Loading document...
==== PAGE 1 ====
22/01408/B Page 1 of 5
PLANNING OFFICER REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
Application No. : 22/01408/B Applicant : Mr Roy Niven Proposal : Rebuild the existing garage building and replace it with a new garage and bedroom accommodation over connected to the main house. An existing single story conservatory to the rear of the property is to be demolished and rebuilt Site Address : Paper Mill East Baldwin Isle Of Man IM4 5EP
Planning Officer: Mrs Vanessa Porter Photo Taken : Site Visit : Expected Decision Level : Officer Delegation
Recommendation
Recommended Decision:
Permitted Date of Recommendation: 13.07.2023 __
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. Prior to occupation the flood resistance measures, as shown in the Flood Risk Assessment dated received 25th November 2022, must be provided and easily available at all times and retained as such thereafter.
Reason: In the interests of occupants' safety in the event of a flood.
This application has been recommended for approval for the following reason. The proposal complies with General Policy 2 and Housing Policy 16 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016.
Plans/Drawings/Information;
This decision relates to the following plans and drawings, date stamped received on 25th November 2022; o P01
==== PAGE 2 ====
22/01408/B Page 2 of 5
o P2 Rev A o P3 o P4 o P5 o P6 o P7 o P8 Rev A o P9 Rev A o P10 o P11 o P12 o P13 o P14
This decision also relates to a bat survey dated received 11th May 2023. __
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 these do relate to planning considerations:
Flood Management Division (DOI) __
Officer’s Report
THE APPLICATION SITE
1.1 The application site is the residential curtilage of Papermill Cottage, East Baldwin a detached two storey dwelling set within large grounds. The property sits in a clearing of trees on the western side of the East Baldwin Road and is accessed from the main highway by its own private lane. The property is not overly visible from the main public thoroughfares.
THE PROPOSAL
2.1 The current planning application seeks approval for the removal of the existing single storey garage extension and erection of a two storey extension to the East of the property, which is to have a roof height of the existing dwelling. The proposal will add a two car garage, utility/ boot room and store to ground floor level, with a laundry room and two bedrooms to first floor level.
2.2 The proposal also proposes the removal of an existing conservatory to the rear of the property and erection of a sun room extension with the same details as the existing sun room.
PLANNING HISTORY
3.1 The previous applications are not relevant in the assessment of this application.
PLANNING POLICY
4.1 The application site is not designated for development on the Area Plan in the East and is not situated within a Conservation Area. The property is situated within both a River and Tidal & Surface Water Flood Risk Zone. In terms of planning policy, the key policies are Environment Policy 1 which seeks that the countryside is protected for its own sake, Housing Policy 16 in
==== PAGE 3 ====
22/01408/B Page 3 of 5
respect of the visual assessment of the proposal within the streetscene and rural area, along with the general standards towards development as set out in General Policy 2 notably those parts referring to amenity and highway safety (parts b, c, g, h and i). Due to the proposal being within a Flood Risk Zone, Environment Policy 10 is also relevant, which seeks that a flood risk assessment and details of proposed mitigation is received with an application.
4.2 These policies are then followed by Strategic Policy 5 which seeks that new development should make a positive contribution to the environment of the Island, General Policy 2 sets out general development control standards in connection with the Residential Design Guidance, Environment Policy 1 seeks to prevent development which would adversely affect the side other than in exceptional circumstances and 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, below is a short summery;
5.2 Highway Services have considered the proposal and state, "After reviewing this Application, Highway Services HDC finds it to have no significant negative impact upon highway safety, network functionality and /or parking." (08.12.22)
5.3 Braddan Commissioners have considered the proposal and state they have no objection. (19.12.22)
5.4 DEFA Ecosystem Policy Officer has stated that after further correspondence that "Our determination is that bats are not roosting in the garage building of the paper mill and that the works can proceed without mitigation for bats being required." (14.06.23)
5.5 DOI Flood Risk Management Division have considered the application and note that the property is within a flood risk as such they request that all building materials and methods of building are flood resistant. (12.12.22)
5.6 Inland Fisheries have commented to state they have no objections.
ASSESSMENT
6.1 The main issues to consider in the assessment of this planning application are:
6.2 PRINCIPLE
6.2.1 The site is not designated for development, nor does the proposal meet the expectation criteria in General Policy 3. However, Housing Policy 16 and it's supporting text clearly allows for residential extensions in the countryside where they would not detract from the countryside, in the case of extensions of non- traditional, poor or dwellings of inappropriate form, this means that they must not increase the overall impact of the dwelling when viewed by the public.
==== PAGE 4 ====
22/01408/B Page 4 of 5
6.2.2 Due to the sites location upon the East Baldwin Road and the general topography of the site and surrounding area, the proposed site is very shielded from any public vantage points, as such it is deemed that the overall principle in general is acceptable, it is required to see whether the proposed works on this site would be acceptable.
6.3 DETAIL OF DESIGN
6.3.1 Turning towards the overall design appearance of the proposal, due to the different but attached sections of the proposal, it is necessary to assess these separately.
6.3.2 When looking at the main bulk of the proposal which is the removal of the existing single storey side extension and erection of a two storey side extension which is to provide a utility room, garage and store to ground floor level and two bedrooms with laundry room to first floor level, we can see that the proposal has been designed to match the features such as window fenestrations, above window accents and pitches from the already existing property. Whilst there is no difference in the roof height from the main dwelling and the proposed extension, nor could the proposed extension be called subordinate when viewed as a whole, ultimately the proposal fits within the already existing dwelling and would not detract from the existing dwellings appearance enough to warrant a refusal.
6.3.3 Turning towards the other works proposed which is the removal of the existing conservatory to the rear and erection of a replacement flat roofed extension, this proposal is copying the already existing flat roofed extension to the rear, as such ultimately the proposal will fit in with the existing and deemed acceptable.
6.4 IMPACT ON NEIGHBOURING AMNEITY
6.4.1 With regards to neighbouring amenity, the site has an additional property situated to the South of "Paper Mill," "Highcliffe" which is approximately 30m away at a higher elevation than "Paper Mill" and as stated within the accompanying Design Statement, within the applicants ownership. Whilst this is the case, due to the elevation difference in the sites and the distance it is unlikely that the proposed extensions to "Paper Mill" would impact "Highcliffe" above and beyond what is currently in place enough to warrant a refusal.
6.5 LANDSCAPE AND ENVIRONMENT
6.5.1 In terms of landscape impact, given the findings above it is not considered that there are any concerns that would warrant refusal.
6.5.2 Whilst it is noted that the site is situated next to a river, Inland Fisheries have considered the application and have no objections. Turning towards the fact that the property is within a Flood Risk Zone, the applicants have provided a Flood Risk Statement which has several mitigation measures. DOI Flood Risk Management Division have stated that they do not oppose subject to all building materials and methods being flood resistant, as such a condition should be applied.
6.5.3 Turning towards the comments raised by DEFA Ecology requesting a Bat Survey, this was received on the 11the of May and further comments received my DEFA Ecology state that they have no objections to the work, but do want the applicants to be vigilant for bats when doing the works.
6.6 HIGHWAYS
6.6.1 Noting the scope of the proposal, the available parking on the site already and the response from highways, no concerns are raised in this regard.
==== PAGE 5 ====
22/01408/B Page 5 of 5
6.7 OTHER MATTERS
6.7.1 The proposed works are an extension to an already existing dwelling, as such the proposal is not expected to create any changes or new issues in respect of criminal actively or spread of fire. The proposal whilst increasing the surface area of the dwelling, any water run- off will be dealt with as per the existing arrangement of the main dwelling. The proposed extension will not increase water usage of the dwelling and therefore there are no new issues in this respect.
CONCLUSION
7.1 The proposed extension is deemed acceptable in terms of their form, mass and design by providing a suitable extension to an existing residential property and as such complies with General Policy 2 and Housing Policy 16.
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.
8.3 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 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: 14.07.2023
Determining officer Signed : C BALMER
Chris Balmer
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