16 September 2022 · Delegated
Ash Lodge, Patrick Road, St. Johns, Isle Of Man, IM4 3br
Permission was granted for a series of alterations at Ash Lodge, a large traditional dwelling set within approximately seven acres of mostly wooded land to the south west of Patrick Road, St Johns. The works included fitting a glazed veranda to the existing roof terrace, replacing the external spiral staircase, and adding a single-storey extension to the side and rear elevations. The application was decided under delegated powers by the Department of Environment, Food and Agriculture. The officer assessed the proposal against the principle of design and impact, the character and appearance of the property, and the potential effect on neighbouring amenity, concluding that the works were acceptable on all counts. One condition was attached to the approval.
The application was approved by delegated decision on 16 September 2022. The key planning considerations were the design and impact of the works, the character and appearance of the property, and the effect on neighbouring amenity, all of which were found to be acceptable.
Housing Policy 15 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016
extensions or alterations to traditionally styled properties in the countryside will only be approved where they respect the proportion, form and appearance of the existing property
Housing Policy 15: 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 50% of the existing building in terms of floor space (measured externally).
General Policy 2
general development control standards in connection with the Residential Design Guidance
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: (a) is in accordance with the design brief in the Area Plan where there is such a brief; (b) respects the site and surroundings in terms of the siting, layout, scale, form, design and landscaping of buildings and the spaces around them; (c) does not affect adversely the character of the surrounding landscape or townscape; (d) does not adversely affect the protected wildlife or locally important habitats on the site or adjacent land, including water courses; (e) does not affect adversely public views of the sea; (f) incorporates where possible existing topography and landscape features, particularly trees and sod banks; (g) does not affect adversely the amenity of local residents or the character of the locality; (h) provides satisfactory amenity standards in itself, including where appropriate safe and convenient access for all highway users, together with adequate parking, servicing and manoeuvring space; (i) does not have an unacceptable effect on road safety or traffic flows on the local highways; (j) can be provided with all necessary services; (k) does not prejudice the use or development of adjoining land in accordance with the appropriate Area Plan; (l) is not on contaminated land or subject to unreasonable risk of erosion or flooding; (m) takes account of community and personal safety and security in the design of buildings and the spaces around them; and (n) is designed having due regard to best practice in reducing energy consumption. 6.3 Development outside of areas zoned for development
Community Policy 7
reducing outbreak of fire
Community Policy 7: The design of new development and the extension and refurbishment of existing buildings and development must, as far as is reasonably practical, pay due regard to existing best practice so as to help prevent criminal and anti-social behaviour. 10.12.2 The Isle of Man Constabulary has suggested that neighbourhood police stations, where the public can meet police officers, are needed to improve community safety. In the majority of cases these will need to be provided within existin g communities as opportunities arise. Consideration should be given to incorporating such facilities in larger new developments in association with other community facilities.
Infrastructure Policy 5
water conservation
, if it can be demonstrated that development there would not result in an incursion into the countryside. However there is no corresponding proposal for residential areas. Proposed Change 75 (in PIP5) now indicates that appropriate colour washes should be applied to the Proposals Map, to show the Mount Murray and Braddan Hills areas as 'Predominantly Residential'; and the Snugborough Estate as 'Industrial'. I agree with this. I also recommend that the whole of the waste management area at Richmond Hill should be similarly delineated and washed over as a site for 'Special Industry' (as defined in paragraph 9.2.3 of the Strategic Plan). CHAPTER 4 - LANDSCAPE Landscape Character Areas and Areas of High Landscape Value 25 Chapter 4 of the draft Area Plan is headed 'Landscape - Character and Appearance'. It draws on a Landscape Character Assessment Report which was prepared for the Government by consultants in 2005. The report describes the qualities of a series of Landscape Character Areas, and identifies landscape features that are worthy of protection. It excludes consideration of the urban areas of Douglas and Onchan. 26 Landscape Proposal 1 of the Area Plan states that the broad landscape strategies and key views for each Character Area are to be regarded as policy statements on matters of landscape in the East. Applicants for planning approval must demonstrate that consideration has been given to these strategies and key views. Twenty different Character Areas are identified. The key strategy for each of them is to 'conserve' (or 'conserve and enhance') the 'character, quality and distinctiveness' of the area; and of certain specified landscape features. During the inquiry, a number of objectors to proposed land allocations argued that this policy of landscape conservation should outweigh other considerations which might tell in favour of development. In my view, if landscape policy fails to distinguish between areas of outstanding beauty or cultural interest on the one hand, and less sensitive areas of countryside on the other, it may become increasingly difficult to find sites for essential development. 27 The approach set out in the Area Plan is intended to replace a landscape policy which has been in place since 1982, and is encapsulated in Environment Policy 2 of the present Strategic Plan. That policy identifies Areas of High Landscape or Coastal Value and Scenic Significance (AHLV). Within each AHLV the protection of the character of the landscape is normally the most important consideration for development control purposes. By implication, outside of AHLVs, other factors can be given relatively greater importance. I consider this to be a useful policy tool, in so far as it identifies those areas which can best absorb necessary development without harming the most sensitive landscapes. A similar policy applies in England, where the protection of the landscape is given priority in National Parks and Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty. The general extent of AHLVs is shown in the Strategic Plan's Key Diagram. 28 Some necessary development will inevitably change and possibly detract from the character of the landscape. Examples might include the extraction and processing of minerals, the management of waste, the generation and transmission of electricity, the construction of roads, or the erection of factories and houses. In my view, it is important that landscape policy should provide guidance as to where such development might best be absorbed into the landscape with minimum harm. 29 Accordingly, it seems to me that consideration should be given to the continued designation of Areas of High Landscape Value in the Area Plan, and that priority should be given to the protection of the landscape in those areas. The Area Plan should define the precise boundaries of the AHLV. ( I note that the rural areas of both Braddan and Onchan are currently covered by a blanket AHLV designation, which may be difficult to justify). I am aware that development control officers find the descriptive material set out for each Landscape Character Area in the draft Area Plan to be useful. I see no reason why the material in question should not be retained in the Area Plan, alongside AHLV. 30 I recommend that consideration be given to the designation, in the Area Plan, of Areas of High Landscape Value, with precise and justified boundaries. Environment Policy 2 of the Strategic Plan would continue to apply within such areas. Effect of Proposed Development on the Landscape North of Douglas and Onchan 31 Miss P Newton and Dr K Kilmurry each referred to the potential impact of proposed development of sites on the northern edge of Douglas and Onchan, referring particularly to the adverse effect of building on the skyline, and the need for an overall scheme of landscaping. I consider it important that development briefs for the sites in question should make provision for the preparation of masterplans which would include comprehensive landscaping schemes. Details of these would
Condition 1
The development hereby approved shall be begun before the expiration of four years from the date of this decision notice.
