Loading document...
Application No.: 24/91280/B Applicant: Mr & Mrs Crellin Proposal: Erection of a rear extension with roof terrace, creation of temporary access and alteration to existing multi-level garden Site Address: Shearwater Andreas Road Dhoor Ramsey Isle Of Man IM7 4EB Planning Officer: Peiran Shen Expected Decision Level: Officer Delegation Recommended Decision: Permitted Date of Recommendation: 01.05.2025 _________________________________________________________________
C : Conditions for approval N : Notes attached to conditions
Reason: To comply with Article 26 of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) Order 2019 and to avoid the accumulation of unimplemented planning approvals.
Any trees or plants indicated on the approved scheme which, within a period of five years from the date of planting, die, are removed or become seriously damaged or diseased shall be replaced during the next planting season with other trees or plants of a species and size to be first approved in writing by the Department.
Reason: to ensure the access is temporary and in the interest of preserving the character of the countryside.
Reason: Ensure the access is temporary and in the interest of preserving the character of the countryside.
Reason: The approval is for an extension and not a new house or ancillary accommodation to an existing house in the countryside.
The proposed extension does not harm the character of the existing building and there is no other adverse impact from the proposal. It is considered to comply with General Policy 2, General Policy 3, Environment Policy 1 and Housing Policy 16 of the Strategic Plan.
This approval relates to the documents, design and access statement and drawing no. 001, 002, 003, 050. 100 Rev C, 300, Rev B, which have all been received on 12th November 2024.
_________________________________________________________________ Right to Appeal
It is recommended that the following organisations should NOT be given the Right to Appeal: Lezayre Parish Commisioners - No objection Department of Infrastructure - No objection
_________________________________________________________________ Officer’s Report
1.0 THE SITE - 1.1 The site is Shearwater, Andreas Road, Dhoor, Lezayre, a detached house located on the southwest of Andreas Road, closer to its south end. There is a private lane on the northwest of the house leading onto Andreas Road. Site and House - 1.2 The site is lower than the road and its southwest neighbouring property. There are hedges planted around the boundary beside the front elevation. - 1.3 The house sits facing northeast (the road). It is set back from the road with a driveway and a recessed gate on the front boundary. The southwest side of the site rises gradually in level. - 1.4 The house is a split-level two-storey side-gabled house, with the southeast side being single-storey and on a higher level than the other half. It consists of a hipped roof main house, a two-storey pitched-roof rear extension on the northwest side and a mono-pitched-roof extension on the southeast side of the main house. - 1.5 The southeast side of the garden is stepped up towards the neighbouring property.
2.0 THE PROPOSAL - 2.1 The proposal is to erect a two-storey flat-roof rear extension with a roof terrace. The existing levelled rear garden is adjusted to make space for the extension. - 2.2 The proposal also includes replacing an existing garage door with a casement window and creating a new window on the ground floor of the northwest elevation. - 2.3 The proposal also includes a temporary access on the private lane during the extension construction.
3.0 PLANNING HISTORY - 3.1 There is no previous application considered materially relevant to this application.
4.0 PLANNING POLICY Site Specific - 4.1 The site is not within an area designated for any development in the 1982 Development Plan, meaning it is considered part of the countryside. Strategic Policy - 4.2 The Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016 (IOMSP) contains the following policies that are considered materially relevant to the assessment of this current planning application:
4.3 The Isle of Man Strategic Plan has no assumption in favour of new development. In decision-making, approval should usually not be granted where a planning application conflicts with the Plan. - 4.4 Spatial Policy 5 states that developments should only occur in defined settlements unless they comply with exceptions in General Policy 3. - 4.5 Environment Policy 1 echoes Spatial Policy 5. - 4.6 Housing Policy 16 states: "The extension of non-traditional dwellings or those of poor or inappropriate form will not generally be permitted where this would increase the impact of the building as viewed by the public."
4.7 General Policy 2 (b) (c) and (g) set out design requirements for development, of which they should respect the character of the site itself and its immediate and not-so-immediate surroundings. - 4.8 General Policy 2 (g) and (h) set out that amenities enjoyed by the site and the site around it should be protected or preserved. - 4.9 General Policy 2 (h) and (i) also sets out that the proposal should satisfy the safety, efficiency and accessibility requirements, including parking provision, of all highway users whenever possible. PPS and NPD
4.11 No planning policy statement or national policy directive is considered materially relevant to this application. - 5.0 OTHER MATERIAL CONSIDERATIONS Strategy and Guidance
5.1 There is no strategy or guidance considered materially relevant to this application. 6.0 REPRESENTATIONS This section is a summary. The original texts of the consultations and comments received are available on the Planning Application Search on the government website.
6.1 Lezayre Parish Commissioners has no objection to this application (10.03.2025).
6.2 DoI Highway Services states there is no highway interest in this application (03.12.2024). - 6.3 DEFA Ecosystem Policy Officer does not object to this application (20.12.2024) on the condition that there should be replacement planting. - 6.4 DEFA Forestry states this application has no forestry interest (13.03.2025). - 6.5 Two neighbouring properties were notified by letter. No comment has been received.
7.1 Housing Policy 16 states the principle of such extension is acceptable depending on its design. So, the proposal is considered to be principally acceptable. Elements of Assessments
7.2 The primary considerations, besides the principle, are the impact of the proposal on:
Design of the House itself
7.3 The house is of modern style, and the extension appears modern in its cuboid form. It has a larger mass than the existing rear extension but still appears subordinate to the main dwelling. Since its finishing matches that of the existing house, it is not considered to stand out from the existing design of the house. The character of the Streetscene and the Area - 7.4 The proposed is next to a public footpath/right of way and is therefore considered visible. There are tall hedges around the site and trees on both sides of the public footpath. They all shield the house and the extension from direct view most of the time. Along the public
footpath, the extension will be viewed against the existing house in its background. With matching finishes, the extension would not stand out from its surroundings. Therefore, the extension is not considered to increase the impact of the building as viewed by the public.
Neighbouring Amenities
7.5 The proposed extension, including the roof terrace, is at a lower level than the neighbouring property on its east, even though they are only approx. 8.5m apart. The main house shields the extension from the neighbouring property to its north. Therefore, the proposed extension is considered to have no additional overbearing, overshadowing or overlooking impact. Highway Safety - 7.6 As Highway Services does not oppose this application, it is considered that the proposal would have a neutral impact on road safety or traffic flows on the local highways. Therefore, its highway impact is considered acceptable. Trees - 7.7 The proposal includes the removal of trees. It is noted that Forestry have not objected. Given that the access is temporary, the removed trees should be conditioned to be replanted.
8.1 The proposed extension does not harm the character of the existing building, and there is no other adverse impact from the proposal. Therefore, the proposal is considered to comply with General Policy 2, General Policy 3, Environment Policy 1 and Housing Policy 16 of the Strategic Plan and is recommended for an approval. - 9.0 RIGHT TO APPEAL AND RIGHT TO GIVE EVIDENCE
9.1 The Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) Order 2019 sets out the process for determining planning applications (including appeals). It sets out a Right to Appeal (i.e. to submit an appeal against a planning decision) and a Right to Give Evidence at Appeals (i.e. to participate in an appeal if one is submitted).
9.2 Article A10 sets out that the right to appeal is available to:
9.3 Article 8(2)(a) requires that in determining an application, the Department must decide who has a right to appeal, in accordance with the criteria set out in article A10. - 9.4 The Order automatically affords the Right to Give Evidence to the following (no determination is required):
9.5 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 the Right to Appeal.
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 and that in making this decision the Officer has agreed the recommendation in relation to who should be afforded interested person status, and/or rights to appeal.
Decision Made : Permitted Date : 09.05.2025 Determining Officer
Signed : S BUTLER Stephen Butler Head of Development Management
Customer note This copy of the officer report reflects the content of the office copy and has been produced in this form for the benefit of our online service/ customers and archive record.
Copyright in submitted documents remains with their authors. Request removal
