Cover Letter Plot 56 Extension

Sth May 2021

Ref: 1522/4.2.5

Planning and Building Control Directorate Department of Environment, Food and Agriculture First Floor, Murray House, Mount Havelock Douglas, Isle of Man, IM1 2SF

2190568

Dear Sir/Madam,

Re: Detailed Application for Extension to Rear of Dwelling Plot 56, 'The Meadows' Residential Development Corner Of Douglas Road And Victoria Road Castletown

Regarding the above development, please find enclosed an application for a rear extension to the approved dwellinghouse at Plot 56.

As the facts supporting our application are set out below, we would be grateful if this letter were considered part of the application bundle.

Plot 56 is located at the north-western edge of the residential development currently under construction, approved under reference 18/00524/B (The Meadows). Plot 56 is bound on all sides by The Meadows, save for where it abuts the land of the steam railway.

A rear extension to the approved house design is sought by a prospective purchaser of Plot 56, which may be summarised as the removal of a 'dog-leg' to the rear of the footprint (providing an additional 6m² floor area, the sum of 3m² over each of the two floors).

The application is made without prejudice to any extant statutory consent in respect of the land of the site, or the approved development.

The extension is not sought as a minor change to 18/00524/B given that the net external footprint of the approved house would be increased.

It should be noted that Plot 56 is not the subject of Condition 4 to 18/00524/B. The footprint change is not sought under permitted development in any event, given that this extension would exceed 4m in height (at first floor level).

(cont.)

Tel: +44 (0)1624 835222 Email: [email protected] Registered in IOM: 104985C VAT number: 002 0577 30 Directors: D.F. Lewis, J. A. Lewis, W. J. Newton Registered Office: The Old Chapel, 32-34 Malew Street, Castletown, IM9 1AF

With reference to Permitted Development (criteria that would otherwise have been applicable were it not for the 4 m threshold being exceeded), it is considered that all other criteria would be adhered to, in that:-

• the footprint would be extended only to the rear of the property and not result in development any closer to the highway;
• the footprint would not be brought any closer to the boundary of the curtilage of the house;
• the external wall finishes would match those of the approved house (in particular the finishes approved in discharging Condition 10 to $18 / 00524 / B$ ); and
• the house would remain in compliance with car parking standards.

Whilst extending the footprint would bring part of the house closer to the railway, it is considered that the footprint as extended:-

• would not bring the main part of the house any closer to the railway line than is already approved (and the adjacent house at plot 55 would be more proximate to the railway in any event);
• would only be perceived from the railway at first floor level, not at ground floor level (insofar as glimpses of the house are possible at all through the mature trees);
• cannot, therefore, be said to have an over-bearing impact on the adjacent railway line; and
• would in any event be a very minor change when considered against development as a whole, and any impact would therefore be negligible.

No change of use is sought in respect of Plot 56 and this would remain a single dwellinghouse (use class 3.3).

I trust the above is self-explanatory, but for any clarification as may be required please do not hesitate to contact the undersigned at this office.

Yours Sincerely,

Euan P. H. Craine B.Arch, M.Arch, ADPPA, ARB, RIBA

Enclosures: (a) 1522-056.00 Plot 56 Location Plan (b) 1522-056.01 Plot 56 Site Plan (c) 1522-056.02 Plot 56 Floor Plans as Approved (d) 1522-056.03 Plot 56 Elevations as Approved (e) 1522-056.04 Plot 56 Floor Plans as Proposed (f) 1522-056.05 Plot 56 Elevations as Proposed