Loading document...
==== PAGE 1 ====
19/01172/B Page 1 of 4
PLANNING OFFICER REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Application No. : 19/01172/B Applicant : Mr & Mrs Chris Allen Proposal : Alterations and erection of extension to front and rear elevations Site Address : Dhowin Cottage Smeale Road Andreas Isle Of Man IM7 4JA
Principal Planner: Mr Chris Balmer Photo Taken :
Site Visit :
Expected Decision Level : Officer Delegation
Recommendation
Recommended Decision:
Permitted Date of Recommendation: 03.12.2019 __
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.
Plans/Drawings/Information;
This approval relates to the submitted documents and drawings reference number 01, 02 & 03 all received on 22nd October 2019. __
Interested Person Status - Additional Persons
None __
Officer’s Report
1.0 SITE 1.1 The application site Dhowin Cottage, Smeale Road, Andreas is located in open countryside within the Parish of Andreas. The application site is located to the eastern of Smeale Road and northwest of Andreas Village. The property is a traditional to storey Manx cottage which appears to have had a single storey extension to its south western gable end wall and a two storey extension to the north east gable end. The property is finished with a
==== PAGE 2 ====
19/01172/B Page 2 of 4
painted rough cast render with smaller section of beach stone for the porch and small element to the single storey extensions.
2.0 PROPOSAL 2.1 This application planning approval for alterations and erection of single storey extensions to the gable ends of the property i.e. attached to previous extensions mentioned within par 1.1.
2.2 External finishes differ to the existing, with the use of Siberian larch timber cladding to the external walls with smaller section of beach stone and metal standing seam roofing system to pitched roof and for flat roofed sections a dark grey/black membranes.
3.0 DEPARTMENT POLICIES 3.1 The application site is within an area of "Woodland" under the Isle of Man Development Plan Order 1982 and therefore not designated for development. The site is not within a Conservation Area.
3.2 In terms of strategic plan policy, the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016 contains the following policies that are considered specifically material to the assessment of this current planning application:
3.3 Environmental 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."
3.4 Housing Policy 15 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)."
3.6 Planning Circular 3/91 - Guide to the Design of Residential Development in the Countryside
4.0 PLANNING HISTORY 4.1 There are a number of previous planning applications in association with the site; which are considered relevant in the assessment and determination of this application;
4.2 Alterations and extension to existing dwelling to provide additional living accommodation - 02/01783/B - APPROVED at appeal
4.3 Extension to increase living accommodation - 90/04261/B - APPROVED
4.4 Extensions to increase living accommodation - 90/01260/B - REFUSED
4.5 Extensions to create additional living accommodation - 89/01055/B - REFUSED
5.0 REPRESENTATIONS 5.1 Highway Services (received on 14.11.2019) have no objection to the application.
6.0 ASSESSMENT
==== PAGE 3 ====
19/01172/B Page 3 of 4
6.1 The main issues are the potential visual impact of the development upon the landscape and individual dwelling.
Potential visual impact of the development upon the landscape and individual dwelling 6.2 As outlined in Housing Policy 15 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.
6.3 In terms of floor area the proposal equates to a percentage increase of 17% (existing 267.4sqm + proposed 47sqm = 314.4sqm) and therefore the proposal would be below the generally permitted 50%.
6.4 In terms of design, it is considered the elevation as seem from the Smeale Road (south east elevation) would in form, appear traditional with a modest pitched roof set slightly below the roof ridge of the side extension which it would be attached to. However, the roofing material and the use of high level windows on top of a new beach stone wall will give a more contemporary design and appearance. It is considered this roadside elevation would give a clear distinction of old and new but in a subtle way. The flat roofed sections to the southwest elevation again would result in arguably more contemporary feel and give even more distinction between "old" and "new". These aspects would not be apparent from the public views in the main, with perhaps only fleeting views through the mature roadside boundary, albeit even during winter periods such views are limited. While flat roofs are not generally ideal, in this case given their modest size, but namely given their high level of design quality and finishes they are considered acceptable in this case.
6.5 It is considered the proposals would appear as subordinate extensions, while still allowing the main dwelling house being the main aspect within the site.
7.0 CONCLUSION 7.1 It is considered that the proposal would comply with the relevant planning policies of The Isle of Man Strategic Plan for the reasons set out in this report, it is recommended that the application be approved.
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. __
==== PAGE 4 ====
19/01172/B Page 4 of 4
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: 09.12.2019
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.
Copyright in submitted documents remains with their authors. Request removal