230437

==== PAGE 1 ====

9 December 2014 14/01225/B Page 1 of 5 PLANNING OFFICER REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Application No. : 14/01225/B Applicant : Mr David Curry Proposal : Erection of a two storey extension and creation of an additional window to dwelling Site Address : Upper Scard Ballakillowey Road Colby Isle Of Man IM9 4BP

Case Officer : Miss Melissa McKnight Photo Taken :

Site Visit : 13.11.2014 Expected Decision Level :

Officer Delegation

Officer’s Report

1.0 THE APPLICATION SITE

1.1 The application site is the curtilage of Upper Scard, a two storey traditional Manx dwelling located to the east of the A36, Ballakillowey, Rushen.

1.2 The site is accessed via a narrow track that travels east from the A36 and serves three other dwellings; Tremon, Lamode and Lower Scard. Located 100+ metres south of the site is a public footpath and roughly 120+ metres south east of the site is a reservoir.

1.3 Within the curtilage of the dwelling, north of the application building, is a barn that has been converted into tourist accommodation with one unit having had recent planning approval for change of use to a dwelling.

2.0 THE PROPOSAL

2.1 This planning application seeks approval for the demolition of the existing single storey extension on the front elevation and erection of a new two storey extension providing a lounge at ground floor and en-suite bedroom at first floor.

2.2 The proposed new extension would project 6 metres from the front elevation, width of 6.1 metres and ridge height of 8.1 metres. To the west of the extension would be a small patio area finished with concrete slabs. The extension would be approximately 50.03% increase in floor area. The extension would be finished in materials to match the main dwelling.

2.3 The final element of the proposal is the installation of a new window on the first floor of the eastern elevation that would serve a bedroom.

3.0 PLANNING HISTORY

3.1 The application site has been the subject of five previous planning applications, all of which were granted planning approval and have been listed below:

==== PAGE 2 ====

9 December 2014 14/01225/B Page 2 of 5 PA 14/00483/B: Change of use of one tourist unit to residential dwelling (retrospective).

PA 10/01560/B: Erection of a rear extension to dwelling house.

PA 06/02102/B: Installation of patio doors and creation of external landing and steps.

PA 04/02199/B: Installation of 15K wind turbine.

PA 04/01099/B: Conversion of redundant barn into three tourist units

4.0 PLANNING POLICY

4.1 In terms of local plan policy, the application site lies within a wider area of open countryside identified on The Area Plan for the South 2013 and within an area identified as Uplands. The site lies adjacent to an area of land owned by the Manx National Trust which is open to ramblage.

4.2 In terms of strategic plan policy, the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2007 contains three policies that are considered specifically material to the assessment of this current planning application:

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: a) essential housing for agricultural workers who have to live close to their place of work (Housing Policies 7, 8, 9 and 10) b) conversion of redundant rural buildings which are of architectural, historical, or social value and interest (Housing Policy 11) c) previously developed land which contains a significant amount of buildings where the continued use is redundant; where redevelopment would reduce the impact of the current situation on the landscape or the wider environmental and where the development proposed would result in improvements to the landscape or wider environment d) the replacement of existing rural dwellings (Housing Policies 12, 13 and 14) e) location-dependant development in connection with the working of minerals or the provision of necessary services; f) building and engineering operations which are essential for the conduct of agriculture 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."

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)."

5.0 REPRESENTATIONS

==== PAGE 3 ====

9 December 2014 14/01225/B Page 3 of 5

5.1 Rushen Parish Commissioners have no objection to the current planning application (20/11/2014).

5.2 The Department of Infrastructure Highway Services do not oppose the current planning application (14/11/2014).

6.0 ASSESSMENT

6.1 The fundamental issues to consider in the assessment of the application are the principle of the extension, the impact upon the character and appearance of the property, the percentage increase in terms of floor area and the impact upon the character and appearance of the area in general.

6.2 When visiting the site and area it was evident that the site and dwellinghouse is not especially apparent when travelling along the A36, although distant aspects of the dwelling are attainable. Although the views would be distant, and most probable to those that would be walking within the area, merely arguing that development is not wholly visible does not give an automatic justification for the relaxation of policies relating to new development. From the public footpath to the south of the site and from the reservoir, the proposed extension would be visible.

6.3 Consequently, it is important to consider that any development is in keeping and appropriate for the traditional property. It should be noted that Housing Policy 15 relates to extensions and/or alterations to traditional properties whether they be apparent from public view or not.

6.4 Housing Policy 15 states that extensions will normally only be approved where these respect the proportion, form and appearance of the existing property. The existing dwelling is an attractive traditional dwelling which benefits from its traditional proportions and balanced appearance; albeit there have been some additions that have interrupted the regular fenestration but not enough to consider the dwelling to be of non-traditional form.

6.5 The proposed extension would be inappropriate in terms of its size, scale, massing and proportions. Planning Circular 3/91 provides a guide to the design of residential development in the countryside. The proposed development has not followed the principles set out in this design guide and as a result fails to respect the existing dwelling.

6.6 Whilst the proposed development would result in the removal of the existing sun room which is not traditional or particularly attractive, it would propose an extension which would be significantly larger, more intrusive and would not respect the existing property in terms of proportion, form and design.

6.7 Housing Policy 15 goes on to state that only exceptionally will permission be granted where extensions measure more than 50%. As set out under the proposal the extension would result in a 50.03% increase in floor area; the 0.03% is considered unobjectionable. Nonetheless, the proposed extension is judged to be completely out of keeping with the existing building and would significantly increase the size and scale of the building and would dramatically alter the style and character of the dwelling.

6.8 The scale, mass and siting of the proposed extension would detract from the existing dwelling and on the landscape rather than complement or maintain the existing visual impact or maintain the character of the existing dwelling. What is proposed is an extension that is not deemed appropriate to the traditional dwelling.

7.0 RECOMMENDATION

==== PAGE 4 ====

9 December 2014 14/01225/B Page 4 of 5

7.1 For the reasons set out above the application is considered to be unacceptable and fails to comply with the provisions set out in General Policy 3, Environment Policy 1 and Housing Policy 15 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2007 and as such is recommended for refusal.

8.0 PARTY STATUS

8.1 In line with Article 6(4) of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure)(No2) Order 2013, the following Persons are considered to have sufficient interest in the subject matter of the application to take part in any subsequent proceedings relating to the application: the applicant or, if there is one, the applicant's agent; the owner and occupier of the land the subject of the application; Highway Services, and the Local Authority, German Commissioners in whose district the land the subject of the application sits.

Recommendation

Recommended Decision:

Refused

Date of Recommendation:

09.12.2014

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

R 1. Due to the size, design and massing of the extension the proposal would not respect the proportion, form and appearance of the existing property and would be contrary to Housing Policy 15 of The Isle of Man Strategic Plan.

--

I confirm that this decision accords with the appropriate Government Circular delegating functions to Director of Planning and Building Control /Head of Development Management/ Senior Planning Officer.

Decision Made : Refused

Date : ...9/12/14...

Determining officer (delete as appropriate)

==== PAGE 5 ====

9 December 2014 14/01225/B Page 5 of 5

Signed :...C Balmer

Chris Balmer

Senior Planning Officer

Signed :... Sarah Corlett

Senior Planning Officer

Signed :... Michael Gallagher

Director of Planning and Building Control

Signed :... Jennifer Chance

Head of Development Management