Loading document...
1.1 The application site is a parcel of land which accommodates a dwelling known as The Rheast, Rheast Road, Santon located to the north of Moaney Road and south of Rheast Road. The site includes a replacement contemporary dwelling which is currently under construction. This utilises the existing entrance from Rheast Road.
1.2 The applicant also owns the adjacent land which is not part of the existing residential curtilage (blue line) and is not proposed by this application to be residential curtilage.
2.1 This application seeks approval for the erection of a linked extension to dwelling to provide ancillary living accommodation. The proposal would be located 3.8 metres from the rear of the recently constructed garage block, albeit connected via a glazed link. The proposal would have a maximum width of 8.4 metres, a depth of 5.3 metres and a maximum height of 3.2 metres.
2.2 The elevational finishes would be Western Cedar log lap cladding to match parts of the existing dwelling.
3.1 The application site is located within an area of the Island which is not designated for development by the 1982 Development Order. The site is shown as being within an area of "white land" by the 1982 Order.
3.2 Due to the zoning of the site, and the nature of the proposed development, the following Planning Policy is relevant in the consideration of the application:-
3.3 General Policy 3: "Development will not be permitted outside of those areas which are zoned for development on the appropriate Area Plan with the exception of:
situation on the landscape or the wider environment; and where the development proposed would result in improvements to the landscape or wider environment;
3.4 Housing Policy 4 states: "New housing will be located primarily within our existing towns and villages, or, where appropriate, in sustainable urban extensions(1) 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:
3.5 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."
4.1 The following previous planning application is considered relevant to the determination of this proposal:
PA 96/0281 - Approval in principle for extension to dwelling - Permitted on review. PA 97/0400 - Alterations to dwelling including erection of conservatory, porch and flagpole, new driveway and extension to garage - Permitted on review. PA 98/1699 - Erection of two conservatories - Permitted. PA 06/1215 - Erection of garage to replace existing - Permitted. PA 07/1383 - Erection of a garage - Permitted. PA 08/1465 - Creation of vehicular access and driveway - Permitted. PA 10/1466 - Erection of replacement dwelling - Withdrawn. PA 11/01400 - Erection of a replacement dwelling - Permitted.
5.1 The Highways Division of the Department of Infrastructure does not oppose this application.
6.1 The key issues to be assessed in the determination of this application are whether the proposal would increase the impact of the building as viewed by the public and does the proposal constitute the creation of a new dwelling in the countryside. 6.2 In relation to the visual appearance of the proposed works, the development would be situated on the previously approved play area which was indentified in the approved plans. The proposal would remain within the original residential curtilage and does not project outside. 6.3 Given its position, height, roadside and site (existing and proposed) boundary treatments and distance from the public views the proposed works would be limited with only
limited of sections along the Moaney Road where the proposal would be apparent. It is unlikely views of the proposal will be seen from the Rheast Road. The proposal in relation to the main dwelling house and garage block is a relatively modest extension to the dwelling and for the above reasons it is not considered the proposal would have an adverse impact upon the visual amenities of the countryside, therefore comply with Housing Policy 16. 6.4 The next issues relates to whether the proposal could be considered to be a new dwelling in the countryside, which planning policy would be against. This question is appropriate as the proposed extension would accommodate a self contained one bedroom unit with its own living area, kitchen, shower room and bedroom. Access would be via the glazed link which has two external entrances to the rear garden and second to a side footpath which runs along the north-eastern elevation of the garage. There is a further access through the main garage block which would also provide the same internal access from the main dwelling house. 6.5 If a building, or part of a building, contains sufficient facilities to be used in a selfcontained manner then they are generally considered to be a separate planning unit, whether or not they are occupied by a relative of occupants of the primary property, or used by guests. 6.6 There is some case law that has accepted fully self contained accommodation as being ancillary to the principal residence, i.e. when they have been occupied by a dependant relative or disabled child, or even a servant, and certainly who pays the bills is a factor. However, in most cases the test of whether it is a separate planning unit rests upon its severability. i.e. If the alleged ancillary use could practically and viably operate on its own were the primary use of the premises cease or cease to be in the ownership of the same person. In this case the size of the proposal, its location, intergraded to the main dwelling house and immediately located to the rear garden of the main dwelling house, would all seem to help the argument that in practical terms it is unlikely to be occupied as a separate household to the main dwellinghouse and therefore would not constitute a new residential dwelling in the countryside in this case.
7.1 It is considered the proposals would comply with the relevant policies of the Isle Of Man Strategic Plan therefore it is recommended that the application be approved subject to conditions.
8.1 It is considered that the following meet the criteria of Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) (Nr2) Order 2013, paragraph 6 (4) (e), and should be afforded interested party status:
DOI Highways Division Santon Commissioners
Recommended Decision: Permitted
Date of 12.12.2013
Recommendation:
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 the erection of a linked extension to dwelling to provide ancillary living accommodation as proposed in the submitted documents and drawings P10-202 and P10-203 all received on 28th October 2013.
C 3. The ancillary accommodation hereby approved may be used only in association with the main dwelling house "The Rheast" and for purposes incidental to the use of main dwelling house "The Rheast" as a single dwelling and for no commercial purposes.
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 : Sarah Corlett Senior Planning Officer Signed : Jennifer Chance Development Control Manager
Copyright in submitted documents remains with their authors. Request removal
