Loading document...
Case Officer: Miss S E Corlett Photo Taken: Site Visit: Expected Decision Level: Officer Delegation
1.1 The site is the residential curtilage of an existing dwelling, Braeside, situated on the western side of the Glen Chass Road which runs south from the A31 Port St. Mary - Cregneash Road through Glen Chass to join Fistard and Port St. Mary to the south east.
1.2 The property is orientated such that the front elevation faces south and the property has its eastern gable to the road. There is a substantial area - 1.4 acres, to the west and south of the dwelling which is within the residential curtilage but much of which is not formal garden, but scrub. Both of the two most recent applications, PA 05/000612 and 06/00195 indicate that this is residential use.
1.3 The property is not a traditional Manx cottage and has elements such as mono-pitch roofed dormers, bay windows, a decorative curved roofed porch but also less interesting features such as the horizontally proportioned windows in the rear annex.
1.4 Access into the site is from the Glen Chass Road into a roadside garage. A similar garage sits alongside which is in the ownership of a neighbour.
2.1 Proposed are alterations to the access, creating access right into the site and the erection of a new garage to the rear of the dwelling, together with the demolition of the existing roadside garage and the creation of a hardstanding for parking in its place, the erection of a timber pergola link between the new garage and the house and the raising of the roof level of the existing extension to the west by 0.5m, such that this becomes part of the main body of the dwelling.
2.2 The creation of the new access will involve the construction of a section of stone walling alongside the road, which will be up to 2.8m high to the rear of the proposed parking area where the garage currently sits. The new driveway will then curve upward towards the rear of the dwelling and the new garage will sit approximately 3.5m above the level of the road, as does the existing dwelling.
| Application No.: | 13/00258/B |
| Applicant: | Mr Graham & Mrs Sharon Roberts |
| Proposal: | Existing sun lounge roof raised, erection of a replacement garage and formation of new vehicular access and driveway |
| Site Address: | Braeside |
| Glen Chass Road | |
| Glen Chass | |
| Port St. Mary | |
| Isle Of Man | |
| IM9 5PN |
3.1 The site lies within an area designated as open space on the Southern Area Plan adopted by Tynwald in 2013. The site lies within an area of Coastal Cliffs - Cregneash Head and Meayll Peninsula on the Landscape Character Assessment mapping provided as part of the Southern Area plan. The advice contained in the Area Plan associated with these landscape character areas suggests that the over-riding importance is the strong sense of openness of the rugged area, the dramatic and expansive views therefrom and the setting of the numerous archaeological sites in the area. No specific comments are made about the Glen Chass area per se. 3.2 There is a presumption against development in such areas as set out in General Policy 3, and Environment Policy 1. However, there is a provision in the Strategic Plan for extensions to existing properties. These policies differentiate between traditional and non traditional properties, with the latter category generally being regarded as unsympathetic to the rural area, clarified as follows:
Paragraph 8.12.2 Extension to properties in the countryside As there is a general policy against development in the Island's countryside, it is important that where development exists, either in an historic or recently approved form, it should not, when altered or extended detract from the amenities of the countryside. Care therefore, must be taken to control the size and form extensions to control the size and form of extensions to property in the countryside. In the case of traditional properties, the proportion and form of the building is sensitively balanced and extensions of inappropriate size or proportions will not be acceptable where these destroy the existing character of the property In the case of nontraditional properties, where these are of poor or unsympathetic appearance, extensions which would increase the impact of the property will generally not be acceptable. It may be preferable to consider the redevelopment of non-traditional dwellings or properties of poor form with buildings of a more traditional style and in these cases, the Department may consider an increase in size of the replacement property over and above the size of the building to be replaced, where improvements to the appearance of the property would justify this."
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 of the existing building in terms of floor space (measured externally)."
Housing Policy 16 states: "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". 3.3 In this case the property is not traditional in the vernacular sense but not of poor form. It is clear whichever category the dwelling were to fall into, the important considerations are to minimise any increase in impact and to avoid insensitive changes to the property or the site. 3.4 Glen Chass Road is narrow and winding and it is also important to bear in mind the general objectives in the Strategic Plan for development to "provide satisfactory amenity standards in itself, including where appropriate safe and convenient access for all highway users, together with adequate parking, servicing and manoeuvring space" and for it not to have "an unacceptable effect on road safety or traffic flows on the local highways" (General Policy 2). The impact of the proposed new garage and access changes must also be considered in the light of this.
4.1 The site has been the subject of a number of applications for alterations and extensions, all of which were permitted and none of which is considered relevant to the consideration of
the current application. An application was submitted for the principle of the erection of a new dwelling but was refused (PA 99/01375).
5.1 Rushen Parish Commissioners and Highways Division indicate that they do not oppose the application.
6.1 The proposed alterations and extensions will increase the massing of the property but not so much as would increase the impact of the property. 6.2 Perhaps the changes which will be most noticeable and which will have the greatest impact are the creation of the access particularly with the new roadside walling. Due to the topography of the site, there will be a large expanse of new wall but there is already walling in the form of terracing at this point and as such the impact of the new works will be lessened accordingly. 6.3 Whilst the works will have an impact it is considered that this impact is not adverse and as such the proposed works are in accordance with the relevant policies and are recommended for approval.
7.1 The local authority, Rushen Parish Commissioners are, by virtue of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) Order 2005 paragraph 6.4(d) interested parties and as such should be afforded party status to this application.
Recommended Decision: Permitted
Date of 08.04.2013
Recommendation:
N : Notes attached to conditions R : Reasons for refusal
C 1. The development hereby permitted shall commence before the expiration of four years from the date of this notice.
C 2.
This permission relates to the alterations and extensions, provision of a new garage and access all as shown in drawings 01, SC1262/P/10-01, SC1262/P/10-02, SC1262/P/10-03, SC1262/P/10-04C and SC1262/P/10-05C all received on 28th February, 2013.
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: ................................................................................................................................................................
Determining officer (delete as appropriate)
Signed : ....................................................................................................................................................................
Anthony Holmes Senior Planning Officer Signed : ....................................................................................................................................................................
Michael Gallagher Director of Planning and Building Control Signed : ....................................................................................................................................................................
Signed : ....................................................................................................................................................................
Sarah Corlett Senior Planning Officer Signed : ....................................................................................................................................................................
Jennifer Chance Development Control Manager
Copyright in submitted documents remains with their authors. Request removal
