Loading document...
| Application No.: | 14/01292/B |
| Applicant: | Mr Grant Smith |
| Proposal: | Alterations and extensions to dwelling including the creation of first floor living accommodation and stair access |
| Site Address: | Hillberry House |
| Hillberry Green | |
| Douglas | |
| Isle Of Man | |
| IM2 6DE |
1.1 The application site is the detached dwelling known as Hillberry House, located in the Hillberry Green private housing estate on the far east of Douglas. Hillberry House is a four-bedroom dwelling set in not especially generous grounds for a house of this size; it is mainly two-storey but has some single storey wings to the side elevations, one of which provides a swimming pool and garage, and the other a billiards room and garden room; above these are two roof terraces. Various utility rooms on the swimming pool/garage side complete the single storey element of the dwelling.
1.2 Hillberry House is of a fairly grand architectural treatment that draws some of its inspiration from Victorian and Regency periods although could not be said to reflect any especial period or style. Slightly unusually, its principal elevation is asymmetrical: the front door is off-set slightly to the right (as one looks at it) while the window widths are greater to the right than the left by a single window panel.
1.3 The area is very much characterised by dwellings of a similar period, size, architectural treatment and grounds. Significant numbers of mature trees are throughout Hillberry Green and clearly pre-date its development.
2.1 Full planning approval is sought for the erection of extensions above some of the single storey elements of the dwelling, along with a pair colonnade-supported, second-storey projecting extensions to the rear. The extension above the billiards room/garden room wing would provide three new bedrooms, while the garden room would be extended slightly forward of the front elevation and converted to another study room. Also proposed in this area is a staircase tower, which would have a square pyramid roof and the dwelling's only third-storey element. This element would provide a very small space that the plans show a single chair within.
2.2 The extension to the swimming pool side is far less significant, and would result in the replacement of an existing terrace to a second dressing room for the master bedroom.
| Case Officer: | Mr Edmond Riley |
| Photo Taken: | 26.11.2014 |
| Site Visit: | 26.11.2014 |
| Expected Decision Level: | Officer Delegation |
2.3 In terms of finishings and new windows and doors, these would in the large be to match the existing dwelling. The staircase would have a single window of a style to match those of the dwelling, but this window would have a concrete surround, making it distinct from the dwelling's other windows. The finishings for the walls and roof are not detailed, although the plan seems to indicate that these would match the existing dwelling. The detail of the colonnades to support the rearward extensions are, again, not shown.
3.1 Planning approval was granted under PA /01118/B for an attached greenhouse and under PA 88/01323/B for a conservatory. However, if either of these approvals was taken up, neither the conservatory nor the greenhouse remains. The site has no other relevant planning history, and it would appear the dwelling was constructed in the mid-1980s - on the 1984 application the site was described as "Plot 10", while for the 1988 application the site bore the address "Hillberry House".
4.1 The site is within an area zoned as Low Density Housing in Parkland (LDHP) in the Douglas Local Plan 1998. While no Written Statement accompanies the Local Plan, there is a Circular relating to LDHP development. Equally, however, Circular 8/89 offers no specific guidance about alteration or extension to such dwellings, aside from the following general point:
"Areas of existing low density housing in parkland (marked "PE" - Private Estates - on the Development Plan) are usually characterised by fine buildings and mature trees standing in landscaped grounds. Whether in the towns or the countryside, such sites make a positive contribution to public amenity."
It goes on to reflect mainly on how new dwellings should be designed. It is true, however, that all trees within such designations are automatically deemed to be Registered. On this point, it should be noted that no work to trees is proposed.
4.2 Within the Strategic Plan, General Policy 2 is, in part, relevant. It 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:
5.1 Highway Services, in an email dated 24th November 2014, advise that they do not object to the planning application.
6.1 As ever with proposals that relate to extensions and alterations, the key issues to consider are the extent to which the works would affect the character of the individual building as well as the streetsce. This assessment must be seen in light of the fact that the dwelling is one of a collection of similarly large and determinedly grand properties within an area designated for such use, but also where mature trees - all of which are Registered -
provide significant levels of screening. It should also not be ignored that Hillberry Green is a private estate and public views into the site, and estate as a whole, are not possible.
6.2 As noted, the existing dwelling is of a grand and imposing nature without necessarily being worthy of significant protection from change.
6.3 The proposed extensions are not symmetrical and, given the fact that the existing dwelling is itself asymmetrical, the proposal could be said to exaggerate this situation. The existing asymmetry is fairly subtle and not immediately obvious; the proposal would essentially make the dwelling more 'honest' about its asymmetry and, while this is not welcomed per se, it is also considered a fairly appropriate design approach to take.
6.4 That the new development would take place primarily on the existing footprint of the dwelling is welcomed from this point of view. On these bases, it is considered that the proposal is unobjectionable in respect of the impact it would have on the existing dwelling.
6.5 The site's being surrounded by mature and evergreen hedging are such that the proposed alterations would not have a harmful effect on any private residential amenity and, as such, no objection is raised in respect of its impact on neighbouring residential amenity. Even without the existing vegetation and walling, the distances between the dwellings are more than sufficient to protect this in any case.
6.6 The site is fairly visible and prominent - despite being noticeably set down from the surrounding highway - in the streets cene but, given that the proposal would have a somewhat neutral overall effect on the design of the dwelling and its consequent visual impact, it is considered that the streets cene and public amenity are satisfactorily preserved.
7.1 For the reasons set out above, it is considered that the application should be approved.
8.1 In line with Article 6(4) of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure)(No2) Order 2013, the following Persons are considered to have sufficient interest in the subject matter of the application to take part in any subsequent proceedings relating to the application: the applicant or, if there is one, the applicant's agent; the owner and occupier of the land the subject of the application; Highway Services, and the Local Authority in whose district the land the subject of the application sits.
Recommended Decision: Permitted Date of Recommendation: 08.12.2014
C: Conditions for approval N: Notes attached to conditions R: Reasons for refusal O: Notes attached to refusals
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 approval hereby issued relates to the following plans, date-stamped as having been received 12th November 2014: SC1354/P/10-00, SC1354/P/10-01, SC1354/P/10-02, SC1354/P/12-01 and SC1354/P/12-02 A.
I confirm that this decision accords with the appropriate Government Circular delegating functions to Director of Planning and Building Control /Head of Development Management/ Senior Planning Officer.
Decision Made: Permitted Date: 9/12/14
Signed: _________________________ Chris Balmer Senior Planning Officer
Signed: _________________________ Michael Gallagher Director of Planning and Building Control
Signed: _________________________ Sarah Corlett Senior Planning Officer
Signed: _________________________ Jennifer Chance Head of Development Management
Copyright in submitted documents remains with their authors. Request removal
