Loading document...
==== PAGE 1 ====
21/00498/B Page 1 of 9
PLANNING OFFICER REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Application No. : 21/00498/B Applicant : Mr Alan Skillicorn Proposal : Alterations and erection of a rear extension and erection of a detached 2 storey garage with upper floor living accommodation Site Address : Capella Main Road Santon Isle Of Man IM4 1JB
Planning Officer: Mr Paul Visigah Photo Taken :
Site Visit : 02.07.2021 Expected Decision Level :
Recommendation
Recommended Decision:
Refused Date of Recommendation: 13.07.2021 __
Reasons for Refusal
R : Reasons for Refusal O : Notes attached to reasons
R 1. The proposed garage with ancillary accommodation over would, by virtue of its proximity and height, result in unacceptable levels of actual and perceived overlooking from the proposal site into 'Mussoorie', to the detriment of the residential amenity. In this respect, the proposed building is considered unacceptable when assessed against General Policy 2 (g).
R 2. The siting, layout, scale, form, and arrangement of the new building on the site, would have a deleterious impact both on the application site and the wider street scene, by resulting in a particularly intrusive feature within the site when viewed from the surrounding area. This aspect of the proposal would be at odds with General Policy 2 (b&c).
R 3. Although the design is traditional (to ensure it ties in with the existing building), the two storey element and orientation with gable facing Main Road would be out of keeping with the dominant character of the area which is dominated by side-on single storey dwellings with accommodation in the roof. Also, the layout of the site together with the lack of suitable amenity space for occupiers indicate that the proposal is an inappropriate backland development and would result in over-development of the site. As such it is considered contrary to policy GP2 (b, c & h) and Environment Policy 42.
R 4. The size of the new building, the fact that the new building has an independent access, the broad layout of the building, and the separating distance between the new building and the main dwelling, would make it difficult to ensure that the new building remains ancillary to 'Capella'; facilitating future severance from this dwelling, which would be at variance with the character of the area and contrary to General Policy 2 (k) of the Strategic Plan and Landscape Proposal 7 of the Area Plan for the East. __
Interested Person Status - Additional Persons
==== PAGE 2 ====
21/00498/B Page 2 of 9
None __
Officer’s Report
1.0 THE SITE 1.1 The site is the curtilage of an existing dwelling, Capella, which sits on the western side of the A5 within the settlement known as Newtown. The existing property is a detached two storey traditional cottage which has a conservatory style flat roofed entrance porch on the front elevation and a hip roofed conservatory on the rear elevation. Vehicular access to the property is via a driveway which runs along the rear of Clannagh Lodge situated directly north east of the application property and connects the site to Clanna Road, while pedestrian access to the site is via the pedestrian access gate on the site frontage which abuts the A5.
2.0 THE PROPOSAL 2.1 Planning approval is sought for alterations and erection of a rear extension and erection of a detached two storey garage with upper floor living accommodation.
2.2 The proposed works would include: 2.2.1 Replacing the existing flat roofed wooden framed porch on the front elevation with white double glazed UPVC frame. The flat roof would be replaced with new GRP flat roof. Also, the existing dwarf wall around this front porch would be maintained and used as base.
2.2.2 The existing hipped roofed conservatory at the rear of the building would be removed and replaced with a new single storey flat roofed sun room. This extension which would project 3m from the rear elevation would be 5.2m and 3m high (from the ground level to top of flat roof. The walls would be rendered and painted to match the existing building. This would also have GRP Flat roof over.
2.2.3 The erection of a two storey garage with upper floor living accommodation. This building would measure 11m x 8m and be 7.9m to the roof ridge (5.6m to the eaves). A pitch roofed wall dormer would be installed on the northeast and southwest elevations respectively, while a velux style roof light would also be installed on either roof plane. There would be a first floor window on the southeast elevation facing the road, as well as other windows installed on both side elevations of the ground floor.
2.2.4 Also, a balcony with 900mm high glass balustrades would be erected on the northwest elevation of this new building. This balcony would be 2.5m wide, 6.9m long and 3.6m high from the ground level to the top of the standing area. A 2.3m x 2m bifold door would provide access from the first floor accommodation to this first floor balcony, while a 5.2m wide and 3.4m high garage door would provide access to the garage on the ground floor which can serve four cars (two standard sized cars and two smaller sized cars); as it has an internal width of 6.35m and depth of 10.3m.
2.2.5 This new garage building would house two double bedrooms, an ensuite, a large shower room and kitchen/lounge area on the top floor, while a large garage with car lift and WC would be on the ground floor level.
2.2 .6 The new building will have a footprint measuring 88sqm which would be almost at par with the main dwelling which has a footprint measuring about 94.5sqm and as such would have a footprint that is about 93% of the existing dwelling.
2.3 The applicants have indicated on the application form that the new building (including ground floor garage with upper floor living accommodation) would be used in conjunction with existing dwelling 'Cappella'.
==== PAGE 3 ====
21/00498/B Page 3 of 9
3.0 PLANNING POLICY 3.1 The site lies within an area designated on the Area Plan for the East Map 11 (Newtown) as 'Predominantly Residential', although the driveway and parking areas at the rear of the dwelling are within an area not designated for development (although marked as part of the residential curtilage under previous applications for the site. The site is not within a Conservation Area and it is also not within a flood risk zone as indicated on the Isle of Man Indicative Flood Maps. As such, the following parts of the Strategic Plan are relevant:
3.2 General Policy 2: "Development which is in accordance with the land-use zoning and proposals in the appropriate Area Plan and with other policies of this Strategic Plan will normally be permitted, provided that the development:
(b) respects the site and surroundings in terms of the siting, layout, scale, form, design and landscaping of buildings and the spaces around them; (c) does not affect adversely the character of the surrounding landscape or townscape; (g) does not affect adversely the amenity of local residents or the character of the locality; (h) provides satisfactory amenity standards in itself, including where appropriate safe and convenient access for all highway users, together with adequate parking, servicing and manoeuvring space; (i) does not have an unacceptable effect on road safety or traffic flows on the local highways". (k) does not prejudice the use or development of adjoining land in accordance with the appropriate Area Plan;
3.3 Paragraph 8.12.1: Extensions to Dwellings in built up areas or sites designated for residential use As a general policy, in built up areas not controlled by Conservation Area or Registered Building policies, there will be a general presumption in favour of extensions to existing property where such extensions would not have an adverse impact on either adjacent property or the surrounding area in general."
3.4 Environment Policy 42 states: "New development in existing settlements must be designed to take account of the particular character and identity, in terms of buildings and landscape features of the immediate locality. Inappropriate backland development, and the removal of open or green spaces which contribute to the visual amenity and sense of place of a particular area will not be permitted. Those open or green spaces which are to be preserved will be identified in Area Plans."
3.5 Strategic Policy 5: New development, including individual buildings, should be designed so as to make a positive contribution to the environment of the Island. In appropriate cases the Department will require planning applications to be supported by a Design Statement which will be required to take account of the Strategic Aim and Policies.
3.6 The following parts of the Area Plan for the East Written Statement are also considered relevant:
3.6.1 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.
3.7 The Residential Design Guidance (July 2019) which provides advice on the design of new houses, extensions to existing property, as well as how to assess the impact of such development on the living conditions of those in adjacent residential property would also provide guidance for the current application. Relevant sections include the following:
3.7.1 Section 3.0: Householder Extensions "3.1 General Considerations
==== PAGE 4 ====
21/00498/B Page 4 of 9
3.1.2 General Policy 2 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan (IOMSP) indicates that generally house extensions and new houses within areas designated for development will be permitted, providing that they reflect and enhance the appearance of the existing property, adjoining properties, and their setting in terms of scale, design and materials. However, there are a substantial number of detailed issues that need to be taken into account in designing domestic extensions. This section provides general guidance on issues that are likely to apply to all forms of extensions, and then more detailed additional advice in relation to different potential types of extensions.
3.1.3 The main design elements that should be considered include: o the relationship to the original part of the building - including materials, design and detailing (such as window materials and proportions); o the relationship with adjoining properties, including the building line, roof line, orientation, and the slope of the site; and o the pitch, shape and materials of the original roof, including the presence of original dormers and chimneys.
3.1.4 All extensions and alterations, particularly those incorporating modern design approaches, should be considered holistically with the original/main building and its setting in the landscape/townscape to avoid an awkward jarring of materials and forms. However, well- judged modern designs using contemporary and sustainable materials will be welcomed, as the Department does not wish to restrict creative designs where they can be integrated successfully into their context. Such approaches, where well designed, can serve to both improve the sustainability of buildings and significantly improve the appearance of buildings to the general benefit of thestreetscene.
3.1.5 However, where inappropriately designed, located and finished, such approaches can be harmful to the character of a building and its surrounds, and become a local eyesore. Therefore, in some cases, modern design approaches will not be the most appropriate solution and the character and form of the building and its context may require a more traditional and reserved design approach.
3.1.6 It should also be accepted that in some instances it may not be possible to design an acceptable extension due to the sensitivity of the site, limited space, or the relationship with neighbouring dwellings."
3.7.2 Section 4.7: Roof Terraces, Balconies, Decking and Patios "4.7.1 These can add a welcome amenity to a dwelling as long as the scale, design and materials complement the character of the property, whether it is traditional or modern.
4.7.2 In most instances, roof terraces on terraced or semi-detached properties are unlikely to be acceptable. For detached properties they can be acceptable where they are carefully designed to avoid unreasonable overlooking of neighbouring properties (including gardens). Large separation distances to neighbouring boundaries and habitable room windows will help to avoid such issues. Strategically placed solid screens/obscure glazed screens/slatted shutter screens may sometimes help where it is not otherwise possible to avoid overlooking. However, the use of such screens needs to be combined with careful design as such screening may result in a loss of light and/or be an overbearing and dominating feature to the outlook of the neighbouring properties/street scene. Balconies should not result in views into the rear windows of neighbouring properties at a distance of less than 20 metres.
4.7.3 Additional consideration should also be given to the potential visual impact upon the street scene and the individual dwelling. A projecting balcony can result in an alien and top heavy feature, particularly at first floor level or above. Thought should be given to minimising the visual impact of such an addition with regard to the size, projection and materials. Balconies should be designed to complement the proportions and character of the property and should be in line with windows on the original house."
==== PAGE 5 ====
21/00498/B Page 5 of 9
4.0 PLANNING HISTORY 4.1 The property has been the subject of a number of applications which are considered to be relevant to the current application.
4.2 PA 99/01786/B for extension to main dwelling, also extension and alterations to detached garage to form living accommodation. This was permitted on Review on 7 April 2000.
4.3 PA 03/01076/B for Creation on new driveway and access and change of use of associated lodge to a separate dwelling, Capella Cottage and Clannagh Lodge. This was approved on 16 October 2003. This enabled the separation of the application site (which was an ancillary accommodation) from Clannah Lodge and the creation of the driveway at the rear of the dwelling.
4.4 PA 04/00248/A for approval in principle for the erection of a dwelling on land forming part of Capella. This was refused on review. Reasons for Refusal: R1: The development of the application site would result in the loss of amenity space for the occupiers of Capella and a cramped dwelling within the streetscene. In addition, the proposed development would impact adversely on occupiers of adjacent properties.
R2: The current capacity of the Glencrutchery Water Treatment Works is such that the Water Authority cannot guarantee a supply of fresh portable water to the development.
R3: The proposal would result in the loss of trees on the site which currently make a positive contribution to the streetscene.
4.4.1 The Santon Parish Commissioners objected to the scheme on the grounds that: i. The site has become crowded now that the barn/garage in the grounds has been converted to a dwelling (and subsequent approved by the Planning Committee as a separate dwelling in spite of the original restriction that it should remain tied to the main dwelling). ii. The addition of another dwelling as 'in fill' would further crowd the site and result in a cramped collection of dwellings at the ned of a reasonably spaced 'ribbon' of development. iii. Additional traffic feeding onto Main Road would be created by approval of another dwelling.
5.0 REPRESENTATIONS Copies of representations received can be viewed on the Government's website. This report contains summaries only.
5.1 The Department of Infrastructure (DOI) Highways Division have indicated that they 'Do not oppose' in a letter dated 4 June 2021.
5.2 Santon Parish Commissioners have stated that they have no objection to the application but would like to see a condition of approval being that the garage part of the property could not be sold separately.
5.3 No comments have been received from neighbouring properties.
6.0 ASSESSMENT 6.1 Given the nature and level of development proposed there are a number of issues to consider; i. The first relates to whether the erection of the proposed garage with living accommodation above would be appropriate in this location in terms of severability of the ancillary accommodation, visual impact and impact on the amenity of the main dwelling and neighbouring dwellings. ii. Second, whether the proposed extensions and alterations in terms of design, size and massing would be appropriate and in keeping with the existing property and the street scene
==== PAGE 6 ====
21/00498/B Page 6 of 9
and whether the various components would result in adverse impacts upon neighbouring amenities.
6.2 Principle of the Ancillary Residential Accommodation above new garage 6.2.1 The application site is located within an area zoned for residential development and as such the principle of a garage with ancillary residential accommodation over on the site is considered to be acceptable. Albeit, the suitability of this element of the scheme would be dependent on the potential severability of the site as a result of the development, the visual impacts, and impact on neighbouring dwellings.
Severability of ancillary use of new building 6.2.2 When assessing applications for ancillary uses, a key issue considered is the severability of the new development from the main dwelling. In applying this test, it would be essential to ascertain if the proposed ancillary accommodation could practically and viably operate on its own were the primary use of the premises to cease. In this case, the new garage with ancillary accommodation would sufficiently serve as a separate dwelling as it can be accessed without going through the main dwelling, giving that it is at the end of a driveway. Moreover, the size of the new garage is such that it would be only 6.5sqm smaller than the main dwelling. More so, the first floor accommodation can comfortably serve as an independent apartment considering its two double bedroom apartment layout with room to further expand downwards given the size of the garage on the ground floor which has an internal floor area of 70.17sqm (34.17sqm larger than a standard double garage).
6.2.3 It is also noted that the proposed building would be erected about 3.9m from the main dwellinghouse with no direct link between the application site property and proposed building; thus they could both operate independent of the other. It needs to be remembered that planning permission runs with the land and the building will remain long after the current owners cease to have an interest in the property. As such, the long term use of the building must be a consideration in the determination of this current planning application. Further to this point, if in time the building is used independently from 'Capella', then this independent use could become lawful, and could cause concern regarding the reduced levels of amenity which would result from having two independent dwellings in such close proximity to each other; with limited amenity space between the buildings. Granting, the proposed development would be located within an area designated as Predominantly Residential, one must recognise that this proposed building would be erected in the back of an existing garden, forming inappropriate backland development (given its size and scale) as it would fill up the existing open garden area which would be contrary to EP 42 of the Strategic Plan and Landscape Proposal 7 of the Area Plan for the East; due to the fact that it would not take account of the particular character and identity of the locality, in terms of green spaces between buildings since it would take up the large side garden contrary to the character of the area which is marked by the dwellings having large gardens within the existing residential curtilages. Besides, no design statement has been provided to provide a clear justification for the size of the new building and the area dedicated to the garage on the ground floor which is significantly larger than the standard size for double garages.
6.2.3 Inference can be also drawn from previous related appeal decisions in the UK. See (Chichester 30/4/02 DCS No.050-329-284) below which relates to the conversion of a garage and rear storage area to residential use. The property was located at the end of a long drive (as the current proposal site), which also served the main dwellinghouse and it was proposed to convert the garage into two bedrooms, lounge, bathroom and kitchen/dining room. The appellants claimed that the building would be occupied by close family or as holiday accommodation. The inspector in noting that the garage was located within 1.5m of the dwellinghouse, held that it would be difficult for the council to ensure that the occupation of the unit generated the necessary degree of dependency upon the host dwelling so as to render its use ancillary to the primary residence. Occupants would have a limited amount of amenity space within a rear courtyard and accordingly this would impinge upon the amenity of occupiers of the main dwelling. She considered that a condition would not enable the ancillary
==== PAGE 7 ====
21/00498/B Page 7 of 9
link to be maintained since it could be breached without the council knowing. Consequently she held that the conversion was unacceptable.
6.2.4 Based on the foregoing, it is considered that whilst the principle of erecting a garage with ancillary accommodation over on the site is considered to be acceptable; since the land is zoned for 'Predominantly Residential' use, it could be argued that the size of the new building, the fact that the new building has an independent access, the design and layout of the building which would facilitate its severance from the main dwelling (with room for conversion to a larger dwelling), and the separating distance between the new building and the main dwelling which is approximately 3.9m, would make it difficult to ensure that the new building remains ancillary to the main dwelling.
Visual impact and impact on the amenity of the main dwelling 6.2.5 In terms of the visual impact of the new building, it is noted that the design of the building which is traditional and incorporates traditional features broadly aligns with the existing dwelling. Albeit, the fact that it is a two-storey building with gable facing the road would make it difficult to seamlessly integrate into the character of the area; as all the buildings in the area that directly abut the highway are positioned side-on, in addition to the fact that the buildings within a 200m stretch from the boundary of the site along Main Road are single storey dwellings with accomodation in the roof (the only building positioned with gable facing the road is 'Sunny Ridge' which is accessed via Moaney Road). As well, the proposed building would have a footprint of approximately 88 square metres (sqm), which would be only 6.5sqm smaller than the footprint of the main dwelling with footprint approximately 94.5sqm. Moreover, the height which would be at 7.4m (9m to the top of the proposed chimneys) would be considerably taller than the existing building which is 6.2m high (7.4m to the top of the chimneys); resulting in an unwarranted and particularly intrusive feature within the site and when viewed from the surrounding area.
6.2.6 Similarly, the positioning of the buildings not only leaves inadequate private amenity space for the main dwelling, but results in an unacceptable relationship between the units; which would undermine the enjoyment of the host dwelling considering the new building would take up over 60 percent of the garden space available to the main dwelling. This is generally an unacceptable situation given the level and scale of development proposed. Moreover, the site history shows that approval in principle has been refused for a building of a smaller scale on this part of the site under PA 04/00248/A due to potential impacts on the neighbouring dwelling and the visual impacts of the scheme on the site; a situation that would be exacerbated by the current scheme which would significantly alter the appearance of the area when viewed from the A5 (Main Road) on the site frontage and Clanna Road on the northeast.
6.2.7 Consequently, it is considered that the scheme as proposed would be averse to the character of the area, and would not respect the existing dwelling and surroundings in terms of its siting, layout, scale, form, and the arrangement of the outdoor spaces, contrary to General Policy 2 (b&c).
Impact on Neighbouring Residential Amenity 6.2.8 With regard to neighbouring residential amenity, it is considered that the property most likely to be impacted by the development would be 'Monaveen' situated south of the new building; given that its rear garden would only be about 7m from the first floor balcony on the new garage building. When assessing the possible impacts on this neighbouring dwelling, it is considered that at 3.6 above ground level, the new balcony would afford views into the rear garden of 'Monaveen'; sufficient to warrant refusal of the scheme (given that the separating distance is considerably within the range whereby overlooking would occur). Whilst it is noted that the outbuilding and the masonry wall situated on the northern boundary of 'Monaveen' would provide some screening for part of the rear garden, the balcony would still enable views into large sections of the rear garden; a situation that would be in conflict with GP2 (g & k).
Highway Impacts
==== PAGE 8 ====
21/00498/B Page 8 of 9
6.2.9 In terms of highway safety impacts, it is noted that the new building would provide additional parking for the property. However, the site already has access to two parking spaces at the rear of the property which would be sufficient for the residential use of the property. Besides, a standard double garage could be erected within the garden and at a scale that would have minimal impacts on the site and locality if there is an intention to increase the number of parking available to the main dwelling.
6.3 The Extensions to the main dwelling 6.3.1 With regard to the flat roofed extensions to replace the hip roofed conservatory at the rear of the dwelling, it is noted that this extension would be visible from public vantage points along Clanna Road situated northeast of the application site. However, the design, proportion and form of this flat roofed extension would ensure that the extension is an appropriate replacement for the existing conservatory on this part of the dwelling. Whilst is would have been more appropriate for the extension to have a hipped roof to mirror the existing conservatory roof or a pitch roof to match the existing roof on the main dwelling, it is noted that the dwelling already has a flat roofed element in the form of the existing front porch. Besides, its roof structure would ensure that the key features of the main dwelling are not obscured by the addition of the extension; with the extension appearing as a contemporary but subordinate addition to the dwelling.
6.3.2 In terms of the possible impacts on neighbouring amenity, it is not considered that there would not be any detrimental impacts on the neighbours as there would be no windows with views to the rear of Clannagh Lodge which is the closest property to the rear extension. The height which would be 3m from the ground level to the top of the flat roof would also ensure there is no overbearing impacts or overshadowing of the neighbouring property since this extension would be 10.5m away from Clannagh Lodge.
6.4 The Proposed Porch 6.4.1 The proposed porch extension would be similar to the existing as the only change would be with the material (from timber frame to UPVC frame with double glazing) and as such would be seamlessly integrated into the existing building appearance. Besides, the new front porch will provide the dwelling with a better thermal capacity within the cold months. Therefore, this element of the proposal is not judged to harm the amenity of the dwelling or the character of the street scene and as such is deemed acceptable.
7.0 CONCLUSION 7.1 The proposed alterations and erection of a rear extension to the main dwelling are considered to be acceptable development, but the proposed detached two storey garage with upper floor living accommodation would enable future severance of the site, have adverse impacts on the neighbouring property, in addition to having adverse impacts on the character and appearance of the area. Planning Officers cannot recommend split decisions on planning applications, so even though some components of this application would be acceptable, the whole application is recommended for refusal due to the detrimental aspects.
8.0 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
==== PAGE 9 ====
21/00498/B Page 9 of 9
(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 in Article 4(2) who should be given Interested Person Status. __
I can confirm that this decision has been made by a Principal Planner in accordance with the authority afforded to that Officer by the appropriate DEFA Delegation and that in making this decision the Officer has agreed the recommendation in relation to who should be afforded Interested Person Status.
Decision Made: Refused
Date: 14.07.2021
Determining officer
Signed : J SINGLETON Jason Singleton Principal Planner
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