Loading document...
==== PAGE 1 ====
25/90150/B Page 1 of 4
PLANNING OFFICER REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Application No. : 25/90150/B Applicant : Mr & Mrs John and Jodie Bolton Proposal : Demolition of existing integral garage, erection of two storey extension to side of existing dwelling house and internal alterations Site Address : 11 Hillary Close Onchan Isle Of Man IM3 4BF
Principal Planner: Chris Balmer Photo Taken : 21.02.2025 Site Visit : 21.02.2025 Expected Decision Level : Officer Delegation
Recommendation
Recommended Decision:
Permitted Date of Recommendation: 11.03.2025 __
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 is in accordance with the proposal complies with General Policy 2 and Environment Policy 36 of the Strategic Plan 2016 and the Residential Design Guidance 2021 having no significant adverse impact upon public or private amenities.
Plans/Drawings/Information; This approval relates to the submitted documents and drawing all received on 11.02.2025. __
Right to Appeal
It is recommended that the following organisations should NOT be given the Right to Appeal:
DOI Highway Services - No Objection
It is recommended that the following organisations should be given the Right to Appeal:
Local Authority - Objection __
Officer’s Report
1.0 THE SITE
==== PAGE 2 ====
25/90150/B Page 2 of 4
1.1 The site is the residential curtilage of an existing dwelling 11 Hillary Close, Onchan, which sits to the south western end of Hillary Close, which forms a residential cul-de-sac. The property is located at the end of the turning head of the cul-de-sac. A public footpath runs along the northern boundary of the site.
1.2 The house is a modern (1970/80's era) two storey semi-detached property which has a single storey attached flat roofed garage to the western gable of the main dwelling. A side decking area also current exists.
1.3 The property has gardens to the front mainly, but also to the side and rear.
2.0 THE PROPOSAL 2.1 The planning application seeks approval for the demolition of existing integral garage, erection of two storey extension to side of existing dwelling house and internal alterations.
2.2 The two storey side extension would have an approximately width of 4.1m, a depth of 8.4m and a maximum ridge height (rear elevation) of 7.6m. The extension runs flush with the front elevation. To the ground floor western gable elevation of the extension it is proposed to install bi-folding doors which open up onto a new decked area. The majority of the decking may fall under the Permitted Development Order 2025; however, the rear section including and adjacent to the rear steps appear to be slightly above the permissible 0.5m height of the PD Order by approximately 0.1 to 0.3m.
3.0 PLANNING POLICY 3.1 The site lies within an area designated on the Area Plan for the East 2020 as "Predominantly Residential" use. The site is not within a Conservation Area.
3.2 As such, the following parts of the Strategic Plan are relevant:
3.3 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; (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".
3.4 The Department has recently published the Residential Design Guidance (March 2021) which provides advice on the design of new houses and extensions to existing property as well as how to assess the impact of such development on the living conditions of those in adjacent residential property.
3.5 Permitted Development Order 2025 (Order comes into operation on 1st March 2025) "Class 21 Construction of decking This is subject to the conditions in sub-paragraph (2). (a) no part of the top surface of the decking may be higher than 0.5 metres above the ground level as existed before the development; (b) no part of the decking may be nearer to any highway which bounds the curtilage of the dwellinghouse than that part of the dwellinghouse nearer to that highway; and (c) the decking may include the provision of perimeter fencing or railings where these do not exceed a height of 2.3 metres above ground level before the development."
==== PAGE 3 ====
25/90150/B Page 3 of 4
4.0 PLANNING HISTORY 4.1 There are no previous planning applications which are considered relevant in the determination of this application.
5.0 REPRESENTATIONS 5.1 Highway Services comment (17.02.2025); "No highway Interest"
5.2 Onchan Commissioners have objected to the application on the grounds that the roof ridge should be lower than the original roof (06.03.2025);
6.0 ASSESSMENT 6.1 The main issues to consider in the assessment of the application are the potential impacts upon the character and appearance of the street scene, and the potential impacts upon the neighbouring properties.
Potential impacts upon the character and appearance of the street scene 6.2 The proposed side two storey extension in terms of its proportion, form, scale and design are in keeping with the property and although being publically viewable; it is considered the works would be appropriate to the amenities of the street scenes and the individual property. The only initial concern was the extension front elevation being flush with the main dwelling houses front elevation. This can lead to the "terracing affect", especially with semi-detached properties. However, in this case this property is at the end of the row of semi-detached properties, which is likely to remain. Accordingly; in this case, it is considered the flush design is acceptable. It should be added that if a similar scheme to any other properties in this street where to seek this approach the Department would likely have concerns.
6.3 It is noted concerns of the Commissioners of the extension roof ridge being a continuation of the roof ridge of the existing roof. It is not indicated why this is a concern, but it is presumed that this would elongate the existing property, and without a lower roof ridge above the extension, this would have an adverse impact to the property and street scene. While it is arguable preferable to have such a break in the roof line to ensure the extension appears more subordinate, in this case it is not considered it is a sufficient reason to refuse the application. The use of composite cladding and the width of the proposed extension which would be narrower than the existing main dwelling house will ensure the visual impact is not significantly adverse.
6.4 All other elements of the proposal are considered acceptable and are in keeping with the existing property and site well within the street scene/area.
Potential impacts upon the neighbouring properties 6.5 The properties most likely to be affected by the development would be Nr 24 Ballachurry Close to the west of the site. The main impact would likely be through overlooking from the side decking and ground floor bi folding doors. It is noted that the existing decking area has the potential to have a greater impact given it is closer to Nr 24 and adjacent to the rear conservatory of this property. The closest part of the new decking would be approximately 6.4m away from the conservatory of Nr 24, while the bi folding doors would be located approximately 19m away. It should be noted the existing decking is located approximately 2.3m from the conservatory of Nr 24. 6.6 Visiting the site it is noted that there is a 1.8/2m high boundary fence shared between the two properties and the rear neighbouring conservatory has high level windows facing the application site.
6.7 Overall, while the proposal has the potential to increase the level of overlooking towards Nr 24, it is considered for the reasons indicated it is not considered there would be a significant impact in a loss of privacy to warrant a refusal.
7.0 CONCLUSION
==== PAGE 4 ====
25/90150/B Page 4 of 4
7.1 Overall, it is concluded that the planning application is in accordance with the proposal complies with General Policy 2 and Environment Policy 36 of the Strategic Plan 2016 and the Residential Design Guidance 2021 having no significant adverse impact upon public or private amenities and therefore it is recommended for approval.
8.0 RIGHT TO APPEAL AND RIGHT TO GIVE EVIDENCE
8.1 The Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) Order 2019 sets out the process for determining planning applications (including appeals). It sets out a Right to Appeal (i.e. to submit an appeal against a planning decision) and a Right to Give Evidence at Appeals (i.e. to participate in an appeal if one is submitted).
8.2 Article A10 sets out that the right to appeal is available to: o applicant (in all cases); o a Local Authority; Government Department; Manx Utilities; and Manx National Heritage that submit a relevant objection; and o any other person who has made an objection that meets specified criteria.
8.3 Article 8(2)(a) requires that in determining an application, the Department must decide who has a right to appeal, in accordance with the criteria set out in article A10.
8.4 The Order automatically affords the Right to Give Evidence to the following (no determination is required): o any appellant or potential appellant (which includes the applicant); o the Department of Environment, Food and Agriculture, the Department of Infrastructure and the local authority for the area; o any other person who has submitted written representations (this can include other Government Departments and Local Authorities); and o in the case of a petition, a single representative.
8.5 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 the Right to Appeal.
__
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 and that in making this decision the Officer has agreed the recommendation in relation to who should be afforded interested person status and/or rights to appeal.
Decision Made : Permitted
Date: 11.03.2025
Determining Officer Signed : J SINGLETON
Jason Singleton
Principal Planner
Customer note
This copy of the officer report reflects the content of the office copy and has been produced in this form for the benefit of our online service/customers and archive record.
Copyright in submitted documents remains with their authors. Request removal