Officer Report

Application No.: 17/01312/B Applicant: Mr Anthony & Mrs Marian Charnley Proposal: Erection of a replacement dwelling with associated access and parking Site Address: Skeddan Veg Fort Island Road Derbyhaven Isle of Man IM9 1TZ Case Officer : Miss Lucy Kinrade Photo Taken: 21.02.2018 Site Visit: 21.02.2018 Expected Decision Level: Officer Delegation Recommended Decision: Refused Date of Recommendation: 19.03.2018 _________________________________________________________________ Reasons for Refusal R : Reasons for Refusal O : Notes attached to reasons - R 1. The replacement dwelling is not considered to respect the site or the surroundings by reason of its mass, mono pitch roof and material finish. The proposal would result in an incongruous and unsympathetic feature in the streetscene and would create visual harm to the general coastal character of Derbyhaven. The proposal therefore fails to accord with parts (b) and (c) of General Policy 2 and Landscape Proposal 26 of the IOM Strategic Plan 2016. - R 2. The proposal will include large areas of glazing and will introduce first floor windows where there is none at present. This new range of overlooking and adverse impacts on privacy is further exacerbated by the fact that the site levels are to be increased and the distances between the proposal and the neighbours is to decrease. As such the proposal fails to comply with part (g) of General Policy 2 of the IOM Strategic Plan 2016.

_______________________________________________________________ Interested Person Status – Additional Persons

It is recommended that the following persons 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):

• - the owners of Balladoyle- due to their property physically adjoining the application site, and
• - representative of Castletown Golf Links, The Herring House, Fort Island Road, Derbyhaven due to the golf course physically adjoining the application site.

• It is recommended that the following persons should not be given Interested Person Status as they are not considered to be directly affected by the proposals or 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):
• - the owners of The Herring House, Fort Island Road, Derbyhaven. _____________________________________________________________________________

Officer’s Report THE SITE

1.1 The application site is the residential curtilage of an existing property located in Derbyhaven. Skeddan Veg is a one and a half storey dwelling situated within a modest plot on the western side of Fort Island Road leading to Langness. - 1.2 The existing dwelling is set back from the main road and accessed by a narrow walled access located central to the plot. The dwelling sits at a level lower than the main road approx.

• 1.4m lower.

1.3 Skeddan Veg has a main frontage comprising a two storey gable, a single storey gable and a flat roof garage that face towards Derbyhaven Bay although orientated at an angle facing south east towards St Michael's Isle. - 1.4 The dwelling has two projecting extensions on the south west elevation facing south west towards the rear garden of Balladoyle House. The closest distance between the two properties is approx. 15m. The rear gable elevation faces north west over Castletown Golf Links. - 1.5 The north east facing elevation of the dwelling faces towards the rear and side elevation of neighbouring property Ashley House. The closest distance between the two main elevations of the dwellings is approx. 17.5m. - 1.6 Living accommodation is predominantly provided at ground floor with a floor area of 152 sq m. A spiral staircase provides access to store rooms and a sitting room within the roof space approx. 55 sq m of floor space. Both floors have a combined total of 207sq m.

THE PROPOSAL

2.1 The current application proposes the demolition of the existing dwelling and its replacement with a new modern two storey dwelling with a mono-pitch roof. The dwelling will also have a number of flat roof projections to the front and rear elevations. On the north side elevation a flat roof garage is proposed with an additional single storey mono pitch covered parking area adjoining with the front driveway.

2.2 The development is to include alterations to increase the levels of the land to match that of the main road (increase of approx. 1.4m). - 2.3 The proposed dwelling is set back from the road on a similar position and orientation as the existing house. The proposal covers a greater width of the existing plot. The closest side elevation of the proposed dwelling is approx. 7m from the nearest elevation of Ashley House. The nearest south side elevation of the proposed dwelling is approx. 3.5m from the side elevation of Balladoyle. - 2.4 The modern dwelling includes a large amount of glazing within the design. The 6.5m high front elevation contains a number of large picture windows on both floors and a full height central glazing area serving the stairwell. On the side elevation facing Ashley House there are five windows at ground floor and one large picture window at first floor that wraps around to

• the front elevation. On the side elevation facing Balladoyle there are picture windows that wrap each of the corners with the front and rear elevations at both floors. At the rear the first floor have bi-folding doors opening onto a first floor roof terrace above the flat roof extension.
• 2.5 The dwelling is to have a finish comprising a mix of materials mostly painted render and vertical timber effect cladding. The roof is to be finished in zinc and aluminium glazing throughout.

PLANNING HISTORY

3.1 The application site has not been the subject of any previous planning applications. PLANNING STATUS AND POLICY - 4.1 The site lies within an area designated on the Area Plan for the South 2013 Map 3 as 'Residential'. The Area Plan for the South 2013 (APS) also provides further information about the Derbyhaven area at Appendix 4:

• (i) Description: Derbyhaven comprises a group of dwellings clustered around the junction where the Castletown Road meets the Fort Island Road. It is a compact group, having a welldefined boundary with the Airport and the Golf Course. There are no public buildings, but there is a sense of place arising from its geographical position facing the largely natural harbour, and the pleasant public foreshore.

ii) Assessment: The group is clearly not sustainable, there is little or no scope for infilling, and extension of the group into Airport or Golf Course land would be undesirable. Derbyhaven is not far enough from Castletown for there to be a valid argument for local housing need. Additional dwellings are not therefore proposed.

4.2 Given that the land use designation is residential and the site already comprises an existing residential dwelling there is a principle in favour of the erection of a replacement dwelling here. In the assessment of such an application it would be relevant to consider the general standards of development as set out in General Policy 2 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016 and also Landscape Proposal 26 of the APS. - 4.3 General Policy 2 states (in part):

"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:

• b) respects the site and surroundings in terms of the siting, layout, scale, form, design and landscaping of buildings and the space 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;

• 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 adverse effect on road safety or traffic flows on the local highways; l) is not on contaminated land or subject to unreasonable risk of erosion or flooding."

4.5 Landscape Proposal 26:

"The character of the compact group at Derbyhaven arises largely from the setting between the foreshore and the green space of the airport and the golf course. Since the buildings are of mixed age, form, and style, there is no need to adopt prescriptive guidelines for extensions, but it is important to maintain the general coastal character as viewed on the approach from Castletown and from the pleasant green areas adjoining the bay."

REPRESENTATIONS

5.1 Department of Infrastructure Highway Services have indicated that they do not oppose the application subject to a suitably worded condition being added relating to the construction of the access and visibility splays in accordance with the submitted drawings and their retention free from obstruction thereafter in the interest of highways safety (18/01/2018).

5.2 Malew Parish Commissioners indicate that they do not object to the application (03/01/18).

• 5.3. The owners of Balladoyle objected to the application on 18/01/2018. Their objection included a number of landscape photographs of the site with the proposed dwelling superimposed for comparative views. They also include a comparative footprint overlay. The main objection was to the raising of the ground level from 4.9m above datum to 6.3m. They state that this increase would cause the following detrimental effects:

• a) increase rainwater run off down into the properties either side of the site, made worse by increased areas of paving. This run off water having potentially detrimental effect on those properties;
• b) substantial visual and landscape impacts above that of the existing lower level dwelling contrary to Paragraph 3.23 and Landscape Proposal 26 of the APS. This impact made worse as the proposed dwelling is substantially larger in terms of scale, bulk and footprint.
• c) reduced level of privacy of neighbouring properties. The existing wall between the site and Balladoyle gives a fairly good degree of privacy between the two properties but that this will no longer be the case if the dwelling is elevated as proposed. This also made worse by the height of the proposed first floor balcony.

• 5.3.1 In addition to the comments regarding the elevated height the owners of Balladoyle also stated in their letter of objection the following points relevant to the plans;

• a) the ground floor level should be no higher than the existing;
• b) the first floor level should be no more than 2.7m above ground floor;
• c) the main reason for raising floor levels is to enhance the scenic views especially from ground floor. This is not an entitlement to the applicant or a material planning consideration however visual impact in relation to the public and privacy of the neighbours are material planning considerations and override the applicants wish for a better view. It is also open to the applicants to restructure the property to an upside-down house with the principle rooms upstairs to enjoy the best views and the bedroom at ground floor benefitting from privacy;
• d) the modernistic design as a 'glass palace' is completely out of character to the street scene and neighbouring Victorian properties Balladoyle and Ashley House. If design is considered acceptable by planners that the datum is kept lower than proposed to reduce visual impact (paragraph 3.23 and Landscape Proposal 26 of APS);
• e) the existing property when views from distance is hardly noticeable due to its texture, low siting and moderate overall bulk however the proposed dwelling would be more prominent and out of keeping in design. It would have much greater impact on street scene and landscape, and
• f) their property has a number of windows on the side elevation facing the site that will be adversely affected by the mass of the proposed dwelling and suffer loss of privacy from the proposed corner windows.

• 5.3.2 The owners of Balladoyle also made comments on the architect's supporting Design Statement indicating that they consider it to be inaccurate and misleading. They indicate that

• the existing greenery and stone wall make no difference to the visibility from the dwelling and that this is a 'red herring' to the raising of the levels. They state that no evidence has been submitted to justify a risk of flooding and the need for raising the levels of the land. They indicate that the revised orientation anti-clockwise by about 15 degrees in reality will not decrease privacy impacts and will align the proposal closer to its neighbours.
• 5.3.3 In their closing statement the owners of Balladoyle request that if the application is minded for approval that suitable conditions be added preventing parking or movement of contractor vehicles on the roadside grass verges and construction works to be between 9-5 Monday to Friday.
• 5.4 Objecting comments have also been received from a representative of Castletown Golf links on 29/01/2018. These comments state that while they do not object to the principle of a replacement dwelling, that any proposal should respect the character of Derbyhaven and its environment. They object to the increase of ground levels and the impacts of the proposal on the amenities of the golfers using the golf course. They state that Derbyhaven Bay will be negatively impacted by the height increases and that the proposal should not exceed that of Ashley House.
• 5.5 On 05/02/2018 responding comments were submitted by the agent on behalf of the applicant. Their comments state that the rising of the levels will not result in additional run off and the garden is to be maintained at existing levels within the perimeter. Rainwater will be disposed of via the proposed soak away. They indicate that the proposal is not contrary to 3.23 or LP26 of the APS as these indicate there is no need to adopt a prescriptive guideline for extensions. The coastal character is maintained due to the stepped back building line, the choice of materials and the rotation and height change to create space between adjacent dwellings. They indicate that careful consideration has been given to the siting of windows to maintain as much privacy as possible between adjacent properties and that the design of the dwelling particularly the height is not excessive or out of the norm. While there are Victorian properties either side the photomontages fail to include the Spanish villa's further south of the site. The proposal is at a height transitional between the heights of Ashley House and Balladoyle and that Balladoyle has a greater impact than the proposal. The development is an investment to the applicants who look to secure their investments from the impacts of global warming impacts. The revised access and levels will rectify the existing issues of the current narrow sloping access. The applicants do not believe that the proposal will have impact on the amenities of the golfers.
• 5.6 Further objecting comments were submitted on 18/02/2018 by a representative of Castletown Golf Links, these comments were superseded by the same comments on 20/02/2018 with a modification of the third paragraph. These comments respond to the agents comments of 05/02/2018 indicating that in their opinion the proposal will have an effect on the amenity of the golfers due to the close proximity of the development, its negative visual impact from 7th, 8th and 9th holes due to its elevated height and the roof terrace impacting privacy and amenity of the golfers. The representative states that the golf courses in the south of the Island including Castletown Golf Links contributes to the regional sports facilities and attract visitors to the area. Each of the course contribute to the open space and landscape character and should be protected from inappropriate development and Landscape Proposal 25 states that it is important to maintain coastal character as viewed on the approach from Castletown and from pleasant green areas adjoining the bay. The representative concluded their comments by stating that while they have no objection to the principle of re-development of the site, that this development should respect the character and environment of Derbyhaven of which the golf course is an integral part. The proposed development will have a negative effect on the coastal character and the privacy and amenity of its neighbours and gold course. The design including floor levels and large terraces should be reconsidered.

5.7 Further comments were received from the owners of Balladoyle in response to the agents comments stating that there will be rain water run off to adjacent properties and that the plans should have included land drains at the bottom of the slopes and an adequately sized soak away. The proposal does not maintain the general coastal character and reduces the open views of the area by reason of its proposed height, the height and orientation also resulting in a reduce level of privacy of the adjoining neighbours, particularly Balladoyle as the proposed new dwelling is closer to their side elevation windows. The proposal is unapologetically modern in nature and does not fit with the street scene of the context of the surrounding properties; the proposal should work to the height constraints of their previous objection. The current application is in breach of Paragraph 8.12.2 and Housing Policy 14 of the Strategic Plan and that family history is not a material planning consideration and global warming is a 'red herring' as well as the need to increase the slope for improved visibility. - 5.8 Subsequent comments were received from the owners of Balladoyle on 26/02/2018 reiterating again that the proposal is in breach of paragraph 8.12.2 and Housing Policy 14, making specific reference to previous PA 08/01931/REM were an Inspector considered Derbyhaven to be within the countryside. Countryside comprising all land outside the settlements defined at A.3.6 in Appendix 3 or which is not designated for future development. The owners of Balladoyle the increased floor area over 50% and increase bulk of the replacement modern dwelling is not appropriate to the countryside and results in adverse visual impact. The proposal would have visual impact on the open spaces and generate visual pollution from public footpaths. The owners of Balladoyle also make reference to PA 17/00367/B which was refused by the Planning Committee and should be taken as a material planning consideration.

ASSESSMENT

6.1 There are a number of issues which have been raised by third parties and which should be considered in respect of the aforementioned policies of 4.0 of this report. The fundamental issues in this case are:

• o the principle of development;
• o the impact on the street scene and Derbyhaven character;
• o the impact on the amenities of the neighbours;
• o the impact on the golf course, and
• o whether there are implications relating to site levels and drainage.

PRINCIPLE

6.2 Derbyhaven comprises a compact group of dwellings with a geographical sense of place. The dwellings are compact with a well-defined boundary. The location of Derbyhaven is not considered to be sustainable. There is little or no scope for infilling and an extension into the airport or golf course would be undesirable. There is no valid argument for local housing need and therefore no additional dwellings are proposed. While some parts of Derbyhaven are not designated for development this particular site lies within an area designated on the Area Plan for the South 2013 as residential, as such there is a principle in favour or residential development.

6.3 The existing residential site already comprises a residential dwelling. The replacement of the existing dwelling with a new dwelling is not considered unacceptable but General Policy 2 would be appropriate in its assessment. The proposal would not infill a currently vacant site nor would it create an additional dwelling within the existing curtilage. The replacement dwelling remains within the extents of the existing plot and does not represent an extension into the golf course. The proposal will demolish an existing dwelling and replace it with a new dwelling. There is a principle in favour for the erection of a replacement dwelling.

6.4 Minded that the principle for the replacement dwelling is acceptable and that the site is not within the countryside Housing Policy 14 is not relevant. The test of its success falls to whether or not it accords with the relevant parts of General Policy 2 of the IOM Strategic Plan

2016 and whether the proposal meets the tests of Landscape Proposal 26 of the Area Plan for the South 2013.

STREET SCENE AND CHARACTER

6.5 Landscape Proposal 26 indicates that the buildings in Derbyhaven are of a mixed age, form, and style, and as such there is no need to adopt prescriptive guidelines for extensions, but that it is important to maintain the general coastal character. Although the current proposal is not for an extension, it would be reasonable to employ the same principles in order to preserve the general coastal character of Derbyhaven. - 6.6 Often is the case that views on design fall to personal opinion. While some may agree a modern design approach offers a unique and welcomed change to the existing area, others may revolt at the harm such a contrast brings to the general coastal character formed by the traditional properties. - 6.7 In the case of this application and in establishing a professional judgement on the development, it is vital that we conduct a contextual analysis against other properties in the area, particularly those along Fort Island Road. - 6.8 Derbyhaven embraces a mixture of building styles. The proposed dwelling would not be the first non-traditional dwelling, but it would be, by far, the most contemporary. - 6.9 Although the height and footprint of the proposal is not so far removed from some of its nearest neighbours, the building's design including large expanses of glazing and the installation of modern building materials (timber cladding, aluminium and zinc) results in a notable contrast to its nearest traditional counterparts, especially when viewed from the street scene. - 6.10 The properties along Fort Island Road are predominantly Manx vernacular terraced cottages, those that aren't, are either of an alternative traditional form (Balladoyle being typically Georgian) or non-traditional. Those that are non-traditional have sought to embrace traditionally qualities where possible, such as the installation of Manx stone, painted render and a pitched roof finish. - 6.11 The replacement dwelling for Skeddan Veg is arguably unique. While this approach to new dwellings may be acceptable in other locations; the unique attributes and modern approach to design including mono-pitch roofs, large expanses of glazing and timber and aluminium cladding materials is not considered to be acceptable in this sensitive coastal location. - 6.12 The proposal is considered to be unsympathetic and incompatible with the appearance of the street scene and consequently harms the general coastal character of Derbyhaven which is sought to be maintained through sensitive development. AMENITIES OF THE NEIGHBOURS - 6.13 The proposed two storey dwelling is considerably taller and larger than the existing but as previously mentioned is not so far removed from some of the other larger dwellings in the area. While its development would not go unnoticed, by reason of its single storey design nearest Ashley House and its finished roof height lower than Balladoyle, it's not considered that the mass of the proposal would have an over bearing or over dominating impact on its neighbours. - 6.14 However, the proposed dwelling contains much more glazing than the existing house. The increased width of the property coupled with the installation of large windows at both ground and first floor, particularly those which face towards the side elevation of Balladoyle substantially increase the levels of overlooking between the two properties and result in a

reduced level of privacy and general amenity of both properties. While the arrangement between the Skeddan Veg and Balladoyle is noticeably the worst, the arrangement of the windows facing towards Ashley House and the proposed increase levels of the land may equally present an unreasonable level of overlooking or an increased feeling of being overlooked.

IMPACT ON GOLF COURSE

6.15 The proposed dwelling is one of many properties that bound with the greens of the golf course and have rear elevations that face towards and over the golf course. Views obtainable from the proposed dwelling are not expected to differ from those achievable from the existing dwellings and it is not expected that the proposal would result in a significant impact the privacy or amenity of those using the golf course to warrant a refusal. SITE LEVELS AND DRAINAGE - 6.16 The proposal is to increase the ground floor of the main dwelling and to marry the levels of the proposed driveway with the existing level of the Fort Island Road. The elevation drawings for the application indicate that the ground will maintain a downwards slope to the lower levels of the garden. The proposal will have a larger building footprint and a slight increase in general hard standing which may increase levels of surface water however the proposed site plan drawing includes information relating to the installation of a new Aquacell soakaway surface drainage system which would accommodate for the additional surface water. This system would be appropriately sized to suit inflow and ground percolation and would ultimately form part of any subsequent Building Regulations application and would be assessed accordingly. It is not considered that the increase in site levels would have an impact on the drainage of the area or impact the drainage of the neighbours.

CONCLUSION

7.1 The principle of a replacement dwelling here is acceptable, however by reason of its form, mass and material finish the proposed replacement dwelling is considered to be unsympathetic and inappropriate to the area and consequently results in unwarranted harm on the general coastal character of Derbyhaven.

7.2 The new dwelling also includes a significant amount of glazing. The location of this glazing at both ground and first floor on the side elevations results in an adverse level of overlooking and an impact on the privacy and amenities of the neighbours.

INTERESTED PERSON STATUS 8.1 By virtue of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) (No 2) Order 2013 (Article 6(4), the following persons are automatically interested persons:

• (a) The applicant, or if there is one, the applicant's agent;
• (b) The owner and the occupier of any land that is the subject of the application or any other person in whose interest the land becomes vested;
• (c) Any Government Department that has made written submissions relating to planning considerations with respect to the application that the Department considers material
• (d) Highway Services Division of Department of Infrastructure and
• (e) The local authority in whose district the land the subject of the application is situated.

8.2 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 in Article 6(4) who should 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.

Decision Made : Refused Date : 27.03.2018 Determining officer

Signed : S BUTLER Stephen Butler Head of Development Management

Customer note

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