2015 revealed that there were about the same number of properties over £3million in Jersey, but no properties over £4million could be found, which suggests that there is not the plenty of choice that Chrystals suggest. For Guernsey there were at least 18 properties over £4million for sale and a quick assumption might be that there are more high class residences on offer there. However it is not possible to make a direct comparison. Properties in the Channel Islands appear to be on the whole more expensive than those on the Island, furthermore the properties that are for sale there would still be types that Chrystals suggested would cause buyers concern, that is they are second hand properties, which may need refurbishment and would not come with a new build warranty.
• 6.19 Reference is made to the development of Ballanard Woods. Planning approval was obtained in 2007 (07/01917) for 21 dwellings on nearby land designated as low density housing in parkland. At the time of writing 4 of the 21 plots have been completed. In 2011 an application was received for the retention of a temporary construction access. During an appeal against approval of that access, the applicants of that site indicated that 'the demand for the type of prestigious properties being built is presently limited. As a result, it cannot be predicted how long the construction access will be required for.' (para 37 of Inspector's report). It is understood that since 2011, no further properties have been constructed on site.
• 6.20 The applicants suggest that Ballanard Woods is not successful because the plots are too small and the land is sloping. However, as one objector has highlighted, land cannot keep being allocated for development because it is suggested that the next site is better than an earlier one, or the design of houses on the earlier one does not now suit the market it is intended for. Developers will, as appropriate, react to the needs of the market.
• 6.21 Whilst no land has been zoned in Douglas since 1998, there is evidence that this has aided the process of regeneration within Douglas. Between 2001 and 2013 there were 1859 new dwellings approved in Douglas, 70% of all new approvals in the East of the Island. This means that Douglas, when compared to the other 23 Local Authority Areas represented 33% of the Island approvals for new dwellings. In terms of applications that lapsed without being implemented, 144 approvals in Douglas lapsed (nearly 50% of all lapsed applications in the East). There may be various reasons for this but it demonstrates that even if new land is not zoned, development can still occur within existing built up areas. More recently, 143 residential units were built in Douglas between July 2011 to June 2013.
• 6.22 In terms of meeting a perceived need for HNWIs, there is evidence to suggest that new large houses are being built which may suit the wishes of some wealthier buyers. A number

• of applications are approved each year for new or replacement dwellings on land either designated for development in quite stunning locations (Kind Edward Road), on sites designated for low density housing in parkland, or replacement dwellings in the countryside. Initial analysis would seem to suggest that perhaps the more wealthy residents are finding properties to alter or redevelop to suit their needs, which is far more appropriate than developing on greenfield sites. Chrystals make the point that potential investors are looking to buy immediately but if someone wants to move to the island for a long period, and invest in it, then they are likely to go to more effort to develop, redevelop or refurbish an existing property.
• 6.23 Certainly the argument that an allowance should be made because people want new build is unsustainable. To meet such demand there would need to be new houses continually built. One would have to question whether it is appropriate to have a stock of semi-complete mansions on land which isn't zoned for such and all the uncertainties this represents. It is doubtful that any HNWI would want to live on an estate that remains half empty and has the potential to look like a building site until such time as all the properties are occupied. It might be that the properties are never occupied. The design of houses change and it could be that they simply go out of fashion such that a discerning rich person would prefer a different design on another new estate.
• 6.24 Whether the stock on the market meets the desires of highly discerning wealthy individuals carries little weight in planning terms, and would not be sufficient to override the Development Plan policies and spatial strategy. One of the attractions of the Isle of Man, and one that has been cited by wealthy residents, is the beauty and unspoilt nature of the Island and the fact that development is controlled. An approval on this site would lead to uncertainty, and further pressure for an application being sought for more large houses on the field to the north for example. What is the evidence to say that it is 8 dwellings that are needed, and not 2 or 20? No evidence has been put forward to this effect.
• 6.25 If a case can be made that the island as a whole lacks a particular range of properties, and that these should be provided for the good of the Island, the appropriate manner in which to make such as case is through the Development Plan process when there would be robust assessment of the evidence put forward. Prematurity:
• 6.26 The application recognises that the Draft Review of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan recommends that 2440 dwellings should be provided in the East of the Island between 2011 and 2026. The applicants argue that this 'windfall site' will not impact on the outcome of the Strategic Plan Review. (NBThe definition of a windfall site is normally where previously developed land unexpectedly becomes available and is able to be used for residential purposes, e.g. the closure of an old factory in an otherwise residential area. It does not apply to land not designated for development.) The applicants state that as additional residential development land will not be zoned in the East before 2018 the situation will remain stagnated with the only choice being the development at Ballanard Woods, of large houses on small sloping sites (as referred to above). They state; 'There is currently no choice and this will remain the case for the next 3-4 years. We need alternative sites to be made available to be able to project a positive 'can do' attitude to compete with other jurisdictions. The provision of more executive homes is a key element of the overall package in attracting inward investment. There is a national need in planning terms, and this application should be supported.'
• 6.27 It is indeed a key objective of the Department's housing policies to provide sufficient opportunities for housing and a choice of sites. The Department approaches this by looking at evidence, not by way of 'ad hoc' planning applications. The Island's housing needs are primarily worked out and informed by the Census; there is a Government commitment to

• retain this survey which is the most accurate Island wide survey data available on population. It allows population projections to be formulated via the use of consistent modelling techniques. The housing need data set out in the Strategic Plan then filters down and informs the Area Plans.
• 6.28 Although it is acknowledged that there have been delays in bringing the Area Plans forward, there is now a timetable that the Department is working to. The Area Plan for the South shows that once approved, applications can flow quite quickly. The 'Call for Sites' for the Area Plan for the East is to begin as soon as the Inspector's Report on the Strategic Plan is finalised, which is expected to be in June or July 2015. There is a commitment to produce a Draft Area Plan for the East by the end of 2016.
• 6.29 Although Chrystals state that they have a number of people on their books for whom the proposed dwellings might be suitable, the application otherwise suggests that the development is speculative, providing a stock of complete, but not fitted out homes to attract people who may wish to move to the Island. This does not suggest a pressing need, rather a longer term aspiration and on this basis, it is not considered that there is the need to preempt the local plan process.
• 6.30 The Inspector to the 2007 application recognised the rigorous approach taken in the identification of land through the local plan process. It is not a matter of simply stating that more land should be allocated. Assessment of sites is taken relative to identified housing need and relative to other sites, looking at their individual assets and constraints, their accessibility and sustainability and whether sites should incorporate additional facilities such as areas for commercial or community purposes. The Inspector who considered the 2004 application interestingly thought that 177 houses was an inefficient use of land. Until an assessment of land brought forward as part of the local plan process is carried out it is not known whether this site will be needed for a vastly different type of development or not needed at all. To develop this site and then realise a large site is needed for a significant number of homes would be entirely wasteful of land. In this context it would be more appropriate for this site to be considered as part of the upcoming call for sites during the preparation of the Area Plan for the East. Other matters:
• 6.31 The drop in levels from one part of the site to another would be likely to mean that there would be a certain amount of cut and fill to build the houses and to lay the access road. This would have the potential to impact on the existing hedgerows and landscaping which cannot be assessed at this time.
• 6.32 Both previous Inspectors considered that the appearance of the area, whilst having some sporadic development, was rural and formed the impression that it is in open countryside. It was felt that development would extend what is already a substantial protrusion into the countryside in a way that would not consolidate development around Douglas in a sustainable manner.
• 6.33 Both previous Inspectors noted that the site was not well served by footpaths. There is a footpath on one site of the road which is narrow and not well maintained. New residential development should not really be approved without associated requirements to upgrade the path.
• 6.34 The application site is not served by public transport.
• 6.35 Drainage was raised as an issue by one of the objectors. There is nothing to indicate that surface water and foul water drainage cannot be accommodated on the site and the

details of this would form part of a reserved matters application and the application for building regulation approval.

Summary 7.1 The application is directly contrary to the provisions of the development plan. It is not accepted that there is a demonstrable need for this development sufficient to warrant the setting aside of policies put in place to protect the countryside as well as the 'open space' designation. It would therefore be premature to permit the proposed development on land not intended for development in advance of a full site-selection process that will be carried out as part of the preparation of the Area Plan for the East.

Recommendation That permission is refused.

Party status

• 1. By virtue of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) (No 2) Order 2013, 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) The Highways Division of the Department; and
• (e) The local authority in whose district the land the subject of the application is situated.

• 2. In addition to those above, article 6(3) of the Order requires the Department to decide which persons (if any) who have made representations with respect to the application, should be treated as having sufficient interest in the subject matter of the application to take part in any subsequent proceedings relating to the application.

In this instance, it is recommended that the following persons have sufficient interest and should be awarded the status of an Interested Person.

The owners and occupiers of numbers 5, 7, 10 The Castleward Green and Vejle Ballanard Road due to their proximity to the site.

Recommendation Recommended Decision: Refused

Date of Recommendation:

Conditions and Notes for Approval / Reasons and Notes for Refusal

C : Conditions for approval

• N : Notes attached to conditions R : Reasons for refusal
• O : Notes attached to refusals

R 1.

"The proposed development would be on land that is zoned as Open Space in Agricultural Use in the Douglas Plan and is not in an area intended for residential purposes. The proposal would be contrary to Strategic Policies 1 and 2, Spatial Policy 6, Environment Policy 1 and General Policy 3 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan. It has not been demonstrated that there is a need for houses of the type proposed or that the approval of such would be in the national interest. Furthermore, it would be premature to permit the proposed development on land not intended for development in advance of a full site-selection process that will be carried out as part of the preparation of the Area Plan for the East.

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 : ..23.03.2015 Signed :Jennifer Chance Presenting Officer Further to the decision of the Committee an additional report/condition reason was required (included as supplemental paragraph). Signatory to delete as appropriate YES/NO