Loading document...
==== PAGE 1 ====
19/00662/B Page 1 of 6
PLANNING OFFICER REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Application No. : 19/00662/B Applicant : Mr Roger Harris Proposal : Alterations, installation of two dormer windows and widening of access and driveway Site Address : 19 Ballaterson Crescent Peel Isle Of Man IM5 1BL
Planning Officer: Mr Paul Visigah Photo Taken : 15.06.2019 Site Visit : 15.06.2019 Expected Decision Level : Officer Delegation
Recommendation
Recommended Decision:
Permitted Date of Recommendation: 17.07.2019 __
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.
Plans/Drawings/Information;
This approval relates to drawing numbers HLK/19/0127-1, HLK/19/0127-2, HLK/0127-3 and HLK/0127-4 date stamped and received 06 June 2019. __
Interested Person Status - Additional Persons
None __
Officer’s Report
SITE 1.1 The site is the residential curtilage of 19 Ballaterson Crescent, Peel. The detached two- storey dwelling on the site is a modern property with an inbuilt garage located on the right section of the front elevation. The dwelling has a steeply pitched roof made up of grey roof tiles and houses two bedrooms and a bathroom on the first floor. There is a bay window on the front elevation (right side when viewed from the road).
==== PAGE 2 ====
19/00662/B Page 2 of 6
1.2 There is a masonry wall fronting the site and separating it from the highway. This wall is broken into to provide the highway access, and the associated driveway leads to the garage. The garage is linked to the main dwelling via the utility room and provides additional parking on site besides the driveway which can support tandem parking for two cars.
1.3 Ballaterson Crescent is characterised by single storey properties; most of which have dormer windows on the front elevation. These dwellings are all bungalows with steeply pitched roofs providing additional living accommodation within the roof space.
PROPOSAL 2.1 The proposal seeks planning approval for alterations, installation of two dormer windows and widening of the access and drive way.
2.2 Two dormers and a roof light set midway between the dormers are proposed for the front elevation. This pitched roof dormers built off proposed steel purlins will be set back from the roof gable by 1.8m. These dormers would run 2.2m from the ridge cap and extend towards the rear gable of the property. These works will provide better lighting to the bedrooms on the first floor. The dormers would feature dark coloured interlocking roof tiles and the dormer bay window will be finished externally in white upvc horizontal cladding or rendered to match existing dwelling. The proposed roof light will be 750mm x 500mm.
2.3 Also proposed is the expansion of the driveway. The works will involve an increase in the width of the existing driveway from 3.5m to 5m. The driveway will be expanded to provide additional parking on site (this will cover an area of 17.5sq.m). The level of the footway and kerbs will be adjusted to suit highway and facilitate access to the modified driveway and parking area. As well, new gate posts to match existing 33x300x1m high gate posts will be installed at the entrance to the driveway.
PLANNING POLICY 3.1 The site lies within an area designated as Predominantly Residential on the Peel Local Plan Order (1989) and it is not located within the Peel Conservation area. As such, General Policy 2 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016 will be relevant to the application.
3.2 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 and (g) does not affect adversely the amenity of local residents or the character of the locality".
3.3 Section 8.12.1 focused on Extensions to Dwellings in built up areas or sites designated for residential use states thus:
"As a general policy, in built up areas not controlled by Conservation Area or Registered Building policies, there will be a general presumption in favour of extensions to existing property where such extensions would not have an adverse impact on either adjacent property or the surrounding area in general".
3.4 Sections of the Residential Design Guide 2019 will also be vital in the assessment of the application.
3.4.1 Subsection 4.6.1 states that: Dormer extensions are often problematic as they can adversely affect the character and appearance of both the individual property and the wider street scene. Unless they are for non- habitable rooms such as bathrooms with obscured glazing, they can also create overlooking.
==== PAGE 3 ====
19/00662/B Page 3 of 6
They are unlikely to be supported where they are publically visible, unless they already form a positive characteristic of the property or street scene.
4.6.2 There are various types, and applicants should consider which is most appropriate for their house. Traditional properties should avoid having flat roof dormers, as pitched roofed dormers may be more appropriate. Flat roofed dormers can appear as clumsy additions to a roof pitch if they are overly long or tall, or if they are as tall as the ridge. Therefore they are only generally appropriate on more modern properties (1960/70's bungalows) and/or properties where the area is characterised by houses with flat roofed dormers. Finishing the front and cheeks of the dormers in a tile or tile like material can reduce this impact.
4.6.3 The position within the roof plane, size and proportion are also important aspects to consider. The size of any dormer should be secondary to the size of the roof in which it will be positioned. Therefore, dormers that would be as wide as the house and run flush or close to the elevations/roof ridge of the house will not normally be supported.
3.5 Section 6.3 of the RDG 2019: Driveways and Front Gardens 6.3.4 Proposals which result in the loss of more than 50% of the existing front lawned/landscaped garden will not normally be supported, to ensure the character of the street scape is retained and avoid frontages of properties appearing as one large car parking area, detrimental to the appearance of the street scene and to the outlook of residents. It is important that the design of a driveway maintains a balance between hard and soft landscaping and contributes positively to the street scene. Proposals are unlikely to be supported where they do not meet the following guidelines: o the area intended for the driveway should be the minimum space necessary (see the Manual for Manx Roads); o where possible, the impact of the driveway is lessened by retaining mature trees and shrubs and/or creating areas of new planting (for example, a planted strip or hedge between the vehicular and pedestrian access can help to break-up the appearance of the hard standing whilst planting around the fringes of the driveway can also be used to good effect and may be used to help screen the vehicle); o if an opening is made in an existing wall, fence or other boundary feature, the ends should be made good with matching or sympathetic materials (i.e. pillars); o where possible, separate pedestrian access should be retained/provided (existing gates should normally be retained and any new gates should not open out over the highway); o any new gates, walls, fences or other boundary features should reflect the traditional style of the local area; o consideration should be given to a strip of grass or gravel placed in the centre of the hard standing can hide leaked oil and maintain the look of a front garden; and o parking spaces should be avoided directly in front of any Primary Window as the resulting outlook can be undermined by the presence of parked cars.
6.3.5 The cumulative impact of the creation of a large number of impermeable surfaces within an area can lead to a material increase in run-off during rainfall events, potentially causing localised flooding. Therefore, proposals are unlikely to be supported unless they adopt one or more of the following approaches: o utilising an existing green or gravel area; o guiding water away from any impermeable area towards a vegetated area, or soakaway; and/or o constructing a driveway from block paving or other permeable surface (i.e. loose gravel and resin bound gravel (prevents gravel spilling onto highway) or matrix pavers or cellular paving or brick pavers or permeable bitmac).
3.6 Section 11.6 of the Manual for Manx Roads 11.6.1 A simple driveway hard standing without a turning area should be laid out so as to:
==== PAGE 4 ====
19/00662/B Page 4 of 6
i. Enable any entrance gates to be opened inwards whilst a car is parked on the hard 1)standing ii. Enable any garage door in front of the hard standing to be opened and/or a car to 2)be parked without the car projecting on to the highway parking iii. Enable pedestrian movement past the car if the driveway provides the sole means 3)of pedestrian access to the dwelling 11.6.2 The minimum recommended distance between the front of a garage and entrance gates is 7.0 m. Where entrance gates are not to be erected this distance can be reduced to 6.0 m. The minimum recommended length of any parking space within the curtilage is 5.5 m. These requirements should be regarded as essential on primary routes and classified roads, as these routes tend to be busier and, on occasion, high speed, meaning that any vehicle parking in the carriageway whilst gates or garage doors are opened would potentially conflict with moving traffic. Where a development is located on the unclassified road network, lower distances will be considered.
11.6.3 If the driveway is to be used as both vehicular and pedestrian access to the dwelling, the parking area should have a minimum width of 3.4 m; otherwise the width can be reduced to a recommended minimum of 2.5 m, unless adjacent to boundaries when the recommended minimum width is 3.0 m.
PLANNING HISTORY 4.1 The application site has been the subject of a single planning application which is considered to be materially relevant to the assessment of the current planning application. PA 06/01062/B - Construction of two dormers on front elevation and one dormer on rear elevation Status: PERMITTED Although the application was approved, only the rear dormer as built. Hence, the front dormers now form part of the current application.
REPRESENTATIONS Copies of representations received can be viewed on the government's website. This report contains summaries only. 5.1 Department of Infrastructure (DOI) Highways Division although consulted on 19 June 2019, has not commented on this application at the time of drafting this report, and so it is assumed that there are no objections to the application.
5.2 Peel Town Commissioners have stated that they do not oppose the application in a letter dated 09 June 2019.
ASSESSMENT 6.1 The key considerations in the assessment of this application are the impacts on the visual amenity of the area and the street scene, the impacts on neighbouring dwellings residential amenity, as well as the impact on highway safety.
6.2 Visual Impact 6.2.1 Firstly, the impact on the character and appearance of the street scene is to be considered. Although this proposal must of course be assessed on its own merits, dormer windows are a common feature of the street scene on Ballaterson Crescent. The front dormer windows proposed would not be detrimental to the appearance of the street scene since the dormers are set back significantly from the roof eave and as such are not dominating. Besides, the use of these dormers would take cues from the front facing dormers of the houses on the street and the dormers would follow the existing pitch of the roof. Bearing in mind the relatively modern, non-traditional nature of the area, it is therefore considered that any negative impact on the character and appearance of the street scene would be minimal as the front dormers sits perfectly into the setting on Ballaterson Crescent. The roof light on its part is not a present feature but would result in minimal visual impact on the street scene.
==== PAGE 5 ====
19/00662/B Page 5 of 6
6.2.1 Concerning the alterations at the rear windows to install patio doors, they would not be visible from any part of the highway. Therefore, they will not have any impact on the street scene.
6.3 Impact on Neighbour Amenity 6.3.1 The main impacts to assess in terms of neighbouring amenity are overlooking and loss of privacy, overbearing and loss of outlook, and overshadowing/ loss of light. 20m is the general rule of thumb for which apertures within this distance could cause overlooking into or onto neighbouring habitable rooms or gardens. An assessment of the distances show that overlooking would not result from the front elevation given the distance of over 20m from the proposed front dormers to the closest property on the northern side of the street (23.5m from No.8, 23.6m from No.6 and 36m from No.9); all adjacent properties to the proposal site. Besides, there is mutual overlooking between the proposal site and No.8, and No.6 Ballaterson Crescent.
6.3.2 Overshadowing and overbearing would not be issues likely to affect neighbouring residential amenity given the fact that the dormer windows would not overhang the eaves and the footprint of the building or building height would not increase.
6.4 Impact on Highway Safety 6.4.1 With regard to the driveway alterations, the issues in this case are whether the proposed hard surfacing will adversely affect the character and appearance of the property and the surrounding area and also whether there would be any adverse impact on highway safety from the proposal.
6.4.2 It can sometimes be the case that an excessive amount of hardstanding for vehicular parking can undermine the attractiveness of an area, particularly where properties are in limited sized plots and/or where there is already a preponderance of vehicular parking and hard standing areas. In this case, however, the frontage is fairly large with generous amount of grass and some planting. To increase this area of paving will increase the amount of hard standing area (from 41.13m2 to 62.23m2, since the hardstanding area will be increased by 21.25m2), although the altered garden space is smaller compared to the green area and as such will not impact negatively on the character of the frontage or the surrounding area (the existing front garden is 55.81m2 and as such a reduction of the garden space by 21.25m2 will result in the remaining front garden area covering an area of 34.56m2. This implies that 61.9% of the existing front garden will be retained as grass).
6.4.3 The changes to the driveway and on-site parking area would comply with Section 11.6 of the 'Manual for Manx Roads' design standards, and would allow for sufficient pedestrian access to the dwelling. In addition, the expansion of the parking area constitutes less than 50% of the existing front garden and as such complies with section 6.3.4 of the RDG 2019. The low boundary wall and the slope angle of the driveway, though leaning, will not create safety challenges for vehicles entering or leaving the site; thus ameliorating any challenges to highway safety resulting from the alterations. In conclusion, the provision of additional vehicle parking on site will decrease the number of vehicles parked on the highway which in this case is a crescent, thereby improving highway safety.
6.4.5 It is also vital to note that No.9 has had approval for similar works on its access and driveway with an identical design on a site that bears matching characteristics with the application site. This work has been completed and is currently in use.
6.4.6 The proposal is considered to be acceptable within the street scene and without detriment to the residential amenity of the dwelling and the adjacent properties.
CONCLUSION
==== PAGE 6 ====
19/00662/B Page 6 of 6
7.1 For the above reasons, it is concluded that the planning application would not harm the use and enjoyment of neighbouring properties or the highway network and would comply with aforementioned planning policies of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016 and is recommended for approval.
8.0 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 a Principal Planner in accordance with the authority afforded to that Officer by the appropriate DEFA Delegation.
Decision Made : Permitted
Date: 19.07.2019
Determining officer
Signed : S CORLETT Sarah Corlett
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.
Copyright in submitted documents remains with their authors. Request removal