Loading document...
6 Proposed is the demolition of the dwelling and its redevelopment into a 2-storey 3-/ 4- bedroom house, the fourth denoted bedroom being only in size. The footprint of the proposal is slightly bigger than the existing and is generally sited further east on the plot so that the distance to Avondale dwelling to the west is increased from 3.2 m to 4.5 m . The footprint of the proposed dwelling also pays cognisance to the fact that the plot itself doglegs southwards at the front (Photograph 10). The westernmost 4.6 m of the total 10.8 m main frontage is 0.9 m in front of the main and current building line. To the east is a single storey sunroom set back 0.3 m from the main elevation. Taking cognisance of the weather conditions experienced at the property and the location of the property's vehicle access and parking the proposal has a more traditional styled porch entrance at its rear with a side door on the east side. Both the sun room on its east side and the dining area on its south side have "French windows" offering optional access when appropriate. Most of the windows comprise multipane casement windows which although having vertical divisions are overall wider than they are tall. This reflects the existing windows in the property (Photograph3). The roof is to be of Marley Modern tiles reflecting the non-slate roof that exists at present. The forward and rear projections of the dwelling will have limestone Stoneer cladding while the rest of the dwelling would be white smooth render in finish.
7 The design follows on from previous refusals on the site. 8 PA12/001684/B (Appendix B) for two 3-storey 3-bedroom dormer semi-detached dwellings both with a single built-in garage had a ridge height of 10 m , eaves height of 6.55 m and would be 5.7 m taller than the existing dwelling. While semi-detached the more eastern dwelling was situated further southwards on the plot than the western dwelling. The proposal required a further single parking space for both dwellings to the rear and separate access to either property. This in turn necessitated total demolition of part of the garden wall on the Mount Gawne road side.
9 This application was refused on grounds relating to design in a prominent position, adverse impact on the street scene and not having an acceptable level of external amenity space - see para 2.2 of current Case Officer's report. The refusal was not taken to appeal.
10 PA13/00796/B (Appendix C) for two 2-storey, 2-bedroom apartments with external parking had a footprint of the main part of the building that at the front was generally handed from the current proposal albeit that part that projected southwards was wider east to west than that currently proposed. It also incorporated an "extension" on the eastern side; this was a 2 - storey solid wall without windows on its gable rather than the single storey sun room build of the current proposal. The height of the proposal being only 2 storey was lower than that of PA 12/001684/B. Its front building line was behind the current dwelling but it extended beyond it on west, north and east sides. Four external parking spaces would each have direct access onto Mount Gawne Road so that a larger amount of wall alongside that road would need to be totally demolished.
11 This application was refused on grounds relating to increased number of dwelling units in the countryside, design grounds in a prominent position, being detrimental to the street scene, and highway safety on Mount Gawne Road. It was challenged unsuccessfully at appeal - see para 2.3 of Case Officer's report.
12 In total for over three of the six years that the property has not been used, the owners and applicant have been actively involved in trying to get planning consent for a replacement. Contrary to the sentiments expressed by the Planning Committee at their meeting on 5th October 2015 (Appendix D) the property has not been intentionally allowed to become derelict.
13 When most houses were built in the locality it was designated "existing residential" in the 1982 Isle of Man Development Plan. Subsequently such designation was removed and the area left with no specific landuse designation that recognised that much development existed in it. No specific reason for the change has been found.
14 Between the two applications above the architect sought advice from the Planning Officer on some draft drawings. The reply received in April 2013 (Appendix E) included the following "There was no objection to having a two storey dwelling on the site on the same or very similar footprint to the existing." and "Due to the designation Housing Policy 14 will need consideration, how much weight to attach to it is a matter of discussion, especially the design aspect (don't consider a traditional Manx farmhouse would be a appropriate on this site which the policy seeks)."
"A argument to this view is that the site in no within the open countryside, but within an area of built development. However, this would be an argument you would have to expand on further, if a further application is made."
15 Notwithstanding the fact that these replies were given in response to a draft proposal which is presumed to have shown two apartments, it is felt the statements should still be considered as relevant to the current application.
16 The site is located at the junction of Shore Road and Mount Gawne Road. Shore Road is dominated at its eastern end by the Shore Hotel a significantly sized building. From there westwards development is of a ribbon nature comprising detached buildings, some of which comprise apartments, either on the roadside which is flat or set back slightly uphill from the road. Towards the junction with Mount Gawne Road development is closer together. The junction itself is only 6.5 m wide and is not very noticeable from the east let alone from the west. As suggested by the name, Mount Gawne Road rises up northwards. It too has ribbon development along its east side and then following a gap its west side (aerial photograph Photographs 19, 30-33).
17 The context of Kilravock's location is very similar to that provided by an Officer's report on the redevelopment of Clybane on the Mount Gawne Road (Appendix paras 1.3, 1.4 and 3.2, Photographs 12,30) "The context of the site is characterised by a significant variety of sizes, shapes and styles of dwelling.----" and "the context of the site has changed in recent years with the redevelopment of Seascape and is likely to continue to change in the future with approval having been granted to the redevelopment of the Motorlands Garage and offices and the dwelling alongside ---."
Re Clybane ie "----is not traditional in the sense of a vernacular cottage. Very few, if any of the existing dwellings in this area are of this type."
18 Within the properties comprising this locality only Mount Gawne House itself which is of "mansion" house size in Manx terms and the Shore Hotel may remotely be considered traditional. All other properties are comparatively recent.
19 Adjacent to Kilravock is the much larger dwelling of Avondale built after 1994 (PA 92/00582/B) which is gable end on to the road (photographs, 10, 11 15). To the northwest are the remains of Mountlands garage (Photographs 17, 22, 29), and set back and higher in the landscape are two very large houses of Seascape and Mount Gawne (aerial photograph 28). The Motorlands garage site and adjacent house are being redeveloped to provide three large houses. Details of the initial approval in principle,PA 12/00298/A (Appendix G), and two alternative schemes approved for this site both of which provide substantial linear development, PA13/00485/REM (Appendix H) and PA 15/00739/B (Appendix I) are given. Together with street views attached they illustrate how much that site dominates over both Avondale and Kilravock (Appendix J).
20 Within this setting the design of the proposed house is such that, viewed from the east is the initial single storey sunroom 4 m high which will be partially screened by the retention of the boundary wall and some planting. This will then be backed by the 2 - storey east elevation of the house. This elevation will not be blank; it will have windows at ground floor level. It does not have windows at upper floor level so that it is not perceived as overlooking or intruding or otherwise being inhibiting on the nearest properties on the opposite side of the road or users of the roads themselves. This makes this elevation different from that proposed in PA 13/00679/B. The nearest part to the apex of the site as referred to in that Inspector's report (Para 6.10 of planning officer's report) is lower than in this former application. Viewed from the north the main 2-storey elevation will mostly be further from the Mount Gawne Road frontage and its central portion will be much lower than that of the previous application. There will not be blank elevations on the east and north sides nearest to Mount Gawne Road. Having projections to the South and the North, particularly ones that will be finished in different materials from the gable, will provide interest and variety to the street scene. Presently at upper level the eastern facing windows (one of them of obscured glass) of Avondale which is rendered and painted white are seen at this level and do not contribute greatly to the street scene (Photograph 29).
21 To the north east of Kilravock at the northern end of existing development on Mount Gawne Road, Clybane at present a single storey dwelling with timber boarded finish has also been given permission for redevelopment into a two storey property. This development will spread over into the adjoining "field" and be in effect the first development seen on the approach southwards along Mount Gawne Road. At 77 sqm the existing property was described by the Planning Officer as "disproportionately modest in size" and "of poor form" (see photographs); despite an increase in floorspace of over 200\% ( calculated from statements in officer's report), with only of the proposed footprint overlapping the existing and an increase of curtilage into a field the application was recommended for approval and eventually approved following appeal on 19th March 2015; details are given in Appendix F.
22 By comparison at 77.2 sqm , with no traditional shape, design or features (compared to those described in Circular 3/91) and clear condition problems (even if only based on external evidence) Kilravock has been described as "not of poor form". It is of "poor form". In accordance with Strategic Plan Housing Policy 14 the proposal represents an overlap of the existing dwelling and of the proposal is over the footprint of the existing. The current appeal application complies far more with Housing Policy 14 than the proposal at Clybane yet has been refused. With regard to the rest of Housing Policy 14 the existing building does not have any slate or stone in it so it cannot reuse these materials. It would be totally impracticable to reuse or replicate the existing materials used in the construction of the current dwelling. Instead in a modern response to Housing Policy 14 it seeks to mix the use of painted rendered finishes which replicate those in the current dwelling with some use of artificial stone.
23 At the foot of Mount Gawne Road the proposal will appear as another modern property within a group dominated by modern properties. Again the mix of finishes around the porch and sunroom will provide interest to the street scene in effect providing a front view rather than a rear elevation to other properties on Mount Gawne Road.
24 Any scheme for the redevelopment of the Kilravock site is materially affected by the need to comply with parking and vehicle access standards. The impact of the latter is reduced by keeping them in the same place as they currently are and separate from the dwelling. If parking is incorporated into the dwelling it has an inevitable impact on the viable design, size and layout of a dwelling. It is noticeable that the change in approved designs at Motorlands (Appendices H and I) above involves the removal of ground level internal parking or circulation space with living and kitchen accommodation upstairs to a more conventional design of attached ground floor garaging with downstairs living and kitchen space; this suggests that the former is not viable.
25 Notwithstanding the fact that the Planning Officer has previously indicated that a traditional farmhouse design would not be appropriate (Appendix E), it is inappropriate to apply Housing Policy 14 strictly or give it so much weight in a setting which is dominated by non-traditional properties and semi-urban in character. With added on, it could also be difficult to design a usable single storey dwelling to fit the site and at the same time comply with car parking standards, vehicle access standards and "notional" amenity standards.
26 In the current statutory Area Plan for the South the relevant landscape designation is one of incised inland slopes (D15). For Port Erin and Port St. Mary references to maintaining the character quality and distinctiveness of the local built vernacular are out of place in an area that has no traditional vernacular. The language of the locality is modern. Identified Key Views will not be impacted on. For Rushen it is stated that the implications of the Landscape Character Assessment include (Para 3.17 iii) "Avoid any new areas of ribbon development along the southern coastline at Bay ny Carrickey. "
27 What is proposed is replacement / redevelopment not new ribbon development. Along a road which approaches the boundaries of an urban area itself with several non-traditional properties (Photograph 24) it should be considered acceptable.
28 As indicated above with its extensions at both front and rear, its horizontal windows and non-traditional construction, Kilravock is not of traditional proportion or form. Circular 3/91 (Proportion and Form Page 4) has a traditional 2-storey building as having a footprint of 11.0 m by 5.5 m and a single storey building having a similar 5.5 m depth but a much more variable length. On plan form (Drawing 1571-21) the existing house reads as either with projections at the front of 8.2 m by 1.6 m and at the rear 2.9 m by 1.5 m or as 8.2 m by 7.2 m with a recessed side extension . The elevations are also non-symmetrical. The existing dwelling does not match any design in Circular 3/91.
29 While most dwellings have only one or perhaps two elevations readily visible from public roads, Kilravock in essence has three elevations which are visible to one degree or another from public roads. With today's building standards on room size and height, and even if a increase is not made, it would not be possible to provide a dwelling that does not exceed the existing in mass and bulk or visual impact.
30 Being at the junction of two roads it is not inappropriate for the proposal to be more upstanding and establish a presence more than the current dwelling. The proposed design has sought to provide interest and variety to all three elevations, north, south and east. In so doing it should be noted that there are no representations let alone objections from adjoining residents with regard to design or amenity.
31 With regard to detailed elements of design the design of the windows and projections reflects elements that are present in Avondale, windows have a horizontal emphasis in many of the properties in area, tiles rather than slates predominate on the roofs of nearby dwellings, external flue stacks are common and most properties have southward facing balconies a reflection of their sea-side location (Photographs 11, 15, 20, 21, 25).
PA 08/01197/B Access onto existing flat roof to create balcony Seahaven, Mount Gawne, Road Port St. Mary; PA 08/00027/B Erection of a block of four apartments (amendment to development approved under PA 05/92429B, comprising the addition of two balconies on rear elevation) Newhaven Shore Road Bay Ny Carrickey Port St. Mary PA 15/00026/B Construction of detached garage block and single garage Barrule Apartments Shore Road Bay Ny Carrickey Port St. Mary
All represent developments in the locality approved under the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2007 and not representing compliance with Strategic Plan policy in terms of traditional design.
32 In terms of plot ratio, ie area covered by buildings compared to the area of the whole site, the proposal including the retention of the existing garage covers of the plot; the dwelling on its own is . By comparison the existing is (including garage), PA 12/01684/B a pair of semi-detached with internal parking was and PA 13/00796/B two apartments with external parking was . At just around one third of the plot there should be no suggestion that the proposal represents over development of the site. Overall its scale and mass are not dissimilar to adjacent dwellings and its design elements reflect those that exist in the current dwelling and are utilised in other nearby dwellings.
33 The proposal results in the dwelling having amenity space on its western side, 2 triangular areas averaging 2.6 m wide and 3.6 deep on its eastern side, 2 strips a minimum of 1.6 m deep and 4 m wide on its northern side and a frontage area 19.6 m long and varying between 1.5 and 2.5 m deep. In total these cover of the site. Whatever space is available around a dwelling there is no requirement for garden or amenity areas to have planting or grassed areas. Areas could be paved. Coupled with the hardstanding at the rear of the house, which is not all required for parking and turning cars all of the time, the proposal allows space for sitting out, playing out and drying out. With some space all around the proposal, different parts will be able to get the sun at different times of the day. It is considered that this should be considered adequate amenity space for the property.
34 The same non-existent amenity standards applied when permission was given for Avondale in 1992. The latter now has hardstanding throughout its rear yard which is again open to public view following approval for its current garage in 2005, PA 05/92317/B (Photograph 15). This results in it having only a frontage amenity area of strip on its eastern and northern sides and a 1.3 m strip on its western side totalling of the site.
35 With open shore and beach stretching for half a mile in front of the proposal it is not lacking in access to amenity space. In Castletown PA 14/00150/B resulted in permission for conversion and extension of a property into 4 apartments, 2 of which have 5 bedrooms, 2 with 2 bedrooms where no amenity space was available at the rear of the property and very little to the front; the beach being on the opposite side of the road is deemed a sufficient alternative (Appendix K). While policy designation for Shore Road has resulted in the locality being designated countryside, the fact that Kilravock is an existing site surrounded on three sides by development presenting more of an urban situation should not be discounted from the equation. The proposal does not justify having notional open space standards applied to it particularly when so much open space in the form of beach is available opposite. Reason 2 for the refusal of the application is not justified.
Copyright in submitted documents remains with their authors. Request removal
View as Markdown