Loading document...
The application site Ballalheaney Bungalow, Andreas Road, Regaby, is located on a corner plot, with Andreas Road to the west of the site.
Within the curtilage of the site consists a total of three buildings
The application site is within an area recognised as being an area of ‘white land’ not zoned for development, under the Isle of Man Development Plan Order 1982. The site is not within a Conservation Area; however the site is within an area zoned as High Landscape or Coastal Value and Scenic Significance.
Conversion of attic to additional living accommodation, including the addition of dormer windows and roof lights - 02/01344/B – APPROVED
Construction of porch to rear elevation - 86/00298/B – APPROVED
The application proposes the erection of a detached garage block with tourist / guest accommodation above. The proposed development would have a width of 8.9 metres, a depth of 6.6 metres and a maximum height of 6.6 metres. Within the roof space the application proposes three dormer windows to the front elevation and three velux roof lights to the rear elevation. Additionally the submission includes a high level gable window. To gain access the above living accommodation, an external staircase is proposed to the side elevation (west).
Andreas Parish Commissioners:- No objection
Highways Division:- Do not oppose
S.P.M.C. & E:- Although claimed to be 'residential' (& controlled at such by Condition - see 00/1797) this building proudly displays a sign reading "Builders & Joinery". Thus, as we suspected then, the use id primarily Industrial (or possibly 'Light Industrial'?)
Of course it may be considered a matter of opinion whether an industrial building and use may be acceptable in the countryside, the Planning Committee obviously did before, but the Society doesn't as it is against Policy and unfair to others who have been confined to Industrial Estates where rents are higher.
We have to Object.
The Planning Authority has received no privately written representations objecting to the application.
In principle I consider the extension to be acceptable. The boundary treatment around the corner of the site which is to be retained will act as a natural barrier; screening the majority of the proposal, therefore reducing the appearance at this junction.
The initial concern I had was the actually use of the shed, as the signage on the shed advertises a Joinery and Building Contractor, and the site is within an area not zoned for industrial use. However the previous application for the approved shed, attached a condition which stated:- The building must only be used for storage purposes which are ancillary to the occupation of the existing dwelling.
I therefore consider with a similar condition in place, and as long as the proposed building is for storage only, I consider the application to be acceptable. Accordingly, it is recommended that the planning application be approved.
I consider that the following meet the criteria of Government Circular 1/06 and should be afforded interested party status:
I consider that the following parties that made representations to the planning application do not meet the criteria of Government Circular 1/06 and should not be afforded interested party status:-
Recommended Decision: Permitted
Date of Recommendation: 10.08.2007
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 submitted documents and drawings 07 0239/1, 07 0239/2 and 07 0239/3 all received on 30th May 2007. C 3. The external finishes of the extension must match those of the existing building in all respects.
C 4. The building must only be used for storage purposes which are ancillary to the occupation of the existing dwelling. This permission does not give permission for any retail, industrial and/or commercial activity at the site.
I confirm that this decision accords with Government Circular Nos 44/05 (Delegation of Functions to Director of Planning and Building Control) and 47/05 (Delegation of Functions to Senior Planning Officer)
Decision Made : Permitted Date : _________________________
Signed : ...
M. I. McCauley
Director of Planning and Building Control
Copyright in submitted documents remains with their authors. Request removal
