85285

==== PAGE 1 ====

                                      22/01417/B                                     Page  1  of  4

PLANNING OFFICER REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

Application No. : 22/01417/B Applicant : Mr Robert Currey Proposal : Extension to form store room at second floor level Site Address : Mill House Old Castletown Road Santon Isle Of Man IM4 1EX

Planning Officer: Mrs Vanessa Porter Photo Taken :

Site Visit :

Expected Decision Level : Officer Delegation

Recommendation

Recommended Decision:

Permitted Date of Recommendation: 04.05.2023 __

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.

This application has been recommended for approval for the following reason. The proposal is deemed not to visually impact the overall traditional quality of the existing building and is in keeping. As such the proposal complies with Planning Circular 3/91, Housing Policy 15 and General Policy 2.

Plans/Drawings/Information;

This decision relates to the following plans and drawings, date stamped received on 9th November 2022; o Drawing No. 01/283/1 Rev A o Drawing No. C/7931/1 Rev B o Drawing No. C/7931/2

This decision also relates to a Bat Survey dated received 25th April 2023.

==== PAGE 2 ====

                                      22/01417/B                                     Page  2  of  4

__

Interested Person Status - Additional Persons

None __

Officer’s Report

THE APPLICATION SITE

1.1 The site relates to 'Mill House', a large traditional mill building sitting between the New and Old Castletown Roads and just a 'stone's throw' from the hairpin corner known as 'blackboards'.

1.2 Adjacent to the main mill building is an outbuilding. Both have permissions in place to facilitate tourist accommodation under 19/00231/C and 22/00838/C.

THE PROPOSAL

2.1 Proposed is the upwards extension of an existing cat slide extension at the rear of the Mill building. The proposed extension will have a pitched roof. The external walls are to be part finished in render to match the existing and part finished in horizontal larch planking to the upper part.

2.2 The floor plans indicate that the extension is to provide a new store room accessed through a break in the wall from an office area.

PLANNING HISTORY

3.1 The site has been subject to a number of previous applications for alterations and extensions to the existing dwelling, but most recently there have been a number of applications for the creation of ancillary accommodation in an outbuilding, and then its subsequent approval for its use for tourism. PA's 19/00231/C and 22/00838/B were both approved for additional use of parts of the main house for tourist accommodation.

3.2 The most relevant previous application to this application is PA22/01116/B which was for "Erection of extension to form store room at second floor level" and was Refused on the basis of, "By reason of its large flat roof design the extension has an adverse visual impact on the existing traditional property contrary to Housing Policy 15 and contrary to the principles of Planning Circular 3/91, General Policy 2 (b, c, g) and Residential Design Guide 2021. The incorporation of the horizontal cladding exacerbates the large flat roof design having an adverse visual impact on the existing property."

PLANNING POLICY

4.1 The site lies within an area zoned as "Not zoned for Development" and an "Area of High Landscape or Coastal Value and Scenic Significance." The 1982 plan also indicates the site as being partially designated as woodland and also recognised as being within an area with height restrictions or other air safety regulations. The site is not within a Conservation Area nor a Flood Risk Zone.

4.2 The key policies for this application are Housing Policy 15 due to the traditional elements of the property, which seeks that extensions or alterations respect the proportion, form and

==== PAGE 3 ====

                                      22/01417/B                                     Page  3  of  4

appearance of the existing property which are mirrored in Planning Circular 3/91, which offers guidance on the design of residential development in the countryside.

4.3 These policies are then followed by, Strategic Policies 1 and 5 which seek to make best use of existing developed sites and ensuring new development is of good design, Spatial Policies 2 and 5 in ensuring development remains within settlement boundaries in line with the spatial hierarchy, paragraph 8.12.1 and General Policy 2 in ensuring development meets with the general standards towards acceptable development and not having an adverse impact on its surroundings or on the neighbours. Section 4 of the Residential Design Guidance 2021 also offers further guidance on extensions to existing residential dwellings and Section 7 addresses good neighbourliness, both are relevant in this case. Transport Policies 9 and 11 seek to safe guard the airport from unacceptable development unless it can be mitigated.

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 that they have no highways interest. (24.11.12)

5.3 No comments have been received from Santon Commissioners at the time of writing this report.

5.4 DEFA Ecosystems have written in firstly to request that a bat survey was undertaken as part of the proposal (7.12.22) and secondly after receiving the bat survey to state that they are happy with the information provided. (02.05.23).

ASSESSMENT

6.1 The site is not designated for development, nor does it meet the expectation criteria of General Policy 3, whilst this is the case Housing Policy 15 and its supporting text clearly allows for residential extensions/alterations in the countryside where they would not a) detract from the countryside and b) that the works must respect the proportion, form and appearance of the existing property.

6.2 The above is also mirrored in Planning Circular 3/91 which provides guidance in rural situations, General Policy 2 which sets out general development standards and requires proposals to respect the site and surroundings in terms of the siting, layout, scale, form, design and landscaping of buildings and the spaces around them and to positively contribute to the character of the locality.

6.3 The proposal within this application is different from the previously refused application, which was for an extension over the same floor area but with an unacceptable flat roof. The proposal here is for a pitched roof which would be more in keeping with the traditional character and appearance of the existing property.

6.4 Whilst the proposal is introducing larch planking to the exterior, this is proposed to match the existing dormer already upon the property, as such this is an acceptable material and will fit within the already existing property.

6.5 Turning towards the proposal and the height restrictions/ air safety. The proposal is attached to an existing building and is not proposed to be taller than the already existing property, as such the proposal is not deemed considered to harm the airport or the flight paths in place.

CONCLUSION

==== PAGE 4 ====

                                      22/01417/B                                     Page  4  of  4

7.1 On balance, the proposal is deemed acceptable as the proposal is deemed not to visually impact the overall traditional quality of the existing building and is in keeping. As such the proposal complies with Planning Circular 3/91, Housing Policy 15 and General Policy 2.

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 __

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: 09.05.2023

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.