Loading document...
Application No.: 16/00832/B Applicant: Mr Philip Routledge Proposal: Installation of a flue Site Address: 27 Close Famman Port Erin Isle of Man IM9 6BL Case Officer : Mr Edmond Riley Photo Taken: 24.08.2016 Site Visit: 24.08.2016 Expected Decision Level: Officer Delegation
1.0 THE APPLICATION SITE - 1.1 The application site is the residential curtilage of a detached dormer bungalow situated at the end of the Close Famman cul-de-sac in Port Erin. The property, no.27, has an immediate neighbour 4.5m to the east in the form of no.25, but is otherwise set quite far from the other, nearby properties and the Cherry Orchard Aparthotel to the west. Both nos. 25 and 27 are dwellings of very recent construction to the point that the application site is in the final throes of its completion while no.25 still has its front porch un-rendered, despite apparently being lived in. No.27 is finished in a pale blue-coloured render.
2.0 THE PROPOSAL - 2.1 Full planning approval is sought for the installation of a flue on the eastern elevation. This would exit the side elevation in a fairly forward position before travelling up and back at an angle until it meets the central line of the gable wall; at this point, the flue angles upwards vertically, and would protrude 0.4m above the ridgeline. It would sit 0.5m out from the side elevation and have a diameter of 0.25m. - 2.2 The applicant has explained that the flue would be cylindrical in form and would be formed of stainless steel, and it is necessary to provide a gas fire.
3.0 PLANNING HISTORY - 3.1 The site unsurprisingly has a recent planning history, with applications relating to its construction. The most recent application, though (PA 14/00666/C), sought to add tourist use to the approved residential use. This was approved.
4.0 THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN - 4.1 The site lies within an area designated on the Area Plan for the South adopted in 2013 as Residential, albeit that the land immediately to the west is designated as Tourism and the Cherry Orchard Aparthotel is referred to as one of the hotels in the South which should remain as such under Tourism Proposal 1. - 4.2 In view of the nature of the proposal and this zoning, then, it is considered appropriate to assess the proposal against General Policy 2 and Environment Policy 22 (parts (ii) and (iii)) of the Strategic Plan.
5.0 REPRESENTATIONS - 5.1 Highway Services of the DoI indicated the proposal had no highway implications on 18.08.2016. - 5.2 Port Erin Commissioners (on 03.08.2016) sought the application's deferral until such time as they had had chance to consider it on 13th September 2016. While this is noted, it is not considered reasonable to the applicants to defer consideration of as minor an application as this for a six-week period.
6.0 ASSESSMENT - 6.1 Flues can be a dominant feature on dwellings if not approached sensitively. Although the dimensions are generally not particularly large, either in actual or relative terms, a 25cm diameter such as that proposed here, along with a stainless steel finish, could appear as a fairly stark and possibly utilitarian structure on a well-considered and neatly designed dormer bungalow. - 6.2 However, the drawings of the dwelling make it appear perhaps older than it is, and the view of the applicant that a stainless steel finish would be appropriate to the dwelling's contemporary design and finish is understood and accepted. The dwelling is attractively proportioned and does have a contemporary appearance despite the form and massing on the drawing perhaps indicating otherwise. Its neighbour, no.25, is similarly finished / styled. Accordingly, a stainless steel flue would be appropriate without necessarily being ideal. - 6.3 Moreover, views of the flue would be satisfactorily limited by the positioning nearby of no.25, and it is further noted that the site lies at the end of a cul-de-sac where through traffic is not possible. The flue would also not protrude significantly high above the dwelling's ridgeline. There are also flues in position on dwellings nearby on Close Famman such that one here would not be wholly out of keeping with the streetscene. - 6.4 Although this is something of a balanced view, it is not considered that the overall impact in visual terms (both in respect of the dwelling itself and streetscene in which it sits) is itself objectionable in the context of the relevant parts of General Policy 2. A traditional chimney breast would of course be preferable, but that is not the proposal here. - 6.5 In respect of parts (ii) and (iii) of EP22, it is noted that no neighbour objection has been received and, moreover, that Building Regulations control the size and position of flues in order to reduce noise / odour / particulate pollution, and accordingly it is not considered that an objection on this ground would be appropriate or necessary.
7.0 RECOMMENDATION - 7.1 In view of the favourable findings on the two key issues - visual impact and potential for pollution - the application is recommended for approval.
8.0 INTERESTED PERSON STATUS - 8.1 By virtue of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) (No 2) Order 2013, the following persons are automatically interested persons:
Recommendation Recommended Decision: Permitted Date of Recommendation: 30.08.2016 Conditions and Notes for Approval: 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 14 of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) (No2) Order 2013 and to avoid the accumulation of unimplemented planning approvals.
The development hereby approved relates to Drawing 01 Rev 05, and the associated flue specification sheets, all being date-stamped as having been received 19th July 2016.
I can confirm that this decision has been made by a Senior Planning Officer in accordance with the authority afforded to that Officer by the appropriate DEFA Delegation.
Decision Made : Permitted Date: 05.09.2016 Determining officer
Signed : C BALMER Chris Balmer Senior Planning Officer
Copyright in submitted documents remains with their authors. Request removal
View as Markdown