Loading document...
Application No.: 09/00463/B Applicant: Robert \& Rachel Holden Proposal: Construction of extension to replace existing rear elevation conservatory and extension to driveway Site Address: Cherry Walk Douglas Isle Of Man IM2 5NW ### Considerations Case Officer : Mr Gary Barr Expected Decision Level: Senior Planning Officer ### Written Representations 33 Ballaquark Douglas Isle Of Man IM2 2EY Objects to the proposal ### Consultations Consultee : Highways Division Notes: Do not oppose Consultee : Douglas Corporation Notes: No objection Consultee : Drainage Services Manager Notes: no objection in principle subject to:-
The application site represents the curtilage of an existing two storey detached dwelling located within the cul-de-sac of Cherry Walk (Number 39) at the southern end of Johnny Watterson's Lane. This south facing property is bordered by 37 and 41 Cherry Walk to the east and west. There is an area of open space with thick vegetation to the north and a small area of public open space to the south.
The planning application seeks approval for the replacement of the existing conservatory with a single storey extension to provide a sun room and study. The extension would measure 3600 mm at a height of 2800 mm . On the rear elevation there would be two large (four door) folding doors; two rooflights; render to match that of the existing property and there would also be an additional windows installed in the kitchen and stairway.
The driveway to the front elevation would be extended to accommodate two cars from a width of 3500 mm to 6500 mm .
The application site is within an area of "Predominately Residential Use" under the Douglas North Local Plan, which was adopted by Tynwald in 1998. The Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2007 contains a policy which is considered specifically material to the assessment of this current planning application 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:
Paragraph 8.12.1 - Extensions to Dwellings in built up areas or sites designated for residential use, is also considered relevant to this application; "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".
The following previous planning applications should be considered relevant in the assessment and determination of this application:
PA 95/01540/B - Erection of a white uPVC conservatory - Permitted PA 04/01817/B - Enclosure of existing open porch - Permitted
The Department of Transport Highways Division do not oppose the development.
The Douglas Corporation has no objection with the proposal. The Drainage Services has no objection in principle subject that there must be no discharge of surface water (directly or indirectly) from this proposed development to any foul drainage system(s), as it is an offence under Manx legislation to permit the discharge of polluting or harmful matter to any public sewers of watercourses.
Mr Clark who is writing on behalf of the owners and / or occupiers of 41 Cherry Walk has objected to the proposed development.
Given the nature of the proposed extension it is therefore appropriate to assess the impact of the proposal upon the existing property, the neighbouring properties and the surrounding area in general.
In terms of the existing dwelling, the proposed extension would be relatively modest in design and scale, as not to have an adverse impact upon the existing property as viewed from the public thoroughfare. The proposed extension would be in-keeping with the character of the existing dwelling and with the large folding doors, matching render and windows would ensure that the new built form would blend with the existing.
In terms of neighbouring properties, 37 Cherry Walk and 41 Cherry Walk would be the properties most likely to be affected by the proposed extension, due to their proximity. In terms of amenity, it is considered that as it is sited to the north and as there is sufficient separation between the proposal and the neighbouring properties, this would prevent loss of light or any unacceptable impacts upon existing residential amenity.
It is judged that there would be no unacceptable overlooking arising from the proposed dwelling given the existing degree of overlooking from the western elevation of the existing conservatory. The 1800 mm high fence would be sufficient to limit the impact further. The majority of the windows are to the northern elevation of the extension and would overlook the applicants' backyard and not the neighbouring properties. The proposed window at first floor level would be conditioned to address the concern of overlooking on to the neighbouring backyard.
The extension would be sited at the rear of the property and relatively well screened, as such; the proposed development would not be a dominant feature within the street scene and would have no adverse impacts upon the surrounding area in general.
Other concerns raised
It is regarded that the proposed extension would not be an over-development of the site compared to the conservatory, as the proposal would fit quite comfortably within the rear elevation of the property. The distance to the boundary of 37 is 1500mm; with the proposal stepping closer to the neighbouring property to 750mm, which is regarded as relatively close. However the height of the extension is 2800mm and the existing boundary treatment is approximately 1800mm high (although a 2000mm high fence could be erected under Permitted Development). Given this it is not considered that the impact would be so sufficient as to warrant a refusal. The proposal would be 1800mm from the neighbouring property of 41 Cherry Walk which is considered sufficient and as the applicant has a rather long backyard the 900mm extension in depth (compared with the existing conservatory) is judged as very minimal and not considered as an over development of the site.
Regarding the issues of balls games, trespassing and the increased nuisance due to the extension to the driveway, these are not material planning considerations and can not be determined in this assessment.
The proposed extension to the driveway to accommodate two off street car parking spaces would be acceptable as there would be a significant area of garden remaining. The lack of opposition from the Department of Transport Highways Division is taken as evidence that the proposal would be appropriate in terms of highway safety.
RECOMMENDATION
For these reasons the proposal is considered acceptable and it is recommended that the planning application be permitted.
It is considered that the following parties, who submitted comments, accord with the requirements of Planning Circular 1/06 and are therefore, afforded Interested Party Status:
Recommendation
Date of Recommendation: 21.05.2009
Conditions and Notes for Approval / Reasons and Notes for Refusal
22 May 2009
09/00463/B
C 1. The development hereby permitted shall commence before the expiration of four years from the date of this notice.
C 2. This approval relates to the submitted drawings 4243/L1, 4243/S1 and 4243/P1 all received on 18th March, 2009.
C 3. This approval relates to the installation of obscure glazing to the first floor level stairway window and shall be kept and maintained thereafter. The window to be formed in the 4th floor level stairway shall only be glazed or re-glazed with obscure glass to Pilkington Levels or equivalent. 27.5.09
I confirm that this decision accords with Government Circular No 10/09, Delegation of Functions (Development Procedure), GC No 11/09 (Advertisements) and GC No 12/09 (Registered Buildings) all to the Senior Planning Officer
Decision Made : Permitted Date : 27.11.09 2009
Signed : Senior Planning Officer
Copyright in submitted documents remains with their authors. Request removal
View as Markdown