35232

==== PAGE 1 ====

Connan. Marie From: Sent: To: Subject: Dear Planning Department Darleen Greenwood [email protected] 02 February 2015 16:08 001, Planning Planning Application 15/00083/6 Please see comments below from Port 5t Mary Commissioner Alec Merchant on behalf of the Board for your information. Kind regards Darleen Darleen Greenwood CIHM (ert. CIH 4 Housing Officer Port 5t Mary Commissioners Town Hall The Promenade Port 5t Mary Isle of Man IM9SDA [email protected] (01624832101) From: Alec Merchant [email protected] Sent: 02 February 2015 15:41 To: Darleen Greenwood Subject: RE: Publication List 30.01.15 Hi Darleen. Ref. Pfanning Application number 15/00083/6 Further to my previous e.mail. I tried again today and was successful in getting further into the various Planning hyperhnks and I have been able to view the drawings of the proposed alterations to 2 High Street. I can see no objection that anyone could make to the proposed alterations to the gable end (additional windows which are not overlooking anyone as far as I can tell), There should be no issue about the proposed "Juliet Balcony" to the rear wall, but there may be issues concerning the enlargement of the three existing windows in the rear mansard roof. There is a fine line to be drawn betw"een personal aesthetic taste (not grounds for objection) and .visual impact" which is an accepted category of objection. The three windows (presently of similar proportions to each other and in balance) are to be widened to differing degrees in a way that could appear unbalanced, to lack hannony and not be in the character of the building or it's near neighbours, On the other hand there are probably very few vantage points from which this would be noticeable. As lead member of the Board for "Planning" I do not believe the Board would have strong grounds to object. Could you please fOlWard this response through whatever channels you normally use. I did try to respond via the Planning hyperlink but was unsuccessful. In any case they would probably have understood it as coming from a member of the public rather than as a formal response fromlon behalf of the local authority. Regards, Alec. 1