Loading document...
Application No.: 21/00202/B Applicant: Mr & Mrs Tom & Aalin Turner & George Proposal: Construction of First Floor Extension above Bedroom / Kitchen & Ground Floor Extension to rear of Kitchen create additional residential accommodation Site Address: 36 Ballanoa Meadow Santon Isle Of Man IM4 1HQ Principal Planner: Miss S E Corlett Site Visit: 15.04.2021 Expected Decision Level: Officer Delegation Recommended Decision: Permitted Date of Recommendation: 05.05.2021 _________________________________________________________________
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. The development is considered to accord with General Policy 2 of the Strategic Plan.
Plans/Drawings/Information; This decision relates to drawings 02 and 03 and the location plan all received on 26th March, 2021. _______________________________________________________________
Additional Persons None _____________________________________________________________________________ Officer’s Report THE SITE
1.1 The site is the residential curtilage of an existing semi detached dwelling situated within the residential estate of Ballanoa Meadow in Newtown. The property is situated towards the end of one of the two culs de sac within the estate. The property is two storey but has a single storey, pitched roofed annex to the left of the main house which accommodates a kitchen and
2.1 Proposed is the extension of the dwelling in the form of building above the single storey element, keeping the ridge below that of the main house by 1.2m. - 2.2 Also included is a rear extension which takes the form of a flat roofed unit which projects out from the rear elevation by 3.6m, less than does the existing lounge project into the rear garden, and this element will be marginally lower (3.19m) than the apex of the existing rear annex (3.4m) with the proposed lantern light slightly higher (3.48m). - 2.3 The applicant provides a supporting statement which explains that the development has been designed having regard to the applicants' aspirations and planning policy and was discussed with the neighbours and no objections were raised during those discussions. The applicants wish to create additional residential accommodation at ground floor level with a new single storey extension which will open up and provide a more open place feel and the incorporation of French windows will provide access directly into the rear garden. The finishes will match those on the existing house. - 2.4 The incorporation of a flat roofed element may be considered not to accord with the Residential Design Guidance but this will not be publicly visible and its design will limit its visibility and it is hoped that it will be acceptable in this instance. They suggest that the appearance of the property as viewed by the public will be maintained and any elements which do not comply with guidance will not be seen with no adverse impact on the amenities of those in neighbouring properties. PLANNING POLICY
3.1 The site lies within an area designated on the Area Plan for the East (2020) as Predominantly Residential as is the land immediately to the rear of the two dwellings which have been constructed on the site of the former Lancashire Hotel. - 3.2 The site is not within any Flood Risk Area nor any Conservation Area and none of the buildings or trees on the site are Registered. - 3.3 As such, the following parts of the Strategic Plan are relevant:
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:
3.4 The Department has published the Residential Design Guidance (March 2019) which 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 property. This provides specific advice on two storey extensions to the side of existing dwellings, describing it as a common form of extension and identify the main issues as being the visual impact and the impact on the living conditions of those in adjacent properties. They recommend a visual break in the streetscene created by either setting back the annex or leaving at least 1m between the side of the extension and the boundary. It also recommends that the width should be significantly less than that of the main house. - 3.5 Advice on single storey rear extensions is that they should generally not be flat roofed unless the main house has these elements and there is general advice on how to measure the effect of this on adjacent propeties using the 45 degree calculation. PLANNING HISTORY
4.1 No applications have been submitted for this property since it was erected under 99/00590/B. - 4.2 Other properties in the estate have had permission for extensions above existing single storey annexes - 04/01707/B (number 10), 05/00537/B (11), 07/02150/B (2), 11/01679/B (2), 12/00044/B (26), 13/91256/B (39), 15/00217/B (18), 16/00466/B (33), 19/00350/B (34). The extensions at numbers 33 and 34 have both been implemented. - 4.3 19/00677/B proposed a flat roofed extension on a modern estate in Crosby and was refused for non compliance with the Residential Design Guidance. This was approved on appeal however, establishing an acceptance of flat roofed extensions in some circumstances. REPRESENTATIONS
5.1 Santon Parish Commissioners were consulted on 06.04.21 but have not commented at the time of writing. - 5.2 Highway Services have no highway interest in the application (20.04.21). ASSESSMENT
6.1 The issue in this case is whether the proposed works would have any adverse impact on the streetscene or the living conditions of those in adjacent properties and in these respects General Policy 2 of the Strategic Plan and the Residential Design Guidance are helpful. - 6.2 The proposal does not comply with the RDG insofar as the extension is not set back from the existing frontage of the main house and the proposal also includes a flat roofed annex which is generally presumed against in the Guidance. However, the single storey element of the proposal is already in situ and the streetscene is already visually broken in that the properties step up towards the south east with number 36 sitting further forward than is number 35. There are no windows in the side of this adjacent property which would be affected by the proposed extension. This set back also means that the proposed rear extension does not project further back than is the rear of number 35 so there is no effect on the outlook from windows in this elevation. - 6.3 Whilst flat roofed extensions are generally presumed against, this is a modest element of an otherwise taller property and will not be seen from a public perpsective and set back from the windows in the adjacent property. Its impact is therefore considered to be acceptable in this case. CONCLUSION
7.1 The proposal is considered to accord with General Policy 2 of the Strategic Plan.
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 : 18.05.2021 Determining officer
Signed : S BUTLER Stephen Butler Head of Development Management
Copyright in submitted documents remains with their authors. Request removal
