Loading document...
==== PAGE 1 ====
22/00478/B Page 1 of 4
PLANNING OFFICER REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
Application No. : 22/00478/B Applicant : Mr Simon Wilkinson Proposal : A single storey rear extension to replace the existing conservatory Site Address : 73 Silverburn Crescent Ballasalla Isle Of Man IM9 2DY
Planning Officer: Miss Lucy Kinrade Photo Taken : Site Visit : Expected Decision Level : Officer Delegation
Recommendation
Recommended Decision:
Permitted Date of Recommendation: 14.06.2022 __
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 application accords with General Policy 2 (b, c, and g) of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan and Section 7.0 of the Residential Design Guidance 2021.
Plans/Drawings/Information;
This approval relates to the following drawings all date received 12/04/2022: Site Location Plan Existing Block Site Plan Proposed Block Site Plan Existing Ground Floor Plan Proposed Ground Floor Plan Existing and Proposed Front Elevations Existing and Proposed Rear Elevations Existing and Proposed Left Elevations Existing and Proposed Right Elevations Planning Statement __ Interested Person Status - Additional Persons
==== PAGE 2 ====
22/00478/B Page 2 of 4
None __
Officer’s Report
1.0 THE SITE 1.1 The application site is the curtilage of 73 Silverburn Crescent, Ballasalla, a detached bungalow situated on the corner with Lilac Grove. All of the properties in the immediate area are single storey 70's style bungalows with attached flat roof garages, some flat roof extensions and some flat roof porches. The dwellings are finished in a mix of painted render and stone cladding.
2.0 THE PROPOSAL 2.1 The current application seeks approval for the replacement of a rear flat roof conservatory with a new larger flat roof extension. The existing is to sit nearest the end facing towards the entrance of Lilac Grove. The proposed extension is to be 7.1m long and projecting from the rear 3.4m. The extension is to have flat roof matching the eaves of the main house and installed with flat roof lights above.
2.2 There are to be patio doors on one end facing into the garden, two windows on the rear elevation facing towards the side of the neighbours garage and one window facing towards Lilac Grove. The extension is to be rendered to match the existing house.
3.0 PLANNING HISTORY 3.1 The site has been subject to two previous applications, one for the erection of a fence and another for the erection of the conservatory.
4.0 DEVELOPMENT PLAN POLICIES 4.1 The application site is within an area zoned as "Predominantly Residential" on the Area Plan for the South 2013. In assessing the current proposal consideration shall be given to a number of policies within the IOM Strategic Plan which seek to make best use of existing developed sites and ensuring new development is of good design (Strategic Policies 1 and 5), ensuring development remains within settlement boundaries in line with the spatial hierarchy (Spatial Policies 2 and 5), and that it meets with the general standards towards acceptable development and not having an adverse visual or amenity impacts on its neighbours or surroundings (paragraph 8.12.1 and General Policy 2). In addition to the Strategic Plan policies, consideration shall also be given to Section 2.2 and 4 of the Residential Design Guidance 2021 which address local distinctiveness and offers further guidance on extensions to existing residential dwellings including flat roof extensions and Section 7 in respect of good neighbourliness.
5.0 REPRESENTATIONS Copies of representations received can be viewed on the Government's website in full. This report contains summaries only.
5.1 Malew Commissioners - no objection of 04/05/2022.
5.2 Department of Infrastructure Highway Services - No highways interest (29/04/2021).
5.3 No comments received from neighbouring properties.
6.0 ASSESSMENT 6.1 The proposed extension is to measure 7.1m x 3.4m and is to have a flat roof matching the height and eaves of the existing house. The RDG 2021 outlines a number of good and poor designs in respect of extensions and indicates that there is not 'a one size fits all'
==== PAGE 3 ====
22/00478/B Page 3 of 4
approach. In this specific case the existing dwelling, like the majority of its neighbours, already has an existing flat roof garage and the rear flat roof conservatory, and these flat roof approaches re-inforce the low eaves line of the bungalows and helps to keep the general massing of the extensions subordinate to and lower than the main house.
6.2 The very nature of these properties already having flat roof garages and extensions generates a streetscene that can to some degree accommodate other flat roof extensions such as that which is detailed as part of this application. The proposed extension is larger than the conservatory which it is to replace, but is set back from the neighbours so as to not result in any overbearing or amenity impacts on their living conditions, existing boundary treatment will limit any inter-visibility between properties at ground floor although the rear windows face towards the neighbours garage and not considered to be so beyond the existing conservatory glazing as to cause unacceptable harm. In terms of visual impact the proposal given its low level roof design is not considered to have any adverse visual impacts or harm on the overall appearance of this area or to detract public view.
7.0 CONCLUSION 7.1 While perhaps not falling in line with the general principles set out in the Residential Design Guidance 2021 for flat roof extensions, given the specific context and appearance of this existing property and the character of the immediate surrounding streetscene, coupled with the reasonable size and location of the extension, that the proposal is considered to be acceptable and not to result in any adverse visual impacts as to detract from the streetscene or generate any significant public harm.
7.2 The application is considered to comply with General Policy 2 (b, c, and g) of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan and Section 7.0 of the Residential Design Guidance 2021.
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 __
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.
==== PAGE 4 ====
22/00478/B Page 4 of 4
Decision Made : Permitted
Date: 14.06.2022
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