DEC Officer Report

Application No.: 22/00508/B Applicant: Ballacreggan Farms Ltd Proposal: Demolition of utility room to the rear elevation. Erection of replacement utility room to the rear elevation Site Address: Ballagawne Farm Ballagawne Road Ballabeg Castletown Isle Of Man IM9 4PD Planning Officer: Mr Paul Visigah Expected Decision Level: Officer Delegation Recommended Decision: Permitted Date of Recommendation: 05.08.2022

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.

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 15, and General Policy 2 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016, and the Residential Design Guide 2021.

Plans/Drawings/Information;

This decision relates to Drawing Register and Drawing Nos. 1600-11, 1600-12, 1600-13, 160014, and 1600-15, all received 21 April 2022. _______________________________________________________________

Interested Person Status – Additional Persons

None _____________________________________________________________________________

Officer’s Report

1.0 THE SITE - 1.1 The application site is the curtilage of Ballagawne Farm, which is to the north of Colby, and situated on the western side of Ballagawne Road (B43). The nearby covered reservoir, water treatment works and associated Manx Utilities building is situated about 240m north of the site boundary. The site has a significant tree cover with the entire site boundary situated within a registered tree area. - 1.2 The existing dwelling on site is a three storey traditional cottage with a pitched roofed outrigger to the rear. There are chimneys situated on both gable walls, while there are flat roofed elements on the front elevation in the form of bay window projections and a flat roofed entrance porch.

2.0 THE PROPOSAL - 2.1 Full planning approval is sought for the demolition of utility room to the rear elevation, and the erection of replacement utility room to the rear elevation. The existing rear outrigger which measures 4.6m x 2.2m and 3m high (2.1m to eaves) would be demolished and replaced with a new flat roofed extension that would project 4.5m from the rear elevation, be 4.5m wide and be 2.8m to the top of its flat roof (3.1m to the top of the parapet around the flat roof). The flat roof would have concrete coping stones on the parapet and kneeler to match the existing features on the bay area, flat roofed porch, and string course on various parts of the dwelling. - 2.2 The new extension would be finished in painted render to match the main dwelling finish, while the new windows would be top hung double glazed white UPVC units to match the existing windows on the dwelling. A new cottage style door would be installed on the west elevation of the extension. - 2.3 The new extension would serve a new utility room and a new WC and be linked to the study. No trees would be removed on site and there would be no alterations to the existing parking arrangement.

3.0 PLANNING POLICIES - 3.1 The site lies within an area designated on The Area Plan for the South (Map 6 - Colby & Ballabeg) as "white land" - that is, not designated for development. The site is not within a Conservation Area or prone to flood risk. There are no registered trees on site, although the entire site area is within a Registered tree Area. - 3.2 The Landscape Character Assessment in the Area Plan contains the following on Ballabeg:

• 3.2.1 "Description and General Strategy

• 3.19.1 Arbory is a largely rural parish, stretching from the Round Table, over Slieau Earystane, to meet the sea at Pooil Vaaish. Between the hill-slopes and the flat land to the south sit the villages of Ballabeg and Colby, strung out along the A7. The two villages are classified as such in the Island Spatial Strategy. The older and most attractive part of Colby Village around the Glen Road is protected by the Conservation Area designation. Ballabeg Village has a strong sense of community, arising in part from Arbory School, the Church, the Chapel, the Parish Hall, and, hopefully, the replacement shop which has now been completed but not yet opened. Part of Ballabeg is also proposed to be designated as a Conservation Area recognising the special nature of the older elements of the Village.

3.20 Implications of the Landscape Character Assessment Landscape Type: Uplands, Incised Slopes, Undulating Lowland Plain

• i. To protect the tranquil, rural character of the area with its open views.
• ii. Sensitive location of new buildings and the use of screen planting.

• iii. Avoidance of physical or visual amalgamation of roadside housing.
• iv. Protection and enhancement of the identity of Ballabeg and Colby by the conservation of the rural character of the adjacent landscape".

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 15 which makes provision for extensions to traditional properties in the countryside.

• 3.3.1 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).

• 3.3.2 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."

3.4 Other relevant parts of the Strategic Plan include:

• 3.4.1 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.

• 3.4.2 Paragraph 4.3.8 and 4.3.11 of the Strategic Plan "4.3.8 The design of new development can make a positive contribution to the character and appearance of the Island. Recent development has often been criticised for its similarity to developments across the Island and elsewhere - "anywhere" architecture. At the same time some criticise current practice to retain traditional or vernacular designs. As is often the case the truth lies somewhere between the two extremes. All too often proposals for new developments have not taken into account a proper analysis of their context in terms of siting, layout, scale, materials and other factors. At the same time a slavish following of past design idioms, evolved for earlier lifestyles can produce buildings which do not reflect twenty first century lifestyles including accessibility and energy conservation. While there is often a consensus about what constitutes good and poor design, it is notoriously difficult to define or prescribe.

• 4.3.11 At the same time as wishing to promote good design in new development the Department recognises that there are an increasing number of alternative styles of housing which draw their design principles from the wish to promote sustainability and energy

efficiency. Many of these can be incorporated into both modern and traditional designs but in some cases they produce a completely different structure or form of buildings, for example underground housing. While wishing to conserve the historic landscape of the Island the Department welcomes new styles of housing as long as they take into account the landscape context and the impact on the amenities of the area in which they are sited. Merely arguing that a new building cannot be seen in public views is not a justification for the relaxation of other policies relating to the location of new development".

3.5 Other policies within the Strategic Plan which are to be considered are; Infrastructure Policy 5, Community Policy 11, Community Policy 7 and Community Policy 10.

- 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 three previous planning applications, none of which are considered relevant in the assessment and determination of the current application. - 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 there is 'No Highway Interest' in a letter dated 5 May 2022.

6.2 Arbory and Rushen Parish Commissioners have indicated that they support the application (19 May 2022). - 6.3 No comments have been received from neighbouring properties.

- 7.0 ASSESSMENT

7.1 They key issues to consider with the current application are:

• i. The impact on the appearance of both the site itself and the surrounding area having particular regard to the fact that the site is situated in the countryside, and
• ii. The potential impacts on neighbours and their amenity.

7.2 Impact on Appearance of the Dwelling and nature of the locality (HP 15 & GP2)

• 7.2.1 The proposed rear extension would fit in seamlessly with the appearance and character of the dwelling and would not detract from the overall appearance of the dwelling given that the dwelling has flat roofed elements with coping stones and kneeler which the proposed extension would replicate. In fact, the proposed extension although flat roofed would respect the proportion, form and appearance of the existing property in its current form, which includes incorporating the existing window style and wall finish. Besides, its roof structure would ensure that the key features of the main dwelling are not obscured by the addition of the extension; with the extension appearing as a subordinate addition to the dwelling. It is also important to note that the thick tree clusters on the site boundary, particularly the north and eastern boundaries would serve to screen the development and ensure the extension is not prominent when viewed from the abutting highway and surrounding fields.
• 7.2.2 With regard to the impact of the proposed works on the character and appearance of the area, it is noted that there would be some view to the extension from the public thoroughfare, particularly during the winter months when the trees would lose their leaves. However, as has been noted, the extension would replicate the key features of the dwelling and the dwelling already has flat roofed elements making the extension a fitting addition. Granting planning Circular 3/91 would usually favour a pitch or lean-to roof over the extension as the supporting texts and illustrations to Policy 3 stipulate that additions to basic form (flat roofs) are not acceptable, flat roofs already exist on the dwelling and the proposed design, form and appearance would ensure the development complies with Housing Policy 15 which stipulates that extensions to existing traditionally styled properties in the countryside will normally be approved where these respect the proportion, form and appearance of the existing property.
• 7.3 Impact on Neighbours (GP 2 and the RDG)

• 7.3.1 In terms of impacts on neighbours it is considered that there is no neighbour within close proximity to be impacted by the proposed scheme, as the nearest neighbour at Ballaoates Farm, Glen Road is situated about 266m from the proposed extension. As such, it is not considered that there would be any detrimental impact on the neighbours.

7.4 Other Matters

• 7.4.1 The scheme does not propose any alterations to the means of access to the site or parking within the site. As such, it is not considered that there would be any impacts on highway safety.

• 7.4.2 No new confined spaces with easy access to those outside the site would be created, which would serve as easy hideouts for criminal activity or antisocial behaviour. Likewise, the scheme would not impede easy access to fire apparatus to the rear of the dwelling, with the existing pedestrian access to the rear of the property via the patio areas retained. Given the above, it is considered that these elements of the scheme aligns with the requirements of Community Policies 7, 10, and 11.
• 7.4.3 Similarly, the proposal would not result in the removal of any tree on site or displace shrubs within the site. As such, it is considered that there would be no detrimental impacts on ecology or site biota.

- 8.0 CONCLUSION

8.1 The application is considered to align with the principles of Housing Policy 15 and the Residential Design Guide, and will have no unacceptable impact, and as such is 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 in Article 4(2) who should be given Interested Person Status.

I can confirm that this decision has been made by the Director of Planning and Building Control 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 : 05.08.2022 Determining officer Signed : J CHANCE Jennifer Chance Director of Planning and Building Control

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.