Loading document...
| Application No.: | 12/01302/B |
| Applicant: | Mr George & Mrs Lynne Fuller |
| Proposal: | Erection of a first floor extension over existing rear elevation extension |
| Site Address: | 1 Glen Bank Glen Maye Isle Of Man IM5 3BQ |
| Case Officer: | Mr Chris Balmer |
| Photo Taken: | 09.10.2012 |
| Site Visit: | 09.10.2012 |
| Expected Decision Level: | Officer Delegation |
1.1 The application site forms the residential curtilage of 1 Glen Bank, Glen Maye which forms part of a row of three, two storey terraced properties (end terrace) located on the eastern side of the A27 road and is directly opposite the Waterfall pub car park to the west
2.1 The application seeks approval for erection of a first floor extension over existing rear elevation extension. The proposal would be above the exiting rear single storey flat roofed rear extension utilising the same footprint. Therefore the extension would have a width of 4.5 metres, a depth of 4.7 metres and a ridge height of 5.8 metres. The proposal also includes an external spiral staircase to the rear elevation.
3.1 The application site is covered by the 1982 Development Order. The exact zoning of the site is difficult to ascertain due to the scale of the map however it is clear that the terrace is established as being residential in terms of its use and the proposal does appear to be within an area designated as residential under the 1982 development plan.
3.2 Due to the site location, zoning and the type of proposal, the following policy is relevant for consideration:-
"General Policy 2: Development which is in accordance with the land-use zoning and proposals in the appropriate Area Plan and with other policies of this Strategic Plan will normally be permitted, provided that the development:
4.1 The previous planning applications are considered relevant in the assessment and determination of this application:
5.1 Patrick Commissioners make no comment on the application.
6.1 It is considered there a number of issues which need assessing when determining this application. These are:
a) Visual impact upon character of the village and the street scene; and b) Potential impact upon neighbouring amenities;
6.2 In terms of planning policy General Policy 2 paragraph b and c are the most relevant to consider. Paragraph b indicates that development will only be permitted if the proposal respects the site and surroundings in terms of the siting, layout, scale, form, design and landscaping of buildings and the spaces around them. Paragraph c states that any development should not affect adversely the character of the surrounding landscape or townscape.
6.3 Given the height increase of the proposal over the existing flat roofed single storey extension, the extension will increase the visual appearance of built development on this site. However, given the extension is to the rear of the existing property and given the existing properties in the area and landscaping between the site and the A27 road, it is not considered the extension would have a significant impact upon the visual amenities of the street scene to warrant a refusal.
6.4 In terms of the proportion, form and design, the extension would be a vast improvement over the existing rear extension which is not in keeping with the existing traditional property given its flat roof design and picture window fenestration. Therefore the proposal is considered beneficial to the visual appearance of the existing property complying with General Policy 2.
Potential impact upon neighbouring amenities
6.5 There are potentially two neighbouring properties which could be affected by the development the first being Nr 2 Glen Bank which forms part of the terrace which the application site is attached. This property is to the south of the application site. Visiting the application site and studying the submitted plans (which helpfully show the neighbouring property) it was clear that Nr 2 has benefited from an unusually single/two storey extension. The proposed 1st floor extension would not project past the rear elevation of Nr 2's rear extension. It was also noted that Nr 2 has two first floor windows within the rear elevation that may be affected by the extension. However, on close inspection the closest window to the extension is obscure glazed and therefore it is considered reasonable to consider this is a bathroom window and therefore not a primary habitable room (i.e. kitchen/living room). Overall, it is considered given the design, size, suns orientation (east to west) and the position of the extension in relation to the neighbouring property, it is considered the proposal would not have a significant impact upon the residential amenities (loss of light, overbearing impact and/or loss of privacy) to warrant a refusal.
6.6 The second neighbouring dwelling potentially affected by the proposed works would be Hillside. This property is located 32.5 metres to the northeast of the application dwelling. The main issue relating to this property is whether the proposal would cause a significant amount of overlooking resulting in a loss or privacy for the occupants of Hillside. The proposed extension includes the installation of a large glazed bi-fold door at first floor level. Furthermore, it proposes an external spiral staircase which includes a very small balcony area which then leads to/or from the bi-folding door to the first accommodation. The Planning Authorities guide for directly facing windows is that a 20 metre gap should be retained. In this case the two properties would be located approximately 32.5 metres away from each other and there would be no windows within the extension (exception for new gable ended landing window which is proposed to be obscure glazed) which would directly look towards Hillview, but would be more angled views. In respect to the balcony, this type of development can cause concern of overlooking. In this case whilst no significant overlooking would occur into the neighbouring dwelling, given the distance. There is the potential for overlooking into the neighbouring garden, however, in this case it is considered given the very small area and limited usable space of the 'balcony area', it is unlikely this area would be used in such a manner and therefore it is not considered this aspect of the proposal would result in a significant amount of overlooking to warrant a refusal.
7.1 It is considered that the proposal would comply with the relevant planning policies of The Isle of Man Strategic Plan (20th June 2007), and for the reasons set out in this report, it is recommended that the application be approved.
8.1 It is considered that the following meet the criteria of Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) Order 2005, paragraph 6 (5) (d) and should be afforded interested party status:
Patrick Commissioners
8.2 The Department of Transport Highways and Traffic Division is now part of the Department of Infrastructure of which the planning authority is part. As such, the Highways and Traffic Division cannot be afforded party status in this instance.
C: Conditions for approval N: Notes attached to conditions R: Reasons for refusal O: Notes attached to refusals
C 1. The development hereby permitted shall commence before the expiration of four years from the date of this notice.
C 2. This approval relates to the erection of a first floor extension over existing rear elevation extension as proposed in the submitted documents and drawings 010, 020, 050 and 051 all received on 21st September 2012.
C 3. Obscure glazing (Grade 5) shall be installed in the first floor landing window within the northern elevation and shall be kept and maintained thereafter.
C 4. The external finishes of the extension must match those of the existing building in all respects.
I confirm that this decision accords with the appropriate Government Circular delegating functions to Director of Planning and Building Control / Development Control Manager/ Senior Planning Officer.
Decision Made: Permitted Date: 30/10/12
Signed: C. H. Blum Anthony Holmes Senior Planning Officer
Signed: Michael Gallagher Director of Planning and Building Control
Signed: Sarah Corlett Senior Planning Officer
Signed: Jennifer Chance Development Control Manager
Copyright in submitted documents remains with their authors. Request removal
