DEC Officer Report

Application No.: 22/00571/B Applicant: Mr David Wormald Proposal: Two-story garage extension, to the rear of the property for 2 vehicles and a games room/gym on the lower level Site Address: Hampton Manor Quines Hill Port Soderick Isle Of Man IM4 1BA Planning Officer: Mr Paul Visigah Expected Decision Level: Officer Delegation Recommended Decision: Permitted Date of Recommendation: 07.02.2023

Conditions and Notes for Approval

C : Conditions for approval N : Notes attached to conditions

• C 1. The development hereby approved shall be begun before the expiration of four years from the date of this decision notice.

Reason: To comply with Article 26 of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) Order 2019 and to avoid the accumulation of unimplemented planning approvals.

• C 2. The games room/gym within the ground floor of the extension and the first floor garage shall only be used in association with the main dwelling house "Hampton Manor" and for purposes incidental to the use of main dwelling house "Hampton Manor" as a single dwelling, for no commercial purposes and only in accordance with the internal layout as shown on the submitted Drawing No.01 rev A received 26 January 2022 and being retained thereafter.

Reason: The dwelling is within an area not zoned for development and permission has been granted as an exception. The application does not propose to create separate units of accommodation within the site and has not been considered as such. To ensure proper control of the development and to reflect the information provided in the application, as the Department has assessed the impact of the proposal on the basis of the specific use and the documents submitted.

This application has been recommended for approval for the following reason.

Overall, it is concluded that the planning application accords with the provisions set out in Housing policy 16, Environment Policy 1 and General Policy 2 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016, and the principles promoted by Policies 3 and 4 of Planning Circular 3/91.

Plans/Drawings/Information;

This decision relates to Drawing No. 02 received 09.06.2022, and Drawing No. 01 rev A received 26.01.23. _______________________________________________________________

Interested Person Status – Additional Persons

None _____________________________________________________________________________

Officer’s Report

1.0 THE APPLICATION SITE - 1.1 The application site is the residential curtilage of Hampton Manor, Quines Hill, Port Soderick located on the south eastern side of the Quines Hill. The site is accessed via an existing entrance off the Old Castletown Road (A25) and is set back approximately 65m from the road ad set within a wooded area, with its entire boundary and driveway enclosed in mature landscaping. Views to the building on site are only through gaps in the mature landscaping around the site as such only very limited views are achievable. - 1.2 The garage building which is the subject of the current application sits exactly northwest of the existing dwelling on site and is joined to the dwelling on the northeast elevation by a single storey flat roofed arch way. This two storey building has a steeply pitched roof finished in grey concrete roof tiles and has three velux roof lights on the rear roof plane. The external walls which appear to be masonry rendered are painted white.

1.2 The site slopes steeply to the rear such that the land drops by over 2m as it slopes away from the building. Due to the changing topography at the rear of the building, the ground floor level sits between 1.2m to 1.8m above the ground level at the rear of the building. - 2.0 THE PROPOSAL

2.1 The application seeks approval for two-story garage extension, to the rear of the property for 2 vehicles and a games room/gym on the lower level. - 2.2 The proposed works would include:

• a. Erecting a two storey extension that would project from the rear of the existing garage by 6m, be 7.7m wide and 7.1m high to the top of its pitch roof (5m to the eaves). This extension which would have its first floor level set at the ground floor level of the garage, and ground floor level creating a lower ground floor level below the garage would be finished externally in painted render to match the main dwelling. Its roof would be finished in material similar to the existing roof. The pitch roof over the extension would be set about 2.7m below the roof ridge of the garage with roof pitch set at 30 degree (26 degree lower than the existing roof pitch set at 56 degrees).
• b. The first floor would serve as an extension to the garage serving two additional cars, while the ground floor would serve as a games room/gym for the dwelling. The floor area created would measure 46sqm.

2.3 No trees would be removed as a result of the proposal. There would also be no change is site levels.

- 3.0 PLANNING POLICY

3.1 The application site is within an area not zoned for development under the Area plan for the East, and the site is not within a Conservation Area. The site is not prone to flood risks or within a Registered Tree Area, and there are no registered trees on site.

3.2 The Character Appraisal within the Area Plan for the East states thus concerning the area: "Douglas Head (D12):

• 3.2.1 Landscape Strategy Conserve and enhance:

• a) the character, quality and distinctiveness of the area, with its open and panoramic views over large rectilinear fields;
• b) its steep winding small lanes enclosed by grassed Manx hedges;
• c) its scattered hill farms fringed by trees.

• 3.2.2 Key Views Open and expansive views from most of the area out to sea, along the coast, over Douglas Bay and inland over the incised inland plateau up to the northern Uplands. Telecommunications tower on hill top forms highly visible landmark in surrounding areas."
• 3.3 In terms of strategic plan policy, the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016 contains the following policies that are considered specifically material to the assessment of the planning application;
• 3.4 Environment Policy 1 states: "The countryside and its ecology will be protected for its own sake. For the purposes of this policy, the countryside comprises all land which is outside the settlements defined in Appendix 3 at A.3.6 or which is not designated for future development on an Area Plan. Development which would adversely affect the countryside will not be permitted unless there is an over-riding national need in land use planning terms which outweighs the requirement to protect these areas and for which there is no reasonable and acceptable alternative."
• 3.5 Environment Policy 3 states: "Development will not be permitted where it would result in the unacceptable loss of or damage to woodland areas, especially ancient, natural and seminatural woodlands, which have public amenity or conservation value."

3.3 The Strategic Plan stipulates a general presumption against development in areas which are not designated for a particular purpose and where the protection of the countryside is of paramount importance (EP 1 and GP3). However given there is an existing dwelling on the site, it is relevant to consider Housing Policy 16 which makes provision for extensions or alterations to non-traditional properties in the countryside. - 3.4 Housing Policy 15: "Housing Policy 16: 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." - 3.5 Paragraph 8.12.2: Extensions 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 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 non-traditional 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.
• 3.6 Since the site has an established residential use and the site is within a location with existing properties, it would also be relevant to consider the general standards of development as set out in General Policy 2.
• 3.7 Other policies within the Strategic Plan which are considered relevant to the proposal are; Infrastructure Policy 5, and Community Policies 7, 10 and 11.

- 4.0 OTHER MATERIAL CONSIDERATIONS

4.1 Planning Circular 3/91 (Guide to the Design of Residential Development in the Countryside) is considered relevant. The section on 'Proportions and Form' on page 4 provides advise on how to make variations to the floor area of traditional buildings (extensions).

• 4.1.2 Policy 3 states: "The shape of small and medium sized new dwellings should follow the size and pattern of the traditional farmhouse. They should be rectangular in plan and simple in form. Extensions to existing buildings should maintain the character of the original form".
• 4.1.3 Policy 4 states: "External finishes are expected to be selected from a limited range of traditional materials". The supporting texts to policy 4 states that "Modern construction and materials may be used to achieve a similar external appearance".

4.2 Whilst not adopted planning policy, DEFA's Residential Design Guide (2021) is a material consideration in the assessment of this application as, "It is intended to apply to any residential development within existing villages and towns, including individual houses, conversions and householder extensions. It is envisaged that a new guidance will be provided for dwellings in the countryside, although some of the broad principles set out within this document may still be relevant to such proposals". - 5.0 PLANNING HISTORY

5.1 The application site has been the subject of a single planning application which is considered relevant in the assessment and determination of the current application:

5.2 Planning approval was granted under PA 04/01979/B for Alterations and conversion of existing detached garage to a dwelling.

5.3 The current scheme seeks to further alter the garage by adding a two storey extension to the rear elevation. - 6.0 REPRESENTATIONS Copies of representations received can be viewed on the Government's website. This report contains summaries only.

6.1 Representation from the Department of Infrastructure (DOI) Highways Division confirms that they 'Do not oppose' in a letter dated 24 June 2022. They also note that they find the application to have no significant negative impact upon highway safety, network functionality and /or parking.

6.2 DEFA Ecosystem Policy Team have made the following comments regarding the application (07/July 2022/19 July 2022): They state that forward to their previous comments, they would like to retract out comments requesting a bat survey for this application, as they believe that if bats are present on site,

they are not located in the area of the garage and therefore should not be impacted by the proposed works.

6.3 Braddan Commissioners indicate that they have no objection to the application (4 July 2022).

6.4 No comments have been received from neighbouring properties. - 7.0 ASSESSMENT

7.1 The main issues to consider with this application are: a. The potential visual impact of the works on the existing dwelling and the surrounding countryside (HP16, GP 2 and EP1)

7.2 There would be no impacts on neighbouring amenity given the position of the garage on site and separating distance between the garage and nearest neighbour. Also, no trees would be removed on site and there would be no impacts on site ecology resulting from the proposal. Additionally, more parking would be created on site and there would be no changes to the vehicular entrance, ensuring that there would be no adverse impacts on parking and highway safety.

7.3 Impact on Appearance of the existing property (HP 16, GP2 & EP1)

• 7.3.1 In terms of impacts on the appearance of the existing garage, it is considered that the proposed rear extension would be finished to match the existing garage in terms of wall finish and roof finish, and its roof would be set considerably lower than the main roof ridge to ensure it appears as a subordinate addition to the existing building. Whilst the pitch angle (slope) of the new roof over the extension would not be set at 57 degrees to match the existing, the new roof slope would ensure that the extension remains subordinate to the main building and as such this element of the proposal is considered acceptable. The setting of the extension to take advantage of the site topography would further serve to ensure that large sections of the extension lies below the ground level and diminish its prominence when assessed against the existing garage building on site.

• 7.3.2 Given the above, it is considered that the new extension would fit seamlessly with the appearance and character of the existing garage and would not detract from the overall appearance of the garage or dwelling on site, with the stepped appearance of the site which sets the lower ground floor level at about 2.6m below the ground floor level of the garage and dwelling on site serving to further enable the integration of the new development with the existing built fabric on site.
• 7.3.3 In terms of impacts on the surrounding countryside, it is noted that Housing Policy 16 is averse to developments that would increase the impact of non-traditional buildings or those of poor or inappropriate form as viewed by the public. In this case, the proposed extension would be located to the rear of the existing garage and at a section of the site with low site levels, with the existing mature landscaping on the site boundary providing sufficient screening of the development any of the surrounding highways or thoroughfare. Accordingly, as there would be no views or very limited views from the surrounding countryside to the development, with very limited or no impacts on site ecology, it is considered that the proposal would have no adverse visual impacts, and therefore is considered acceptable. The proposed forms and external appearance are also not contrary to the requirements of Policies 3 and 4 of Planning Circular 3/91.

- 8.0 CONCLUSION

8.1 Overall, the proposal complies with the requirements of HP16, Environment Policy 1, and General Policy 2, as it would not harm the character and quality of the site and surrounding landscape. The application is, therefore, recommended for approval.

- 9.0 INTERESTED PERSON STATUS

9.1 By virtue of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) Order 2019, the following persons are automatically interested persons:

• (a) the applicant (including an agent acting on their behalf);
• (b) any Government Department that has made written representations that the Department considers material;
• (c) the Highways Division of the Department of Infrastructure;
• (d) Manx National Heritage where it has made written representations that the Department considers material;
• (e) Manx Utilities where it has made written representations that the Department considers material;
• (f) the local authority in whose district the land the subject of the application is situated; and
• (g) a local authority adjoining the authority referred to in paragraph (f) where that adjoining authority has made written representations that the Department considers material.

9.2 The decision maker must determine:

• o whether any other comments from Government Departments (other than the Department of Infrastructure Highway Services Division) are material; and
• o whether there are other persons to those listed above who should be given Interested Person Status

9.3 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 a Principal Planner 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 : Permitted Date: 09.02.2023 Determining officer

Signed : C BALMER Chris Balmer Principal Planner

Customer note This copy of the officer report reflects the content of the file copy and has been produced in this formfor the benefit of our online services/ customers and archive records.