Loading document...
Application No.: 09/00977/B Applicant: Mr Michael \& Mrs Bernadette Haywood Proposal: Erection of an extension to rear elevation of dwelling Site Address: 27 Cronk Cullyn Colby Isle Of Man IM9 4NQ ### Considerations Case Officer : Miss S E Corlett Expected Decision Level: Senior Planning Officer ### Written Representations ### Consultations Consultee : Highways Division Notes : Consultee : Arbory Parish Commissioners Notes: no comments. Consultee : Drainage Division Notes: No objection subject to the following conditions:-
The site represents the curtilage of an existing dwelling situated on the north eastern side of the estate road in Cronk Cullyn to the north of the A7 Main Road on the eastern side of Colby.
The dwelling is a detached dwelling within a row of four similar properties. of which this was the last to be completed. The properties are all single storey, the application property has the largest gadren area - front and rea and is set back from the estate road by the greatest amount - 9.6 m
The site lies within an area designated as partly within the Existing Residential and partly within the Proposed Residential area noted as Area 14 on the Arbory and East Rushen Local Plan. The Written Statement which accompanies the Plan states "The Department remains of the opinion that Area 14 should remain as shown in the draft local plan for a total of 4 single storey dwellings only with a significant amount of landscaping to be introduced to the site to soften the impact not only of the new dwellings but of the buildings within Cronk Cullyn which are also clearly visible from the west" (paragraph 18.10). The policy in the local plan which applies to this site includes the requirement that
"No development will be permitted above the 39m contour line although gardens, tree and shrub planting may be permitted outside the area indicated as Development Area 14".
The dwelling and its neighbours were approved on appeal under PA 01/1953. A further application was refused - PA 00/1456. Since then there have been no further applications for the application site. The adjacent site - plot 28 has been the subject of PA 07/0914 for an extension which projected 4.8 m into the rear garden and was 9.5 m long and encroached into the area above the 39 m contour line which skirts the rear of this property.
Proposed is the extension of the property to the rear to provide a lounge and playroom linked to the house by a masonry walled passageway. The roof of the extension is lower than that of the main dwelling and the link lower than the height of the extension. The extension will project as much as 11 m from the rear of the property although the extension will be at an angle to the rear elevation.
The extension will not project past the line of the 39 m contour as it was prior to the dwellings being erected.
Arbory Parish Commissioners indicate that they have no objections to the application. Department of Transport Drainage Division indicate that they wish conditions to be attached to any approval regarding the disposal of surface water. The application states that surface water will be discharged to the existing system. Department of Transport Drainage Division indicate that this should not include the main foul sewer.
As is noted in the assessment of PA 07/0914, the application for the construction of the four dwellings, PA 01/1953 refers to the 39 m contour in a number of places. In the conditions of approval, condition 9 states "No approval is hereby granted or implied for the extension of the estate road above the 39 m contour line". The Inspector's report, paragraph 19 states "Amongst other things the Development Brief seeks to prevent development above the 39 m contour line. That criterion is necessary in order to ensure that the built up area does not extend too far up the hillside, but it does restrict the area on which the bungalows can be built." He also comments in paragraph 27 that "I can see no substantial reason for interfering with the rights which new residents can reasonably expect" and did not support the application of a condition which restricts permitted development which may now include extensions to the dwelling. As such, regardless of the provisions of the local plan, an extension could be built to this property up to 15 square metres in size.
The extension is proposed within the area which fell beneath the 39 m contour as shown on the local plan and as such the proposed development would not breach this policy within the plan. In any case, the extension would be further south than that permitted alongside. There will be no view of or from the extension of neighbouring properties and as such the proposal is considered to accord both with the local plan policies and those of the Strategic Plan. The policy RES/P/1 paragraph 4.8 in the local plan states "Within those areas designated and developed for residential purposes, the Department will not generally oppose the principle of alterations and extensions of existing dwellings. Each application will however be judged on its own merits in the light of the appearance of the finished building and its impact on the surrounding area". This is similar in implication to General Policy 2 of the Strategic Plan which 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: 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 space around them;
c) does not affect adversely the character of the surrounding landscape or townscape; 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 adverse 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. As such the application is recommended for approval. PARTY STATUS
The Department of Transport and the local authority are, by virtue of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) Order 2005, paragraph 6 (5) (c) and (d), considered "interested persons" and as such should be afforded party status.
Recommendation Recommended Decision: Permitted Date of Recommendation: 28.07.2009 Conditions and Notes for Approval / Reasons and Notes for Refusal C : Conditions for approval N : Notes attached to conditions R : Reasons for refusal O : Notes attached to refusals
The development hereby permitted shall commence before the expiration of four years from the date of this notice.
This permission relates to the extension of the property as shown in drawings 645/002, -003 and -004 all received on 4th June, 2009.
There must be no discharge of surface water to the main foul sewer.
I confirm that this decision accords with Government Circular No 09/09 Delegation of functions, 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 : Signed : Senior Planning Officer
Copyright in submitted documents remains with their authors. Request removal
View as Markdown