Loading document...
==== PAGE 1 ====
PLANNING OFFICER REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS Application No.: Applicant: Proposal: 14/00140/B Mr Victor Yates Erection of a replacement dwelling (amendment to PA 13/00289/B) Hill View Sulby Glen Sulby Isle Of Man IM7 2BB Site Address: Mr Edmond Riley 19.02.2014 19.02.2014 Planning Committee Case Officer: Photo Taken : Site Visit: Expected Decision Level: Officer's Report THIS APPLICATION IS REFERRED TO THE PLANNING COMMITTEE DUE TO THE PUNNING HISTORY OF THE APPLICATION SITE. 1.0 THE APPLICATION SITE The application site is a parcel of land that will represent the residential curtilage of a detached dwelling currently under construction. It is located on the eastern side of Sulby Glen Road to the south of Sulby Village, Lezayre. 1.1 2.0 THE PROPOSAL Full planning approval is sought for the erection of a replacement dwelling within the application site. The design now proposed is slightly different to that approved in 2013 (details of which are outlined below); the proposed re-design comprises a larger - by lOsqm
==== PAGE 2 ====
the 13th June 2012. A subsequent appeal against the refusal was dismissed by the Minister, In accordance with the recommendation of the appointed Planning Inspector, with the appeal refusal decision issued on the 22nd October 2012. The four stated reasons for refusal were: Reason for refusal 1: "The proposal is contrary to Environment Policy 1 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2007 in that the proposed development, if approved, would represent unwarranted encroachment into the countryside to the detriment of the character of the landscape." Reason for refusal 2: "The proposal is contrary to Environment Policy 1 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2007 in that it has not been demonstrated that there is an overriding national need in land use planning terms to justify setting aside this policy which requires the protection of the countryside for its own sake." Reason for refusal 3: "The proposal is contrary to Housing Policy 14 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2007 in that the proposed development, if approved, would be detrimental to the character, appearance and landscape of this area of countryside by reason of its scale, massing, siting and design." Reason for refusal 4: "The proposal is contrary to Policies 2-7 of Planning Circular 3/91 in that the proposed development, if approved, would be detrimental to the visual amenity of this area of countryside by reason of its scale, massing, design and form." • Planning application 13/00289/B sought planning approval for the erection of a replacement dwelling. This previous planning application was approved at Planning Committee on 22nd April 2013, and was subject to the two standard conditions in respect of approved plans and the time limit for commencing development. The case officer's report into this application noted that the reduction in size and resulting re design of the dwelling to a smaller and traditional form ultimately meant that the reasons for refusal no longer applied as the dwelling was less than 50% greater in size than the existing dwelling and did not encroach unnecessarily into the countryside, Members of Planning Committee also noted the opinion expressed at the Planning Committee by the presenting officer that the proposed dwelling was an improvement over the existing. The case officer also concluded that the issues of flood risk and access were also satisfactorily addressed. It is also worth noting that the Planning Authority is currently considering an application for a new, detached double garage (reference 13/00138) on this same site. This application is recommended for approval and has been taken before Planning Committee given the history of the site. 3.2 4.0 PLANNING POUCY In terms of land use designation the application site is located within wider areas of land that are designated as i) woodland; and ii) high landscape or coastal value and scenic significance under the Isle of Man Planning Scheme (Development Plan). 4.1 The application site is also within an area identified as being at potential risk of flooding from encroachment of flood waters from the north and south rather than direct flooding from the river. 4.2 Page 2 of 7 21 April 2014 14/00140/B
==== PAGE 3 ====
In terms of strategic plan policy, the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2007 contains several policies that are considered specifically material to the assessment of this current planning application. 4.3 General Policy 3 states: "Development will not be permitted outside of those areas which are zoned for development on the appropriate Area Plan with the exception of: 4.4 essential housing for agricultural workers who have to live dose to their place of work; (Housing Policies 7, 8, 9 and 10); conversion of redundant rural buildings which are of architectural, historic, or social value and interest; (Housing Policy 11); previously developed land which contains a significant amount of building; where the continued use is redundant; where redevelopment would reduce the impact of the current situation on the landscape or the wider environment; and where the development proposed would result in improvements to the landscape or wider environment; the replacement of existing rural dwellings; (Housing Policies 12, 13 and 14); location-dependent development in connection with the working of minerals or the provision of necessary services; building and engineering operations which are essential for the conduct of agriculture (a) (b) (c) (d) (e) (f) or forestry; (g) development recognised to be of overriding national need in land use planning terms and for which there is no reasonable and acceptable alternative; and (h) buildings or works required for interpretation of the countryside, its wildlife or heritage." Environment Policy 1 states: "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." 4.5 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: 4.6 (a) the development would not harm the character and quality of the landscape; or (b) the location for the development is essential." Environment Policy 10 states: "Where development is proposed on any site where in the opinion of the Department of Local Government and the Environment there is a potential risk of flooding, a flood risk assessment and details of proposed mitigation measures must accompany any application for planning permission. The requirements for a flood risk assessment are set out in Appendix 4." 4.7 Environment Policy 13 states: "Development which would result in an unacceptable risk from flooding, either on or off-site, will not be permitted." 4.8 Housing Policy 4 states: "New housing will be located primarily within our existing towns and villages, or, where appropriate, in sustainable urban extensions of these towns and 4.9 Page 3 of 7 21 April 2014 14/00140/B
==== PAGE 4 ====
villages where identified in adopted Area Plans; otherwise new housing will be permitted in the countryside only in the following exceptional circumstances: essential housing for agricultural workers in accordance with Housing Policies 7, 8, 9 (a) and 10; conversion of redundant rural buildings in accordance with Housing Policy 11; and the replacement of existing rural dwellings and abandoned dwellings in accordance with Housing Policies 12, 13 and 14." (b) (c) 4.10 Housing Policy 12 states: "The replacement of an existing dwelling in the countryside will generally be permitted unless: the existing building has lost its residential use by abandonment; or the existing dwelling is of architectural or historic interest and is capable of renovation, In assessing whether a property has lost its habitable status by abandonment, regard will be had to the following criteria: the structural condition of the building; the period of non-residential use or non-use in excess of ten years; evidence of intervening use; and evidence of intention, or otherwise, to abandon." (a) (b) (i) (ii) (iii) (iv) Housing Policy 14 states: "Where a replacement dwelling is permitted, it must not be 4.11 substantially different to the existing in terms of siting and size, unless changes of siting or size would result in an overall environmental improvement; the new building should therefore generally be sited on the "footprint" of the existing, and should have a floor area, which is not more than 50% greater than that of the original building (floor areas should be measured externally and should not include attic space or outbuildings). Generally, the design of the new building should be in accordance with Policies 2-7 of the present Planning Circular 3/91, (which will be revised and issued as a Planning Policy Statement). Exceptionally, permission may be granted for buildings of innovative, modern design where this is of high quality and would not result in adverse visual impact; designs should incorporate the re-use of such stone and slate as are still in place on the site, and in general, new fabric should be finished to match the materials of the original building. "Consideration may 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." 5.0 REPRESENTATIONS 5.1 Lezayre Parish Commissioners do not object to the planning application, 5.2 Highway Services do not oppose the planning application. 6.0 ASSESSMENT Although this is an application that shows a minor change to a previously-approved application, it is important to note that it is a new application and should be treated on its own merits. That said, the matters for assessment remain similar today as in 2013, when the most recent application was considered on this site. 6.1 As highlighted earlier in this report there is provision for replacement dwellings on a one-for-one basis within the countryside under established planning policy. As such, the principle of a replacement dwelling is accepted, a conclusion supported by the approval last year of planning application 13/00289 on this site. The main purpose of this planning application is therefore to assess the site-specific impacts of the proposal. Such assessment is 6,2 14/00140/B Page 4 of 7 21 April 2014
==== PAGE 5 ====
made by testing the proposal against the relevant planning policy while having regard to the planning history of the site. 6.3 The key planning policy to take into account is Housing Policy 14. The proposed development is located entirely within the residential curtilage of the previous property and part of the footprint of the proposed replacement dwelling overlaps that of the existing dwelling (Hillview); thereby satisfying those elements of the policy. This is no different to the dwelling approved under 13/00289. However, the two applications diverge in respect of the increase in floorspace between Hillview and the dwelling proposed. In 2013, the increase proposed (and approved) was 50% - from 161.4sqm to 242.1sqm. The additional lOsqm now proposed for the new porch/utility room/boiler room would take that figure to 252.1sqm - a 56% increase on Hillview's footprint. This makes the application contrary to Housing Policy 14. However, it must be noted that, once complete, permitted development rights will apply to the new dwelling. Under Articie 14 of the Town and Country Pianning (Permitted Development) Order 2012 ("the PDO"), extensions of 15sqm in size can be built without the need to submit a planning application (although they are subject to a number of criteria other than just a 15sqm size threshold). Such an extension would take the new dwelling's footprint to 257.1sqm, or some 59% greater than Hillview. It is considered that the design of the new porch/utiiity room/boiler room is in keeping with the design of the new dwelling and not in itself objectionable. As such, that now being proposed is perhaps 'the lesser of two evils' inasmuch as it is of a smaller size than could be built under permitted development rights. It is recommended that permitted development rights in respect of Article 14 of the PDO be removed by planning condition should the application be approved. 6.4 With those issues addressed it remains necessary to consider the design of the proposed replacement dwelling. In that respect it can be seen that the proposed dwelling is essentially traditional in form and design. As such, it is considered that the proposed design satisfactorily accords with policies 2-7 of Planning Circular 3/91. This, final, element of Housing Policy 14 is therefore also satisfied. 6.5 Flooding was a key issue in the determination of the previous approval. A Flood Risk Assessment (FRA) was submitted as part of the application, which recommended that the finished floor level (FFL) of the new dwelling be 28.3m above the local datum point. This was duly shown on the approved plans and, as such, no such condition was required on this matter. No other recommendations in respect of flood mitigation measures were considered required by the authors of the FRA; the Water &. Sewerage Authority (as it then was) agreed with this conclusion. The current application also shows the proposed dwelling's FFL as being 28.3m above the local datum point and, as such, no objection is raised on this point and no condition to require the dwelling be of such a FFL upon completion is considered necessary. 6.6 As for other material considerations the proposed dwelling is positioned sufficiently distant from existing surrounding properties so as not to unduly affect private amenity. Access arrangements for the proposed development, which are not changed from the approved proposal of 13/00289 and are not opposed by Highway Services, are concluded to be acceptable. 6.7 7.0 RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the planning application be approved subject to the removal of permitted development rights granted under Article 14 of the Town and Country Planning (Permitted Development) Order 2012. 7.1 21 April 2014 14/00140/B Page 5 of 7
==== PAGE 6 ====
8.0 PARTY STATUS Highway Services is, by virtue of the Town and Country Pianning (Development Procedure) Order 2013, Articie 6(4)(d), considered "interested persons" and as such shouid be afforded interested person status. 8.1 The iocai authority, Lezayre Parish Commissioners, is, by virtue of the Town and Country Pianning (Deveiopment Procedure) (No 2) Order 2013, Articie 6(4)(e), considered an "Interested Persons" and as such should be afforded Interested Person Status. 8.2 Recommendation Recommended Decision: Permitted Date of Recommendation: 21.04.2014 Conditions and Notes for Approval / Reasons and Notes for Refusal C : Conditions for approval N : Notes attached to conditions R : Reasons for refusal O : Notes attached to refusals Cl. The deveiopment hereby approved shaii be begun before the expiration of four years from the date of this decision notice. To compiy with articie 14 of the Town and Country Pianning (Deveiopment Reason: Procedure) (No2) Order 2013 and to avoid the accumuiation of unimpiemented pianning approvais. C2. Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Pianning (Permitted Deveiopment) Order 2012 (or any Order revoking and/or re-enacting that Order with or without modification) no extension, eniargement or other aiteration of the dweiiing(s) hereby approved, other than that expressiy authorised by this approvai, shaii be carried out, without the prior written approvai of the Pianning Authority. Reason: To controi deveiopment in the interests of the amenities of the surrounding area. 14/00140/B Page 6 of 7 21 April 2014
==== PAGE 7 ====
This approval relates to the following plans, date-stamped as having been received 4th February 2014: Y/331/1 (C) and Y/331/2. 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 : Committee Meeting Date : Signed :... Presenting Officer Further to the decision of the Committee an additional report/condition reason is requiredi signing ofncer to delete as appropriate 21 April 2014 14/00140/B Page 7 of 7
Copyright in submitted documents remains with their authors. Request removal
