179034

==== PAGE 1 ====

                                      19/00412/B                                     Page  1  of  5

PLANNING OFFICER REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Application No. : 19/00412/B Applicant : Mr & Mrs Paul Griffiths Proposal : Erection of a detached three door garage Site Address : Croit-Ny-Meagh Rhenab Road Cornaa Ramsey Isle of Man IM7 1EL

Planning Officer: Mr Nick Salt Photo Taken : 07.05.2019 Site Visit : 07.05.2019 Expected Decision Level : Officer Delegation

Recommendation

Recommended Decision:

Permitted Date of Recommendation: 29.05.2019 __

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. The garage hereby approved shall be used for the parking of private vehicles by the occupants of Croit-Ny-Meagh only and shall not be used for the parking of commercial vehicles and/or for the repair/maintenance of commercial vehicles.

Reason: To safeguard the residential character and amenities of the area.

Plans/Drawings/Information:

This decision relates to the following plans and drawings, date stamped received on 4th April 2019: o Location Plan o Site Plan o Topographical site plan as proposed 1489-2 o Elevations and plan as proposed 1489-1

__

==== PAGE 2 ====

                                      19/00412/B                                     Page  2  of  5

Interested Person Status - Additional Persons

None __

Officer’s Report

1.0 SITE 1.1 The application site represents the curtilage of an existing detached house in the countryside. The dwelling is a dormer bungalow which is located on the eastern side of Rhenab Road near to Ballaglass Glen.

1.2 The ground level of the site slopes upwards, approximately from the north-east to the south-west. There is an existing detached garage to the east of the dwelling which is located at a lower ground level. The western gable of the house fronts onto the highway, so the house is at a right angle to the road with the front elevation facing northwards. On the eastern side of the house is an existing conservatory and raised patio area with steps down to garden level. To the east there is a further lower level gravel area accessed from the main driveway, which lies at approximately 4 metres below the ground level of the existing garage and is bounded by mature trees.

2.0 THE PROPOSAL 2.1 Proposed is the erection of an additional 3 door, 9.9m long garage in the lower gravel area to the east of the site. The ground would be excavated with retaining walls used to allow the garage to sit into the land below the existing garage approximately 5 metres to the west. One tree would be removed to facilitate this although the majority are shown as being retained. There would also be alterations to the driveway and an extension of the turning area in front of the garage to around 11 metres in front.

2.2 The garage would be single storey, finished in dash render and with a slate pitched roof to match the dwelling on the site.

2.3 The applicant has provided the following reason for the proposal:

"I have 2 classic cars and 3 motorcycles in addition to 2 cars that are in daily use. The current double garage is used partly for the storage gardening equipment. The classic cars are in need of some restoration and I have run out of room. One of the classic cars is stored in the open and is deteriorating rapidly. This garage is out of site from the public road and will remove some vehicles from the driveway."

3.0 PLANNING POLICY 3.1 The proposal site is not in an area zoned for development and lies within and Area of High Landscape or Coastal Value and Scenic Significance, Woodland and a Nature Conservation Zone as per the 1982 Development Plan (North map).

3.2 With the land use in mind, General Policy 3 is relevant:

"Development will not be permitted outside of those areas which are zoned for development on the appropriate Area Plan with the exception of: (a) essential housing for agricultural workers who have to live close to their place of work; (Housing Policies 7, 8, 9 and 10); (b) conversion of redundant rural buildings which are of architectural, historic, or social value and interest; (Housing Policy 11); (c) previously developed land(1) which contains a significant amount of building; where the continued use is redundant; where redevelopment would reduce the impact of the current

==== PAGE 3 ====

                                      19/00412/B                                     Page  3  of  5

situation on the landscape or the wider environment; and where the development proposed would result in improvements to the landscape or wider environment; (d) the replacement of existing rural dwellings; (Housing Policies 12, 13 and 14); (e) location-dependent development in connection with the working of minerals or the provision of necessary services; (f) building and engineering operations which are essential for the conduct of agriculture or forestry; (g) development recognised to be of overriding national need in land use planning terms and for which there is no reasonable and acceptable alternative; and (h) buildings or works required for interpretation of the countryside, its wildlife or heritage."

3.3 There are also several Environment Policies which are relevant to the application:

3.3.1 Environment Policy 1:

"The countryside and its ecology will be protected for its own sake. For the purposes of this policy, the countryside comprises all land which is outside the settlements defined in Appendix 3 at A.3.6 or which is not designated for future development on an Area Plan. Development which would adversely affect the countryside will not be permitted unless there is an over- riding national need in land use planning terms which outweighs the requirement to protect these areas and for which there is no reasonable and acceptable alternative."

3.3.2 Environment Policy 2:

"The present system of landscape classification of Areas of High Landscape or Coastal Value and Scenic Significance (AHLV's) as shown on the 1982 Development Plan and subsequent Local and Area Plans will be used as a basis for development control until such time as it is superseded by a landscape classification which will introduce different categories of landscape and policies and guidance for control therein. Within these areas the protection of the character of the landscape will be the most important consideration unless it can be shown that:

(a) the development would not harm the character and quality of the landscape; or (b) the location for the development is essential.

3.3.3 Environment Policy 3:

"Development will not be permitted where it would result in the unacceptable loss of or damage to woodland areas, especially ancient, natural and semi-natural woodlands, which have public amenity or conservation value."

4.0 PLANNING HISTORY 4.1 There have been past alterations to the site approved including additions to the dwelling. Most are not considered specifically materially relevant to this application. It is noted however that an application for a new dwelling on the northern part of the site was refused (04/01368/A). The most recent application was for an extension and raised decking to the side elevation (11/01228/B) which was approved. The existing garage was constructed following PA 98/01038/A.

5.0 REPRESENTATIONS 5.1 Garff Commissioners have provided the following comment (07.05.19):

"The location and potential visual impact of this proposal were discussed. It was agreed that the Commission would reserve comment and defer to the expertise of the Planning Officer and Planning Committee in regard to this application."

==== PAGE 4 ====

                                      19/00412/B                                     Page  4  of  5

5.2 DoI Highway Services have stated that there is no highways interest in this application (01.05.19).

6.0 ASSESSMENT 6.1 The key issues to consider here are the principle of the additional garage in an area not zoned for development, the visual impact of the proposals, and the impact on ecological and environmental interests.

6.2 Principle of the development

6.2.1 To begin with, the level of parking provision on site is stated on the application as being for 6 or more cars, and this evident when looking at the site. There is no overriding need for additional car parking on the site, the garage would instead provide a dry space for the storage of classic cars. No attic use of proposed, and this would be unlikely given the low pitch of the roof - this reduces the likelihood of the garage being used for alternative purposes in future. This garaging use is considered ancillary to the main dwelling, and whilst a garage already exists on site, the proposal would not be unacceptable in principle - subject to the other considerations below.

6.3 Visual Impact

6.3.1 The proposed location of the garage is to the side of the existing dwelling and garage, and accessed via a separate part of the driveway. As shown in the topographical site plan 1489-2, this part of the site is currently cleared and gravelled, and sits below the ground levels of the house and garage by over 3 metres. At roof ridge level, the proposed garage would be 4 metres in height -meaning that the majority of the garage would not be visible over the ground level of the eastern part of the site. This part of the site is also bounded by trees and hedging and is not visible from Rhenab Road. For this reason, the visual impact is regarded as being minimal. There would be no resulting increase in the 'built up' appearance of this rural area. The same is the case for the extended gravel turning area.

6.4 Ecological and Environmental Impact

6.4.1 The existing footprint of the garage is gravel hard surfacing and some maintained garden. The impacts on local ecology would therefore be limited to the removal of some small trees and shrubs. However, most of the trees shown as surveyed by the DEFA Arboricultural Officer in drawing 1489-2 are to be retained, with an immature mulberry bush to be relocated elsewhere on site. Impacts on the ecology of the site and the surrounding environment would be minimal.

6.4.2 There would be no adverse impact on the surrounding woodland or on the overall Area of High Landscape Value. The proposal accords with Environment Policies 1-3 in this regard.

6.4.2 No comments have been received concerning any ecological concerns in relation to this application. It is also not considered that any would arise as most of the works will be on an existing gravel area.

7.0 CONCLUSION 7.1 In summary, the proposal would have some impacts on smaller existing trees and would increase the amount of built development in the countryside. However, for the reasons outlined in the assessment above, the proposal is considered appropriate and acceptable on balance both in principle and in terms of visual and environmental impacts. The proposal is not found to be contrary to the policies outlined in section 3 of this report.

7.2 The application is recommended for approval on that basis.

==== PAGE 5 ====

                                      19/00412/B                                     Page  5  of  5

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 can confirm that this decision has been made by a Principal Planner in accordance with the authority afforded to that Officer by the appropriate DEFA Delegation.

Decision Made : Permitted

Date: 30.05.2019

Determining officer

Signed : S CORLETT Sarah Corlett

Principal Planner

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.