Loading document...
{{table:8478}} Policy 15: The extension or alteration of existing traditionally styled properties in the countryside will normally only be approved where these respect the proportion, form and appearance of the existing property. Only exceptionally will permission be granted for extensions which measure more than 50% of the existing building in terms of floor space (measured externally). "Housing Policy 16: The extension of non-traditional dwellings or those of poor or inappropriate form will not generally be permitted where this would increase the impact of the building as viewed by the public." ### Planning History The following planning application is considered relevant in the assessment and determination of this application: Alterations and erection of extensions to dwelling house - 10/00179/B - APPROVED ### Proposal The application seeks approval for the erection of extensions to dwelling. These include two single storey extensions to either side of the previously approved glazed garden room. Each extension would have a depth of 2.5 metres, a width of 4.9 metres and a maximum height of 2.6 metres. In essence the proposals would result in the entire length of the southeast elevation at ground floor level having a glazed garden room. Other alterations include window alterations and the removal of a gable end roof to the southwest elevation. ### Representations Highways Division: "Do not oppose has no traffic management, parking or road safety implications." The Authority has received no other privately written representations objecting to the application. ### Assessment For the extension of properties within the countryside there are two possible policies to consider. These are Housing Policies 15 and 16 which are indicated within the Policy section of this report. Housing Policy 15 deals with traditional properties and states that generally the proposed extension should not be greater in terms of floor area over the original area by more than 50%. Housing Policy 16 deals with non-traditional dwellings or dwelling of poor form, and that no extension should be allowed which increases the appearance of the property from public view. For this application consideration needs to be taken to which policy should be used. Currently, given the proportion, form and design of the existing two storey traditional Manx property, it is considered the proposal should be considered with Housing Policy 15. As indicated within the history section of this report approval was granted for alterations and extensions to the existing property (87% increase over existing floor area). Under that application it was considered that from the east, south or west the large side/rear flat extension did have an adverse impact on the dwelling and therefore from these aspects was considered a dwelling of poor form. However, when viewing the property from the north the property would appear to be an attractive three window, traditional Manx farmhouse. The existing single flat roofed extension would be demolished and replaced by the proposed two storey side extension to the southeast elevation which also included a two storey infill extension between the existing rear outlet and the proposed rear outlet (two storey extension). Added to the southeast elevation is a single storey garden room. The previous approved application resulted in an 87% increase over the existing floor area. Housing Policy 15 states that exceptionally permission will be granted for extensions which measure more than 50% of the existing building in terms of floor space. It was concluded given the proposal would vastly improve the appearance by the removal of a large flat roofed extension, which significant detracts from the visual appearance of the original traditional property the proposal in this case would be acceptable. The proposed extensions/external alterations have been substantially completed. This new submission now proposes two modest sized extensions to either side of the approved garden room to the southeast elevation. These extensions result in a floor area increase of 24sqm. The percentage increase over the existing building depends on how you class the "existing" building. If it is taken that the existing building is the dwelling before any alterations/extensions were taken, i.e. pre the previously approved application (10/00179/B); then these extensions plus the approved extensions result in an increased floor area of 101%. Alternatively, if the view is taken that given the approved extension are substantial complete, and therefore the building as it stands is the "existing" building, then the proposed extensions would only result in a floor area increase over the current existing property of 7%. The argument against the latter view is that this results in an incremental development over the original building which therefore results in an increase of development within the open countryside. Taking this view there would never be an end to development/extensions to houses in the countryside as you would just calculate the existing floor area (including most recent extensions) and adding up to another 50%. Whilst Housing Policy 15 is not total clear in explaining the term "existing building" and perhaps the word existing replaced with original, it is considered logical and reasonable that the Strategic Plan does not want to encourage incremental development. The policy was introduced to prevent dwellings being continually enlarged considerably over time, with no planning policies in place to prevent such development (i.e. pre Strategic Plan) resulting in substantial properties in the countryside. This has occurred to a number of properties throughout the Island over number of years. For these reasons it is considered the term "existing building" relates to the property before the approved works commenced (10/00179/B). Consequently, it is considered the proposal would result in an increased floor area over the existing building of 101%. In terms of the visual appearance the proposal would be in keeping with the property, given the proportion, form and design all of which would be appropriate for the existing traditional property. Furthermore, the proposal would not be apparent from public view, given the orientation of the dwelling in relation to Ballacurn Road, the landscaping between the highway and the proposed extensions and given the distance from the highway (130 metres). It should be noted that Ballacurn Road is a narrow single width lane and that the application site is the last dwelling to use the lane. No through traffic uses Ballacurn Road. The Planning Authority has already acceptable an increase over the generally permitted 50% threshold when the previously application was approved (87%). It could be argued therefore the applicant have already benefited more than is usually accepted. It should be noted this acceptance was due to the flat roofed extension which had been erected previously, and had a detrimental impact upon the visual amenities and character of the traditional property. The issue now is whether a further increase (19%) is acceptable. As indicated the design, scale and siting would not have a significant impact upon the visual amenities of the area, given the very modest size and siting of the proposed works. However, the proposal would further increase the floor area over the existing property. In conclusion, given the proposed extensions are modest in size, improves the appearance of the south east elevation and would not have a significant impact upon the appearance of the property or surrounding countryside, it is considered the proposals to be acceptable in this case. It should be noted to the applicants that it is unlikely any further extensions would be viewed in a positive light, given the approval of the pervious application and this application, both of which result in an increase over the generally permitted 50% threshold as indicated with Housing Policy 15. All other external alterations are considered acceptable and un-objectable. ### Recommendation Accordingly, it is recommended that the application be approved. ### Party Status It is considered that the following meet the criteria of Government Circular 1/06 and should be afforded interested party status:- #### Ballaugh Parish Commissioners The Department of Transport Highways and Traffic Division is now part of the Department of Infrastructure of which the planning authority is part. As such, the Highways and Traffic Division cannot be afforded party status in this instance. ### Recommendation Recommended Decision: Permitted Date of Recommendation: 15.07.2011
C : Conditions for approval N : Notes attached to conditions R : Reasons for refusal
C 1.
The development hereby permitted shall commence before the expiration of four years from the date of this notice.
C 2.
This approval relates to the erection of an extension to dwelling as proposed in the submitted documents and drawings 437-1H and 437-03 all received on 13th June 2011.
C 3.
The external finishes of the extension must match those of the existing building in all respects.
I confirm that this decision has been made by the Planning Committee in accordance with the authority afforded to it under the Town and Country (Development Procedure) 2005
Decision Made : Committee Meeting Date : 04/08/11 Signed : 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