Loading document...
Application No.: 20/00456/B Applicant: Manx Utilities Authority Proposal: Installation of a heat pump Site Address: Seabourne Mount Morrison Peel Isle Of Man IM5 1PN Planning Officer: Miss Lucy Kinrade Expected Decision Level: Officer Delegation Recommended Decision: Refused Date of Recommendation: 08.07.2020 _________________________________________________________________ Reasons for Refusal R : Reasons for Refusal O : Notes attached to reasons R 1. There is insufficient information to fully determine whether the proposal would have an acceptable impact on neighbouring amenity and therefore by reason of the noise level expected and position in close proximity to neighbouring dwellings is considered to fail GP2 (g) of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016.
_______________________________________________________________ Interested Person Status – Additional Persons None _____________________________________________________________________________ Officer’s Report THE APPLICATION SITE
1.1 The application site is Seaborne, Mount Morrison an existing three storey terraced dwelling located in the northern side of Peel and with front facing views over the green and towards Peel Bay and the old swimming pool. - 1.2 Like each of its neighbours the application dwelling has a rear outlet and rear yard/garden area connecting with a rear lane which also serves a number of dwellings fronting Peveril Road. THE PROPOSAL
2.1 Proposed is the installation of an air source heat pump at ground floor level of the rear outlet. The proposed unit is to be 1020mm wide x 1350mm high and 360mm deep.
2.2 Noise levels provided by the product specification submitted for the application indicate that the noise emitted by the unit (at normal heating levels and tested to British Standards) would have:
3.1 There have been no previous applications considered material to the assessment of this specific application. PLANNING POLICY - 4.1 The site is identified as being 'Residential' on the Peel Local Plan and is not within the Conservation Area. Given the nature of the proposal it's relevant to consider the following policies and paragraphs from the IOM Strategic Plan 2016:
4.2 General Policy 2 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016 is therefore relevant:
"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:
4.3 Paragraph 12.2.8:
"The Department is fully supportive of the need to secure greater energy efficiency in new and existing development and has recently introduced additional energy efficiency requirements in the Building Regulations 2003. Energy efficiency and the use of renewable energy sources are covered in General Policy 2(m) of the Building Regulations. At the same time the Department recognizes that renewable energy sources can have adverse environmental impacts. The idea of a wind turbine Installation is currently being investigated and considered by the Manx Electricity Authority. Any feasible site is likely to be exposed and have considerable visual impact. There may also be other impacts such as noise. On a smaller scale, the popularity of domestic wind turbines has been increasing in recent years in response to rising energy prices and increasing awareness of climate change. Planning applications for domestic wind turbines are unlikely to require the submission of an Environmental Impact Assessment. The Department will assess any proposals for wind turbine installations by weighing the benefits of using such renewable energy sources against the environmental impact arising in any particular site. It is likely that the visual impact would be less detrimental on a coastal site than on a rural or upland one. Accordingly:
4.4 Energy Policy 4:
"Development involving alternative sources of energy supply, including wind, water and tide power, and the use of solar panels, will be judged against the environmental objectives and policies set out in this Plan. Installations involving wind, water and tide power will require the submission of an EIA.
REPRESENTATIONS Copies of representations received can be viewed on the Government's website. This report contains summaries only.
5.1 Peel Town Commissioners - had not commented as of 08/07/2020.
5.2 Department of Infrastructure (DOI) Highways Division - NHI (27/05/2020) ASSESSMENT - 6.1 The proposal will accord with GP2(n) in respect of non-renewable energy consumption and the general support in the Strategic Plan for the installation of renewable energy installations set out in Energy Policy 4, the application is not required to provide an EIA. The apparatus is modest in size and is to be located at ground floor and to the rear of the dwelling, views from a public perspective from the main highway will be limited and visual impact from neighbouring dwellings will likely be low. Visually the proposal is not to affect the character or appearance of the area and in this respect accords with GP2(b,c,g).
6.2 In terms of noise impact, the sound pressure level of the pump is expected to be between 53-67.5 dBA. For reference, 50dB is similar to the noise generated by light traffic, 60dB that of normal conversation or an air conditioning unit. During the daytime, few people are annoyed by activities with LAeq levels below 55 dB, however sound pressure levels during the evening and night should be 5-10 dB lower than during the day.
6.3 An air source heat pump could be a noise nuisance, particularly at night when background noise levels can be lower. The World Health Organisation Guidelines for Community Noise states that both continuous and intermittent noise leads to sleep disturbance and the more intense the background noise, the more disturbing is its effect on sleep. Measurable effects on sleep start at background noise levels around 30 dB LAeq and where noise is continuous, the equivalent sound pressure level should not exceed 30 dBA indoors, if negative effects on sleep are to be avoided. - 6.4 In dwellings, the critical effects of noise are on sleep, annoyance and speech interference. To avoid sleep disturbance, indoor guideline values for bedrooms are 30 dB LAeq for continuous noise and 45 dB LAmax for single sound events, although this can be dependent on the nature of the noise source. When the noise is composed of a large proportion of lowfrequency sounds (e.g. from ventilation systems) this can disturb rest and sleep even at low sound pressure levels. - 6.5 To protect the majority of people from being seriously annoyed at night, sound pressure levels at the outside façades of the living spaces should not exceed 45 dB LAeq and 60 dB LAmax, so that people may sleep with bedroom windows open (the noise reduction from outside to inside with the window partly open is assumed to be around 15 dB). - 6.6 The application dwelling is situated in a small terrace and amongst a small cluster of surrounding dwellings. At present there is no guidance or standards within IOM Legislation that cover noise levels matters from equipment such as air source heat pumps (ASHP). In seeking to better understand what noise levels may be considered tolerable standards, guidance has been sought from other jurisdictions. While some still require planning applications for ASHP, England and Scotland have introduced permitted development for installation subject to a number of conditions including positioning, size and noise levels, and in order to achieve permitted development status the installation must comply with all the conditions including the MCS020 standard, which requires a noise limit below 42 dB(A). - 6.7 The proposed ASHP has a:
Both figures are higher than the tolerable level referred to in UK Legislation. Between the ASHP and the applicants own bedroom window (nearest on end gable) would be approx. 4m away.
Inverse Square Law indicates that doubling the distance from the source will reduce sound pressure levels by 6dB.
6.8 Assuming that glazing further reduces noise by 15dB, the sound pressure level would be 36dB(A) and sound power 40.5dB(A). While it would be the applicants own decision as whether they wish to jeopardise their own sleeping conditions this should not come at detriment to neighbouring living or sleeping conditions. - 6.9 The applicant has not provided any information for the neighbouring elevations as to understand the distance between them and the consequential noise impacts upon them (particularly bedroom windows), and the application contains no other information as to demonstrate that there would be no adverse noise impacts on neighbouring amenity or sleeping conditions. It is also unknown what the existing boundary treatment is between the properties and whether this would to a degree help to buffer noise expected from the unit.
7.1 To protect the amenity of neighbouring residential properties, it is important for the planning system to assess and control the noise emitted from any domestic mechanical plant including ASHPs. A noise level of 42bD(A) is considered to be a tolerable sound pressure from a single unit, and noise levels for a reasonably comfortable night's sleep should remain 30dB or lower measured inside a room. There is no information to demonstrate that the proposed unit would not have an adverse impact on neighbouring amenity, therefore by reason of its higher noise level and its position with a close knit terrace with residential uses in close proximity the proposed ASHP is not considered to be acceptable and fails General Policy 2 (g) in respect of adverse noise impact. INTERESTED PERSON STATUS - 8.1 By virtue of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) Order 2019, the following persons are automatically interested persons:
8.2 The decision maker must determine:
8.3 The Department of Environment Food and Agriculture is responsible for the determination of planning applications. As a result, where officers within the Department make comments in a professional capacity they cannot 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.
Decision Made : Refused Date: 18.09.2020 Determining officer
Signed : S CORLETT Sarah Corlett 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
