Loading document...
Application No.: 17/01027/B Applicant: Mr & Mrs Paul Richardson Proposal: Erection of single storey extension to rear of property Site Address: 34 Bellevue Park Peel Isle Of Man IM5 1UE Case Officer : Mr Edmond Riley Photo Taken: 15.11.2017 Site Visit: 15.11.2017 Expected Decision Level: Officer Delegation Recommended Decision: Permitted Date of Recommendation: 20.11.2017 _________________________________________________________________
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 Drawing PR/1/17, date-stamped as having been received 29th September 2017. _______________________________________________________________ Interested Person Status – Additional Persons None. _____________________________________________________________________________
1.0 THE APPLICATION SITE - 1.1 The application site is the residential curtilage of 34 Bellevue Park, Peel, which is a semi-detached bungalow sited on the northeast of a residential cul-de-sac. To the rear, and set back from the front building line, of the dwelling is a flat-roofed garage. This runs along the boundary with the adjacent (un-attached) no.33 to the southeast.
1.2 Beyond the site to the northeast are industrial uses.
2.0 DESCRIPTION OF THE APPLICATION - 2.1 Full planning approval is sought for the erection of an extension at the rear of the dwelling and garage. The garage would be extended rearward by just over 2m and at the same width to provide a utility room, while there would also be a new dining room formed by an extension attached to this, which project slightly less than the rearward-most part of the garage extension. - 2.2 All this development would retain the flat-roofed nature of the garage, while the walls would be finished in dashed render to match the dwelling. There would be a new set of French doors facing northwest in the dining room extension, which would replace an existing door that provides access from the garage to the garden. The garage extension would have a new garden access door and window in its rear elevation, while there would be a single picture window in the dining room extension rear elevation. The wall running along the boundary with the adjacent no.33 would be fully formed of masonry.
3.0 PLANNING HISTORY - 3.1 The site has not been the subject of any applications considered to be of material relevance to the assessment of the current application.
4.0 PLANNING POLICY - 4.1 The site lies within a Predominantly Residential zoning on the Peel Local Plan, and outwith the town's Conservation Area. Accordingly, the proposal falls to be assessed against General Policy 2, Transport Policy 7 / Appendix 7 and paragraph 8.12.1 of the Strategic Plan.
5.0 REPRESENTATIONS - 5.1 Highway Services of the DoI stated that there were no highways' implications on 19th October 2017, while Peel Town Commissioners offered no objection in an email dated 12th October 2017.
6.0 ASSESSMENT - 6.1 None of the extension proposed will be visible from public positions. This is an important point since the extension proposed is proportionally quite large, and flat roofed extensions are rarely ideal from an aesthetic or maintenance point of view. The fact that built development cannot be seen is not, of course, reason enough to approve it. The fundamental policy tests still apply. - 6.2 However, in this case, the proportional increase of the dwelling is not judged to be so significant as to warrant the application's refusal. Extended bungalows rearwards can be difficult to do in a manner that reflects the built form, since roof pitches tend to be shallow. In this case, the extension would not able to accommodate a roof pitch to match the existing dwelling, and were an alternative pitch added this could result in a greater overall massing to an even greater detriment to the existing dwelling. There is concern that further proposed extensions may be piecemeal in their approach, much like this, leading to something of a sprawling bungalow, but this is a hypothetical concern that can be addressed at such time as is necessary, and on its own merits at that point. - 6.3 This is a balanced conclusion, though, and were the extension proposed any larger it is quite possible an amended design would have been sought or the application recommended for refusal. It is noted, though, that the estate is not within Peel's Conservation Area. - 6.4 There will be no unduly harmful impact on neighbouring amenity levels. The only likely neighbour to be affected is the detached no.33 to the southeast, the issue in this case being the loss of light of possible overbearing nature of the extension proposed on the enjoyment of that dwelling and its garden. However, there is already a fairly robust boundary treatment
between these dwellings, and the additional mass of the proposed extension will not significantly materially alter the current relationship between the dwellings. It is also to be borne in mind that, although there are industrial uses to the rear, the immediate land to the northeast is actually open and laid to grass, meaning that any feeling of being 'hemmed in' will be less severe than might be the case were the development in the area to be of a greater density.
7.0 CONCLUSION - 7.1 The application is concluded to comply with the relevant planning 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 : 23.11.2017 Determining officer
Signed : S BUTLER Stephen Butler Head of Development Management
Copyright in submitted documents remains with their authors. Request removal
