124438

==== PAGE 1 ====

                                      20/00774/B                                     Page  1  of  4

PLANNING OFFICER REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Application No. : 20/00774/B Applicant : Mr Stuart Greaves Proposal : Extension to road facing elevation of property Site Address : Thie-Yn-Dreeym Ballacollister Road Laxey Isle Of Man IM4 7JT

Planning Officer: Mrs Vanessa Porter Photo Taken : Site Visit : Expected Decision Level : Officer Delegation

Recommendation

Recommended Decision:

Permitted Date of Recommendation: __

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. The proposal will have a limited visual or amenity impact and is therefore considered to comply with Housing Policy 16 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016.

Plans/Drawings/Information;

This decision relates to the following plans and drawings, date stamped received on 20th July 2020: o Drawing No. 6/944/1 o Drawing No. 6/944/2 __

Interested Person Status - Additional Persons None __

Officer’s Report

THE APPLICATION SITE

==== PAGE 2 ====

                                      20/00774/B                                     Page  2  of  4

1.1 The application site is the residential curtilage of Thie-Yn-Dreeym, Ballacollister Road, Laxey which is a two storey detached dwelling situated to the west where Ballacollister Road meets Rencell Hill.

1.2 The nearest neighbour to Thie-Yn-Dreeym is The Firs which is situated on Rencell Hill and around 77m away. Due to the topography of the site Thie-Yn-Dreeym is situated at a higher level that The Firs but due to the mature hedging and trees surrounding Thie-Yn-Dreeym there is no view of The Firs.w

THE PROPOSAL

2.1 The current planning application seeks approval to erect an extension to the front elevation measuring approximately 5.9m by 5m with a height of 2.9m from ground level to roof level with a 1.1m high chrome/stainless steel and glass railing. The lower level there is to be a window measuring 1.7m by 1.2m to the north east elevation with bi-fold doors on the corner of the north east and north west elevation. The extension is to be rendered to match the existing dwelling.

2.2 The window to the lower level on the south east elevation has been changed from one plane of glass to two separate planes of glass and there is a proposed new window measuring approximately 1.1m by1.5m to the lower ground floor level of the north west elevation.

PLANNING HISTORY

3.1 The previous planning applications are not considered to be specifically material in the assessment of the current application.

PLANNING POLICY

4.1 The site lies within an area zoned as Open Space/Agricultural use on the Laxey and Lonan Area Plan 2005, Lonan map. The Onchan Local Plan 2000 has a policy which is relevant to this assessment, L/OSNC/PR/1 which states,"There will be a general presumption against development in areas designated as open space or open space for particular purposes.

4.2 General Policy 3: Development will not be permitted outside of those areas which are zoned for development on the appropriate Area Plan with the exception of: (a) essential housing for agricultural workers who have to live close to their place of work; (Housing Policies 7, 8, 9 and 10); (b) conversion of redundant rural buildings which are of architectural, historic, or social value and interest; (Housing Policy 11); (c) previously developed land(1) which contains a significant amount of building; where the continued use is redundant; where redevelopment would reduce the impact of the current situation on the landscape or the wider environment; and where the development proposed would result in improvements to the landscape or wider environment; (d) the replacement of existing rural dwellings; (Housing Policies 12, 13 and 14); (e) location-dependent development in connection with the working of minerals or the provision of necessary services; (f) building and engineering operations which are essential for the conduct of agriculture or forestry; (g) development recognised to be of overriding national need in land use planning terms and for which there is no reasonable and acceptable alternative; and (h) buildings or works required for interpretation of the countryside, its wildlife or heritage.

4.3 When looking at properties within the countryside Housing Policy 16 is also relevant and states, "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."

==== PAGE 3 ====

                                      20/00774/B                                     Page  3  of  4

4.4 The Residential Design Guidance 2016 is also relevant in this application of which the parts which are relevant are below in the assessment of this application.

REPRESENTATIONS

5.1 Highway Services have considered the proposal and have no objection (04.08.20).

5.2 No comments have been received from Garff Commissioners at the time of writing this report.

ASSESSMENT

6.1 The fundamental issues to consider in the assessment of this application are the impacts on the character and appearance of the property, the visual amenity of the area and whether there would be any impact on neighbouring residential amenity.

Visual Amenity

6.2 In the first instance it is relevant to assess whether with the extension being at the front of the property is acceptable.

6.3 The Residential design guide gives guidance on extensions to the front of a property and state, "An extension to the front of a property can have the greatest impact upon the individual dwelling and/or the street scene. There may be limited circumstances when a front extension is appropriate, for example where the street has an irregular building line or pattern. Any extension should normally appear as if it were designed with the original building and not look out of place in the street-"

6.4 When looking at the proposed extension in relation to the above and Housing Policy 16, the proposed extension whilst situated to the front elevation of the property due to the topography of the ground level and the mature hedging surrounding the property the likelihood of seeing the lower part of the extension is minimal as such the impact of the extension on the property and the overall streetscene would also be minimal. The main aspect that will be seen from the main roadside is the railings which would look like a normally balcony.

Neighbouring amenity

6.5 Whilst the upper area of the proposed extension is not going to be used as a decked area and the railings are to be used as a decorative feature, it is still necessary to assess whether if the upper area was used whether there would be an impact on neighbouring amenity. The Residential Design Guidance 2019 provides guidance on balconies and states the following, "4.7.2 In most instances, roof terraces on terraced or semi-detached properties are unlikely to be acceptable. For detached properties they can be acceptable where they are carefully designed to avoid unreasonable overlooking of neighbouring properties (including gardens). Large separation distances to neighbouring boundaries and habitable room windows will help to avoid such issues. Strategically places solid screens/obscure glazed screens/ slatted shutter screens may sometimes help where it is not otherwise possible to avoid overlooking. However, the use of such screens needs to be combined with careful design as such screening maybe result in a loss of light and/or be an overbearing and dominating feature to the outlook of the neighbouring properties/ street scene. Balconies should not result in views into the rear windows of neighbouring properties at a distance of less than 20 metres.

7.5.1 The "20 metre guide" provides a useful way to identify where overlooking is likely to be a concern. It refers to the distance between elevations that contain windows serving habitable rooms that face each other - if this distance is over 20 metres, overlook is unlikely to be a

==== PAGE 4 ====

                                      20/00774/B                                     Page  4  of  4

concern. This distance can be relaxed where the design or orientation is such that privacy and amenity of a neighbouring property is not compromised. In dense urban areas where there is already a level of mutual overlooking a lesser standard may be acceptable. The required distance may need to be greater if there is a change in topography, which would result in an adverse effect on the privacy and amenity of a neighbouring property."

6.6 The closest neighbour to "Thie Ny Dreeym" who could potentially be affected by the works is "The Firs" who are situated to the north of the site and over 76m away as such any possible overlooking from the use of the balcony will be minimal.

CONCLUSION

7.1 For the above reasons the proposal is considered to comply with Housing Policy 16 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016 and therefore acceptable.

INTERESTED PERSON STATUS

8.1 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.

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 above who should 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.

Decision Made : Permitted

Date: 20.10.2020

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 form for the benefit of our online services/customers and archive records.