Extension Time Officer Memo

Department Of Local Government And The Environment ### Memorandum To: Director of Planning and Building Control From: Miss Sarah Corlett, Planning Officer Subject: PA 06/0394 - approval in principle for erection of six semi-detached affordable dwellings and fifteen detached dwellings, field 311788 adjacent to brickworks entrance, Glenfaba Road, Peel Date: 30th July, 2008 ### Extension Of Time The above application was permitted on 22nd June, 2006 by way of a notice dated 30th June, 2006 for a period of two years. Subsequent to this, the following applications have been considered - 07/01465/B for the matters reserved from this approval in principle. This application was refused due to concerns expressed about the access and vehicular turning facilities at the northern end of the site and also the design and massing of the property on plot 17. The refusal was appealed by the applicant and the appeal was heard on 21st May, 2008. The recommendation and decision for this appeal have now been received and the application was permitted subject to conditions. The applicant submitted this request for an extension of time prior to the receipt of the appeal decision, in case the appeal was unsuccessful and so that he would have the time to address concerns raised in the appeal decision and still be able to submit another application for the matters reserved from the 2006 application. Since the approval of the application, the Strategic Plan has been adopted by Tynwald and brought into effect. The 2006 application was not considered in the light of the policies of the Strategic Plan although the application did propose affordable housing in accordance with the Tynwald resolution of July 2005 which required the provision of 25% of any development of 8 dwellings or more in a residential area to be affordable units, ahead of the provisions of the Strategic Plan which also required this to be provided. As such, there has been a major change in policy since the approval of the application in principle which could suggest that the approval in principle should not be extended. Whilst there is provision of affordable housing in accordance with the requirements of the Strategic Plan, during the appeal for PA 07/1465 possible conditions were discussed and it became apparent that the applicant had not intended the six affordable units to be provided through the Department in the usual fashion but had simply included smaller, cheaper houses which he considered were affordable. The applicant indicated that if there were a condition attached to any approval requiring that the price of the housing was discounted in accordance with the House Purchase Assistance Scheme (HPAS) the scheme would not be viable and he would not pursue it. The matter was left with the Inspector as I confirmed that such a condition would be appropriate and the applicant considered that it was not. He and his agent also stressed that the approval in principle did not specifically require the units to be made available through the HPAS or any other similar mechanism so to require in now would be inequitable. Also, since the commencement of consideration of applications for this site, in PA 02/0491 for the principle of residential development on the site we have seen applications for the development of the land to the west - 05/00377/A – which was refused for reasons relating to the inadequacy of access