Loading document...
==== PAGE 1 ====
22/00819/B Page 1 of 10
PLANNING OFFICER REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
Application No. : 22/00819/B Applicant : Mr & Mrs Greenhalgh Proposal : Replacement Dwelling and Integral Garage Site Address : The Warren Clannagh Road Santon Isle Of Man IM4 2HP
Planning Officer: Mr Paul Visigah Photo Taken : Site Visit : Expected Decision Level : Planning Committee
Recommendation
Recommended Decision:
Permitted Date of Recommendation: 03.10.2022 __
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 26 of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) Order 2019 and to avoid the accumulation of unimplemented planning approvals.
C 2. The development shall not take place other than in accordance with the Manx Wildlife Trust's Precautionary Working Method Statement for Common Lizard and Schedule 8 non- native invasive species submitted in support of the application.
Reason: In the interests of protecting and enhancing the biodiversity of the environment, and to ensure that the development does not contravene Environment Policy 4 of the Strategic Plan.
C 3. Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (Permitted Development) Order 2012 (or any Order revoking and/or re-enacting that Order with or without modification), no garages or car ports shall be erected within the curtilage of the dwelling hereby approved, other than that expressly authorised by this approval, without the prior written approval of the Department.
Reason: To control development in the interests of the amenities of the surrounding area.
C 4. Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (Permitted Development) Order 2012 (or any Order revoking and/or re-enacting that Order with or without modification) no extension, enlargement or other alteration of the dwelling(s) hereby
==== PAGE 2 ====
22/00819/B Page 2 of 10
approved, other than that expressly authorised by this approval, shall be carried out, without the prior written approval of the Department.
Reason: To control development in the interests of the amenities of the surrounding area.
C 5. 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 development or the occupation of the dwelling, whichever is the sooner. 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.
C 6. The development hereby approved shall not be occupied or operated until the parking and turning areas have been provided in accordance with the approved plans. Such areas shall not be used for any purpose other than the parking and turning of vehicles associated with the development and shall remain free of obstruction for such use at all times.
Reason: To ensure that sufficient provision is made for off-street parking and turning of vehicles in the interests of highway safety.
This application has been recommended for approval for the following reason. Overall, it is considered the proposal would be acceptable, having no adverse impacts upon private or public amenities and complying with the Area Plan for the East, and Environment Policy 1, General Policy 3, and Housing Policies 12 & HP14 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan.
Plans/Drawings/Information; This approval relates to the submitted documents and drawings received on 7 July 2022, and Covering Letter and Amended drawings received 22 August 2022. __
Interested Person Status - Additional Persons
It is recommended that the following Government Departments should be given Interested Person Status on the basis that they have made written submissions relating to planning considerations:
Manx National Heritage __
Officer’s Report
THE PLANNING APPLICATION IS BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMITTEE AS THE PROPOSAL DOES NOT COMPLY FULLY WITH HOUSING POLICY 14 OF THE STRATEGIC PLAN BUT IT IS RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL
1.0 THE SITE 1.1 The site is the residential curtilage of an existing dwelling, The Warren, which sits on the western side of the Clannagh Road which links the A5 and the Stuggadhoo. Immediately to the south east of the site is another dwelling, Clannagh House which sits to the south east of the application dwelling. To the south west of the site and the dwelling is a third dwelling, Ballacorris Croft.
==== PAGE 3 ====
22/00819/B Page 3 of 10
1.2 The existing dwelling on the application site is set below the level of the road but is visible therefrom with Clannagh House being higher and more prominent from the highway. Both properties appear as relatively modern properties with tiled roofs and light coloured, rendered walls set in relatively spacious grounds which are mostly lawned. These properties are also visible from much further south, near St. Mark's as white rectangles sitting in a rough line along the southern side of Chibbanagh.
1.3 The existing dwelling has a detached garage between it and the road and a detached outbuilding at the lower, south western end of the site.
2.0 THE PROPOSAL 2.1 The proposal seeks planning approval for Replacement Dwelling and Integral Garage. The new dwelling is a modification of replacement dwelling previously approved under PA 21/00203/B.
2.2 The replacement dwelling will still sit on the footprint of the former dwelling, garage and outbuildings, but similar to the approved layout, although the footprint of the proposed house has been reduced. The new dwelling would be 30.5m long at the longest elevation (southwest and northeast), and 25.5m long on the shorter elevations (southeast and northwest). The building would be about 7.9m high when viewed from the front elevation and about 11.3m high when viewed from the rear. The roof would be finished in imitation slate or concrete interlocking tiles, while the windows would be black framed windows.
2.3 The applicants have stated in their supporting information that the footprint of the proposed house is now 602.7sqm compared to the existing which was 737.4sqm, but slightly re-orientated towards the south west. This re-orientation has been done to optimise the effectiveness of the solar panels on the roof. The new orientation will also assist with natural light and heating.
2.5 The proposed house has a floor area, over both the ground and lower ground floor, of 985sqm, which is 9% larger than the previously approved house (901.3sq m). This increase would result in a 59% increase in floor area over the former dwelling which has a floor area measuring 588sqm.
2.5.1 The applicants have included a detached garage with accommodation over with floor area measuring 236sqm and a detached garden store with floor area 21 sqm, as part of the floor area for the dwelling totalling 845sqm for the former dwelling. However, Appendix 1 of the Strategic Plan defines floor area to exclude outbuildings and as such the calculation used for the former dwelling will be 588sqm.
2.6 The dwelling now proposed follows the general design approach of the approved scheme but with a more vertically oriented style, overall presenting a more modern and interesting dwelling with a more consolidated form and with stone outer sections, pitched roofed links.
2.7 Air source heat pump technology is to be used to generate heating and hot water and are to be located so as not to cause noise issues for neighbours, the nearest of which, Clannagh House is more than 40m from the nearest point of the proposed dwelling.
2.8 The applicants have argued that: o The resultant reduced building envelope area will be more energy efficient. This brings the design up to date with current NHBC regulations and the aims of the Climate Change Bill. o Whilst the new design is actually slightly taller, by 390mm, it will sit further down the slope, limiting the increase in relative height to 215mm, though the neighbouring property sits much higher.
==== PAGE 4 ====
22/00819/B Page 4 of 10
o As the proposed house sits in a similar position to, and has a smaller footprint than the previously approved house, it will have less impact on the neighbouring properties. o Steeper pitched roofs and revised more local vernacular wall finishes have been introduced to help improve the design.
2.9 Other works proposed: 2.9.1 The existing entrance is to be retained but the gate and posts (rendered pillars) would be moved further into the site to be 6m away from the edge of the highway. The gate to be 1.7m high power coated galvanised steel gates.
2.9.2 A new summerhouse with store attached to be erected on the southern side of the proposed dwelling. This pitch roofed building would have roof finished to match the main house, while the external walls would be finished in white cedral cladding or similar cladding boards. A log burner with flue through roof would be installed in the summerhouse.
2.9.3 The site plan also shows a pool and spa is proposed on the southern end of the proposed dwelling and close to the summerhouse, although no detailed plans have been provided. As such, this element of the proposal has not been assessed within the current scheme.
3.0 PLANNING POLICY 3.1 The site lies within an area designated 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 on the Area Plan for the East (2020). The site is not within a Conservation Area or susceptible to flooding. Also, the site is not within a Registered tree area and there are no registered tree on site.
3.2 The Area Plan for the East Landscape Character Appraisal provides the following advice for the area in which the application site sits:
3.2.1 Landscape Strategy: 3.2.1.1 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.
3.2.2 Key Views: o Open and expansive views from the higher areas along the rugged coast in the east and inland towards the upland areas over Braaid. o Incinerator chimney forms a notable landmark in the immediate area. o Glimpsed views framed by vegetation in the valley bottoms and along the main roads where they follow the wooded valley bottoms. o Views in the northern part of the area up to the Transmitting Masts on top of Douglas Head hill top. o Views from Isle of Man Steam Railway.
3.2.3 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.
3.3 The Strategic Plan stipulates a general presumption against development in areas which are not designated for a particular purpose and where the protection of the countryside is of paramount importance (EP 1 and GP3). However, there is provision within General Policy 3 for
==== PAGE 5 ====
22/00819/B Page 5 of 10
the replacement of existing rural dwellings as an exception to this presumption against development in the countryside.
3.3.1 General Policy 3: Development will not be permitted outside of those areas which are zoned for development on the appropriate Area Plan with the exception of: (d) the replacement of existing rural dwellings; (Housing Policies 12, 13 and 14);
3.4 Housing Policy 14 provides guidance on the erection of replacement dwellings and states: 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."
3.5 Environment Policy 1 protects the countryside and its ecology. It stipulates that 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.
3.6 Environment Policy 4 and 5 protects ecology.
3.7 Whilst the site is not in an area designated for development, General Policy 2 is still considered relevant in that it relates to matters around design and amenity.
3.8 Transport Policy 7 notes that in all new development, parking provision must be in accordance with the Department's current standards as set out in Appendix 7 of the SP. For a residential dwelling the requirement is for 2 parking spaces.
3.9 Transport Policy 6: In the design of new development and transport facilities the needs of pedestrians will be given similar weight to the needs of other road users.
3.10 Strategic Policy 3: Proposals for development must ensure that the individual character of our towns and villages is protected or enhanced by: (b) having regard in the design of new development to the use of local materials and character.
3.11 Transport Policy 7: The Department will require that in all new development, parking provision must be in accordance with the Department's current standards. The current standards are set out in Appendix 7: "Typical Residential - 2 spaces per unit, at least one of which is retained within the curtilage and behind the front of the dwelling".
==== PAGE 6 ====
22/00819/B Page 6 of 10
3.12 Other policies within the Strategic Plan which are considered relevant in the assessment of the proposal are; Infrastructure Policy 5, Community Policy 11, Community Policy 7 and Community Policy 10.
3.13 Floor Space and Floor Area (see Housing Policy 13-15) Where there are references to "floor space" and "floor area", the space or area in question should be measured externally, and should not include attics or outbuildings.
4.0 OTHER MATERIAL CONSIDERATIONS 4.1 Planning Circular 3/91 (Guide to the Design of Residential Development in the Countryside) is considered relevant. The section on 'Proportions and Form' on page 4 provides advise on how to make variations to the floor area of traditional buildings (extensions).
4.1.2 Policy 3 states: "The shape of small and medium sized new dwellings should follow the size and pattern of the traditional farmhouse. They should be rectangular in plan and simple in form. Extensions to existing buildings should maintain the character of the original form".
4.1.3 Policy 4 states: "External finishes are expected to be selected from a limited range of traditional materials". The supporting texts to policy 4 states that "Modern construction and materials may be used to achieve a similar external appearance".
4.2 Whilst not adopted planning policy, DEFA's Residential Design Guide (2021) is a material consideration in the assessment of this application as, "It is intended to apply to any residential development within existing villages and towns, including individual houses, conversions and householder extensions. It is envisaged that a new guidance will be provided for dwellings in the countryside, although some of the broad principles set out within this document may still be relevant to such proposals". Section 4.11 which deals with Roof Terraces, Balconies, Decking and Patios is considered relevant.
4.3 IOM Biodiversity Strategy 2015 to 2025 4.3.1 The strategic aims (In part): o Managing biodiversity changes to minimise loss of species and habitats. o Maintaining, restoring and enhancing native biodiversity, where necessary.
4.3.2 Habitat loss actions "21. DEFA will continue to promote a policy of 'no net loss' for semi-natural Manx habitats and species and ensure that unavoidable loss is replaced or effectively compensated for."
5.0 PLANNING HISTORY 5.1 The site has been the subject of six previous planning applications, two of which are considered to be materially relevant to the current application.
5.2 Approval was granted under PA 21/00203/B for the erection of a replacement dwelling with associated landscaping. This was approved 23rd April 2021 with four conditions.
5.3 A subsequent Minor Change application was submitted in February 2022 under PA 22/00123/MCH involving reduction of footprint, amendments to roof and utilising roof space, alterations of windows and driveway alignment. This was refused on 24th February 2022 on the grounds that: "The change in siting, mass, design and form are changes which go beyond minor and which would require full assessment as part of a new application."
6.0 REPRESENTATIONS
==== PAGE 7 ====
22/00819/B Page 7 of 10
Copies of representations received can be viewed on the Government's website. This report contains summaries only.
6.1 Representation from the Department of Infrastructure (DOI) Highways Division confirms that they 'Do not oppose' in a letter dated 29 July 2022.
6.2 DEFA's Ecosystems Policy Team has requested that a condition is secured for the development to be undertaken in line with the Manx Wildlife Trust's Precautionary Working Method Statement (PWMS): Common Lizard and Schedule 8 non-native invasive species (10 August 2022).
6.3 Manx national Heritage have reinforced the request by the Ecosystem Policy Team that the development be carried out in line with the Manx Wildlife Trust's Precautionary Working Method Statement for Common Lizard and Schedule 8 non-native invasive species. They further support the enhancement of the lowered sod hedge by placing large stones along the top of the bank for use by common lizards as basking areas (3 August 2022).
6.4 Santon Commissioners have not made any comments on the application although they were consulted on 2 August 2022/23 August 2022.
6.5 No comments have been received from neighbouring properties.
7.0 ASSESSMENT 7.1 The fundamental issues to consider with the current application are: i. The principle of the proposed development (HP 12. HP 14, GP3), and ii. Whether the proposed dwelling would have any adverse impacts on the character and appearance of the area (HP 14, EP 1, the Landscape Character Assessment in the Area Plan, & PC 3/91).
7.2 The principle of the proposed development 7.2.1 In assessing the principle of the proposed development, it should be noted that approval was granted for a replacement dwelling at the site under PA 21/00203/B which is still extant, with a further application to amend the approved scheme via a minor change application refused n then grounds that the change proposed was more than minor. As such, the current scheme seeks to alter a previously approved scheme for the site, with the proposal having a fall-back position to implement the previously approved scheme should approval not be granted for the current scheme.
7.2.2 As was established under the previous application, the former dwelling on site was not of any particular architectural merit which would warrant its retention on site. Also, the former dwelling was still in active use and had not lost its residential use by abandonment. Therefore, as this application builds on the previous principle and only seeks to alter slightly the position of the replacement dwelling, its footprint and appearance, it is considered that the new proposal would be compliant with Housing Policy 12, and in accordance with the principles advocated by General Policy 3.
7.2.3 Given that the circumstances which warranted the removal of the former dwelling and accepted a replacement dwelling has not changed and there has been no policy changes since the previous approval, the principle of the proposed development is acceptable.
7.3 Potential visual impact of the development upon the landscape and individual dwelling 7.3.1 With regard to potential visual impacts resulting from the scheme, it is considered that the site layout and topography is such that there would be clear views from the abutting highway, with distant views of the proposed dwelling achieved over long distances. The concern here, however, should not be whether views would be achieved or not as in this case it is clear that views would certainly be achieved given the factors that have already been
==== PAGE 8 ====
22/00819/B Page 8 of 10
highlighted. Perhaps the key concern should be whether the proposed dwelling would be compliant with the guidelines stipulated in Housing Policy 14.
7.3.2 The first element of the proposal to be assessed is the siting of the proposed dwelling relative to the existing. With the current scheme, it is noted that that the new dwelling would be positioned on the footprint of the former dwelling (although it would be pushed further towards the highway by about 5.7m off the existing footprint). As the siting is only slightly different from the position of the former dwelling, it is considered that this element of the proposal is acceptable.
7.3.3 Turning to the size of the proposed dwelling, it is considered that new dwelling would result in an increase in floor area by about 59% over the former dwelling which had a floor area measuring 588sqm (by creating a floor area measuring 985sqm). Accordingly, the proposal is clearly above the generally permitted 50% threshold as stated within HP 14, which weighs against the development. However, the policy does allow for larger dwellings in certain exceptions which the current scheme is considered to meet. In the first instance, the proposal would involve the replacement of an existing dwelling of poor form with one of a somewhat traditional character. Whilst the new dwelling is not traditional in terms of Manx vernacular proportions and sizes, its appearance would broadly align with the guidelines stipulated in Planning Circular 3/91 in terms of building shape and proportions (including steeply pitched roofs), window proportion and positions, as well as large render and stone finishes which are reflective of the traditional materials.
7.3.4 The proportion, form and appearance of the proposed development, although contemporary in design, with two front gabled pitched roofed sections and a pitch roofed section in the centre linking the pitched roof elements together. The large sections of glazing would be kept at the rear and away from the highway with the windows in front reflecting traditional proportions and sizes. The northeast elevation which is the elevation fronting the highway would be of a height similar to that of the former dwelling with the higher elevation also kept to the rear. This elevation would be finished in stonework effect and render, and imitation slate roof. The frames of the windows and doors are proposed to be black. As there would be very limited views to the rendered sections from the highway, it is considered that the materials proposed would reduce the visual impact of the proposal. Furthermore, as the dwelling would sit further down the slope this would result in a relative height reduction of about 215mm.
7.3.5 Further to the above, the new dwelling would have a reduced visual impact when viewed from the surrounding landscape given that it would be significantly narrower in front (10.3m narrower than the front and rear elevations of the previously approved which was 40.8 long on the widest elevation), and 4.6m narrower than the previously approved when viewed from the side elevation (the previous was 30.1m long on the sides). It is also important to note that the new footprint would be about 655.3sqm, a 260.1sqm (28.4%) reduction in footprint compared to the previously approved dwelling under PA 21/00203/B which was 915.4sqm. As well, if the proposed built footprint is compared with the previous dwelling and outbuildings on site (including detached garage with accommodation over), the proposal would result only in an increase in built footprint of about 40sqm (as the dwelling, garage and detached garden store has a total floor area of 845sqm). Besides, the new scheme would remove the large flat roofed elements included in the previous approval, and offer a more refined site appearance, with the impression of a reduced built scale over the previous which had more buildings with blank rear and side walls overlooking the highway and blocking views to the main dwelling.
7.3.6 An additional consideration is the environmental benefits of the new scheme. Inference in this case could be drawn from a recently refused application for a replacement dwelling under PA 19/00182/B which was considered to be contrary to EP1, GP3 & HP14, due to the siting of the new dwelling not being on the original footprint and also given a new and much larger residential curtilage was also being proposed. This was appealed by the applicant's
==== PAGE 9 ====
22/00819/B Page 9 of 10
where the Planning Inspector recommended an approval, which was subsequently agreed by the Minister. In reserving the decision the Inspector stated: "28. With regard to whether or not the proposal constitutes an overall environmental improvement, the PA takes the view that the improvements simply relate to a better house on a larger site and that these are for the convenience of the appellant and her family. Again, at first sight, that stance is understandable considering the significant difference in size of the two sites. The PA considers, that the differences of siting and size do not result in an overall environmental improvement and, therefore that the proposal is contrary to policy HP14.
7.3.7 The Inspector (and Minister) accepted this line of argument and that "overall environmental improvements" did not just relate to the visual impact upon the environment which the Department had initial concerns, but also other environmental implications i.e. wildlife/habitats/carbon footprint/energy efficiency etc.
7.3.8 In the case of the current scheme, it is considered that there would be no increase in the size of the curtilage, although there would be considerable environmental benefits such as; use of solar panels and air source heat pumps, solar gain achieved through large glazing and building orientation, more thermally and energy efficient construction, and the incorporation of significant landscaping which will enhance the biodiversity value of the site, through hedge planting to provide wildlife benefit and privacy screen between properties and bund to help planting get them established, hedge planting with netting fence until established, graded bank planted with shrubs and ground over plants terraces, and the creation of ornamental hedges. All these could be classed under wildlife/habitats and energy efficiency which are environmental improvements as outlined in the recent decision.
7.3.9 Based on the foregoing, it is considered that the scheme as proposed broadly aligns with the requirements of Housing Policy 15 and would accord with the requirements of Environment Policy 1 of the Strategic Plan, and Landscape Proposal 7 of the Area Plan for the East.
7.4 OTHER MATTERS 7.4.1 All other matters are considered acceptable.
8.0 CONCLUSION 8.1 Overall, in relation to Housing Policy 14 and the visual impact, due to the size increase of the proposed dwelling, it cannot be ignored that the proposal is an increase in size over that of the existing. However, for the reasons outlined in this report it is considered the proposal could be considered to comply with the elements of HP14 which stipulate that exceptions could be made for larger replacement dwellings, where these are of innovative, modern design which are of high quality and would not result in adverse visual impacts. The design, finishes, pitch roof form, siting, and the proposed landscape features (including trees) and level of built development on the site relative to the previous scenario will help to reduce the visual impact of the proposed larger dwelling.
8.2 For the reasons indicated within this report, it is considered the proposal would be acceptable; having no adverse impacts upon private or public amenities and complying with Environment Policy 1, General Policy 3, Housing policy 12 and Housing policy 14 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan, and the
==== PAGE 10 ====
22/00819/B Page 10 of 10
9.0 INTERESTED 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 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 in Article 4(2) who should be given Interested Person Status.
9.3 The Department of Environment Food and Agriculture is responsible for the determination of planning applications. As a result, where officers within the Department make comments in a professional capacity they cannot 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: 10.10.2022
Signed : P VISIGAH
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