Loading document...
==== PAGE 1 ====
23/00987/B Page 1 of 5
PLANNING OFFICER REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
Application No. : 23/00987/B Applicant : Mr & Mrs John Griffiths Proposal : Proposed alterations and extensions, including rear dormer and balcony Site Address : Driftwood Dogmills Ramsey Isle Of Man IM7 4AD
Planning Officer: Mr Toby Cowell Photo Taken : Site Visit : Expected Decision Level : Officer Delegation
Recommendation
Recommended Decision:
Permitted Date of Recommendation: 16.11.2023 __
Conditions and Notes for Approval
C : Conditions for approval N : Notes attached to conditions
C 1. The development hereby approved shall be begun before the expiration of four years from the date of this decision notice.
Reason: To comply with Article 26 of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) Order 2019 and to avoid the accumulation of unimplemented planning approvals.
C 2. The 1.8m high privacy screen on the northern flank elevation of the first-floor terrace shall be installed prior to the occupation of the development hereby approved and thereafter retained as such in perpetuity.
Reason: In the interests of safeguarding amenity.
C 3. Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (Permitted Development) Order 2012 (or any Order revoking and/or re-enacting that Order with or without modification) no garages or car ports may be constructed within the curtilage of the dwellinghouse, without the prior written approval of the Department.
Reason: To control development in the interests of the amenities of the surrounding area.
This application has been recommended for approval for the following reason. The proposed extensions are acceptable in terms of their form, mass and design by providing suitable additions and alternations to an existing residential property in the countryside, without detriment to the amenity of surrounding residential properties. The development is
==== PAGE 2 ====
23/00987/B Page 2 of 5
therefore in compliance with General Policy 2 and Housing Policy 16 of the Strategic Plan (2016).
Plans/Drawings/Information;
This decision relates to the following plans and documents referenced;
23 1740 - 00 23 1740 - 01 23 1740 - 02 23 1740 - 03 23 1740 - 04 23 1740 - 05 23 1740 - 06 23 1740 - 07 23 1740 - 08 23 1740 - 09 Site photographs Received 21.08.23. __
Interested Person Status - Additional Persons
None. __
Officer’s Report
1.0 THE SITE 1.1 The site relates to the detached bungalow of Driftwood (formerly known as Ballabrune) and its associated curtilage. The property is located within the small dispersed settlement of The Dog Mills and forms part of a small collection of dwellings sited either side of the principle streetscene. The property benefits from a generous curtilage to the side and rear, with the plot backing directly onto the beach to the immediate east.
1.2 The plot includes a fairly significant amount of mature coverage to either side of the dwelling itself and along the site's western boundary adjoining the streetscene, however the rear portion of the site is largely clear. The property is further well-recessed from the streetscene and is therefore not particularly visible within the context of the same.
1.3 The dwelling is noted as being finished in pebbledash, with an unusual gabled front entrance with the outer flank walls bowing outwards, together with an open arched entrance. The property is complete with an attached dual-pitched single garage, a flat roofed single- storey rear extension, and a large chimney breast which widens towards the base. The exact age of the property is not certain however it likely dates from the 1960s/70s given its absence on historic mapping from 1955 and the notable built vernacular of the property.
2.0 THE PROPOSAL 2.1 Planning permission is sought for various alterations and extensions to the property, which include the following:
Creation of balcony atop existing single-storey rear extension with glass balustrades and privacy screening along it's perimeter and erection of glazed external staircase;
==== PAGE 3 ====
23/00987/B Page 3 of 5
Alterations to the front gable entrance by way of removing arched entrance and straightening of the flank walls.
3.0 PLANNING HISTORY 3.1 None of relevance.
4.0 PLANNING POLICY 4.1 The application site is identified on the 1982 Development Plan as 'white land' and within an area of countryside that is not designated for development. The site is not within a Conservation Area or an area at risk of flooding, but does falls within an Area of High Landscape Value as defined by the 1982 Development Plan.
4.2 The following policies from the 2016 Strategic Plan are considered pertinent in the assessment of this application;
Strategic Policy 1 Efficient use of land and resources 2 Priority for new development to identified towns and villages 5 Design and visual impact
Spatial Policy 5 Development in the countryside will only be permitted in accordance with General Policy 3
General Policy 2 General Development Considerations 3 Exceptions to development in the countryside
Environment Policy 1 Protection of the countryside 2 Areas of High Landscape Value
Housing Policy 16 Extension or alteration to non-traditional styled properties in the countryside
4.5 Residential Design Guide (2021) This document provides advice on the design of new houses and extensions to existing property as well as how to assess the impact of such development on the living conditions of those in adjacent residential properties and sustainable methods of construction.
5.0 REPRESENTATIONS 5.1 Bride Commissioners - No response received at the time of writing.
5.2 Highways Services - No highways interest (25.08.23)
5.3 Manx Utilities Authority - No response received at the time of writing.
5.4 Forestry Officer - No response received at the time of writing.
==== PAGE 4 ====
23/00987/B Page 4 of 5
6.0 ASSESSMENT 6.1 The main issues to consider in the assessment of this planning application are as follows:
6.2 PRINCIPLE 6.2.1 The site falls outside of a defined settlement boundary within the open countryside, is not designated for residential development with the proposals not according within one of the defined exception criteria outlined in General Policy 3. Housing Policy 16 and its supporting text do however include provision for extensions to non-traditional dwellings within the countryside, provided such additions are of a high quality design, would not detract from the character and appearance of the countryside, nor increase the overall visual impact of the resultant dwelling in the context of the public realm.
6.2.2 The property is well-recessed from the streetscene with mature trees and hedging noted along the plot's front boundary. The dwelling is therefore nor overly visible in the context of the streetscene. In any case, the majority of works are proposed to the rear of the property, with alterations to the front largely aesthetic and taking the form of fenestration alterations, the use of timber cladding and white painted render to the exterior and alterations to the front entrance.
6.2.3 Whilst matters relating to design are covered in the following sections of this report, the general footprint, form and scale of the proposed extensions/alterations are considered to be acceptable in the context of the existing dwelling and such that the impact of the development upon the wider streetscene/visual amenities of the locality would be minimal. Consequently, the principle of development is deemed acceptable.
6.3 DESIGN AND VISUAL IMPACT 6.3.1 The existing property displays a degree of architectural interest with the unusual front entrance and large chimney breast. Whilst the proposed seek some changes to the front entrance, the changes to the general exterior of the property through the removal of the pebbledash and addition of high quality timber cladding and white painted render would, on balance, largely improve the general character and appearance of the property. When viewed from the front, the changes to the property would provide a more modern and fresh appearance to the dwelling which is not objected to.
6.3.2 The rear of the property is the focus for the majority of the proposed changes, however these would not be evident in the context of the streetscene. Again, the changes seek to modernise and freshen up the exterior of the dwelling with the addition of the first-floor balcony adding a degree of visual interest when combined with the greater use of glazing in the existing extension below. Likewise, the 'shed style' dormer adds a further degree of interest to the rear of the property, with the design technique welcomed over a conventional box dormer.
6.3.3 Overall, the proposed changes to the rear of the property are considered to be acceptable from a design standpoint and such that the wider landscape character would not be adversely impacted as a result of the proposals. The proposals are therefore deemed compliant with General Policy 2, (b) and (c).
6.4 NEIGHBOURING AMENITY 6.4.1 The only element of the scheme likely to pose any material impact upon neighbouring amenity is the first-floor balcony which allows elevated views to the north and south. However, given the significant retained separation distance between the balcony and the site's southern
==== PAGE 5 ====
23/00987/B Page 5 of 5
boundary, coupled with retained mature screening along the intervening boundary, clear views into the garden of the neighbouring property of Sea View to the south would not be overly realistic. Likewise, whilst the balcony is to be sited at a much reduced distance to the site's northern boundary shared with the adjacent property of Seafield, the proposals include the erection of a 1.8m high privacy screen along the northern section of the balcony to prevent any realistic overlooking. On this basis, and in the absence of any further material issue, the proposals are considered to be acceptable in the context of safeguarding neighbouring amenity, in compliance with General Policy 2 (g).
7.0 CONCLUSION 7.1 The proposed extensions are acceptable in terms of their form, mass and design by providing suitable additions and alternations to an existing residential property in the countryside, without detriment to the amenity of surrounding residential properties. The development is therefore in compliance with General Policy 2 and Housing Policy 16 of the Strategic Plan (2016), and recommended for approval.
8.0 INTERESTED PERSON STATUS 8.1 By virtue of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) Order 2019, the following persons are automatically interested persons: (a) the applicant (including an agent acting on their behalf); (b) any Government Department that has made written representations that the Department considers material; (c) the Highways Division of the Department of Infrastructure; (d) Manx National Heritage where it has made written representations that the Department considers material; (e) Manx Utilities where it has made written representations that the Department considers material; (f) the local authority in whose district the land the subject of the application is situated; and (g) a local authority adjoining the authority referred to in paragraph (f) where that adjoining authority has made written representations that the Department considers material.
8.2 The decision maker must determine: o whether any other comments from Government Departments (other than the Department of Infrastructure Highway Services Division) are material; and o whether there are other persons to those listed above who should be given Interested Person Status __
I can confirm that this decision has been made by the Head of Development Management in accordance with the authority afforded to that Officer by the appropriate DEFA Delegation and that in making this decision the Officer has agreed the recommendation in relation to who should be afforded Interested Person Status
Decision Made : Permitted Date : 17.11.2023
Determining officer
Signed : S BUTLER
Stephen Butler
Head of Development Management
Customer note
This copy of the officer report reflects the content of the file copy and has been produced in this form for the benefit of our online services/customers and archive records.
Copyright in submitted documents remains with their authors. Request removal