Loading document...
==== PAGE 1 ====
20/01482/B Page 1 of 5
PLANNING OFFICER REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Application No. : 20/01482/B Applicant : Mr Lawrence Looney Proposal : Erection of a replacement extension Site Address : 5 Majestic Drive Onchan Isle Of Man IM3 2JQ
Planning Officer: Mr Paul Visigah Photo Taken : Site Visit : Expected Decision Level : Officer Delegation
Recommendation
Recommended Decision:
Permitted Date of Recommendation: 12.02.2021 __
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.
This application has been recommended for approval for the following reason. It is considered that the planning application is in accordance with General Policy 2 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016 and the relevant sections of the Residential Design Guide 2019.
Plans/Drawings/Information;
This approval relates to drawing numbers 01, 02, 03, 04 and 05 date stamped and received 7 December 2020.
__
Interested Person Status - Additional Persons
None __
Officer’s Report
1.0 THE APPLICATION SITE 1.1 The application site comprises the residential curtilage of 5 Majestic Drive, Onchan, a two storey detached dwelling located within a corner plot on Majestic Drive in Onchan. This property which has an integral garage on its west elevation is designed such that its west and
==== PAGE 2 ====
20/01482/B Page 2 of 5
south elevation both appear as the front elevation. Its large front garden is enclosed by a painted masonry wall which runs along the entire site frontage, opening up only at the vehicular access and pedestrian access.
1.2 On the front elevation of this dwelling a single storey conservatory which fills the gap between the two arms of this L-shaped property, with its sector shaped conservatory with hipped roof uniting both sections of the dwelling. The dwelling sits on a slightly higher elevation than the level of the abutting highway,
2.0 THE PROPOSAL 2.1 The current application seeks planning approval for erection of a replacement extension. This extension which would replace the existing conservatory on the front elevation of the dwelling will be 4.6m x 3.6m and will be 4.4m high (2.6m to the eaves), maintaining the same height as the existing conservatory.
2.2 The extension will have its external walls finished in painted render to match the main dwelling, while its roof will be covered in dark brown Celcuis roof tiles to match the existing roof tiles on the existing building. As well, the extension will have grey UPVC full-length windows that would run along the entire length of the extension on both elevations. These windows would have the same appearance as the existing windows on the dwelling.
3.0 PLANNING POLICY 3.1 In terms of local plan policy, the application site is within an area recognised as being within predominantly residential use under the Onchan Local Plan 2000. The site is also designated as 'Predominantly Residential' on the Area plan for the East Map 6 (Onchan).
3.2 In terms of strategic plan policy, the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016 contains one policy that is considered specifically material to the assessment of the application.
3.2.1 General Policy 2: "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; (e) does not affect adversely public views of the sea; (g) does not affect adversely the amenity of local residents or the character of the locality; (n) is designed having due regard to best practice in reducing energy consumption."
3.2.2 Paragraph 8.12.1 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2007 states "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.".
3.3 The following policy within the Onchan Local Plan Written Statement (Planning Circular 1/2000) that accompanies the Onchan Local Plan is also considered relevant:
Policy O/RES/P/21 states: "Extensions and alterations to existing residential property will generally not be opposed where such proposals are appropriate in terms of scale, massing, design, appearance and impact on adjacent property."
3.4 The Department has recently published the Residential Design Guidance (March 2019) which provides advice on the design of new houses and extensions to existing property as well
==== PAGE 3 ====
20/01482/B Page 3 of 5
as how to assess the impact of such development on the living conditions of those in adjacent residential property. This aims to "encourage creative, innovative and locally distinct designs" and which improves the quality of the built environment. Specific advice is given regarding the design of extensions, suggesting that "extensions should generally have the same roof pitch and shape as the existing dwelling and their height should be lower than that of the main building. Generally pitch roofs are the preferred roof type compared with flat roofs which are generally inappropriate forms of development, especially if publicly viewable, unless the existing property as a flat/low pitched roof design" (3.2.2).
3.5 Paragraph 4.1.1 of the RDG 2019 would also provide valuable guidance in the assessment of the application:
4.1.1 An extension to the front of a property can have the greatest impact upon the individual dwelling and/or the street scene. There may be limited circumstances when a front extension is appropriate, for example where the street has an irregular building line or pattern. Any extension should normally appear as if it were designed with the original building and not look out of place in the street. A porch extension is perhaps the most common form of extension to the front elevation of a dwelling. Whilst porches are relatively small in size, careful consideration still needs to be given.
4.0 PLANNING HISTORY 4.1 The application site has been the subject of five previous planning applications, four of which are considered to be material relevant to the current application.
4.2 Planning application 93/01687/B sought planning approval for the erection of dwelling with integral garage. The refusal of this previous planning application was confirmed at appeal on the 5th December 1994.
4.3 PA 94/01760/B for erection of dwelling with garage, Plot 5, Majestic Drive, Onchan. This was refused by the Planning Committee in April 1995, but approved at appeal.
4.4 PA 11/00344/B for extension to dwelling which was approved in June 2011. This sought to replace the existing sector shaped conservatory with a two story conservatory with conical roof.
4.5 PA 12/00293/B for Erection of first floor and two storey extensions to dwelling. This application was approved by the Planning Committee in April 2012, with the decision upheld at Appeal.
5.0 REPRESENTATIONS Copies of representations received can be viewed on the government's website. This report contains summaries only.
5.1 Representation from the Department of Infrastructure (DOI) Highways Division confirms that they 'Do not oppose' in the letter dated 8 January 2021.
5.2 Onchan District Commissioners have recommended that the application be approved for planning purposes only in a letter dated 2 February 2021.
6.0 ASSESSMENT 6.1 The fundamental issues to consider in the assessment of this planning application are the visual impact of the proposed development GP2 (b) & (c), and RDG 2019; and the impact upon the amenities of the neighbouring properties GP2 (g).
6.2 Front extensions are often difficult to accommodate without negatively impacting on the property. However, the proposed extension is such that it would only mildly alter the
==== PAGE 4 ====
20/01482/B Page 4 of 5
appearance of the front elevation of the building as evidenced in the straightening up of the walls and roof of the extension from the curved outlook, and the removal of the brick facing on the extension. There would be no changes to the height of the extension which would ensure that it fits seamlessly into the position of the existing extension. Besides, the painted render finish and the use of grey UPVC windows would be in keeping with the character of the existing building. Therefore, on balance, it is considered that the proposal would not harm the characteristics of the existing building. In this respect, the proposal complies with GP2.
6.3 The proposed front extensions in terms of its proportion, form, scale and design are not unusual within the existing street scene, considering the mix of dwelling design types and styles, and the fact that the new extension would create a more complimentary outlook than the existing as it would appear as if it were designed with the original building and not look out of place in the street. Whilst the extension would be publicly viewable from within the street scene given its prominent position on the front elevation, it would be a more fitting extension to the dwelling than the existing curved extension given the basic straight forms that characterise the property. As such, it is considered that the proposed extension would not be an obtrusive feature within the immediate vicinity, but would be in keeping with the street scene, therefore complying with General Policy 2 and the RDG 2019.
6.4 Regarding impacts on the neighbouring dwellings, the position of the extension together with its design (which would ensure that it retains the existing levels of fenestration), and or build form as a single storey extension would limit the chance for overlooking to results. Additionally, the height and massing would ensure that the extension does not have an overbearing impact on the neighbouring dwellings. Therefore, there would be no adverse impacts on the living conditions of those in adjacent properties.
7.0 CONCLUSION 7.1 For the reasons set out above, the proposed development is deemed acceptable and is concluded to accord with the provisions of General Policy 2 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016.
8.0 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 __
==== PAGE 5 ====
20/01482/B Page 5 of 5
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: 15.02.2021
Determining officer Signed : S CORLETT Sarah Corlett
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