Loading document...
Application No.: 24/91141/B Applicant: Mr James Simpson Proposal: Single storey extension to West elevation of existing dwelling (Dwelling approved under PA 17/00105/B) Site Address: Ballacaroon West Baldwin Road Mount Rule Isle Of Man IM4 4HW Principal Planner: Chris Balmer Recommended Decision: Permitted Date of Recommendation: 12.11.2024 _________________________________________________________________
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 planning application would be an acceptable form of development that has been designed to ensure that it would not visually harm the property or that of the surrounding countryside and would comply with Environmental Policy 1 and Housing Policy 15 of the IOM Strategic Plan and Planning Circular 3/91.
Plans/Drawings/Information; This approval relates to the submitted documents and drawing all received on 02.10.2024.
_________________________________________________________________ Right to Appeal It is recommended that the following organisations should NOT be given the Right to Appeal: DOI Highway Services - No Objection Local Authority - No Objection
_________________________________________________________________ Officer’s Report
1.1 The application site currently is the residential curtilage of Ballacaroon, West Baldwin Road, Mount Rule which is a substantial dwelling which has been constructed (now finished) in the last few years. To the north of site is the A23 (West Baldwin Road) and to the west of the site is Mount Rule Equestrian Centre. To the east of the site is an unmade access lane. The application site is approximately 0.5ha in area.
2.0 THE PROPOSAL - 2.1 The application seeks approval for a single storey extension to West elevation of existing dwelling (Dwelling approved under PA 17/00105/B).
3.0 PLANNING POLICY - 3.1 In terms of local plan policy, the application site is located within a wider area of land that is designated as open space (agricultural) under the Area Plan for the East 2020. - 3.2 In terms of strategic plan policy, the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016 contains a number of policies that are considered specifically material to the assessment of this current planning application. - 3.3 Environment Policy 1 states; "The countryside and its ecology will be protected for its own sake. For the purposes of this policy, the countryside comprises all land which is outside the settlements defined in Appendix 3 at A.3.6 or which is not designated for future development on an Area Plan. Development which would adversely affect the countryside will not be permitted unless there is an over-riding national need in land use planning terms which outweighs the requirement to protect these areas and for which there is no reasonable and acceptable alternative." - 3.4 Housing Policy 15 states: "The extension or alteration of existing traditionally styled properties in the countryside will normally only be approved where these respect the proportion, form and appearance of the existing property. Only exceptionally will permission be granted for extensions which measure more than 50% of the existing building in terms of floor space (measured externally)." - 3.5 Planning Circular 3/91 - Guide to the Design of Residential Development in the Countryside
4.0 PLANNING HISTORY - 4.1 Erection of dwelling and detached garage - 17/00105/B - APPROVED - 4.2 Erection of a dwelling with detached garage - 18/01060/B - APPROVED - 4.3 Erection of single storey home gym/yoga studio and garden store - 20/01203/B APPROVED - 4.4 Erection of a single storey stand alone sauna building - 22/00238/B - APPROVED
5.0 REPRESENTATIONS - 5.1 The Braddan Commissioners raise no objection (01.11.2024). - 5.2 Highways Services have commented (18.10.2024) there is not highway implications. - 5.3 Ecosystem Team (DEFA) object commenting (20.10.2024): "General stance We request further information, prior to determination of this application. We object to the determination of this application without this information, unless this were dealt with by condition, requiring alternative provision. Detail
We note that there is a pond that will be removed for this development. It is surrounded by a low wall, in a formal garden, and it is not clear whether frogs have access to it, but this cannot be ruled out and no information is provided on the matter. It does appear that there is another pond on site, though there is no information about it. We request information on whether the pond to be removed is a breeding site for frogs, which are protected under the Wildlife Act (Schedule 5), along with their places of shelter or protection (e.g. breeding ponds). If this is a frog breeding site, then is there alternative and appropriate provision for them within the site?
Also, under the Biodiversity Strategy we work to a no net loss strategy and therefore ask whether there is an opportunity to replace the pond (not just for frogs but biodiversity in general).
Potential conditions Provision of alternative frog breeding pond, if frogs are present, prior to removal of the pond."
6.0 ASSESSMENT - 6.1 The fundamental issue to consider in the assessment of this planning application is the visual impact of the proposed development on the character and appearance of the area and the individual property. - 6.2 The existing dwelling, which has been recently constructed (PA 17/00105/B) is a two storey traditional style farmhouse style property with painted render finishes, slate roof, vertically proportion windows and gable chimneys. Further as part of the approved plans under PA 17/00105/B included a stone two storey building to the eastern gable elevation of the dwelling, in the appearance of a converted barn, which is linked to the main dwelling. The existing property is traditional in form and appearance and it is considered HP 15 requires consideration. - 6.3 In terms of the size increase of the current proposed extensions would have a floor area of approximately 36.4sqm. Currently the existing dwelling has a floor area of approximately 881.8. Taking this into account and that the proposed works would result in the dwelling having an overall floor area of 917.5sqm, this would equate as a percentage increase over the existing property of approximately 4%. - 6.4 In terms of the proportion, finish, scale and form of the proposals the modest extension would be appropriate with the main dwelling house, being a subordinate but well-designed extension to the property and would still allow the main dwelling house being the main aspect within the site, especially when viewed from pubic views. - 6.5 Due to these reasons; this it is considered it would be difficult to argue that the proposal would adversely affect the countryside as per the requirements of Environment Policy
6.6 Comment's in relation to the loss of the "pond" and whether this would impacted frogs in noted. However, the pond which is perhaps descripted as a water feature in a formal hard landscaped garden is very modest in size (1.9m x 1.9m) with a low wall around. It did not require planning permission to be installed nor to be removed. Accordingly, it is not considered this is a material planning matter. Any impacts to Protect Wildlife is covered by other Legislation (Wildlife Act) and the responsible lies with that.
7.0 CONCLUSION - 7.1 The planning application would be an acceptable form of development that has been designed to ensure that it would not visually harm the property or that of the surrounding countryside and would comply with Environmental Policy 1 and Housing Policy 15 of the IOM Strategic Plan and Planning Circular 3/91.
8.0 RIGHT TO APPEAL AND RIGHT TO GIVE EVIDENCE - 8.1 The Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) Order 2019 sets out the process for determining planning applications (including appeals). It sets out a Right to Appeal (i.e. to submit an appeal against a planning decision) and a Right to Give Evidence at Appeals (i.e. to participate in an appeal if one is submitted). - 8.2 Article A10 sets out that the right to appeal is available to:
8.3 Article 8(2)(a) requires that in determining an application, the Department must decide who has a right to appeal, in accordance with the criteria set out in article A10. - 8.4 The Order automatically affords the Right to Give Evidence to the following (no determination is required):
8.5 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 the Right to Appeal.
I can confirm that this decision has been made by the Acting Head of Development Management 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 and/or rights to appeal.
Decision Made: Permitted Date: 14.11.2024 Determining officer
Signed : A MORGAN Abigail Morgan Acting Head of Development Management
Customer note This copy of the officer report reflects the content of the office copy and has been produced in this form for the benefit of our online service/customers and archive record.
Copyright in submitted documents remains with their authors. Request removal
