Planning Officer Report

Case Officer: Miss S E Corlett Photo Taken: Site Visit: Expected Decision Level: Officer Delegation

Officer's Report

The Site

1. The site is an approved plot within the developing estate of Poacher's Pocket, situated between Bridge Road, the Silverburn River and the Silverburn residential estate. The plots lie in the centre of the estate between two approved dormer bungalows and opposite a row of dwellings which back onto Beech Grove, Pine Grove and Fuchsia Grove.

1. Planning permission was granted for the erection of a dwelling on this plot under PA 05/92162. This proposed the erection of a dwelling which was 10.9m wide, between 7.5m and 9.5m deep and between 6.4m and 7.2m high. The building was divided into three sections with the central section taller than those on each side. No integral garaging was provided and the dwelling was to be set back from the estate road by around 3m with a driveway which would accommodate only one full sized vehicle alongside the dwelling.

The Proposal

1. Proposed is the erection of a new dwelling type on the plot. The drawings show "existing" elevations where these are actually as approved elevations. The new dwelling will be 11.4m wide with an attached garage which adds a further 3.5m to the width of the property. The dwelling will be between 7.9m and 8.9m deep and 6.6m high. The dwelling is to be set back from the estate road by around 5m and there is space within the garage for one vehicle to be parked and a full sized parking space in front of this (6.1m by 3.6m).

1. The roof is to be finished in slates and the walls Manx stone, timber cladding and cream coloured render.

Planning Status And Policy

1. The site lies within an area of Residential land use on both the Town and Country Planning (Development Plan) Order 1982 and the draft Southern Area Plan. As such the provisions of General Policy 2 of the Strategic Plan are applicable as follows:

"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:

Application No.:	12/01520/B
Applicant:	Arragon Ltd
Proposal:	Erection of a dwelling with attached garage
Site Address:	Plot 18 Poachers Pocket Bridge Road Ballasalla Isle Of Man

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; d) does not adversely affect the protected wildlife or locally important habitats on the site or adjacent land, including water courses; f) incorporates where possible existing topography and landscape features, particularly trees and sod banks; 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."

1. Regard should also be had to the history of the site, and in particular PA 02/0712 which approved the layout of the site for 22 dwellings. The Inspector reporting on the layout of the estate clearly stated that "provided that the height of the dwellings was not excessive and did still retain the appearance of single storey structure as well as there being no overlooking of existing dwellings", he saw no harm in amenity or visual terms. He goes on to state "I can see little wrong with the principle of including dormer windows providing they do not face existing dwellings or cause the height of the new buildings to become excessive" and recommended a condition which reads "The proposed dwellings shall generally be of a single storey height. Any dormer windows constructed shall not be in those elevations facing existing dwellings around the site in a manner that would cause overlooking and loss of privacy or result in the height of the new dwellings to become excessive".

1. A material consideration in assessing whether the proposal accords with GP2, is the approved application, PA 05/92162 which effectively established the height and proximity to the boundary of an acceptable dwelling on this plot.

1. Also of relevance are the findings of the inspector in respect of PA 10/01358 (see below).

Planning History

1. Planning permission was granted for the layout of the plots, roads and services for 22 dwellings under PA 02/00712. Since then individual applications were submitted for the plots, in some cases with multiple proposals. In the case of plot 18, permission was granted under PA 05/92162 for a dwelling as described in paragraph 2. Permission was subsequently sought for the development of different house types on plots 12, 13, 15 - 22 under PA 10/01358. This was refused at appeal for reasons relating to a "hotch potch" of building finishes and heights and the inclusion of two storey gables which were considered to be dominant in the streetscene. The dwelling shown on plot 18 was 0.6m taller than the dwelling which had approval.

1. Permission was then sought for a redesign of the dwellings on plots 17 - 22 inclusive (PA 11/01074). Following concerns raised by the local authority, plots 18 and 21 were removed from the approval and the applicant indicated that they would proceed with the approval already granted in respect of these plots. The dwelling shown on plot 18 in that application would have been broadly similar to what is now proposed but 0.5m less long and the driveway was slightly shorter.

Representations

1. Malew Parish Commissioners indicate that they do not oppose the application.

1. Highways Division recommend that the application is acceptable provided that the garage is retained for the parking of vehicles.

1. An objection has been received from the owner of 64, Beech Grove which lies to the south east of the application site, but separated therefrom by an existing dwelling, plot 6, Poacher's Pocket. They express concern regarding the large windows at first floor level which may look towards the rear of their property and compromise the privacy of their property, particularly the master bedroom.

Assessment

1. Despite the fact that the dwelling now proposed is broadly the same as was proposed but withdrawn in PA 11/01074, this was not refused by the Planning Authority, merely withdrawn by the applicant. The scheme is lower than that which had approval originally and has better access and parking provision and is set back slightly further from the road. There is to be a mixture of finish materials, which perhaps was criticised by the previous inspector, however, the same inspector criticised the "density of building and the mediocre design of the development under construction will be such that open or undeveloped space will be important to provide visual relief from the tightly-packed, characterless bungalow sorburbia currently being built." (his paragraph 16, PA 08/01617).

1. The dwelling is in the centre of the estate and will not generally be seen by the public. Whilst the property may be visible from properties outside the site, notable those in Silverburn estate, they are more than 35m away and as such, using the 20m distance as a guide as to what will compromise private amenities, it is not accepted that the existing properties outside the estate will be adversely affected by the proposal. The properties between the application plot and the Silverburn Estate dwellings are relatively close together but do have their ridges at right angles to the road, which would enable an outlook between them towards 64, Beech Grove. However, given the distance, it is not accepted that this will be objectionable.

1. The dwelling will have less of an impact than what has approval and has better provision than this. As such, it is considered that the application is acceptable and is recommended for approval.

1. There are no details of any proposed landscaping on this plot, but none of the earlier applications showed any planting so such a condition would not be appropriate. Also, whilst previous applications for this estate have been considered by the Planning Committee, the dwelling proposed here is shorter than that which has approval and has better parking provision. As such and as there has been no request from Planning Committee members to have the application referred to them it is considered appropriate to recommend that the application is considered under delegated authority.

1. Whilst the Town and Country Planning (Permitted Development) Order 2012 would allow the conversion of an attached garage to living accommodation without planning permission, in this case, as there are not two full sized car parking spaces available to the property, it is important that the garage is retained for use for car parking and a condition should be attached to this effect.

Party Status

1. The local authority, Malew Parish Commissioners are, by virtue of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) Order 2005, paragraph 6 (5) (d), considered an "interested person" and as such should be afforded party status.

1. The Department of Transport Highways and Traffic Division is now part of the Department of Infrastructure of which the planning authority is part. As such, the Highways and Traffic Division cannot be afforded party status in this instance.

1. The owner of 64, Beech Grove is not immediately alongside the proposed development and is at a distance as not justify being awarded party status in this case.

Recommendation

Recommended Decision: Permitted

Date of Recommendation: 19.12.2012

Conditions and Notes for Approval / Reasons and Notes for Refusal

C : Conditions for approval N : Notes attached to conditions R : Reasons for refusal

• : 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 erection of a dwelling and attached garage, as shown in drawing 0210/PL01018F received on 13th November, 2012.

C 3. Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (Permitted Development) Order 2012, the garage may be used only for the storage of motor vehicles in association with the occupation of the main dwelling and may not be used as ancillary accommodation nor converted thereto without planning permission.

NOTE: the provisions of the PDO enable this to occur where there is provision for two vehicles to be parked within the curtilage of the dwelling, each space being at least 6m by 3.25m. This is not available within the development as shown.

C 4. Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (Permitted Development) Order 2012, no extensions, greenhouses, walls, gates, fences, garden sheds, summerhouses, flag poles, decking, garages or tanks for the storage of domestic heating fuel, shall be erected without planning permission, other than are expressly authorised by this approval.

I confirm that this decision accords with the appropriate Government Circular delegating functions to Director of Planning and Building Control / Development Control Manager/ Senior Planning Officer.

Determining officer (delete as appropriate)

Signed : Anthony Holmes Senior Planning Officer	Signed : Sarah Corlett Senior Planning Officer
Signed : Michael Gallagher Director of Planning and Building Control	Signed : Jennifer Chance Development Control Manager