Loading document...
==== PAGE 1 ====
23/00440/B Page 1 of 5
PLANNING OFFICER REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
Application No. : 23/00440/B Applicant : Mr Cameron Miller Proposal : Rear dormer extension, and erection of extension to rear of garage Site Address : 60 Wybourn Drive Onchan Isle Of Man IM3 4AT
Planning Officer: Mr Hamish Laird Photo Taken : 14.06.2023 Site Visit : 14.06.2023 Expected Decision Level : Officer Delegation
Recommendation
Recommended Decision:
Permitted Date of Recommendation: 15.06.2023 __
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 26 of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) Order 2019 and to avoid the accumulation of unimplemented planning approvals.
This application has been recommended for approval for the following reason. Overall it is concluded that the planning application accords with the provisions set out in Housing Policy 15, Environment Policy 1 and Environment Policy 2 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016.
Plans/Drawings/Information;
This approval relates to the documents date stamped and received 17 April 2023:
Drawing No. JTM2217-P-00 Site Location Plan @ scale 1:500;
Drawing No. JTM2217A-P-01 Rev. C Proposed Site, Proposed Ground & First Floor Plans, Proposed Elevations & Typical Section; __
Interested Person Status - Additional Persons
None. __
==== PAGE 2 ====
23/00440/B Page 2 of 5
Officer’s Report
1.0 THE SITE 1.1 The site is the residential curtilage of 60 Wybourn Drive, Onchan, a single-storey detached dwelling with additional living space in the roof and an attached flat roof garage to one side. The dwelling is located on the northern side of the road and backs on to the rear of a number of terraced properties sitting at a higher level along Bemahague Avenue.
2.0 THE PROPOSAL 2.1 Proposed is the erection of a large flat roof extension and large flat roof dormer at the rear.
2.2 The proposed extension is to project 5.7m back from the rear of the garage and would be approx. 7.1m wide. The extension steps another metre into the garden behind the main part of the house. The extension is to be finished with a flat roof and bi-folding doors facing into the patio area locate to the rear of and accessed from the living room. A lantern on the roof with an approx. 100mm upstand would allow further daylight into the extension.
2.3 The proposed dormer is to be 7.39m (8.6m previously) wide covering almost the full width of the rear roof slope and measuring approx. 2.6m tall. There are three windows proposed on the rear, two serving bedrooms and a third serving a bathroom. It would be housed under a mono-pitch tiled roof in matching roof tiles to the dwelling and would cut into the rear roof-slope just under the main roof ridge.
3.0 PLANNING HISTORY 3.1 There have been two similar applications at neighbouring dwelling No. 56 Wybourn Drive, a similar sized and styled dwelling as the application property. Both proposed rear dormer and rear extension, the first one was amended to reduce the size of the dormer from being full width to being half the width of the roof slope, and throughout both the rear extension was smaller than that proposed now. These applications were approved under 21/00900/B and 21/01053/B.
3.2 PA Ref: 22/01220/B - for the "Erection of single storey extension to the rear of the garage and erection of dormer extension to the rear" was refused on 19/12/22 for the following reasons:
By reason of the size, scale, mass and design of the proposed flat roof rear dormer the proposal result in an unacceptable adverse visual impact and overbearing impact on the rear roof slope contrary to parts b, c, g of General Policy 2 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016, and contrary to the principles set out in 4.10 of the Residential Design Guide 2021.
By reason of its size, scale and flat roof design the proposed rear extension is considered to have an overbearing and adverse visual impact on the overall appearance of the rear of the dwelling and from neighbouring properties and failing parts b, c and g of General Policy 2 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016 and the principles set out in 4.6 of the Residential Design Guide 2021.
3.3 This proposal involved the extension projecting 5.7m back from the rear of the garage and approx. 7.1m wide. The extension was stepped in 1.0 m into the garden behind the main part of the house. The extension was to have been finished with a flat roof and bi-folding doors facing into the patio area.
2.3 The proposed dormer was to be 8.6m wide covering almost the full width of the rear roof slope and measuring approx. 2.4m tall. It was proposed to have a flat roof. Three windows were proposed on the rear, two serving bedrooms and a third serving a bathroom.
==== PAGE 3 ====
23/00440/B Page 3 of 5
4.0 PLANNING POLICY 4.1 The site is within an area designated as Predominantly Residential in the Area Plan for the East. In terms of strategic plan policy, there's a general presumption in favour of residential development in this location provided that the works comply with the general development standards set out in General Policy 2 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016. The Residential Design Guidance 2021 (RDG) also provides advice on the design of rear extensions and dormer extensions to existing dwellings (section 4.0) and also sets out the way in which the impact of development on the living conditions of those in adjacent dwellings may be measured (Section 7.0).
4.2 Sections '4.6 Rear Extensions' covers rear projection and ensuring no amenity impact on neighbours by assessing the 45 degree rule and tunnelling effect. Section 4.10 'Dormer Extensions' outlines their impact on character and appearance, with them generally being appropriate in areas already characterised with dormers but can look clumsy if overly long and running flush with eaves or ridge heights, and should ultimately be secondary to the size of the roof slope. Section '7.5 Overlooking resulting in loss of privacy' covers intensity of overlooking, the 20m rule of thumb where distances over 20m there's likely to be less concern but changes to topography such as sitting at a higher level can intensify this overlooking aspect.
5.0 REPRESENTATIONS Copies of representations received can be viewed on the Government's website. This report contains summaries only.
5.1 Onchan Commissioners - No comments had been received by the Report drafting stage.
5.2 Department of Infrastructure Highway Services - No highways interest (23/4/2023).
5.3 No comments received from neighbouring properties.
6.0 ASSESSMENT 6.1 The site lies within an area designated for residential development where Paragraph 8.12.1 of the Adopted Isle of Man Strategic Development plan (2016) indicates a general presumption in favour of residential development so long as it does not adversely impact adjacent neighbours or the surrounding area. In assessing such impact regard shall be given to the general standards towards acceptable development set out in General Policy 2, with the design guidance contained within the RDG being a material consideration in ways to assess such impact.
6.2 The key matters for consideration in this case are the visual and amenity impacts of the proposed rear dormer and proposed rear extension.
Rear Dormer - Visual and Amenity Impact 6.3 The principle of a flat roof dormer design would be acceptable here given the surrounding estate is already characterised by such flat roof dormers. However, following on from the refusal of PA 22/01220/B, the applicants have chosen a mono-pitch roof design, which would be tiled in the same tiles as the existing main roof over the dwelling and would located just below the existing roof's ridge height. The dormer has also been reduced in width from 8.6m to approx. 7.4m. The dormer would be set back from the main roofs eaves, , and its width stepped in from the verge to create an overall secondary appearance to the roof slope. There are some slightly taller peaked dormers in the area although these are finished in tiles to match the main roof and are of small widths ensuring a secondary appearance.
6.4 In this instance the proposal is for a smaller width rear dormer (1.2m) than previously sought, with a mono-pitch roof in matching roof tiles as described above. The overall size, scale, width and massing of the dormer results in a proposal that is not secondary to the
==== PAGE 4 ====
23/00440/B Page 4 of 5
appearance of the roof slope, but at the same time would not appear as an overly dominant feature. Its appearance is assisted by the sloping nature and use of matching tiles for the dormers roof.
6.5 Turning to overlooking and privacy, the properties to the rear are just over 20m rule of thumb distant from the application dwelling, but sit at a slightly higher level. Naturally, they already overlook the application dwelling. While the proposal will introduce new windows at first floor level which would face towards the rear terrace dwellings this is not considered to significantly change or adversely alter the already established levels of overlooking to an unacceptable degree.
6.6 On balance, it is considered that it would not appear as an overbearing feature, given that it would be sited on the rear roof slope away from any significant public views. Its impact on the overall appearance of the rear of the property and from views from rear neighbouring properties, the occupants of whom have raised no objections, is considered to result in an acceptable form of development that accords with the principles of the RDG 2021 and Policy GP 2 (b, c and g) in the Adopted Isle of Man Strategic Development plan (2016).
Rear Extension - Visual and Amenity Impact 6.7 The proposed extension covers over most of the rear elevation of the garage, as opposed to all of it as per PA 22/01220/B, and approximately half of the rear elevation - 6.84m as opposed to the previous 7.14m width - hardly a great reduction. It is, however, set in off the side boundary with No. 62 by 0.25m, and overall amounts top approx. half the width of the dwelling. Its proposed depth would be 3.3m out from the rear elevation of the dwelling, and 5.265m out from the rear of the garage. This would be a reduction in depth at this point of 0.48m (5.713m depth previously).
6.8 The extension is shown to be finished in sand/cement external rendered walls matching the height of the existing garage and eaves level. The RDG 2021 outlines a number of good and poor designs in respect of extensions and while there is not 'a one size fits all' approach there are certain design and finishes which may not be appropriate.
6.9 In this case the existing dwelling, like the majority of its neighbours, already has an existing flat roof garage and these flat roofed garages characterise the area and help to re- inforce the low eaves lines of the main house, and keep the general height and massing of the garages at a low level and ensure they appear subordinate. It would be reasonable to state that the existing dwelling is capable of accommodating some kind of flat roof extension although such an extension should remain subordinate. In the PA 22/01220/B case the footprint and projection of the extension and its chosen roof design was considered to result in an unacceptably large flat roof design and one which had an overbearing impact on the main dwelling. The extension now proposed, like the revised dormer in the rear roof slope does not represent a great reduction in size, however, it would not be visible from the main estate road, and it is noted that no objections have been received from any neighbours, including occupants of the 2-storey dwellings to the rear that look out over the rear aspect and garden area of No. 60.
6.10 On balance, it is considered that it would not appear as an overbearing feature which would have an adverse visual impact from those dwellings sitting higher at the rear. The rear extension is considered to result in an acceptable form of development that accords with the principles of the RDG 2021 and Policy GP 2 (b, c and g) in the Adopted Isle of Man Strategic Development plan (2016).
CONCLUSION 7.1 The dormer extension and rear extension are individually considered acceptable - just - and overall appropriate and acceptable in their visual impact on and relationship with the host
==== PAGE 5 ====
23/00440/B Page 5 of 5
dwelling and neighbouring residential properties. The application is considered to accord with General Policy 2 (b, c and g) and the principles of the RDG 2021.
INTERESTED PERSON STATUS 8.1 By virtue of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) Order 2019, the following persons are automatically interested persons: (a) the applicant (including an agent acting on their behalf); (b) any Government Department that has made written representations that the Department considers material; (c) the Highways Division of the Department of Infrastructure; (d) Manx National Heritage where it has made written representations that the Department considers material; (e) Manx Utilities where it has made written representations that the Department considers material; (f) the local authority in whose district the land the subject of the application is situated; and (g) a local authority adjoining the authority referred to in paragraph (f) where that adjoining authority has made written representations that the Department considers material.
8.2 The decision maker must determine: o whether any other comments from Government Departments (other than the Department of Infrastructure Highway Services Division) are material; and o whether there are other persons to those listed above who should be given Interested Person Status __
I can confirm that this decision has been made by a Principal Planner in accordance with the authority afforded to that Officer by the appropriate DEFA Delegation and that in making this decision the Officer has agreed the recommendation in relation to who should be afforded Interested Person Status.
Decision Made : Permitted
Date: 23.06.2023
Determining officer
Signed : C BALMER
Chris Balmer
Principal Planner
Customer note
This copy of the officer report reflects the content of the file copy and has been produced in this form for the benefit of our online services/ customers and archive records.
Copyright in submitted documents remains with their authors. Request removal