Officer Report

Application No.: 17/01075/B Applicant: Mr Robin Radcliffe Proposal: Erection of single storey extension to rear of property Site Address: 18 Fairway Drive Ramsey Isle Of Man IM8 2BB Case Officer : Mr Edmond Riley Photo Taken: 22.11.2017 Site Visit: 22.11.2017 Expected Decision Level: Officer Delegation Recommended Decision: Permitted Date of Recommendation: 22.11.2017 _________________________________________________________________

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.

Plans/Drawings/Information;

The development hereby approved relates to Drawings 17/1233/1 (date-stamped as having been received 11th October 2017) and 17/1233/2 Rev A (date-stamped as having been received 30th October 2017).

_______________________________________________________________ Interested Person Status – Additional Persons

None. _____________________________________________________________________________

Officer’s Report

1.0 THE APPLICATION SITE - 1.1 The application site is the residential curtilage of 18 Fairways Drive, Ramsey, which is a detached bungalow with shallow-pitched roofs and a flat-roofed extension to the rear. This extension is sited alongside an existing eaves line, but stops short of the adjacent gable wall. While much of Fairways Drive is formed of dwellings sweeping in a roughly

• southwest/northeast arc, the application site is situated on a cul-de-sac situated off the main part of the highway.
• 1.2 The dwelling at no.18 is situated between two dwellings: one to the northwest (no.20) and one to the southeast on the cul-de-sac (no.16), but its garden is long such that it borders three of the dwellings that front onto the main part of Fairways Drive to the northwest (the aforementioned no.20, plus nos.22 and 24).
• 1.3 There is a mixture of architectural forms in the area, but the language is fairly consistent inasmuch as dashed render, brown concrete ridge tiles and the single storey form are predominant. Some of the dwellings have dormer windows of varying forms as well.

2.0 DESCRIPTION OF THE APPLICATION - 2.1 Full planning approval is sought for the erection of a single storey extension to the rear elevation of the dwelling. This would be added to the existing flat-roofed extension and would be sited in front of the adjacent gable wall: its two external elevations would follow exactly those of the existing sunroom extension and the side wall of the dwelling itself. - 2.2 The extension would have a pitched roof, which was sought by officers in replacement of the initial submission, which showed a flat roof. The pitch would follow that of the existing dwelling, and in order to achieve this some of the extension would still have a flat roof. - 2.3 There would be three new windows, each set in the southwest-facing elevation (i.e. into the rear garden, to the southwest). The windows would be set centrally within the new walling but, owing to the arrangement of the pitched roof eaves and the new flat-roofed element, one of the windows would sit partly below the pitched element and partly below the flat-roofed element. - 2.4 The amended drawing was circulated for information.

3.0 PLANNING HISTORY - 3.1 The application site has not been the subject of previous applications judged to be of particular material relevance to the assessment of the current proposal.

4.0 PLANNING POLICY - 4.1 The site is zoned as Predominantly Residential on the Ramsey Local Plan, meaning the application falls to be assessed against the relevant parts of General Policy 2 as well as Environment Policy 35 of the Strategic Plan.

5.0 REPRESENTATIONS - 5.1 Highway Services of the DoI stated that the application had no highway safety implications on 24.10.2017, while Ramsey Town Commissioners offered no objection in a letter received 20.11.2017.

6.0 ASSESSMENT - 6.1 The key issues here are the effect the extension would have on the character and appearance on the dwelling, and also the effect it would have on neighbouring living conditions. - 6.2 The existing dwelling is a bungalow that has a flat-roofed extension at the rear. The proposed additional extension would help reduce the visual impact of the existing flat-roofed extension by virtue of the former's scale and position relative to the latter. - 6.3 The relationship between the pitch and flat roof would be awkward in terms of how this would sit above one of the proposed windows. However, this is considered a minor concern relative to the overall design improvement that the pitched roof extension would have.

6.4 As proposed the new side elevation would be almost adjacent the boundary of 18 and 22 Fairway Drive. It is noted that there would be a distance of 18.5m between the new and existing building fabric under the development proposed, and it is further noted that the extension would not bring the application site dwelling materially closer to no.22. There is robust boundary treatment in the form of fencing and vegetation around the rear garden. - 6.5 On this basis, and noting also the lack of windows proposed to face no.22 (which, it should be remembered, will sit in place of the current sun room doors facing northwest), it is judged that the extension proposed would have a neutral effect on the living conditions at no.22. It is not considered that the extension would affect the amenity of either nos.16 or 20.

7.0 CONCLUSION - 7.1 In view of the above, it is concluded that the extension proposed complies with the 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:

• (a) The applicant, or if there is one, the applicant's agent;
• (b) The owner and the occupier of any land that is the subject of the application or any other person in whose interest the land becomes vested;
• (c) Any Government Department that has made written submissions relating to planning considerations with respect to the application that the Department considers material;
• (d) Highway Services Division of Department of Infrastructure, and
• (e) The local authority in whose district the land the subject of the application is situated.

8.2 The decision-maker must determine:

• o whether any other comments from Government Departments (other than the Department of Infrastructure Highway Services Division) are material, and
• o whether there are other persons to those listed in Article 6(4) who should be given Interested Person Status.

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

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.