**Document:** Officer Planning Report Recommendations **Application:** 08/01409/B — Alterations and extension **Decision:** Permitted **Decision Date:** 2008-10-31 **Parish:** Braddan **Document Type:** report / officer_report **Source:** https://planningportal.im/a/85885-braddan-3-king-extension/documents/1568505 --- # Officer Planning Report Recommendations Part 1 ### Considerations [Table omitted in markdown export] [Table omitted in markdown export] ### Written Representations [Table omitted in markdown export] ### Consultations [Table omitted in markdown export] ### Officer's Report ## THE APPLICATION SITE AND PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT The application site comprises the curtilage of a three storey property that is situated on the end of a terrace of three similar properties located on the north western side of King Edward Road in Onchan. The proposed development comprises of the alteration and extension of the dwelling. ### Planning History The application site has been the subject of four previous planning applications that are considered material to the assessment of the current planning application: Planning application 04/00923/B sought approval for the demolition and rebuilding of rear outlet together with renovations and alterations of existing building to form four self contained apartments with adjacent parking on the application site. This previous planning application was initially considered and approved on the 9th July 2004, with the initial approval decision notice issued on the 12th July 2004. At review on the 10th September 2004 the Planning Committee resolved to confirm the approval, with the review approval decision notice issued on the 14th September 2004. A subsequent appeal against the approval was upheld by the Minister, in accordance with the recommendation of the appointed Planning Inspector, with the appeal refusal decision issued on the 8th March 2005. Copies of the decision notices for this previous planning application have been placed on the file for the current planning application. Planning application 05/01307/B sought approval for the demolition and rebuilding of rear outlet together with renovations and alterations to existing building to form three self contained apartments with adjacent parking on the application site. This previous planning application was initially considered and refused on the 7th October 2004, with the initial refusal decision notice issued on the 13th October 2004. At review on the 16th December 2005 the Planning Committee resolved to confirm the refusal, with the review refusal decision notice issued on the 22nd December 2005. A subsequent appeal against the refusal was dismissed by the Minister, in accordance with the recommendation of the appointed Planning Inspector, with the appeal refusal decision issued on the 16th May 2006. Copies of the decision notices for this previous planning application have been placed on the file for the current planning application. Planning application 06/01578/B sought approval for the renovation and refurbishment to provide two one bedroom apartments and one two bedroom apartment on the application site. This previous planning application was considered and approved on the 8th December 2006, with the approval decision notice issued on the 11th December 2006. A copy of the decision notice for this previous planning application has been placed on the file for the current planning application. Planning application 07/01954/B sought approval for alterations and extensions to dwelling to provide three apartments with associated car parking on the application site. Under the provisions of Article 4(4) of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) Order 2005 the Planning Committee declined to consider this previous planning application on the grounds that it was substantially the same as the proposal refused under previous planning application 05/01307/B. Copies of the relevant elevation drawings for the development proposed by planning applications 04/00923/B, 05/01307/B and 06/01578/B copied onto acetate for comparison purposes have been placed on the file for the current planning application. ### Representations Onchan District Commissioners have no objection to the planning application. The Department of Transport Highways Division do not oppose the planning application. The Department of Transport Drainage Division do not oppose the planning application. The owners and/or occupants of 5 King Edward Road, which directly neighbours the application site, object to the planning application. The grounds for their objection can be summarised as concern regarding the impact of the extent and scale of proposed development on their residential amenity, making reference to the conclusions of previous planning applications. They query the advertising of the planning application, the potential re-development of the property into apartments and the impact of construction work. ### Planning Policy In terms of local plan policy, the application site is within an area recognised as being within predominantly residential use under the Onchan Local Plan. Policy O/RES/P/21 of the written statement (Planning Circular 1/2000) that accompanies the Onchan Local Plan states: "Extensions and alterations to existing residential property will generally not be opposed where such proposals are appropriate in terms of scale, massing, design, appearance and impact on adjacent property." In terms of strategic plan policy, the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2007 contains one policy that is considered specifically material to the assessment of this current planning application. General Policy 2 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; 15 October 2008 - (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." ## Assessment The planning application seeks approval for the alteration and extension of the dwelling, with four parking spaces to the rear. The submitted planning application states that the previous scheme was to provide apartment but the applicant has now decided to renovate and extend the property to remain as a single dwelling. As detailed within the planning history section of this report the application site has been the subject of three previous planning applications that are considered specifically material to the assessment of the current planning application. The impact of the alterations and extensions to the building proposed by those previous planning applications have been previously examined, resulting in two refused planning applications (04/00923/B & 05/01307/B) and one extant planning approval (06/01578/B). In terms of assessing the impact of development proposed by the current planning application it is considered appropriate have regard to the outcome of these previous planning applications. A comparison exercise can be done to see the differences between what was previously proposed and what is currently proposed. To do the relevant elevations from previous drawings have been copied onto acetate to allow them, which allows them to be overlaid on top of the proposed drawings. These acetates have been placed on the file for the current planning application. In respect of comparison it can be seen that the level of proposed extension is significantly less than that proposed by the two previously refused planning applications, but is similar to that proposed by the previously approved planning application. Based on an examination of drawing no. P-04 rev. C of extant planning approval 06/01578/B against drawing no. P/48/1(a) of the current planning application the difference between what was previously approved and what is proposed can be established. In that respect: - The general height of the main body of the proposed extension is approximately 0.1m higher at the ridge height than the previously approved development; - The general width of proposed extension increases by approximately 1.4m from the previously approved development. This increase in width is the result of the extension being the full width of the dwelling and results in a more centralised ridge line that is further away from 5 King Edward Road than as previously approved; - The utility room located at the end of the proposed extension projects approximately 0.6m further than the extent of the previously approved development. The level at which the slope of the utility room joins onto the main body of the proposed extension is approximately 1.3m higher than the level of the respective part of the previously approved development; and - The other changes to from the form of the previously approved development to the proposed development comprise of the addition of a number of rooflights and changes to the fenestration detailing. In terms of the current planning application, whilst drawing no. P/48/1(a) shows a single dwelling containing four bedrooms it should be noted that a study on the second floor is could be readily used as a bedroom, meaning that it would reasonable to say that the current planning application potentially results in a single dwelling containing five bedrooms. Irrespective of that, the potential level of occupancy is lower than the potential seven bedrooms that could be created through the implementation of extant planning approval 06/01578/B. The main issues to consider in the assessment of the planning application are considered to be a) the impact of the proposed development on the amenity of the locality; b) the impact of the proposed development on the residential amenity of the neighbour property; and c) the impact of the proposed development on car parking provision and vehicular access arrangements. In respect of a) the scale, form and design of the proposed development is considered to be in keeping with the general locality. It is pertinent to note that the proposed development is similar in scale, form and design to that previously approved under 06/01578/B. Furthermore, whilst not necessarily a material reason to approve something, the existing building is currently in a poor state of repair and renovation with an acceptable scheme would be visually beneficial to the area. In respect of b) it has already been established that the extent and form of the proposed extension is similar to that permitted under approved planning application 06/01578/B. The impact of that extension on the residential amenity of neighbouring property was concluded to be acceptable. As there have been no changes in material planning considerations since that approval was granted it is reasonable to conclude that planning approval would be granted if the planning application would to be considered now. In terms of the impact of the proposed development it is therefore appropriate to assess whether the differences between what has been 15 October 2008 previously approved and what is now proposed result in unacceptable harm to residential amenity. It is considered that the differences are relatively modest in areas that would potentially affect 5 King Edward Road. On that basis it is concluded that the impact on the residential amenity of neighbouring property is acceptable. In respect of c) the planning application indicates that the property has parking provision for four cars to the rear of the site. This situation and the means of access are similar to the existing situation. The level of car parking provision is appropriate for the development proposed by the planning application. This assessment addresses the material planning concerns of the owner and/or occupant of 5 King Edward Road. There are a number of other issues raised within their representation that are not material planning considerations and therefore cannot be taken into account in the assessment of a planning application. The impact of construction work is not material as this is a temporary issue and potentially civil matter. It is not appropriate to assess a development on the basis of what may or may not be applied for in the future, as if something constitutes development it will require planning approval and will be assessed at that time. The financial implications or constraints of a development are matter for the applicant not the Planning Authority. In conclusion, the proposal is considered to be an acceptable form of development and it is recommended that the planning application be approved. ## PARTY STATUS It is considered that the following parties that made representations to the planning application meet the criteria of Government Circular 1/06 and should be afforded interested party status: Onchan District Commissioners; The Department of Transport Highways Division; The Department of Transport Drainage Division; and The owners and/or occupants of 5 King Edward Road. Recommendation Recommended Decision: Permitted Date of Recommendation: 15.10.2008 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 drawing no. P/48/1(a) date stamped the 18th July 2008. I confirm that this decision accords with Government Circular No 44/05 (Delegation of Functions to Director of Planning and Building Control) Decision Made : Permitted Date : 78/1/08 Signed : M. I. McCauley Director of Planning and Building Control 15 October 2008 08/01409/B Page 4 of 4 --- *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/85885-braddan-3-king-extension/documents/1568505*