Loading document...
Redacted
From: To: DEFA, Planning Subject: PA 22/00759/B - 27 Cannan Court, Kirk Michael Date: 16 July 2022 10:43:10
Good Morning, A letter of objection was posted to you on 12th July, but isn’t yet on the website. In case it was not received, the text of the letter is below. Regards,
12 July 2022 Dear Sir/Madam Re: PA 22/00759/B - 27 Cannan Court, Kirk Michael IM6 1FA We write in connection with the above application, and wish to be given interested party status, our properties being within the required distance from the boundary of 27 Cannan Court.
We object to the application, on the following grounds:
"Replacing a large shed with an extension that is designed to fit in is betterment to the current situation." It must now, therefore, be concluded that retaining the large shed would be detrimental to the current situation.
"Whilst the applicant respects the concerns of the neighbours, extending a dwelling is generally considered to be an acceptable providing it respects the site and its surrounding which this proposal does. Under permitted development the applicant is perfectly at liberty to construct an extension up to 15m2. Whilst this extension is larger than that, its size is nevertheless in keeping with the size of the site and the impact of construction activities in the area remain the same."
Having the approved 34m2 extension, and retaining the large c.15m2 shed, must surely be out of keeping with the size of this small site.
"ASSESSMENT… Amenity Impact 6.7 … Towards the rear of the site the gap between the existing shed/garage to be demolished and No.26 nearest elevation is approx. 7m" The Planning Officer's assessment of PA 210071B for an extension was clearly, in part, based on the demolition of the large shed. When concerns were expressed by objectors at the Planning Committee meeting that the shed might actually be retained on site, despite no mention of this being made by the applicant, the committee asked for an additional condition to be included in the approval, i.e. Addendum to the Officer’s Report "… The addition condition now applied to the approval reads as follows: "Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (Permitted Development) Order 2012 (or any Order revoking and/or re-enacting that Order with or without modification), no development shall be undertaken in accordance with any of the following Classes of Schedule 1 of the Order at any time:
The Planning Committee were clearly of the opinion that, given their approval of an extension, other structures on this site, especially this large shed, could be considered to be detrimental to the amenities, and over-development, of the well designed and very attractive Cannan Court sheltered housing development.
We concur with that assessment and respectfully ask, therefore, that the application for relocating the large shed be refused. Yours sincerely, Redacted Redacted 25 Cannan Court 23 Cannan Court Kirk Michael Kirk Michael IM6 1FA IM6 1FA
Redacted
c.c. Michael Commissioners Kirk Michael Community Housing Association Hon. A. Cannan MHK
Mr. T. D. Johnston MHK
Copyright in submitted documents remains with their authors. Request removal
