Loading document...
This application has been referred to the Planning Committee as the proposal would be 50% larger than the existing building and the application is recommended for an approval.
The application site forms the residential curtilage of Sarah's Cottage, Ballasloe, Cornaa, Ramsey, which is located east of the Cornaa. Current the site comprises of a partially built dwelling.
The application seeks approval for the erection of a replacement dwelling. The proposal would have an overall width of 15.5 metres, a maximum depth of 7.8 metres (excluding porch) and a ridge height of 8.4 metres.
The proposal from the front elevation would appear as a traditional Manx farmhouse with three upper front windows over a central doorway which is flanked by single windows with a single storey lean-to extension to the side (southwest) elevation.
The application site is within an area recognised as being an area of "woodland and white land", under the Isle of Man Development Plan Order 1982. The site is not within a Conservation Area; but is within an area zoned as High Landscape or Coastal Value and Scenic Significance.
Due to the site location, zoning and the type of proposal, the following policies are relevant for consideration:
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:
Policy 2: The present system of landscape classification of Areas of High Landscape or Coastal Value and Scenic Significance (AHLV's) as shown on the 1982 Development Plan and subsequent Local and Area Plans will be used as a basis for development control until such time as it is superseded by a landscape classification which will introduce different categories of landscape and policies and guidance for control therein. Within these areas the protection of the character of the landscape will be the most important consideration unless it can be shown that:
Policy 4: 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:
Policy 14: Where a replacement dwelling is permitted, it must not be substantially different to the existing in terms of siting and size, unless changes of siting or size would result in an overall
environmental improvement; the new building should therefore generally be sited on the "footprint" of the existing, and should have a floor area(1), which is not more than 50% greater than that of the original building (floor areas should be measured externally and should not include attic space or outbuildings). Generally, the design of the new building should be in accordance with Policies 2-7 of the present Planning Circular 3/91, (which will be revised and issued as a Planning Policy Statement). Exceptionally, permission may be granted for buildings of innovative, modern design where this is of high quality and would not result in adverse visual impact; designs should incorporate the re-use of such stone and slate as are still in place on the site, and in general, new fabric should be finished to match the materials of the original building.
Consideration may be given to proposals which result in a larger dwelling where this involves the replacement of an existing dwelling of poor form with one of more traditional character, or where, by its design or siting, there would be less visual impact."
The previous planning application is considered relevant in the assessment and determination of this application:- Erection of a detached garage (Amendment to PA 04/01353/B) - 11/00539/B - PENDING CONSIDERATION The erection of a replacement dwelling (including a garage) - 11/00032/B - REFUSED for the following reasons:-
The erection of a replacement dwelling (amendments to PA 04/01353B) - APPROVED
Erection of two storey dwelling to replacement existing cottage - 04/01353/B - APPROVED
a) Approval in principle for the replacement of existing dwelling - 03/00900/A - APPROVED b) Approval in principle for the erection of a new dwelling - 03/00900/PART - REFUSED
Maughold Commissioners:-
"No objection"
Highways Division:-
"Do not oppose has no traffic management, parking or road safety implications."
No written private representations have been received by the Planning Authority regarding this application.
The starting point is considering whether the development should be regarded as a replacement dwelling or an extension of the existing uncompleted dwelling.
The dwelling has partially been erected, but not in accordance with the approved drawings (04/01353/B). The dwelling and garage have been confirmed by the applicant's agent as being erected as shown in the new submitted plans under consideration.
Accordingly, the dwelling and garage have been erected unlawfully as they have not been erected in accordance with planning application 04/01353/B.
It should be noted that application 04/01353/B has now expired (19th December 2009). The current building has not been erected as per the approved plans, but built to what has now been submitted. Furthermore, given the Isle of Man Strategic Plan was adopted after the original approval (Housing Policy 14 not considered) then it would be unlikely such an approval would be granted now, given the initial approval represented a 215% increase in terms of floor area over the original Manx cottage, therefore failing HP 14.
However, the applicant commenced the building and submitted in December 2009 an additional planning application (09/01978/B) which showed minor alterations to the ground floor window fenestration of the originally approved application (04/01353/B). As the dwelling was not completed, the Planning Authority considered the scheme as the erection of a replacement dwelling and not just the minor amendments (amendments can't be made to an unfinished development).
The applicant is fortunate that application 09/01978/B was approved; otherwise they would have no approval for development on this site.
Due to these reasons, weight must be attached to planning application 09/01978/B, which has been approved. At the time of the application it was considered as building works had commenced (although now it would appear the dwelling was not being built in accordance with the initial approved plans) and the proposed alterations only related to the change of fenestration and not to the overall size or massing of the dwelling; it was considered to be inappropriate to refuse the application on the grounds of Housing Policy 14. The application was therefore approved.
The new submission is similar to the previous refused application (11/00032/B), although they have tried to address the areas of concern.
It should be noted that the applicant in their submission indicates that the ground levels outside the property have been dug out and lowered during the course of the building works and when reinstated the ground level will be approximately 0.6 metres higher at its greatest point (southwest elevation of dwelling).
The first area of concern was the height of the property. This submission proposes a height measured to ridge height of 8.3 metres (finished ground level). Using current ground levels the ridge height at its highest is 8.8 metres. For the avoidance of doubt all measurements are taken from the south east corner of dwelling.
In essence, the difference between the new proposal and what was original approved under applications 04/01353/B & 09/01978/B, is the proposal is would be 0.7 metres taller (ridge height to ground level, measured from south east corner). All other dimensions remain the same (i.e. footprint), with only slight window alterations between the previous applications.
The previously refused dwelling had the same a roof design as proposed under this submission; however, the submission would have resulted in living accommodation (bedroom & en-suite) within the roof space served by four roof lights.
No living accommodation is now proposed, nor are any roof lights proposed. The applicants have confirmed that only a ceiling hatch and loft ladder will be installed to utilise the roof space for storage only.
The previous submission also included a two storey side extension to the main dwelling and a rear single storey extension. Under this new submission the side extension is now only a single storey lean-to extension as previously approved and the rear extension has been omitted from this application.
Due to these differences the application under consideration now needs to be considered against Housing Policy 14, which relates to the replacement of dwelling in the countryside.
Housing Policy 14 states that a replacement should generally be on the same footprint and should not be greater than 50% greater than that of the original building.
The original dwelling was a small single storey Manx Cottage (60sqm) whilst the proposal would result in a floor area of 189 sqm. The new dwelling would represent a 215% increase in terms of floor area, over the original dwelling. This is clearly contrary to Housing Policy 14.
It should be noted that whilst planning permission was originally granted for a substantially larger dwelling (215% increase) this was prior to the Isle of Man Strategic Plan (HP 14) being adopted.
Weight is required to be attached to planning application 09/01978/B which granted planning permission for a two storey traditional Manx property which had the same percentage increase of 215% over the original footprint.
For reference, the previously refused application would have resulted in a floor area of 268 sqm and would have represented a 346% increase in terms of floor area, over the original dwelling. Again, this would be clearly contrary to Housing Policy 14.
Housing Policy 14 does indicated that consideration may be given to proposals which result in a larger dwelling where this involves the replacement of an existing dwelling of poor form with one of more traditional character, or where, by its design or siting, there would be less visual impact.
The original single storey Manx property (from plans submitted in the original application 04/01353/B) would not have been considered of poor form, therefore the proposal would not comply with this aspect of the policy.
The next exception for a larger dwelling; "where, by its design or siting, there would be less visual impact". Again this development cannot comply with this aspect of the policy; given the dwelling is significantly larger (215% increase) in terms of height, scale and massing, and is located in a prominent position in the countryside.
Application 09/01978/B was approved more recently, following the adoption of the Strategic Plan. At the time of its consideration significant weight was attached to the previously approved application and permission was granted on this basis.
As indicated, the footprint and the size increase have been accepted on two previous occasions. Therefore, the issue is whether the increase of the dwelling by 0.7 metres would have/has a detrimental impact upon the visual amenities of the area, given the increase of massing of the property which is in a very prominent position in the open countryside. The dwelling is very apparent from the adjacent public highway (A15).
Overall, whilst taller and greater in mass, it is considered this slight increase in height would not have such a significant impact upon the visual amenities of the area to warrant a refusal.
Concern would arise if subsequent applications are received for roof light/dormers to make the space useable for living accommodation (bedrooms etc). Due to this, it is perhaps wise to add a condition to remove all Permitted Development rights (extension/roof lights) given the substantial increase which has been allowed over the original dwelling.
The next issue of the dwelling which needs consideration is the proportion, form and design of the proposed dwelling.
As indicated within Housing Policy 14 the design of the new building should be in accordance with Policies 2-7 of the present Planning Circular 3/91. This policy relates to traditionally designed properties which take the form of Manx vernacular.
From the front elevation the proposal would follow the lines of Planning Circular 3/91 and would be symmetrical with three upper front windows over a central doorway which is flanked by single windows. All other elevations would also meet the criteria set out in Planning Circular 3/91. The proposal is identical to the previous approved applications (with the exception minor alterations to windows)
Therefore the property would comply with the policies as set out within the Circular.
It is considered that the proposals would comply with the relevant planning policies of The Isle of Man Strategic Plan (20th June 2007), and for the reasons set out in this report, it is recommended that the application be approved.
It is considered that the following meet the criteria of Government Circular 1/06 and should be afforded interested party status:-
Maughold Parish Commissioners
The Department of Transport Highways and Traffic Division is now part of the Department of Infrastructure of which the planning authority is part. As such, the Highways and Traffic Division cannot be afforded party status in this instance.
Recommended Decision: Permitted
Date of Recommendation: 03.06.2011
C : Conditions for approval 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 approval relates to the erection of a replacement dwelling (Amendments to PA 09/01978/B & PA 04/01353/B) as proposed in the submitted documents and drawings 10 726 06 and 10 726 01 all received on 14th April 2011.
C 3.
Within one month of the decision notice full details of both hard and soft landscaping works are required to be submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority and these works shall be carried out as approved. Details of the soft landscaping should include, but not limited to, details of planting along the eastern boundary, albeit set back from the visibility splays. Details of the hard landscaping works include footpaths and hard surfacing materials. The hard landscaping works shall be completed in full accordance with the approved details prior to the first occupation of the proposed dwelling hereby permitted. All planting shall be carried out in accordance the approved details in the first planting and seeding seasons following that first occupation. Any trees or shrub which within 5 years from the completion of the development dies, is removed or becomes seriously damaged or diseased shall be replaced in the next planting season with another of similar size and species unless the planning authority gives written consent to any variation.
C 4.
Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (Permitted Development) Order 2005 (or any Order revoking or re-enacting that Order) no extensions, greenhouses, walls, gates, fences, garden sheds, summerhouses, flag poles, decking, roof lights, windows, garages, or tanks for the storage of oil for domestic heating shall be erected (other than those expressly authorised by this approval).
C 5.
The subcills must be pre-formed concrete cills to a depth of 0.15m and the windows all timber framed sliding sashes all as shown in the approved drawing.
I confirm that this decision has been made by the Planning Authority in accordance with the authority afforded to it under the Town and Country (Development Procedure) 2005
Decision Made : Authority Meeting Date : 17/6/11 Signed : Presenting Officer Further to the decision of the Authority an additional report/condition reason is required. Signing Officer to delete as appropriate
YES/NO
C6. Removal items within one month C7. Living all prev, store only.
Copyright in submitted documents remains with their authors. Request removal
