Loading document...
==== PAGE 1 ====
22/01082/B Page 1 of 4
PLANNING OFFICER REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
Application No. : 22/01082/B Applicant : Mr Damien Attenborough & Mr Ben Callow Proposal : Installation of a flue Site Address : 61 Royal Park Ramsey Isle Of Man IM8 3UH
Enforcement/Planning Assistant: Ms Charlotte Gatt Photo Taken :
Site Visit :
Expected Decision Level : Officer Delegation
Recommendation
Recommended Decision:
Permitted Date of Recommendation: 14.10.2022 __
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 planning application accords with the provisions set out in General Policy 2 and Environment Policy 22 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016 and the principles of the Residential Design Guide and as such the planning application is approved.
Plans/Drawings/Information;
This decision hereby approved relates to drawings and documents submitted to the Department titled;
Location Site Plan Existing and Proposed Elevations
date stamped as being received by the Department on 22.08.22
==== PAGE 2 ====
22/01082/B Page 2 of 4
__
Interested Person Status - Additional Persons
None __
Officer’s Report
THE APPLICATION SITE 1.1 The application site represents the residential curtilage of 61 Royal Park Ramsey, an existing two-storey detached dwelling located on the southern side of the estates road, closer to its junction with Bride Road. On the eastern elevation (front) is an existing driveway and attached garage.
THE PROPOSAL 2.1 The current planning application seeks approval for the erection of 150mm diameter wood burning flue. The proposed flue will be approximately 0.6m above the ridge level.
2.2 The proposed flue is to project from the first floor of the south east elevation, following the roofline and is to be finished in black, with a small cowl on top. The total length of the flue is proposed to be 8.2m total length.
PLANNING HISTORY 3.1 There are no previous planning applications in relation to this site which would be considered materially relevant in the assessment of this application.
PLANNING POLICY 4.1 In terms of land use designation, the application sites are within an area recognised as being an area of "Proposed Residential" under the Ramsey Local Plan. The site are not within a Conservation Area. The property is not with a Conservation Area nor a Flood Risk Zone.
4.2 In terms of the Strategic Plan (2016), General Policy 2 (GP2) is the most relevant and states 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;
4.3 Environment Policy 22 is also relevant and sets out prevention of unacceptable harm to the environment and/or the amenity of neighbouring properties.
4.4 The Department has published the Residential Design Guide (2021) of which the relevant section is section 5.1 Chimney Stacks and Flues and states in part the following;
"5.1.3 In recent years the Department has seen a number of planning application for flues serving wood burning stoves, and is broadly supportive of these. Consideration should be given to their placement, height, size and finish, as the main issue is likely to be the visual appearance of them and whether they would fit with the existing property and the street scene as a whole. Tall and/or prominent flues which have a detrimental impact to a property and/or street scene are unlikely to be supported. Where a flue may have an unacceptable detrimental impact, it may be possible to mitigate the impact by:
==== PAGE 3 ====
22/01082/B Page 3 of 4
o colouring the flue to blend in with the existing colour of the wall the flue may adjoin (or a dark colour when the flue sits within a roof); o encasing the flue so that it appears as a chimney; or o incorporating the flue within the existing or new chimney stacks."
REPRESENTATIONS 5.1 Highway Services have considered the proposal and state, "No Highway Interest." (07.09.2022)
5.2 The Local Authority Ramsey Town Commissioners have stated that they have no objections to this proposal. (03.10.2022)
5.3 There have been no comments received from neighbouring properties at the time of writing this report.
ASSESSMENT 6.1 The main issues to consider in the assessment of this planning application are;
6.2 CHARACTER AND APPEARANCE 6.2.1 The proposed flue is to be situated projecting out of the gable from the first floor of the property and whilst this means that the proposed flue will be seen from a public vantage point, it would not be a feature which would have a significant visual impact given its size and given that flue's are not an unusual feature seen within residential properties. The proposed colour would not look out of place. Accordingly, it is considered the proposal would be an appropriate form of development within the street scene and to the individual property.
6.3 NEIGHBOUR AMENITY 6.3.1 There was an application (for a different location) which was approved initially but refused on appeal following an adverse recommendation from the inspection. The application, PA18/01125/B was refused for reasons relating to the appearance of the flue and the effect of its use in terms of smell and smoke nuisance, to the immediate neighbour. The Inspector accepted that that flue would only be seen by those living around the site but still considered that an adverse visual impact experienced by them would breach GP2 and the RDG. He was also concerned about the emissions from the flue, regardless of the fact that it appeared to have been installed by a registered installer and that Environmental Health had visited the site and had not experienced any smoke or smell. The flue was installed almost on the boundary of both properties and approximately 1m from the rear elevation, extending around 1m higher than the eaves of the main part of the two storey house.
6.3.2 Although what is proposed here is similar in height, it is further away from the nearest neighbour. The flue is over 3m away from the closest neighbouring property.
6.3.3 Discussions were held with the Head of Building Control and Standards within the Department indicate that in his view, the issue at Close Cowley was not with the location and installation of the flue which would appear to accord with the guidelines in the Building Regulations, but with the operation and it is possible that incorrect fuel was being used. There are procedures for this which would normally involve the installer returning to check the installation. Whilst in the Close Cowley case, the EHI visited the site it is clear that on their visit there was no smoke or smell nuisance. It would appear from the discussions with Building Control that there are both standards for flues and measures which can be taken through Building Control and Environmental Protection which can address issues should they arise. As such, in the absence of any evidence that this current proposed flue will result in harm to the
==== PAGE 4 ====
22/01082/B Page 4 of 4
living conditions of those in adjacent dwellings, it is considered that the application is acceptable.
6.4 The proposed flue here is situated around 3.25m away from the nearest neighbouring property, as such, in the absence of any evidence that this current proposed flue will result in harm to the living conditions of those in adjacent dwellings, it is considered that the application is acceptable.
CONCLUSION 7.1 Overall it is concluded that the planning application accords with the provisions set out in General Policy 2 and Environment Policy 22 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016 and the principles of the RDG and as such the planning application 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: 20.10.2022
Determining officer
Signed : A MORGAN Abigail Morgan
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