Loading document...
==== PAGE 1 ====
22/00401/B Page 1 of 5
PLANNING OFFICER REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
Application No. : 22/00401/B Applicant : Mrs Kaylee Guy Proposal : Erection of a first floor extension above garage Site Address : 2 Erin Lane Port Erin Isle Of Man IM9 6FE
Planning Officer: Mr Paul Visigah Photo Taken : Site Visit : Expected Decision Level : Officer Delegation
Recommendation
Recommended Decision:
Permitted Date of Recommendation: 24.05.2022 __
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.
This application has been recommended for approval for the following reason. The proposal is considered to be in accordance with General Policy 2 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016, and the principles set out in the Residential Design Guidance, in that no unacceptable visual, residential amenity or other impacts were identified.
Plans/Drawings/Information; This decision relates to the Cover Letter and Plan List, and Drawing Nos. 22/03/01 and 22/03/02, received 30 March 2022. __
Interested Person Status - Additional Persons
None __
Officer’s Report
1.0 THE APPLICATION SITE 1.1 The application site is the residential curtilage of 2 Erin Lane, a two storey detached dwelling located on the southern side of Erin Lane, Port Erin. The property which has its entire
==== PAGE 2 ====
22/00401/B Page 2 of 5
ground floor elevation and front facing gable finished in facing brick has an integral garage on its west elevation.
1.2 The application dwelling sits close to the junction with Erin Way, with No. 35 Erin Way situated to the west, while No. 4 Erin Lane is situated on the eastern boundary. Its large rear garden which has mature landscaping and trees situated along its boundaries faces agricultural fields to the southeast.
1.3 The properties on the estate share a common architectural language; the most noticeable similarity being the finishing of the ground floors and parts of the first floor front elevations in facing brick. Most of the properties also have integral garages, with the larger properties having two integral garages.
2.0 THE PROPOSAL 2.1 The current planning application seeks approval for the erection of a first floor extension above garage.
2.2 The side extension would have a width of 3m to match the width of the existing garage, and also match the length of the garage and utility at the rear measuring 8.8m. The extension would have a pitch roof with pitch to match that of the existing dwelling, with a maximum height of 7.2 metres (850mm lower than the main roof ridge). There would be one window on the front and rear elevation. Two roof lights would be installed within the roof; one on either roof plane. This extension over the garage would enable the creation of a large master en-suite bedroom.
2.3 The new windows would match the existing windows on the dwelling, while the external walls and roof would be finished in materials to similar to the main dwellinghouse.
3.0 PLANNING POLICY 3.1 In terms of local plan policy, the application site is within an area zoned as Predominantly Residential under the Area Plan for the South 2013, and is not within a Conservation Area. The site which is considered to have low likelihood of flood risk, is not within a registered tree area and there are no registered trees on site.
3.2 The Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016 contains the following policies that are considered specifically material to the assessment of this application;
3.3 General Policy 2 (GP2) (in part) "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; (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 unacceptable effect on road safety or traffic flows on the local highways; (n) is designed having due regard to best practice in reducing energy consumption."
3.3.1 Paragraph 8.12.1 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
==== PAGE 3 ====
22/00401/B Page 3 of 5
property where such 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, 4.7 on Flat Roof Extensions, and 7.0 which deal with impact on neighbouring properties are considered relevant to the current scheme.
5.0 PLANNING HISTORY 5.1 The application site has been the subject of a previous planning application which is not considered to be materially relevant to the current application.
5.2 There has been a number of similar applications within the vicinity of the application site which are considered to be relevant to the current application. These include PA 15/01288/B - 40 Erin Way, 15/00928/B - 45 Erin Way, 15/00882/B - 42 Erin Way, 08/00778/B - 5 Erin Lane, 08/00078/B - 20 Erin Way, and 07/00162/B - 25 Erin Way, Port Erin, which comprised either a first floor extension over the existing integral garage or a two storey extension to the side. All these were granted planning approval with some now fully implemented.
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 there is 'No Highway Interest' in a letter dated 8 April 2022.
6.2 Port Erin Commissioners support the planning application (13 April 2022).
6.3 No comments have been received from neighbouring properties.
7.0 ASSESSMENT 7.1 The fundamental issues to consider in the assessment of this current planning application are; i. The impact of the proposal on the appearance of the existing dwelling; ii. The impact on the street scene of Erin Way and locality in general; and iii. Impact on Neighbouring Amenity
7.2 Impact on Existing Dwelling 7.2.1 In terms of impacts on the existing dwelling, it is considered that the proposed extension would be finished to match the main dwelling in respect of the windows, render and roof tiles. It is also considered that the roof of the side extension would be set about 850mm lower than the roof of the main dwelling, making it subordinate. From a design point of view, these are judged to respect the design and proportions of the dwelling and are not considered to have an adverse impact upon the character and appearance of the existing dwelling.
7.3 Impacts on the character of the street scene and locality 7.3.1 With regard to the possible impacts on the street scene of Erin Lane and vicinity, it is considered that some properties within Erin Lane and the immediate locality have had similar
==== PAGE 4 ====
22/00401/B Page 4 of 5
extensions above the garage and as such the proposed changes would seamlessly fit into the character of the street scene. As well, the extension would be finished in materials and detailing that would match the main dwelling, thereby maintaining the key features which characterises the street scene.
7.3.2 It is worth noting that there are within Erin Lane and this modern estate a number of varying house types including, terraced, semi-detached to detached with a number of variations to the frontage including modification to porches, erection of new porches, conversion of garages, extension to side elevations and extensions above garages to which the proposed scheme would be well integrated. Therefore, these aspects of the development are deemed to be acceptable, with the proposed development complying with those sections of General Policy 2(b) & (c) and the RDG 2021.
7.4 Impacts on neighbouring amenity 7.4.1 When considering potential impact on the residential amenity of neighbours, general concerns of overlooking, overshadowing and overbearing impacts are assessed.
7.4.2 Firstly, overlooking risk is assessed by applying the '20 metre rule'. If a neighbours habitable room (living, dining, bedroom etc.) or garden area is within 20 metres of a proposed window opening there may be a risk of overlooking and subsequent loss of privacy. When this rule is applied, there is limited opportunity for overlooking to occur. This is hinged on the fact that the windows on the added floor are in front and behind; having no views of the abutting neighbour at 35 Erin Way. The existing landscaping on the boundary would also serve to further limit views of the neighbouring rear garden. For these reasons, overlooking risk is not regarded as sufficient insomuch as to warrant a reason for refusal.
7.4.3 The level of overshadowing can be estimated by drawing a section in a plane perpendicular to the main face of the building affected. If the potential obstructing extension subtends an angle to the horizontal, at a height 2 metres from ground level, less than 25° then there will still be the potential for good daylight to the interior. If this rule is applied, it is not considered that there would be a detrimental loss of light to the nearest neighbour at 35 Erin Way the first floor extension over the existing attached garage given the siting of the new extension. It is also considered that the proposed extension would not block the path of the sun towards the front or rear garden of this neighbour that is situated west of the application dwelling, given the span of the extension and the position of the application dwelling in relation to the neighbour.
7.4.4 Likewise, the massing and scale of the proposal would not result in an overbearing structure as the height and form of the main dwelling would be preserved, with the roof ridge of the new extension above the existing garage set considerably lower than the roof ridge of the main dwelling. Moreover, the proposed extension would not bring the application dwelling any closer to the boundary with Nos. 35 Erin Way than it already is. As well, its height, pitched roof and position in relation to the dwelling on that site would limit any impact.
7.4.5 On assessment, it is not considered that the extension above the existing garage would have a harmful impact upon the residential amenity of the neighbours, and would be compliant with the requirements of General Policy 2 (g) and the relevant sections of the Residential Design Guide.
7.5 Other Matters 7.5.1 The scheme does not propose any alterations to the means of access to the site or parking within the site. As such, it is not considered that there would be any impacts on highway safety.
7.5.2 No new confined spaces with easy access to those outside the site would be created, which would serve as easy hideouts for criminal activity or antisocial behaviour. Likewise, the
==== PAGE 5 ====
22/00401/B Page 5 of 5
scheme would not impede easy access to fire apparatus to the rear of the dwelling, with the existing pedestrian access to the rear of the property retained.
7.5.3 As such, it is considered that these elements of the scheme aligns with the requirements of Community Policies 7, 10, and 11.
8.0 CONCLUSION 8.1 Overall, it is concluded that the planning application is in accordance with the relevant policies of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016 and the principles promoted by the Residential Design Guide, and as such is recommended for approval.
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 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: 26.05.2022
Determining officer Signed : J SINGLETON
Jason Singleton
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