Officer Report

Application No.: 16/00383/B Applicant: Mr Greg Wright & Ms Tracy Kinrade Proposal: Alterations and erection of extension to provide replacement garaging and additional living accommodation Site Address: Copper Top Booilushag Ballajora Ramsey Isle of Man IM7 1BD Case Officer : Miss Abigail Morgan Photo Taken: 23.04.2016 Site Visit: 23.04.2016 Expected Decision Level: Officer Delegation

Officer’s Report

1.0 THE SITE - 1.1 The application site represents a detached dwelling known as CopperTop located on the eastern side of the Booilushag Estate, 1990s estate of detached properties located on the eastern side of Maughold. - 1.2 The Booilushag Estate is characterised by a mix of dwellings of different form, layouts and appearance, along this road the majority of the dwellings are detached bungalows. Set onto the hillside the estate slopes down towards the coastline and Port Mooar. The estate benefits from mature planting in the rear gardens and along the roads. - 1.3 Copper Top, along with its neighbour, Seapoint, is unique in the area due to its roof materials being copper, which has through the passage of time undergone a series of chemical reactions and now has a pale green outer layer called a patina. It has white UPVC windows and a cream render finish. - 1.4 The estate itself is visible when approaching from the Maughold Road. The green roof does make it easier to identify the application property and its neighbour, Seapoint. - 1.5 Planning permission, 16/00131/B, was granted under delegated powers for Alterations and creation of a first floor to dwelling. This application is awaiting the outcome of an Appeal. The application at Copper Top is similar to the one at Sea Point. - 1.6 The applicants at Copper Top have requested that the application be determined, in advance of the appeal outcome for the neighbouring property Seapoint.

2.0 THE PROPOSAL - 2.1 This application seeks approval for the demolition of the existing single garage and the erection of two storey side extension, with balcony, and erection of first floor extension and replacement roof to remaining single storey element. The first floor extension sits on top of the main part of the dwelling and ties in with the proposed two storey side extension. The application also includes the replacement of remaining windows with UPVC to match the proposed.

2.2 The overall height of the dwelling will rise from apx 4.3m to 7m, to the ridge on the proposed two storey element. The existing chimney stack is to be raised up with the first floor extension. - 2.3 The proposed extension would have pitched roofs with a minimum pitch of 15 degrees, to be finished in either Met-seam MsPro Samsung copper dark brown standing seam metal roofing system or similar. The proposed and remaining walls are proposed to be finished in coloured render system, to provide a continuous render finish. The southern gable and entrance and garage (at ground floor level) is proposed to be precast board marked concrete shiplap panels. Soffits/barge boards to be 900mm cedar (or similar) clad. All windows to be double glazed composite frames in dark grey. The proposed balcony to be glass panels with stainless steel fixings to a minimum height of 1.1m.

3.0 PLANNING HISTORY - 3.1 There is no planning history since the erection of the dwelling.

4.0 DEVELOPMENT PLAN POLICIES - 4.1 The application site is located within an area identified 'Predominantly Residential' and near an 'Area of High Landscape or Coastal Value and Scenic Significance' and 'Nature Conservation Zones, Nature Reserves and Sites of Ecological Importance for Conservation' in the Isle of Man Development Plan 1982. The Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2007 contains policies which are considered specifically material to the assessment of this current planning application - General Policy 2 and Environment Policy 2. - 4.2 General Policy 2: "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;

• (e) does not affect adversely public views of the sea;
• (f) incorporates where possible existing topography and landscape features, particularly trees and sod banks;
• (g) does not affect adversely the amenity of local residents or the character of the locality;
• (h) provides satisfactory amenity standards in itself, including where appropriate safe and convenient access for all highway users, together with adequate parking, servicing and manoeuvring space;
• (i) does not have an unacceptable effect on road safety or traffic flows on the local highways;
• (j) can be provided with all necessary services;

4.3 Paragraph 8.12.1 is also considered relevant:

"As a general policy, in built up areas not controlled by Conservation Area or Registered Building policies, there will be a general presumption in favour of extensions to existing property where such extensions would not have an adverse impact on either adjacent property or the surrounding area in general".

4.4 Environment Policy 2 states the following: The present system of landscape classification of Areas of High Landscape or Coastal Value and Scenic Significance (AHLV's) as shown on the 1982 Development Plan and subsequent Local and Area Plans will be used as a basis for development control until such time as it is superseded by a landscape classification which will introduce different categories of landscape and policies and

guidance for control therein. Within these areas the protection of the character of the landscape will be the most important consideration unless it can be shown that:

• (a) the development would not harm the character and quality of the landscape; or
• (b) The location for the development is essential

4.5 Given the dwelling's non-traditional appearance, Housing Policy 16 is worth considering: "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."

5.0 REPRESENTATIONS - 5.1 DOI Highways do not oppose the application. 25.04.2016. - 5.2 Maughold Parish Commissioners object, they have concerns over the size and scope, thus have concerns over the visual intrusion on the landscape. 26.04.2016 - 5.3 Owner/occupier of Acers, Booilushag initially raised the following;

• o Delay in availability of application documents being available online for consideration; and
• o Wishes to register a third party interest.

5.4 After requesting further clarification as to why they should be granted third party status submitted the following comments;

• o we believe that we satisfy the requirements to be considered not only on the issue of our close proximity but also because of the elevated and dominant nature of Copper Top and its road gable relative to our property. Also in relation to Circular section 2 (1) (b) the question of privacy, 2

(1) (c) outlook changed and yet to determine the effect on winter sun, and item 2 (1) (d).

• o Whilst recognizing the submitted plans have the first floor set back from the road gable in consideration of the potential for major and unneighbourly visual impact, the attached photographs give an indication of the relationship - the rear half appears to be higher than the aerial attached to the chimney albeit in the absence of any site section submitted we are left to make our own assessment as to any impact from that.
• o We believe we are in sufficient close proximity for status to be wholly appropriate and granted.
• o Others have made direct comment to the matter of the application and saw no point in repeating any of those comments or observations. They will presumably be given due consideration as to their merits and appropriateness.

5.5 Owner/occupier of Eden, Booilushag raises the following; (05.05.16)

• o Like the owner of Acers they also note the delay in publication and display of the planning documents;
• o Whilst we have no fundamental objection to the development of Coppertop, the addition of an upper floor, to a property already occupying an elevated position on the Booilushag Estate, would result in significant visual intrusion and be out of proportion to the landscape of the area;
• o There appears to be plenty of available land in which to develop Coppertop by extending the ground floor; and
• o We note that the development of the site adjacent to Coppertop already appears to have commenced with the erection of a concrete and plastic panel fence over 1m high fronting onto the shared Booilushag access road.

5.6 Owner/occupier of Fushcia Bank, Ballajora Hill raises the following; (11.05.16)

• o Application is to increase very substantially the size, and more importantly the height of what is already a fairly large house;

• o While an enlarged footprint would be of no consequence to use, the addition of an extra storey and the raising of the roofline would make the house very conspicuous and a dominant feature on the local skyline, as it already the highest - set house on the estate;
• o It would virtually be the only two-storey house on the estate. I understand that there are plans to add a storey to another house in the area, but this is set lower, further down the hill and the extra height would not be of concern, unless to the immediate neighbours;
• o The house as proposed would overlook our property our property, standing as it would well above the existing (and indeed any reasonable) hedge height. The ground between use originally agricultural land has been turned into a garden with woodland - we gather without any permission for change of use; and
• o In summary, we feel that the whole enterprise is entirely out of keeping with the character
• of the estate and that permission to develop in this way should be refused.

5.7 Owner/occupier of Glebe Cottage, Kirk Maughold raises the following; (18.04.16)

• Having looked at this property (from our lounge window, through field glasses) it seems an unassuming place at the moment and these considerable extensions will undoubtedly make it considerably more prominent in the landscape. However, it is a pleasant design and we see no reason to object.

5.8 Owner/occupier of Magher Drine, Ballajora raises the following; (28.06.16)

• o My property overlooks the entire valley. The valley has several clusters of houses and bungalows. I feel that this development would not be of any significant impact or detriment to my view or any other residents or visitors using the Raad ny Folilan path or Manx Electric Railway.
• o The property in question is no within the conservation area and is on a large private residential estate which is not accessible to the general public. The properties along the upper part
• of the estate building in the 60's and are not, in my opinion, of any architectural merit.

6.0 ASSESSMENT - 6.1 The application site is in an area designated as predominantly residential and therefore the principle for extension is deemed acceptable. - 6.2 There are considered to be two key considerations, firstly the potential impact upon neighbours in terms of visual impact or outlook and the character and appearance of the area. Potential impact upon neighbouring amenities - 6.3 The properties mostly likely to be affected would be Seapoint, which is immediately adjacent to the site and Acers which is to the north east of the site. Both of these are large detached bungalows set in their own gardens. Acers is set down from the application site due to the topography of the land on the other side of the estate road. - 6.4 In respect of Seapoint, due to the angle of Coppertop the rear elevation is the main elevation that faces towards the rear garden of Seapoint. The rear elevation has been designed to minimise any overlooking with only high level windows at the rear, starting at about 1.6m above floor level. These are mainly for additional light to dining area and to add interest to the rear elevation of the gable which would otherwise be blank. The main window to dining area is in the side elevation with the kitchen window, which due to orientation faces away from the main house of Seapoint towards their front garden. Due to distances and orientation the proposed extension is not considered to adversely affect Seapoint. - 6.5 Acers is located to the north east of the application property, separated by the estate road, it is apx 24m away. It has been acknowledged by the owner of Acers that the design of the proposal has been set back and kept to the rear of the property to minimise any and unneighbourly visual

• impact, they still feel that it due to its elevated position and therefore dominant nature it will affect privacy and their outlook has changed. On this basis they also consider that they should be afforded interest person status, this is dealt with later on in the report.
• 6.6 In respect of privacy the application does include a balcony on the front elevation above the garage however any views from that towards Acers would be oblique due to the way that Copper Top is angled away from Acers so any views from there would be generally over their front parking area and across the valley rather into their property directly.
• 6.7 Generally there is no right to a view over adjoining land or to a pleasant outlook. However the view from a dwelling or garden can contribute to good living conditions in a property and the loss of such a view or significant interference with it can be a consideration. While the outlook from the front of Acers towards the application site will change due to topography any view or pleasant outlook is already affected by Copper Top itself, as demonstrated by the photographs submitted by the owner. On this issue, while the outlook from the front of the property will be altered it is not considered to interfere with or adversely affect living conditions at this property as the main living areas are to the side and rear of Acers which face away from the proposal.
• 6.8 If a proposed extension is closer to a neighbouring property than existing buildings, it could have a dominating or overbearing effect on the outlook of occupiers. While in this instance the proposal is not nearer to Acers than the existing building, and has been designed to minimise any impacts, due to Copper Top being set higher there is no doubt that it would appear larger it is not considered to interfere with or adversely affect living conditions at this property.
• 6.9 The other potentially affected property is Ardbeg House, while the main house is some 90 metres away there could be some perceived overlooking to the nearest part of their garden from the kitchen and dining room windows, however having viewed this from the approximate location of the kitchen window the view is limited due to topography and existing intervening hedgerow and tree features.
• 6.10 When weighed in the balance, in terms of impact on neighbours, whilst it is likely that the proposal will result in some impacts, as set out above, it is not considered to have is not considered to be a significant impact to warrant a refusal. Character and Appearance
• 6.11 The application site is in area zoned as Predominantly Residential which has a general presumption in favour of extensions to existing property where such extensions would not have an adverse impact on either adjacent property or the surrounding area in general. The development of the application site would change the appearance of the street scene. The dwellings along this part of the road are detached bungalows of a similar style however through the wider Booilushag estate there are varying styles and sizes.
• 6.12 The existing dwelling is fairly unremarkable and offers little in the way of architectural merit, aside from the roof material which gives is some character. It has a fairly prominent position, as part of the Booilushag estate on a coastal slope from where it is readily visible from the Maughold Road. Given its somewhat unprepossessing design, this prominence is unfortunate, and is mostly through the roof materials, and efforts to either reduce this prominence or improve the appearance of the property should, in principle, be welcomed.
• 6.13 As already indicated, the proposed works while extensive and would result in a two storey dwelling has a small increase in the existing footprint. The works appear to seek to achieve a more contemporary flavour to the dwelling, through the keeping of render at second floor and the use of met-seam MSPro copper brown standing seam which is nod to the existing roof. With the south gable façade and ground floor entrance and garage to be concrete ship panels giving it a more contemporary feel. The proposed colour of the render is not clear from the drawings it is

• understood that they are to match/be similar the existing to provide a continuous external render finish.
• 6.14 Whilst it is judged that whilst the proposal would alter the appearance of the dwelling and the surrounding area and street scene, it is not considered to be of a scale to cause unacceptable harm to the character of the area or the character and quality of the landscape so as to warrant refusal.
• 6.15 The extensions and alterations proposed are therefore considered to comply with General Policy 2 (and Housing Policy 16), and also Environment Policy 2 (a) and it is therefore recommended that planning approval be issued. RECOMMENDATION

7.1 It is recommended that the planning application be approved. - 8.0 PARTY STATUS

8.1 By virtue of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) (No 2) Order 2013, the following persons are automatically interested persons:

• (a) The applicant, or if there is one, the applicant's agent;
• (b) The owner and the occupier of any land that is the subject of the application or any other person in whose interest the land becomes vested;
• (c) Any Government Department that has made written submissions relating to planning considerations with respect to the application that the Department considers material , in this case, Department of Infrastructure Highway Services and (e) The local authority in whose district the land the subject of the application is situated.

Department of Environment, Food and Agriculture Fisheries are part of the same Department as is the planning authority and as such should not be afforded interested person status under the Order.

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.

In this instance, it is recommended that the following persons have sufficient interest and should be awarded the status of an Interested Person in accordance with Government Circular 0046/13:

• Owner/occupier of Acers, Booilushag This dwelling is sufficiently close to the application site to be materially affected by any change in the nature / use of the application site.

8.3 In this instance, it is recommended that the following persons have do not have sufficient interest and should not be awarded the status of an Interested Person in accordance with Government Circular 0046/13:

• o Owner/occupier of Eden, Booilushag
• o Owner/occupier of Fushcia Bank, Ballajora Hill
• o Owner/occupier of Glebe Cottage, Kirk Maughold

• o Owner/occupier of Magher Drine, Ballajora This is due to their distance from the application site.

Recommendation Recommended Decision: Permitted Date of Recommendation: 04.07.2016 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.

This approval relates to Land Ownership Plan, Photos 1 -5, External Finishing Examples, Drawings 16/1159/1, 2, 3 and 4 all date stamped received 1 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: 14.07.2016 Determining officer

Signed : S CORLETT Sarah Corlett Senior Planning Officer

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.