Case Officer: Mr Edward Baker Photo Taken: Site Visit: 24.04.2013 Expected Decision Level: Officer Delegation
Officer's Report
The Application Site
The application relates to No 21 Sunnybank Avenue, Onchan. The site accommodates a large detached bungalow on a built up residential estate. It is on the side of a hill, which rises from south west to north east. This part of Sunnybank Avenue is a cul-de-sac and the site is directly adjoined by properties to the north, and across the road to the south and east.
The Proposal
The application seeks planning permission for the erection of a two storey extension at the south east end of the property. The extension would be positioned at right angles to the existing bungalow and would feature dormer windows on the south east elevation. No details of the external materials have been provided although the drawings give the impression that they will match the existing bungalow.
Planning History
09/01020/B – permission granted on 20 August 2009 for the erection of a two storey extension.
90/01724/B – permission granted for a satellite dish.
Planning Policy
The site is within an area recognised as being predominantly residential under the Onchan Local Plan 2000.
General Policy 2 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2007 is relevant:
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;
Application No.:
13/00438/B
Applicant:
Mr Ernie Donne
Proposal:
Erection of a two storey extension to dwelling
Site Address:
21 Sunnybank Avenue Onchan Isle Of Man IM3 3BP
(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.
Representations
Onchan District Commissioners - recommend refusal:
'The proposed extension is contrary to the provisions of General Policy 2 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan in that is does not respect the size and surroundings in terms of the siting, scale, form and design of the buildings and spaces around it, It also adversely affects the character of the surrounding streetscape.'
Water and Sewerage Authority - CCTV investigation needs to be undertaken by the Authority to assess the impact of the proposal upon the public sewerage system. The Authority has now completed its investigations into the drainage layout and established that the pipeline that runs down the side of the property where the proposed extension is to be built is not a public sewer as previously thought but a private drain. The Authority therefore has no further comments on this application.
Highways Division indicate that they do not oppose the application.
Assessment
Background
Planning permission was granted in August 2009 for the erection of a two storey side extension in a similar position to that proposed by the current planning application. The permission remains extant until August of this year. However, the previously approved extension has a low first floor and its roof is no higher than the existing bungalow. The present application is quite different and the roof of the new extension extends above the ridgeline of the bungalow. It also extends to the rear forming a T-shape layout.
The effect of the proposal upon the character and appearance of the area
The proposed extension is considered to be a very inappropriate design. Its roof extends above the ridgeline of the existing bungalow by approximately 1.3 metres. It has substantial mass and would be positioned at right angles to the orientation of the existing bungalow, forming a T shape. The form of the extension is at substantial odds with the form and design of the original bungalow and would appear cumbersome and over-dominant.
As well as problems with its overall form, the detail of the extension is also considered unattractive. The dormer windows would appear an alien feature on the bungalow. The main facade of the extension - the south east elevation would appear squat, elongated and overdominated by fenestration. The ground floor windows on the north east gable do no match the height of the existing windows in the bungalow (which lay immediately underneath the eaves) thus giving a sense of imbalance.
Overall, it is considered that the proposed extension would have a highly disruptive, jarring and over-dominant visual impact on the existing bungalow to the detriment of the character and appearance of both the bungalow and the surrounding area.
No details have been provided of the external materials. However, the drawings seem to indicate that materials will match the existing bungalow - a condition could ensure that matching materials are used.
The effect of the proposal upon the neighbour amenity
The main potential impact on neighbour amenity is overlooking of No. 27 Sunnybank Avenue to the immediate north. The gable end first floor window in the extension would look towards the rear garden and conservatory of No. 27. Currently, there is a substantial leylandii hedge on the boundary, however, this could be felled in the future thus exposing No. 27 to a loss of privacy. This can be overcome by requiring that the north gable first floor window is fitted with obscured glazing; this is considered reasonable in this instance because the floor plan shows that this would be a secondary window.
The dormer windows on the south east elevation would look towards the side and rear of No. 19 Sunnybank Avenue to the other side of the highway to the south east. However, the boundary of No. 19 is at least 10 metres away, and it is considered that this relationship is satisfactory.
It is considered that there are no other neighbour impacts.
Recommendation
It is recommended that the planning application is refused.
Party Status
The Local Authority, Onchan District Commissioners, is by virtue of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) Order 2005, paragraph 6 (5)(d) granted Interested Party Status.
The Water and Sewerage Authority is also granted Interested Party status.
21 The Highway Authority is now part of the Department of Infrastructure of which the Planning Authority is part. As such, the Highway Authority cannot be afforded party status in this case.
Recommendation
Recommended Decision: Refused
Date of
Recommendation:
Conditions and Notes for Approval / Reasons and Notes for Refusal
C : Conditions for approval <br> N : Notes attached to conditions <br> R : Reasons for refusal <br> 0 : Notes attached to refusals
R 1. The proposed extension, by reason of its height which exceeds the ridgeline of the existing bungalow, its massing, form, orientation, and fenestration design (which includes dormer windows which would be an alien feature on the bungalow), is highly out of keeping with the design of the existing bungalow and its surroundings. The proposed extension would appear overwhelming, overdominant, visually jarring and highly visually discordant. The proposed extension would be detrimental to the character and appearance of the existing bungalow and the surrounding area. The proposal is contrary to General Policy 2 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2007 and is unacceptable.
I confirm that this decision accords with the appropriate Government Circular delegating functions to Director of Planning and Building Control / Development Control Manager/ Senior Planning Officer.
Decision Made : Refused Date : 2011.5.13 Determining officer (delete as appropriate) Signed : Anthony Holmes Senior Planning Officer Signed : Michael Gallagher Director of Planning and Building Control
Signed : Sarah Corlett Senior Planning Officer Signed : Jennifer Chance Development Control Manager
Case Officer: Mr Edward Baker Photo Taken: Site Visit: 24.04.2013 Expected Decision Level: Officer Delegation
Officer's Report
The Application Site
The application relates to No 21 Sunnybank Avenue, Onchan. The site accommodates a large detached bungalow on a built up residential estate. It is on the side of a hill, which rises from south west to north east. This part of Sunnybank Avenue is a cul-de-sac and the site is directly adjoined by properties to the north, and across the road to the south and east.
The Proposal
The application seeks planning permission for the erection of a two storey extension at the south east end of the property. The extension would be positioned at right angles to the existing bungalow and would feature dormer windows on the south east elevation. No details of the external materials have been provided although the drawings give the impression that they will match the existing bungalow.
Planning History
09/01020/B – permission granted on 20 August 2009 for the erection of a two storey extension.
90/01724/B – permission granted for a satellite dish.
Planning Policy
The site is within an area recognised as being predominantly residential under the Onchan Local Plan 2000.
General Policy 2 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2007 is relevant:
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;
Application No.:
13/00438/B
Applicant:
Mr Ernie Donne
Proposal:
Erection of a two storey extension to dwelling
Site Address:
21 Sunnybank Avenue
Onchan
Isle Of Man
IM3 3BP
(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;
(I) 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.
Representations
Onchan District Commissioners - recommend refusal:
'The proposed extension is contrary to the provisions of General Policy 2 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan in that is does not respect the size and surroundings in terms of the siting, scale, form and design of the buildings and spaces around it, It also adversely affects the character of the surrounding streetscape.'
Water and Sewerage Authority - CCTV investigation needs to be undertaken by the Authority to assess the impact of the proposal upon the public sewerage system. The Authority has now completed its investigations into the drainage layout and established that the pipeline that runs down the side of the property where the proposed extension is to be built is not a public sewer as previously thought but a private drain. The Authority therefore has no further comments on this application.
Highways Division indicate that they do not oppose the application.
Assessment
Background
Planning permission was granted in August 2009 for the erection of a two storey side extension in a similar position to that proposed by the current planning application. The permission remains extant until August of this year. However, the previously approved extension has a low first floor and its roof is no higher than the existing bungalow. The present application is quite different and the roof of the new extension extends above the ridgeline of the bungalow. It also extends to the rear forming a T-shape layout.
The effect of the proposal upon the character and appearance of the area
The proposed extension is considered to be a very inappropriate design. Its roof extends above the ridgeline of the existing bungalow by approximately 1.3 metres. It has substantial mass and would be positioned at right angles to the orientation of the existing bungalow, forming a T shape. The form of the extension is at substantial odds with the form and design of the original bungalow and would appear cumbersome and over-dominant.
As well as problems with its overall form, the detail of the extension is also considered unattractive. The dormer windows would appear an alien feature on the bungalow. The main facade of the extension - the south east elevation would appear squat, elongated and overdominated by fenestration. The ground floor windows on the north east gable do no match the height of the existing windows in the bungalow (which lay immediately underneath the eaves) thus giving a sense of imbalance.
Overall, it is considered that the proposed extension would have a highly disruptive, jarring and over-dominant visual impact on the existing bungalow to the detriment of the character and appearance of both the bungalow and the surrounding area.
No details have been provided of the external materials. However, the drawings seem to indicate that materials will match the existing bungalow - a condition could ensure that matching materials are used.
The effect of the proposal upon the neighbour amenity
The main potential impact on neighbour amenity is overlooking of No. 27 Sunnybank Avenue to the immediate north. The gable end first floor window in the extension would look towards the rear garden and conservatory of No. 27. Currently, there is a substantial leylandii hedge on the boundary, however, this could be felled in the future thus exposing No. 27 to a loss of privacy. This can be overcome by requiring that the north gable first floor window is fitted with obscured glazing; this is considered reasonable in this instance because the floor plan shows that this would be a secondary window.
The dormer windows on the south east elevation would look towards the side and rear of No. 19 Sunnybank Avenue to the other side of the highway to the south east. However, the boundary of No. 19 is at least 10 metres away, and it is considered that this relationship is satisfactory.
It is considered that there are no other neighbour impacts.
Recommendation
It is recommended that the planning application is refused.
Party Status
The Local Authority, Onchan District Commissioners, is by virtue of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) Order 2005, paragraph 6 (5)(d) granted Interested Party Status.
The Water and Sewerage Authority is also granted Interested Party status.
21 The Highway Authority is now part of the Department of Infrastructure of which the Planning Authority is part. As such, the Highway Authority cannot be afforded party status in this case.
Recommendation
Recommended Decision: Refused
Date of
Recommendation:
Conditions and Notes for Approval / Reasons and Notes for Refusal
C : Conditions for approval <br> N : Notes attached to conditions <br> R : Reasons for refusal <br> 0 : Notes attached to refusals
R 1. The proposed extension, by reason of its height which exceeds the ridgeline of the existing bungalow, its massing, form, orientation, and fenestration design (which includes dormer windows which would be an alien feature on the bungalow), is highly out of keeping with the design of the existing bungalow and its surroundings. The proposed extension would appear overwhelming, overdominant, visually jarring and highly visually discordant. The proposed extension would be detrimental to the character and appearance of the existing bungalow and the surrounding area. The proposal is contrary to General Policy 2 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2007 and is unacceptable.
C1 - The development hereby permitted shall commence before the expiration of four years from the date of this notice.
C2 - The development hereby permitted shall not be carried out except in full accordance with the following plans: Drawing Number 2013/JE/01 (site location plan and existing elevations) and 2013/JE/P1 (block plan, proposed floor plans and elevations) received on 11 April 2013.
C3 - All external walling and roofing materials to be used shall match those of the existing building in respect of type, size, colour, pointing, coursing, jointing, profile and texture, unless the Planning Authority grants its prior written approval to any variation.
C4 - The first floor window in the north east gable of the extension, shown as serving the games room, shall be fitted with obscured glazing and permanently retained as such.
Should you require any further information then please let me know.
Yours sincerely,
E. Baker
Ed Baker BSc DipTP CMS MRTPI Planning Officer
Copyright in submitted documents remains with their authors. Request removal
