Loading document...
==== PAGE 1 ====
24/00673/B Page 1 of 8
PLANNING OFFICER REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Application No. : 24/00673/B Applicant : Mr & Mrs John Griffiths Proposal : Erection of detached replacement dwelling, including extension to rear of existing garage Site Address : Driftwood Dogmills Ramsey Isle Of Man IM7 4AD
Planning Officer: Toby Cowell Photo Taken : Site Visit :
Expected Decision Level : Planning Committee
Recommendation
Recommended Decision:
Permitted Date of Recommendation: 06.09.2024 __
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. Prior to the commencement of development, a soft and hard landscaping plan incorporating native species shall be submitted to the Department for approval in writing. Any new planting which is removed, becomes severely damaged or diseased within five years of planting shall be replaced. Replacement planting shall be in accordance with the approved details.
Reason: To ensure the delivery and retention of an appropriate landscaping scheme, in the interests of the visual amenity of the locality.
C 3. Within 12 months of the completion and occupation of the new dwelling, the existing dwelling on site shall be demolished and all materials removed from the site. The approved landscaping scheme shall be implemented in full as per the approved details within 12 months of the occupation of the new dwelling.
Reason: To safeguard the countryside for its own safe and to ensure the delivery and retention of an appropriate landscaping scheme, in the interests of the visual amenity of the locality.
C 4. The development hereby approved shall be undertaken in full accordance with the approved materials and finishes detailed in drwg. no. 23 1740 RD - 09.
==== PAGE 2 ====
24/00673/B Page 2 of 8
Reason: In the interests of the visual amenity of the locality.
C 5. 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, and no garages or other free standing buildings shall be erected within the curtilage of the dwelling hereby approved, other than that expressly authorised by this approval, shall be carried out.
Reason: To control development in the interests of the amenities of the surrounding area.
This application has been recommended for approval for the following reason. The proposed development is considered to be acceptable in principle by providing a modern replacement dwelling of a high standard of design, which would successfully assimilate into the wider streetscene without detriment to the character of the wider streetscene or landscape setting. The proposals comprise a more efficient use of the site than the previous dwelling in situ, whilst amounting to an environmental improvement through the use of modern buildings techniques, solar panels and an air source heat pump.
The development is considered to be provide suitable accommodation for future occupants, without detriment to the amenities of surrounding properties or giving rise to an adverse impact upon highway safety. The proposals are therefore deemed compliant with General Policies 2 and 3, Environment Policies 1 and 2, and Housing Policy 14 of the Strategic Plan.
Plans/Drawings/Information;
This decision relates to the following plans and documents referenced;
23 1740 RD - 09 Received 04/09/24
23 1740 RD - 01 RevA 23 1740 RD - 02 RevA 23 1740 RD - 03 RevA 23 1740 RD - 04 RevA 23 1740 RD - 05 RevA 23 1740 RD - 06 RevB 23 1740 RD - 07 RevA 23 1740 RD - 08 RevA Received 04/09/24
23 1740E - 00 23 1740E - 01 23 1740E - 02 23 1740E - 03 23 1740E - 04 23 1740G - 01 23 1740G - 02 23 1740G - 03 1031 DW - 01 Planning statement Site photographs Received 12.06.24
__
==== PAGE 3 ====
24/00673/B Page 3 of 8
Interested Person Status
It is recommended that the following 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 4(2):
The Haven, Dogmills Grand View, Dogmills Dogmills Cottages, Dogmills
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
THIS APPLICATION IS BROUGHT TO PLANNING COMMITTEE FOR DETERMINATION DUE TO THE OBJECTION RECEIVED FROM THE LOCAL AUTHORITY
1.0 THE SITE 1.1 The site relates to the detached bungalow of Driftwood (formerly known as Ballabrune) and its associated curtilage. The property is located within the small dispersed settlement of Dogmills and forms part of a small collection of dwellings sited either side of the principle streetscene. The property benefits from a generous curtilage to the side and rear, with the plot backing directly onto a steep embankment leading down to the beach to the immediate east with the topography of the sloping notably sloping gently upwards from west to east and downwards from north to south.
1.2 The plot includes a fairly significant amount of mature coverage to either side of the dwelling itself and along the site's western boundary adjoining the streetscene, however the rear portion of the site is largely clear. The property is further well-recessed from the streetscene and is therefore not particularly visible within the context of the same.
1.3 The dwelling is noted as being finished in pebbledash, with an unusual gabled front entrance with the outer flank walls bowing outwards, together with an open arched entrance. The property is complete with an attached dual-pitched single garage, a flat roofed single- storey rear extension, and a large chimney breast which widens towards the base. The exact age of the property is not certain however it likely dates from the 1960s/70s given its absence on historic mapping from 1955 and the notable built vernacular of the property.
2.0 THE PROPOSAL 2.1 Planning permission is sought for the demolition of the existing dwelling and erection of a replacement dwelling, together with an extension to the existing detached double garage. The new dwelling would be sited further rearward within the plot than the existing, with the front elevation to sit circa. 5m back from the rear elevation of the existing property.
2.2 The new dwelling would incorporate a central full height gabled front entrance finished in natural stone with angled glazing above, with the remainder of the principal section of the dwelling to effectively incorporate a dummy pitched roof extending rearward into a flat roof for the majority of the ground-floor.
2.3 The new dwelling would further incorporate a lower ground floor which would be partially exposed at the front and side (south), but would not extend across the entire width of the dwelling due to the downward sloping nature of the site from north to south. The proposals notably include a louvered/slatted timber wall feature on the front elevation which partially
==== PAGE 4 ====
24/00673/B Page 4 of 8
enclosed a side terrace at ground floor level, with timber cladding proposed for the exposed lower ground floor section on the southern elevation.
2.4 Substantial elements of glazing are proposed on the southern side elevation at ground floor level, whilst a combination of glazing and render would be utilised for the remainder of the level as it wrap around at the rear and northern flank elevation, with white rendering for the remainder of the front elevation. Standing seam zinc roofing is proposed for the principal roof, whilst grey waterproof membrane would be used for the flat roof element extending to the rear.
2.5 The proposals further includes 4 no. rooflights in the front elevation, with 2 additional rooflights proposed on the flat roof element, together with a natural stone chimney visible from the front. As part of the site's wider development, the proposals include additional patio areas to the front and side of the new dwelling, with the area in front and occupying the footprint of the current dwelling to be fully landscaping.
2.6 No changes are proposed to the existing site access, however the driveway would be extended past the current detached garage, which would in itself be extended rearward to include a covered car port for 2 vehicles with a garden room and covered canopy at the end. A new chimney breast would also be installed at the end of the extended garage building to serve a fire pit. The resultant garage would be finished in a combination of slate roof tiles, white rendering and timber cladding, with the chimney to be finished in natural stone.
3.0 PLANNING HISTORY 3.1 23/00897/B - Proposed alterations and extensions, including rear dormer and balcony - Permitted
4.0 PLANNING POLICY 4.1 The application site is identified on the 1982 Development Plan as 'white land' and within an area of countryside that is not designated for development. The site is not within a Conservation Area or an area at risk of flooding, but does falls within an Area of High Landscape Value as defined by the 1982 Development Plan.
4.2 The following policies from the 2016 Strategic Plan are considered pertinent in the assessment of this application;
Strategic Policy 1 Efficient use of land and resources 2 Priority for new development to identified towns and villages 5 Design and visual impact
Spatial Policy 5 Development in the countryside will only be permitted in accordance with General Policy 3
General Policy 2 General Development Considerations 3 Exceptions to development in the countryside
Environment Policy 1 Protection of the countryside 2 Areas of High Landscape Value
Housing Policy 4 Exceptions to allowing new housing in the countryside 12 Replacement dwellings in the countryside
==== PAGE 5 ====
24/00673/B Page 5 of 8
14 Siting, size and design of replacement dwellings in the countryside
Transport Policy 4 Highways safety 7 Parking provision
4.5 Residential Design Guide (2021) This document provides advice on the design of new houses and extensions to existing property as well as how to assess the impact of such development on the living conditions of those in adjacent residential properties and sustainable methods of construction.
5.0 REPRESENTATIONS 5.1 Bride Parish Commissioners - The Commissioners felt there is no good reason to pull down the current property. It has been extended and permission was also granted to extend again and build a garage. This was not done. The current plans are not at all in keeping with Bride village and the surrounding areas, the coast at that point is in a precarious state. The extra weight of the property and movement of the surrounding area may exacerbate coastal erosion or other unknown issues. (14.07.24)
5.2 Highway Services - No highways interest (21.06.24)
5.3 Highways Drainage - 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 shall demonstrate compliance with the statements above and that no surface water will be discharged onto the highway. (21.06.24)
Confirmation subsequently received that amended plans submitted showing the inclusion of a drainage channel along the existing site entrance would satisfy their requirements. (04.07.24)
5.4 Manx Utilities Authority - No response received at the time of writing.
5.5 Forestry Officer - No response received at the time of writing.
5.6 A petition has been submitted on behalf of three neighbouring properties writing in support of the proposals, which in particular consider that full consideration has been given to the aesthetics and practical impacts of the proposed development in relation to surrounding properties.
6.0 ASSESSMENT 6.1 The main issues to consider in the assessment of this planning application are as follows:
6.2 PRINCIPLE 6.2.1 The site falls within the open countryside and an area not zoned for development within the 1982 Development Plan. There is a general presumption again development in the countryside with development to be focussed towards defined settlements in accordance with Spatial Policy 5. Development will only be permitted in the countryside in accordance with the exceptions outlined in General Policy 3, one of which includes 'the replacement of existing rural dwellings'.
==== PAGE 6 ====
24/00673/B Page 6 of 8
6.2.2 Housing Policy 12 provides further clarity by noting that the replacement of an existing dwelling in the countryside will be permitted, unless the existing building has lost its residential use by abandonment, or the existing dwelling is or architectural or historic interest and capable of restoration. In this instance, the existing dwelling has not been abandoned and remains occupied, whilst further not being considered to be of any architectural or historic interest which would merit its preservation. On this basis therefore, the principle of a replacement dwelling is deemed acceptable in this instance.
6.2.3 It is further noteworthy that Environment Policy 1 advises that the countryside will be protected for its own sake, and development which would adversely affect the countryside will not be permitted unless there is an over-riding national need in land use planning terms. Environment Policy 2 adds that when considering development in Areas of High Landscape Value (AHLV's), the protection of the character of the landscape will be the most important consideration, unless it can be shown that the development would not harm the character and quality of the landscape, or the location for the development is essential.
6.3 DESIGN AND VISUAL IMPACT 6.3.1 The proposed dwelling, in terms of its design, built vernacular and materials palette, would not amount to a 'traditional styled' dwelling in accordance with the principles set out in Planning Circular 3/91. Indeed, the design is considered to amount to a modern take upon traditional built vernacular through the use of an uncomplicated roof form with render and natural stone for much of the exterior, whilst extending rearwards with a flat roof incorporating substantial glazing and timber cladding.
6.3.2 Whilst there is a clear preference for replacement dwellings in the countryside to consist of a more traditional form in line with the principles of Planning Circular 3/91, Housing Policy 14 does make provision for buildings of an innovative, modern design where this would be of high quality and not result in an adverse visual impact.
6.3.3 Likewise, Housing Policy 14 further states that replacement dwellings should not be substantially different to the existing in terms of siting or size (no greater than 50% uplift), unless such changes would result in an overall environmental improvement. Consideration may also be given to proposals which result in a larger dwelling where this involves the replacement of an existing dwelling of poor form with one of more traditional character, or where, by its design or siting, there would be less visual impact.
6.3.4 In this instance, the proposed replacement dwelling would comprise a total floor area of circa. 300sqm, which amounts to a 30sqm decrease relative to the existing which stands at 330sqm. The proposals would therefore represent no conflict with HP14 from a floor area perspective.
6.3.5 It is however recognised that the new dwelling would be shifted rearward within the plot and therefore not occupy the same footprint or location of the existing. Nevertheless, HP14 does make provisions for this should such a change result in an environmental improvement. The proposed replacement dwelling would clearly achieve a higher standard of thermal efficiently whilst utilising renewable energy sources including an air source heat pump and solar panels on the extended garages. Therefore, the proposals can clearly be argued as comprising an environmental improvements relative to the existing.
6.3.6 Likewise, the visual impact of the new dwelling would be largely reduced in the context of the streetscene due to its siting further rearward within the plot, whilst not being overly if at all visible in the context of wider landscape views due to the site's topography and the notable presence of mature tree belts along either flank boundary of the plot.
6.3.7 Overall, the proposed replacement dwelling is considered to represent a much higher standard of design that the existing property on site, whilst clearly responding to the site's
==== PAGE 7 ====
24/00673/B Page 7 of 8
varied topography. The proposed dwelling would consist of a more conventional front elevation which would be visible from the streetscene, whilst extending further rearward into a more modern flat roofed element that reduces the bulk and massing of the resultant dwelling. The use of external materials as proposed, including a combination of painted render, natural stone and timber cladding are also considered to be appropriate in this rural location, which is further reflected in the extensions to the garage in order to correspond successfully to the new dwelling.
6.3.8 The development is considered to constitute an innovative and high standard of design, without appearing obtrusive or imposing within the context of the wider landscape and seascape. The proposals allow for a more efficient use of the site with the resultant dwelling to benefit from enhanced views of the sea to the east, but without being visible in the context of the beach or wider seascape. Moreover, when compared to the extant approval for extending the existing dwelling, the current scheme represents a more holistic and complete redevelopment of the site and therefore would amount to a visual improvement in the site's immediate context. The provision of a comprehensive landscaping scheme, which would be controlled by condition, would further complement and enhance the wider scheme.
6.3.9 Overall, the proposed replacement dwelling is considered to be acceptable from a design standpoint and such that the wider landscape character would not be adversely impacted as a result of the proposals. The proposals are therefore deemed compliant with General Policy 2, (b) and (c) and Housing Policy 14.
6.4 NEIGHBOURING AMENITY 6.4.1 The new dwelling would be sited a significant distance from neighbouring properties within the site's immediate vicinity, and in particular would be situated circa. 60m from the closest part of the neighbouring property of Seafield to the north and 45m from Sea View to the south/south-west. When considered with the mature vegetation and tree belts presence along both flank boundaries of the site, together with the modest scale of the new dwelling and its positioning within the site; it is not considered that the amenities of surrounding properties would be materially affected as a result of the proposals with respect to loss of light, overshadowing, overlooking or overdominance. On this basis, the proposals are considered to be acceptable in the context of safeguarding neighbouring amenity, in compliance with General Policy 2 (g).
6.5 OTHER MATTERS 6.5.1 Concerns have been notably raised by the Local Authority over the location of the proposed dwelling within greater proximity to the embankment, and the potential impact upon the resultant dwelling from future coastal erosion. The application submission has been duly accompanied by a drone survey which has noted the location of a maximum building line which should not be crossed without further measures being undertaken to underpin the building. The proposed dwelling would be set well back from this line, and the conclusion of the survey notes that based on the results of a previous erosion study for the site, approximately 55 years would need to pass before any preventative measures may need to be undertaken. The survey further adds that the upper section of the embankment is reinforced with the root systems of the existing vegetation, which is in imminent danger of localised collapse. However, the embankment slope is deemed to remain stable.
6.5.2 On the basis of the above it is not considered that the proposed development would be subject to an immediate or long term danger as a result of coastal erosion. It should also be noted that such matters relate to structural concerns in any case and are not a material planning consideration. Further assessment of such an issue would undoubtedly be further considered at the Building Regulations stage.
7.0 CONCLUSION
==== PAGE 8 ====
24/00673/B Page 8 of 8
7.1 The proposed development is considered to be acceptable in principle by providing a modern replacement dwelling of a high standard of design, which would successfully assimilate into the wider streetscene without detriment to the character of the wider streetscene or landscape setting. The proposals comprise a more efficient use of the site than the previous dwelling in situ, whilst amounting to an environmental improvement through the use of modern buildings techniques, solar panels and an air source heat pump.
7.2 The development is considered to be provide suitable accommodation for future occupants, without detriment to the amenities of surrounding properties or giving rise to an adverse impact upon highway safety. The proposals are therefore deemed compliant with General Policies 2 and 3, Environment Policies 1 and 2, and Housing Policy 14 of the Strategic Plan, and recommended for approval.
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
__
I confirm that this decision has been made by the Planning Committee in accordance with the authority afforded to that body by the appropriate DEFA Delegation and that in making this decision the Committee has agreed the recommendation in relation to who should be afforded interested person status and/or rights to appeal.
Decision Made : ...Permitted... Committee Meeting Date:...16.09.2024
Signed :...TOBY COWELL... 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 office copy and has been produced in this form for the benefit of our online service/customers and archive record.
Copyright in submitted documents remains with their authors. Request removal