**Document:** Officer Planning Report Recommendation **Application:** 08/02142/B — Erection of a juliet balcony to rear elevation **Decision:** Permitted **Decision Date:** 2009-01-12 **Parish:** German **Document Type:** report / officer_report **Source:** https://planningportal.im/a/86586-german-stanley-terrace-christian-erection-balcony/documents/1535180 --- # Officer Planning Report Recommendation ## Planning Report And Recommendations [Table omitted in markdown export] ### Considerations [Table omitted in markdown export] ### Written Representations ### Consultations [Table omitted in markdown export] [Table omitted in markdown export] [Table omitted in markdown export] ### Officer's Report #### The Site The application site represents the curtilage of the residential dwelling Elm Bank, Stanley Terrace, Christian Street, Peel. The property is a three storey end terrace building which was formerly used as a residential care home. The property has since been converted back to a single dwelling house under PA 05/01762/R which was a split decision at appeal where the rear balcony aspect of the proposed development was refused. #### Planning Status The application site is located within an area identified as being Mixed Use by the Peel Local Plan (Planning Circular 6/89). The site is also within the Peel Conservation Area. Within the adopted Isle of Man Strategic Plan, the following policies are considered relevant in the assessment and determination of this application: General Policy 2, which states: "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: - (a) is in accordance with the design brief in the Area Plan where there is such a brief; - (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; - (d) does not adversely affect the protected wildlife or locally important habitats on the site or adjacent land, including water courses; - (e) does not affect adversely public views of the sea; - (f) incorporates where possible existing topography and landscape features, particularly trees and sod banks; - (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; - (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; - (l) is not on contaminated land or subject to unreasonable risk of erosion or flooding; - (m) takes account of community and personal safety and security in the design of buildings and the spaces around them; and - (n) is designed having due regard to best practice in reducing energy consumption." Environmental Policy 35, which states: "Within Conservation Areas, the Department will permit only development which would preserve or enhance the character or appearance of the Area, and will ensure that the special features contributing to the character and quality are protected against inappropriate development." ### Planning History The following previous planning applications are considered relevant in the assessment and determination of this application: Planning application 05/00676/B sought permission for alterations and the conversion of former nursing home to three apartments. This application was refused on Review 8th September 2005. Planning application 05/01762/R sought retrospective permission for the alteration of former nursing home to a single dwelling, including balcony to the rear at first floor level. This application was the subject of a split decision with the balcony being refused 9th November 2006. The reason for refusal stated: "The balconies to the rear would have an unacceptable impact on the amenity of neighbouring properties due to their size and location by virtue of the overlooking of the rear gardens of these properties and the direct overlooking of the upper floor window of the neighbouring property." Planning application 07/02325/B sought approval for the construction of a metal fire escape to replace the existing (refused) balcony. This was permitted. ### Representations The Department of Transport Highways Division does not object this application. Peel Town Commissioners have not commented on this application. Mr Crookall MHK has asked to be kept informed of the progress of the application. ### The Proposal This application seeks approval for the erection of a balcony on the rear elevation of the property at first floor level. The balcony would match that approved under PA07/02325/B. The balcony refused under PA 05/01762/R is still in place and is the subject of enforcement action. ### Assessment The issues to be considered in the assessment of this application are the visual impact of the proposed balcony, particularly in relation to the Conservation Area setting and the potential for overlooking to adjacent properties. In terms of visual impact, the balcony would be of a modest scale and would be to the rear elevation of the property. As such it is not considered that the character or appearance of the Peel Conservation Area would be adversely affected by the proposed development. The balcony would be relatively small, having a useable area of approximately 1 square metre. This is a similar area to that which would be created by the approved fire escape which this development would supersede. As such it is judged that there would not be an unacceptable level of overlooking caused by the proposed balcony. ### Recommendation It is recommended that the application be approved. ### Party Status It is considered that the following parties, who submitted comments, accord with the requirements of Planning Circular 1/06 and are therefore, afforded Interested Party Status: - Peel Town Commissioners - The Department of Transport Highways Division Accordingly the following parties are not granted Interested Party Status: Mr T Crookhall MHK ### Recommendation Recommended Decision: Permitted Date of Recommendation: 31.12.2008 ### 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 approval relates to the erection of a balcony at first floor level as shown by the plans 04-S067-SHL 06 and 04-S067-SHL 008 submitted and date stamped 19th November 2008. N 1. For the purposes of clarity, this approval does not remove or alter any obligations to remove the existing unauthorised balcony refused under Planning Application 05/01762/R and the subject of Planning Enforcement Notice 08/00281/NOTICE. I confirm that this decision accords with Government Circular No 31/07 (Delegation of Functions to Senior Planning Officer) Decision Made : Permitted Date: 8/1/09 Signed: DB Senior Planning Officer --- *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/86586-german-stanley-terrace-christian-erection-balcony/documents/1535180*