Loading document...
Application No.: 17/01131/B Applicant: Mr Clive Kelly & Mrs Paula Kelly Proposal: Alterations and additions to property Site Address: Ballashamrock Cottage Port Soderick Glen Port Soderick Isle of Man IM4 1BE Case Officer : Mr Edmond Riley Expected Decision Level: Officer Delegation Recommended Decision: Permitted Date of Recommendation: 29.11.2017 _________________________________________________________________
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 Drawings 1, 2, 3 and 4, all date-stamped as having been received 30th October 2017. _______________________________________________________________ Interested Person Status – Additional Persons None. _____________________________________________________________________________
1.0 THE APPLICATION SITE - 1.1 The application site is the residential curtilage of a detached bungalow known as Ballashamrock Cottage. The dwelling has an L-shaped footprint to which a conservatory has been attached externally to the 90-degree corner of the 'L', and is located adjacent another
dwelling but in an otherwise fairly isolated part of Port Soderick. It is visible from the B23 highway at distance, but is well-screened the further south one drives.
2.0 DESCRIPTION OF THE APPLICATION - 2.1 Full planning approval is sought for the removal of the existing conservatory and its replacement with a sun lounge measuring 5.8m by 6.1m (measured externally). The sun lounge would have a pitched roof that would sit alongside nearly half of one roof plane on the existing dwelling, the pitch of which forms a gable, but would be set back slightly from the other roof plane. - 2.2 Aside from a dwarf wall, likely formed of masonry and painted render to match the existing dwelling, and also the slate-like roof, the extension would be entirely glazed. - 2.3 Also proposed as part of the above is the removal of one of the dwelling's chimney stacks, atop the gable against which the proposed extension would sit.
3.0 PLANNING HISTORY - 3.1 The site has not been the subject of applications considered to be materially relevant to the assessment of the current proposal.
4.0 THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN - 4.1 The site lies within an area not zoned for any particular development on the Braddan Local Plan. Therefore, the application falls to be assessed against Environment Policies 1 and 2 and Housing Policies 15 and 16 of the Strategic Plan. While the dwelling is not traditional, it is also not considered to be of especially poor or inappropriate form, meaning both the latter policies are relevant. General Policy 2 also applies.
5.0 REPRESENTATIONS - 5.1 Highway Services indicate that they have no interest in the application (21.11.17). - 5.2 Braddan Parish COmmissioners indicate that they do not opppose the application (06.11.17).
6.0 ASSESSMENT - 6.1 The existing conservatory is considered to be the least successful element of the existing dwelling. It is like many such extensions, but in this case is particularly unfortunate as it projects prominently towards the highway, and its finish and flat-roofed nature conflict with the neat proportions of the bungalow. - 6.2 That which is proposed in its place, while larger, is considered well-judged. The setback and set-down of the extension when seen against one of the dwelling's existing walls will help define a certain subordination. While the extension would result in the removal of the Lshaped footprint, this is not in itself a particular cause for concern as the dwelling is not wholly traditional. In any case, the new extension would respect the form, proportion and appearance of the existing dwelling. While larger than the existing conservatory, the proposed extension is likely to decrease the dwelling's prominence when viewed from public positions owing to the more appropriate massing / architectural detail. A set-back on both sides of the gable wall may have been preferred, but this is not a significant concern. - 6.3 The loss of the chimney stack, too, is perhaps a trifle regrettable, but the existing dwelling would retain another chimney and, in this case, the existing chimney adds a feature of interest to a prominent gable wall: the proposed extension would also achieve this. No objection to the loss of the stack is therefore raised.
7.1 It is concluded that the development proposed complies with the five identified relevant Development Plan policies.
8.0 INTERESTED PERSON STATUS - 8.1 By virtue of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) (No 2) Order 2013 Article 6(4), the following persons are automatically interested persons:
8.2 The decision-maker must determine:
I can confirm that this decision has been made by the Head of Development Management in accordance with the authority afforded to that Officer by the appropriate DEFA Delegation.
Decision Made : Permitted Date : 29.11.2017 Determining officer
Signed : S BUTLER Stephen Butler Head of Development Management
Copyright in submitted documents remains with their authors. Request removal
