Loading document...
Application No.: 20/01324/B Applicant: Guiding Star Entertainment Holdings Limited Proposal: Erection of a dwelling Site Address: Saoirse Station Road Port St. Mary Isle Of Man IM9 5LF Principal Planner: Miss S E Corlett Expected Decision Level: Officer Delegation Recommended Decision: Refused Date of Recommendation: 13.01.2021 _________________________________________________________________ Reasons for Refusal R : Reasons for Refusal O : Notes attached to reasons R 1. The proposed dwelling, by virtue of its size, mass and design would necessitate the removal in all of the existing trees on site with insufficient space around the building to introduce any mitigation planting, result in an overbearing and overdeveloped appearance and impact on the surrounding area, detrimentally affecting the character and appearance of the area which includes Registered Buildings of historic and architectural interest which are visited by the public, as well as the amenities of those in adjacent properties, particularly those who may live in the house approved to the south on plot 1 and those in the approved houses and public open space to the west. The previously approved dwelling (15/01008/B) demonstrates that it is possible to erect a dwelling on this site without the adverse impact that the dwelling now proposed would have. The development is therefore contrary to General Policy 2 b, c, f, g, k of the Strategic Plan.
_______________________________________________________________ Interested Person Status – Additional Persons
It is recommended that the owners/occupiers of the following properties should be given Interested Person Status as they are considered to have sufficient interest in the subject matter of the application to take part in any subsequent proceedings and are not mentioned in Article 6(4) (or 4(2)):
The Old Chapel, Malew Street as owners of the land immediately to the west of the site, and Ballaghreiney as owners of the land immediately to the south and to the east of the site
as they satisfy all of the requirements of paragraph 2 of the Department's Operational Policy on Interested Person Status. _____________________________________________________________________________
Officer’s Report THE SITE
1.1 The site is part of an area which was granted approval for the development of a number of dwellings, alongside the former gas works which lay to the west of the Port St. Mary Railway Station, The Station Hotel and an existing dwelling, Ballaghreiney. The approval in principle for the dwellings on the former gas works site was granted under PA 14/00357/A for twenty three dwellings and full, detailed approval was granted for twenty dwellings (PA 15/00870/B with minor changes approved under 20/00523/MCH) on all of that earlier site. Subsequent to this, planning approval was granted for the erection of two detached dwellings on the land between Ballaghreiney and the former gas works site (15/01008/B). - 1.2 The site was formerly a car park which served the public house although the lack of lighting and a consistent surface of the lane led over the years to the car park not being used by patrons of the hotel. The car park was then acquired by the applicants who obtained planning approval for its use as a storage yard for their landscaping business (PA 09/02030/C). - 1.3 There is a line of trees on the northern boundary of the application site with the lane. THE PROPOSAL
2.1 Proposed is the erection of a dwelling on the site, replacing that which was approved under 15/00780/B. The approved dwelling was a dormer bungalow, not dissimilar to the approved dwelling on the adjacent plot. This building had a footprint of 130 sq m with a slightly smaller area above at first floor. This house would have been 7.4m high, 3.5m from the rear boundary. - 2.2 What is now proposed is less than 1.2m from the western boundary, 1.4m from the southern boundary with plot 1 and has an L shaped footprint of 18m by 14.5m at the longest elements, a total footprint of 179 sq m and 8m. Other than the footprint of the building, and linear planting along the side and rear boundaries, the plot will be hard surfaced with vehicular parking in addition to the integral garaging. - 2.3 The elevation which faces west towards the approved estate housing will have four first floor windows and three ground floor windows and a pedestrian door. The first floor windows will serve a master bedroom, bedroom 1 and two serve a first floor living space. This room also has two windows looking south towards the dwelling on plot 1. The approved dwelling had rooflights in the plane facing west and a first floor double window with balcony. A similar feature was in the eastern elevation facing Ballaghreiney. - 2.4 The elevation which faces south towards plot 1 has the two first floor windows referred to above and at ground floor level two bathroom windows. The approved house on plot 1 has facing the proposed dwelling a door served by an external staircase. The approved southern elevation had one round headed window at first floor level almost directly facing the external staircase and door. - 2.5 The approved house on plot 1 immediately to the rear is 7.7m from the boundary where there is a first floor bedroom window and the house then steps back slightly to be 9m from the boundary. The part of the proposed dwelling immediately to the rear of this will have two first floor living room windows looking directly towards it at a distance of less than 10m to the approved dwelling. - 2.6 The dwelling will be finished externally in red brick on the elevations facing north and east and render for the other elevations all with a sandstone plinth. The roof will be pitched and finished in unspecified tiles with triangular shaped dormers in each plane - 4 facing the access lane (north), none facing west and two each facing east and south.
2.7 The property will accommodate four bedrooms, a garage, craft room, foyer and living room on the ground floor and a fifth and sixth bedroom, second living room and office space above the garage which is accessible from both the external staircase and from within the house. PLANNING POLICY
3.1 The site lies within an area designated on the Area Plan for the South adopted in 2013 as part of a larger area of Industrial use, reflecting the previous use of the gas works site for that purpose. This industrial area includes the gas works site and the former car park which is the subject of this application but Ballaghreiney is designated as residential and the hotel as Mixed Use (Public House). The railway station and goods shed together with the platform are Registered (RB 281). - 3.2 The previous applications for residential development of the larger site including this, are the most relevant of material considerations, the inspector accepting that the land was suitable for residential use and at a density far in excess of what is currently being proposed. There were no issues with drainage or access -that application proposing to improve visibility at the entrance to the lane from Station Road which was reiterated in the detailed application for the twenty houses. Similarly, the detailed approval for the two houses on this and the adjacent plot is also relevant. - 3.3 As such, the following parts of the Strategic Plan are relevant:
General Policy 2: "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:
3.4 The Department has recently published the Residential Design Guidance (March 2019) which provides advice on the design of new houses and extensions to existing property as well as how to assess the impact of such development on the living conditions of those in adjacent residential property. Generally where development results in windows which look directly towards each other in adjacent dwelling, there should be at least 20m between the windows unless there could be an unacceptable level of inter-visibility and an adverse impact on the privacy of both sets of occupants. There is also a mechanism for measuring whether new development would be overbearing on adjacent dwellings, involving a 25 degree line drawn from 2m high within an existing property window and where the new development encroaches within this line, the development could result in an overbearing impact. In using these assessments, regard should be had to the impact of the approved dwelling on any adjacent dwellings.
4.1 The most relevant previous applications are summarised in the opening paragraphs. In addition, Port St. Mary Railway Station has been the subject of recent approval for conversion to a tea room, museum and offices with associated car parking (19/01117/GB and 19/01118/CON, 20/01230/GB, 20/01231/CON). REPRESENTATIONS - 5.1 Port St. Mary Commissioners have no objections to the application (14.12.20).
5.2 Highway Services do not oppose the application (04.12.20). - 5.3 DEFA's Ecosystems Policy Officer note that the application requires the removal of a number of trees without any proposed mitigation. They request that either the application makes provision for replacement or retention of trees prior to determination of the application (17.12.20). - 5.4 The owner of the site immediately to the west objects to the application on the grounds that, if implemented, the development would have an adverse impact on the lawful use of their land in terms of privacy and outlook and they consider that the application does not comply with policy requirements including specification of levels. There would be four large windows within an elevation which will sit 1m from the boundary with their property where plots 1-5 are 7m from this boundary. The proposal would thus affect natural morning sunlight and indirect natural light at other times of the day to plots 1 and 2. They consider that the whole of the private rear garden of the house on their plot 2 would be overlooked and have their outlook compromised. The distance between the two properties would be much less than the 20m recommended in the Residential Design Guidance and these impacts are worsened as the proposed house has its living accommodation on the first floor. They are also concerned at the impact on their proposed public open space through overlooking. They dispute that their works to the lane will affect trees and note that it is possible to retain the trees whilst developing the site as is demonstrated by 15/01008/B. They consider that the removal of all of the trees will adversely affect the setting of the Registered Buildings at the railway station and the amenities of those using the proposed POS as well as damaging the tree corridor for ecological value. They note the office with external access and with its kitchenette and toilet facilities and suggest that this could be occupied separately from the rest of the property and this additional feature should require additional car parking. If the separate access were removed, this could remove this element of concern (11.12.20). - 5.5 The owner of both the approved plot alongside and the existing bungalow, Ballaghreiney object to the application as they consider the proposed is oversized and far too high and note that they already have the railway station one side and the hotel on the other. They also note that the house for which they have permission is 7.5m high and what is proposed is 9m and the inclusion of a self contained office will result in staff overlooking their property (24.12.20). - 5.6 The Principal Registered Buildings Officer has concerns regarding the above application. He considers that whilst the application is not within a conservation area, the site has the potential to impact upon the setting of a registered building and the form and positioning of the proposed new dwelling is inferior to the previously approved scheme. He has concerns that the development will impact upon the setting of the railway station and goods shed which are registered buildings, this in part is due to its positioning within the site and also the large monolithic nature of the proposals (17.12.20). - 5.7 The Arboricultural Officer of DEFA comments on 08.12.20 to say that in his view the trees are not of sufficient quality for them to require their retention and a number were previously allowed to be removed due to their condition which is likely to be considered as U if categorised.
6.1 The principle of the development of a dwelling here is acceptable given the previous planning approvals on the site and adjacent. The estate to the west has been commenced.
6.2 As such, the relevant issues are whether the proposed dwelling would have an adverse impact on the character and appearance of the area and the adjacent Registered Buildings and on the living conditions of those in adjacent property - notably the house on plot 1 to the south and plot 1 and the public open space of the larger development to the west which is 8m away, having regard to General Policy 2 of the Strategic Plan and the Residential Design Guidance which provides advice on how the impact of new development can be measured. There would appear to be no issue with the means of access and no objection from the highway authority. Impact on the character and appearance of the area - 6.3 The approved dwelling was designed and approved at the same time as that on plot 2 and there were some similarities between the two in design and finish. What is proposed is now different to the approved dwelling on the adjacent plot which in itself is not unacceptable given the different styles of building approved and existing within the vicinity of the site. However, the mass and height of the proposed building is now greater than that proposed and whilst in itself there may not be a concern with this given the proportions and dimensions of buildings around it, regard must be paid to the size of the plot in which it sits. What is proposed will necessitate the removal of all of the existing trees on site and the hard surfacing of almost all of the plot in order to provide access and parking and such a large footprint. Whilst there is no objection from the Arboricultural Officer of the Department to the loss of the trees, it is understood that individually and even collectively they may not be particularly good specimens but they do contribute as a landscape feature both in terms of the setting of the railway station and to establish a boundary and part screen between the new house and the lane and the rest of the buildings in the area. The loss of an opportunity for the reestablishment of a replacement hedge or tree line is as much a concern as the loss of the existing trees. The building will also be much closer to its boundaries which are other residential property, public open space and a lane opposite important civic buildings which are also Registered. This is considered to represent over-development of the site which an unacceptable impact on the character and appearance of the building. The size of the building results from the inclusion of what could be used as a self contained office and six bedrooms for which no justification has been provided which would override the concerns about the over-development of the plot. The inclusion of a door on all of the elevations could suggest that the property will be subdivided internally giving rise to additional requirements for parking. Impact on the living conditions of those in adjacent property - 6.4 What is proposed, as noted above is both taller and larger than what has approval and this will result in a greater impact on the land around it. There will be additional height and an additional level of windows which will overlook the properties to the south and east and additional first floor windows. Impact on Ballaghreiney - 6.5 The proposed dwelling will have an external staircase and first floor large windows although these are all more than 20m from the windows of this adjacent property. The amenity space for Ballaghreiney is mostly at the south of that property with access and parking directly in front of the dwelling so the privacy and outlook from this property is not considered to be affected so badly that the application should be refused for that reason although what is now proposed will have more of an effect on its outlook than what was approved. Impact on approved plot 2 - 6.6 The approved dwelling was in line with the dwelling approved to the south whereas what is now proposed is wider and projects further west, affecting the outlook from the ground floor windows nearest the proposed dwelling using the 45 degree measurement in the Residential
Design Guidance. The position and height and inclusion of windows in the southern elevation will also affect the privacy and outlook from the rear garden of approved plot 1.
Impact on approved residential development to the west
6.7 What was approved on both the application property and the adjoining plot would have been closer to the approved development to the west than would normally be considered acceptable having reference to the RDG. However, what was approved on both sides of this boundary were two storey and with at least some distance between the proposed dwellings on the two plots, and those to the west. What is now proposed is much closer to the mutual boundary and taller. Whilst there are no additional windows at roof level in the western elevation, the dwelling is nevertheless, taller and more imposing and closer and the proximity of the house to the boundary leaves little or no space for the planting of a hedge which could help mitigate any impacts of overlooking and intervisibility and where the hedging itself would not be overbearing if it were to be successful in preventing these issues.
7.1 The proposed dwelling, by virtue of its size, mass and design would necessitate the removal in all of the existing trees on site with insufficient space around the building to introduce any mitigation planting, result in an overbearing and overdeveloped appearance and impact on the surrounding area, detrimentally affecting the character and appearance of the area which includes Registered Buildings of historic and architectural interest which are visited by the public, as well as the amenities of those in adjacent properties, particularly those who may live in the house approved to the south on plot 1 and those in the approved houses and public open space to the west. The previously approved dwelling (15/01008/B) demonstrates that it is possible to erect a dwelling on this site without the adverse impact that the dwelling now proposed would have. INTERESTED PERSON STATUS - 8.1 By virtue of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) Order 2019, the following persons are automatically interested persons:
8.2 The decision maker must determine:
8.3 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 Interested Person Status.
I can confirm that this decision has been made by the 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
Decision Made : Refused Date : 14.01.2021 Determining officer
Signed : S BUTLER Stephen Butler Head of Development Management
Copyright in submitted documents remains with their authors. Request removal
