Loading document...
Application No.: 16/00533/B Applicant: Mrs Janine Dale Proposal: Creation of a rear terrace to provide a patio area Site Address: 8 Glen Maye Park Glen Maye Isle Of Man IM5 3AX Case Officer : Mr Edmond Riley Photo Taken: 16.06.2016 Site Visit: 16.06.2016 Expected Decision Level: Officer Delegation
1.0 THE APPLICATION SITE - 1.1 The application site is the residential curtilage of 8 Glen Maye Park, a two-storey dwelling roughly 10 years of age and situated at the end of a cul-de-sac of dwellings all sharing a similar architectural language. - 1.2 Within the rear garden are two areas of decking - one adjacent the rear elevation and another much further down and at the northwesternmost extent. The garden, which slopes downwards to the west, is well-tended and benefits from various sculpted hedging plants. - 1.3 The dwelling is sited between two neighbouring dwellings of similar form and mass, but both of which are angled away: each faces onto the turning circle forming the end of the cul-de-sac. To the rear the land falls steeply away - including within the gardens - and although there are some mature and semi-mature trees here there remain long-distance views over the countryside to the west.
2.0 THE PROPOSAL - 2.1 Full planning approval is sought for the grading of some of the garden land to provide a clear, stepped definition between the 'upper' garden and 'lower' garden. As part of the works, a new "BBQ / Sitting Area" would be created as an addition to the existing decked area adjacent the dwelling. A pair of retaining walls are shown in the submitted section drawing, each of which would be timber-clad, and which would provide the stepping down described above. Concrete slabs would be lain between these, and the walls would be 1.15m and 1.75m at the highest, which would reflect to some degree the change in levels proposed across the site, although without a full survey (existing and proposed) it is difficult to be certain about this. As they are retaining walls, this much of each will be visible when viewed from the west, though with the land grading around the westernmost, the amount visible will not be consistent. - 2.2 All of the works are identified as forming part of the application, and so all will be assessed, but it is considered that only the engineering works to provide the flattened area actually require the submission of an application with the remainder either not comprising development or benefitting from permitted development rights (the concrete slabs and walls respectively).
3.1 Planning approval was granted for the erection of a porch on front and installation of patio doors to replace existing window on rear elevation under PA 05/00003/B; both have been undertaken. - 3.2 At present undetermined, PA 16/00572/B also seeks approval for the erection of a rear extension.
4.0 THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN - 4.1 As the site falls within an area zoned as Proposed Residential on the 1982 Development Plan (with the land to the west identified as an Area of High Landscape Value), it is considered appropriate to assess the proposal against General Policy 2 of the Strategic Plan. The Strategic Plan does not have any policies directly relating to engineering or landscaping works with respect to residential dwellings.
5.0 REPRESENTATIONS - 5.1 Highway Services of the DoI identified the proposal as having no highway implications on 27.05.2016 and Patrick Parish Commissioners have no objection (21.06.16).
6.0 ASSESSMENT - 6.1 The main issue from the proposal is considered to be the effect the use of the newly flattened area would have on neighbouring living conditions. The physical works proposed are unobjectionable in themselves and though potentially visible from further afield would be appropriate for an edge-of-village garden. Additional hardstanding is perhaps not to be encouraged in view of the other areas already existing, but the varied and fairly large garden is dominated by the trees and shrubbery and this would not alter significantly under the proposal. - 6.2 The neighbouring dwellings are well-screened from the site by the existing boundary treatment and there are no windows that face directly towards the proposed patio area as would be the case were the dwellings sat in a straight line alongside one another. In this case, however, it is unlikely that the proposed patio could even be seen from inside these dwellings. - 6.3 While there is sometimes cause for concern in respect of how a patio area might come to be used - late-night parties, for example - and how this would affect neighbours in terms of noise / disturbance, it is always to be remembered that gardens can already be used for this purpose and, while there is more chance of a garden being so used when a 'formal' area is laid out as proposed here, it is to be noted that the existing decking areas already provide for this potential and so an additional area of hardstanding would not materially alter the existing situation in this regard.
7.0 RECOMMENDATION - 7.1 In view of the above, it is considered that the proposal is acceptable from the points of view of both visual amenity and residential amenity and, accordingly, is recommended for approval.
8.0 INTERESTED PERSON STATUS - 8.1 By virtue of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) (No 2) Order 2013, the following persons are automatically interested persons:
Recommendation Recommended Decision: Permitted Date of Recommendation: 21.06.2016 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 14 of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) (No2) Order 2013 and to avoid the accumulation of unimplemented planning approvals.
The development hereby approved relates to Drawing 1, Drawing 2, Drawing 3, Drawing 5 and Drawing 6, all date-stamped as having been received 11th May 2016.
I can confirm that this decision has been made by a Senior Planning Officer in accordance with the authority afforded to that Officer by the appropriate DEFA Delegation.
Decision Made : Permitted Date: 23.06.2016 Determining officer
Signed : S CORLETT Sarah Corlett Senior Planning Officer
Copyright in submitted documents remains with their authors. Request removal
