81127

==== PAGE 1 ====

                                      22/00169/B                                     Page  1  of  4

PLANNING OFFICER REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

Application No. : 22/00169/B Applicant : Mr Paul & Mrs Andrea Stallard Proposal : Erection of extension and change of use of land from agricultural to residential Site Address : Wayside Gordon Peel Isle Of Man IM5 3AT

Planning Officer: Mrs Vanessa Porter Photo Taken :

Site Visit :

Expected Decision Level : Officer Delegation

Recommendation

Recommended Decision:

Permitted Date of Recommendation: 05.01.2023 __

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. 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 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.

This application has been recommended for approval for the following reason. In this case there is an absence of practical harm to the countryside by the extension of the residential curtilage due to its small size and where it is situated within the streetscene, it is considered that the proposal would not offend the objectives of GP3 and EP1 which seek to avoid harm to the countryside and therefore the application is considered acceptable.

Plans/Drawings/Information;

This decision relates to the following plans and drawings, date stamped received on 2nd February 2022;

==== PAGE 2 ====

                                      22/00169/B                                     Page  2  of  4

o Drawing No. 01 Rev A This decision also relates to the following plans and drawings, received on the 21st December 2022; o Drawing No. 02 Rev A o Drawing No. 03 Rev A

__

Interested Person Status - Additional Persons

None __

Officer’s Report

THE APPLICATION SITE

1.1 The application site is within the curtilage of "Wayside" which is rooms within the roofspace bungalow situated to the Western side of the main road which runs from Patrick to Glen Maye.

THE PROPOSAL

2.1 The current planning application seeks approval for the change of use from part of the side field connected to the property from agricultural to residential.

PLANNING HISTORY

3.1 The previous applications are not relevant in the assessment of this application.

PLANNING POLICY

4.1 The site lies within an area zoned as "not for development" and an "Area of High Landscape or Coastal Value and Scenic Significance" and an "Area of Private Woodland or Parkland" on the 1982 Development Plan, North Map. The site is not within a Conservation Area nor a Flood Risk Zone.

4.2 With regards to the change of use of the land from agricultural to residential the following Strategic Policies are applicable, Environment Policy 1 seeks to prevent development which would adversely affect the side other than in exceptional circumstances, Environment Policy 2 which seeks that development in areas of High Landscape and Costal Value and Scenic Significance does not harm the character and quality of the landscape, Environment Policy 3 which seeks that development will not result in the unacceptable loss of or damage of woodland areas, General Policy 3 states that development will not be permitted outside of those areas which are zoned for development on the appropriate Area Plan other than a number of stated exceptions, which do not include the extension of existing dwellings

REPRESENTATIONS

5.1 The following representations can be found in full online;

5.2 Highway Services have considered the proposal and state "No Highways Interest." (23.12.22)

5.3 Patrick Parish Commissioners have considered the proposal and state they have no objection subject to tree protection measures for the mature trees. (18.03.22)

==== PAGE 3 ====

                                      22/00169/B                                     Page  3  of  4

5.4 DEFA Forestry have written in to object to the proposal on the basis that the proposal includes a lack of information to properly judge the arboricultural impact of the proposal. (28.02.22)

ASSESSMENT

6.1 The main issues to consider in the assessment of this planning application are:

• principle
• other matters

6.2 PRINCIPLE

6.2.1 Generally when looking at the extension to an existing residential curtilage, there is the potential that this could bring adverse impacts where the open countryside is eroded by expansions of gardens with accompanying Permitted Development rights and domestic paraphernalia.

6.2.2 As such the main consideration when assessing the change of use of the land is whether the extended curtilage would have a change on the character and quality of the landscape, in relation to the countryside. The application site itself lies outside of any settlement, but within a cluster of buildings and is not designated for development which includes extending the residential curtilage into agricultural land. In principle, therefore, the proposal is contrary to Environment Policy 1, which seeks to protect the countryside and ecology for its own sake. However, the policy also seeks to ensure that development would not have any adverse visual effect and the proposal should be assessed on this as well as on the basis of the principle of the development.

6.2.3 Whilst it is not normal practice to allow the extension of residential curtilages in the countryside, the proposed extension in this specific case is not considered to be excess, with the total area totalling approximately 63.76m2. It can also be clearly seen with the Departments Aerials that this land has been separated by fencing since at least 2001 and it specially can be seen as being used for residential purposes upon the April 2010 Google Streetview as such, this parcel of land has not been used as agricultural for a long time period.

6.2.5 Overall the openness and rural character of the countryside is not expected to be undermined as a result of the proposed curtilage extension in principle.

6.3 OTHER MATTERS

6.3.1 It should be noted that the original application included an erection of a side extension, which brought forward issues regarding the existing trees on site and how the proposed extension might affect the trees. As such the proposed extension was removed from the application.

6.3.2 As such due to the original land zoning of the site and the proposed extension bringing forward issues regarding the existing trees, a condition should be attached to remove Permitted Development rights.

CONCLUSION

7.1 In this case there is an absence of practical harm to the countryside by the extension of the residential curtilage due to its small size and where it is situated within the streetscene, it is considered that the proposal would not offend the objectives of GP3 and EP1 which seek to avoid harm to the countryside and therefore the application is considered acceptable.

INTERESTED PERSON STATUS

==== PAGE 4 ====

                                      22/00169/B                                     Page  4  of  4

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 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 : Permitted

Date: 09.01.2023

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.