Loading document...
Application No.: 16/00164/B Applicant: Mr Richard & Mrs Sara Hogg Proposal: Alterations and extension to dwelling, alterations to driveway and vehicular access Site Address: Creg Ny Shee Lhergydhoo Peel Isle of Man IM5 2AE Case Officer : Mr Edmond Riley Photo Taken: 31.03.2016 Site Visit: 31.03.2016 Expected Decision Level: Officer Delegation
1.0 THE APPLICATION SITE - 1.1 The application site is a parcel of land representing the residential curtilage of a dwelling currently known as 'Creg ny Chree' - but previously known as 'Medehamsted' - and which is located to the northwestern side of the A4 highway as it travels northeast out of Peel. The Raad ny Foillan also runs along this stretch of highway. - 1.2 Creg ny Chree is a large, detached bungalow with some accommodation within the roof space (two bedrooms and an office) and which has evidently been significantly altered since its original construction. While it might not necessarily be considered of poor form, it is certainly not traditional. Its footprint is not dissimilar to a 'capital T' and the slight variance in form from the more common rectangular footprints also benefits from some gable features and differentiation in roof heights throughout. - 1.3 The dwelling is sat within its own grounds in an area of clearly defined countryside, but this general area just northeast of Peel is characterised by individual dwellings and the occasional small cluster of dwellings as well. Opposite Creg ny Chree to the southeast and northeast are two further dwellings ('Lhergydhoo Cottage' and 'Shilley Aalin' respectively). The former is very prominent from the highway and is a traditional Manx cottage that has been extended to the side in a somewhat unsympathetic way, while the latter is less prominent and appears to be of a similar construction era and history of alteration at Creg ny Chree itself. - 1.4 It is very visible though by no means prominent from the highway from the southwest, but is otherwise shielded from view by robust vegetation behind a Manx hedgerow that line the A4 here, and also by Shilley Aalin to the northeast. The Raad ny Foillan runs quite near and parallel to the southwestern boundary line and views of the site are certainly achievable from the public footpath here though not from the highway itself. - 1.5 The access to the site is to its southeastern corner and provides fairly good albeit disturbed visibility to the southwest, with a low hedge, gates, pillars, trees and road signs evident. The visibility achievable to the northeast is poor due to the trees and hedging / banking described above. The driveway itself rises by about 2.5m over its roughly 40m of length at a fairly consistent slope.
2.0 THE PROPOSAL - 2.1 Full planning approval is sought for four distinct kinds of development: a number of alterations to the dwelling, as well as alterations to the access and driveway, in addition to the installation of some solar panels; finally, the levelling of the garden to the west is also proposed. - 2.2 The alterations to the dwelling would result in the creation of three projecting gable features in a northwestern direction, which would provide for an extended lounge and dining room at ground floor and two extended and one new bedroom at first floor; the existing office would be lost for the additional bedroom. These extensions are complemented by a single dormer window on the other roof pitch for the southwesternmost of the bedrooms. The upper floors would also have a balcony with glass screens. - 2.3 Also proposed is a new entrance lobby with a timber-clad gable and tone cladding below to match that found elsewhere on the dwelling. - 2.4 Other alterations are shown internally as relating to the external alterations also proposed but these in themselves do not require planning approval. - 2.5 The photovoltaic panels would be installed on - and would cover - the southeast-facing plane of roof on the corresponding side of the proposed dormer window. - 2.6 The highway access would be enlarged quite significantly, from its existing 4m to roughly 14m. This would require the removal of the short section of hedge here and also some of the existing walling, gates, pillars and hedging plants as well as the telegraph pole that sit within this area. The driveway would be shaped to tie in with the existing width within 16m, while it would also be expanded quite significantly closer to the dwelling. This would be supported by some fairly extensive engineering works providing banking to support the new driveway / parking area. - 2.7 Finally, the garden to the west of the driveway would also be flattened out and would again be supported by some banking around it. - 2.8 Originally proposed was a wind turbine, located fairly centrally towards the northern side of the site. The pole on which the turbine would have been mounted was 7.8m above ground level, while the highest of the turbine arms would have been 9.1m above ground level. The agent to the application commented as follows: "The turbine is in this position due to the strong North-Westerly winds, being stronger in general, and the lowest position available to allow for the height of the turbine and the best height in which to gain the best from a wind current." - 2.9 In view of concern relating to the turbine raised during the consultation process by both a local resident and the Commissioners, the agents / applicants decided to withdraw this element of the proposal. The amended plans and description was circulated for information - in view of the fact that less development was proposed than was initially the case, it was felt this was sufficient and that the application need not be re-advertised as is normal in circumstances where a description has changed.
3.0 PLANNING HISTORY - 3.1 The dwelling was extended under two previous applications submitted in 1985 and 2000 (PAs 85/01153/B and 00/01424/B).
4.1 The site falls within an area of 'white land' as zoned on the 1982 Development Plan, and is also zoned as being an Area of High Landscape Value or Coastal and Scenic Significance. - 4.2 As such, the proposal needs to be assessed against the wording of both Environment Policies 1 and 2:
4.3 The proposed alterations to the dwelling should be assessed having regard to the wording of Housing Policy 16; while the dwelling is not traditional (and hence Housing Policy 15 does not apply), neither is it considered to be of especially poor form, although this is somewhat of a subjective judgement and it is freely accepted that some people may consider Creg ny Chree as being of poor form.
Housing Policy 16: "The extension of non-traditional dwellings or those of poor or inappropriate form will not generally be permitted where this would increase the impact of the building as viewed by the public."
4.4 Given that the land is not zoned for development, there are no specific policies against which to assess the proposals regarding the garden and driveway. General Policy 2 is the most relevant, however, and also contains some useful wording in respect of the wider development proposals.
General Policy 2 (in part): "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:
4.5 The proposed solar panels can in part be considered against the policies outlined above, but they will also need to be considered against Energy Policies 1 and 4.
Energy Policy 1: "Proposals for the provision of energy supply facilities or development arising as incidental to such facilities will be expected to comply with all other policies of this Plan to ensure that any effect on the environment is minimised whilst ensuring that the community's needs for energy are satisfied."
Energy Policy 4: "Development involving alternative sources of energy supply, including wind, water and tide power, and the use of solar panels, will be judged against the environmental objectives and policies set out in this Plan. Installations involving wind, water and tide power will require the submission of an EIA."
5.1 Highway Services of the Department of Infrastructure stated that they did not oppose the proposal on 22.02.2016. - 5.2 German Parish Commissioners initially (on 24.02.16) sought deferral of the decision until the Commissioners had had the opportunity to consider the proposal, and then later offered no objection on 08.03.16, although they did express "reservations with regard to the height of the wind turbine". - 5.3 The owner / occupier of Knocksharry House, which is a dwelling on the Switchback Road, objected to the proposal in comments received 01.03.2016. The concerns raised relate to the fact that the proposed location for the wind turbine is not properly defined, and so the application lacks care and "the peppering of our beautiful landscape with wind turbines can only be detrimental for our Island", which is also incongruous with The Role of Landscape Character in Development document. - 5.4 No further comments were received from any correspondent following the circulation of the amended plans and description.
6.1 The different elements are assessed in turn. The proposed alterations to the dwelling - 6.2 Housing Policy 16, which is probably the key policy, requires that alterations to a nontraditionally styled dwelling will not be permitted where these will increase the impact of the dwelling as viewed by the public. The largest scale extensions, forming the gable and dormer windows, are also those that are the most prominent. Therefore, the dwelling's appearance will certainly be visibly altered from both the Raad ny Foillan footpath and the A4 highway. - 6.3 That being said, the impact of the appearance will not be especially different from that which exists now. The dwelling will remain one of non-traditional appearance but the continuation of the existing varied architectural forms and proportions will not alter its impact significantly from the situation at present. As such, it is considered that the proposal complies with Housing Policy 16. - 6.4 General Policy 2 also requires that extensions and alterations proposed to a dwelling should be appropriate in terms of the siting, layout, scale, form, design and landscaping of buildings and the spaces around them. While this policy does only apply to land zoned for development, which this site is not, the text provides important general design criteria for consideration. In this, and as noted already, the alterations proposed would not be out of scale with the existing dwelling in its much-altered form. The new porch would help break up an existing, fairly blank façade to the benefit of the dwelling. It is therefore considered that the alterations proposed would, somewhat
on balance, have an overall beneficial impact on the appearance of the dwelling even if it might in some ways be said to reflect the continued 'spread' of it.
The proposed alterations to the access and driveway
6.5 The existing access is, as noted, poor. The expanded access would provide an improvement to visibility in both directions. A much greater improvement could possibly be achieved were the landscape features to the south of the site and lining the highway removed but this could well be to the significant detriment of the appearance of the area and contrary to part (f) of General Policy 2. However, any improvement is to be welcomed and the manner proposed to achieve this will not affect the valuable, traditionally Manx, landforms mentioned a moment ago. Indeed, the short section of hedging that would be lost sits between the robust Manx hedgerow and the access on one side and a wall on the other such that it looks a little out of place and its loss would consequently not be lamented. - 6.6 While the new access will be much larger than the existing, views into the domestic curtilage of the dwelling here already very clearly indicate the residential nature of the site and this would be continued with the new access. It would also not be a particularly expansive entrance with pillars and walls, which can offer an inappropriate grandeur to a residential dwelling. The fact that the access would be larger would also provide for additional visibility: any negative (visual) impact from the widened access would be more than satisfactorily offset by the consequent improvement to highway safety arising. No objection to this element of the proposal is therefore raised. - 6.7 The widening of the driveway nearer to the dwelling would not be readily visible. While it might be large in both actual and proportional terms the expansion also allows for the retention of sufficient garden land. As such, this element of the proposal is not considered unacceptable. The engineering works proposed - 6.8 Related to the above, and in addition to the changes proposed to the garden land, none of the level changes are considered to be of a scale inappropriate. While there is always the concern about the 'domestication' of the countryside, and flattening of green land is a particularly important element of this concern, the existing curtilage for Creg ny Chree is very well-defined: it is obvious that the garden and driveway are domestic rather than natural, such as the majority of the land surrounding. Against this context, the levelling of the land and the banks proposed are not considered unacceptable. While the banking in particular would be visible to a small degree, it would not be so significantly different from the existing situation as to raise an objection to this element of the proposal. The solar panels - 6.9 The solar panels would be located on the most appropriate roof pitch: that is, one facing the most southerly as exists on the site. They would not be widely visible but in any case would sit fairly tightly to the existing roof plane (indeed, they are not seen in side elevation) such that they would not be prominent. As such, they are considered to be appropriate to the dwelling and to this countryside location and, accordingly, they are considered to also reflect the wording of General Policy 2 and Energy Policies 1 and 4. They are not of a scale to require the submission of an Environmental Impact Assessment.
7.1 In view of the above favourable findings, it is recommended that the application be approved. - 8.0 INTERESTED PERSON STATUS
8.1 By virtue of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) (No 2) Order 2013, the following persons are automatically interested persons:
With effect from 1 June 2015, the Transfer of Planning & Building Control Functions Order 2015 amends the Town and Country Planning Act 1999 to give effect to the meaning of the word 'Department' to be the Department of Environment, Food and Agriculture unless otherwise directed by that Order.
8.2 In addition to those above, article 6(3) of the Order requires the Department to decide which persons (if any) who have made representations with respect to the application, should be treated as having sufficient interest in the subject matter of the application to take part in any subsequent proceedings relating to the application.
8.2.1 In this instance, it is considered that the following persons do not have sufficient interest and therefore should not be awarded the status of an Interested Person:
Recommendation Recommended Decision: Permitted Date of Recommendation: 27.04.2016 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 14 of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) (No2) Order 2013 and to avoid the accumulation of unimplemented planning approvals.
The development hereby approved relates to the drawings carrying the reference numbers 15/2487/01 and 15/2487/02, both of which are date-stamped as having been received on both 10th February 2016 and 15th February 2016, to the drawing carrying the reference number 15/2487/05, date-stamped as having been received on 15th February 2016, and also to the drawings carrying the reference numbers 15/2487/03A and 15/2187/04B, both of which are dated as having been received on 11th April 2016.
I can confirm that this decision has been made by a Senior Planning Officer in accordance with the authority afforded to that Officer by the appropriate DEFA Delegation.
Decision Made : Permitted Date: 29.04.2016 Determining officer
Signed : C BALMER. Chris Balmer Senior Planning Officer
Copyright in submitted documents remains with their authors. Request removal
