Loading document...
==== PAGE 1 ====
21/01034/B Page 1 of 5
PLANNING OFFICER REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Application No. : 21/01034/B Applicant : Mr Colin Moughton Proposal : Erection of a ground floor and first floor extension with associated first floor balcony Site Address : Geay Varrey Four Roads Port St. Mary Isle Of Man IM9 5LQ
Planning Officer: Mr Paul Visigah Photo Taken : Site Visit :
Expected Decision Level : Officer Delegation
Recommendation
Recommended Decision:
Permitted Date of Recommendation: 01.02.2022 __
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. The proposed 1.8m high privacy screen on the northern section of the first floor decking on the boundary with Easedale (shown on Drw.21 1552/02) shall be installed prior to the use of the decking and then permanently retained as such.
Reason: To safeguard the amenities of adjoining occupiers from overlooking and loss of privacy.
This application has been recommended for approval for the following reason. The proposal is considered to accord with General Policy 2 of the Strategic Plan and the principles set out in the Residential Design Guidance.
Plans/Drawings/Information; This decision relates to the Cover Letter, Photographs, and Drawing Nos. Drw.21 1552/01 and Drw.21 1552/02, received 1 September 2021. __
Interested Person Status - Additional Persons
None __
==== PAGE 2 ====
21/01034/B Page 2 of 5
Officer’s Report
1.0 THE SITE 1.1 The application site is the residential curtilage of Geay Varrey, a three storey mid terraced dwelling located on the eastern side of Four Roads, Port St Mary. The rear of the dwelling like the other dwellings on the terrace looks out over open fields towards the east.
1.2 At the rear of the dwelling and on the ground floor level is a mon-pitch roofed outrigger which projects to the rear boundary and houses the kitchen, a bath and WC and front the rear yard which is linked to the rear lane via a pedestrian timber gate.
2.0 THE PROPOSAL 2.1 This current planning application seeks approval for the erection of a ground floor and first floor extension with associated first floor balcony.
2.2 The proposed works would involve: 2.2.1 Removal of the mono-pitch roofed outrigger and its replacement with a flat roofed extension that would be 5.4m wide (spanning the entire width of the rear yard) and 8.1m long (extending to the boundary with the rear lane), although an area measuring 3.6m wide and 1.7m long would be excludes to serve as the new rear yard with links to the rear lane. This new extension would serve a new open plan Kitchen and sitting area, a utility, and new WC. A new patio door would be installed at the rear of this extension to provide access to the new yard.
2.2.2 Erection of a pitch roofed first floor extension that would project from the rear of the dwelling by 3.8m, be 2.3m wide and 2.8m to the roof ridge (2m to the eaves). The window would be to the side overlooking the first floor deck area and be flanked by the door to the landing serving the bath which this extension would serve as.
2.2.3 The other sections of the first floor extension over the flat roofed area would form a first floor decking which would project 1.7m beyond the rear wall of the neighbouring at Easedale to the north, and 360mm beyond the rear wall of Moorlands to the south. A new 1100mm balustrade would mark the extent of this decking area.
2.2.4 New external cavity walls to ground floor to receive vertical cedar of larch cladding. Utility wall to lane and first floor bathroom to receive smooth render painted white similar to the existing house.
2.2.5 Flat roof over the ground floor extension to be in a grey polyroof fibreglass surface with treated timber boarding to the standing roof deck area. The new pitched roof to the first floor bathroom to be natural grey slate to match the main house roof.
2.3 Other works would involve: i. The installation of a 1.8m privacy screen on the boundary with Easedale to the north, to screen this property from the first floor decking. ii. Relocation of the oil tank to the new yard. iii. Installation of three EOS roof lights over the flat roof of the ground floor extension and on the decking area. iv. Installation of flat roof over the remaining area of the ground floor extension not covered by the decking area.
3.0 PLANNING POLICY 3.1 The application site is zoned as Residential under the Area Plan for the South 2013 (Map 7), and the site is not within a Conservation Area or prone to flood risks. There is no registered tree on the site and the site is not within a registered tree area. As such, the following parts of the Strategic Plan are relevant:
==== PAGE 3 ====
21/01034/B Page 3 of 5
3.2 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; (g) Does not affect adversely the amenity of local residents or the character of the locality; (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; (n) Is designed having due regard to best practice in reducing energy consumption.
3.3 Paragraph 8.12.1 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 would not have an adverse impact on either adjacent property or the surrounding area in general.
3.4 Other policies within the Strategic Plan which are considered relevant in the assessment of the proposal are; Infrastructure Policy 5, Community Policy 11, Community Policy 7 and Community Policy 10.
4.0 OTHER MATERIAL CONSIDERATIONS 4.1 Whilst not adopted planning policy, DEFA's Residential Design Guidance is a material consideration in the assessment of this application as, "It is intended to apply to any residential development within existing villages and towns, including individual houses, conversions and householder extensions". Sections 2.0 on sustainable construction, and 7.0 which deal with impact on neighbouring properties are considered relevant to the current scheme.
5.0 PLANNING HISTORY 5.1 The site has not been the subject of any previous planning application.
6.0 REPRESENTATIONS Copies of representations received can be viewed on the Government's website. This report contains summaries only.
6.1 Representation from the Department of Infrastructure (DOI) Highways Division confirms that they 'Do not oppose' in the letter dated 14 September 2021.
6.2 Port St Mary Commissioners have no objection to the current planning application in a letter dated 30 September 2021.
6.3 No comments have been received from neighbouring properties.
7.0 ASSESSMENT 7.1 In assessing the potential impacts of the proposed development, the main issues to consider in the assessment of the application are; i. the impact upon the character and appearance of the property and the surrounding area in general, and ii. the impacts upon the amenities of the neighbouring properties
7.2 Character and appearance (GP2 b, c & g) 7.2.1 In terms of impacts on the development on the existing dwelling, it is noted that the proposed works would remove and existing single storey rear outrigger and replace it with the proposed extension which would cover most parts of the rear yard. Whilst the works would increase the built form within this rear yard, and height of the building at the rear, the second floor which would be most prominent from distant views along the rail track would be finished
==== PAGE 4 ====
21/01034/B Page 4 of 5
with a pitched roof and render similar to the main dwelling. This would ensure that the visible elements of the proposed works integrate seamlessly into the existing built fabric.
7.2.2 It is also considered that only a 1.3m section of the ground floor extension would be visible, given the presence of the boundary wall at the rear of the property and the depressed site level when compared to the rear lane which is rarely used. Besides, the first floor rear projection would be set about 300mm below the eaves and 2.4m lower than the main roof ridge, making it subordinate to the main dwelling.
7.2.3 With regard to impact on the streetscene, it is considered that the works would be within the rear lane which is not a particularly important element of the terrace, considering the limited attention paid to the appearance of the rear of the properties here (as evidenced in the varied levels of attention to detail here). Albeit, the proposed extension would be similar to a number of other properties within the rear street scene and therefore is considered to be in keeping with the character and appearance of the rear of the row of terraced properties. The appearance would also be enhanced over the existing, which would serve to contribute positively to the appearance of the area.
7.3 Impact on Neighbours 7.3.1 The key considerations in terms of impact on neighbours are risks of overshadowing and/or overlooking and loss of privacy to dwellings within 20 metres of the site dwelling.
7.3.2 With regard to overlooking, it is considered that although the works would involve a first floor element, it is bounded by higher walls on both sides with Easedale to the north, and Moorlands to the south, with only the gap between the first floor bath extension and sections of the terrace measuring about 1.7m wide (on the north) of particular concern, considering it would offer clear views at first floor level into Easedale. The applicants, have, however, proposed to install a 1.8m high privacy screen on the northern side of the decking area to ensure views are not attainable to the neighbouring rear yard.
7.3.3 In terms of overlooking impacts on Moorlands to the south, it is considered that this dwelling already has a large two storey extension to the rear, which is only 360mm short of the extent of the new decking area, with windows at this level also having glancing views of the application site. As such, any impacts would be negligible.
7.3.4 Given the above, it is not considered that the development would introduce levels of overlooking sufficient to warrant refusal of the scheme.
7.3.5 With regard to overbearing impacts or loss of light, there would be no impacts on Moorlands to the south given the extent of the extension on the rear of this dwelling (in terms of scale, form and extent). In considering impacts on Easedale, it is noted that this property already has a ground floor extension which projects into the rear yard, with a three storey extension projecting further into the rear yard. In the case of the proposed first floor extension, this would only be at first floor level (set at about 4.5m from the rear boundary), a position that would ensure that impacts on the neighbour is minimal. Moreover, the proposed pitch roof of the first floor extension would lean away from Easedale, and has a low pitch which would reduce the levels of shadow cast on the neighbouring rear yard.
7.3.6 It is, therefore, considered that the proposed development would not appear unduly overbearing or result in significant levels of loss of light to the neighbouring properties, given the level of built form at the rear of its adjacent neighbours to the north and south boundaries.
8.0 RECOMMENDATION 8.1 Overall, it is concluded that the planning application is in accordance with General Policy 2 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan, and as such the planning application is recommended for approval.
==== PAGE 5 ====
21/01034/B Page 5 of 5
9.0 INTERESTED PERSON STATUS 9.1 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.
9.2 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 in Article 4(2) who should be given Interested Person Status. __
I can confirm that this decision has been made by the Head of Development Management 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 : 03.02.2022
Determining officer Signed : S BUTLER
Stephen Butler
Head of Development Management
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