192634

==== PAGE 1 ====

                                      24/00365/B                                     Page  1  of  6

PLANNING OFFICER REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

Application No. : 24/00365/B Applicant : Mr Norman Cunningham Proposal : Alterations and extensions to front and side elevations to provide garaging and additional living accommodation. Site Address : Laurel Mount House Glen Duff Ramsey Isle Of Man IM7 2AT

Principal Planner: Chris Balmer Photo Taken : Site Visit : Expected Decision Level : Officer Delegation

Recommendation

Recommended Decision:

Permitted Date of Recommendation: 28.05.2024 __

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 26 of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) Order 2019 and to avoid the accumulation of unimplemented planning approvals.

C 2. 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 3. The front door (north elevation) shall be solid in nature and a design and style with glazed top and side lights as shown on drawing 05 REV A and shall be completed prior to the occupation of the extension and retained thereafter.

Reason: in the interest of visual amenities of the area/individual traditional property.

This application has been recommended for approval for the following reason. Overall, it is considered the proposed extensions, which slightly above the generally 50% threshold of HP15, it is considered given the front and side extensions would be appropriate and would be in keeping to the traditional Manx farmhouse style property complying to PC

==== PAGE 2 ====

                                      24/00365/B                                     Page  2  of  6

3/91 and HP15. Furthermore, the proposals would not harm the character and quality of the landscape or adversely affect the countryside and therefore also fail to comply with EP 1 & 2.

Plans/Drawings/Information;

This approval relates to the submitted documents and drawings reference numbers all received;

27.03.2024 01 02 03 Measured Survey

26.04.2024 04 REV A 05 REV A __

Interested Person Status - Additional Persons

None __

Officer’s Report

1.0 SITE 1.1 The application site represents the residential curtilage of Laurel Mount House, Glen Duff, Ramsey which is an existing traditional Manx farmhouse style with three uppers windows over a central doorway which is flanked by a single window either side. The detached dwelling is situated to the southern side of the Lezayre Road (A3) and south east of Lezayre team Rooms and east of the Glen Duff Depot (DOI).

1.2 The boundaries of the site comprises of mature vegetation, including substantial trees. Access to the site is via an entrance which access directly onto the Lezayre Road along the northern boundary of the site. The driveway from the entrance runs to the front and to the side of the dwelling.

2.0 PROPOSAL 2.1 This application seeks approval for the alterations and extensions to front and side elevations to provide garaging and additional living accommodation. The initially scheme raised concerns of the design and therefore the application has now been amended.

2.2 The two storey side extension would have a maximum depth of 9m, a width of 7m and a ridge height of 9m. The side extension would project 2.6m forward of the front elevation of the existing dwelling.

2.3 To the front elevation, it is proposed to erected a single storey extension which has a front projection of 1.4m and would run the entire frontage of the existing dwelling (11.5m) and continues to the frontage of the side extension resulting in a total width of 18.5m. The front extension includes the provision of two bays windows which flank the main entrance to either side at ground level only. A lean-to roof overhangs the front extension, bay windows and the front door and continuities to the side extension.

==== PAGE 3 ====

                                      24/00365/B                                     Page  3  of  6

2.4 External finishes of both extensions would be finished in a painted white rendered. The roof would be finished in a natural blue/dark grey slate. The east gable elevation includes a floor to ceiling first floor gable end window.

3.0 DEPARTMENT POLICIES 3.1 The application site is within areas of "High Landscape Value or Coastal Value and Scenic Significance" and "Ares of Private Woodland or Parkland" under the Isle of Man Development Plan Order 1982. 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 Environment Policy 2 states: "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."

3.5 Environment Policy 3 states: "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."

3.6 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; however, only the following is considered relevant in the assessment and determination of this application:

4.2 Erection of a conservatory - 09/01272/B - APPROVED

5.0 REPRESENTATIONS 5.1 Highway Services make the following comments (26.04.2024): "Highway Services HDC has reviewed the updated information for application 24/00365/B dated 26 Apr 2024 online and have no further comments to make."

==== PAGE 4 ====

                                      24/00365/B                                     Page  4  of  6

5.2 Lezayre Commissioners (03.05.2024) recommend the application is approved.

5.3 Ecosystem Policy Officer (DEFA) comment (18.04.2024 - initial comments on original scheme which was larger); "I don't think this will require any ecological survey as is. There doesn't seem to be any space for bats on the side of the property where the extension is to be located and the roof looks to be in good condition. Also, it doesn't look like vegetation will need to be removed to facilitate the development."

5.4 | Arboricultural Officer (DEFA) comment (17.04.2024 - initial comments on original scheme which was larger); "I have no concerns with the existing plans. All proposed works appear to be within existing hardstanding and should not significantly impact any retained trees. It is not entirely clear from the plans however the proposal does appear to seek the removal of 3 small trees/shrubs, this is not of any concern due to the small size and low quality of the trees/shrubs. This application included lots of detailed photos, this has been very helpful in making a consultation"

5.5 Highway Services Drainage (DOI) comment (11.04.2024 and 02.05.2024); "Allowing surface water runoff onto a public highway would contravene Section 58 of the Highway Act 1986 and guidance contained in section 11.3.11 of the Manual for Manx Roads. Recommendation: The applicant should be aware of and demonstrate compliance with the comments above"

6.0 ASSESSMENT 6.1 The main issues are the potential visual impact of the development upon the landscape and individual dwelling and potential impact upon the woodland area/ Ecology impacts

POTENTIAL VISUAL IMPACT OF THE DEVELOPMENT UPON THE LANDSCAPE AND INDIVIDUAL DWELLING 6.2 The existing dwelling as outlined previously is a traditional Manx farmhouse styled property and therefore the initial policy consideration is Housing Policy 15. This policy is clear that any extension should;

"...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 The existing dwelling has a total floor area of approximately 197.5sqm. It should be noted that this figure excludes the single storey side conservatory which has been approved since the adoption of the IOMSP in 2007 - if included the existing dwelling has a total floor area of 219sqm.

6.4 In terms of the size increase the proposed extensions would have a floor area of approximately 128.5sqm.

6.5 Accordingly, if the proposed extension where constructed the dwelling would have an approximately floor area of 330.5sqm, which equates to a percentage increase of 67% which is above the generally permitted 50% threshold as stated within HP 15. Where the existing conservatory included as being within the existing floor area calculation, the proposed extensions would equate to a 50.9% increase. Therefore the proposal would slightly be above the generally permitted 50% threshold as stated within HP 15.

6.6 In terms of the proportion, scale and form of the proposal, there was initial concerns with the scheme, namely the side gable projecting two storey side extension and the design of the front extension. There were also design concerns, including demolition of the existing

==== PAGE 5 ====

                                      24/00365/B                                     Page  5  of  6

gable end chimney. Overall it was considered the works, namely the side extension would result in a dominating feature over the existing traditional property, contrary to the various planning policies. Due to this the applicant's agents and the Department discusses the application and an amendment was made.

6.7 The proposed two storey element would result in an extension which respects the proportion, form, scale and design of the existing property and would comply with Policy 3 of Planning Circular 3/91 which states;

"The shape of small and medium sized new dwellings should follow the size and pattern of traditional farmhouses. They should be rectangular in plan and simple in form. Extensions to existing buildings should maintain the character of the original form."

6.8 The setback of the first floor elements of the side extension, the retention of the eastern gable end chimney stack and the lower roof ridge and its overall width, all would ensure the main dwelling is still the dominating element of the dwelling with the side extension siting as a subordinate feature. The inclusion of the enlarged garage door, namely its height (3.2m) is arguably more unusual, albeit it is understood the applicants have a variety of classic vehicles, and the additional height to enable storage within the garage.

6.9 Overall, it is considered the two storey extension would be in keeping with the existing traditional property. Accordingly, it is considered this feature would comply with PC 3/91 and HP15.

6.10 The front single storey lean-to roof extension initially also raised concerns. However, the reduction in size and the inclusion of vertically proportioned bay windows with an improved front door arrangement (compared to patio doors and horizontally proportion windows the entire length of the extension) would be appropriate and be a feature which is seen throughout the IOM, especially when more classical/ornate features where added to the original farmhouse style properties historically. Again it is considered the works would be appropriate and in keeping to the traditional property and therefore again would comply with PC 3/91 or HP15.

6.11 Given the above conclusions and as the dwelling can be partially visible from the public footpath along Lezayre Road (albeit the ground level would likely be screened due to the mature landscaping), it is considered the proposals would not have adversely affect the countryside or harm the character and quality of the landscape as per the requirements of Environment Policies 1 & 2, namely given the works would be in keeping and appropriate to this traditional Manx farmhouse styled property.

6.12 It should be noted that while the trees within the site would require a tree felling notice (falls outside of the Planning Department), all other vegetation could be removed without any permission (again does not need planning permission). Accordingly, while landscaping can be taken into account when determining a planning application; it should not be the sole reason for allowing inappropriate development, only to reduce/compliment/mitigate acceptable development. Landscaping of any type can be damaged, removed or die. However, in this case, if the dwelling where to become more publicly apparent due to landscaping being removed/dying it is considered the works would sit well within the sites countryside setting/street scene.

POTENTIAL IMPACT UPON THE WOODLAND AREA / ECOLOGY IMPACTS 6.13 No concerns have been raised with the application or conditions sought.

7.0 CONCLUSION 7.1 Overall, it is considered the proposed extensions, which slightly above the generally 50% threshold of HP15, it is considered given the front and side extensions would be appropriate and would be in keeping to the traditional Manx farmhouse style property

==== PAGE 6 ====

                                      24/00365/B                                     Page  6  of  6

complying to PC 3/91 and HP15. Furthermore, the proposals would not harm the character and quality of the landscape or adversely affect the countryside and therefore also fail to comply with EP 1 & 2.

7.2 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) Order 2019, the following persons are automatically interested persons: (a) the applicant (including an agent acting on their behalf); (b) any Government Department that has made written representations that the Department considers material; (c) the Highways Division of the Department of Infrastructure; (d) Manx National Heritage where it has made written representations that the Department considers material; (e) Manx Utilities where it has made written representations that the Department considers material; (f) the local authority in whose district the land the subject of the application is situated; and (g) a local authority adjoining the authority referred to in paragraph (f) where that adjoining authority has made written representations that the Department considers material.

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 above who should be given Interested Person Status

8.3 The Department of Environment Food and Agriculture is responsible for the determination of planning applications. As a result, where officers within the Department make comments in a professional capacity they cannot 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 and that in making this decision the Officer has agreed the recommendation in relation to who should be afforded Interested Person Status.

Decision Made : Permitted

Date: 31.05.2024

Determining officer

Signed : J SINGLETON

Jason Singleton

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.