**Document:** Officer Planning Report Recommendations **Application:** 05/92204/B — Erection of a two storey extension to side elevation **Decision:** Permitted **Decision Date:** 2006-07-10 **Parish:** Michael **Document Type:** report / officer_report **Source:** https://planningportal.im/a/79760-michael-5-snaefell-view-jurby-extension/documents/1458779 --- # Officer Planning Report Recommendations ## Planning Report And Recommendations [Table omitted in markdown export] [Table omitted in markdown export] [Table omitted in markdown export] [Table omitted in markdown export] ### Considerations [Table omitted in markdown export] ### Written Representations ### Consultations [Table omitted in markdown export] ### Officer's Report #### Description Of Application Site - The application site is a two storey semi detached property situated on a corner plot on the junction of The Threshold and Snaefell View. - Snaefell View is a residential cul-de-sac situated within a predominantly residential area. - To the northeast of the application site is the residential property of 6 Snaefell View - To the southwest of the site is the public highway of The Threshold. - To the rear of the application site is the property of No.19 Snaefell View #### Proposal - The proposal is to erect a two storey side extension. - The extension will project 3.3m to the side of the property and will be 8m in length. - The height of the extension will be 7m to the ridge. - The extension will be rendered to match the existing property. ## Relevant Planning History - None ## Development Plan Policies - Isle of Man Planning Scheme (Development Plan Order) 1982 - Isle of Man Strategic Plan (Modified Draft) 2004; GP2, Para 8.12.1, TP4 ## Statutory Consultation Responses - Highways, DoT – There are no/insufficient details given of parking and access requirements to evaluate the application. Two off-street parking spaces are required within the boundary of the property to serve the needs if the development. - Drainage, DoT – No objection - Jurby Parish Commissioner – No objection ## Public Responses - Press notice were posted on 17/11/04. - A representation from the IoM Fire and Rescue Service has been received. They comment that the installation of mains, interconnected domestic smoke detection is recommended in accordance with Section 1 of the Building Regulations 2000 – Approved Document B. ## Issues - Paragraph 8.12.1 of the emerging Strategic Plan states that “...in built up areas not controlled by Conservation Areas 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.” - In respect of the impact on the street scene, the application site is a corner plot. The existing property breaches the existing building line of No’s 19 and 20 Snaefell View by 2.5m. The proposed extension would project beyond the established building line of the No’s 19 and 20 Snaefell View by 5.5m. This is increases the current breach of the building line by 3.1m. This proposal will leave a 3.5m gap between the proposed extension and the back of the public footpath at its nearest point. - The existing building does not exceed the existing building line of No. 42 The Threshold. This proposal will breach the building line by 3.3m. There is very little landscaping running around the boundary of the site. - On balance, I feel the proposal still retains some of the openness and character of the plot and I therefore do not consider the proposal would be harmful to the visual amenities of the locality. - Highways have objected to the proposal in that there are no/insufficient details given of parking and access requirements to evaluate the application. The proposal will not projecting onto area of open space and will not remove any allocated parking space. There are two parking spaces in existence for the property, which the DoT considers is necessary for the development. I consider the proposal will not have any significant impact on highway safety. ## Conclusion I therefore recommend that planning permission ber granted subject to conditions. ## Recommendation Recommended Decision: Permitted Date of Recommendation: 14.02.2006 ## Conditions and Notes for Approval / Reasons and Notes for Refusal C : Conditions for approval N : Notes attached to conditions R : Reasons for refusal - : Notes attached to refusals C 1. The development hereby permitted shall commence before the expiration of four years from the date of this notice. C 2. This permission relates to the erection of a two storey side extension as shown in drawing numbers GTD date stamped 17th November 2005. C 3. No facing and roofing materials shall be used other than materials similar to those used on the existing building M I : SN0016 *Stable details* I confirm that this decision accords with Government Circular Nos 44/05 (Delegation of Functions to Director of Planning and Building Control) and 47/05 (Delegation of Functions to Senior Planning Officer) Decision Made : Permitted Date : 30/6/06 Signed: **M. I. McCauley** Director of Planning and Building Control M. I. McCauley Director of Planning and Building Control --- *Data sourced from the Isle of Man public planning register under the [Isle of Man Open Government Licence](https://www.gov.im/about-this-site/open-government-licence/).* *Canonical page: https://planningportal.im/a/79760-michael-5-snaefell-view-jurby-extension/documents/1458779*