Loading document...
==== PAGE 1 ====
15/00755/B
Page 1 of 5
PLANNING OFFICER REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Application No. : 15/00755/B Applicant : Mark & Frances Guthrie Proposal : Erection of a two storey extension to existing dwelling and erection of a detached garage Site Address : Rose Hill Lodge Richmond Hill Douglas Isle Of Man IM4 1JG
Case Officer : Miss Melissa McKnight Photo Taken : 20.08.2015 Site Visit : 20.08.2015 Expected Decision Level : Officer Delegation
Officer’s Report
1.0 THE APPLICATION SITE
1.1 The application site is the residential curtilage of Rose Hill Lodge, a two storey traditional Manx dwelling located on the southern side of Richmond Hill, Douglas.
1.2 The application dwelling follows a regular fenestration and maintains a central porch entrance. The dwelling has five upper front windows which can often symbolise an extended version of a vernacular three upper front window dwelling. The dwelling has two single storey extensions; one to the southern elevation and one to the western elevation. These extensions remain subordinate to the main dwelling.
1.3 Rose Hill Lodge sits in a large plot equating to just less than 1 acre. The site is accessed via a narrow track that runs south off Richmond Hill and also serves Rose Hill Farm.
2.0 THE PROPOSAL
2.1 The current planning application seeks approval for the erection of a two storey extension to the south western elevation and erection of a single storey garage.
2.2 The proposed extension would extend 6.2 metres and have a depth of 7.1 metres to match the main dwelling. The extension would have a ridge height of just less than 7.6 metres that would also match the main dwelling house. The extension would provide a family room to the ground floor and master bedroom to the first floor. The master bedroom would be accessed only from the family room. There would be no first floor access from the first floor.
2.3 The garage would be located 5 metres south east of the main dwelling and would measure 6.7 x 6.7 metres with a height of 5.3 metres.
2.4 The garage and extension would be finished in materials to match the main dwellinghouse.
3.0 PLANNING HISTORY
3.1 Previously planning permission was granted in 2005 under PA 05/00694/B for the erection of a detached double garage with store over. This previously proposed garage measured 6.3 x 6.6 x
==== PAGE 2 ====
15/00755/B
Page 2 of 5
5.6 metres. This approval was subject to a number of conditions, one of the conditions stated that the building must only be used as a garage and for domestic storage purposes in association with the dwelling on the site. Prior to this, planning approval was granted in 2006 under PA 06/01776/C for the change of use from residential to self-catering accommodation. Previous to this, planning approval was granted in 2002 under PA 02/01330/B for the erection of a replacement dwelling.
4.0 PLANNING POLICY
4.1 The application site lies within an area zoned as an Area of High Landscape or Coastal Value and Scenic Significance under the Isle of Man 1982 Development Plan.
4.2 In terms of strategic plan, the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2007 contains four policies that are considered materially relevant 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."
Environment Policy 2 which states: "The present system of landscape classification of Areas of High Landscape of 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 difference 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." 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)."
==== PAGE 3 ====
15/00755/B
Page 3 of 5
5.0 REPRESENTATIONS
5.1 Braddan Parish Commissioners have no objection to the current planning application (22/07/2015).
5.2 The Department of Infrastructure Highway Services do not oppose the current planning application (30/07/2015).
6.0 ASSESSMENT
6.1 It is considered that the fundamental issues to consider in the assessment of this current planning application is the impact of the extension with regards to the existing dwelling and surrounding area and the visual impact and use of the garage.
6.2 When visiting the site and travelling along Richmond Hill, the dwellinghouse is not especially apparent, although partial aspects of the dwelling are attainable when travelling in an easterly direction. The dwelling is visible in its entirety from the access track to the west of the site that also serves Rose Hill Farm. Although the views are partial from Richmond Hill, mostly 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.
6.3 Consequently, it is important 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 Planning Circular 3/91 provides a guide to the design of residential development in the countryside and gives guidance on the extension of traditional properties. Planning Circular 3/91 implies that the extension of traditional properties are traditionally done by lengthening or shortening the length of the block within the constraints of achieving regular fenestration with a central entrance, or by rear extensions.
6.6 The extension proposed reflects characteristics of the original dwelling, particularly by lining through window cill and head heights and window proportions to match the existing windows of Rose Hill Lodge. If the extension was any longer then it may be considered to overpower and detract from the existing character of the dwelling.
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 44% increase in floor area and would therefore comply with the second part of Housing Policy 15.
6.8 The extension would not appear domineering over the existing dwelling and would represent an extension to a traditional dwelling whilst retaining the existing character of the main dwelling. The extension would partially be visible from Richmond Hill as one travelled towards Douglas, but would not be visible in its entirety due to the existing vegetation Richmond Hill and the topography of the landscape.
6.9 The internal layout of the extension runs contrary to basic flow and function of a building. The upstairs master bedroom can only be accessed via a spiral staircase from the proposed family room. The interior layout of a building does form part of a planning application, although later
==== PAGE 4 ====
15/00755/B
Page 4 of 5
amendments to a layout generally don't need approval, unless restricted by condition, this is usually because the internal layout does not raise many planning issues of importance. As the internal layout would not result in adverse impact outside of the site, its layout is not seen as a reason for refusal.
6.10 Turning to the impact of the garage, the garage would be sited 5 metres from the main dwellinghouse and would have a height of 5.3 metres with the ridge height of the garage 2.3 metres lower than the ridge height of the main house.
6.11 As previously mentioned, the application site is located within an area of High Landscape or Coastal Value and Scenic Significance not zoned for development. This zoning means that the site is not designated for any development and the proposed development is therefore constrained by General Policy 3, Environment Policy 1 and Environment Policy 2 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2007.
6.12 There are some exceptions to the presumption against development in the countryside; these are listed under General Policy 3. The proposed development would not fall under any of these exceptions. Environment Policy 1 protects the countryside for its own sake against developments which would have an adverse effect upon it with Environment Policy 2 setting out the provisions to protect the landscape ensuring that development should not harm the character and quality of the landscape with the location for development being essential.
6.13 Whilst there are no policies in the Strategic Plan which relate specifically to the erection of garages, it is reasonable that people may wish to have a garage within the curtilage of their property and in fact there is provision within the Town and Country Planning (Permitted Development) Order 2012 for such development without planning approval. The impact on the countryside is the main issue and in assessing this it is relevant to consider the size and scale and siting of the proposal.
6.14 The garage would be subordinate to the main dwelling and be complementary to the existing property. The finish, form and design of the detached garage is not considered to detract from the overall site. As with the dwelling, the garage would not be visible from a main public thoroughfare. If views are achievable, the building would be read as a detached garage which would not be uncommon for a large house in the countryside. On assessment, the garage proposed under this scheme is considered to be an acceptable form of development.
7.0 RECOMMENDATION
7.1 For the reasons set out above it is recommended that the planning application be approved.
8.0 PARTY STATUS
8.1 By virtue of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) (No 2) Order 2013, 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 considered material, in this case, Department of Infrastructure Highway Services; (e) The local authority in whose district the land the subject of the application is situated.
With effect from 1 June 2015, the Transfer of Planning & Building Control Functions Order 2015 amends the Town and Country Planning Act 1999 to give effect to the meaning of the word
==== PAGE 5 ====
15/00755/B
Page 5 of 5
'Department' to be the Department of Environment, Food and Agriculture unless otherwise directed by that Order.
Recommendation
Recommended Decision:
Permitted Date of Recommendation:
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.
This approval relates to Drawing Number 15/2457/02 date stamped as received 8th July 2015 and 15/2457/01-A and 15/2457/03 A date stamped as received 13th October 2015.
I can confirm that this decision has been made by the Head of Development Management in accordance with the authority afforded to that Officer by the appropriate DEFA Delegation.
Decision Made : Permitted Date : 09.12.2015 Determining officer
Signed : J CHANCE
Jennifer Chance
Head of Development Management
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