Birch Hill - Heritage Homes Development

[loaf]

Here

[tree]

wo hooooo. at least thats put em off 4 a while

[Kurashima]

Its nice to see Dandara/HH not getting their way for once.

 

Theyll be back though. A little pressure applied to the right MHK, and theyll get what they want, as usual

[joeyconcrete]

loaf I'll post the article, ManxRadio's pants news system doesn't appear to keep the same NewsID for articles after a certain period of time. This makes it impossible to link to, because the link changes after a day or so.

 

It's certainly a good decision and a very sensible one.

 

Explanation of Birch Hill planning application refusal

Thu 5th Aug 2004  Listen to Audio Clip

An explanation of why the Planning Committee has ruled against the application, for a second time, has been posted to the interested parties.

 

The "reasons for refusal" are contained in four numbered paragraphs, on a single sheet of A4 paper.

 

The first paragraph relates to the zoning of the land.

 

It says the 14 acre site is designated as "open space" on the Tynwald approved Onchan Plan, which came into effect a little over two years ago.

 

The planning committee notes that an inspector who reported to the government on the Draft Onchan Plan recommended land to the north of Birch Hill should be designated for residential development.

 

This was to provide for the amount of housing which would be needed during the life of the plan.

 

However, the idea was firmly rejected by Tynwald when it considered the plan.

 

The committee adds that the plan clearly states that the whole of the rural area surrounding the built up part of Onchan should be designated as being of High Landscape Value, and Scenic Significance,

 

The second point is that much of the proposed development would involve two storey buildings, in an area where the existing homes are generally single storey.

 

The planning committee says this would exacerbate the impact of development in the area, as viewed from

certain directions, and draw even further attention to what would be an extension of the built up part of Onchan into the surrounding countryside.

 

The planning committee is also unhappy with the main access route into the proposed estate.

 

It would be between numbers 68 and 64 Birch Hill Crescent, with only 7.5m at the closest point to the existing properties.

 

The committee says this isn't enough to adequately protect the privacy and amenities of the properties from the traffic which would use the road.

 

Finally, the Planning Committee isn't satisfied the proposed development complies with, what it calls, "the provisions of Manx Roads".

 

It says the existing road network in and around the estate accommodates about 580 dwellings, when the document recommends such a system should support no more than 400.

 

The committee says that even with three access points into the main distributive system, as it calls it, the number of dwellings served should be no more than 600.

 

With the 120 dwellings proposed by Heritage Homes there would be over 700.

 

The conclusion is that the existing road network is not suitable for satisfactorily accommodating the traffic from the development.

 

We have received the briefest of comments from Heritage Homes on the rejection of the scheme; the company says it will be making "no comment".

[joeyconcrete]

DEVELOPER WILL BATTLE ON TO BUILD IN ONCHAN

10 August 2004

 

THE battle to build 127 houses in Onchan will continue, the company behind the controversial plans has confirmed.

 

Heritage Homes will appeal against the government planning committee's decision to block its scheme to develop land next to Birch Hill Crescent.

 

Planners refused permission for the second time because the land, which lies between Ballachrink Farm, Maple Avenue and Birch Hill Crescent, is not zoned for housing.

 

They also fear it will intensify the built-up environment in the area and lead to more traffic than the roads can handle.

 

A spokesman for the company confirmed the fight will go on.

 

Full story in today's Isle of Man Examiner.

 

I wish the planning committee would stand up and say "F**k Off" you are not building houses here!!

 

If they get permission after a 3rd attempt to me, that means the government are weak and give in under pressure.

[FCMR]

Dont forget its on Richard E Grants doorstep

[Ripsaw]

Between this site, Ballanard Road and Johnny Waterson Lane there are enough houses to build a decent sized village.

 

Remember my rant about better utilising the railway?

 

There must be sufficient unfarmed land adjoining the railway that could be developed for housing along with a new station to service the estate.

 

Drainage wouldn't be a problem as Iris runs under the track and could be tapped into very easily.

 

Transport is covered by the railway and for those who still choose to use cars, the main road to Douglas and the South is only metres away. No hundreds of cars converging onto a couple of small roads at 8:30 and 5:30 five days per week.

 

No existing neighbours to have their lives blighted.

 

(running out of good reasons now)

 

The Government compiled a 5 year Strategic Plan in which the need for a new town was dismissed. So now we have estates of stupid sizes, being planed in stupid places and doing nothing to enhance the lives of the potential residents or existing neighbours.

 

A new town of a decent size would justify the investment in a railway station, a local pub, shops, community hall and the other 'local' commodities that benefit the residents.

[geo]

A new town of a decent size would justify the investment in a railway station, a local pub, shops, community hall and the other 'local' commodities that benefit the residents.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

I seem to remeber that Santon was proposed as a 'New Town' and development seems to be continuing in Santon which sort of supports this (and it doesnt seem to be Dandara doing the development.

 

Geo

[FCMR]

New Towns No

Re Generate the old Towns yes

[Ripsaw]

New Towns No

Re Generate the old Towns yes

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Regenerate the old towns, Yes I agree, BUT... there are a lot of schemes wanting to build on green field sites.

 

Ignoring the arguements about ex letting properties coming on to the market, the building companies build. If the market exists to increase the Island's housing stock then should they be building 40 or 50 houses one one site and 80 to 100 on another?

 

What has happened in the past when this has happened is that there isn't the incentive to build the add ons. Who is going to open a shop to serve 50 to 100 houses? Who is going to provide community facilities? So the houses are built as an extension of the existing infastructure and we end up with the related problems that Birch Hill residents are voicing.

 

Whatever peoples opinion of the houses on Governers Hill, it at least supplies services to the people living there and beyond... Carpet shop, Chineese Takeaway, Convenience Store, Child Care centre, School, playground, public house, Doctors and Clinic and on a regular bus route....

 

For me (purely as an example) my child goes to the school, then to the after school club, I can cash my family allowence in the Post Office, buy a couple of bags of shopping in the store, then walk my son home or cross the road and have half an hour in the play area, rather than driving to 3 or 4 different locations dotted around the place.

 

I don't drink or eat out much, but the pub and resturant is within walking distance, so a no brainer about leaving the car at home.

 

There have been a few developments recently where the houses just open out onto a main road and that's it. Is it any wonder that children become accustomed to being driven everywhere?

[shamus]

Before any planning permission is granted or building allowed to commence, there should be proper infrastructure planning. Particularly if the houses are to be occupied by residents yet to come here. For example there must be sufficient schools and health services. At present there is not. Also roads.

 

Another example is Vicarage Road. A right mess. They should have widened that before they allowed all the building around it.

 

Why is it they do the building first and then worry about the road problems afterwards? That is re-active planning not pro-active.

 

Back to the point, Birchill in Onchan cannot take any more houses with the two access roads feeding it. It really is quite madness for this proposed development to go ahead.

 

But I would not put a bet on Heritage Homes loosing an appeal. The boss of Heritage is big mates with Hugh Grant. I'm sure most people will know what I mean And Heritage own the land.

 

There is hardly anywhere left in Onchan to build on now. I think Onchan has done its bit.

[ans]

:gb2mcyfcm:

[thebees]

Grrrrrr what does that mean?

[loaf]

Seems to be a war of attrition that Dan from Kildara eventually and ultimately wins at some point.

[Sock Puppet]

I have long been a reader of this forum and its predecessors but I don't like to post, because I'm scared of you all. But I just had to post to say how much I agree with Shamus. And I believe I speak for all the people who read this forum but don't post when I say that his views are always enlightening and profound.

 

I expect I am going to be flammed by ans, that big bully, and the click for saying this. But ya boo sucks to you ans. The silent majority don't like your accronyms.