Loading document...
==== PAGE 1 ====
21/00238/B Page 1 of 5
PLANNING OFFICER REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Application No. : 21/00238/B Applicant : Mr David Salkeld Proposal : Variation of condition 1 of PA 17/00214/B, Erection of a replacement dwelling, to increase the period of permission by two years Site Address : Perk Cottage Knock Froy Road Santon Isle Of Man IM4 1JD
Principal Planner: Miss S E Corlett Photo Taken :
Site Visit :
Expected Decision Level : Planning Committee
Recommendation
Recommended Decision:
Permitted Date of Recommendation: 06.04.2021 __
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 two years from the date of this decision notice.
Reason: To respond to the application as applied for and to avoid the accumulation of unimplemented planning approvals.
C 2. All planting, seeding or turfing comprised in the approved details of landscaping must be carried out in the first planting and seeding seasons following the completion of the construction of the proposed dwelling. Any trees or plants which within a period of five years from the completion of the development die, are removed, or become seriously damaged or diseased must be replaced in the next planting season with others of a similar size and species.
REASON: the landscaping of the site is an integral part of the scheme and must be implemented as approved.
This application has been recommended for approval for the following reason. The development is considered to accord with the Area Plan for the East and Housing Policy 14 of the Strategic Plan.
Plans/Drawings/Information; This decision relates to drawings 1329/21, 1329/20 Revision 1 and the location plan all received on 22nd February, 2021. __
Interested Person Status - Additional Persons
==== PAGE 2 ====
21/00238/B Page 2 of 5
DOI Floodrisk should be afforded IPS as they have made a representation on material issues. __
Officer’s Report
THIS APPLICATION IS REFERRED TO THE PLANNING COMMITTEE AS THE DEVELOPMENT COULD BE CONSIDERED TO BE CONTRARY TO THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN BUT IS RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL
THE SITE 1.1 The site is the curtilage of an existing single storey dwelling situated on the northern side of Knock Froy Road which leads from the A5 Castletown Road past Knock Froy motocross track to Knock Froy Farm. The area has a number of dwellings within it, the most noticeable being Cronk Froy and High Bank both of which are new dwellings replacing earlier, smaller ones. Green Hedges is a modern bungalow which sits across the lane from the application property.
1.2 Knock Froy Lane is narrow and largely single vehicle width.
1.3 Perk Cottage, the application property is visible from the A5 as one proceeds uphill from The Forge, across the field where the gable and part of the front of the property is visible.
THE PROPOSAL 2.1 Proposed is the variation of the condition attached to 17/00214/B for the erection of a replacement dwelling to allow a further two years to commence the approved development. The applicant advises on the form that they have been unable to commence work within the required period due to ongoing work and unforeseen issues to provide alternative accommodation prior to the demolition of the existing dwelling and not helped by COVID.
2.2 The application, 17/00214/B is due to expire on 08.05.21. That proposed the replacement of the existing dwelling with a new, two storey residence. This dwelling is identical to that approved under 17/00214/B and similar to an earlier refused application (16/00886/B) other than for the fact that:
the front and rear elevations are 1m longer (now just under 13m) the rear extension projects out 2m less (now 4m) the dwelling is partially on the footprint of the existing the extension of the residential curtilage is reduced by 7m in depth the porch has been reduced in depth and the proposed property moved correspondingly further forward on the site planting is proposed at the northern boundary of silver birch, mountain ash and alder with fuchsia in between.
2.3 The existing dwelling was described in the most recent application modest and with a floor area of 92 sq m. The proposed dwelling is 2m higher and has a floor area of 262 sq m, an increase of 184%. It is the same design and general layout as was previously proposed but 32 sq m smaller.
2.4 The new curtilage will not be bounded by any landscaping although there is some now proposed to the north and there will be around 5.5m between the rear of the property and the rear boundary (an increase of 2.5m from the initial proposal), 5.7m between the side of the house and the side boundary to the north. The new house is set back slightly (3.3m) from the position of the existing cottage in order to provide manoeuvring space for the vehicles entering and leaving the site. The existing single garage is to be retained to the south of the new house.
==== PAGE 3 ====
21/00238/B Page 3 of 5
2.5 The applicant provided supporting information, explaining how the previous application would have allowed the applicant to remain in the existing cottage whilst the new house was being built, and comments that any views of the property are from "a considerable distance back" and on a fast stretch of road and the substantial new dwellings, High Bank and Cronk Froy are visible behind. He also draws attention to the two new sizeable dwellings built on the site of the Lancashire Hotel and at Bay View on the Old Castletown Road all of which are more visible than Perk Cottage or its replacement.
PLANNING POLICY 3.1 The site lies within an area designated on The Isle of Man Planning Scheme (Development Plan) Order 1982 as not for any particular purpose and of High Landscape Value and Scenic Significance. Since the determination of the previous application the Area Plan for the East has been adopted and designates the site as not for a particular purpose and also within a Landscape Character Area (a classification system which replaced the Areas of High Landscape or Coastal Value and Scenic Significance in the East) of Incised Inland Slopes. As such, there is a presumption against development other than where it would accord with other Strategic Plan policies, including Housing Policy 14 which provides guidance on the erection of replacement dwellings:
Housing Policy 14 states: "Where a replacement dwelling is permitted, it must not be 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 generally, 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 which involves the replacement of an existing dwelling of poor form with one of more traditional character, or where, by its design and or siting, there would be less visual impact."
3.2 The Area Plan for the East Landscape Character Appraisal provides the following advice for the area in which the application site sits:
Landscape Strategy Conserve and enhance: a) the character, quality and distinctiveness of the area, with its wooded valley bottoms and wooded horizons; b) its scattered settlement pattern; c) its Victorian garden and the railway.
Key Views Open and expansive views from the higher areas along the rugged coast in the east and inland towards the upland areas over Braaid. Incinerator chimney forms a notable landmark in the immediate area. Glimpsed views framed by vegetation in the valley bottoms and along the main roads where they follow the wooded valley bottoms. Views in the northern part of the area up to the Transmitting Masts on top of Douglas Head hill top. Views from Isle of Man Steam Railway.
==== PAGE 4 ====
21/00238/B Page 4 of 5
Landscape Proposal 7 (Santon) In cases where new development is proposed, applications must demonstrate that it can be suitably integrated into the surrounding landscape setting through reasonable mitigation measures and considering siting, colours, materials, finishes and the general scale.
PLANNING HISTORY 4.1 Prior to the approval of 17/00214/B the most recent application on the site, 16/00886/B proposed a similar house but moved further back on the site so that it was not at all on the footprint of the existing and which resulted in an extension of the curtilage (see 2.1 and 2.2 above). This was refused for the following reason:
It is not considered that the increase in the residential curtilage and corresponding increase in the visual impact of the residential development and use of this site is justified by the improvement in vehicular access, parking and manoeuvring on site, given that the countryside is protected for its own sake in Environment Policies 1 and 2.
The proposed new dwelling, by virtue of its height, size and mass, would have a significant and significantly greater impact than the existing cottage, on the character and appearance of the surrounding area which is identified as being of High Landscape Value and Scenic Significance, contrary to the provisions and objectives of Housing Policy 14. The new dwelling would be more prominent and of significantly greater proportions than is advocated in Planning Circular 3/91. Whilst the policy allows for replacement dwellings of a size greater than 50% larger than the existing, this is where the existing property is of poor form, which this is not, or where there are exceptional circumstances and it is not considered that in this case, that there are.
4.2 Since the approval of 17/00214/B permission was granted for alterations to the access and the erection of a sizeable replacement garage on the site - 17/00871/B.
REPRESENTATIONS 5.1 Highway Services do not object to the application (19.03.21).
5.2 Santon Commissioners, DEFA Arboricultural Officer and Manx Utilities were consulted on 10.03.21 but none has submitted any comments to date.
5.3 The DoI's Flood Risk Management Team advise that there is no flood risk management interest in this application (08.04.21).
ASSESSMENT 6.1 Applications which propose a variation only of the time in which the previously approved development may be commenced need to consider whether there have been any changes in policy or circumstance which would justify a decision different to that which was taken previously. In this case the development plan for the site has changed from the 1982 Development Plan Order to a specific plan considering the East of the Island. However the provisions of the plan result in the same land use designation of not for a particular purpose and the High Landscape or Coastal Value and Scenic Significance has been replaced by a landscape designation which considers the specific landscape in the area surrounding the site. No greater or lesser test is required for development proposed in this area and the appropriate Strategic Plan policy - Housing Policy 14 is still applicable. As the development was found previously to accord with that policy, it is suggested that there is no reason now why this should not still continue to be the case.
6.2 The application is recommended for approval.
CONCLUSION
==== PAGE 5 ====
21/00238/B Page 5 of 5
7.1 The development continues to comply with the development plan in that the resultant impact on the countryside is deemed acceptable and as such complies with Housing Policy 14 and Environment Policies 1 and 2 of the Strategic Plan.
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.
Decision Made : Permitted
Committee Meeting Date: 26.04.2021
Signed : S CORLETT 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 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