Loading document...
Application No.: 23/01090/B Applicant: Mr Matt Beech Proposal: Proposed Extension to East Elevation Site Address: Meadowfield House Croit E Caley Colby Isle Of Man IM9 4AW Planning Officer: Miss Lucy Kinrade Photo Taken: 23.02.2024 Site Visit: 23.02.2024 Expected Decision Level: Officer Delegation Recommended Decision: Permitted Date of Recommendation: 11.03.2024
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 26 of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) Order 2019 and to avoid the accumulation of unimplemented planning approvals.
This application has been recommended for approval for the following reason.
By reason of the land use designation, the size and scale of the host dwelling, the siting to the rear and distance from the neighbour the proposal is considered to have an acceptable visual and amenity impact on the existing dwelling, surrounding area and not to impact neighbouring amenity in line with General Policy 2 (b, c, g) and being rear in connection with the main dwelling and clustered within a residential area the proposal is not to undermine Transport Policy 3 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016.
Plans/Drawings/Information; This approval relates to the following information all date received 20/09/2023:
Additional Persons
None _____________________________________________________________________________
1.0 THE APPLICATION SITE - 1.1 The application site relates to an existing dwelling Meadowfield House, Croit E Caley, Colby.
2.0 THE PROPOSAL - 2.1 Proposed is the erection of a large single storey flat roof extension to the rear infilling an existing patio area.
3.0 PLANNING HISTORY - 3.1 The application site has been the subject of quite an extensive planning history which outlines the original outline approval at appeal back in 1993, through to new dwelling applications in the early 2000's and various alterations since. Most recent application was 14/00559/B for alterations and extensions including a first floor extension above the garage to create a gym and an extension to the utility room to create a garden store.
4.0 PLANNING POLICY - 4.1 The site lies within an area designated as residential on the Area Plan for the South
4.2 The Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016 contains the following policies considered materially relevant to the assessment:
4.3 The Residential Design Guide (July 2021) contains the following guidance also considered materially relevant:
4.4 The Area Plan for the South 2013 makes reference to Croit e Caley at 4.10.3 indicating that it was not judged to have a sense of place and community sufficient to make them worthy of assessment as a ground of houses in the countryside and were not in any way sustainable settlements.
REPRESENTATIONS Copies of representations received can be viewed on the Government's website. This report contains summaries only.
5.1 Rushen Commissioners - in support (01/11/2023). - 5.2 Department of Infrastructure Highway Services - No highways interest (29/09/2023)
6.0 ASSESSMENT - 6.1 The existing house and its garaging extensions are a modern interpretation of the traditional form, they sit along the main road visible by passing public and the Steam Railway Line runs directly along the southern boundary. The house has gable end stacks, slate pitched roof, painted render walls, window and door arrangement typical of a traditional dwelling (central door and windows aligned either side) and use of Manx stone features throughout. The garage is also two storey with pitched slated roof. From the streetscene the dwelling and its extension and garage are fairly in-keeping with the traditional buildings, cottages and barns found along the road and in the immediate surrounding area of Croit-e-Caley and The Level. The key matters to consider in the assessment are the visual impact from the main roads, visual impact on the Railway Line, visual impact on existing dwelling and neighbouring amenity impact. Visual Impact from Main Roads - 6.2 The proposed works in this case sit at the rear of the dwelling where there are no views from Croit-e-Caley road and limited if any views from the main road due to the distances, angles, intervening development and boundary vegetation, and so from a public streetscene perspective there will be no adverse or unacceptable changes to warrant a concern. Visual Impact from Steam Railway Line - 6.3 Transport Policy 3 seeks to protect public rail routes from development that would compromise their attraction as a tourism or leisure facility. In this instance the Steam Railway Line runs directly along the boundary of the dwelling and whilst there may be views through or above the boundary hedging, the proposed works would be seen as an extension to an existing house and within a small area already clustered and characterised by residential development where such works would not be unexpected nor out of general residential character as to detract from the overall nature at this section along the railway route or to compromise its attraction. Visual Impact on Existing Dwelling - 6.4 As previously mentioned this house has a design mimicking a traditional dwelling. Housing Policy 15 and Planning Circular 3/91 offer guidance in the alteration and extension of such traditional properties and the proposal as presented would contract these general principles being of considerable footprint and of a flat roof design which would sit at odds to the original character and appearance, however, a considerable element weighing in favour of this proposal is the fact that the site is located within an area designated as 'residential' where there is a "general policy, in built up areas not controlled by Conservation Area or Registered Building policies, there will be a general presumption in favour of extensions to existing property where such extensions would not have an adverse impact on either adjacent property or the surrounding area in general". - 6.5 Residential Design Guide 2021 (RDG) offers guidance to extensions to residential dwellings including rear extensions, it provides advice on approaches to design and acknowledges that flat roof schemes have become increasingly popular and that their finished design and architectural detailing considerably contributes to whether or not they are successful. The RDG also sets out how to best assess the impact on such extensions on existing dwellings as well as on the amenity of neighbours. It ultimately outlines that each proposal will be assessed on its own merits and that what might work for one property might not necessarily work for another. - 6.6 The proposal is a for a flat roof extension at the rear finished in painted render and windows matching the existing house, the extension is to sit where there is currently a large patio area which when visiting the site was explained by the applicant to be an area that receives very little sun due to its position behind the house, in a shady east facing position, and the reason why they installed a decking towards the rear of the garden where it gets more sun.
6.7 The extension measures approx. 10m wide and projected 7.6m from the rear elevation. In terms of numerical figures the existing dwelling is 15m wide x 10m deep meaning that the proposed extension would be 50% of the overall footprint of the main two storey part of the existing dwelling which is quite large, however when visiting the site and taking into consideration the arrangement of the existing dwelling, the fact that the existing will remain single storey, not covering over all of the rear elevation and infilling part of a corner where there is already a small rear projection that the extension although presenting a considerable change to the rear, would in this specific instance expect to remain visually subordinate to the overall size, height and width of the main house which is notably large. The proposed parapet walls do make the structure marginally taller but the existing dwelling is capable of accommodating this height given its existing two storey height. Impact on Neighbouring Amenity - 6.8 Given the distance, relationship and orientation from the neighbours the proposed extension would not result in any overbearing or privacy impacts and again the distance from any neighbour prevents any overshadowing impacts. CONCLUSION
7.1 Whilst what is proposed is a fairly large flat roof extension to what is a fairly traditionally styled dwelling, given the land use designation being 'residential', the size and scale of the host dwelling already being quite big and capable of accommodating the proposal, the siting of the proposed extension being to the rear infilling an existing patio area where there is limited public view and no amenity impacts expected on any neighbours and minded that the overall siting and appearance of the extension would not be so out of keeping with the overall residential nature of the dwelling and the surrounding area as to compromise the steam railway line that the proposal is considered to be acceptable in this case. - 7.2 The application is considered to have an acceptable visual and amenity impact in line with General Policy 2 (b, c, g) and to undermine Transport Policy 3 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016.
8.0 INTERESTED PERSON STATUS - 8.1 By virtue of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) Order 2019, 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 and that in making this decision the Officer has agreed the recommendation in relation to who should be afforded Interested Person Status
Decision Made : Permitted Date : 13.03.2024 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.
Copyright in submitted documents remains with their authors. Request removal
