Loading document...
| Application No.: | 14/00633/B |
| Applicant: | John Cairney |
| Proposal: | Erection of a dwelling |
| Site Address: | Land Adjacent To Cherry Orchard Hotel And Adjacent To 25 Close Famman Close Famman Port Erin Isle Of Man |
1.1 The site is a presently undeveloped plot situated on the southern side of Close Famman. The plot has planning approval for the erection of a dwelling, as has the plot to the east. To the west of the plot is the curtilage of the Cherry Orchard Aparthotel, separated from the application site by a horizontally boarded fence with some intermittent hedging within it. To the rear lies an apartment building which has two floors of accommodation, the higher of which is in the roofspace, served by rooflights, three of which (two large and a small light) are on the pitch facing towards the application site. This apartment building is 13m from the rear of the house proposed in this current application and 14m from the approved property alongside, to the east.
2.1 Proposed is the erection of a dwelling on the site. The proposed dwelling is very similar to what already has approval except insofar as:
2.2 Otherwise the proposal remains as approved with the dwelling having a concrete tiled roof, rendered walls and obscure glazing fitted to the dormer window on the rear pitch serving the bathroom. The previous approval did not require that this was retained in perpetuity.
3.1 The site lies within an area designated on the Area Plan for the South adopted in 2013 as Residential. As such the Strategic Plan General Policy 2 is applicable in this case:
"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:
| Case Officer : | Miss S E Corlett |
| Photo Taken : | |
| Site Visit : | |
| Expected Decision Level : | Officer Delegation |
b) respects the site and surroundings in terms of the siting, layout, scale, form, design and landscaping of buildings and the space around them; c) does not affect adversely the character of the surrounding landscape or townscape; g) does not affect adversely the amenity of local residents or the character of the locality; h) provides satisfactory amenity standards in itself, including where appropriate safe and convenient access for all highway users, together with adequate parking, servicing and manoeuvring space; i) does not have an adverse effect on road safety or traffic flows on the local highways; j) can be provided with all necessary services; k) does not prejudice the use or development of adjoining land in accordance with the appropriate Area Plan."
4.1 Planning approval was granted for the erection of a dwelling on this site under PA 10/01808. More recently planning approval was considered for the adjacent plot. PA 13/01177 was approved by the planning authority but subject to a condition which required that the dormer windows fitted in the rear dormers be fitted with glass obscured to Pilkington Level 5 or equivalent and top hinged to prevent overlooking of the apartments to the rear. This was challenged by the applicant who considered that this condition was unnecessary and unreasonable. The inspector however, concluded that, "clear glazing would afford mutual overlooking between these windows and those of the flats some 15 m or thereabouts away with a likely perception of being overlooked particularly in the ground floor flats standing appreciably below the dormer windows. This would provide levels of privacy well below the frequently applied standard of a minimum of 20 m separation between facing windows".
5.1 There are letters which have been received from three parties who state that they own land and the plot adjacent to the application site and have no objection to the application provided that it is the same as the plans which have been shown to them. These adjacent plots are believed to be number 25, Close Famman, the apartments to the rear and the Cherry Orchard Hotel site. 5.2 The owner of 43, Station Road which sits alongside the apartments which abut the site to the rear, objects to the application on the basis that the inclusion of dormer accommodation should not have been permitted as this is out of keeping with the character of Close Famman. The house on the adjacent plot is complete in structure and confirms his fears about the impact of the properties with their additional height, dormers and rooflights. 5.3 Department of Infrastructure Highway Services indicate that they do not oppose the application. 5.4 Port Erin Commissioners indicate that they support the application
6.1 The appearance of the proposed dwelling is very similar to what already has approval. The critical differences are the increase in width and depth and the resultant decrease in the amount of separation between the proposed dwelling and the apartment building to the rear. There would still be 1 m surrounding the sides of the proposed dwelling, leaving sufficient space to allow a wheeled bin to be brought from the front to the rear. An area between 5-6m long and 5 m wide is available for parking in front of the dwelling leaving over half of the front garden to lawn and planting. 6.2 The relationship between the dwellings proposed on numbers 25 and 27, Close Famman and the apartments to the rear is a sensitive one, highlighted in the most recent application for the plot adjoining the application site, to the east. The issue is particularly the impact of any dormer windows on the apartments to the rear. In this current case, there is one dormer
window at the rear, which serves a bathroom and could therefore be fitted with obscured glazing to prevent overlooking, without the potential reduction in amenity for those in the dwelling itself as was potentially the case in the adjacent dwelling which had one bedroom whose only window would have been that within the rear dormer. The current application however has only two bedrooms in the upper floor and as such both benefit from the front dormer window as well as the rooflights in the rear and would be unaffected by any condition to require obscured glazing in the rear facing dormer. 6.3 Whilst there would be less space between the apartments and this proposed dwelling, due to its increased depth, the position of the dormer would be around 1 m closer to the apartments, it would be fitted with obscured glazing and as such it is not considered that this relationship would be unacceptable, given what has approval and that two dormers with obscured glazing have been approved on the property alongside. A condition should be attached requiring the retention of the obscured glazing. 6.4 Whilst the owner of 43, Station Road has objected, reiterating the concerns he has raised in previous applications for this plot and the one alongside (PAs 11/00770 and 10/01808), planning approval has been granted through these and other applications on which such an objection was not received from this party, for the development of dwellings on these two plots which are not truly single storey. The Strategic Plan requires that development "optimises the use of previously developed land, redundant buildings, unused and under-used land" (Strategic Policy 1) and the site does lie between truly single storey properties, behind a dormer apartment building and alongside a car park which abuts a much higher aparthotel building. As such it has been considered that the site represents a transition between the bungalows and taller development and bearing in mind SP 1, the principle of dormer bungalows is acceptable on these two plots. 6.5 The critical issues in this case are the changes in relationship between the proposed dwelling and the approved developments to the side and rear and the parties who own these sites have indicated that they have seen schemes for the site and have no objection to them. There is no precise response to the submitted application from these parties as the views refer to plans which have been provided prior to the application being submitted rather than the application itself. The dwelling will be slightly closer to the approved dwelling alongside and slightly closer to the apartments at the rear but these changes are not considered to be so significant as to warrant refusal of the application. The property is not directly alongside 43, Station Road and as such it is not considered that there will be an adverse impact from the proposed development on the amenities of this property.
7.1 The local authority, Port Erin Commissioners are, by virtue of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) (No 2) Order 2013, paragraph 6 (4) (e), considered "interested persons" and as such should be afforded party status. 7.2 Department of Infrastructure Highway Services is granted interested party status under the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) (No 2) Order 2013 paragraph 6 (4) d. 7.3 The owners of the land alongside and to the rear - ie the addressees of Ravenscroft House at 39, Station Road, COA Properties Ltd at Bridson Street and 3, Erin Crescent should be afforded party status under article 2(1) a of Government Circular no 0046/13, the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) Order 2013, Determination of Interested Person Status. 7.4 The owner of 43, Station Road is not directly alongside the site and not considered to be directly affected by the proposal and as such should not be afforded party status in this case.
Recommended Decision: Permitted
Date of 30.06.2014 Recommendation:
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.
C 2. The dormer window in the rear pitch must be fitted with glass obscured to Pilkington Level 5 or equivalent and any opening window must be top hinged or fitted with an opening restriction so as to prevent overlooking of the apartments to the rear.
This approval relates to drawing 01 received on 21st May, 2014.
I confirm that this decision accords with the appropriate Government Circular delegating functions to Director of Planning and Building Control /Head of Development Management/ Senior Planning Officer.
Decision Made : Permitted Date : Determining officer (delete as appropriate) Signed : Chris Balmer Senior Planning Officer Signed : Michael Gallagher Director of Planning and Building Control
Signed : Sarah Corlett Senior Planning Officer Signed : Jennifer Chance Head of Development Management
30 June 2014 14/00633/B
Copyright in submitted documents remains with their authors. Request removal
View as Markdown