Demolition of existing and erection of a replacement dwelling
Site Address:
Balladoole Cottage Bride Road Ramsey Isle Of Man IM7 4AB
Case Officer:
Mr A Holmes
Photo Taken:
Site Visit:
Expected Decision Level:
Officer Delegation
The Application Site
The application site comprises the residential curtilage of a detached dwelling located on the eastern side of Bride Road in Lezayre. The existing property consists of a two storey dwelling, detached double garage and a couple of outbuildings. The dwelling is in a somewhat dilapidated state of repair and is not believed to have been occupied for a significant period of time. However, having said that it is considered that the dwelling could be occupied without requiring planning approval as the relevant repair work would not constitute development.
Whilst the application site, as defined by the red line, is comparatively large the land within in it on which the property is contained is actually relatively narrow as the application site is predominantly made up of the coastal slope that leads from the land adjacent to the highway down to the adjacent beach.
The Proposal
The proposal comprises the erection of a dwelling on the application site. The existing dwelling, detached double garage and outbuildings would be removed as part of the proposed development and replaced with a single storey dwelling with two on-site car parking spaces.
Planning History
The application site has been the subject of a number of previous planning applications, one of which is considered specifically material to the assessment of this current planning application:
Planning application 98/02182/B sought planning approval for the erection of replacement dwelling with garage on the application site. This previous planning application was initially refused on the 20th August 1999. The initial refusal was confirmed at review, with the review refusal issued on the 18th October 1999. An appeal against the refusal was subsequently dismissed, with the appeal refusal issued on the 24th March 2000. The two reasons for refusal of the planning application were:
i. The existing dwelling is of traditional form and occupies a prominent and isolated site between the highway and the coastal footpath; the replacement dwelling as proposed would, by virtue of its increased size and massing, represent an increased visual intrusion into open countryside that would detract from the view of the coast when seen from the highway (1982 Order, Part 3, 11(2) (b) (vii)).
ii. The detailed design of the proposed replacement dwelling is contrary to the provisions of Planning Circular 3/91 "Guide to the Design of Residential Development in the Countryside", particularly in terms of the front bay window, the rear dormer, and the fenestration and glazing pattern, and as such the building would be of inappropriate
would be of inappropriate appearance when viewed from both the highway and the coastal footpath.
Planning Policy
In terms of land use designation the application site is not designated for any site specific purpose but is located within a wider area of land that is designated as being of high landscape or coastal value and scenic significance under the Isle of Man Planning Scheme (Development Plan) Provisional Order 1982.
In terms of strategic plan policy, the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2007 contains the following policies that are considered specifically material to the assessment of this current planning application.
General Policy 3 states:
"Development will not be permitted outside of those areas which are zoned for development on the appropriate Area Plan with the exception of:
(a) essential housing for agricultural workers who have to live close to their place of work; (Housing Policies 7, 8, 9 and 10);
(b) conversion of redundant rural buildings which are of architectural, historic, or social value and interest; (Housing Policy 11);
(c) previously developed land which contains a significant amount of building; where the continued use is redundant; where redevelopment would reduce the impact of the current situation on the landscape or the wider environment; and where the development proposed would result in improvements to the landscape or wider environment;
(d) the replacement of existing rural dwellings; (Housing Policies 12, 13 and 14); (e) location-dependent development in connection with the working of minerals or the provision of necessary services; (f) building and engineering operations which are essential for the conduct of agriculture or forestry;
(g) development recognised to be of overriding national need in land use planning terms and for which there is no reasonable and acceptable alternative; and
(h) buildings or works required for interpretation of the countryside, its wildlife or heritage."
Environment Policy 2 states:
"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."
Environment Policy 9 states:
"A precautionary approach will be adopted for development relating to land affected, or likely to be affected, by erosion or land instability. In the case of receding cliffs, development will not be permitted in areas where erosion is likely to occur during the lifetime of the building."
Appendix 1 (Definitions and Glossary of Terms) of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2007 defines precautionary approach as:
"Assumes that activity might be damaging unless it can be proved otherwise in respect of development where significant environmental implications are involved. Where activity could prove to be harmful (to people, wildlife or the environment) and science cannot tell us the risks of the proposed activity then prevention is best."
Housing Policy 4 states:
"New housing will be located primarily within our existing towns and villages, or, where appropriate, in sustainable urban extensions of these towns and villages where identified in
adopted Area Plans: otherwise new housing will be permitted in the countryside only in the following exceptional circumstances:
(a) essential housing for agricultural workers in accordance with Housing Policies 7, 8, 9 and 10;
(b) conversion of redundant rural buildings in accordance with Housing Policy 11; and
(c) the replacement of existing rural dwellings and abandoned dwellings in accordance with Housing Policies 12, 13 and 14."
Housing Policy 12 states:
"The replacement of an existing dwelling in the countryside will generally be permitted unless:
(a) the existing building has lost its residential use by abandonment; or
(b) the existing dwelling is of architectural or historic interest and is capable of renovation.
In assessing whether a property has lost its habitable status by abandonment, regard will be had to the following criteria:
(i) the structural condition of the building;
(ii) the period of non-residential use or non-use in excess of ten years;
(iii) evidence of intervening use; and
(iv) evidence of intention, or otherwise, to abandon."
Housing Policy 14 states:
"Where a replacement dwelling is permitted, it must not be substantially different to the existing in terms of siting and size, unless changes of siting or size would result in an overall environmental improvement; the new building should therefore generally be sited on the "footprint" of the existing, and should have a floor area, which is not more than 50% greater than that of the original building (floor areas should be measured externally and should not include attic space or outbuildings). Generally, the design of the new building should be in accordance with Policies 2-7 of the present Planning Circular 3/91, (which will be revised and issued as a Planning Policy Statement). Exceptionally, permission may be granted for buildings of innovative, modern design where this is of high quality and would not result in adverse visual impact; designs should incorporate the re-use of such stone and slate as are still in place on the site, and in general, new fabric should be finished to match the materials of the original building.
Consideration may be given to proposals which result in a larger dwelling where this involves the replacement of an existing dwelling of poor form with one of more traditional character, or where, by its design or siting, there would be less visual impact."
REPRESENTATIONS
Lezayre Parish Commissioners recommend that the planning application be approved. Whilst not opposing the design they do state that they would have preferred to see a more traditional build proposed.
The Department of Infrastructure Highways Division do not oppose the planning application. They recommend that conditions are attached to any approval to require that i) the existing vehicular access is blocked up; and ii) nothing is be planted, erected or allowed to remain within the visibility sprays that exceeds or may exceed one metre in height above the level of the adjacent carriageway.
The Manx Electricity Authority expresses an interest in the planning application. The contents of their representation relate to non-planning considerations.
ASSESSMENT
Given the dilapidated state of the property and the understood period since its last occupation it is necessary to consider the issue of habitable status, which is specifically referred to within Housing Policy 12. In terms of this it is concluded that the structural condition of the building is basically sound and that it could be occupied without requiring planning approval as the necessary repair work would not constitute development. Furthermore, the building is essentially all there and appears as an existing dwelling within the overall landscape. As such, it is considered that habitable status has not been lost to an extent that would rule out a replacement dwelling. The basic principle of a replacement dwelling is considered to be
acceptable on the basis that there is an existing dwelling contained within the application site and the proposal represents a one for one replacement in accordance with planning policy. It is therefore appropriate to assess the proposal against Housing Policy 14.
Housing Policy 14 states that replacement dwellings must not be substantially different to the existing in terms of siting and size. The exception to this is where it is judged that changes of siting or size would result in an overall environmental improvement. In terms of this proposal the siting can be said to be generally the same as the existing, with the proposed dwelling directly overlapping the existing dwelling. In respect of size the proposed dwelling equates to a 48% increase in floor area over the existing dwelling, which less than the 50% increase referred to within the policy. As such, the proposal accords with the first part of Housing Policy 14.
In terms of design the policy states that the design of new dwellings should generally be traditional but does also state that dwellings of innovative and modern design may be acceptable where this is of high quality and would not result in adverse visual impact. The design of the proposed dwelling cannot be described as traditional but the change from a two storey dwelling to a single storey dwelling of modern design does reduce the visual impact of a dwelling on the application site. Whilst occupying a larger footprint than the existing the proposed dwelling would be less visible within the landscape due to the reduction in height by a full storey. The design of the proposed dwelling is bespoke to the application site and considered to be an innovative and modern solution to the site. As such, it is concluded that the design of the proposed dwelling accords with the provisions of Housing Policy 14.
Notwithstanding the considerations under Housing Policy 14 it is necessary to consider the issue of erosion due to the position of the application site, and the proposed dwelling, next to the coastal slope. The consideration of this issue is primarily against Environment Policy 9, which sets out a precautionary approach to development relating to land affected, or likely to be affected, by erosion or land instability. It states that in the case of receding cliffs, development will not be permitted in areas where erosion is likely to occur during the lifetime of the building. A report on the structural stability of the coastal slope, prepared by Curtins Consulting, has been submitted with the planning application. This report correctly identifies that the ability to construct the proposed dwelling is largely dependent on foundation design to take account of ground conditions. As this is a matter that would be examined by separate legislation (Building Regulations) it is not the role of this planning application to specifically consider this. What the planning application does need to consider is whether the proposed dwelling is likely to be unduly affected by erosion during its lifetime. In this respect the submitted report highlights that the Joliffe report identified that whilst erosion was occurring at significant rates along the coast line from the Dog Mills to Ramsey that erosion has been negligible. The report also highlights that Aeolian (wind) factors can also influence stability but that in this location the coastal slope is densely vegetated, which has the effect of binding the subsoil and resisting wind erosion. Taking this into account it is concluded that erosion in this location is unlikely to affect the proposed dwelling to an extent that would warrant refusal of the planning application under the provisions of Environment Policy 9.
As for other material planning considerations, the proposed dwelling is sufficient distanced from other residential properties so as not to affect private residential amenity. The provision of two on-site car parking spaces, appropriate on-site turning facility and acceptable visibility onto the adjoining highway satisfies parking and highway standards.
Recommendation
It is recommended that the planning application be approved.
Party Status
It is considered that the following parties that made representations to the planning application should be afforded interested party status:
Lezayre Parish Commissioners.
It is considered that the following parties that made representations to the planning application should not be afforded interested party status:
The Department of Infrastructure Highways Division; and The Manx Electricity Authority.
Recommendation
Recommended Decision:
Permitted
Date of Recommendation:
18.09.2012
Conditions and Notes for Approval / Reasons and Notes for Refusal
C: Conditions for approval N: Notes attached to conditions R: Reasons for refusal O: Notes attached to refusals
C 1. The development hereby permitted shall commence before the expiration of four years from the date of this notice.
C 2. This approval relates to drawing no.s 01, 02 rev. A, 100768/1, 100768/2 and 100768/3 date stamped the 30th July 2012.
C 3. Prior to the occupation of the new dwelling the vehicular access and visibility must be set out in accordance with drawing no. 100768/2 date stamped the 30th July 2012. Thereafter the visibility splays must be maintained free of obstructions that measure greater than one metre in height above the level of the adjacent carriageway.
I confirm that this decision accords with the appropriate Government Circular delegating functions to Director of Planning and Building Control / Development Control Manager/ Senior Planning Officer.
Decision Made : Permitted
Date: 19.9.12
Determining officer (delete as appropriate)
Signed :
Signed: S20hCwcl
Anthony Holmes
Sarah Corlett
Senior Planning Officer
Senior Planning Officer
Signed :
Signed:
Michael Gallagher
Jennifer Chance
Director of Planning and Building Control
Development Control Manager
Copyright in submitted documents remains with their authors. Request removal
Source & Provenance
Official reference
12/01082/B
Source authority
Isle of Man Government Planning & Building Control
