DEC Officer Report

PLANNING OFFICER REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

Application No.: 23/00889/B Applicant: Mr Michael Sloane Proposal: Construction of a boundary wall along the roadside frontage of Hawthorn Cottage Site Address: Hawthorn Cottage Maughold Isle Of Man IM7 1AS Principal Planner: Mr Chris Balmer Expected Decision Level: Officer Delegation Recommended Decision: Permitted Date of Recommendation: 06.10.2023

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. No development shall take place until full details of soft landscaping works have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Department and these works shall be carried out as approved. Details of the soft landscaping works include details of new planting showing, type, size and position of each, which includes planting behind the boundary wall hereby approved which runs from the sycamore tree to the western pedestrian gate. All planting comprised in the approved details of landscaping must be carried out in the first planting and seeding seasons following the completion of the development. Any trees or plants which die or become seriously damaged or diseased must be replaced in the next planting season with others of a similar size and species

Reason: To ensure the provision of an appropriate landscape setting to the development and for biodiversity net gain.

• C 3. No development shall take place until details of a bird nest box suitable for house sparrows to be installed within site has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Department and these works shall be carried out as approved. Reason: To ensure biodiversity net gain.

This application has been recommended for approval for the following reason.

The proposed new walling is acceptable in terms of form, mass, finish and design to an existing residential property and as such has no significant impact upon public or private amenity and therefore complies with the relevant planning policies outlined and Section 18(4) of the Town and Country Planning Act (1999).

Plans/Drawings/Information; This approval relates to the submitted documents and drawings reference numbers all received; 25.08.2023 01-23 REV B 03-23 REV B _______________________________________________________________ Interested Person Status – Additional Persons

It is recommended that the following persons should not be given Interested Person Status as they are not considered to have sufficient interest in the subject matter of the application to take part in any subsequent proceedings and are not mentioned in Article 4(2):

The owners/occupiers of Dhrynane House, Maughold as they do not refer to the relevant issues in accordance with paragraph 2C of the Policy and as they have not explained how the development would impact the lawful use of land owned or occupied by them and in relation to the relevant issues identified in paragraph 2C of the Policy, as is required by paragraph 2D of the Policy.

The owners/occupiers of Ballaterson Farm, Church Road, Maughold as they do not refer to the relevant issues in accordance with paragraph 2C of the Policy and as they have not explained how the development would impact the lawful use of land owned or occupied by them and in relation to the relevant issues identified in paragraph 2C of the Policy, as is required by paragraph 2D of the Policy and are not within 20m of the application site and the development is not automatically required to be the subject of an EIA by Appendix 5 of the Strategic Plan, in accordance with paragraph 2B of the Policy

The Society for the Preservation of the Manx Countryside and the Environment as they do not clearly identify the land which is owned or occupied which is considered to be impacted on by the proposed development in accordance with paragraph 2A of the Policy; are not within 20m of the application site and the development is not automatically required to be the subject of an EIA by Appendix 5 of the Strategic Plan, in accordance with paragraph 2B of the Policy; as they do not refer to the relevant issues in accordance with paragraph 2C of the Policy and as they have not explained how the development would impact the lawful use of land owned or occupied by them and in relation to the relevant issues identified in paragraph 2C of the Policy, as is required by paragraph 2D of the Policy. _____________________________________________________________________________

Officer’s Report

1.0 THE APPLICATION SITE - 1.1 The application site is the residential curtilage of Hawthorn Cottage, Maughold, a two storey detached property located within the centre of Maughold Village. The site is bounded to the north by the road, and the centre triangle grass area of Maughold via a mature hedge. To the north east corner of the a site is mature vegetation and trees.

2.0 THE PROPOSAL - 2.1 The application seeks approval for the construction of a boundary wall along the roadside frontage of Hawthorn Cottage. The works include removal of existing hedgerow (does not require planning permission) and replacing the hedgerow with a boundary wall of a height of 1.25m high which would be finished in a painted render to match the main dwelling. The two existing pedestrian access are to be retained. - 2.2 Initially the application included the installation of a access; however, this has now being omitted.

3.0 PLANNING HISTORY - 3.1 The previous applications on the site are considered to be material to the assessment of this application; - 3.2 Erection of a replacement summerhouse - 19/00674/B - APPROVED - 3.3 Erection of a summer house - 07/01616/B - APPROVED

- 4.0 PLANNING POLICY

4.1 The site is on land not designated for development but also within an area zoned as High Landscape Value or Costal Value and Scenic Significance under the Isle of Man Development Plan Order 1982. The site is also within Maughold Conservation Area. - 4.2 General Policy 2 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;
• (d) does not adversely affect the protected wildlife or locally important habitats on the site or adjacent land, including water courses;

• (g) does not affect adversely the amenity of local residents or the character of the locality;

4.3 Environment Policy 35 states: 'Within Conservation Areas, the department will permit only development which would preserve or enhance the character or appearance of the Area, and will ensure that the special features contributing to the character and quality are protected against inappropriate development.' - 4.4 Conservation Areas of Planning Policy Statement 1/01 (Policy and Guidance Notes for the Conservation of the Historic Environment of the Isle of Man) - 4.5 Section 18(4) of the Town and Country Planning Act (1999) states, "(4) Where any area is for the time being a conservation area, special attention shall be paid to the desirability of preserving or enhancing its character or appearance in the exercise, with respect to any buildings or other land in the area, of any powers under this Act".

4.7 Residential Design Guide 2021 - 5.0 REPRESENTATIONS

5.1 The following representations can be found in full online. Initially some parties raised concerns of the access. However as this has been omitted the following comments do not relate (in the main) to the access that was proposed.

5.2 Highway Services have considered the proposal and state (31.08.2023);

• "Highway Services HDC note the updated plans and elevations dated 25th August 2023 online the application 24/00889/B and as the off-street parking has been removed from the proposals, HDC now find the application acceptable and therefore do not oppose subject to the wall elevation being conditioned as per dwg 03-23 B."
• 5.3 Garff Commissioners have considered the proposal and have no objections. (18.09.2023) "Members had previously outlined their concerns that a number of structures associated with the dwelling had not been included in the elevation drawings. It was noted that this is a sensitive location within the Maughold Conservation Area and that Maughold Village Green and Church area have an iconic status in terms of the Island's culture and heritage. The Commissioners are very concerned that the removal of the hedge will cause a significant change in the character of the area. The planning statement made by the applicant's agent was noted. Previous permissions at the site have been given on the basis that the hedge will screen the development. If the screen is removed, then the various structures will be highly visible and intrusive.

The unanimous consensus was that a better solution needs to be determined to safeguard and preserve the character of the Village Green and the approach to Kirk Maughold. Members requested that amended be brought forward before any approval is granted. The Commissioners object to these proposals until these matters are reconciled."

5.4 The Ecosystem Policy Officer comments (31.08.2023); "The Ecosystem Policy Team are glad to see that the plans have been revised to retain the large Sycamore. We still do not understand why the whole hedge has to be removed, especially considering that the vehicle entrance has been removed. However, we are glad to see that some mitigation planting is intended in the form of holly and honeysuckle planting and this should be secured via a condition on approval, but we still believe that mitigation is required for the loss of nesting habitat and so we request that an additional condition is secured for a bird nest box suitable for house sparrows to be installed on site." - 5.5 The Assistant Registered Building Officers comments (06.10.2023); "The boundary treatments of the properties within this area of the conservation area are a mixture of exposed stone walls, hedges, white-washed stone walls, and painted render walls. The proposal of a painted render wall on the boundary of this property is therefore judged to be a traditional boundary treatment, and judged appropriate. Indeed, the proposed boundary walls would in many respects match those of Thie Dhrynane next door (streetview image below). With the above in mind, I would consider the proposals to preserve the special character of the conservation area, and to therefore be acceptable from a building conservation point of view." - 5.6 The owners/occupiers of Dhrynane House, Maughold object to the application which are summarised as (07.08.2023 & 19.09.2023); Incorrect plans, the site plans appear to have a number of structures missing and is not accurate; Over recent years, there have been a number of building works and outhouses added to the property, only one of which appears to have planning consent. These have not been included on previous site plans and would be visible should the hedge be replaced by a wall. This includes a second shed immediately in front of the cottage and a wooden platform. In addition to this a conservatory added previously is also not on the plans and would be visible should this plan be approved; The summerhouse, whose replacement was granted planning permission, is an eyesore and as far as we are aware was not used as a summerhouse but as a motorcycle workshop by the previous owners; We feel that the whole removal of this hedge and installation of the driveway and proposed wall would be very detrimental to the whole look of the village green area. The large shed would be completely visible from three sides and this hard landscaping would not be in keeping with the vista currently in Maughold Village Conservation Area; Perhaps a new hedge could be planted behind the wall to match others in the village in order to soften the landscape; and I note there

• are no gates on the application and would therefore presume the original ones are to be reinstalled.
• 5.7 The owners/occupiers of Ballaterson Farm, Church Road, Maughold, object to the application which are summarised as (16.08.2023); concerns relating to the use of the adjacent road, in relation to the new access and it is therefore important that the road shown on the application is considered as a main road and not a lane or no through road as stated on the application
• 5.8 The Society for the Preservation of the Manx Countryside and the Environment comment (18.09.2023); The property lies in the Maughold Conservation Area; Old photographs of the village show that the boundary walls to the houses and cottages to be in undressed stone walls. At some point the adjoining property, Thie Dhrynane had the boundary wall rendered over; concerns over the proposals as a rendered block wall is far too urban for such a rural location as it would have to have an irregular finish to simulate a stone wall that had been rendered; and we also have concerns that a temporary timber building will be exposed as a result of the removal of the present bush hedge and this would be detrimental to the visual amenities of the Conservation Area whereas any work taking place should enhance the area. The repositioning of the wooden building to behind the building line or its screening should form part of this application.
• 5.9 In repose to the representations received the applicants responded which can be summarised as (15.09.2023): The letter from Dhrynane House refers to the 'eye sore' which is the summer house on our property (this was permitted by planning under an application submitted by the previous owners), reference has also been made to a second shed to the front of the property in which a claim is made that the shed is not in keeping with the vista. The summer house will (as previous) be hidden from the roadway and village green as the recommended planting matures. We would also (if advised) be happy to remove the shed which is in a state of disrepair to address any concern the planning team may have. We would also like to advise that the wooden platform highlighted on the letter is incorrect, the identified area is a patio accessed from the kitchen which is of a paved brick surface.

The appearance of the proposed new boundary wall rendered and painted to match our property will be more aesthetically pleasing than the thinning hedge which is currently acting as the boundary between the roadway and our front garden, in addition you will note from correspondence from the owner of Ballaterson that reference has been made to the overgrown hedging encroaching on the public roadway, we can confirm this is the case and again would acknowledge that a boundary wall with the planned ecological mitigation as recommended would resolve this issue.

- 6.0 ASSESSMENT

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

• - Statutory test
• - Potential impact upon character and appearance of the Conservation Area
• - Potential impact upon highway safety

- 6.2 CONSERVATION AREA STATUTORY TEST

• 6.2.1 Prior to the assessment elements of this application, it is necessary to apply the Conservation Area statutory test as referenced in section 4.5 of this assessment on whether the proposal would preserve or enhance the Conservation Area.
• 6.2.2 As outlined the removal of the existing hedgerow does not require planning permission and therefore little planning weight can be attached to this element. The proposal is to replicate the existing boundary wall which fronts the neighbouring property Thie Dhrynane, as well as similar front boundary walls found in the immediate vicinity. In terms of design, size, height, finishes and overall appearance, it is considered the proposed wall would be an

• appropriate additional in this location, fitting with the character and quality of the Conservation Area and also the traditional dwelling within the application site. The proposal would preserve the character or appearance of the Area and therefore comply with Section 18(4) of the Town and Country Planning Act (1999).
• 6.3 POTENTIAL IMPACT UPON CHARACTER AND APPEARANCE OF THE CONSERVATION AREA

• 6.3.1 The Planning Department has a duty to determine whether such proposals are in keeping with not only the individual building, but the special character and quality of the area as a whole. With this in mind it is very relevant to consider Environment Policy 35 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan (adopted June 2016). This policy indicates that development within Conservation Areas will only be permitted if they would preserve or enhance the character or appearance of the Area, and will ensure that the special features contributing to the character and quality are protected against inappropriate development.
• 6.3.2 As outlined previously (paragraph 6.2.2), there are no concerns in relation to the new wall, for the reasons indicated and therefore this proposal is considered to preserve the character or appearance of the Conservation Area and would comply with Environment Policy 35.
• 6.3.3 It is noted that concerns relate to appearance of the summerhouse by the removal of the mature hedgerow along the frontage. As outlined, the removal or reducing the height of the hedge does not require planning approval and could be done irrespective of this application.
• 6.3.4 It is noted that the Planning Officer report for the previously approved application (19/00674/B) stated; "6.3 The proposed building would be nestled between existing buildings within Maughold Village. Furthermore, there is currently mature landscaping along the eastern and northern boundaries of the site which would also help in screening the proposed building. Accordingly, distance views of the proposed building would be difficult to achieve. It is also noted the design, height and finish of the building would also be helpful in reducing the visual impact the building may have. Overall, it is considered the proposal would preserve the Conservation Area and be an appropriate form of development within this site. From a visual perspective, it is not considered that there would be any increased impact from the existing summerhouse which the proposed would replace."
• 6.3.5 While the hedge does not require planning approval for its removal/cutting, it is noted that one reason for its removal is to make way for the new boundary wall. Accordingly, it is considered that mitigation in the form of the planting of new landscaping behind the proposed wall would be appropriate. It is noted the submitted plans show this, albeit does not extend to the rear of the summerhouse. It is considered the landscaping should. Therefore a condition should be attached which seeks additional information on the type, centres and location of planting proposed.

- 6.4 ECOLOGY

• 6.4.1 The retention of the large Sycamore and the proposed new landscaping overcomes the initial concerns of the Ecosystem Policy Officer. A condition for a bird nest box suitable for house sparrows to be installed on site should be attached.
• 7.0 CONCLUSION

7.1 The proposed new walling is acceptable in terms of their form, mass, finish and design to an existing residential property and as such has no significant impacts upon public or private amenities and therefore complies with the relevant planning policies outlined and Section 18(4) of the Town and Country Planning Act (1999).

- 8.0 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: 09.10.2023 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.