Officer Report

Application No.: 18/00445/B Applicant: Mr Karl Hartmann & Mrs Jojanneke Hartmann-Struik Proposal: Alterations and erection of a double garage to front elevation Site Address: Woodlands Ballagawne Road Colby Isle of Man IM9 4BB Principal Planner: Miss S E Corlett Photo Taken: 22.06.2018 Site Visit: 22.06.2018 Expected Decision Level: Planning Committee Recommended Decision: Permitted Date of Recommendation: 20.07.2018 _________________________________________________________________

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 14 of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) (No2) Order 2013 and to avoid the accumulation of unimplemented planning approvals.

• C 2. No further works may commence on site until such times as details of the planting intended to replace the elm and hedging along the frontage have been approved and the planting must be undertaken either in the planting season October 2018 - April 2019 or prior to the construction of the garage, or, at latest, in the first planting season following the completion of the garage. The details must include the depth of soil, species of tree and hedging and the replacement tree when planted, must be as large as is possible to ensure its survival given the area available for the tree to grow. If any of the hedging or the tree die, are damaged or are removed within five years of the date of their introduction, they must be replaced with species of the same type and size.

Reason: To ensure that the landscaped setting of the site is retained for visual benefit and value to the ecology, including protected species, in the area.

• C 3. No further development may continue on site until such times as details of the measures to be taken to protect the existing sycamore, which is to be retained, have been approved by the Department and the development must be undertaken in accordance with these details.

Reason: To ensure that the landscaped setting of the site is retained for visual benefit and value to the ecology, including protected species, in the area.

• C 4. Prior to the commencement of any building works on the garage, detailed levels of the garage floor level, the adjacent ground level and its ridge level, all relevant to a fixed datum point outside the site, must be approved by the Department, and the development undertaken in accordance with these details.

Reason: To ensure that the development is undertaken in accordance with the drawings submitted.

Plans/Drawings/Information:

This decision relates to drawings 1805/01, 1805/02, 1805/03 and 1805/04, all received on 27th April, 2018.

_______________________________________________________________ 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):

The owners of Red Gables which is immediately alongside the site

It is recommended that the following organisation should not be given Interested Person Status as it is not 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 Isle of Man Victorian Society. Whilst they are a properly constituted body, their area of interest is clearly in Victorian properties, which the application building is not and as such, their influence must be accordingly reduced.

_____________________________________________________________________________ Officer’s Report

THIS APPLICATION IS REFERRED TO THE PLANNING COMMITTEE DUE AT THE REQUEST OF THE HEAD OF DEVELOPMENT MANAGEMENT, DUE TO THE NATURE OF THE PROPOSALS

THE SITE

1.1 The site is the residential curtilage of an existing dwelling, Woodlands, which is the eastern half of a pair of semi-detached houses situated on the northern side of the A7 main road through Colby and to the east of the Four Roads roundabout. The other half of the pair is annotated as Majolica but is currently called Red Gables. Both properties are set back from the A7 by 26m - more than are the properties on each side - Cronk Beg and Cronk Drian which are set back by around 12m. Ballagawne Cottage which lies to the east of Cronk Beg sits closer still to the road - around 5m therefrom. - 1.2 Red Gables and Woodlands are striking properties which sit higher than the road and are distinctive in the streetscene with their red facing brick walling and red tiled roofs. Both have projecting two storey bays: Woodlands' is open with a balcony rail and that on Red Gables is enclosed by glazing. Both have curved brickwork entrances off the main road and straight driveways uphill to the house which cut through landscaped gardens. Both have small attached, hipped roofed garages to the side of the main house and set back from the front elevation.

1.3 Greenacres, to the east of Ballagawne Cottage, is a large property which is designated as Low Density Housing in Parkland. THE PROPOSAL

2.1 Proposed is the erection of a detached garage in the front garden to the left of the driveway. The garage would be flat roofed and built with dark green stained timber walling with a relatively flat roof finished in sedum into which two flat rooflights will be inserted. The front doors opening out onto the driveway will slide open. An open sided store will be provided to the right of the garage doors. - 2.2 The land will be altered in terms of the presently sloping profile to have a relatively level area created around 3m from the road. This will be up to 600mm higher than the existing level closest to the road and up to 1m lower at the eastern end. This levelled area will come within 0.5m of the boundary between Woodlands and Red Gables. This work has commenced: a plateau has been created at the lower level of the garden and due to these works, the integrity of an elm which sat on the western corner of the driveway was compromised, Following discussion with the Arboricultural Officer of DEFA, who described the tree as not in the best of physiological health with evidence of dieback in the crown, the Division accepted the removal of the tree and this has now been removed. This was subject to the planting of a replacement tree - details of this are discussed later in the report. - 2.3 The application includes supporting information which explains that the owner has reviewed the parking arrangements for the site and considers that the scheme for extension of the garage would not suit their needs. They own two classic cars and family cars, the former of which require garaged parking and space for the vehicles to be worked on. They indicate that the neighbours at Red Gables were consulted and had concerns about a pitched roofed structure and thought that the option now proposed would be more acceptable. Care has been taken to ensure that the building sits below the level of the existing roadside hedging so that there is no intrusion into the view of the property from the road or that outward from Red Gables. The existing parking area will be used by general family and visitor parking. - 2.4 They wish to retain vehicular access to the rear of the garden in case of the need for machinery to access it which is why they are reluctant to build more garaging at the top level which would extinguish vehicular access into the rear garden. PLANNING POLICY

3.1 The site lies within an area designated on the Area Plan for the South (2013) as Residential. Woodlands is neither Registered nor proposed for such and the site does not lie within a Conservation Area, proposed or adopted. Greenacres and Ballagawne Cottage are both buildings which are suggested in the Area Plan as being worthy of consideration for Registration. - 3.2 The following Strategic Plan policy is considered relevant to the consideration of the application:

"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:

• (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;

• (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."

3.3 Where a development would have an impact on ecology, Environment Policy 4 provides guidance and protection as follows: "Development will not be permitted which would adversely affect:

• (a) species and habitats of international importance:

• (i) protected species of international importance or their habitats; or
• (ii) proposed or designated Ramsar and Emerald Sites or other internationally important sites.

• (b) species and habitats of national importance: (i) protected species of national importance or their habitats; ii) proposed or designated National Nature Reserves, or Areas of Special Scientific Interest; or

• (iii) Marine Nature Reserves; or
• (iv) National Trust Land.

• (c) species and habitats of local importance such as Wildlife Sites, local nature reserves, priority habitats or species identified in any Manx Biodiversity Action Plan which do not already benefit from statutory protection, Areas of Special Protection and Bird Sanctuaries and landscape features of importance to wild flora and fauna by reason of their continuous nature or function as a corridor between habitats.

Some areas to which this policy applies are identified as Areas of Ecological Importance or Interest on extant Local or Area Plans, but others, whose importance was not evident at the time of the adoption of the relevant Local or Area Plan, are not, particularly where that plan has been in place for many years. In these circumstances, the Department will seek site specific advice from the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry if development proposals are brought forward."

PLANNING HISTORY

4.1 Both semi-detached properties have been the subject of applications for alteration and extension, none of which is considered relevant to the consideration of the current application. Planning approval was refused for the principle of the erection of a dwelling to the rear of Red Gables for the reason that:

"Whilst the area is designated for residential development it is considered that the introduction of a new dwelling as proposed would be detrimental to the outlook of Woodlands and to the outlook, privacy and amenities of Majolica and to the character and setting of both properties, contrary to the provisions of General Policy 2 and Environment Policy 42 of the Strategic Plan."

4.2 Planning approval was granted for the extension of the existing garage but these works were never undertaken (05/00491/B).

REPRESENTATIONS

5.1 DEFA Senior Biodiversity Officer recommend that existing trees are retained where possible as Natterers bats have been recorded as roosting at this dwelling in September. They are unaware of access and movements in the area but the mature tree cover is likely to be important (25.05.18).

5.2 DEFA Forestry, Amenity and Lands Directorate (FALD) advise that the elm which previously existed alongside the access, is unlikely to survive the proposed works due to its root spread

• under the area of the proposed garage. They recommend that the proposed garage is moved further up the site to allow a greater area in which a new tree could be planted and survive with sufficient volume of soil available for root development and that the retained sycamore tree be protected through appropriate measures to be approved (15.05.18).
• 5.3 The owners of Red Gables (formerly Majolica) do not object in principle but are concerned that the hedge separating their properties be retained at a height which is above the top of the garage, the hedge alongside the road is retained at the same height as that separating their properties, the height of the garage can never be increased and the sedum roof never replaced and that the building can never be used for residential purposes. They have some concerns about the visual impact of the garage from their property and from Ballagawne Road and Mount Gawne Road and addressing their earlier concerns would go some way towards alleviating these although they would not completely remove their concerns. They note that the conformity of the two properties would be lost through the introduction of the garage and loss of open garden and introduction of the new building (31.05.18).
• 5.4 The Isle of Man Victorian Society clarify that whilst their focus relates to buildings built between 1830 and 1914 in line with the UK Victoria Society, they also have regard for buildings of merit in from the twentieth century. They describe the application property and Majolica/Red Gables as "a pair of outstanding semi-detached villas" which were designed by the later WH Lomas shortly after he took up residence on the Island. Other than the unfortunate glazed balcony on Red Gables, these "distinctive" properties remain generally unaltered and uncompromised. They describe the properties as sharing a common building line and are visible from the road through the vehicular entrances. They consider that the introduction of the garage will compromise the ambience of the presence of the dwellings and whilst the building may be screened by existing roadside vegetation, this may not last forever. They advise that there appears to be plenty of space elsewhere in the site for a new garage where it would not compromise the setting of the buildings by being built in the open space in front of them. They object to the application and urge dialogue to achieve a repositioning of the garage and they note that no pressing or convincing evidence has been produced to justify the development (31.05.18).
• 5.5 No response has been received from Rushen Parish Commissioners.
• 5.6 Highway Services does not oppose the application, noting that there should be no new highway issues as a result of the proposal.

ASSESSMENT

6.1 The issues in this case are whether the proposal will result in any adverse impact on:

• i. the appearance and character of the property and those of Red Gables and
• ii. the living conditions of those in adjacent property, particularly Red Gables.
• iii. any impact on protected species and ecology. Impact on the appearance and character of the property and those of Red Gables

6.2 The introduction of buildings in front of the building line can often result in an adverse visual impact on the character of an area, particularly where the new building obscures the principal view of the main building on the site. Such development can often result in what looks like cramped development with the removal of front gardens which can establish the character of an area. In this case, however, the grounds are spacious due to the considerable set back of the house and its neighbour, Red Gables and the new building is unlikely to result in a cramped effect. - 6.3 The building will though, have an impact on the uninterrupted view of the house and its neighbour, from the driveway, albeit that this view is fleeting and from the driveway of Woodlands only (the existing boundary hedge will completely hide the new building from the

• view up the driveway of Red Gables. The view of Red Gables is unlikely to change from this perspective as much of it is already hidden behind the middle boundary hedge, above which the proposed building will not rise. The current view into the site is very open due to the removal of the elm and part of the hedge alongside. It is proposed to continue the hedge to replace that which has been lost and to introduce another tree to replace the elm. Even with the hedging and elm removed, the view is limited. It was originally intended, and recommended by DEFA FALD that this tree be a lime which would provide the significance and cover as did the elm previously. However, there is insufficient space remaining between the bank and the retaining wall alongside the bank, to enable a lime to survive in the long term. Another tree of a different species could be planted although it would not grow as large as would an elm or lime. This would effectively close up the view once more and would significantly reduce the view of the garage from the road. The fact that it will be set back from the driveway by 7m means that the new building will not have so significant an impact on the character and appearance of Woodlands and Red Gables nor would obscure either of them from view from the road, to justify refusal of the application.
• 6.4 Whilst the properties are clearly a pair of distinctive buildings, it is considered that the garage will not significantly alter this impact due to the lower level of the building and the existing screening from the roadside vegetation as well as its set back from the driveway, behind the existing hedging. Even if the roadside or middle hedging were removed or died, these features currently screen what lies behind it and the garage would have a similar impact and would not screen any more of the dwellings or the site than do the existing hedges. It is clear that the owners of Red Gables value the screening impact of the existing middle hedge and as such, if it were to die or be removed, it would be possible to replant a similar hedge on their side of the boundary to re-create the same screening impact from their perspective. The living conditions of those in adjacent property, particularly Red Gables.

6.4 If the building is kept below the height of the boundary hedge, it should not be seen from the adjacent property. In any case, the building will be set lower than the level of the properties. As such, it is not considered that the proposal will adversely affect the living conditions of those in Red Gables. The building will not be seen from other adjacent properties and would not affect those living conditions. CONCLUSION - 7.1 Whilst the dwelling and its neighbour are of architectural interest, they are not Registered nor are they in a Conservation Area. There are, close by, buildings which have been identified for consideration for Registration and as such, it is concluded that Red Gables and Woodlands are not of sufficient merit to warrant similar consideration or they too, would have been identified at the same time. As such, they should not be given any additional protection over and above what is afforded to all other non-Registered Buildings, and is set out in GP2. It is not concluded that the proposal conflicts with any of the policies set out in GP2 and as such the application is supported subject to, inter alia, a condition that replacement hedging and planting is introduced to mitigate the elm and hedging that has been lost. 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.

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 confirm that this decision has been made by the Planning Committee in accordance with the authority afforded to it under the appropriate delegated authority.

Decision Made : Permitted Committee Meeting Date: 30.07.2018 Signed : S Corlett Presenting Officer Further to the decision of the Committee an additional report was required YES/NO

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.