143146

==== PAGE 1 ====

                                                 15/01326/B
                                 Page  1  of  4

PLANNING OFFICER REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Application No. : 15/01326/B Applicant : Mr Dudley & Mrs Marjorie Butt Proposal : Alterations and erection of extension to provide living accommodation and garage to dwelling Site Address : 4 Sandringham Drive Onchan Isle of Man IM3 4HH

Case Officer : Mr Chris Balmer Photo Taken : 17.12.2015 Site Visit : 17.12.2015 Expected Decision Level : Planning Committee

Officer’s Report

THE APPLICATION IS BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMITTEE AS HIGHWAY SERVICES HAVE OBJECTED TO THE APPLICATION BUT THE APPLICATION IS RECOMMENDED FOR AN APPROVAL.

1.0 THE APPLICATION SITE 1.1 The application site is 4 Sandringham Drive, Onchan, which is a two storey semi-detached dwelling (1930's style). It is sited on the western side of Sandringham Drive and north of Whitebridge Road, in Onchan.

2.0 THE PROPOSAL 2.1 Full planning approval is sought for alterations and erection of extension to provide living accommodation and garage to dwelling. The works involve a single storey side and rear extension which essentially forms a 'L-shaped' development which wraps around the side and rear of the dwelling. The works would provide a garage and an extended kitchen and an extended dining room. The proposal would involve the removal of part of the existing rear kitchen out-rigger and the existing rear conservatory.

3.0 PLANNING HISTORY 3.1 The following previous planning application is considered relevant to the determination of this proposal:

3.2 Erection of a conservatory on rear elevation - 06/01874/B - APPROVED

4.0 PLANNING POLICY 4.1 In terms of local plan policy, the application site is designated as predominantly residential under the Onchan Local Plan. The site is not within a Conservation Area

4.2 In terms of strategic plan policy, the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2007 contain one policy that is specifically material to the assessment of this current planning application:

4.3 General Policy 2 states: "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: (a) is in accordance with the design brief in the Area Plan where there is such a brief; (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;

==== PAGE 2 ====

                                                 15/01326/B
                                 Page  2  of  4

(d) does not adversely affect the protected wildlife or locally important habitats on the site or adjacent land, including water courses; (e) does not affect adversely public views of the sea; (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; (j) can be provided with all necessary services; (k) does not prejudice the use or development of adjoining land in accordance with the appropriate Area Plan; (l) is not on contaminated land or subject to unreasonable risk of erosion or flooding; (m) takes account of community and personal safety and security in the design of buildings and the spaces around them; and (n) is designed having due regard to best practice in reducing energy consumption."

5.0 REPRESENTATIONS 5.1 Highways Services, in an email dated 09.12.2015, oppose the application on the following grounds: "The internal measurements of the proposed garage do not meet the minimum standard of 3 metres in width. The existing has the same internal width measurements. Highways feel that the garage would not be used for the garaging of a car and as such would suggest that the front lawn is made wider to allow for two useable off road parking spaces."

5.2 Onchan Commissioners have no objection (received on 16.12.2015).

6.0 ASSESSMENT 6.1 The main considerations are the potential visual impact of the proposal upon the property and street scene; the potential impacts upon neighbouring amenities; and whether the property still retains adequate parking provision.

POTENTIAL VISUAL IMPACT OF THE PROPOSAL UPON THE PROPERTY AND STREET SCENE 6.2 The proposed extension from the front elevation would be modest in scale in relation to the main dwelling and would be a form of development which in commonly found in residential areas. The majority of the extension would be limited or screened from public views. Overall, it is consider the proposal in terms of scale, form, design and finish would be an appropriate form of development and comply with General Policy 2.

POTENTIAL IMPACTS UPON NEIGHBOURING AMENITIES 6.3 The neighbouring property which potentially would be most affected by the development would be Nr 6 Sandringham Drive which is to the north of the site. Visiting the site it was also noted that the floor level of this neighbouring property was approximately 1 to 1.5 metre above that of the floor level of the application dwelling and the ground level was also above the ground level of the application site. It was also noted that Nr 6 has a ground floor kitchen window which is located within the gable end, which directly faces towards the application site and the proposed extension and would be 2.7 metres away from the wall of the extension. The kitchen is only served by this window for outlook and light. There was also a small ground floor window serving a room under the stairs and a first floor window serving a bathroom.

6.4 The main consideration is whether the proposal would have a significant impact upon neighbouring amenities either through loss of light and/or overbearing impact.

6.5 The proposal would result in a 3 metre high wall running almost the length of the property (10.7 metres) which directly faces the gable elevation and the driveway of the Nr 6. Initially, there

==== PAGE 3 ====

                                                 15/01326/B
                                 Page  3  of  4

was some concern that the proposal would adverse effect the amenities of Nr 6, due to the height and proximity of the proposed garage wall with the neighbouring kitchen window. However, when visiting the site it was noted that the cill level of the neighbouring kitchen window was approximately at the same height as the top of the applicant's gable kitchen window, which currently face towards each other. Due to this level difference it is likely views from the neighbouring kitchen window would be above/level of the parapet wall which runs along the extension wall, rather than at a blank wall. Accordingly, whilst the proposal will have an impact, this would not be so significant as to warrant a refusal. Should the neighbouring kitchen window have been at the same height as the applicant's kitchen window, then there would likely have been concerns with the proposal.

WHETHER THE PROPERTY STILL RETAINS ADEQUATE PARKING PROVISION 6.6 Highway Services have objected that the internal width of the proposed garage would not meet the minimum standard of 3 metres. It should be noted that the existing width of the driveway does not meet the standard now sought, being 1.6 metres in width. The new proposed garage would have a width of 2.5 metres (garage door 2.2 metres wide) and a depth of 6.7 metres. This width of 2.5 metres has generally been accepted by the Planning Authority as a minimum width for an internal parking space, within a garage. It should also be noted that under Permitted Development Order, a double garage 6m x 6m can be built without the need for planning permission. If you take into account of the widths of cavity walls (300mm x 2=600mm) then each parking space would equate to 2.7 metres (5.4m/2) in width, again smaller than the requested 3 metres. The property would also still be served by a further off street parking space on the existing driveway which fronts the extension.

7.0 RECOMMENDATION 7.1 For these reasons the proposal is considered to comply with the relevant polices of the Strategic Plan and the Onchan Local Plan and therefore recommended for an approval.

8.0 PARTY STATUS 8.1 By virtue of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) (No 2) Order 2013 as modified by the Transfer of Planning and Building Control Functions Order 2015, 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) The Highways Services of the Department of Infrastructure; and (e) The local authority in whose district the land the subject of the application is situated.

With effect from 1 June 2015, the Transfer of Planning & Building Control Functions Order 2015 amends the Town and Country Planning Act 1999 to give effect to the meaning of the word 'Department' to be the Department of Environment, Food and Agriculture unless otherwise directed by that Order.

Recommendation

Recommended Decision:

Permitted Date of Recommendation: 06.01.2016

Conditions and Notes for Approval: C : Conditions for approval N : Notes attached to conditions

==== PAGE 4 ====

                                                 15/01326/B
                                 Page  4  of  4

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.

This approval relates to drawings reference Location Plan/Site Plan & Plans and Elevations all received on 7th December 2015.

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 : Approved

Committee Meeting Date: 18.01.2016

Signed :C Balmer Presenting Officer

Further to the decision of the Committee an additional report/condition reason was required (included as supplemental paragraph to the officer report).

Signatory to delete as appropriate 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.