Loading document...
==== PAGE 1 ====
18/00532/REM Page 1 of 9
PLANNING OFFICER REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Application No. : 18/00532/REM Applicant : Landfall Limited Proposal : Reserved Matters application for the erection of a detached dwelling (relating to PA 15/00794/A) Site Address : Land to east of Old School House Main Road Sulby Isle of Man
Photo Taken :
Site Visit :
Expected Decision Level : Planning Committee
Recommendation
Recommended Decision:
Permitted Date of Recommendation: 05.11.2018
Conditions and Notes for Approval: C : Conditions for approval N : Notes attached to conditions
C 1. The development hereby approved shall be begun before 1st September 2020.
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 development shall commence until a schedule of materials and finishes and samples of the materials to be used in the construction of the external surfaces, including roofs, cedar cladding and details of the colour and texture of the render, have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Department. The development shall not be carried out unless in accordance with the approved details.
Reason: In the interests of the character and appearance of the site and surrounding area.
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 extension, enlargement or other alteration of the dwelling(s) hereby approved, other than that expressly authorised by this approval, shall be carried out, without the prior written approval of the Department.
Reason: To control development in the interests of the amenities of the surrounding area.
C 4. No works shall commence until full details of the proposed external windows and doors, have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Department. The works shall not be carried out unless in accordance with the approved details.
Reason: In the interests of the character and appearance of the site and surrounding area.
C 5. No site works or clearance shall be commenced until protective fences which conform with British Standard 5837:2012 (or any British Standard revoking and re-enacting British Standard
==== PAGE 2 ====
18/00532/REM Page 2 of 9
5837:2012 with or without modification) have been erected around any existing trees. Unless and until the development has been completed these fences shall not be removed and the protected areas are to be kept clear of any building, plant equipment, material, debris and trenching, with the existing ground levels maintained, and there shall be no entry to those areas except for approved arboricultural or landscape works.
Reason: To safeguard the areas to be landscaped and the existing trees and planting to be retained within the site.
C 6. The development hereby approved shall not be occupied or operated until the parking and turning areas have been provided in accordance with the approved plans. Such areas shall not be used for any purpose other than the parking and turning of vehicles associated with the development and shall remain free of obstruction for such use at all times.
Reason: To ensure that sufficient provision is made for off-street parking and turning of vehicles in the interests of highway safety.
__
Interested Person Status - Additional Persons
It is recommended that the following persons should not be given Interested Person Status as they are not considered to have sufficient interest in the subject matter of the application to take part in any subsequent proceedings and are not mentioned in Article 6(4):
The owner/occupant of 9 Kella Close, Sulby is not within 20m of the application site and the development is not automatically required to be the subject of an EIA by Appendix 5 of the Strategic Plan, in accordance with paragraph 2B of the Policy and as they do not refer to the relevant issues in accordance with paragraph 2C of the Policy
Officer’s Report
THE PLANNING APPLICATION IS BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMITTEE AS IT IS CONTRARY TO THE VIEWS OF THE LOCAL AUTHORITY BUT RECOMMENDED FOR AN APPROVAL
1.0 SITE 1.1 The application site represents land to the east of the Sulby Old School, now a dwelling, which appears to be currently used as part of the curtilage of the Old Sulby School. The site is located to the southern side of the Main Road and east of Sulby School.
1.2 The site is accessed via a vehicular entrance and driveway which runs between the properties of the Sulby Old School and St Stephens Church & Hall. Both properties are Registered Buildings (Nrs 170 & 171). The driveway runs to the rear of the properties where area of existing hardstanding can be found. These are currently used for parking spaces, although they appear to originally been used as the playground for the Sulby Old School. A single storey outbuilding (toilet block) and a modern detached double garage with attached lean to store can also be found. The existing entrance, driveway, areas of hardstanding, outbuilding and double garage are all within the ownership of the applicant, who also lives at the dwelling Sulby Old School.
1.3 The application site is rectangular in shape, measuring 26.5 metres in depth with a width of 11.8 metres. The site runs parallel to the rear boundary of St Stephens Church & Hall which is a single building. The site is currently made up of a section of hardstanding and also includes the modern detached double garage with lean-to outbuilding. The site is enclosed on three boundaries (north, east and south) with a Manx stone wall approximately 1.5 metres in height.
==== PAGE 3 ====
18/00532/REM Page 3 of 9
2.0 PLANNING POLICIES 2.1 In terms of local plan policy, the application site is within an area recognised as being within an 'Area of Building for Civic, Cultural & Other Special Use - Worship' use under the Sulby Local Plan. The site is not within a Conservation Area. The Sulby Old School and St Stephens Church & Hall are both registered buildings.
2.2 Due to the zoning of the site and the proposed works the following policies are relevant in the determination of the application:-
2.3 Strategic Policy 4 states: "Proposals for development must: (a) Protect or enhance the fabric and setting of Ancient Monuments, Registered Buildings(1), Conservation Areas(2), buildings and structures within National Heritage Areas and sites of archaeological interest; (b) protect or enhance the landscape quality and nature conservation value of urban as well as rural areas but especially in respect to development adjacent to Areas of Special Scientific Interest and other designations; and (c) not cause or lead to unacceptable environmental pollution or disturbance."
2.4 General Policy 2 states: "Development which is in accordance with the land-use zoning and proposals in the appropriate Area Plan and with other policies of this Strategic Plan will normally be permitted, provided that the development: (a) is in accordance with the design brief in the Area Plan where there is such a brief; (b) respects the site and surroundings in terms of the siting, layout, scale, form, design and landscaping of buildings and the spaces around them; (c) does not affect adversely the character of the surrounding landscape or townscape; (d) does not adversely affect the protected wildlife or locally important habitats on the site or adjacent land, including water courses; (e) does not affect adversely public views of the sea; (f) incorporates where possible existing topography and landscape features, particularly trees and sod banks; (g) does not affect adversely the amenity of local residents or the character of the locality; (h) provides satisfactory amenity standards in itself, including where appropriate safe and convenient access for all highway users, together with adequate parking, servicing and manoeuvring space; (i) does not have an unacceptable effect on road safety or traffic flows on the local highways; (j) can be provided with all necessary services; (k) does not prejudice the use or development of adjoining land in accordance with the appropriate Area Plan; (l) is not on contaminated land or subject to unreasonable risk of erosion or flooding; (m) takes account of community and personal safety and security in the design of buildings and the spaces around them; and (n) is designed having due regard to best practice in reducing energy consumption."
2.5 Transport Policy 7 states: "The Department will require that in all new development, parking provision must be in accordance with the Department's current standards.
The current standards are set out in Appendix 7."
3.0 PLANNING HISTORY 3.1 The following previous planning applications are considered relevant in the assessment and determination of this application site:
3.2 Approval in principle for erection of a dwelling addressing siting and means of access- 15/00794/A - APPROVED AT APPEAL (contrary to Inspectors recommendation) with the following conditions attached:
==== PAGE 4 ====
18/00532/REM Page 4 of 9
"C 1. The development hereby approved shall be begun either before the expiration of four years from the date of this approval or before the expiration of two years from the date of approval of the last of the reserved matters.
Reason: To comply with article 14 of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) (No2) Order 2013.
C 2. Application for approval of the reserved matters shall be made to the Department before the expiration of two years from the date of this approval and thereafter the development shall only be carried out in accordance with the details as approved.
Reason: To avoid the accumulation of unimplemented planning approvals.
C 3. Approval of the details of design, external appearance of the buildings, internal layout, parking layout, and landscaping of the site (hereinafter called "the reserved matters") shall be obtained from the Department in writing before any development is commenced.
Reason: To comply with the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure)(No2) Order 2013.
C 4. Any reserved matters planning application must include provision for the parking of a minimum of 2 cars within the curtilage of the application site.
Reason: in the interest of highway safety
C 5. Prior to any work commencing on site the visibility splays as shown on drawing 202 are required to be provided and thereafter kept permanently clear of any obstruction exceeding 1.05m in height, within the applicants ownership, above adjoining carriageway level. Should any roadside pillar/wall within the applicant control required to be altered this should be submitted as part of the Reserved Matters application.
Reason: In the interests of highway safety."
3.3 Approval in principle for erection of a dwelling (west of Old School House) addressing siting and means of access - 15/00795/A - APPROVED AT APPEAL
3.4 Conversion of School House to dwelling with new conservatory and double garage - 00/01660/GB - APPROVED
3.5 Approval in principle for change of use from school to private dwelling - 00/01173/GA - APPROVED
3.6 Approval in principle for the change of use from former school to residential - 96/01508/A - APPROVED
4.0 PROPOSAL 4.1 The application seeks approval for the Reserved Matters application for the erection of a detached dwelling (relating to PA 15/00794/A). It should be noted that only the following issues are being considered; design, external appearance of the buildings, internal layout, parking layout, and landscaping of the site. Issues such as the principle of a dwelling on this site, siting and the access have already been considered and agreed by the Minister.
4.2 The proposal indicates a two storey dwelling, rectangular footprint in the main, which has a pitched roof with a mixture of finishes including traditionally laid Manx stone, vertical cedar boarding, render to match neighbouring property and a dark natural slate roof. The property would
==== PAGE 5 ====
18/00532/REM Page 5 of 9
have two of road parking spaces to its frontage, as well as a small landscaped area. To the rear of the property is a garden area.
4.3 Access to the property would be from the existing entrance onto the Main Road which is shared with the dwelling Sulby Old School. This was approved under the Approval in Principle application (15/00794/A) including a Condition 5 regarding visibility splays being provided prior to work commencing.
5.0 REPRESENTATIONS 5.1 Lezayre Parish Commissioners have recommended a refusal (21.06.2018) which can be summarised as: Commissioners feel that the proposed dwelling is too high and too big; overdevelopment of the site; concerns of trail drains of church being affected; concerns of possible damage to Church during construction of dwelling; proposal shows the closing up of vehicular access for part of the site which gained approval for a dwelling under 15/00795/A; and the architect states that the height of the proposed property will be below the ridge level of the Church Hall which is misleading, the Church ridge is 9.2m but the Church Hall ridge is 7.3m and therefore the proposed building will be higher than the Church Hall by 0.8m.
5.2 Highway Services (30.10.2018) make the following comments: "The previous 15/00794/A approval in principle application for the site was granted planning permission following an appeal. Planning condition 5 of that decision notice stated "Prior to any works commencing on site the visibility splays as shown on drawing 202 are required to be provided and thereafter kept permanently clear of any obstruction exceeding 1.05m in height, within the applicants ownership, above adjoining carriageway level. Should any roadside pillar/wall within the applicants control be required to be altered, this should be submitted as part of the Reserved Matters application." Reason: In the interests of highway safety.
The highway comments for the 15/00794/A application stated that the proposals were supported subject to the provision of visibility splays of 2.4m x 54m in both directions within land owned by the applicant, and with nothing exceeding 1.05m in height within the splays. The applicant's letter of 16/12/15 stated that drawing 202 showed 2.4m x 54m visibility splays. These visibility splays of 2.4m x 54m need to be drawn on the proposed site plan (not 2m x 54m as stated on the proposed site plan for this application by the current [different] applicant) and demonstrate that nothing, including any pillar/wall, is within the splays. If this is the case, then the plan must state that such obstructions or planting will be removed or reduced in height accordingly.
The 15/00794/A decision notice also included planning conditions for 2 car parking spaces to be provided within the site and for the parking layout to be approved prior to construction. The proposed site plan shows 2 spaces, each of at least 2.5m x 5m, which complies with the minimum size of a parking space in the 'Manual for Manx Roads' design guide. There would be a sufficient aisle width to allow cars to turn in and out of the parking spaces and enable cars to turn around so they could enter and exit the site from the adjacent highway in forward gear. The proposed parking and site turning arrangements are therefore acceptable.
Highway Services request that the application is deferred to allow the applicant to consider the above.
Recommendation: DEFER"
5.3 The owner/occupant of 9 Kella Close, Sulby (18.06.2018) objects to the application which can be summarised as: The Church/School Rooms are Registered Buildings sue to their unique design, historical and social interest; application do not comply with the Inspectors Report or those of Ministers Ronan (who overruled the Inspectors recommendation); proposed design are not compatible in scale, proximity, architectural language or proportions to the existing buildings; will have a detrimental impact on Registered Building proposed development is highly inappropriate for such a rural location as the high density would be more fitting for an urban environment; proposal
==== PAGE 6 ====
18/00532/REM Page 6 of 9
deviates from those approved at outline because dwelling B (west of old school house) would be blocked; restrictions of building work during wedding, funerals and regular services; rail pipes will be disturbed or damages; concerns of structural damage or collapse of boundary wall of site/Church; the west elevation has no stone work which would not blend with the existing building; the large floor to ceiling glass windows are out of context and are not sympathetic to the existing Registered Building; and the west elevation is highly visible from the public highway and footpath.
6.0 ASSESSMENT 6.1 The following Material Planning Issues should be considered: o potential impact upon the visual amenities of the adjacent registered buildings and character and appearance of the street scene; and o Parking provision.
POTENTIAL IMPACT UPON THE VISUAL AMENITIES OF THE ADJACENT REGISTERED BUILDINGS AND CHARACTER & APPEARANCE OF THE STREET SCENE 6.2 It is key that any dwelling should be in keeping and sympathetic with the character, appearance and finish of the St Stephens Church & Hall which is a registered building and therefore comply with Strategic Policy 4.
6.3 The main public views of the site are from the east of the site, namely along the Sulby Straight when approaching the site from the Sulby Bridge end of Sulby Village, towards the site, heading towards the Sulby Crossroads. Such views are broken up/screened by mature tree line (especially during spring/summer periods) along the highway; however, the existing modern double garage can be read in places currently, against the St Stephen's Church/Hall and therefore the rear elevation (east - wrongly annotated on submitted drawings) will also be apparent. The eastern elevation of the Church/Hall building is a traditional side elevation which is seen at most Churches, which include glazed arched windows, but this also includes a projecting section which incorporates a gable end facing in an easterly direction. The proposal would replicative this gable end feature, albeit on a larger scale. The proposal would also be set back from the eastern side elevation of the church building by approximately 5.5 metres and the cat-slide roof section would be set back even further from the rear elevation of the new dwelling by a further 3 metres (east); all of would reduce the mass of the proposal, when read in conjunction with the Church. Further the proposal roof ride (8m) would be below the main roof of the Church building (9.2m) which would be the section of roofing which would be read against the west elevation of the new build. The finish of the east elevation of the new dwelling is proposed to a render finish to match the adjacent Church building; while the rear cat-slide roofed section would be finished in a vertical cedar boarding. It is considered the colours of both these finishes are key to help blend the new proposal with the existing building. Accordingly, it is considered perhaps with an unpainted or dark coloured render and cedar boarding which is untreated timber would result in the finishes which are dark and blend well with existing finishes and not striking in appearance. The applicants have confirmed they are happy with these suggestions and that a condition be attached to any approval for samples of the finishes to be submitted.
6.4 There maybe also views from public footpaths to the south/southeast of the site, which would be distances views across a number of agricultural fields. Such views would be of the side elevation (south) of the new dwelling. The distance views would not be significantly different to what is currently viewed, i.e. the rear elevation (south) of the Church/Hall building, which is made up of a single/two storey with a cat-slide roof above, a lot more plainer in finish and detailed compared to the front elevation. This is being replicated with the new proposal (south), which again has a similar size, height and finish, replicating the cat-slide roof design. For these reasons, it is considered the proposal will essentially blend in with the neighbouring properties and would not adversely affect the Registered Building or the surrounding countryside setting.
6.5 In terms of views of the front elevation of the dwelling (west) views would be very limited and any such views would be fleeting and oblique when passing the entrance of the site and looking towards the new dwelling, between the two Registered Buildings. Added to the siting of the
==== PAGE 7 ====
18/00532/REM Page 7 of 9
dwelling in relation to the neighbouring properties, it is considered the front gable facing elevation (west) finished in traditional laid Manx stone and set back approximately 2.5m behind the side elevation of the Church (west elevation) will all again help reduce the appearance and impact upon the two adjoining Registered Buildings and will essentially blend in with the existing properties, when seen from public views.
6.6 It is noted comments made by the applicant and the Commissioner's in relation to the height comparisons of the proposed dwelling and the Church appear to differ. However, they are both correct. The proposal does have a height of 8m which all parties agree. What differs is the height of the main Church and Hall buildings. It is noted the main Church building is 9.2m in height. The Church Hall (attached to the main Church building) which was an extension is lower, being 7.2m in height, which the Commissioner's confirm also. Accordingly, the proposal would essentially be lower than the main part of the Church, but higher than the Church Hall section and these height differences are taken into account when determining this application. Consideration, has also taken into account that when viewed immediate in front of the Church Hall, on the highway (Sulby Straight); that given the heights differences and also how far the roof ridge of the new dwelling is set away from the highway/Church Hall, it is unlikely the new dwelling roof will be seen projecting above the roof ridge of the existing Church Hall building.
6.7 It should also be acknowledged that the two Registered Buildings do differ in terms of design, detailing, some finishes and height. Furthermore, the Church has been extended in the past and its own finishes do not match that of the main Church building. Accordingly, while the new dwelling would differ in some aspects also, it is not considered these differences on this site are a reason to refuse the application.
6.8 It is considered the proposed design, size, height and finish of the building is such that it would not result in a dominating feature nor detract from the character and quality of the neighbouring Registered Buildings, rather appear as a subordinate building which would sit well in the grouping of buildings and protect the fabric and setting of these Registered Buildings. Further, the removal of the existing modern detached garage with lean-to roof structure would be of benefit to the area and registered buildings. While this is smaller in scale and mass, its appearance and design is inappropriate. The proposal while resulting in a larger building, its quality, design, size and finish would be a marked improvement over the existing situation for the reasons given previously.
6.9 Regarding of its impact to the surrounding countryside, it is considered the proposal would be appropriate, sitting within an area already development and not result in an expansion of built development in the countryside, but rather adding to an existing grouping of properties in the area.
6.10 Finally, in terms of potential overdevelopment of the site, as commented by the Commissioner's, generally such issue arises when a development is clearly too big for a site, which in turns reduces the amount of external amenity space (i.e. garden), insufficient parking spaces, poor outlook, impacts on neighbouring properties etc. In this case for the reasons stated, it is considered the proposal meets all the requirements and therefore cannot be classed as an overdevelopment of the site.
PARKING PROVISION 6.11 The proposal provides two off road parking spaces to the front of the property in accordance with the IOMSP parking requirements. Highways Services have no objection.
OTHER MATTERS 6.12 In terms of comments in relation to visibility splays, these have been approved under the previously approved application ((15/00794/A) and therefore not a matter to consider at this stage. The condition from the original approval would still need to be complied with i.e. splays provided before the dwelling is occupied.
==== PAGE 8 ====
18/00532/REM Page 8 of 9
6.13 Furthermore, comments have been made that the dwelling approved under application 15/00795/A (west of Old School House - not current application site) would not be able to be accessed via the existing approved access as this current proposal indicates the blocking up of the access it would have used. While this is correct, it is the applicant's choice and makes no difference to the application currently under consideration, only that less traffic would use the existing access and travel past the new/existing properties.
6.14 In relation to matters relating to potential drainage concerns between this site and the neighbouring Church, these are matters which need to be considered under a Building Regulations stage.
7.0 CONCLUSION 7.1 For these reasons the proposal is considered to comply with the relevant polices of the Strategic Plan and the Sulby Local Plan and therefore recommended for an approval.
8.0 INTERESTED PERSON STATUS 8.1 By virtue of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) (No 2) Order 2013 (Article 6(4), the following persons are automatically 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) Highway Services Division of Department of Infrastructure and (e) The local authority in whose district the land the subject of the application is situated.
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 in Article 6(4) who should be given Interested Person Status.
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 : Refused
Committee Meeting Date: 26.11.2018
Signed : C Balmer Presenting Officer
Further to the decision of the Committee an additional report and reason was required
YES/NO See below
==== PAGE 9 ====
18/00532/REM Page 9 of 9
PLANNING COMMITTEE DECISION 26.11.2018
Application No. :
18/00532/REM Applicant : Landfall Limited Proposal : Reserved Matters application for the erection of a detached dwelling (relating to PA 15/00794/A) Site Address : Land to east of Old School House Main Road Sulby Isle of Man
Principal Planner Mr Chris Balmer Reporting Officer As above
Addendum to the Officer’s Report
At the meeting held on the 26th November 2018 the Committee, with the exception of Mr Cubbon, rejected the recommendation of the case officer, and the application was refused. The Chairman proposed that the application be refused under Strategic Policy 4 as the proposed dwelling was not subservient to the Registered Buildings. The motion was seconded, and with the exception of Mr Cubbon, the Members voted in favour of the proposed reasons for refusal.
Reason for Refusal
R 1. It is considered that the scale, height and massing of the proposed dwelling would not be subservient to the adjacent registered buildings and would therefore not protect or enhance their setting and so be contrary to Strategic Policy 4 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan.
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