Loading document...
==== PAGE 1 ====
17/00390/B
Page 1 of 4
PLANNING OFFICER REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Application No. : 17/00390/B Applicant : Hartford Homes Proposal : Creation of ancillary accommodation and installation of dormer windows Site Address : Ballaveare Old Castletown Road Port Soderick Isle of Man IM4 1BB
Case Officer : Mr Edmond Riley Photo Taken : 18.05.2017 Site Visit : 18.05.2017 Expected Decision Level : Officer Delegation
Officer’s Report
1.0 THE APPLICATION SITE
1.1 The application site is a parcel of land, almost rectangular, that comprises the residential curtilage of a nearly complete dwelling known as Ballaveare on the main road in Port Soderick. The dwelling has an attached triple garage, projecting forward of the principal elevation.
2.0 THE PROPOSAL
2.1 Full planning approval is sought for the installation of three dormer windows above the garage, which would accommodate guest accommodation in the form of a living room, bedroom and bathroom. Internal access would be provided by way of a new staircase connecting down to the ground floor, but unfortunately ground floor drawings are not included with the application. The dormer windows would each have a pitch and be finished with imitation slate roof tiles to match those already on the garage, with lead cheeks.
2.2 Also proposed is the creation of a dressing room for Bedroom 5 for the main dwelling, but as this would be formed via the conversion of part of an existing hipped roof and would not result in the creation of new windows, it does not actually comprise development in its own right. Similarly, three rooflights are shown on the rear garage roof pitch and these, too, could be installed under Class 28 of the Town and Country Planning (Permitted Development) Order 2012 and, though indicated on the drawings, again could be undertaken without the benefit of a planning approval.
2.3 The description of the application was amended from the original submission, which sought only for the installation of dormer windows, while the guest accommodation as originally proposed showed a kitchen but this was removed from the proposal as it could have resulted in the accommodation being occupied independently from the main dwellinghouse. The application was fully readvertised.
3.0 PLANNING HISTORY
3.1 Ballaveare was approved for redevelopment under PAs 14/00381/B, 14/01320/B and 16/00024/B. (Prior to that, permission was refused for a replacement house, garaging and staff accommodation under PA 11/01551/B for reasons relating to the style and size of the replacement dwelling.)
==== PAGE 2 ====
17/00390/B
Page 2 of 4
3.2 There has recently been approved a replacement field store under PA 17/00391/B, which followed an approval granted for a new access into the field (PA 14/00984/B) and also a replacement stable building within the curtilage of Ballaveare itself (PA 16/00412/B).
4.0 THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN
4.1 The site lies within an area not designated for a particular purpose on the Braddan Local Plan of 1991 and also within an area of High Landscape Value and Scenic Significance. As such, there is a general presumption against development in the Strategic Plan. However, alterations to an existing dwelling are allowed for under Housing Policy 15, which states:
"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)."
4.2 It is also worth bearing in mind Housing Policy 14.
5.0 REPRESENTATIONS
5.1 DOI Highway Services stated the proposal had no highway implications on 05.05.2017, while Braddan Commissioners offered no objection on 24.04.2017 and 16.06.17.
5.2 The owner / occupier of 'Claremont', which is a dwelling that sits opposite to half the width of the application site, express the view that the addition of a 'granny flat' would represent overdevelopment. They note that the visual impact of the dwelling when viewed from the B25 highway is far greater than was expected. They also raise concern regarding the integrity of the planning process in general, noting that developers are able to submit an unlimited number of planning applications during the construction period. They ask whether or not the increased living area would have got planning permission originally. Their comments were received 20th April 2017. Upon the application's re-advertisement, no further comments from the owner / occupier of 'Claremont' were received.
6.0 ASSESSMENT
6.1 The local resident raises the fundamental question in their objection letter: would the dwelling have gained planning approval were the existing dormer accommodation proposed at that time?
6.2 In its amended form, it is now considered that the proposed works are acceptable in the context of Housing Policy 15 and also would have been in the context of Housing Policy 14. While additional floorspace will result, this is contained entirely within an existing roofspace and footprint and, as such, the test is whether the resulting visual impact would be acceptable. The addition of dormer windows help break up the fairly large massing of the triple garage's roof, and the pitches reflect the projecting gable feature of the dwelling. It is concluded that they represent a slight improvement to the appearance of the dwelling for those reasons.
6.3 It is moreover noted that the dwelling, though large, is surprisingly well-hidden from public view from the main road owing to the presence of trees and boundary walls. Only glimpses of the garage would be possible from the main road but, even so, for the reasons outlined above, it is considered that the dwelling as proposed to be altered is acceptable such that the very sight of those dormer windows would not be inappropriate.
6.4 The accommodation is clearly ancillary to the main dwelling: the plans are clear that there are no kitchen facilities and therefore any person using the new rooms could not do so
==== PAGE 3 ====
17/00390/B
Page 3 of 4
independently of Ballaveare. A condition to this effect would, however, be appropriate for the avoidance of doubt.
7.0 RECOMMENDATION
7.1 It is concluded that the application is acceptable when assessed against the relevant policies and, accordingly, is recommended for approval subject to the aforementioned condition.
8.0 INTERESTED PERSON STATUS
8.1 By virtue of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) (No 2) Order 2013, the following persons are automatically interested persons:
o The applicant, or if there is one, the applicant's agent; o 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; o Any Government Department that has made written submissions relating to planning considerations with respect to the application that the Department considers material; o Highway Services of the Department of Infrastructure, and o The local authority in whose district the land the subject of the application is situated.
8.2.1 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.
8.2.2 In this instance, it is considered that the following persons do not have sufficient interest and therefore should not be awarded the status of an Interested Person:
o The owner / occupier of 'Claremont', Old Castletown Road, Port Soderick.
Though this dwelling is opposite to the application site, it is not physically adjoining it. While the comments raised are certainly partially material to the assessment of the application, a close reading of Government Circular No.0046/13 'Determination of Interested Person Status' does not make clear provision for anyone not judged to be substantially and / or adversely impacted by a proposed development to be granted Interested Person Status. As it has been concluded that the owner / occupier of 'Claremont' will not be substantially and / or adversely impacted by the proposal for reasons of impact on privacy, loss of outlook, or noise, dust, smell or traffic generated, it is also concluded that the owner / occupier of 'Claremont' should not be afforded Interested Person Status.
Recommendation
Recommended Decision:
Permitted Date of Recommendation: 27.06.2017
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.
==== PAGE 4 ====
17/00390/B
Page 4 of 4
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. For the avoidance of doubt, the ancillary accommodation hereby approved above the triple garage shall not be occupied at any time other than for purposes incidental to the residential use of the dwelling known as 'Ballaveare', Old Castletown Road, Port Soderick as identified on the approved plans, and it shall not be occupied as an independent dwelling unit.
Reason: To ensure proper control of the development and to avoid any future undesirable fragmentation of the curtilage in an area that is not zoned for any particular purpose on the Development Plan.
The development hereby approved relates to Drawing 15 (date-stamped as having been received 4th April 2017) and Drawings 16 Rev A and 17 Rev A (both date-stamped as having been received 25th May 2017).
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.
Decision Made : Permitted
Date : 29.06.2017 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