Loading document...
Application No.: 25/90200/B Applicant: Mr Nigel Heaton Proposal: Erection of single storey extension to the rear of the existing dwelling house and internal alterations Site Address: 6 Orry Lane Peel Isle Of Man IM5 1NN Senior Planning Officer: Jason Singleton 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.
N . Factors that can affect the impact of smoke on neighbouring premises include: Fuel quality - wet/ damp wood produces more smoke than well-seasoned/dried wood. The burning of rubbish on a fire, particularly plastics, produces particularly pungent smoke and should generally be avoided.
Insufficient airflow - this can cause fuel to smoulder and produce excessive smoke. Cowls fitted to the termination of a flue.
The installation of solid fuel stoves/burners is not a necessity in properties with modern heating systems.
Where complaints are received concerning a smoke nuisance the matter could be investigated and, where complaints are found to be justified, formal action taken requiring the abatement of the nuisance.
This application has been recommended for approval for the following reason. The proposed development has been designed to comply with Environmental Policy 35 and General Policy 2 of the Strategic Plan 2016.
This decision relates to drawings and supporting information received on 1 March 2025, referenced;
_________________________________________________________________ Right to Appeal It is recommended that the following organisations should NOT be given the Right to Appeal: DoI - Highways Services - No objection _________________________________________________________________ Officer’s Report
1.0 THE SITE - 1.1 The application site is the curtilage of No.6 Orry Lane, Peel. The property is located to the west of the roadway which links from Michael Street to the south and Peel promenade to the north. - 1.2 The property appears as three stories high with a pitched tiled roof and bookended with chimney stacks. The property whilst stands alone is attached to 2.4m high painted Manx stone masonry wall to the south. To the north is a lane way which gives access to the rears and side gate way. - 1.3 The property has regular fenestration detailing with five portrait shaped windows to each of the upper floors and the ground floor has a doorway in the central and flanked by two other windows to each side, with small basement windows below. - 1.4 To the rear of the property is a two story extension that extends out into the rear yard area and to this is attached a lean to extension. The rear yard area hear is enclosed on all sides with 3.0m+ high masonry walls.
2.0 THE PROPOSAL - 2.1 The application seeks to renovate the property internally and to the rear is proposed the erection of a single story extension.
2.2 The scope of works would see to the front elevation the replacement of the existing windows (14 in total) with light grey timber or aluminium composite framed, double glazed, traditional sliding sash units with external horns ( each window is 1.4m x 0.8m). The windows to the side (north) elevation (800mm wide but varies in length) would be light grey timber or aluminium composite framed, double glazed, casement units. - 2.3 The existing roof would be replaced in dark blue/grey natural roof slates. With powder coated aluminium gutters, fascia boards and soffits. - 2.4 To the rear elevation would see the removal of the lean-to extension and the erection of a ground floor extension into the rear courtyard with a roof top terrace above. This would see the creation of an open plan living accommodation creating space for a lounge/kitchen/diner with a wood burning stove and a covered spa area. The external elevation would be finished with vertical timber cladding - 2.5 The creation of a roof top terrace above the ground floor extension would allow for access from the half landing stairwell. To the south and west boundary walls would see the installation of a privacy screen, this screen would be set 2000mm high off the finished floor level of the proposed Roof Terrace and to be formed in either timber, or powder coated aluminium slats angled at 45 degrees to provide privacy from and to the proposed Roof Terrace area.
3.1 The application site is located within an area designated as 'Mixed Use' and within the settlement boundary of Peel on the Peel Local Plan 1989. The site also sits within Peel Conservation Area. - 3.2 There are no registered trees on site nor is it within an area of flood risk. - 3.3 The Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016 contains the following policies that are considered specifically material to the assessment of this application; Strategic Policy
Spatial Policy 2 Peel is a named Service Centre
General Policy 2 General Development Considerations
Environment Policy 22 Protection of the wider environment and properties through nuisances 35 Preserve or enhancement for Conservation Areas 39 Retention of building in Conservation Areas 42 Designed to respect the character and identity of the locality
4.6 Residential Design Guide (2021) This document provides advice on the design of new houses and extensions to existing property as well as how to assess the impact of such development on the living conditions of those in adjacent residential properties and sustainable methods of construction.
4.7 Section 18(4) of the Town and Country Planning Act (1999) states,
"(4) Where any area is for the time being a conservation area, special attention shall be paid to the desirability of preserving or enhancing its character or appearance in the exercise, with respect to any buildings or other land in the area, of any powers under this Act".
5.0 REPRESENTATIONS (in brief - full reps can be read online) Statutory Consultations
5.1 Peel Town Commissioners have not commented at the time of writing
5.2 Highways Services - Do not object (07/03/25) - 5.3 DEFA Environmental Health (03/03/25) no objection but add comment on the risk of a smoke nuisance. - 5.4 DEFA Ecosystem Policy (28/03/25) Objection due to lack of information and the potential for nesting birds and roosting bats. Seeks a preliminary assessment to identify if there are any present. Public Representations - 5.5 None.
6.0 ASSESSMENT The key considerations in the determination of the application are;
6.1 The property is situated within a Conservation Area, as such it is necessary to test the application under section 18(4) of the Town and Country Act (1999), see section 4.2 of this report, on whether the works would preserve or enhance the Conservation Area. The proposals as further assessed below will ascertain whether there is any detrimental visual impact from the demolition of the existing conservatory on the rear and the erection of a rear extension. With this in mind and noting that the proposal is within the curtilage of an existing guest house and located at the rear at a lower level, the proposals are of a scale that should not alter the wider Conservation Area as a whole, the proposal at this stage would pass the Section 18(4) test by helping to preserve the Conservation Area. PRINCIPLE
6.2 The site falls within the existing settlement boundary of Peel and within an area zoned for mixed use development and principally would be in accordance with SP2 and STP2. In terms of the proposals (demolition and a rear extension), it is noted whilst within a conservation area, this building is not a registered building and the majority of the scope of works are solely contained to the rear elevation. The front elevation would be largely un affected other than the insertion of new sliding sash windows in to the existing reveals. The land use designation of mixed use and the proposal to create extra habitable accommodation would be complementary and would make use of an underused part of the curtilage / rear yard area. As such the principle of a rear extension to an existing property would be acceptable in this instance. DESIGN & VISUAL IMPACT - 6.3 In terms of the proposal, the demolition of this 1980's type extension would not be seen to affect the host property or compromise its integrity and given the desire is to build over the same footprint and over the remained of the rear courtyard area would be acceptable
for the creation of an extension with a flat roof design to keep the profile lower than the boundary walls to the sides. The only noticeable aspect would be the upper part of the privacy screen projecting above the rear boundary wall, which would only be visible from the parking area to the rear of the property and not from any public vantage point.
6.4 As previously noted, from the access lane to the side and car park to the rear, the ground level at the rear of the property where the extension would be erected would not be visible from within the public realm at the front and would be screened by the massing of the property, nor would it be visible from the rear given the height of the boundary walls to the sides and rear. - 6.5 As such, from a design perspective, the proposal would be read within the context of the property and that of the streetscene with little to no visual impact upon the host property or that character of the streetscene front and rear, further ensuring compliance with GP2b,c, and Ep42. CONSERVATION AREA - 6.6 With regard to any adverse impact upon the existing conservation area the character of the streetscene, it is noted as being predominately mixed use and given the location of the scope of works biased to the rear of the property, the demolition would not be contentious nor would the building of the rear extension for residential use. The proposal would not be out of character here and would have a neutral impact upon the conservation area helping to preserve the overall appearance of the streetscene in accordance with EP35. NEIGHBOURING AMENITIES - 6.7 In terms of whether there is any material harm to the neighbouring amenity, taking into consideration the boundary details and the proposed use, the nearest neighbouring property would be to the north, N0.4 Orry lane. To the south is identified as "works" on the govt. map. - 6.8 In terms of whether there is any material harm to the neighbouring amenity, taking into consideration the nature of the site and boundary treatment and the size and scale of the proposals. It is not considered to have any negative impact upon the neighbouring living conditions and the proposal would not be seen to have an overbearing impact as the proposal is no higher than the boundary wall, neither would the proposal leading to a loss of light. The use or the rear courtyard in conjunction with the guest house would not result in any overlooking or loss of privacy to the neighbouring amenity to the sides or rear for the reasons stated above. As such this aspect would comply with Gp2g. ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES - 6.9 The comments from Ecology are helpful to consider whether there is any nesting birds or roosting bats at the property given its age and possible entry/ exist points in the eaves or roof space. As such, a condition (as per their suggestion) can be added to any approval, mainly to ensure prior to any works commencing a survey is undertaken. This would be preferable and more up to date given any approval is valid for 4 years and the start date could be at this point. If a survey is done at this stage in the planning process it could be out of date when the works commence. In this instance a condition can be attached to any approval seeking compliance before any works commence on site. - 6.10 With regard to the comments from Environmental Health on the combustion of burning material from the wood burning stove. The use of the flue in conjunction with a proposed wood burning stove, can raise concerns of air pollution to neighbouring properties. However, given the location of the flue pipe on the rear of the property and its height existing half way up at approx. eaves level at two stories, and that it is to be used a 'feature' as opposed to the sole supply of heating and hot water due to the refurbishment of the property, it is considered to be of sufficient distance away for adequate discharge of the smoke following combustion so not to be considered a nuisance from smells or smoke. A guidance note can be added to
remind the applicants of their obligations when using such appliance to prevent any formal action taken requiring the abatement of the nuisance. As such this aspect would conform to EP22.
7.1 For the above reasons, the proposed demolition of the existing two storey extension and its rebuild would not be detrimental to streetscene or that of the conservation area and would comply with Spatial Policy 2, Spatial Policy 1, General Policy 2, and Environmental Policy 22,35,39,42 of the IOMSP. The application is therefore recommended for approval. - 8.0 RIGHT TO APPEAL AND RIGHT TO GIVE EVIDENCE
8.1 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). - 8.2 Article A10 sets out that the right to appeal is available to:
8.3 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. - 8.4 The Order automatically affords the Right to Give Evidence to the following (no determination is required):
8.5 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 a Principal Planner 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: 07.05.2025 Determining Officer
Signed : C BALMER Chris Balmer Principal Planner
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
