Loading document...
==== PAGE 1 ====
22/00024/B Page 1 of 6
PLANNING OFFICER REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
Application No. : 22/00024/B Applicant : Mr Paul Carey Proposal : Erection of side extension with roof terrace above and associated works Site Address : Ballasalla Farm Coast Road Jurby Isle Of Man IM7 3AS
Planning Officer: Mr Peiran Shen Photo Taken :
Site Visit :
Expected Decision Level : Officer Delegation
Recommendation
Recommended Decision:
Refused Date of Recommendation: 09.06.2022 __
Reasons for Refusal
R : Reasons for Refusal O : Notes attached to reasons
R 1. The extensions to Ballasalla Farm cottage, a traditional countryside dwelling, is inconsistent with the existing proportion, form and appearance and would harm the traditional design of the cottage itself as well as negative impact the countryside character of the area. It would also be visible to the public and is also within an AHLV, which requires the character of the area not to be harmed by new development.
R 2. This application is considered to fail to comply with General Policy 2, General Policy 3, Environment Policy 2, Housing Policy 15 of the Strategic Plan and Policy 3 and 5 of the Planning Circular 3/91. Therefore, it is recommended for a refusal.
__
Interested Person Status - Additional Persons
None __
Officer’s Report
1.0 THE SITE
==== PAGE 2 ====
22/00024/B Page 2 of 6
1.1 The site is part of Ballasalla Farm, Coast Road, Juby West, located on the west of Peel Road, between its junction with Ballamona Road and Jurby Road. There is a group of rural buildings. The house is a two-storey detached dwelling. There is also a barn which has been converted to flats and some agricultural buildings.
1.2 The house is of traditional Manx countryside dwelling character. It consists of a two- storey pitched-roof main dwelling, a two-storey pitched-roof side extension on the west elevation, a single-storey mono-pitched roof on the rear (north) elevation and a single-storey pitched roof porch on the front (south) elevation. The side extension is of the same height and width as the main dwelling.
2.0 THE PROPOSAL 2.1 The proposal is the erection of a single-storey flat-roof extension on the west elevation of the extension along with a roof terrace.
2.2 The proposed extension will be slimmer than the existing main dwelling. It will have a bi-fold door on the front elevation and on the west elevation. It will also have two sliding sash window on the north elevation.
2.3 The roof terrace will have a screening wall on the north elevation and glass screen on the west and south elevation.
3.0 PLANNING HISTORY 3.1 Extension to farm house to form additional living accommodation and erection of new implement and feed store was APPROVED under PA 02/01489/B.
4.0 PLANNING POLICY Site Specific 4.1 The site is not within an area with specific land use designation in the 1982 Development Plan, meaning it is considered to be part of the countryside.
4.2 The site is within an Area of High Landscape or Coastal Value and Scenic Significance (AHLV). The site is not within any Conservation Area or Flood Risk zones.
Strategic Policy 4.3 The Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016 contains the following policies that are considered materially relevant to the assessment of this current planning application:
4.4 General Policy 2, which provides an overall requirement for all development, states: "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; (m) takes account of community and personal safety and security in the design of buildings and the spaces around them; and (n) is designed having due regard to best practice in reducing energy consumption."
4.5 General Policy 3, which provides an overall requirement for all development proposed outside areas zoned for development, states: "Development will not be permitted outside of those areas which are zoned for development on the appropriate Area Plan" within certain exceptions.
==== PAGE 3 ====
22/00024/B Page 3 of 6
4.6 Paragraph 4.3.11 of the Strategic Plan states: "a new building cannot be seen in public views is not a justification for the relaxation of other policies relating to the location of new development"
4.7 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)."
4.8 Environment Policy 1 states: "The countryside and its ecology will be protected for its own sake. ... 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."
4.9 Environment Policy 2 states: "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."
4.10 Strategic Policy 5 states: "New development, including individual buildings, should be designed so as to make a positive contribution to the environment of the Island."
4.11 Community Policy 7 and 10 state that the design of new development must, as far as is reasonable and practicable, pay due regards to existing best practise such as to prevent criminal and anti-social behaviour and outbreak and spread of fire.
4.12 Infrastructure Policy 5 states that "Development proposals should incorporate methods for water conservation and management measures to conserve the Island's water resources."
PPS and NPD 4.13 Planning Circular 3/91 Guide to the Design of Residential Development in the Countryside provides a standard for typical housing requirement in rural areas:
4.14 Policy 3 states: "... Extensions to existing buildings should maintain the character of the original form."
4.15 Policy 5 states: "Doors and windows together with their size and relationship with each other and the wall face should follow traditional rural forms."
5.0 OTHER MATERIAL CONSIDERATIONS Strategy and Guidance 5.1 The Residential Design Guide (July 2021) provides guidance on the design of new houses and extensions to an existing property, as well as how to assess the impact of such development on the living conditions of those in adjacent residential property.
5.2 RDG 4.7 Flat Roof Extension sets out some key considerations regarding the acceptability and details of having a flat roof for extensions. It states that a parapet should be used along with architecture detailing. Furthermore, contemporary design can be acceptable in certain circumstances.
==== PAGE 4 ====
22/00024/B Page 4 of 6
5.3 RDG 4.8 Extension to Side Elevations sets out key considerations for side elevation extension. These include the potential visual appearance of the extension within the street scene and of the individual dwelling as well as the impact on the amenities of those in neighbouring properties. These impacts can be regulated by designing with the right location, size, and architecture style. The section also specifically mentioned that detached/semi- detached dwellings should avoid a terraced appearance due to two extensions being placed too close to each other.
5.4 RDG 4.11 Roof Terraces, Balconies, Decking and Patios sets out some key considerations. It states that for terraced and semi-detached properties, it is unlikely to be acceptable; and for detached properties, it has to be carefully designed to avoid unreasonable overlooking of neighbouring properties (including gardens). Large separation distance and strategically placed screens may help avoid overlooking but may also cause loss of light or being overbearing to the neighbours. It may also have a visual impact on the street scene and the individual dwelling.
5.5 RDG Chapter 5 sets out key considerations regarding architectural details. These include window details and external finishing. The general idea is that development should fit in with the street scene and the building itself.
5.6 RDG Chapter 7 sets out key considerations regarding the impact on neighbouring properties. These include the potential loss of light/overshadowing, overbearing impact upon outlook and overlooking resulting in a loss of privacy.
6.0 REPRESENTATIONS 6.1 Jurby Parish Commissioners has not commented at the time of the report (31.05.2022).
6.2 Highway Services states there is no highway interest in this application. (27.01.2021).
7.0 ASSESSMENT 7.1 The key considerations of this application are the principal of the Development, its impact on the house itself, on the character and street scene of the area and the amenities of the neighbours.
Principal of the Development 7.2 Although the site is within the countryside, and General Policy 3 discourages development in the countryside, it is a dwelling and their extensions are still permitted based on the quality of design under Housing Policy 15. Therefore, having a design that respects the character of the countryside would be the determining factor of this application. Given the location of the site within an AHLV, consideration of visual/landscape impacts in relation to Environment Policy 2 is a key consideration.
Design of the House Itself 7.3 The side extension is designed in a more contemporary style as the main dwelling. The flat roof is not common with either traditional or Manx countryside dwelling. The large-pane bi- fold doors and glass screens does not match the proportion of the windows panes nor the traditional windows which have small panes supported by glazing bars. The extension is also the second extension to the west, which would further distort the form of a traditional Manx cottage. In summary, it is considered that the proposal does not respect the proportion, form or appearance of the existing cottage.
Character and Landscape 7.4 The proposal would be visible from part of Coast Road. As the flat-roof extension and the roof terrace would stand out from rural setting of the cottage as well as the converted barn building as well as the cottage itself, it is considered that the proposal would negatively impact the character of the building group as well as the landscape of the area.
==== PAGE 5 ====
22/00024/B Page 5 of 6
Neighbouring Amenities 7.5 The extension is single storey and passes the "45-degree Approach". Therefore, it is considered that there is no concern for overshadowing or overbearing.
7.6 There is no property within 20m south or west of the proposal. The screening wall on the north elevation would prevent any overlooking towards the other buildings within the farm. The ground floor window is facing the front elevation of the converted barn but there are also existing hedges reduce the overlooking into a minimum. Therefore, there is no concern for overlooking.
Planning Balance Assessment 7.7 The proposal would not create negative impact to neighbouring amenities. However, its flat-roof and contemporary glazing does not fit in with the traditional Manx countryside characters nor the character of the building itself, and, in consequence, does not meet the principal set out in Housing Policy 15. In addition, as the site is within an AHLV, the proposal would harm the character of the area. Since the cottage has sufficient living space, it is different to justify the proposal as essential to the location. Therefore, it is considered that the harm to the character of the area is sufficient reason for a recommendation of refusal.
8.0 CONCLUSION 8.1 The extensions to Ballasalla Farm cottage, a traditional countryside dwelling, is inconsistent with the existing proportion, form and appearance and would harm the traditional design of the cottage itself as well as negative impact the countryside character of the area. It would also be visible to the public and is also within an AHLV, which requires the character of the area not to be harmed by new development.
8.2 The proposal is considered failing to comply with General Policy 2, General Policy 3, Environment Policy 2, Housing Policy 15 of the Strategic Plan and Policy 3 and 5 of the Planning Circular 3/91. Therefore, it is recommended for a refusal.
9.0 INTEREST PERSON STATUS 9.1 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 which 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.
9.2 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. __
==== PAGE 6 ====
22/00024/B Page 6 of 6
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 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 : 09.06.2022
Determining officer
Signed : S BUTLER
Stephen Butler
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