179726

==== PAGE 1 ====

                                      19/00087/B                                     Page  1  of  12

PLANNING OFFICER REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Application No. : 19/00087/B Applicant : Landfall Ltd Proposal : Erection of a detached dwelling Site Address : Land To East Of Old School House Main Road Sulby Isle Of Man

Principal Planner: Mr Chris Balmer Photo Taken : 01.03.2019 Site Visit : 01.03.2019 Expected Decision Level : Planning Committee

Recommendation

Recommended Decision:

Permitted Date of Recommendation: 08.07.2019 __

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. 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 3. 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 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 4. 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.

==== PAGE 2 ====

                                      19/00087/B                                     Page  2  of  12

Reason: To ensure that sufficient provision is made for off-street parking and turning of vehicles in the interests of highway safety.

C 5. Prior to any work commencing on site the visibility splays as shown on drawing 1440.R3 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.

Reason: In the interests of highway safety.

C 6. 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 7. 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 8. 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 garages or other free standing buildings shall be erected within the curtilage of the dwelling(s) hereby approved, other than that expressly authorised by this approval, without the prior written approval of the Department.

Reason: To control development in the interests of the amenities of the surrounding area.

C 9. 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 fences, gates, walls or other means of enclosure shall be erected or placed within the curtilage of any dwelling house forward of any wall of that dwelling house which fronts onto a highway, without the prior written approval of the Department.

Reason: To control development in the interests of the amenities of the surrounding area.

C 10. 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 garden sheds or summerhouses shall be erected or placed within the curtilage of the dwelling(s) hereby approved, other than that expressly authorised by this approval, without the prior written approval of the Department.

Reason: To control development in the interests of the amenities of the surrounding area.

C 11. 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 greenhouses or polytunnels shall be erected or placed within the curtilage of the dwelling(s) hereby approved, other than that expressly authorised by this approval, without the prior written approval of the Department.

==== PAGE 3 ====

                                      19/00087/B                                     Page  3  of  12

Reason: To control development in the interests of the amenities of the surrounding area.

Plans/Drawings/Information;

This approval relates to the submitted documents and drawings reference number 1440.R3 received on 28th January 2019 and 1440.R1 date stamped as received 23rd May 2019.

__

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):

Reayrt-Ny-Curragh and 9 Kella Close, Sulby as they do not clearly identify the land which is owned or occupied which is considered to be impacted on by the proposed development in accordance with paragraph 2A of the Policy; are 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; as they do not refer to the relevant issues in accordance with paragraph 2C of the Policy and as they have not explained how the development would impact the lawful use of land owned or occupied by them and in relation to the relevant issues identified in paragraph 2C of the Policy, as is required by paragraph 2D 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 site accommodates the Old School House, now a private dwelling and land at the rear: the curtilage extends around the rear of the church hall curtilage where there sits an existing garage which is a relatively modern structure with two single garage doors which face south west and rendered unpainted walling. Immediately to the rear of the Old School House are other outbuildings which are more interesting with stone walls and monopitch, slated roofs. In terms of this current application the main area of interest within the application site is the land behind St Stephens Church/Hall. This section of the site is rectangular in shape,

==== PAGE 4 ====

                                      19/00087/B                                     Page  4  of  12

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. This section of the site is currently made up of a section of hardstanding and also includes the modern detached double garage with lean-to outbuilding. This section of the site is also enclosed on three boundaries (north, east and south) with a Manx stone wall approximately 1.5 metres in height.

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

==== PAGE 5 ====

                                      19/00087/B                                     Page  5  of  12

3.1 The following previous planning applications are considered relevant in the assessment and determination of this application site:

3.2 Reserved Matters application for the erection of a detached dwelling addressing internal layout, design, external appearance, parking layout and landscaping (relating to PA 15/00794/A) - 18/01328/REM - WITHDRAWN - it was noted that the application had been submitted after the original AiP (15/00794/A) had expired.

3.3 Reserved Matters application for the erection of a detached dwelling (relating to PA 15/00794/A) - 18/00532/REM - REFUSED on the following ground: "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."

This application was not appealed.

3.4 Approval in principle for erection of a dwelling addressing siting and means of access- 15/00794/A - - APPROVED by the Planning Committee and at the subsequent Appeal (contrary to Inspectors recommendation) with the following conditions attached:

"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."

3.5 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

==== PAGE 6 ====

                                      19/00087/B                                     Page  6  of  12

3.6 Conversion of School House to dwelling with new conservatory and double garage - 00/01660/GB - APPROVED

3.7 Approval in principle for change of use from school to private dwelling - 00/01173/GA - APPROVED

3.8 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 full approval for the Erection of a detached dwelling. It should be noted that all of following issues are being considered; design, external appearance of the buildings, internal layout, parking layout, access and landscaping of the site. Albeit significant weight is still attached to the previous decisions, including the AIP application (15/00794/A) which accepted 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 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 which has views over neighbouring fields.

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 (28.02.2019) which can be summarised as: Commissioners quote comments from the previous Inspectors comments who recommended the application be refused (15/00794/A) but which were reversed by the Minister. They agree with these comments. Such comments as summarised as; built development would exacerbate the current perception of built form encroaching too close to the main body of the church and church hall; new residential curtilage with normal paraphernalia could be seen in the context of the church and hall; a separate residential development on this site in his view would significantly harm the setting of the Church contrary to SP4; would be seem out on a limb from the rest of the development along the road and be obtrusive and alien development intruding into the countryside; contrary to GP 2 (b) & (c).

5.1.1 The Commissioners (15.04.2019) also comment in a second letter that further to a letter from the applicant stating they has invited the Commissioners to join them into their connection of main drainage. However they advised that they were not involved in the Church and passed him onto their details, although they understand no contact was made with the Church.

5.1.2 The Commissioners also commented (14.06.2019) that they had no further comment (in respect to additional plan).

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

==== PAGE 7 ====

                                      19/00087/B                                     Page  7  of  12

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"

5.2.1 The applicants have since provided additional information in relation to demonstrating the visibility splays; however, at the time of writing this report comments from Highway Services had not been updated. It is hoped such comments would be available at the Planning Committee meeting.

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 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.

5.3.1 Addition comments (14.06.2019)draws attention to the previous Inspector report commenting that they are relevant for consideration (namely his concerns the proposal would be contrary to SP4); The owner/occupant of 9 Kella Close also comments that the visibility splays would not be acceptable for new residential development; the site use has lapsed; questions whether the density criteria per acre/hectare is acceptable for this rural location; proposal negatively impacts the Registered Buildings; over intensive development on this site; and any new foundations will interfere with the drainage.

==== PAGE 8 ====

                                      19/00087/B                                     Page  8  of  12

6.0 ASSESSMENT 6.1 Firstly, it should be noted that this is a full detailed application and all matters require consideration. The approval in principle application (15/00794/A) has since expired; albeit weight is attached to this approval, namely as there have not been any policy changes since this approval. Accordingly, the following Material Planning Issues should be considered: 1. Principle of Residential Development; 2. Potential impact upon the visual amenities of the adjacent registered buildings and character & appearance of the street scene; 4. Highway Issues/Parking provision; and 5. Potential amenities for future occupants.

PRINCIPLE OF RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT 6.2 As indicated within the 'Planning Policy' section of this report, the site is designated for 'Area of Building for Civic, Cultural & Other Special Use - Worship' use. Looking at the historical maps, it is appears that approximately two thirds of the site has never been used in connection with St Stephens Church & Hall and was in fact used in connection with Sulby Old School. Historical maps show a building/structure with a width of approximately 9 metres and a depth 4.5 metres being located on the application site. The more modern double garage is now sited on a similar position to this original outbuilding associated with the school.

6.3 Also visiting the site there is a clear boundary wall which appears to have been in place for some considerable time, potentially constructed when the Sulby Old School was originally constructed or afterwards. It should be noted the St Stephens Church & Hall was built before, utilising the same curtilage it has today. There are also no access points from St Stephens Church & Hall to the application site.

6.4 Due to this it is considered an argument could be made that perhaps the land use designation on the Sulby Local Plan isn't entirely correct, and arguably the adjoining residential land used which includes the Sulby Old School should have also incorporated two thirds of the application or in its entirety.

6.5 Consideration is also given that currently the entirely of the application site is within and used in connection with the residential property Sulby Old School. As indicate the site currently accommodates a modern detached garage and a lean-to outbuilding to the eastern gable elevation of the garage. Both these structures are partially apparent when travelling along the Main Road when approaching the site from the east (from Sulby Bridge direction). Neither structure add to the visual appearance of the area, nor upon the adjacent Register Building St Stephens Church & Hall, in fact it could be considered they detract from the character and quality of the Register Building.

6.6 The proposal does have the potential to remove these inappropriate buildings from the site, and potentially replace with a more appropriate building in the form of a new dwelling, this aspect will be discussed further in this report.

6.7 Weight is also attached to comments of the previous Appeals Inspector (15/00794/A): "If it was used as part of the school land, when approval was granted for the change of use to residential, then it follows, that weight can be given to consider the lawful use of the land to now be residential rather than for Worship use. Thus, in terms of interpreting its designation the continued use of the land would be residential and site A should be considered to be residential for the purpose of Appeal A (current application site).

6.8 In terms of the principle of developing this site for a single dwelling, it is considered for the reasons given; the proposal would be acceptable at this stage. However, this is not an automatic reason to allow the development. Further material planning matters as indicated previously need to be considered to determine if the principle of a single dwelling on the site is appropriate.

==== PAGE 9 ====

                                      19/00087/B                                     Page  9  of  12

POTENTIAL IMPACT UPON THE VISUAL AMENITIES OF THE ADJACENT REGISTERED BUILDINGS AND CHARACTER & APPEARANCE OF THE STREET SCENE 6.9 Arguably, this is the main issue relating to this application. 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. As outlined with the previous application (18/00532/REM) it was this aspect which raised concern, namely the scale, height and massing of the proposed dwelling, not being subservient to the adjacent registered buildings and would therefore not protect or enhance their setting.

6.10 To overcome this issue the applicants have lowered the overall height of the building by approximately 1m so its roof ridge is lower than the adjacent church and church halls roofs. The overall design, footprint, proportion, form and finish of the dwelling is the same/similar to the last application (which did not raise concern) but the size, height and scale have been reduced in repose to the last refusal.

6.11 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 (render painted white) can be read in places currently, against the St Stephen's Church/Hall and therefore the rear elevation of the proposal 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 (painted white) 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 to 7 metres and the cat-slide roof section of the new dwelling would be set back even further back (3 metres); all of would reduce the mass of the proposal, when read in conjunction with the Church. Further the proposal roof ride (7m) would be below the main roof of the Church building (9.2m) and below the Church Hall roof (7.3m). The finish of the eastern elevation of the new dwelling is proposed to a dark coloured 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 church 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 previously confirmed they are happy with these suggestions and that a condition be attached to any approval for samples of the finishes to be submitted.

6.12 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.

6.13 In terms of views of the front elevation of the dwelling (west), this was an area which the Planning Committee appeared to have the greatest concerns, in that the approved roof ridge of the proposal would be seen above the roof ridge of the Church Hall. The applicant, by lowering the dwelling by 1m and now below the roof ridge of the hall, has overcome this

==== PAGE 10 ====

                                      19/00087/B                                     Page  10  of  12

potential conflict and it is not considered the new dwellings roof will be seen projecting above the roof ridge of the existing Church Hall building. In terms of additional views (namely form the footpath along Main Road), they 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. The applicant has also added additional planting to the front of the Old School House (along driveway) which would also reduce the potential limited views. Furthermore, the siting of the 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 between 2.5m & 3.5m 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 limited public views.

6.14 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.

6.15 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 (painted white) 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.

6.16 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.

6.17 Overall, it is considered the proposal would comply with General Policy 2 and Strategic Policy 4 of the IOMSP.

HIGHWAY ISSUES/PARKING PROVISION 6.18 In terms of parking provision the new dwelling and the existing dwelling ' Sulby Old School' both require two off road parking spaces associated with each property. This can easily be achieved on the site, with both having adequate turning provision to enable any vehicle to exit onto Main Road in a forwards gear. Accordingly, the proposal from this respect causes no concern.

6.19 Regarding visibility splays from the shared access, the applicants has provided a drawing which demonstrates visibility splays of 2.4m x 65.6m to the right (towards Sulby Bridge) and 2.4m x 64.99m to the left (towards Sulby Crossroads) both with a 0.5m offset. This is greater than what was approved under application 15/00794/A which had 2.4m x 54m in both directions (no offset). As previously accepted to achieve the splay to the right it requires the splay to go over land outside the applicants control, being the roadside frontage of St Stephens Church Hall. This can normally cause concern as a condition attached requiring 'X' visibility needs to be achieved and retained. If the applicants do not control the land, there is the risk that the owner could plant landscaping etc which blocks visibility. In this case, it is reasonably to consider there is comfort that this is unlikely to occur, given the area in question (essentially the roadside frontage) is made up of a wall no higher than 1.05m and perhaps key, the area in question provides visibility for the users of St Stephens Church Hall as well. If they

==== PAGE 11 ====

                                      19/00087/B                                     Page  11  of  12

were to plant or allow landscaping to grow above 1.05 metres in height (landscaping is regularly maintained), they would likely screen their own visibility as well. The applicants have also recently removed the roadside trees/landscaping fronting the Sulby Old School and this has improved visibility for their property, but also the users of St Stephens Church Hall in a westerly direction, beneficial to all.

6.20 The Inspector for 15/00794/A agreed with this view commenting that:

"...In such situations Highway Division would normally be concerned but it is stressed that in this case it is considered that the church would be most unlikely to cause any planting or other barrier to be positioned on their land since this would affect their own visibility.

While this is a reasonable assumption to make, in theory the visibility splays would not fully comply with relevant standards. However, the removal of trees along the frontage must have significant improved visibility for all in a westerly direction and Highway Division is satisfied that, on balance, the proposal are acceptable.

Having seen the site and having been driven in and out of the existing access to 'Old School House', I consider that the prosed visibility splays are acceptable. The Highway Division has not recorded any accidents due to the use of the existing access to the dwelling and the church. Furthermore, I do not consider than an increase in usage by the residents of up to two more dwellings (using the 'Old School House' access) would significantly alter the situation regarding highway safety.

I have noted the concerns relating to the use of the road during the TT racing period but all residents in this area are fully aware of the situation at that time of the year. Again I do not consider that the increase in use as proposed would cause any additional undue risk. In conclusion on the highways issue I agree with PBCD and Highway Division that both proposals are acceptable in relation to policy GP2, criterion (i) of the IOMSP."

6.21 It should also be noted that when the Inspector made the above comments it was proposed that three dwelling would utilise the existing access. However, this current proposal would result in only two dwellings using the access and therefore less traffic would use the existing access.

6.22 As before, alterations will also need to be made to four of the existing pillars fronting the Old School House, essentially reducing their height from 1.5m to 1.05m. There is no objection to this. A condition should be attached which ensure the tops of the pillars are finished (rounded) to match the existing pillars.

6.23 Overall, once again it is considered the access arrangement would be acceptable and therefore considered to comply with General Policy 2 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan.

POTENTIAL AMENITIES FOR FUTURE OCCUPANTS 6.24 The proposed dwelling internally would be a 2/3 bedroomed property with a open plan kitchen/living room, study, utility, bedroom/dining rooms and bathroom at ground floor level, with two bedroom each with a en-suite located at first floor. The principle habitable room (kitchen/ living room) would have open views across the rear garden and potentially over the boundary walls to the open fields beyond. The first floor bedrooms would have uninterrupted views across the neighbouring fields.

6.25 Externally, the dwelling would have parking for two vehicles on the front driveway and a small garden. To the rear of the dwelling would be a flat garden which would be of an acceptable size for a dwelling of this size (there are no set standards for a garden size). Furthermore, the amenity standard in terms of views and light would be of a high standard.

==== PAGE 12 ====

                                      19/00087/B                                     Page  12  of  12

OTHER MATTERS 6.26 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. Further any damage to any boundary wall would be a civil matter between the relevant parties.

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 : ...Permitted... Committee Meeting Date:...15.07.2019

Signed :...C BALMER... Presenting Officer

Further to the decision of the Committee an additional report/condition reason was required (included as supplemental paragraph to the officer report).

Signatory to delete as appropriate YES/NO See below

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.