153238

==== PAGE 1 ====

                                                 17/00601/B
                                 Page  1  of  8

PLANNING OFFICER REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Application No. : 17/00601/B Applicant : Mr Raj Chatha Proposal : Erection of new dwelling including associated greenhouse, shed, gardens and access Site Address : Ballaughton Manor Saddle Road Douglas Isle of Man IM2 1HG

Case Officer : Miss Jennifer Chance Photo Taken :

Site Visit :

Expected Decision Level : Planning Committee

Officer’s Report

THE APPLICATION IS TO BE DETERMINED BY THE PLANNING COMMITTEE DUE TO THE PLANNING HISTORY OF THE SITE

INTRODUCTION The site of Ballaughton Manor is one that was occupied by a grand residence that had been considered as having potential for Registration. In recent years two applications have been made on the site, the first for a new house retaining the front façade and front facing rooms, and the second for an entirely new build property albeit using the design of the manor house as its inspiration. Both were approved (see Planning History). The manor house has now been demolished. This application is the third application, effectively seeking changes to the previously approved application.

1.0 SITE 1.1 The application site is approximately 8 acres in area. It is surrounded on all its boundaries by other residential development. To the north-west is Harcroft Road, north is Ballaughton Lane, to the south-east is Ballaughton Close and to the south is Ballaughton Meadows. With the exception of Ballaughton Meadows, all the properties that border the application site have relatively small back gardens of between 6m and 9m in depth.

1.2 The applicant also owns two other properties that border the site, Orchard Lodge and Chestnut Lodge.

1.3 There are a large number of trees within the site.

2.0 THE PROPOSAL 2.1 Proposed is a 6 bedroom dwelling, with a living, dining room and kitchen, a great hall, leisure facilities, entertaining space and office facilities. Externally there will be remodelled gardens, new garaging with ancillary accommodation above, a gatehouse and widened access.

2.2 Since obtaining approval for the new build residence, the scheme has undergone more detailed design development and refinement. The current application proposes a larger property, 2540sqm, as opposed to 2167sqm created by way of a large, full height, lower ground floor providing entertainment facilities and stores. The ridgeline of the property has also increased.

2.3 Other amendments to the previous scheme include:

==== PAGE 2 ====

                                                 17/00601/B
                                 Page  2  of  8

-Replacement of the contemporary spa with one that has the appearance of an orangery; -New timber greenhouse (12m x 4m) and garden shed (12m x 6m); -The introduction of dormer windows to assist breaking up the mass of the roof. The dormer windows are detailed similar to other Georgian style properties in the UK; -Increase in height of the parapet, interspersed with stone balustrade; -Introduction of a cupola to provide interest to the roof and to provide additional natural light into the deep floor plan over the central staircase; -Ground floor windows elongated; -External material now to be warm-toned grit stone rather than limestone. Roll lead hips, lead cladding and copper cupola, white painted timber windows and door with black metal rainwater goods, slate roof; -Landscaped formal gardens including an upper lawn framed by parterre hedging with a stone staircase to the lower lawn containing a statue (intended to be by Lorenzo Quinn) adjacent to which would be a tennis court. There would be low level lighting through the gardens with additional lighting around the tennis court and main house. The laying of formal gardens results in the loss of 7 trees;

• A walled garden comprising compost bins, shed, greenhouse, raised garden beds and potager gardens.

2.4 The garaging with ancillary accommodation, access and gatehouse remain unchanged from the previous schemes.

3. PLANNING HISTORY. 3.1 Planning approval was granted for the 'Erection of a replacement dwelling whilst retaining the front façade of the existing dwelling, including the erection of detached garaging with guest accommodation, gatehouse and landscaping.' Ref: 15/00975.

3.2 Planning approval was confirmed on appeal for the Erection of a Dwelling, ref 16/00019/B.

4.0 PLANNING POLICIES. 4.1 The site is designated in the Douglas Plan 1998 as a Private Estate, in an Area of Open Space/Woodland. The un-adopted Written Statement provides no further advice as to how to treat applications with such a designation.

4.2 Circular 8/89 Low Density Housing in Parkland does offer advice. It sets out that: 'Areas of existing low density housing in parkland (marked "PE" - Private Estates - on the Development Plan) are usually characterised by fine buildings and mature trees standing in landscaped grounds. Whether in the towns or the countryside, such sites make a positive contribution to public amenity. In terms of development potential, they may be classified into (a) those which are clearly within the built areas of the Island's Towns and Villages, and (b) those which are not. In the case of (a), Where residential development could take place without any tree-felling and without any diminution of the public amenity value of the landscape, development in accordance with the criteria set out in (4) below may be permitted'.

4.3 The criteria in (4) states that 'proposed buildings must be substantial, and designed and finished to the highest quality; and each dwelling must be sited, in at least 1 acre (0.4 ha) of its own grounds, such as to sit comfortably and naturally in a landscaped setting which acknowledges existing ground contours and existing trees'.

4.4 The Policy further suggests that applications for the development of such areas must include an accurate and complete survey showing existing ground levels and the position and branch- spread of all trees.

The relevant Strategic Plan Policies are:

==== PAGE 3 ====

                                                 17/00601/B
                                 Page  3  of  8

4.5 Strategic Policy 5, which seeks that new development, including individual buildings, be designed to make a positive contribution to the environment of the Island.

4.6 General Policy 2 which provides for a presumption in favour of development provided that development; respects its site and surroundings in terms of layout, scale, form, design and landscaping; does not adversely impact on wildlife; does not adversely impact on the amenity of residents or the character of the locality; does not have an unacceptable impact on road safety; is designed having due regard to best practice in reducing energy consumption.

4.7 Environment Policy 3 seeks to ensure there is no unacceptable loss or damage to woodland areas.

4.8 Environment Policy 22 seeks to ensure the amenities of nearby properties are protected from vibration, odour, noise or light pollution.

5.0 REPRESENTATIONS 5.1 Douglas Borough Council: no objection (20.6.17).

5.2 Highway Services: do not object (30.6.17).

5.3 DEFA Forestry request an arboricultural impact assessment, a tree protection plan and an arboricultural method statement (16.6.17).

5.4 The owner of 7, Harcroft Road remains concerned at the distance and height of the garage block to the rear of the houses on Harcroft which have small back gardens. He is of the view that the garage is likely to cause further loss of light, which is already an issue due to the number of unmanaged trees and although reference has been made to the height of the properties on Harcroft Road, they are all of different heights and not the same. He considers that the impact will be worse on number 5 Harcroft (20.6.17).

5.5 The owners of Rosemanly, New Castletown Road generally support proposal, commenting that the land proposed for vegetable garden is currently a field (now used as the compound) and its use as a vegetable garden is supported from an aesthetic, amenity and sustainability point of view. They describe the site as open on 3 sides to neighbours, is highly visible and on a higher ground level and as such, thought should be given to the potential for increased flood risk and overlooking. Also, they consider that the boundary treatment for the properties to the rear of Ballaughton Close needs consideration and discussion as there are deeds in relation to this boundary. They note that the application proposes a ballroom, so assurance is sought via condition in respect of the timing and frequency of traffic movements for functions and they understand there is to be events in marquees in the grounds and consequently expect the traffic impact to be assessed taking into account the poor visibility splays bearing in mind the appeal decision for a house 08/01485/B. Concerned regarding the positioning and size of the shed, which will be more like an industrial unit. They are concerned that there is likely to be workmen/gardeners in there with continual noise and music playing and neighbours have already had to contend with illegal tipping and burning of material at this site. They would like the entrance of the shed moved to the other side and a condition stating that it should be used for garden storage only and not any light industrial activity, service of machinery, parking of vehicles or processing of materials. They are concerned that security lights on the shed could be a nuisance and although CCTV is proposed this could cover some of their property and should be resisted - again if the entrance were at the other end of the shed this would be better - furthermore no trees would have to be removed. They comment that the 3 metre high ornate wall is on ground level above theirs and thus will be visible from their property. They would request that it is planted with trees and shrubs so that it is consistent with the parkland setting of the house and this would help screen the roof of the shed. They understand that espalier fruit trees were planned and would like this specified on the plan. They are keen that the development goes ahead and would like a time bound condition in respect of the vegetable garden: they suggest Easter 2019 (20.6.17).

==== PAGE 4 ====

                                                 17/00601/B
                                 Page  4  of  8

6.0 ASSESSMENT 6.1 While the application seeks approval for a larger dwelling than that already approved, the proposal still complies with the designation of the site as a Private Estate and its additional height and width is unlikely to result in any adverse impact on neighbouring properties. The house itself remains fairly central to the site and a minimum of 21 metres from any neighbouring property.

6.2 The application provides greater detail on how the landscaped grounds are to be dealt with. Some of the landscaping would not in itself require planning approval other than more significant changes in ground level, walls over 2 metres in height and the greenhouse and garden shed - that are larger than those which would normally be found in a domestic garden. They are however 12 metres from the nearest neighbouring property and as such would not be likely to have an adverse impact.

6.3 The application does propose the loss of trees of amenity value, but this is clearly part of an overall formal plan which has added benefits. There remain a large number of trees on the site. It is suggested that a condition be imposed seeking protection/management of those trees in accordance with an arboricultural assessment as suggested by DEFA's Arboricultural Officer.

6.4 The concern about the potential for the shed to be used for more industrial purposes given its size and that of the house is understood, however the land use property is residential and any change of use of the shed would require planning approval. It is not otherwise possible to condition the level of activity that may occur in the shed any more than we could condition the level of activity in any domestic shed. Similarly, it is not possible to condition the times and frequency of any visitors or guests to the house. As the property is a dwelling, the garden ought not be used for public events. Should this occur then planning approval would be required.

6.5 The concern in respect of the impact of the garage block to residents on Harcroft Road is understood, but the application proposes no changes to those garages. Clarification of the separation distances shall be provided by officers.

6.6 In respect of other conditions requested, it is not possible to time limit works to the garden but it is possible to seek a lighting scheme for the property. Laws regarding the positioning of CCTV cameras are outwith planning regulations.

6.7 The area within which the kitchen garden is to be has recently been laid with hard core, using material from the demolition of the house and as such the land has been raised. The applicant's agent has confirmed that the area will be returned to its original height as part of the proposals, and this should be conditioned. It is thought that the manner in which this was done, may have contributed to water run off to a neighbouring property and returning the land to its original height, plus removal of the hardcore will rectify this.

7.0 RECOMMENDATION. 7.1 The application be approved subject to conditions.

8.0 PARTY STATUS. 8.1 By virtue of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) (No 2) Order 2013, the following persons are 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 of Infrastructure; and (e) The local authority in whose district the land the subject of the application is situated.

==== PAGE 5 ====

                                                 17/00601/B
                                 Page  5  of  8

8.2 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 case, those parties who have made relevant comments are 7 Harcroft Road and Rosemanly, New Castletown Road.

Recommendation

Recommended Decision:

Permitted Date of Recommendation: 31.07.2017

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 14 of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) (No2) Order 2013 and to avoid the accumulation of unimplemented planning approvals.

C 2. No external lighting shall be installed except in accordance with a lighting scheme to be submitted and approved in writing by the Department.

Reason: In order to protect neighbouring amenities

C 3. No development shall commence on the plant room until a scheme specifying the level of noise that would be generated and the means for its control has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Department and the plant room must be installed in accordance with these details.

Reason: In the interests of residential amenity.

C 4. Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (Permitted Development Order) 2012 (or any order revoking and re-enacting that Order with or without modification) no garage, sheds, or other buildings other than those expressly approved by this application shall be erected within the grounds and no extension, enlargement, or other alteration of the dwelling shall be carried out without further approval.

Reason: In order for the Planning Authority to retain control over the impact of the proposal on its overall design and on neighbouring properties.

C 5. The fruit cage approved as part of this application may not be erected until details of its size and positioning are agreed in writing with the Department and the fruit cage must be installed in accordance with these details.

Reason: To protect neighbouring amenity.

C 6. Within 2 months of the completion of the dwelling, or sooner, all hard-core, containers and any other building or machinery on the land marked as a kitchen garden on Plan 2020D P0003A shall be removed and the land restored to its original level of 103.00 or a level to be agreed with the Department.

Reason: In the interests of residential amenity.

==== PAGE 6 ====

                                                 17/00601/B
                                 Page  6  of  8

C 7. Notwithstanding any details on submitted plans, further details of the boundary treatment between the site and the neighbouring properties on Ballaughton Close and Rosemanly, New Castletown Road, shall be submitted and approved in writing by the Department. The boundary treatment shall be implemented in accordance with these details within one month of the completion of the dwelling or sooner.

Reason: In the interests of residential amenity.

C 8. Within one month of the date of this approval an arboricultural impact assessment and tree protection plan shall be submitted to approved by the Department. The assessment shall contain an arboricultural method statement providing on-going advice in respect of the maintenance and care of the trees on the property. The assessment and tree protection plan must be implemented prior to any further works on the site.

Reason: In the interest of the environment and protection of trees.

This approval relates to drawings P0001 Rev A, P0003 Rev A, P1000, P1001, P1002, P1003, P1004, P1005 Rev A, P3000, P3001, P3004, P4000, P6200, X0001Rev A, X1001 and X3000 all date stamped received on 2nd June 2017 and P0006 date stamped received on 23rd June 2017.

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 : Permitted

Committee Meeting Date: 07.08.2017

Signed : S E Corlett Presenting Officer

Further to the decision of the Committee an additional report was required

YES/NO See below

PLANNING COMMITTEE DECISION 07.08.2017

Application No. :

17/00601/B Applicant : Mr Raj Chatha Proposal : Erection of new dwelling including associated greenhouse, shed, gardens and access Site Address : Ballaughton Manor Saddle Road Douglas Isle of Man IM2 1HG

Presenting Officer : Miss S E Corlett

Addendum to the Officer’s Report

==== PAGE 7 ====

                                                 17/00601/B
                                 Page  7  of  8

The Committee approved the application at its meeting of 7th August, 2017 but amended condition 5 to include reference to the Harcroft Road boundary, in response to points raised by the owner of 7, Harcroft Road.

Conditions of Approval

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 14 of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) (No2) Order 2013 and to avoid the accumulation of unimplemented planning approvals.

C 2. No external lighting shall be installed except in accordance with a lighting scheme to be submitted and approved in writing by the Department.

Reason: In order to protect neighbouring amenities

C 3. No development shall commence on the plant room until a scheme specifying the level of noise that would be generated and the means for its control has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Department and the plant room must be installed in accordance with these details.

Reason: In the interests of residential amenity.

C 4. Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (Permitted Development Order) 2012 (or any order revoking and re-enacting that Order with or without modification) no garage, sheds, or other buildings other than those expressly approved by this application shall be erected within the grounds and no extension, enlargement, or other alteration of the dwelling shall be carried out without further approval.

Reason: In order for the Planning Authority to retain control over the impact of the proposal on its overall design and on neighbouring properties.

C 5. The fruit cage approved as part of this application may not be erected until details of its size and positioning are agreed in writing with the Department and the fruit cage must be installed in accordance with these details.

Reason: To protect neighbouring amenity.

C 6. Within 2 months of the completion of the dwelling, or sooner, all hard-core, containers and any other building or machinery on the land marked as a kitchen garden on Plan 2020D P0003A shall be removed and the land restored to its original level of 103.00 or a level to be agreed with the Department.

Reason: In the interests of residential amenity.

C 7. Notwithstanding any details on submitted plans, further details of the boundary treatment between the site and the neighbouring properties on Harcroft Road, Ballaughton Close and Rosemanly, New Castletown Road, shall be submitted and approved in writing by the Department. The boundary treatment shall be implemented in accordance with these details within one month of the completion of the dwelling or sooner.

Reason: In the interests of residential amenity.

C 8.Within one month of the date of this approval an arboricultural impact assessment and tree protection plan shall be submitted to approved by the Department. The assessment shall contain

==== PAGE 8 ====

                                                 17/00601/B
                                 Page  8  of  8

an arboricultural method statement providing on-going advice in respect of the maintenance and care of the trees on the property. The assessment and tree protection plan must be implemented prior to any further works on the site.

Reason: In the interest of the environment and protection of trees.

This approval relates to drawings P0001 Rev A, P0003 Rev A, P1000, P1001, P1002, P1003, P1004, P1005 Rev A, P3000, P3001, P3004, P4000, P6200, X0001Rev A, X1001 and X3000 all date stamped received on 2nd June 2017 and P0006 date stamped received on 23rd June 2017.

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.