Loading document...
==== PAGE 1 ====
20/01089/B Page 1 of 7
PLANNING OFFICER REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Application No. : 20/01089/B Applicant : Manx Utilities Authority Proposal : Installation of a heat pump Site Address : Seabourne Mount Morrison Peel Isle Of Man IM5 1PN
Planning Officer: Mr Paul Visigah Photo Taken : 11.11.2020 Site Visit : 11.11.2020 Expected Decision Level : Officer Delegation
Recommendation
Recommended Decision:
Permitted Date of Recommendation: 04.01.2021 __
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.
C 2. This approval relates to the installation of a Mitsubishi Ecodan, unit model PUHZ- HW140VHA2(-BS) air source heat pump as shown and described in the submitted brochure dated 1 October 2020; and Site Plan, marked up photograph, Letter received 17th November 2020, and Air Source Heat Pump Calculation Details received 18 December 2020.
Reason: to clarify the extent of the approval in the interests of the living conditions of those in adjacent property in accordance with General Policy 2 and Environment Policies 22 and 24 of the Strategic Plan.
This application has been recommended for approval for the following reason. The proposal is considered to accord with GP2 and Energy Policy 4 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan, as well as wider Government climate change strategy.
Plans/Drawings/Information; This approval relates to: o Location plan, Site Plan, Annotated Site Plan, Proposed Elevations, Proposed Floor Plans, and Mitsubishi Ecodan brochure received on 1st October 2020; o Letter and Annotated Photographs received 17th November 2020; and o Sound Pressure Calculation Details received 18 December 2020. __
==== PAGE 2 ====
20/01089/B Page 2 of 7
Interested Person Status - Additional Persons
It is recommended that the owners/occupiers of the following properties should be given Interested Person Status as they are considered to have sufficient interest in the subject matter of the application to take part in any subsequent proceedings and are mentioned in Article 6(4):
Grand View, Mount Morrison, Peel
as they satisfy all of the requirements of paragraph 2 of the Department's Operational Policy on Interested Person Status (July 2018).
It is recommended that the owners/occupiers of the following properties should not be given Interested Person Status as they are not considered to have sufficient interest in the subject matter of the application to take part in any subsequent proceedings and are not mentioned in Article 6(4):
Balladoyle House, Fort Island Road
as they are not within 20m of the application site and the development is not automatically required to be the subject of an EIA by Appendix 5 of the Strategic Plan, in accordance with paragraph 2B of the Policy __
Officer’s Report
1.0 THE APPLICATION SITE 1.1 The application site is Seaborne, Mount Morrison an existing three storey terraced dwelling located on the northern side of Peel and with front facing views over the Bowling Green and towards Peel Bay and the old swimming pool.
1.2 Like each of its neighbours the application dwelling has a rear outlet and rear yard/garden area connecting with a rear lane which also serves a number of dwellings fronting Peveril Road. The rear yard is partly enclosed by a 500mm thick stone wall which is 3m high on the eastern boundary (although it drops to about 2m within a 4m stretch) and 2m high on the western boundary, although rising to about 3m at the peak of a gable on the wall.
2.0 THE PROPOSAL 2.1 Proposed is the installation of an air source heat pump at ground floor level of the rear outlet. The proposed unit is to be 1020mm wide x 1350mm high and 360mm deep.
2.2 Noise levels provided by the product specification submitted for the application indicate that the noise emitted by the unit (at normal heating levels and tested to British Standards) would have: o Sound pressure level at 1m (dBA) = 53 o Sound power level (dBA) = 67.5
3.0 PLANNING POLICY 3.1 The site is identified as being 'Residential' on the Peel Local Plan and is not within the Conservation Area. Given the nature of the proposal it's relevant to consider the following policies and paragraphs from the IOM Strategic Plan 2016:
3.2 General Policy 2 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016 is therefore relevant:
==== PAGE 3 ====
20/01089/B Page 3 of 7
"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; (g) does not affect adversely the amenity of local residents or the character of the locality and (n) is designed having due regard to best practice in reducing energy consumption."
3.3 Paragraph 12.2.8:
"The Department is fully supportive of the need to secure greater energy efficiency in new and existing development and has recently introduced additional energy efficiency requirements in the Building Regulations 2003. Energy efficiency and the use of renewable energy sources are covered in General Policy 2(m) of the Building Regulations. At the same time the Department recognizes that renewable energy sources can have adverse environmental impacts. The idea of a wind turbine Installation is currently being investigated and considered by the Manx Electricity Authority. Any feasible site is likely to be exposed and have considerable visual impact. There may also be other impacts such as noise. On a smaller scale, the popularity of domestic wind turbines has been increasing in recent years in response to rising energy prices and increasing awareness of climate change. Planning applications for domestic wind turbines are unlikely to require the submission of an Environmental Impact Assessment. The Department will assess any proposals for wind turbine installations by weighing the benefits of using such renewable energy sources against the environmental impact arising in any particular site. It is likely that the visual impact would be less detrimental on a coastal site than on a rural or upland one. Accordingly:
3.4 Energy Policy 4:
"Development involving alternative sources of energy supply, including wind, water and tide power, and the use of solar panels, will be judged against the environmental objectives and policies set out in this Plan. Installations involving wind, water and tide power will require the submission of an EIA.
4.0 PLANNING HISTORY 4.1 PA 20/00456/B for Installation of a heat pump which was recently refused for the application site is considered to be materially relevant in the assessment and determination of the current application.
Reason for refusal: There is insufficient information to fully determine whether the proposal would have an acceptable impact on neighbouring amenity and therefore by reason of the noise level expected and position in close proximity to neighbouring dwellings is considered to fail GP2 (g) of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016.
5.0 REPRESENTATIONS Copies of representations received can be viewed on the Government's website. This report contains summaries only.
5.1 Representations from the Department of Infrastructure (DOI) Highways Division indicates that there is 'No Highway Interest' in a letter dated 27 November 2020.
5.2 There has been no written representation made regarding the current planning application by the Peel Town Commissioners at the time of writing this report, although they were consulted on 1 October 2020.
==== PAGE 4 ====
20/01089/B Page 4 of 7
5.3 The Owners/Occupants of Balladoyle House, Fort Island Road, Derbyhaven have made the following comments regarding the application in a letter dated 5 October 2020:
We object to the application on principle as it does not comply with the laid down standards. The excuses made why it should be allowed are irrelevant because:-
5.3.1 The Owners/Occupants of Balladoyle House, Fort Island Road, Derbyhaven have made further comments which reiterated the previous comments in a letter dated 10 December 2020. The additional comment state thus:
"5) Only slightly over the limit - that's like saying that it is OK to have an alcohol/blood reading of 81 mg/100ml compared with drink/drive limit of 80 as there would not be much difference in driving ability! Also it would set a dangerous precedent - the next application would ask for a bit more leeway, and so on.
There would also appear to be confusion over house numbering. The application site is stated as 5 Mount Morrison, whereas the houses on either side for assessment purposes are stated as numbers 6 and 7. Clearly, there is something wrong that needs sorting out!
Therefore we reaffirm our previous comments of 29 October and believe that the application, as currently constituted, should be refused on principle."
5.4 The Owners/Occupants of Grand View, Mount Morrison, Peel, the neighbouring dwelling on the northeast boundary have made the following comments regarding the application in a letter dated 29 October 2020:
I am not objecting to the application per se, but rather I am concerned that the heat pump may generate a level of noise which may impact on our enjoyment of our garden.
I am also concerned that the level of noise generated may disturb the sleep of the person who uses the first floor bedroom at the rear of the property. This bedroom does not have a modern upvc double glazed window, but rather a wooden framed window.
I understand that steps could be taken to mitigate noise levels coming from the unit, such as covering it with a housing which directs the noise away from our home and or placing it on a noise absorbing base. I would hope that our neighbour would be willing to undertake any measures considered necessary to make any noise from the unit as unintrusive as possible. Relationship to site: Immediately adjacent to the site
5.4.1 Having viewed the comments made on the proposal, the applicants have submitted additional documents in support of the application dated 17 November 2020.
ASSESSMENT 6.1 The issues here, as with the previous application, are the visual impact and whether the proposed development would impact on the residential amenity of the neighbouring dwellings.
==== PAGE 5 ====
20/01089/B Page 5 of 7
6.2 The proposal will accord with GP2 (n) in respect of non-renewable energy consumption and the general support in the Strategic Plan for the installation of renewable energy installations as set out in Energy Policy 4, and the application is not required to provide an EIA. It is considered that the apparatus is modest in size and is to be located at ground floor and to the rear of the dwelling where views from a public perspective from the main highway will be limited and visual impact from neighbouring dwellings will likely be low. Based on the foregoing, it is considered that the proposal would not to affect the character or appearance of the area and in this respect accords with GP2 (b, c & g).
6.3 In terms of noise impact, the sound pressure level of the pump is expected to be between 53-67.5 dBA. For reference, 50dB is similar to the noise generated by light traffic, 60dB that of normal conversation or an air conditioning unit. During the daytime, few people are annoyed by activities with LAeq levels below 55 dB, however sound pressure levels during the evening and night should be 5-10 dB lower than during the day.
6.4 An air source heat pump could be a noise nuisance, particularly at night when background noise levels can be lower. The World Health Organisation Guidelines for Community Noise states that both continuous and intermittent noise leads to sleep disturbance and the more intense the background noise, the more disturbing is its effect on sleep. Measurable effects on sleep start at background noise levels around 30 dB LAeq and where noise is continuous, the equivalent sound pressure level should not exceed 30 dBA indoors, if negative effects on sleep are to be avoided.
6.5 In dwellings, the critical effects of noise are on sleep, annoyance and speech interference. To avoid sleep disturbance, indoor guideline values for bedrooms are 30 dB LAeq for continuous noise and 45 dB LAmax for single sound events, although this can be dependent on the nature of the noise source. When the noise is composed of a large proportion of low- frequency sounds (e.g. from ventilation systems) this can disturb rest and sleep even at low sound pressure levels.
6.6 To protect the majority of people from being seriously annoyed at night, sound pressure levels at the outside façades of the living spaces should not exceed 45 dB LAeq and 60 dB LAmax, so that people may sleep with bedroom windows open (the noise reduction from outside to inside with the window partly open is assumed to be around 15 dB).
6.7 The application dwelling is situated in a small terrace and amongst a small cluster of surrounding dwellings. At present there is no guidance or standards within IOM Legislation that cover noise levels from equipment such as air source heat pumps (ASHP). In seeking to better understand what noise levels may be considered tolerable standards, guidance has been sought from other jurisdictions. While some still require planning applications for ASHP, England and Scotland have introduced permitted development for installation subject to a number of conditions including positioning, size and noise levels, and in order to achieve permitted development status the installation must comply with all the conditions including the MCS020 standard, which requires a noise limit below 42 dB(A).
6.8 The proposed ASHP has a: o sound pressure level at 1m of 53 dB(A), and o a sound power level of 67.5 dB(A)
Both figures are higher than the tolerable level referred to in UK Legislation. Between the ASHP and the applicants own bedroom window (nearest on end gable) would be approx. 4m away. Inverse Square Law indicates that doubling the distance from the source will reduce sound pressure levels by 6dB. o at 4m away the sound pressure would be 41dB(A) (53 -12=41) o at 4m away the sound power level would be 55.5dB(A) (67.5-12=55.5)
==== PAGE 6 ====
20/01089/B Page 6 of 7
6.9 Assuming that glazing further reduces noise by 15dB, the sound pressure level would be 36dB(A) and sound power 40.5dB(A). While it would be the applicants own decision as whether they wish to jeopardise their own sleeping conditions this should not come at detriment to neighbouring living or sleeping conditions.
6.10 The previous determination (PA 20/00456/B) considered that there was insufficient information to fully determine whether the proposal would have an acceptable impact on neighbouring amenity given that no information was provided to give an indication of the noise levels that would be attainable from habitable rooms within the neighbouring dwellings (particularly bedrooms) at set distances from the position of the ASHP. With the current application, information has been provided which indicates that a 500mm thick and 3m high boundary wall serves as the boundary marker between the application property and the nearest neighbour Grand View on the north-east boundary. This boundary wall also exists on the south-west boundary with 3 Mount Morrison (Creg Malin View), although at a height of about 2m at its lowest point along this boundary; conditions which would serve to ameliorate any noise impacts from the proposed ASHP installation. Likewise, additional information has also been provided which shows the calculation of noise levels attainable at various assessment positions on the neighbouring dwelling which suggests that the noise calculation from the Utility room at 7 Mount Morrison which would be 5m from the ASHP position would be 42.1dB(A), while the noise level measured at the other neighbouring windows within close proximity to the ASHP would be 42dB(A) and as such it is considered that the impact would be minimal given that the maximum noise level attainable for these rooms would be within the MCS guided threshold for permitted development limit.
6.11 Granting the values obtained from the utility room would be 0.1dB higher than would be acceptable under permitted development for ASHP's, the affected window serves a non- habitable room where noise levels would generally be high in comparison to other rooms within this neighbouring dwelling. Utility rooms usually have tumble dryers and washing machines which generate a lot of noise, with both generating about 70dB on the average.
6.12 Whilst it is noted that the use of a utility room within a property could change over time, given that it could be converted to serve a habitable room during the operational life of the property, it is considered that a 0.1dB(A) rise would not be sufficient to generate an impact that would be detrimental to the use of this room. This is hinged on the fact that the impact of the difference would be negligible given that it would be within the 0.1 - 0.9 margin of noise change which would make the noise change negligible. As such, it is considered that any impacts generated by the installation of the ASHP on this bedroom would be minimal and would not result in a level of disturbance sufficient to warrant refusal of the proposed scheme.
6.13 As there is no criteria for determining the magnitude of the impact and effect of the increase in noise levels locally, the UK Design Manual for Roads and Bridges (HA 205/08, Highways Agency et al 2008) which provides guidance for assessing, reporting and monitoring the environmental effects of projects served as the guide for evaluating the impacts from noise change in this case. The Magnitude of Noise Impact Criteria from DMRB (2008) is presented below:
6.13.1 The Magnitude of Noise Impact Criteria from DMRB (2008): Noise Change [dB(A)]/ Magnitude of Impact 0
No change 0.1 - 0.9
Negligible 1.0 - 2.9
Minor 3.0 - 4.9
Moderate 5.0 +
Major
7.0 CONCLUSION
==== PAGE 7 ====
20/01089/B Page 7 of 7
7.1 Whilst it is noted that the noise level attainable at one of the neighbouring windows would be 0.1dB(A) higher than the MCS guided threshold for permitted development limit, the proposal is considered to accord with GP2 and Energy Policy 4 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan, as well as the wider Government Climate Change Strategy and is recommended for approval.
INTERESTED PERSON STATUS 8.1 By virtue of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) Order 2019, the following persons are automatically interested persons: (a) the applicant (including an agent acting on their behalf); (b) any Government Department that has made written representations that the Department considers material; (c) the Highways Division of the Department of Infrastructure; (d) Manx National Heritage where it has made written representations that the Department considers material; (e) Manx Utilities where it has made written representations that the Department considers material; (f) the local authority in whose district the land the subject of the application is situated; and (g) a local authority adjoining the authority referred to in paragraph (f) where that adjoining authority has made written representations that the Department considers material.
8.2 The decision maker must determine: o whether any other comments from Government Departments (other than the Department of Infrastructure Highway Services Division) are material; and o whether there are other persons to those listed above who should be given Interested Person Status
__
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.
Decision Made : Permitted
Date: 07.01.2021
Determining officer
Signed : C BALMER
Chris Balmer
Principal Planner
Customer note
This copy of the officer report reflects the content of the file copy and has been produced in this form for the benefit of our online services/customers and archive records.
Copyright in submitted documents remains with their authors. Request removal